What is Politics - Dissertation Example

Introduction: Since time immemorial, politics has been a part of humanity from its the primeval conceptualization up to its modernized encapsulation. Politics existed even before government, democracy, state and et al came to its realization. During the primordial state of man, chaos is everywhere due to the stiff competition for survival. Man lives in an inevitable partition against other individual to secure territory, food and property. Decentralization is the embodiment of man’s primitive status quo. The schematization of centralization and planning arise to curb the catastrophic nature of man and to reconstruct the operation of politics within man’s disorganized society. Innumerable treatises, social contracts, and laws were enacted to guarantee that man’s nature and society will actualize a perpetual order and peace. The discussion of centralization and planning was only given enough attention during the twentieth century to provide a nitty-gritty exposition of how politics should operate. In this paper, I will outline a concise mechanism of politics, as well as, its logic and loopholes using different conjectures of four political philosophers as our framework. The paper will also deal on how authorities contribute on the advancement of politics and on how they jeopardize the perpetuation of politics. Remember, politics aims to empower an individual, in order for him/her to actualize all of his/her potentialities, which is enough reason to for politics to be practiced properly or to be misconstrued for personal benefits. What is Politics? Several stereotypes have been attached to the word politics. Most people think that politics is an embodiment of corruption and shenanigans among officials. And others usually associate this term to government, administration, bureaucracy, politicians and the likes. In order for us to achieve a definitive definition of politics, it is a necessity to utilize a systematic approach. The first task is to outline the historical encapsulation of politics starting from its origin and its primeval understanding. And then we will incorporate numerous core concepts to, in order for us to come up with a concise and realistic meaning and interpretation of the word politics. Etymologically speaking, the term politics was derived from the Greek word polis, which means the state or the totality of community. In ancient times, polis was encapsulated to exemplify an ideal state, which is prominent in Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy. In Plato’s The Republic, he defines ideal state as a community where citizens work according to their innate soul and natural duty, which is considered as the connotative stance of politics. Aristotle, on the other hand, in his The Politics postulated that man in its primal condition is a political animal, which implies that even without any concept of government or democracy, politics is already existent in the life of every individual. Plato and Aristotle converge on the credence that politics within the psyche of man is imperfect that is why an ideal state is necessary. From this conceptualization of politics, several philosophers posited that the word originated from the significance of self-preservation. Due to the catastrophic state of affairs, man started to engage himself in an agreement to advance his personal interests. According to David Miller, “politics presupposes a diversity of view, if not about ultimate aims, at least the best ways of achieving them”, and since then, this premise became the foundation of politics. Miller’s basis of politics necessitates a conflict among men because it is logical to conclude that each of them will advance their own cause. Miller replied that conflict will be resolved because these men will not compete anymore, and instead, they will participate in an agreement to promote each of their interests. Therefore, politics serves as a mediator that provides solutions to the prominent conflicts. The third element of politics is power. As mentioned earlier, man in his primitive condition is down right selfish the main reason why they engage in certain agreement. But in every agreement there should be an initiator, and he/she must have a power over the members of his society so that he/she can start convention for all of them. The authority of the initiator is derived from the support of his/her society either individually or in groups. It must be noted that an initiator is immune to self-serving since he/she has the power. Therefore, we can say that politics is a struggle for power, which in the long run, paved way for the creation of government. From all the above-mentioned definition, we can conclude that politics is a guarantor to actualize an ideal state, which is achievable through the initiative of a specific authority to create certain proposals that can be agreed upon by the members of the society. And most importantly, politics is the catalyst to resolve conflicts by implementing necessary method of organization. Politics is present not only in certain government or society but it is omnipresent to all forms of government and human society because politics exists in co-habituation. Crick’s Stance on Politics In his book In Defence of Politics, Bernard Crick posits that politicians are always assumed of being untruthful and insincere because of the intrinsic features of their position, which implies rewards and failure. It has been established that politicians enjoy the concept of power over because it satiates the unfathomable desire of man to dominate others, which is available only in the realm of politics. Politics is like opium, it becomes addictive the more you taste its benefits, and the more you gain power out of it. To curtail politicians’ frailties and tendency for power abuse democratic societies adopted the practice of checks and balances. Crick argues that politics should be perceived as means for compromise and mediation and not as means of power exultation. He believes that the deteriorations of politics is way better than adopting tyranny or oligarchy as an alternative for more plausible politics. According to him, politics is perpetually in the cycle of conflict where there are triumphs and failings, and when politics reach the state of boredom and mundaness the possibility of noble consequences is inevitable. Being a politician is not only an ambition but it is also a career wherein an individual’s aspiration can be satisfied. According to political analysts, throughout the years the ages of aspiring politicians are getting younger and younger because the younger the politician is, the greater rewards and satisfaction he/she can obtain. Crick notes that the building block of politics is ambition, which is a valid reason why the number of aspirants is getting bigger and bigger. Politics is an enterprise where competition is stiffer than any contest combined that is why first time politician is more likely to be manipulated, and worse, be eliminated. For Crick politics is nothing but a pure conflict. It operates in the essence of harmonizing the pros and the cons within the interface of the government to its state, and the state to its citizenry. And within this mechanism, power is the major precursor, which can either alleviate or aggravate the present status quo. Therefore, as Crick concludes, politicians are ought to serve the welfare of his constituents in all of his/her competencies and capabilities; on the one hand, the constituents must be appreciative of their politicians rather than being contemptuous. Crick differentiates two elements of politics; one is micro politics and the other is macro politics. The former is defined as minute predicaments where political actors and factors are clashing because of conflicting interests existing in between them that must be resolved in a given time. Micro politics includes the necessity of guiding people to behave in a given manner (power), the need of ensuring that goals will be accomplished (will power), the importance of convincing other political actors and audience (influence), and the ability of executing proper strategy (manipulation). The latter, on the other hand, is defined on the basis of more difficult situations in terms of its impact and duration on a more general milieu. For example, cabinet dilemmas, industrial and agricultural debates, confusion with regards to authority, and anything that involves national interests. Since the state plays a vital role in politics Crick provides a definition and enumerates its purpose. State is not merely a government because it represents all establishments such as the law enforcement, magistrates and militia. It also has a defined territory in terms of land boundaries, seabed and airspace limitations, which necessitates sovereignty over this territory. And significantly, state must embodies legitimacy in terms of what form of government will be adopted according to its citizenry. State acts as the medium in guaranteeing that the needs of its citizenry are satisfied, and if not at least it must be addressed. In addition, Crick also delineated power and authority in terms of politics because these concepts are the epicenter of the misinterpretation of politics, which threatens the continuity of politics. Power is the ability to manipulate an individual to do what one desires and what one cannot do. The effectiveness of power relies on the permeation of prominent values in an individual. However, authority is acting upon enacted laws, orders, and even limitations, which an individual accepted in his recognition of the politicians. Most people think that power is synonymous to authority, and this confusion leads to improper application of the said concepts. In toto, Crick’s philosophical stance implies that politics is inherent among men but its activities differ depending on who practice it. One can perceive politics as an opportunity to realize his/her highest possibility, while others can extend this to the extreme by consuming oneself to the human frailty and the tendency of abusive capacity. Evaluation of politics whether it is good or bad is futile since in intrinsic conceptualization it does not possesses any of these values. An individual is empowered by politics; therefore, he/she has the right to determine on what terms he/she wants to use it in leading his/her life. And because of this realization, politics is threatened in the modern world because its mechanism is greatly controlled by individuals. The primordial nature of politics has been modified in the past years and continuously undergoing modifications in the present and future periods. These modifications might enhance or might annihilate politics because authorities, teachers and students of politics are going beyond the primal condition of politics. Most political theorists provided enlightenment on how politics should be perceived and applied, while others misconstrued the basic premise of politics to promote their own volitions. The Anatomy of Scott’s Political Perspective In his book Seeing Like a State, James Scott discusses the importance of understanding the composition of centralization and decentralization because ignorance on these matters will result to unwarranted decision-making of the government, which is critical to the growth of politics. Scott’s political standpoint summarizes how government should function in shaping its society and the politics that it embodies without the restrictions of any hierarchal and geometrical order. His political credence aims to explicate the development of politics in different societies that has diverse social elements, and how social structure can compromise these vast social elements among societies. Scott postulates that modern state imposes order on the aspects of society that requires understanding and control. The significance of incorporating order in a society is to abridge the complexities of some phenomena such as the right for suffrage through the provision of definitive processes. In Scott own terms, creation of processes is what he called legibility, which implies the arguments that politics must paved way for statehood and that “the most tragic episodes of state-initiated social engineering originate in the pernicious combination of four elements”. These four elements are as follows: 1 a. Administrative ordering of nature and society. 2 b. Confidence about scientific and technical progress that leads to the conclusion that science comprehends all knowledge and therefore maximizes all productivity, he termed as high-modernist ideology. 3 c. An authoritarian state that is willing and able to use the full weight of its coercive power. 4 d. A prostrate civil society that lacks the capacity to resist these plans. In the furtherance of his discussion on politics, Scott narrates a story about the scientific forestry geographically positioned in Germany, which gives so much importance on the value and fecundity of every forest. In order for the German state to utilize the end-product of its forests they propagated and nourished them through measuring its quality and counting its quantity, and most of all, they created a homogeneous forest industry because its prolificacy resulted to higher capital returns. In order to secure the productiveness of forestry, the state created landscape different trees homogeneously in a unilateral formation and workforces were trained to manage the designed forests following easy to follow rules and regulations. Later on, this mechanism transformed into a centralized management. Centralized management has been adopted by several countries in their political system even though this mechanism failed Germany after years of effectiveness. This mechanism is widely executed as impetus for tax collection in the modern state. Centralized management medicated some political disputes specifically of whose interest must be promoted or satisfied. Tax collection balances the disparity between poor and rich citizens because it standardized the measurement or the quantity of how much one must contribute. Since rich individuals have higher demands they incur higher tax payment and the financially challenged individuals must pay less tax or in most cases they were exempted because of their financial status. In essence, politics aims to guarantee that the welfare of every citizen is serves equally and justly. Tax collection operates in lieu to politics, because it aids in the development of society and in alleviating poverty. And this is the first step in consolidating and enabling the state to function accordingly. The second level of statehood is the legitimization of surnames among members of state to ensure that everyone can participate in state activities, especially on taxation. The quantity of the populace will only be quantified if the state was successful in identifying its citizens, and the best means to identify them is through assigning names or surnames. In the case of the Philippines, its Spanish colonizers designated common names from A to Z to eliminate ambiguity and to identify the majority of Filipino population. Scott posits that in order to remove any barrier between the state and its citizens, universal language or lingua franca must adopted because language derived from customs can result to several conflicts in the political arena wherein the state inevitably failed to address one’s needs due to communication barrier. The importance of these steps is to warrant that politics operates according to its definitive features through the usage of methods that are easy to follow in controlling regulatory key features. In doing so, the state must quantified and regularized common social features. The purpose of this quantification regularization is to simplify the complexity of certain societal issues to achieve the intelligibility of these issues. In some cases, a state can resort to extreme mechanism to ensure that quantification and regularization is strictly observed. In toto, Scott argues that contingency is an absolute truth where certain centralized management and commitment to it can sketch a defined future. Politics is perpetually evolving because man himself undergoes evolution. What we perceived as modern state will not be considered modern in the future because man’s desires, needs and volitions become more and more complex and acquired higher value. What political planners can do is to establish methods that can fulfill the pressing needs of the present times, and create an open-ended mechanism that will adapt to the unpredicted future. Consideration on the reality of contingency paves for a modifiable plan, embraces unexpected happenstances, and answers the present question. Up to this modern day period, politics still possesses several gray areas that are not yet comprehended by human knowledge. Ignorance on the reality of contingency led modern planners to the malfunction of their own visions. In the end, modern planners debilitated the functions of politics because it is dogmatized by its own standardization. Human Affairs according to Arendt Hannah Arendt’s contribution on the articulation of politics is manifested in her works entitled The Human Condition. The epicenter of Arendt’s philosophical stance is defining human activities in terms of vita activa since she thinks that knowing what human is unattainable but human existence is something attainable. Arendt claims that "Men are conditioned beings because everything they come in contact with turns immediately into a condition of their existence”. While she defines condition as “Whatever touches or enters into a sustained relationship with human life immediately assumes the character of a condition of human existence” There are two questions that must be answered in terms of vita activa; first what are its compositions and what are the intrinsic features of each composition, and second, what are the means to relate each composition with each other, with other aspects of human existence, and with the life-world. According to Arendt, the answers to these questions rely on fluctuation of certain aspects of human activities due to the deleterious ascension of labor, which contributed to the declination of actions in political life. This argument is founded on four basic stages. First stage is the definition of terms that is incorporated in vita activa such as labor, work and action, in which necessitates the fundamental state of affairs human life. Labor is the activity which corresponds to the biological process of the human body, whose spontaneous growth, metabolism, and eventual decay are bound to the vital necessities produced and fed into the life process by labor. The human condition of labor is life itself. Work is the activity which corresponds to the unnaturalness of human existence, which is not imbedded in, and whose mortality is not compensated by, the species' ever-recurring life cycle. Work provides an 'artificial' world of things, distinctly different from all natural surroundings. Within its borders each individual life is housed, while this world itself is meant to outlast and transcend them all. The human condition of work is worldliness. Action, the only activity that goes on directly between men without the intermediary of things or matter, corresponds to the human condition of plurality, to the fact that men, not Man, live on the earth and inhabit the world. ... Plurality is the condition of human action because we are all the same, that is human, in such a way that nobody is ever the same as anyone else who ever lived, lives, or will live. She states that the condition of political life is derived from the plurality of action, while labor and work does not contribute to the improvement of political life because both of these concepts void of plurality. The second stage focuses on the demarcation between public spheres to private spheres, which is the main operation of vita activa. Arendt posits that the amalgamation of labor in public sphere while result to the elimination of action in the picture. Private realm consists of the autonomy of an individual to his private rights such as the right to live and the right to choose, which implies a pluralistic activity because activities are not confined to a single schema. Conversely, public realm consists of rights that are founded on national interests, which demands a one-track activity because the state imposes it. The third stage is the furtherance of vita activa, which conjectures that modern thinking put greater importance to labor because it embodies the highest good among everything that necessitates life. She adds that modern economy is nothing but a futile economy because once a novel idea sprouted it must be instantly annihilated, which implies the ascendancy of labor operations in the economic realm. Lastly, she extends vita activa beyond its horizon to highlight its impact on man’s political life. She argues that philosophical and scientific advancement led to man’s narcissism because an individual confines himself/herself to an isolated realm, and then doubt the life-world outside his/her isolated realm. This doubt directly affected action and political life because discourse became unavailable. Another factor that aggravated dominance of labor over action is the proliferation Christian doctrines because it has redefined the mechanism of action, which limited actions to virtuosity and stigmatized politics as worldly enterprise. The point is that man has put labor in the summit of hierarchy of vita activa in expense of action, and in exchange of political life’s growth. In summary, Arendt exemplifies the worth of evaluating the hierarchy of vita activa in terms of political life and the strata of practical human action because elucidation of these hierarchies will highlight human potentialities and the undeniable value of politics in the society. In the later part of The Human Condition, Arendt vehemently affirms the following arguments “The conviction that the greatest that man can achieve is his own appearance and actualization is by no means a matter of course. Against it stands the conviction of homo faber that a man's products may be more – and not only more lasting - than he is himself, as well as the animal laborans' firm belief that life is highest of all goods. Both therefore ... will incline to denounce action and speech as idleness, idle busybodies and idle talk, and generally will judge public activities in terms of their usefulness to supposedly higher ends - to make the world more useful and more beautiful in the case of homo faber, to make life easier and longer in the case of animal laborans”. Arendt points out that the individual’s dignity is manifested through his words and acts, which is shaped by his/her political credence. On Pieper’s Interjection of Leisure In furthering the issue of how state jeopardizes politics, Josef Pieper claims in his book Leisure: The Basis of Culture that our abandonment of the ancient connotation of leisure will lead to the fiasco of our culture and callousness of humanity. He argues that leisure is represents paradoxical essence because a labor-less society necessitates the importance of having labor. Since Pieper is a devout Thomist the incorporation of God in his viewpoint is prominent, he says that the core of paradox lies in the worship of God and having said this one must redefine leisure. Etymologically speaking, leisure is derived the essence of the Latin word schola, which means school. One of the elements of school is idleness, which is translated to leisure, meaning, leisure in its entire sense lacks any form of idleness. From here on, Pieper borrows some concepts from several philosophers to strengthen his definition of leisure. First, he utilizes Kant’s postulate that philosophy is labor because knowing demands an action or activity. Then he uses Heraclitus conjecture that knowing is paying attention to the isness of things. Therefore, he concludes that leisure must not be passive rather it must perpetually be active. Pieper argues that the modern society has annihilated the classical conception of leisure because philosopher of this period deduced philosophy as a mere work. For example, Kant believes that knowing is working, which stresses that man must always work to comprehend the contingency of the universe, or in simple terms to understand his political environment. The legitimization of working is based on the impossibility of knowing what one wants to know i.e. truth and goodness. Then Pieper advances St. Thomas Aquinas standpoint that states that it is not difficult to know truth or goodness because it is inherent among men and he just have to follow it properly, meaning truth and virtues are easy to comprehend and to know. And then Pieper concludes that the states of love and contemplation should be realized without any effort but work/labor is necessary premise to realize these conditions. In addition, Pieper affirms that the essence of leisure has been diminished because of modernity. According to him, leisure is the panacea of grave boredom to one’s existence but because of modern world integration of work leisure became an activity, which is contradictory because intrinsically leisure exemplifies non-activity since in terms of listening to the ideas that emanates from the environment. Work demands efforts, while leisure is not confined by effort because the concept is free-spirited in the sense that it liberates itself from the dogmatization of work. In toto, Pieper sees politics as a means to eliminate leisure because it demands undying effort to maintain law and order. Since politics was encapsulated as a medium towards the fulfillment of man’s interest, leisure is neglected because man exerts all his effort to achieve his interests. And this is the modern perception of politics that is designed to work perpetually for the acquisition of certain knowledge or actualization of certain volitions. During ancient times, politics is tantamount to leisure because it operates according to its inherent nature, which is to advance interests minus the restrictions applied upon it due to modernization. Politics, according to Pieper, in its primitive condition does not succumb to any rules rather it enjoys its liberty of understanding the needs embedded within itself and not what has been imposed by modernization Conclusion: It remains clear that politics’ key feature is its ability to present the interest of the individual. That because of modification in forms of laws or restrictions, in guise of achieving perpetual peace and order, has been jeopardized because its operation was given to hands of the government or the politicians, who manipulate the mechanism of politics. Modernization brought enlightenment to politics, as well as darkness, because it improves and diminish its essence. REFERENCE: Arendt, Hannah. The Human Condition University of Chicago Press, 1972. Crick, Bernard. In Defence of Politics. 4th edition ed: University of Chicago Press, 1993. Pieper, Josef. Leisure the Basis of Culture. 50 Anniversary Ed edition ed: St. Augustines Press, 1998. Scott, James C. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed Yale University Press, 1999.  Read More