If you've seen me on this subreddit before, you would know that I love philosophy. And, of course, a very large part of philosophy is political philosophy. Nowadays, it is majorly held that democracy is the best (or at least, most practical) form of government, but I still find it useful to look back to see some of the older critiques of such a form.
(As is par for the course, I can only offer a short summary of Plato's true reasoning. If you want his actual explanations, read Books V-IX of the Republic) For Plato, in his Republic, he has a very specific definition of democracy. It is not simply majority rule; rather, it is the form of government in which the highest good of the people is freedom. In this democratic society, Plato writes that the unrestricted freedom of the people will cause them to start ignoring all authority, whether it be the law, teachers, or even their own parents. This ignorance will lead to major disorder and chaos. He also says that a democratic society allows every member to rule, rather than restricting the power to the trained view (for Plato, the philosopher-kings). And because the majority is often unwise, the society will suffer. Moreover, as the majority is unwise in Plato's view, it allows evil people to very easily and quickly rise to power, for all they need to obtain votes is appear charismatic and upstanding, while concealing their true intentions.
So, what do you think? Are these valid criticisms, or wholly incorrect?