This chapter explains how the moral society will, with enough time, decay and stray from it's principles of goodness. There are 4 modes of government that follow in degeneration, each with a corresponding person and mentality.

Moral community declines eventually, 4 succesive forms of governments explained. Each government also has a corresponding mentality in their people. First comes timocracy then follows oligarchy, democracy and finally tyranny. The succession of society follows the divided line while the people of each government mode follow developments in the tripartite mental model.

The starting point is the furthest right of the line with aristocracy having real knowledge and is in the category of "Being". Reason is the supreme ruler of this society and together with Passion it controls the Desirous part.

The timocracy, now without true knowledge and instead based on thought that while closer to the truth than belief is methodologicaly flawed. Passion now rules alone but Desire is still controlled. Reason is present but not supreme.

Oligarchy is where "Being" is left behind for "Becoming", society is now based on "Belief" of what goodness. Wealth had become the greatest objective of society, but Desire is still controlled so that no desire can jeopardize the accumulation of wealth. Desire is now in control but order is still present.

Democracy is where "conjecture" is the guiding principle of society. Ideas and thoughts are freely exchanged and flowing with no order to separate or guide them. Desire is in control and goes from one pursuit to the next.

Tyranny is another stage of "Becoming", I can't give it it's own spot on the divided line as previously, it shares "Conjecture" with Democracy. Desire here is fully enthralled with one single desire above all others and will expend any resource to satisfy it.

Timocracy:

The aristocracy is the most stable and least changing government, but everything in our world decays eventually. Earlier chapters established that the guardians must be united in reason foremost, the other castes are less significant in terms of preserving the community. The downfall occurs within the gold and silver caste.

The likely culprit will be the auxilliaries introducing children of inferior quality. Socrates backs it up mathematically, but it is incomprehensible without substantial background knowledge. Feedback makes each generation further inferior and the mental and cultural studies become neglected. The metals will mix and the level of guardianship declines. Private ownership is introduced and the communal aspect of the guardians ceases. People no longer limit themselves to their function and needs, specialization ceases. Passionate people come to rule instead of complex characters, war becomes the focus of the community. The governments of Crete and Sparta are purported to have this form, militaristic and more concerneted with honor than wealth.

Money will be hoarded but not spent openly as the people still put up the façade of following the moral education they were forced to learn.

The timocracy person will be eager for status and glory. They focus more on physical exercise and neglect cultural studies, but are not dismissive of culture. Though good by nature, those around them will taint their soul, urging them to pursure status. Torn between reason and desire, they let passion steer them.

Oligarchy:

After timarchy follows oligarchy. The transition occurs as the pursuit of wealth overtakes the ambition and competition of the timarchy. Goodness finally leaves the community as wealth is prized above it and all others. Meritocracy is further eroded as only those with enough wealth can hold political positions. The unity of the previous government is gone as society is bitterly divided between rich and poor. The rulers are few ("oli") and terrified of arming the poor, weakening the military prowess of the community. The few good people that remain in the community are ridiculed for not pursuing wealth.

The meek die in poverty while the bad steal and rob themselves wealth. The oligarchic person is formed from the instability of the timarchy. Scarred after losing everthing in a failed ambition scheme, they hoard wealth and property. Reason and passion only serve to gain further wealth, not for goodness. All desires does not serve wealth accumulation are repressd. But this is not true self-control, when wealth is not threatened their most evil desires are unleashed, such as when spending other's money.

Democracy:

From oligarchy follows democracy. The rich ruling class is weak and few, eventually the poor will overwhelm them. Where wealth previously guided and restricted society now any form of desire is free to manifest. There is a grand diversity of thoughts and ideas in the society. Plenty of short term pleasures. Translator notes that democracy in Athens was much more restrictive than Plato portrays it here. External vs internal influence. The ideas and desires that best flatters the population succeeds.

The democratic person is born of the oligarchic mindset and starts with control of their desires for the purpose of moneymaking. The desires that are necessary for wealth are allowed while those that deplete wealth are repressed. Drones are a category of people in this society that are completely controlled by their desires, criminals for example. The transition to democracy occurs as the oligarchic person is lured by the drones to embrace the other desires.

Tyranny:

The final state after democracy is tyranny. All structures break down in equality. The oligarchy excluded criminal drones from seeking wealth solely, but in democracy they are free to be elected into power. The masses enlist champions to rob the rich, causing internal strife. Eventually the champions become dictators. The absolute rule of one desire above others, without any reason or passion or the restraint of the oligarchy. The dictator provokes warfare to make their leadership necessary. The people are taxed to poverty to make them unable to resist. « Mental equivalent of war? Strife that prevents you from introspection». The more unpopular the dictator is the harsher the repression becomes. The worst of the drones are enlisted to serve them.

Good people leave the rational faculties awake when sleeping instead of indulging in the lawlessness of dreams. Passionate and desirous parts are passive. Everyone has terrible desires, some just have better control of themselves.

The tyrannic person abandons the egalitarian freedom of democracy for one single desire. Everything is expended for the desire. Once resources run out they resort to depravity to sustain it. If these people gain critical mass they will infest and corrupt any society.

Observations:

Goodness and the circular structure of Plato's metaphysics:

There is a circular or recursive structure in Plato's idea of goodness. The good society is governed by the silver and gold races that make sure the people are good and ordered. The guardians represent reason, the auxilliaries passion while the iron and bronze races are necessary desires that must be regulated. The people in these races themselves also have the tripartite mental model of reason, passion and desire. The guardians mental model is ruled by reason with the assistance of passion to control desire. Establishing self-control, the guardians then take part in society control of itself, which also controls the guardians. Self-control to control society that controls them.

Goodness as a concept permeates every layer and structure of the world. The good city is good as its own internal structure follows goodness to establish goodness in the people who can then establish goodness in the city.

Plato emphasized that nental cultivation cannot be forced like physical education, but must be voluntary. Republic, with its layers of meaning under the dialogue, can only be understood by those willining to dissect it and really thinking about what is presented to them on multiple levels and not just at face value. The message is buried to encourage the reader to use their own reasoning skills. I think there is a parallel with how Socrates discusses how external influence grows on the modes of governments as it descends from aristocracy. Tyrrants prop themselves up with foreign mercenaries and can infest other societies. The aristocracy is a closed society that prohibits foreign influence, but as it becomes more open the greater the potential for external malign influence. But goodness cannot be forced upon a society? Is this an advantage of badness that gives degeneration an advantage over regeneration?

The philosophers that leave the cave eventually return to establish order and goodness. They ascend to the world of being, but then return to the world of becoming with their knowledge of goodness to establish order. Goodness demands a call to action to improve the world and not stay in the lofty realm of being. Though Plato is disenchanted with engaging with politics.

There are plenty of explanations for degeneration, the aristocracy declines from eventually having children at the wrong time, but what explanation is there for regeneration? The odds are stacked against goodness, only if raised properly can a person's nature and mental constitution reflect it, but they can still fall to the influence of others. Is it simply unexplained that every now and then people of good enough nature appear to change things for the better? Decline is the focus since we start from the most possibly good. There is some hinting of the small chance of a philosopher rising out of the badness of the world and establishing the imagined moral society. I wonder how this influenced Abrahamic thought. Everything decays but also strives to return to goodness?

Passion is our innate sense of justice and goodness, but without knowledge of them and is more like "thought" of goodness.

What is the mental equivalent of the golden caste having births out of order? That eventually even a sound mind can slip up and permit bad thoughts to fester?

Goodville - Kalliopolis

In Phaedo desires are connected with the body and the material world while the mind seeks knowledge, but here we dont see a purely material vs immaterial distinction in regards to desire. Though we could still categorize desires as becoming versus the reason of being, but isnt that the same as a material vs immaterial distinction?

Curiously Socrates remarks that in democracy structure breaks down that men and women get on equal standing (not a thing in Athenian democracy), but we already accepted women as potential guardians earlier. Perhaps the distinction is that Plato recognized that women can be great, but men and women in general are not equal. Good people are equal, not genders.