In Why Plato Matters Now, the University of Sheffield philosophy professor considers what the ancient thinker might have to say about free speech, fake news, and populism today.

What would Plato think about current anxieties over populist threats to democracy?

Plato gives a coruscating analysis in The Republic of how democracy can be subverted by demagogues who lapse into tyranny. First, the demagogue gets voted into power by claiming to be the champion of the people. He creates a cult in which his supporters think he can do no wrong, makes wild promises, and baselessly charges his opponents as haters of the people because he identifies himself as “the people.” The tyrant eventually creates a private army. Plato observes that it’s in the demagogue’s interest to keep people poor because the poor are his base. Then his supporters realize, “Hang on, we don’t like this at all,” so he finally turns on his own people. Plato does not mince words: “the man becomes a wolf.”

Plato lived through tumultuous times and observed different forms of government; how did that shape his thinking?

He grew up amid a civil war between his native Athens and Sparta, and Athens lost. It was a difficult time of war and plague; the divides in Athens between the oligarchs and the democratic faction influenced him profoundly. He also tried to train the Sicilian tyrant Dionysius II as a philosopher-ruler, but Dionysius imprisoned him and he had to be rescued by Pythagorean philosophers—it was quite dramatic. Plato was widely experienced in civil war and tyranny; it’s no surprise that in his political philosophy,
the chief aim is harmony.

Plato’s dialogues wrestle with issues of sound argumentation and language, and resonate with current debates about fake news, free speech, and online vitriol. Would Plato support content moderation?


Plato’s clear that moral and political degeneration start with the corruption of language, particularly terms like freedom and democracy. He would love for online content to be moderated. Given that that’s a long ways off, he’d want to train citizens, from a young age, to sift out truth from lies and conspiracy theories.

Plato’s philosophy can seem fixated on abstractions—ideal “forms” of goodness and beauty. How can that inform modern politics?

I don’t believe in Plato’s theory of forms, in absolute entities like perfect justice and beauty. However, we should pay more attention to concepts of truth, goodness, and virtue. We’re morally unambitious, both individually and politically, and I think that’s a shame. What is politics for, what is life for? Is it to stay alive? Or to pursue some notion of a good life? In setting a direction, ambitious
ethical thinking can be helpful. How will we know how to pursue practicalities until we’ve got a picture of where we want to aim? That’s also crucial for AI. How will we know how to train our AI systems, and what direction we want them to travel in, until we have a clue ourselves?