| Revision as of 18:17, 5 August 2003 edit142.177.6.37 (talk) sen: link← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:59, 5 August 2003 edit undo142.177.6.37 (talk) expandedNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| '''Politics''' is the study of decision-making power (who's got it, and who doesn't) at the inter-social and societal levels. When considered at smaller scales, e.g. within a profession, it is indistinguishable from ] or specialist ]s - for these issues see the ]. | '''Politics''' is the study of decision-making power (who's got it, and who doesn't) at the inter-social and societal levels. When considered at smaller scales, e.g. within a profession, it is indistinguishable from ] or specialist ]s - for these issues see the ]. | ||
| At whatever scale, politics is the rather imperfect way that we actually do coordinate individual actions for mutual (or strictly personal) gain. |
At whatever scale, politics is the rather imperfect way that we actually do coordinate individual actions for mutual (or strictly personal) gain. What distinguishes the '''political''' from the ] or merely ] is a much-debated question. Most theorists would acknowledge that to be political, a process has to involve at least some potential for use of force or violence - politics is about conflict that is about much more than theory and fashion. To win a political conflict always implies that one has taken power away from one ] to give it to another. Most would also acknowledge that political conflict can easily degrade to ]s, with little learned or settled by conflict other than "who won and who lost": | ||
| ] said politics was about "who could do what to whom" (] "]" for "Who-Whom"). As political scientist ] said, politics is "who gets what, when and how." It also concerns how we resolve moral conflicts that are sufficiently serious that they constitute a risk of social disruption - in which case commitment to a common process of ] or ] tends to reduce ] - usually viewed as a key goal of ]. ] is a major theorist of this view and also of the idea that politics is itself simply "] done in public", where public institutions can agree, disagree, or intervene to achieve a desirable culmination or comprehensive (process) result. | |||
| In addition to ], ], | In addition to ], ], | ||
| Line 9: | Line 11: | ||
| ] of studies of politics have both reflected and influenced the political systems of the world. ] wrote ], an analysis of politics in a ], in 1513, while living in a monarchy. ] and ] wrote "]" in ] and it went on to be one of the most influential works of the twentieth century. | ] of studies of politics have both reflected and influenced the political systems of the world. ] wrote ], an analysis of politics in a ], in 1513, while living in a monarchy. ] and ] wrote "]" in ] and it went on to be one of the most influential works of the twentieth century. | ||
| Today, much study of politics focuses on ], and how their form affects the decisions they make. | Today, much study of politics focuses on ], and how their form affects the decisions they make. | ||
| Other lines of political inquiry attempt to answer | Other lines of political inquiry attempt to answer | ||
| ] questions: is there a moral ] for government? | ] questions: is there a moral ] for government? | ||
| What is ]? Is there any possible empirical or more ] that could augment or replace ] or ] or political contention in deciding what political leaders "should" do? That is, is there an objective way to evaluate the quality of a decision, policy, leader or ]? These are ongoing debates that are millenia old. | |||
| What is ]? | |||
| As well being influenced by these weighty matters, politics is also a social activity, and as such it is subject to the whims of ] as any other. | As well being influenced by these weighty matters, politics is also a ] activity, and as such it is subject to the whims of ] as any other. | ||
| == Political science == | == Political science == | ||
| Line 39: | Line 42: | ||
| == ] == | == ] == | ||
| ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] | ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] | ||
| == Classical and modern political theorists == | == Classical and modern political theorists == | ||
Revision as of 21:59, 5 August 2003
An article on this topic is also available in Simple English.
Politics is the study of decision-making power (who's got it, and who doesn't) at the inter-social and societal levels. When considered at smaller scales, e.g. within a profession, it is indistinguishable from applied ethics or specialist ethical codes - for these issues see the list of ethics articles.
At whatever scale, politics is the rather imperfect way that we actually do coordinate individual actions for mutual (or strictly personal) gain. What distinguishes the political from the ethical or merely social is a much-debated question. Most theorists would acknowledge that to be political, a process has to involve at least some potential for use of force or violence - politics is about conflict that is about much more than theory and fashion. To win a political conflict always implies that one has taken power away from one group or faction to give it to another. Most would also acknowledge that political conflict can easily degrade to zero-sum games, with little learned or settled by conflict other than "who won and who lost":
Lenin said politics was about "who could do what to whom" (Russian "Kto-Kgo" for "Who-Whom"). As political scientist Harold Lasswell said, politics is "who gets what, when and how." It also concerns how we resolve moral conflicts that are sufficiently serious that they constitute a risk of social disruption - in which case commitment to a common process of arbitration or diplomacy tends to reduce violence - usually viewed as a key goal of civilization. Bernard Crick is a major theorist of this view and also of the idea that politics is itself simply "ethics done in public", where public institutions can agree, disagree, or intervene to achieve a desirable culmination or comprehensive (process) result.
In addition to government, journalists, religious groups, special interest groups, and economic systems and conditions may all have influence on decisions. Therefore, politics touches on all these subjects.
Authors of studies of politics have both reflected and influenced the political systems of the world. Niccolo Machiavelli wrote The Prince, an analysis of politics in a monarchy, in 1513, while living in a monarchy. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote "The Communist Manifesto" in 1848 and it went on to be one of the most influential works of the twentieth century.
Today, much study of politics focuses on democracies, and how their form affects the decisions they make.
Other lines of political inquiry attempt to answer philosophical questions: is there a moral justification for government? What is the purpose of government? Is there any possible empirical or more formal method for evaluating and quantifying ethicality and morality of human actions that could augment or replace religion or authority or political contention in deciding what political leaders "should" do? That is, is there an objective way to evaluate the quality of a decision, policy, leader or party? These are ongoing debates that are millenia old.
As well being influenced by these weighty matters, politics is also a social activity, and as such it is subject to the whims of fashion as any other.
Political science
Political scientists are academics who research the conduct of politics. They look at elections, public opinion, institutional activities (how legislatures act, the relative importance of various sources of political power etc), the ideologies behind various politicans and political organisations, how politicians achieve and wield their influence, and so on.
Ethical view of politics
To those who view politics as a branch of ethics, indistinguishable from it, or inalterably opposed to it, the concepts of aesthetics, culture, moral codes, ethical codes, legal codes, legal rights, individual capital and the moral core of an individual, and more abstract ideas of safety and fairness are fundamental to understanding politics and why it is or is not ethical.
Political Systems and Ideologies
Anarchism -- Anarcho-capitalism -- anarcho-communism -- anti-communism -- authoritarianism -- Capitalism -- classical liberalism -- Communism -- Conservatism -- Corporatocracy -- Democracy -- democratic socialism -- Green -- Fascism -- leftism -- Liberalism -- Libertarianism -- Libertarian socialism --Marxism -- Meritocracy -- Minarchism -- Nationalism -- National Socialism -- Oligarchy -- post-communism -- Republicanism -- Socialism -- stalinism -- totalitarianism -- Theocracy
Sector-Based Ideologies
Feminism -- Masculism -- Primitivism -- Islamism -- Scientism
Political Entities
City -- City-state -- Country -- Federal -- Government -- Nation-state -- police state -- Province -- Republic -- State
Political philosophy
The justification of the state -- Anarchism and natural law theory -- Social contract theories -- Raw is moral philosophy -- Consequentialist justifications of the state -- The purpose of government -- Formal method for evaluating and_quantifying ethicality and morality of human actions -- Political virtues
Classical and modern political theorists
Plato -- Aristotle -- Mustafa Kemal Ataturk -- John Locke -- Karl Marx -- John Stuart Mill -- Jean-Jacques Rousseau -- Johann Gottfried von Herder -- Lysander Spooner -- Henry David Thoreau -- Ludwig von Mises
Contemporary Political Theorists
David Friedman -- Noam Chomsky -- John Rawls -- Jan Narveson -- David Gauthier -- Amartya Sen -- Jürgen Habermas -- James Buchanan -- Bernard Crick -- Michael Foucault -- Jane Jacobs -- Carol Moore
Social institutions with major political implications
Voting systems, Market systems, Moral purchasing, Measuring well-being, Tax, Tariff and Trade, Law, Religion
Miscellaneous
International organization -- Corporate police state -- Crony capitalism -- European Union -- Police -- Propaganda -- U.S. Politics -- Political spectrum -- Political party-- Political economy -- Political parties of the world -- Techno-democracy -- Techno-oligarchy -- Terrorism -- Political Compass -- Divide and conquer