except to some slight extent, by adding here and deducting there. Any
large modification is out of the question, short of damaging the
democracy itself. No doubt many expedients might be discovered for
improving the constitution, but if the problem be to discover some
adequate means of improving the constitution, while at the same time
the democracy is to remain intact, I say it is not easy to do this,
except, as I have just stated, to the extent of some trifling addition
here or deduction there.

There is another point in which it is sometimes felt that the
Athenians are ill advised, in their adoption, namely, of the less
respectable party, in a state divided by faction. But if so, they do
it advisedly. If they chose the more respectable, they would be
adopting those whose views and interests differ from their own, for
there is no state in which the best element is friendly to the people.
It is the worst element which in every state favours the democracy--on
the principle that like favours like.[19] It is simple enough then.
The Athenians choose what is most akin to themselves. Also on every
occasion on which they have attempted to side with the better classes,
it has not fared well with them, but within a short interval the
democratic party has been enslaved, as for instance in Boeotia;[20]
or, as when they chose the aristocrats of the Milesians, and within a
short time these revolted and cut the people to pieces; or, as when
they chose the Lacedaemonians as against the Messenians, and within a
short time the Lacedaemonians subjugated the Messenians and went to
war against Athens.

[19] I.e. "birds of a feather."

[20] The references are perhaps (1) to the events of the year 447