The source of Plato's insights
Born in 428 or 427 BC, Plato is arguably the most influential figure among philosophers. (So about Plato, Russell spends more space in six chapters.) ）
The most important elements of Plato's philosophy are fivefold: first, he created the first of a long series of utopian sequences of humanity concerning the ideal realm; second, his theory of ideas sought to solve the hitherto unsolved problem of universality; third, he supported the immortality of the soul and made arguments; fourth, his theory of the origin of the universe; and fifth, he regarded knowledge as a memory rather than a perception.
The source of understanding Plato's insights must be combined with his identity and the circumstances of his time. Plato was born into the nobility, and in a society at that time there was a contradiction between the nobility and the democratic citizens, so he despised democracy very much; Plato lived in an era when Athens was defeated and gradually declined, and he blamed the defeat of Athens on democracy, so it is not surprising that he turned to Sparta to depict the outline of his ideal state.
How, then, did Plato's ideas relate to totalitarianism in politics? There are four main reasons for this:
Plato believed that both good and reality have no temporality, so that the best state is stable, so that it can be closest to the model above heaven. Its ruler is the one who best understands this eternal "goodness."
Second, as with all mysticism, Plato's faith has a kernel that must be embodied as a way of life in order to be conveyed to others. This needs to be achieved through intellectual and moral training. It is also necessary to solidify it by strictly controlling the living habits of the people.
Third, to make a good ruler according to Plato's principles requires a lot of education. This view necessarily implies an oligarchy.
Plato's view that leisure is an indispensable condition for wisdom is essentially aristocratic.
Plato attempted to rule wisely by defining "wisdom" and by stating that as long as one possesses this wisdom, one can rule wisely. But from the perspective of human history, this is clearly out of touch with reality. Because the divergence of interests exists objectively, what politicians should do is to promote the most feasible compromise. (This is to guide people with different interests to think differently, and people with different opinions should respect each other's different ideas, rather than using hegemony or even waging war to resolve contradictions.)
How to find a group of "wise" people and put the government in their hands is an insoluble problem. This is the ultimate reason for democracy.