Plague of Inequality CHAPTER ONE Plato "THE GREATEST OF ALL PLAGUES"

Plato building on Socrates warned against path 0G of the Econs:  “(Plato makes clear) that economic inequality undermines the virtue and civic harmony required for thriving regimes. The greater this inequality, the less stable the regime (p 19).”  The Econs act without sufficient attention to the other virtues beyond mere prudence, a point made in Lynne (2025).

DIT Points to the Incentive Only Path 0G of the Rich as Excessive Greed

Path 0G reflects the “… consuming desire of the rich to enhance their wealth at the expense of all other concerns is the vice of pleonexia (πλεονεξια), often translated as “greed.” Those infected with pleonexia are reduced to desiring more without the possibility of satisfaction. No matter how much they acquire, they will want more. The desires for money and power are perhaps the most susceptible to pleonexia (pp. 29-30).” 

Path 0M Brings in the Ethic to Temper Pleonexia

And, how bring path 0M into play --- representing the virtues essential to civic harmony ---  to temper the extreme greed of path 0G?  Well, Plato claimed one way was to remind people of the “ … Myth of Er … (first, concerns for) the afterlife and its power to influence … behavior  … (second) ‘wealth or poverty’  ... ‘choose the middle life … and avoid either of the extremes’ … (and third)  brute fear … the fear of poverty … powerful forces of ‘compulsion and fear’ (p. 34).”  It was about reminding the Econs wanting to be on path 0G that perhaps said choices would not lead to good things in the afterlife.

Path 0M also reflects the Law, and the Law must address extreme inequality:  “Whereas the Republic provides a framework for pondering wealth, poverty, and economic inequality, it is in his Laws that Plato defines inequality as a central problem of politics. As in the Republic, the Laws stresses the importance of fraternal bonds (p. 34).”  Arguably, said bonds come from empathy-with the other.

Ignoring Extreme Inequality is to Ignore the Plague

Ignoring extreme inequality is like ignoring the devasting effects of a plague:  “ … (Plato) detests both concentrated wealth and inequality as the origins of nothing less than ‘the greatest of all plagues’ … (leads to social disharmony, perhaps even civil war)…  attention to this ‘plague’ is neither fleeting nor incidental. It upends the friendship, harmony, and virtue necessary for sustaining a just republic (p. 37).”

It is also not good for an Econ to put all attention to path 0G, as  “… great wealth corrupts souls. It disables their capacity to exercise self-control (p. 38).”  Also, the children of the extremely wealthy may not do well, either:  “Why would wealthy children, praised for their unearned fortunes, ever consider cultivating moderation? They have no incentives to do so. … (especially with) no one teaching them self-control (pp. 38-39).”

Ultimately it is About the Ethic in Play

And, it is all unethical:  “…great wealth and luxury frustrate the virtues (ethics)…  (Plato asserted) ‘It is impossible that those who become very rich also become good’ (p. 40).” Like DIT makes clear, it is about instead seeking Optimal Inequality, to avoid the inevitable: “While the extremely wealthy grow egoistic and pleonectic, the poor grow destitute, embittered, desperate, and angry (p. 40).” Optimal Inequality sees the need for adequate Incentive to innovate and create wealth, but tempered by an Ethic that reduces the resentment and anger by in effect dampening if not outright eliminating poverty.  Extreme Inequality, in contrast, leads to an unsustainable economic & social system, as the pleonectic person goes to excess in the pursuit and then keeping of wealth and power.  Empathy (the basis for the Ethic)  must temper the excess of the ego (which acts only on Incentive). Pleonexia --- extreme drive for wealth and the power it buys, at the expense of the other --- is the root of injustice.

Extreme Poor Tend to Rob, Steal, Covet, Revolt while the Extreme Rich Tend to Pleonexia, Immoderation, Injustice and Ignorance

Plato pointed to the need to work at ensuring “The impossibility of becoming exceedingly rich or poor …  insofar as no one can become too poor, one can expect less suffering, less starvation, fewer citizens being tempted to rob, steal, covet, or revolt out of desperation … insofar as no one can become extremely wealthy, citizens will avoid the many vices associated with great fortunes. They will be less likely to think themselves above the law ...  will be less susceptible to pleonexia, immoderation, injustice, and ignorance (p. 43).”  Plato clearly is a MetaEcon, seeing path 0Z as optimal. And, it was to be framed by the Rule of Law, not the Rule of Men.

Plato Had Suggestions on the Balance in Rich & Poor

Plato has several suggestions for finding path 0Z, accomplished with limitations on inheritances; across class marriages; ban on interest bearing loans; prohibit the buying and selling of landed property;  no private possession of gold and silver, with currency only used for transactions, not accumulation; regulate retail trade to avoid insatiability problem; special attention to the problem of price gouging;  and, overall, the richest person not to have more than 4X wealth of the poorest.   Now, Plato was realistic   --- just like DIT, supported by empirical reality coming from experience and scientific grounds --- pointing out that such a system was likely possible only for a city-state populated by the gods and/or the children of gods, who would operate mainly on selflessness to favor the common good.  Plato would like DIT, which makes clear selfishness is primal, and, that reality points to tempering the selfishness with the selflessness, as in DIT based selfishness & selflessness in good balance. And, overall, the culture must work to shame pleonexia.

Government had to be Part of the Tempering of the Rich and the Poor

Also, Plato was all in on Government regulation to deal with the tendency to pleonexia:  “Commerce must be regulated to protect against (extreme) wealth, poverty, and inequality, which in turn must be avoided to preserve social harmony (p. 45).”  It was about good balance in Market & Government, as DIT also makes clear.  It is about the sense of fairness --- Government plays a role in finding and bringing it into play --- bringing the Ethic of fairness into play, which is also a key idea in A Theory of Justice by Rawls (1971).

Inequality is Not the Issue: How Much Inequality is the Issue

So, how much inequality?  “… among the many real-world circumstances that wise lawgivers must consider is the people’s capacity to tolerate inequality (p. 49),” both economic and political inequality being at issue.  Again, as DIT makes clear, it is about finding Optimal Inequality.  It is a kind of inequality that provides for adequate Incentive while paying attention to the Ethic that reduces resentment to what is tolerated.

Conclusions

Plato was not into supporting places that did not want anything to do with addressing extreme inequality. Plato was invited by two different cities, areas to legislate. “As Rousseau would summarize these historical accounts, Plato refused to legislate for both because he ‘knew that these two peoples were rich and could not tolerate equality (SC, 2.8, 74).’ (p. 53)”

Plato claimed that it was essential to avoid extreme inequality was to be avoided in moving toward more equality:  “Whereas equality breeds friendship, inequality breeds faction, civil strife, and civil war (p. 53)… every republic requires a ‘sturdy foundation’ on which legislators can build. … ‘If this foundation is rotten, political activity would always encounter difficulties in the city’ …  the sturdiest foundation …is a people unburdened by extreme inequality and an insatiable lust for wealth (p. 53).”  Makes DIT sense.

It was just the start of such thinking:   “Aristotle’s acceptance of Plato’s critique of inequality helped cement this criticism in Western political thought, which would then inform not only Christianity but also early modern thinkers such as Thomas More, Jean Bodin, Montesquieu, and especially Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Plato may not have been a political reformer … but his work as a teacher and scholar assured an enduring egalitarian legacy (p. 54).”  Plato was in effect a MetaEcon.