When reflecting on premodern political thought and modern political thought, the biggest difference between the two is the idea of who is fit to lead and the concept of idealism versus realism. This is evident in how the philosophers view the rights of the everyday people within society. Overtime the philosophers have leaned farther away from idealism and closer to realism, Plato being the most idealistic and Alexis de Tocqueville the most realistic. Plato philosophized that those who govern should be of a higher intellectual and moral caliber. “The heaviest penalty for declining to rule is to be ruled by someone inferior to yourself.” This is more of an idealist point of view as power does not usually go to the virtuous and intellectual. Especially because Plato says people are ruled by their desire. People are born with the desire to have more wealth, power and sex than others. If this is to be believed, then Plato’s argument that the morally sound and virtuous should rule would be nearly impossible thus making him an idealist. If everyone is driven by their greed, only the greediest of individuals will acquire great power. This makes it impossible for the morally sound and virtuous to rule. Plato’s idealism is also evident in his concept of specialization. Plato asserts that people should do what they are suited to and nothing more. He says “we must infer that all things are produced more plentifully and easily and of a better quality when one man does one thing which is natural to him, and does it at the right time, and leaves other things. Those who rule just rule and those who farm just farm. Everyone sticks to their lane. This would not work if people were driven by the desire to acquire more power and wealth as they would not be content staying in one place without the ability to move up. Plato writes about an ideal society while also recognizing that what he believes is the natural instinct of man will never allow that society to happen. Thomas Aquinas is also an idealist. Aquinas states that “Granted that the world is ruled by Divine Providence…the whole community of the universe is governed by Divine Reason.” (ST, I-II, 91.1). He explains the concept of eternal law wherein power is given divinely. He goes on to say “the very idea of the government of things in God the Ruler of the universe, has the nature of a law. And since Divine Reason’s conception of things is not subject to time but is eternal, according to Prov. viii, 23…this kind of law must be called eternal.” (Ibid.). It is through eternal law that God can govern his subjects. As humans have free will, they stray the perfect governance of God and follow natural law. Natural law is just the way in which humans interpret and follow eternal law. This theology is idealist as it is unrealistic that humans will follow the natural law perfectly and strive to do good and avoid evil. He also states that political society is created to meet the needs of h>