how to get the balance right between the King and the Philosopher?
But according to Plato, the philosopher should be the king because the dominant trait of a philosopher is intellect/wisdom.
The industrial forces would produce, but they would not rule, the military forces would protect, but they would not rule, the forces of knowledge and science and philosophy would be nourished and protected, and they would rule
So how do you interpret, when the philosopher is the king, a perfect convergence or a perfect balance or otherwise........???
Well, I would gladly agree with Plato, if only there was a way to enforce that. In a hereditary monarchy you may, by sheer luck, get a philosopher to mount the throne. But in our democracies getting to be "King" or even getting close to the King requires focus, determination, ruthlessness and a set of skills that are almost the opposite of those of a philosopher. In that respect, our democratic societies basically ensure that only people with a deep craving for power (something you won't find in a philosopher) will get the power ...
That means the "capacity of organization" prevails over the "intellect" in democracies.
According to Mosca, the distinguished characteristic of a ruler is "capacity of organization". According to Pareto talent should be the quality of elites.
There is an unorganized majority and an organized minority and there is constant competition between the two. When the unorganized majority gets organized, they tend to become rulers and compete with the organized minority to become rules.
I found a PDF stranded in a corner of the internet, apparently from a political science / socilogy class at Princeton:
Would you please share the pdf link, I would love to read it thoroughly. Thank you.
Sure: https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/ccameron/files/getting_organized_v3.pdf