AGP Manifesto Hello, for those of you unfamiliar with me, my name is Aristotle, and I am the presidential nominee for the Aristotelian Good-life Party. My hope for today is to persuade everyone that I am the most viable candidate running for president- not just because of my immortality, but because of my overall political philosophy. Politicians of today will completely change their views from one election to the next, or at the least shift their emphasis onto the current media-selected popular issue. The polar opposite of these political contrivances is my philosophy based entirely on my two thousand-year-old book entitled The Politics. "While coming into being for the sake of living, it (the political partnership) exists for the sake of living well." (p. 37) This is the main point of our philosophy, which is thoroughly espoused in my book for those of you who are interested. This rationale has no similarity to any current ideologies being pronounced today, giving me no choice but to run for president. From our outlook, lower necessities of bodily and external goods coupled with high necessities of political participation and virtue will lead to the only truly happy life, we call this the good-life. If a politician does not act towards narrowing the margin between life and the good-life, he is not a true politician at all; but before I get into that, I must make some points of clarification. Historians and feminists alike have condemned my work for being racist, misogynistic, and even condoning slavery. (p. 39-41) This is all true, or was true. You see, my philosophy is based on observation and the consequent deductions. Thus, in the Greek villages I frequented, I observed wives, children and slaves occupying a role of inferiority. Presently, women and slaves in America and other modernized nations have proven their equality and I gladly accept this. However, no one will disagree that children continually serve in a slave-like environment, which is ordained by nature. From this fact, I would oppose new attempts at giving children increased rights from their parents, as well as to trying juveniles as adults in our criminal system. This mode of thinking exemplifies my belief that truth is discovered in nature, not created in the minds of human beings. Note that my philosophy is not some abstract utopianism, but is pragmatic and evolves with time because it is based on observation of a specific period of time. Therefore, with time we see more precisely what is natural, which is of utmost importance in our quest of the good life, because "nothing contrary to nature is noble." (p. 202) Another point of clarification is that of my view of citizenship. As stated, a citizen in the unqualified sense is one who participates in the ruling of the city. (p. 87) This will always be the definition of a citizen in its purest sense, but as president I would have a differing definition of the citizen in the legal sense. This is because, in ancient Greece, citizenship was merely an abstract term used to justify superiority and jingoism. These racist beliefs have been proven faulty by nature, while government economics have changed dramatically as well, a citizen is now entitled to many benefits from government. The question arises, "Who will receive the benefits of the government?" First, I should explain to you what I mean by the good-life. Basically, "superintendence of the body must necessarily precede that of the soul; next comes that of the appetite; but that of the appetite is for the sake of intellect, and that of the body for the sake of the soul." (p. 223) A human must have his basic needs of food, water, shelter and such, in order to have a chance at attaining happiness. (p. 197) It is impossible for one being tortured to be happy, as some have claimed in the past. However, along with goods of externalities and the body, one must have the goods of the soul to be truly happy and live the good-life. This is because externals are based on chance, and justness cannot be obtained by mere chance. (p. 198) There are many goods that could be described as goods of the soul. The basic essence of our list would include living virtuously, using politics as an end in improving quality of life for all humans, and developing civic friendship based on understanding and participation. It is often said that voters today are issue-based, then let it be known that my one issue is the good-life. Everything else is either trivial or a branching off from the most important idea. Through politics is the only way to fulfill this goal, and I am the only candidate that understands this. Many Americans have no chance at attaining the good-life. Millions are homeless, living in poverty, and lacking food and healthcare; this is unacceptable in any country, let alone the wealthiest country on the Earth. My first action then would be a massive campaign of economic redistribution. This will be applied through avenues of progressive taxes, minimum and maximum wages, and increased social spending on healthcare, welfare and low-income housing if still needed after the initial redistribution. The question of who will receive these benefits can now be answered. From the assimilation of many cultures and races into this country throughout the years, we see that races are equal by nature. Nature does nothing in vain, (p. 37) so it is our duty to imitate this natural equality when dealing with social inequality. So, although nearly all Americans are not citizens in the unqualified sense (although it could be argued that anyone who votes or acts as a juror is in fact participating in the ruling of the people) (p. 87.), I would ensure them the rights of a legal citizen by the mere fact that they are a human being living within our borders. Even if this idea of human equality was not yet fully evolved, the principal that non-citizens are enemies of the state and should consequently be given citizenship may be strong enough to grant legal citizenship to everyone. (p. 101) However, in consideration of our observational philosophy we do accept this concept, which naturally forces us to include all other nations and races in our humanitarian efforts. We should help as many people as we possibly can to have a chance at attaining the good-life. However, "If the poor by the fact of being the majority distribute among themselves the things of the wealthy, is this not unjust?" (p. 100) There is a statistical answer to this question as well as a philosophical or ethical answer. Statistics show that minimum wage is no longer synonymous with a living wage. While a living wage is the perfect measure of the attainment of most basic external needs demanded for our happiness. Despite our unprecedented prosperity, the inflation-adjusted minimum wage has actually decreased. Adjusting minimum wage to inflation alone would solve many of our external and bodily necessities. Also, workers must pay corporations from their own pockets in the form of subsidies, bailouts, loopholes, debt revocations, loan guarantees; this is know as corporate welfare. This behavior of giving extra incentives to the already powerful is clearly unnatural, and thus unjust. These arguments alone should persuade Americans towards adoption of a more progressive economic redistribution, but the philosophical argument is much more important to our democratic nature. The philosophical or ethical answer to this question lies in my idea of the prudent middle, which coincidentally is also the basis of the American political system. The very same idea that you have termed pluralism. You understand that it is impossible for all citizens to be similar, (p. 90) and constant factioning will always take place. This is not a negative characteristic however, because extremes cancel out and the aggregate opinion is very knowledgeable. (p. 101) Americans fail to reason that the prudent middle is advantageous for other fields than just politics; for example, money. Money, along with other externals is a mere instrument to nobler activities; it is not an end in itself. "Everything useful belongs among those things an excess of which must necessarily be either harmful or not beneficial to those who have them." (p. 198) Redistributing from the wealthy is thus justified so long as their mere essentials are left untouched. Excess of anything is good only when that excess is of something intrinsic instead of external. The issue of education nicely illustrates the essence of the difference between the external and the intrinsic. This election has heard a good deal of quibble about the need for reform in education. It is true that our primary schools need reform, but most importantly, the entire American mindset is in need of educational reform. We need to realize that by nature man is a political animal. (p. 37) Any person arguing that they do not need politics implicitly harbors a will to war, and is a beast or a God. (p. 37) Political unions arise because man realizes he is completely dependent on others for survival. (p. 36) This realization is known as affection, (p. 99) and without it civil virtue dies. Without civic virtue, there can be no individual virtue, because the individual is a part of the whole. (p. 90, 203) Thus, without civic virtue, each man cannot himself be virtuous, and no man can lead the good-life. The good-life cannot result until man sees education and politics as ends in themselves, instead of mere instruments. Through education and knowledge, we can allow ever increasing amounts of humans to fulfill their ultimate potential and live the good-life. As The Politics states, the intrinsic factors for achievement of the good-life are nature, habit, and education. Naturally, modern observance tells us that all human adults have the potential to live the good life. However, not many people live in a community that allows for a habit of living which facilitates happiness. Happiness being a life in "accordance with virtue and unimpeded." (p. 133) It is our culture, education system, media, entertainment, biases, our entire superstructure that is impeding our virtuous development. This is where my party would allow monumental changes to occur. We understand that every political party in American history has sought their own self-interest at the expense of others. The AGP is the first party to look to the good of the entire community, and only those parties with a view towards the common good are correct. (p. 96) Finally, education will be the last step in procuring our life of happiness. By understanding the effects of increased civic awareness and political ends, we have no where to go but up. Basically, our natural predisposition, combined with our community based habit and educational system will provide for a pure participation. Participation in which cooperation presides over competition, and all are equal. Besides educating and coaching our citizens towards this goal, we must also assure political equality. We must pass campaign finance reform that gives each citizen an equal voice without discriminating against the less well off, after all, this is supposed to be a democracy, not an oligarchy. Passage of this reform will not merely give everyone an equal say, it will necessarily bring the aggregate opinion to the middle, which is always advantageous as was stated earlier. Our present tainted participation will merely lead us to the same sort of grasping life, with my help we may finally reach our target. With toxic individualism tamed, and the affection of civic virtue garnered, a good-life for all is the only possible outcome. With a government that seeks the good of all, everyone would lose their apathy and enter the political arena. With their newfound mindset, self-interest will be replaced by the search for virtue, as humans naturally strive for complexity and social ties when given a choice. They will become ecstatic over the feeling that results from participation in the improvement of themselves and their equals. "It is clear that most men will endure much harsh treatment in their longing for life, the assumption being that there is a kind of joy inherent in it and a natural sweetness." (p. 94) It must be apprehended that this congenital longing for life is founded on our search for political affection and happiness. Therefore, the only issue of any pertinence in politics is on the question of the acquisition of the good-life. Each human must have the opportunity to have his entire minimum bodily and external needs met. All must be proclaimed equal not only in areas of civil rights, but also economic rights and equal say in government. Only after these changes have been accomplished will the community be ready to facilitate the higher aspects of humanity that make life truly worth living. It must be learned how habit, education, and participation will most effectively produce this climax. For those of you who agree that this aspect is more important than personality contests and verbal sciamachy, vote Aristotle on Election Day! Works Cited Lord, Carnes. Introduction. The Politics. By Aristotle. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1984.