The most celebrated of these ideal systems is that of Plato.In it the idea of the subordination of the individual to the stateappears in its most extreme form.Within that class of the citizens of his republic who represent the highest type of life,community of property and of wives is established,as the most effective means of suppressing the sense of private interest,and consecrating the individual entirely to the public service.It cannot perhaps be truly said that his scheme was incapable ofrealisation in an ancient community favourably situated for the purpose.But it would soon be broken to pieces by the forceswhich would be developed in an industrial society.It has,however,been the fruitful parent of modern Utopias,speciallyattractive as it is to minds in which the literary instinct is stronger than the scientific judgment,in consequence of thefreshness and brilliancy of Plato's exposition and the unrivalled charm of his style.Mixed with what we should call thechimerical ideas of his work,there are many striking and elevated moral conceptions,and,what is more to our presentpurpose,some just economic analyses.In particular,he gives a correct account of the division and combination ofemployments,as they naturally arise in society.The foundation of the social organization he traces,perhaps,too exclusivelyto economic grounds,not giving sufficient weight to the disinterested social impulses in men which tend to draw and bindthem together.But he explains clearly how the different wants and capacities of individuals demand and give rise to mutualservices,and how,by the restriction of each to the sort of occupation to which,by his position,abilities,and training,he isbest adapted,everything needful for the whole is more easily and better produced or effected.In the spirit of all the ancientlegislators he desires a self-sufficing state,protected from unnecessary contacts with foreign populations,which might tendto break down its internal organisation or to deteriorate the national character.Hence he discountenances foreign trade,andwith this view removes his ideal city to some distance from the sea.The limits of its territory are rigidly fixed,and thepopulation is restricted by the prohibition of early marriages,by the exposure of infants,and by the maintenance of adeterminate number of individual lots of land in the hands of the citizens who cultivate the soil.These precautions areinspired more by political and moral motives than by the %Malthusian fear of failure of subsistence.Plato aims,as far aspossible,at equality of property amongst the families of the community which are engaged in the immediate prosecution ofindustry.This last class,as distinguished from the governing and military classes,he holds,according to the spirit of his age,in but little esteem;he regards their habitual occupations as tending to the degradation of the mind and the enfeeblement ofthe body,and rendering those who follow them unfit for the higher duties of men and citizens.The lowest forms of labourhe would commit to foreigners and slaves.Again,in the spirit of ancient theory,he wishes (Legg.,v.12)to banish theprecious metals,as far as practicable,from use in internal commerce,and forbids the lending of money on interest,leavingindeed to the free will of the debtor even the repayment of the capital of the loan.All economic dealings he subjects to activecontrol on the part of the Government,not merely to prevent violence and fraud,but to check the growth of luxurioushabits,and secure to the population of the state a due supply of the necessaries and comforts of life.
Contrasted with the exaggerated idealism of Plato is the somewhat limited but eminently practical genius of Xenophon.Inhim the man of action predominates,but he has also a large element of the speculative tendency and talent of the Greek.Histreatise entitled Oeconomicus is well worth reading for the interesting and animated picture it presents of some aspects ofcontemporary life,and is justly praised by Sismondi for the spirit of mild philanthropy and tender piety which breathesthrough it.But it scarcely passes beyond the bounds of domestic economy,though within that limit its author exhibits muchsound sense and sagacity.His precepts for the judicious conduct of private property do not concern us here,nor his wisesuggestions for the government of the family and its dependents.Yet it is in this narrower sphere and in general in theconcrete domain that his chief excellence lies;to economics in their wider aspects he does not contribute much.He sharesthe ordinary preference of his fellow-countrymen for agriculture over other employments,and is,indeed,enthusiastic in hispraises of it as promoting patriotic and religious feeling and a respect for property,as furnishing the best preparation formilitary life,and as leaving sufficient time and thought disposable to admit of considerable intellectual and political activity.
