The Hidden Economics of Aristotle’s Politics: Wealth, Slavery, and Justice

To fully grasp Aristotle’s political philosophy, one must confront the economic foundations of his thought. Some men are slaves by nature, and it is advantageous to both master and slave, Aristotle asserts, reflecting a view that certain individuals lack the rational capacity for self-governance and thus naturally fit into servitude. This concept, though controversial today, was central to the ancient social fabric.

Slaves are described as living instruments, essential tools animated by life but directed by their owners. Property, including land, animals, and slaves, forms the economic backbone of the household and the state. The master’s role is to manage these resources prudently to ensure the well-being of the family and community.

Aristotle draws a clear line between natural and legal slavery, acknowledging that some enslaved individuals are captives of war or law rather than nature. This distinction underscores the layered realities of ancient society.

On wealth, Aristotle differentiates between natural acquisition — obtaining what is necessary for life — and unnatural accumulation, such as usury, which involves making money from money itself. Usury is most reasonably detested, he argues, as it violates the purpose of wealth and threatens moral and social order.

This economic vision insists on limits and ethical boundaries, emphasizing that the pursuit of wealth must serve the good life and the polis rather than personal greed. Aristotle’s integration of economy and ethics remains a powerful lens for examining modern economic challenges.

References: In-depth analyses from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Blinkist summaries, and scholarly articles provide context and critique of these economic ideas. 2 3