What Makes a Good Regime? Philosophers on Governance
This paper examines how major Western political philosophers defined a "good regime," tracing ideas from ancient Greece through the Enlightenment and into the founding of the United States. Drawing on Aristotle's virtue ethics, Plato's concept of arete, Machiavelli's pragmatic ends-justify-the-means reasoning, Hobbes's absolutism and social contract theory, Locke's liberalism and individual rights, and Nietzsche's critique of free will and morality, the paper identifies common threads and contrasts among these thinkers. It then connects these philosophical frameworks to the Declaration of Independence and The Federalist Papers, arguing that the American founders synthesized multiple traditions to construct their vision of legitimate government.
- Early Philosophers on Virtue and the Good Regime: Aristotle and Plato define good governance through virtue
- The Ends Justify the Means versus Absolutism: Machiavelli's pragmatism versus Hobbes's absolutist social contract
- Liberalism and Questions of Free Will: Locke's individual rights and Nietzsche's moral skepticism
- American Political Culture and the Founding Documents: Founding documents synthesize Enlightenment political philosophy
- Conclusion: Founders built the best regime their philosophy allowed
✍️ How to write this paper — guide & tools ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper moves chronologically and thematically, allowing readers to trace the evolution of political thought from ancient virtue ethics through Enlightenment liberalism and into American constitutional design.
- Each philosopher's position is anchored to a direct quotation or textual reference, grounding the analysis in primary sources rather than unsupported assertion.
- The paper synthesizes diverse thinkers coherently around a single organizing question—what makes a regime good—rather than treating each philosopher as an isolated topic.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative philosophical analysis: it extracts each thinker's core criterion for good governance (virtue, pragmatism, social contract, individual rights, moral skepticism) and holds them up against one another, revealing both convergences and tensions. The technique culminates in the final section, where the American founders are shown to have selectively borrowed from this tradition, illustrating how abstract political philosophy translates into institutional design.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with ancient Greek thinkers (Aristotle and Plato), advances to Renaissance and early-modern political theory (Machiavelli and Hobbes), shifts to Enlightenment liberalism (Locke and Nietzsche), and closes by applying all these frameworks to the Declaration of Independence and The Federalist Papers. This four-part arc moves from theory to application, making the concluding section the payoff for the philosophical groundwork laid earlier.
Early Philosophers on Virtue and the Good Regime
Early philosophers like Aristotle and Plato each characterized their versions of ideal government and governance in works such as the Nicomachean Ethics and Meno. Their ideals were formed through close critical examination of what is right and what it means to be a just leader or politician. What exactly makes a good regime, according to these thinkers, depends on the ideals that the regime or its leaders would strive for. Many of these early concepts were later incorporated into real political systems, including the founding of the United States.
Aristotle's Ethics—a collection of writings including the Nicomachean Ethics, the Eudemian Ethics, and the Magna Moralia—is primarily concerned with the subject of virtue (Aristotle, 1999). For him, a person's or leader's ethical knowledge is never perfect. No man may have precise knowledge, just as no person can rule precisely and without error (Aristotle, 1999). Aristotle believed that ethical knowledge involved both general and experiential understanding. He also recognized that the discipline of ethics was fundamentally practical: even when theory is used to justify a decision, it is practical knowledge that sets a good person or good leader apart from others (Aristotle, 1999). It is certainly possible to examine ethics from a theoretical standpoint, but when actual decisions must be made, practical wisdom plays the largest role.
Aristotle regarded certain actions and emotions as morally wrong, and argued that any leader who allowed themselves to be ruled by hate, envy, murderous impulse, or greed would ultimately lead their constituents down the wrong path (Aristotle, 1999). For him, human experience fell somewhere on a scale between two poles he called "deficiency" and "excess." He believed in moderation, and that all things proceeding from human action fell between these two extremes. To argue that a regime is good, according to Aristotle, it would have to operate in constant pursuit of the highest good—that is, the good attained with a worthy goal in mind. He argued that the highest good has three characteristics: it is desirable for its own sake, all other goods are desirable for its sake, and it is not desirable for the sake of some further good. This was the litmus test Aristotle used to distinguish the highest good from a lesser good, and to determine whether a regime was truly virtuous.
Plato's identification of a good regime comes from a different perspective, yet shares certain similarities with Aristotle's. He believed in a philosopher-king model of governance, and also held, as did Aristotle, that governance should be guided by virtue (Plato, 2005). Plato's concept of excellence—which he called arete—formed the backbone of his argument about what makes something genuinely "good" (Plato, 2005). According to Plato, virtue differs from person to person, and his vision of a good regime would incorporate this idea. As he proposes in Meno, Plato believed that true virtue is the desire for good things combined with the ability to bring them about (Plato, 2005). For Plato, virtue is neither naturally acquired nor learned; it is something that certain people possess and others do not. A good regime, in his view, is one that does good for its own citizens—not by attacking or destroying other regimes, but through understanding what virtue is and applying virtuous reasoning to all decisions, great and small.
Works Cited
Aristotle; ed. Irwin, Terence. Nicomachean Ethics. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing, 1999.
Plato; ed. Jowett, Benjamin. Meno. Stilwell, KS: Digireads Publishing, 2005.
Machiavelli, Niccolò. The Prince. Scotts Valley, CA: Createspace Books, 2009.
Hobbes, Thomas; ed. Curley, Edwin. Leviathan. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing, 1994.
Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government and a Letter Concerning Toleration. Stillwell, KS: Digireads Publishing, 2005.
Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm. Twilight of the Idols, Or, How to Philosophize with a Hammer. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing, 1997.
Hamilton, Alexander; Madison, James; Jay, John; ed. Kesler, Charles R. The Federalist Papers. New York, NY: New American Liberty, 2003.
Pilon, Roger, ed. The Declaration of Independence. Washington, D.C.: The Cato Institute, 2000.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.