>Plato's Republic posits that the ideal government would be a city-state ruled by an assembly of Philosopher KingsWould that even be a Republic at that point? Or would that not simply make it a Meritocratic Oligarchy? And for that matter, as the Roman Republic was ran by a non-elected assembly of wealthy patrician Senators, would that also not make the Roman Republic an Oligarchy as well?China calls itself a Republic, but it's a command economy ran by a single, centralized Statesman and his cabinet with Marxist foundational principles that they follow only to varying degrees at best.What even is a Republic?
>>17988308>What even is a Republic?It's a bigger oligarchy
>>17988308If we are being real, every '''republic''' is just a cope for whatever oligarchy is currently in charge. Rome? Patrician oligarchy. Plato's kallipolis? Literally a technocratic oligarchy with extra steps. China? Fucking autocratic state. The word is meaningless. Just an aesthetic to make the ruling class seem legitimate. The only *maybe* true republic is a constitutional one with actual checks, and even those get corrupted.
>>17988308The cult leader's personality pushes him towards establishing a monopoly on truth. Only the "philosopher king" can decide what is real or not, so he can then control the populace to serve his whim. Aristotle called his ass out even back in the day. You can see it in anything Plato wrote/said. His "cave allegory" is a blatant attack on the human capability for reason.>You can't understand what true reality is, only I can (for reasons I will not elaborate on) so you should listen to me! Also a seperate world that no one can see is totally around us! The chairiest chair exists there!
>>17988308“Republic” is just a loose translation of its original Ancient Greek title Πολιτεία (Politeía) which refers to any political entity in general.
>>17988308Republic in a broader sense is a state in which the ruler's legitimacy comes from common consensus rather than simply their god's given right to xyz like in medieval kingdoms or ancient persia. So you could argue that not only Plato's hypothetical state would be a republic, but that the Roman Empire remained a republic until its bitter end in 1453
Republic basically means what various greek philosophers called a mixed constitution balancing elements of monarchy, oligarchy, and democracy. You can see this with even a cursory reading into say modern tripartition of powers into executive legislative and judiciary, how it basically is the old greek concept rebranded. The important part in practical terms about the concept of republic is that the state is not some patrimonial chiefdom to the point it is partitioned among heirs like the carolingian or indeed the entire 4th century AD roman empire (ironic that the byzantine empire at least got out of that habit post Arcadius).This implies a greater degree of some non share of population being shareholders having a vested interest in the continuity of the state. Before modern democracy, the most democratic example probably is punic wars era rome having a third or so of adult males having political weight because of the fact they were mass conscripted and thus had to have some role in politics (by the way this is the exact same process that unfolded in 19th century europe among the countries that fought against the French by replicating its mass conscription). Tiny greek polis theoretically could have even more but no evidence but because too tiny to have historical records and of the big ones only Athens briefly is like this with poorer rowers dominating its affairs, but it doesn't last very long. Tribal societies are poorly recorded in general could also theoretically be even more democratic, but they operated like chiefdoms with irregular political continuity invalidating them as states and consequently as republics.
A Republic is any state without a monarch, where law and institutions define public authority. So, by that definition, China is a Republic.
