Changes

[[Image:lighterstill.jpg]]

[[Image:lighterstill.jpg]][[Image:Knot_tiling-s_3.jpg|right|frame]]

[[Image:Knot_tiling-s_3.jpg|left|"Knot Tiling"]]

'''Politics''' is the [[process]] by which groups of people make [[decisions]]. Although the term is generally applied to [[behavior]] within civil governments, politics is observed in all [[human]] [[group]] interactions, including corporate, academic, and [[religion|religious]] institutions.

'''Politics''' is the process by which groups of people make decisions. Although the term is generally applied to behavior within civil [[government]]s, politics is observed in all human group interactions, including [[corporation|corporate]], [[academia|academic]], and [[religion|religious]] institutions.

Politics consists of "social relations involving [[authority]] or [[power]]" [https://dict.die.net/politics/ Definition of politics from die.net] and refers to the regulation of a political unit, [https://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=303454] and to the methods and tactics used to formulate and apply [[policy]]. [https://www.thefreedictionary.com/politics Definition of politics from "The Free Dictionary"]

[[Political science]] (also political studies) is the study of political [[behavior]] and examines the acquisition and application of [[power]].  Related areas of study include [[political philosophy]], which seeks a rationale for politics and an [[ethic]] of [[public]] behavior, and public administration, which examines the [[practice]]s of governance.

 

[[Political science]] (also political studies) is the study of political behavior and examines the acquisition and application of [[political power|power]].  Related areas of study include [[political philosophy]], which seeks a rationale for politics and an ethic of public behavior, and [[public administration]], which examines the practices of governance.

==Key political concepts==

==Key political concepts==

===Government===

===Government===

A [[government]] is the body that has the power to make and [[Politics#Authority and legitimacy|authority]] to enforce laws, rules, and policies.  Governments exist in all institutions that have laws, rules, or politics

A [[government]] is the [[body]] that has the power to make and [[authority]] to make [[law]]s, rules, and policies.  Governments exist in all institutions that have laws, rules, or politics

=== Political power ===

=== Political power ===

[[Max Weber]] defined power as the ability to impose one's will  "even in the face of opposition from others", [[Max Weber|Weber]], Max,[http://www.ne.jp/asahi/moriyuki/abukuma/weber/lecture/politics_vocation.html] Politics as a Vocation] while [[Hannah Arendt]] states that "political power corresponds to the human ability not just to act but to act in concert."

[[Max Weber]] defined power as the ability to impose one's will  "even in the face of opposition from others", Weber, Max,[https://www.ne.jp/asahi/moriyuki/abukuma/weber/lecture/politics_vocation.html] Politics as a Vocation] while [[Hannah Arendt]] states that "political power corresponds to the human ability not just to act but to act in concert."

* [[Arendt, Hannah]]; On Violence 1970, A Harvest Book

* Arendt, Hannah; On Violence 1970, A Harvest Book

===Pragmatic view of power===

===Pragmatic view of power===

=== Authority and legitimacy ===

=== Authority and legitimacy ===

[[Authority]], in a political sense, is different from political power in that it implies [[legitimacy]] and [[acceptance]]; it implies that the person or state exercising power has a perceived right to do so.[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/authority/] "Authority" at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]. [[Legitimacy]] is an attribute of government gained through the acquisition and application of power in accordance with recognized or accepted standards or principles.

[[Authority]], in a political sense, is different from political power in that it implies [[legitimacy]] and [[acceptance]]; it implies that the person or state exercising power has a perceived right to do so.[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/authority/] "Authority" at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]. [[Legitimacy]] is an attribute of government gained through the acquisition and application of power in accordance with recognized or accepted standards or principles.

[[Max Weber]] identified three sources of [[legitimacy]] for [[authority]], known as the [[tripartite classification of authority]].[[Max Weber|Weber]], Max, [http://www.ne.jp/asahi/moriyuki/abukuma/weber/lecture/politics_vocation.html] Politics as a Vocation] He proposed three reasons why people follow the orders of those who give them:

[[Max Weber]] identified three sources of [[legitimacy]] for [[authority]], known as the [[tripartite classification of authority]].[[Max Weber|Weber]], Max, [https://www.ne.jp/asahi/moriyuki/abukuma/weber/lecture/politics_vocation.html] Politics as a Vocation] He proposed three reasons why people follow the orders of those who give them:

====Traditional authority====

====Traditional authority====

[[Legal domination|Legal-rational authorities]] receive their ability to compel behavior by virtue of the office that they hold. It is the authority that demands obedience to the office rather than the office holder; Weber identified "rationally-created rules" as the central feature of this form of authority. Modern [[democracy|democracies]] are examples of legal-rational regimes. People also abide by legal-rational authority because it makes sense to do so for their own good, as well as for the greater good of society.

[[Legal domination|Legal-rational authorities]] receive their ability to compel behavior by virtue of the office that they hold. It is the authority that demands obedience to the office rather than the office holder; Weber identified "rationally-created rules" as the central feature of this form of authority. Modern [[democracy|democracies]] are examples of legal-rational regimes. People also abide by legal-rational authority because it makes sense to do so for their own good, as well as for the greater good of society.

The [[philosopher]] [[Plato]] classified governments into [[monarchies]] (the rule of one individual), [[oligarchies]] (rule by a small elite), [[timarchy|timocracies]] (rule by one race or group over another) and [[democracies]] (rule by the governed).<ref>[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-ethics-politics/#4.5 Political Analysis in Plato's Republic] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Modern taxonomy separates monarchies (where succession is hereditary) from [[autocracies]].

The [[philosopher]] [[Plato]] classified governments into [[monarchies]] (the rule of one individual), [[oligarchies]] (rule by a small elite), [[timarchy|timocracies]] (rule by one race or group over another) and [[democracies]] (rule by the governed).<ref>[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-ethics-politics/#4.5 Political Analysis in Plato's Republic] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Modern taxonomy separates monarchies (where succession is hereditary) from [[autocracies]].

In more recent times, the distinction between forms of government has become more complex; in a [[constitutional monarchy]], for instance, there is a [[monarch]] as head of state, but actual power is typically held by a [[parliament]] or [[legislative assembly]] of some description. A [[republic]] is the term usually used to describe nations without a monarchy.  

In more recent times, the distinction between forms of government has become more complex; in a [[constitutional monarchy]], for instance, there is a [[monarch]] as head of state, but actual power is typically held by a [[parliament]] or [[legislative assembly]] of some description. A [[republic]] is the term usually used to describe nations without a monarchy.  

Likewise, the definition of "democracy" has become less clear in more recent times; many nations with widely differing forms of government describe themselves as democratic. The [[Politics of North Korea|North Korean constitution]], for instance, describes [[North Korea]] as a democratic state,<ref>[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_North_Korea Constitution of North Korea] on Wikisource</ref> but some commentators in [[Western]] nations have described it as a [[totalitarian]] [[dictatorship]].[http://freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=22&year=2006&country=6993] Freedom in the World 2006] at freedomhouse.org

Likewise, the definition of "democracy" has become less clear in more recent times; many nations with widely differing forms of government describe themselves as democratic. The [[Politics of North Korea|North Korean constitution]], for instance, describes [[North Korea]] as a democratic state,<ref>[https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_North_Korea Constitution of North Korea] on Wikisource</ref> but some commentators in [[Western]] nations have described it as a [[totalitarian]] [[dictatorship]].[https://freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=22&year=2006&country=6993] Freedom in the World 2006] at freedomhouse.org

[[Autocracy]] is a form of government in which unlimited or near-unlimited power is held by an individual or group, without effective [[constitution]]al limitations, who derive their power from [[force]], rather than [[legitimacy]].[http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9030347/dictatorship Dictatorship] at the Encyclopedia Britannica.  The term is frequently viewed as pejorative, and many nations described as "dictatorships" have disputed this claim.

[[Autocracy]] is a form of government in which unlimited or near-unlimited power is held by an individual or group, without effective [[constitution]]al limitations, who derive their power from [[force]], rather than [[legitimacy]].[https://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9030347/dictatorship Dictatorship] at the Encyclopedia Britannica.  The term is frequently viewed as pejorative, and many nations described as "dictatorships" have disputed this claim.

===Sovereignty===

===Sovereignty===

===Confucius===

===Confucius===

The [[Chinese people|Chinese]] [[philosopher]] [[Confucius]]([[551]]-[[471]] [[BCE]]) was one of the first thinkers to adopt a distinct approach to [[political philosophy]]. His philosophy was "rooted in his belief that a ruler should learn self-discipline, should govern his subjects by his own example, and should treat them with love and concern."[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/confucius/#ConPol Confucius on Politics] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy</ref> His political beliefs were strongly linked to personal [[ethics]] and [[morality]], believing that only a morally upright ruler who possessed "de", or [[virtue]], should be able to exercise power, and that the behavior of an individual ought to be consistent with their rank in society. He stated that "Good government consists in the ruler being a ruler, the minister being a minister, the father being a father, and the son being a son."<ref>''Lunyu'' 12.11, [[The Analects of Confucius]] ([http://classics.mit.edu/Confucius/analects.html] available in English here])

The [[Chinese people|Chinese]] [[philosopher]] [[Confucius]]([[551]]-[[471]] [[BCE]]) was one of the first thinkers to adopt a distinct approach to [[political philosophy]]. His philosophy was "rooted in his belief that a ruler should learn self-discipline, should govern his subjects by his own example, and should treat them with love and concern."[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/confucius/#ConPol Confucius on Politics] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy</ref> His political beliefs were strongly linked to personal [[ethics]] and [[morality]], believing that only a morally upright ruler who possessed "de", or [[virtue]], should be able to exercise power, and that the behavior of an individual ought to be consistent with their rank in society. He stated that "Good government consists in the ruler being a ruler, the minister being a minister, the father being a father, and the son being a son."<ref>''Lunyu'' 12.11, [[The Analects of Confucius]] ([https://classics.mit.edu/Confucius/analects.html] available in English here])

===Plato===

===Plato===

The [[Ancient Greece|Greek]] [[philosopher]] [[Plato]](428-328 BC), in his book [[The Republic]], argued that all conventional political systems ([[democracy]], [[monarchy]], [[oligarchy]] and [[timarchy]]) were inherently corrupt, and that the state ought to be governed by an elite class of educated philosopher-rulers, who would be trained from [[birth]] and selected on the basis of [[aptitude]]: "those who have the greatest skill in watching over the community." p113, [[Plato]], ''The Republic'', translated by Desmond Lee, 1955, Penguin Classics, ISBN 0-140-44914-0.  This has been characterised as [[authoritarian]] and [[elitist]] by some later scholars, notably [[Karl Popper]] in his book ''The Open Society and its Enemies'', who described Plato's schemes as essentially [[totalitarian]] and criticised his apparent advocacy of [[censorship]].[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-ethics-politics/#4.4 Totalitarianism in Plato's Republic] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.  The Republic has also been labelled as [[communist]], due to its advocacy of abolishing [[private property]] and the [[family]] among the ruling classes; however, this view has been discounted by many scholars, as there are implications in the text that this will extend ''only'' to the ruling classes, and that ordinary citizens "will have enough private property to make the regulation of wealth and poverty a concern."[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-ethics-politics/#4.2 Communism in The Republic] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

The [[Ancient Greece|Greek]] [[philosopher]] [[Plato]](428-328 BC), in his book [[The Republic]], argued that all conventional political systems ([[democracy]], [[monarchy]], [[oligarchy]] and [[timarchy]]) were inherently corrupt, and that the state ought to be governed by an elite class of educated philosopher-rulers, who would be trained from [[birth]] and selected on the basis of [[aptitude]]: "those who have the greatest skill in watching over the community." p113, [[Plato]], ''The Republic'', translated by Desmond Lee, 1955, Penguin Classics, ISBN 0-140-44914-0.  This has been characterised as [[authoritarian]] and [[elitist]] by some later scholars, notably [[Karl Popper]] in his book ''The Open Society and its Enemies'', who described Plato's schemes as essentially [[totalitarian]] and criticised his apparent advocacy of [[censorship]].[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-ethics-politics/#4.4 Totalitarianism in Plato's Republic] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.  The Republic has also been labelled as [[communist]], due to its advocacy of abolishing [[private property]] and the [[family]] among the ruling classes; however, this view has been discounted by many scholars, as there are implications in the text that this will extend ''only'' to the ruling classes, and that ordinary citizens "will have enough private property to make the regulation of wealth and poverty a concern."[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-ethics-politics/#4.2 Communism in The Republic] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

===Aristotle===

===Aristotle===

In his book ''[[Politics (Aristotle)|Politics]]'', the [[Ancient Greece|Greek]] [[philosopher]] [[Aristotle]](384–322BC) asserted that man is, by nature, a political animal. He argued that [[ethics]] and politics are closely linked, and that a truly ethical life can only be lived by someone who participates in politics. Aristotle's ''Politics'' at [http://www.iep.utm.edu/a/aris-pol.htm#H2 The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

In his book ''[[Politics (Aristotle)|Politics]]'', the [[Ancient Greece|Greek]] [[philosopher]] [[Aristotle]](384–322BC) asserted that man is, by nature, a political animal. He argued that [[ethics]] and politics are closely linked, and that a truly ethical life can only be lived by someone who participates in politics. Aristotle's ''Politics'' at [https://www.iep.utm.edu/a/aris-pol.htm#H2 The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

Like Plato, Aristotle identified a number of different forms of government, and argued that each "correct" form of government may devolve into a "deviant" form of government, in which its institutions were corrupted. According to Aristotle, [[monarchy|kingship]], with one ruler, devolves into [[tyranny]]; [[aristocracy]], with a small group of rulers, devolves into [[oligarchy]]; and [[polity]], with collective rule by many citizens, devolves into [[democracy]].[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-politics/#supplement3 Aristotle's views on politics] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy</ref> In this sense, Aristotle does not use the word "[[democracy]]" in its modern sense, carrying positive connotations, but in its literal sense of rule by the ''demos'', or common people. A more accurate view of Aristotle denouncing democracy was that it was described as mob rule, or [[ochlocracy]].

Like Plato, Aristotle identified a number of different forms of government, and argued that each "correct" form of government may devolve into a "deviant" form of government, in which its institutions were corrupted. According to Aristotle, [[monarchy|kingship]], with one ruler, devolves into [[tyranny]]; [[aristocracy]], with a small group of rulers, devolves into [[oligarchy]]; and [[polity]], with collective rule by many citizens, devolves into [[democracy]].[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-politics/#supplement3 Aristotle's views on politics] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy</ref> In this sense, Aristotle does not use the word "[[democracy]]" in its modern sense, carrying positive connotations, but in its literal sense of rule by the ''demos'', or common people. A more accurate view of Aristotle denouncing democracy was that it was described as mob rule, or [[ochlocracy]].

===Niccolo Machiavelli===

===Niccolo Machiavelli===

In his work ''[[The Prince]]'', the [[Renaissance]] [[Italy|Italian]] political theorist [[Machiavelli]] put forward a political worldview which described practical methods for an [[absolutism|absolute ruler]] to attain and maintain [[political power]]. His work is sometimes viewed as rejecting traditional views of [[morality]] for a ruler: "for Machiavelli, there is no moral basis on which to judge the difference between legitimate and illegitimate uses of power."[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/machiavelli/#2 Machiavelli's The Prince] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. It is from Machiavelli that the term [[Machiavellian]] is derived, referring to an [[amoral]] person who uses manipulative methods to attain power; however, many scholars have questioned this view of Machiavelli's theory, arguing that "Machiavelli did not invent 'Machiavellism' and may not even have been a 'Machiavellian' in the sense often ascribed to him."[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/machiavelli/ Niccolo Machiavelli] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.  Instead, Machiavelli considered the stability of the [[state]] to be the most important goal, and argued that qualities traditionally considered morally desirable, such as generosity, were undesirable in a ruler and would lead to the loss of [[political power|power]]. Critics of Machiavelli have often pointed out his works were studied and put into practice by leaders such as [[Josef Stalin]], [[Mao Zedong]], [[Benito Mussolini]], and [[Adolf Hitler]], who all argued their brutal programs were needed for security of the state just as Machiavelli recommended.  

In his work ''[[The Prince]]'', the [[Renaissance]] [[Italy|Italian]] political theorist [[Machiavelli]] put forward a political worldview which described practical methods for an [[absolutism|absolute ruler]] to attain and maintain [[political power]]. His work is sometimes viewed as rejecting traditional views of [[morality]] for a ruler: "for Machiavelli, there is no moral basis on which to judge the difference between legitimate and illegitimate uses of power."[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/machiavelli/#2 Machiavelli's The Prince] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. It is from Machiavelli that the term [[Machiavellian]] is derived, referring to an [[amoral]] person who uses manipulative methods to attain power; however, many scholars have questioned this view of Machiavelli's theory, arguing that "Machiavelli did not invent 'Machiavellism' and may not even have been a 'Machiavellian' in the sense often ascribed to him."[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/machiavelli/ Niccolo Machiavelli] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.  Instead, Machiavelli considered the stability of the [[state]] to be the most important goal, and argued that qualities traditionally considered morally desirable, such as generosity, were undesirable in a ruler and would lead to the loss of [[political power|power]]. Critics of Machiavelli have often pointed out his works were studied and put into practice by leaders such as [[Josef Stalin]], [[Mao Zedong]], [[Benito Mussolini]], and [[Adolf Hitler]], who all argued their brutal programs were needed for security of the state just as Machiavelli recommended.  

===Thomas Hobbes===

===Thomas Hobbes===

In 1651, [[Thomas Hobbes]] published his most famous work, ''[[Leviathan (book)|Leviathan]]'', in which he proposed a model of early human development to justify the creation of [[polity|polities]], i.e. governed bodies.  Hobbes described an ideal [[state of nature]] wherein every person had equal right to every resource in nature and was free to use any means to acquire those resources. He claimed that such an arrangement created a “war of all against all” (''[[bellum omnium contra omnes]]''). The book has been interpreted by scholars as posing two "stark alternatives"; total obedience to an [[absolute monarchy|absolute ruler]], or "a state of nature, which closely resembles civil war...where all have reason to fear a violent death".[http://www.iep.utm.edu/h/hobmoral.htm Thomas Hobbes] at the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]. Hobbes' view can therefore be interpreted as a defense of [[absolutism]], arguing that human beings enter into a [[social contract]] for their protection and agree to obey the dictates of the [[sovereign]]; in Hobbes' worldview, "the sovereign is nothing more than the personal embodiment of orderly government."[http://www.iep.utm.edu/h/hobmoral.htm Thomas Hobbes] at Britannica's Philosophy Pages. Hobbes himself argued "The final cause, end, or design of men (who naturally love liberty, and dominion over others) in the introduction of that restraint upon themselves, in which we see them live in Commonwealths, is the foresight of their own preservation, and of a more contented life thereby." Hobbes, Thomas, [[Leviathan]] (available online [http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-c.html#THESECONDPART here])

In 1651, [[Thomas Hobbes]] published his most famous work, ''[[Leviathan (book)|Leviathan]]'', in which he proposed a model of early human development to justify the creation of [[polity|polities]], i.e. governed bodies.  Hobbes described an ideal [[state of nature]] wherein every person had equal right to every resource in nature and was free to use any means to acquire those resources. He claimed that such an arrangement created a “war of all against all” (''[[bellum omnium contra omnes]]''). The book has been interpreted by scholars as posing two "stark alternatives"; total obedience to an [[absolute monarchy|absolute ruler]], or "a state of nature, which closely resembles civil war...where all have reason to fear a violent death".[https://www.iep.utm.edu/h/hobmoral.htm Thomas Hobbes] at the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]. Hobbes' view can therefore be interpreted as a defense of [[absolutism]], arguing that human beings enter into a [[social contract]] for their protection and agree to obey the dictates of the [[sovereign]]; in Hobbes' worldview, "the sovereign is nothing more than the personal embodiment of orderly government."[https://www.iep.utm.edu/h/hobmoral.htm Thomas Hobbes] at Britannica's Philosophy Pages. Hobbes himself argued "The final cause, end, or design of men (who naturally love liberty, and dominion over others) in the introduction of that restraint upon themselves, in which we see them live in Commonwealths, is the foresight of their own preservation, and of a more contented life thereby." Hobbes, Thomas, [[Leviathan]] (available online [https://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-c.html#THESECONDPART here])

===John Locke===

===John Locke===

The [[England|English]] philosopher [[John Locke]] was "one of the greatest philosophers in [[Europe]] at the end of the [[seventeenth century]]".[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/#HisBacLocLif Historical Background to John Locke's life] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. His political philosophy is contained primarily in his ''[[Two Treatises of Government]]''. In the ''First Treatise of Government'', Locke refutes the theory of the [[Divine Right of Kings]] as put forward by [[Robert Filmer]]; he "minutely examines key [[Bible|Biblical]] passages"[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/#TwoTreGov John Locke's Two Treatises of Government] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and concludes that [[absolute monarchy]] is not supported by [[Christian]] [[theology]]. "Locke singles out Filmer's contention that men are not 'naturally free' as the key issue, for that is the 'ground'...on which Filmer erects his argument for the claim that all 'legitimate' government is 'absolute monarchy'."

The [[England|English]] philosopher [[John Locke]] was "one of the greatest philosophers in [[Europe]] at the end of the [[seventeenth century]]".[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/#HisBacLocLif Historical Background to John Locke's life] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. His political philosophy is contained primarily in his ''[[Two Treatises of Government]]''. In the ''First Treatise of Government'', Locke refutes the theory of the [[Divine Right of Kings]] as put forward by [[Robert Filmer]]; he "minutely examines key [[Bible|Biblical]] passages"[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/#TwoTreGov John Locke's Two Treatises of Government] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and concludes that [[absolute monarchy]] is not supported by [[Christian]] [[theology]]. "Locke singles out Filmer's contention that men are not 'naturally free' as the key issue, for that is the 'ground'...on which Filmer erects his argument for the claim that all 'legitimate' government is 'absolute monarchy'."

In the ''Second Treatise of Government'', Locke examines the concept of the [[social contract]] put forward by other theorists such as [[Thomas Hobbes]], but reaches a different conclusion. Although he agreed with Hobbes on the concept of a [[state of nature]] before existing forms of government arose, he challenged Hobbes' view that the state of nature was equivalent to a state of [[war]], instead arguing that there were certain [[natural rights]] belonging to all human beings, which continued even after a political authority was established. "The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone...being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, liberty, health or possessions". Locke, John, ''Second Treatise of Government'' According to one scholar, the basis of Locke's thought in the Second Treatise is that "contract or consent is the ground of government and fixes its limits...behind [this] doctrine lies the idea of the independence of the individual person."[http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/l/locke.htm#Two%20Treatises%20of%20Government John Locke's Two Treatises of Government] at the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.  In other words, Locke's view was different from Hobbes' in that he interpreted the idea of the "state of nature" differently, and he argued that people's natural rights were not necessarily eliminated by their consent to be governed by a political authority.

In the ''Second Treatise of Government'', Locke examines the concept of the [[social contract]] put forward by other theorists such as [[Thomas Hobbes]], but reaches a different conclusion. Although he agreed with Hobbes on the concept of a [[state of nature]] before existing forms of government arose, he challenged Hobbes' view that the state of nature was equivalent to a state of [[war]], instead arguing that there were certain [[natural rights]] belonging to all human beings, which continued even after a political authority was established. "The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone...being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, liberty, health or possessions". Locke, John, ''Second Treatise of Government'' According to one scholar, the basis of Locke's thought in the Second Treatise is that "contract or consent is the ground of government and fixes its limits...behind [this] doctrine lies the idea of the independence of the individual person."[https://www.utm.edu/research/iep/l/locke.htm#Two%20Treatises%20of%20Government John Locke's Two Treatises of Government] at the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.  In other words, Locke's view was different from Hobbes' in that he interpreted the idea of the "state of nature" differently, and he argued that people's natural rights were not necessarily eliminated by their consent to be governed by a political authority.

===Jean-Jacques Rousseau===

===Jean-Jacques Rousseau===

The [[18th century]] [[France|French]] [[philosopher]] [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], in his book [[The Social Contract]], put forward a system of political thought which was closely related to those of Hobbes and Locke, but different in important respects. In the opening sentence of the book, Rousseau argued that "...man was born free, but he is everywhere in chains" [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-23965/Jean-Jacques-Rousseau Jean-Jacques Rousseau] at the ''Encyclopedia Britannica'' online. He defined political authority and legitimacy as stemming from the "general will", or ''volonté generale''; for Rousseau, "true Sovereignty is directed always at the public good".<ref name="iepross">[http://www.iep.utm.edu/r/rousseau.htm#SH4b The Social Contract] at the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. This concept of the general will implicitly "allows for individual diversity and freedom...[but] also encourages the well-being of the whole, and therefore can conflict with the particular interests of individuals."<ref name="iepross"/> As such, Rousseau also argues that the people may need a "lawgiver" to draw up a constitution and system of laws, because the general will, "while always morally sound, is sometimes mistaken".

The [[18th century]] [[France|French]] [[philosopher]] [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], in his book [[The Social Contract]], put forward a system of political thought which was closely related to those of Hobbes and Locke, but different in important respects. In the opening sentence of the book, Rousseau argued that "...man was born free, but he is everywhere in chains" [https://www.britannica.com/eb/article-23965/Jean-Jacques-Rousseau Jean-Jacques Rousseau] at the ''Encyclopedia Britannica'' online. He defined political authority and legitimacy as stemming from the "general will", or ''volonté generale''; for Rousseau, "true Sovereignty is directed always at the public good".<ref name="iepross">[https://www.iep.utm.edu/r/rousseau.htm#SH4b The Social Contract] at the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. This concept of the general will implicitly "allows for individual diversity and freedom...[but] also encourages the well-being of the whole, and therefore can conflict with the particular interests of individuals."<ref name="iepross"/> As such, Rousseau also argues that the people may need a "lawgiver" to draw up a constitution and system of laws, because the general will, "while always morally sound, is sometimes mistaken".

Rousseau's thought has been seen by some scholars as contradictory and inconsistent, and as not addressing the fundamental contradiction between individual freedom and subordination to the needs of [[society]], "the tension that seems to exist between liberalism and communitarianism".< As one [[Catholic]] scholar argues, "that it [The Social Contract] contains serious contradictions is undeniable...its fundamental principles--the origin of society, absolute freedom and absolute equality of all--are false and unnatural."[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04335a.htm The Social Contract] at the Catholic Encyclopedia. The ''Catholic Encyclopedia'' further argues that Rousseau's concept of the general will would inevitably lead to "the suppression of personality, the reign of force and caprice, the tyranny of the multitude, the despotism of the crowd", i.e. the subordination of the individual to society as a whole.

Rousseau's thought has been seen by some scholars as contradictory and inconsistent, and as not addressing the fundamental contradiction between individual freedom and subordination to the needs of [[society]], "the tension that seems to exist between liberalism and communitarianism".< As one [[Catholic]] scholar argues, "that it [The Social Contract] contains serious contradictions is undeniable...its fundamental principles--the origin of society, absolute freedom and absolute equality of all--are false and unnatural."[https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04335a.htm The Social Contract] at the Catholic Encyclopedia. The ''Catholic Encyclopedia'' further argues that Rousseau's concept of the general will would inevitably lead to "the suppression of personality, the reign of force and caprice, the tyranny of the multitude, the despotism of the crowd", i.e. the subordination of the individual to society as a whole.

 

===John Stuart Mill===

===John Stuart Mill===

In the [[19th century]], [[John Stuart Mill]] pioneered the [[liberal]] conception of politics. He saw [[democracy]] as the major political development of his era<ref>p11, Tansey, Stephen J., ''Politics: The Basics'', 1995, London, ISBN 0-145-19199-8 and, in his book ''[[On Liberty]]'', advocated stronger protection for individual rights against government and the rule of the majority. He argued that [[liberty]] was the most important right of human beings, and that the only just cause for interfering with the liberty of another person was self-protection.[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mill/#SocPol Social and Political Philosophy of John Stuart Mill] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. One commentator refers to ''[[On Liberty]]'' as "the strongest and most eloquent defense of [[liberalism]] that we have." Mill also emphasised the importance of [[freedom of speech]], claiming that "we can never be sure that the opinion we are attempting to stifle is a false opinion, and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still." p229, Mill, John Stuart, ''On Liberty'', ISBN 1-59986-973-X (also available online [http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/m/mill/john_stuart/m645o/ here]

In the [[19th century]], [[John Stuart Mill]] pioneered the [[liberal]] conception of politics. He saw [[democracy]] as the major political development of his era<ref>p11, Tansey, Stephen J., ''Politics: The Basics'', 1995, London, ISBN 0-145-19199-8 and, in his book ''[[On Liberty]]'', advocated stronger protection for individual rights against government and the rule of the majority. He argued that [[liberty]] was the most important right of human beings, and that the only just cause for interfering with the liberty of another person was self-protection.[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mill/#SocPol Social and Political Philosophy of John Stuart Mill] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. One commentator refers to ''[[On Liberty]]'' as "the strongest and most eloquent defense of [[liberalism]] that we have." Mill also emphasised the importance of [[freedom of speech]], claiming that "we can never be sure that the opinion we are attempting to stifle is a false opinion, and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still." p229, Mill, John Stuart, ''On Liberty'', ISBN 1-59986-973-X (also available online [https://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/m/mill/john_stuart/m645o/ here]

===Karl Marx===

===Karl Marx===

[[Karl Marx]] was among the most influential [[political philosophy|political philosophers]] of history. His theories, collectively termed [[Marxism]], were critical of [[capitalism]] and argued that in the due course of history, there would be an "inevitable breakdown of capitalism for economic reasons, to be replaced by [[communism]]."[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/#4 Karl Marx] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. He defined history in terms of the [[class struggle]] between the [[bourgeoisie]], or property-owning classes, and the [[proletariat]], or workers, a struggle intensified by [[industrialisation]]: "The development of Modern Industry, therefore, cuts from under its feet the very foundation on which the bourgeoisie produces and appropriates products. What the bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are its own grave-diggers. Its fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable. Marx, K. & Engels, F. (1848), [http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm ''The Communist Manifesto'']

[[Karl Marx]] was among the most influential [[political philosophy|political philosophers]] of history. His theories, collectively termed [[Marxism]], were critical of [[capitalism]] and argued that in the due course of history, there would be an "inevitable breakdown of capitalism for economic reasons, to be replaced by [[communism]]."[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/#4 Karl Marx] at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. He defined history in terms of the [[class struggle]] between the [[bourgeoisie]], or property-owning classes, and the [[proletariat]], or workers, a struggle intensified by [[industrialisation]]: "The development of Modern Industry, therefore, cuts from under its feet the very foundation on which the bourgeoisie produces and appropriates products. What the bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are its own grave-diggers. Its fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable. Marx, K. & Engels, F. (1848), [https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm ''The Communist Manifesto'']

Many subsequent political movements have based themselves on Marx's thought, offering widely differing interpretations of [[communism]]; these include [[Marxism-Leninism]], [[Maoism]] and [[libertarian Marxism]]. Possibly the most influential interpreter of Marxist theory was [[Lenin]], founder of the [[Soviet Union]], who created a revolutionary theory founded on Marxist thinking. However, [[libertarian Marxism|libertarian Marxist]] thinkers have challenged Lenin's interpretation of Marx; [[Cornelius Castoriadis]], for instance, described the Soviet Union's system as a form of "bureaucratic capitalism" rather than true communism.[http://chronicle.com/free/v50/i29/29a01401.htm The Strange Afterlife of Cornelius Castoriadis] by Scott McLemee, ''[[Chronicle of Higher Education]]'', March 26, 2004.

Many subsequent political movements have based themselves on Marx's thought, offering widely differing interpretations of [[communism]]; these include [[Marxism-Leninism]], [[Maoism]] and [[libertarian Marxism]]. Possibly the most influential interpreter of Marxist theory was [[Lenin]], founder of the [[Soviet Union]], who created a revolutionary theory founded on Marxist thinking. However, [[libertarian Marxism|libertarian Marxist]] thinkers have challenged Lenin's interpretation of Marx; [[Cornelius Castoriadis]], for instance, described the Soviet Union's system as a form of "bureaucratic capitalism" rather than true communism.[https://chronicle.com/free/v50/i29/29a01401.htm The Strange Afterlife of Cornelius Castoriadis] by Scott McLemee, ''[[Chronicle of Higher Education]]'', March 26, 2004.

The multiple notions of political power that are put forth range from conventional views that simply revolve around the actions of politicians to those who view political power as an insidious form of institutionalized social control - most notably "[[anarchism|anarchists]]" and "[[anarcho-capitalism|radical capitalists]]".  The main views of political power revolve around [[normative]], [[post-modern]], and [[pragmatic]] perspectives.

The multiple notions of political power that are put forth range from conventional views that simply revolve around the actions of politicians to those who view political power as an insidious form of institutionalized social control - most notably "[[anarchism|anarchists]]" and "[[anarcho-capitalism|radical capitalists]]".  The main views of political power revolve around [[normative]], [[post-modern]], and [[pragmatic]] perspectives.

=== Normative faces of power debate ===

=== Normative faces of power debate ===

The faces of power debate has coalesced into a viable conception of three dimensions of power including ''decision-making'', ''agenda-setting'', and ''preference-shaping''.  The decision-making dimension was first put forth by [[Robert Dahl]], who advocated the notion that political power is based in the formal political arena and is measured through voting patterns and the decisions made by politicians. Dahl, Robert A., ''Who Governs? : Democracy and Power in the American City'', (Yale University Press, 1961) This view has been criticised by many as simplistic, notably by the sociologist [[G. William Domhoff]],[[G.William Domhoff|Domhoff]], G. William, [http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/new_haven.html Who Really Ruled in Dahl's New Haven?] who argues that political and economic power is monopolised by the "elite classes".

The faces of power debate has coalesced into a viable conception of three dimensions of power including ''decision-making'', ''agenda-setting'', and ''preference-shaping''.  The decision-making dimension was first put forth by [[Robert Dahl]], who advocated the notion that political power is based in the formal political arena and is measured through voting patterns and the decisions made by politicians. Dahl, Robert A., ''Who Governs? : Democracy and Power in the American City'', (Yale University Press, 1961) This view has been criticised by many as simplistic, notably by the sociologist [[G. William Domhoff]],[[G.William Domhoff|Domhoff]], G. William, [https://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/new_haven.html Who Really Ruled in Dahl's New Haven?] who argues that political and economic power is monopolised by the "elite classes".

A second dimension to the notion of political power was added by academics Peter Bachrach and Morton Baratz involving "agenda-setting".  Bachrach and Baratz viewed power as involving both the formal political arena and behind the scenes agenda-setting by elite groups who could be either politicians and/or others (such as industrialists, campaign contributors, special interest groups and so on), often with a hidden agenda that most of the public may not be aware of.  The third dimension of power was added by British academic [[Steven Lukes]] who felt that even with this second dimension, some other traits of political power needed to be addressed through the concept of 'preference-shaping'. Lukes developed the concept of the "Three faces of power" - decision-making power, non-decision-making power, and [[ideology|ideological]] power. Lukes, Steven, ''Power: a Radical View'', [[Macmillan Publishers|Macmillan]], ([[1974]])

A second dimension to the notion of political power was added by academics Peter Bachrach and Morton Baratz involving "agenda-setting".  Bachrach and Baratz viewed power as involving both the formal political arena and behind the scenes agenda-setting by elite groups who could be either politicians and/or others (such as industrialists, campaign contributors, special interest groups and so on), often with a hidden agenda that most of the public may not be aware of.  The third dimension of power was added by British academic [[Steven Lukes]] who felt that even with this second dimension, some other traits of political power needed to be addressed through the concept of 'preference-shaping'. Lukes developed the concept of the "Three faces of power" - decision-making power, non-decision-making power, and [[ideology|ideological]] power. Lukes, Steven, ''Power: a Radical View'', [[Macmillan Publishers|Macmillan]], ([[1974]])

=== Postmodern challenge of normative views of power ===

=== Postmodern challenge of normative views of power ===

Some within the [[postmodern]] and [[post-structuralist]] field claim that power is something that is not in the hands of the few and is rather dispersed throughout society in various ways. As one academic writes, "...postmodernists have argued that due to a variety of inherent biases in the standards by which ”valid“ knowledge has been evaluated...modernist science has tended to reproduce ideological justifications for the perpetuation of long-standing forms of inequality. Thus, it is the strategy of postmodern science...to identify and, thereby, attack the ”deceiving“ power of universalizing scientific [[epistemology|epistemologies]]." McGettigan, Timothy,[http://www.sociology.org/content/vol003.004/mcgettigan.html] Redefining Reality:  

Some within the [[postmodern]] and [[post-structuralist]] field claim that power is something that is not in the hands of the few and is rather dispersed throughout society in various ways. As one academic writes, "...postmodernists have argued that due to a variety of inherent biases in the standards by which ”valid“ knowledge has been evaluated...modernist science has tended to reproduce ideological justifications for the perpetuation of long-standing forms of inequality. Thus, it is the strategy of postmodern science...to identify and, thereby, attack the ”deceiving“ power of universalizing scientific [[epistemology|epistemologies]]." McGettigan, Timothy,[https://www.sociology.org/content/vol003.004/mcgettigan.html] Redefining Reality:  

Epiphany as a Standard of Postmodern Truth], Electronic Journal of Sociology

Epiphany as a Standard of Postmodern Truth], Electronic Journal of Sociology

While left and right refer to different methods of developing an economically stable and just society,[[authoritarianism]] and [[libertarianism]] refer to the amount of individual [[Freedom (political)|freedom]] each person possesses in that society relative to the state. One author describes authoritarian political systems as those where "individual [[rights]] and goals are subjugated to group goals, expectations and conformities" are paramount. More extreme than libertarians are [[anarchism|anarchists]], who argue for the total abolition of [[government]], while the most extreme authoritarians are [[totalitarianism|totalitarians]] who support state control over all aspects of [[society]].

While left and right refer to different methods of developing an economically stable and just society,[[authoritarianism]] and [[libertarianism]] refer to the amount of individual [[Freedom (political)|freedom]] each person possesses in that society relative to the state. One author describes authoritarian political systems as those where "individual [[rights]] and goals are subjugated to group goals, expectations and conformities" are paramount. More extreme than libertarians are [[anarchism|anarchists]], who argue for the total abolition of [[government]], while the most extreme authoritarians are [[totalitarianism|totalitarians]] who support state control over all aspects of [[society]].

Authoritarianism and libertarianism are separate concepts from the [[Left-right politics|left-right]] political axis. For instance, [[classical liberalism]] and contemporary American libertarianism are socially liberal, but reject extensive governmental intervention in the [[economy]] and [[Social welfare provision|welfare]]. According to the libertarian [[Institute for Humane Studies]], "the libertarian, or 'classical liberal,' perspective is that individual well-being, prosperity, and social harmony are fostered by 'as much liberty as possible' and 'as little government as necessary.''[http://www.theihs.org/about/id.1084/default.asp What Is Libertarian?], Institute for Humane Studies. Likewise, anarchists may be left-wing ([[anarcho-syndicalism]]) or right-wing ([[anarcho-capitalism]]).

Authoritarianism and libertarianism are separate concepts from the [[Left-right politics|left-right]] political axis. For instance, [[classical liberalism]] and contemporary American libertarianism are socially liberal, but reject extensive governmental intervention in the [[economy]] and [[Social welfare provision|welfare]]. According to the libertarian [[Institute for Humane Studies]], "the libertarian, or 'classical liberal,' perspective is that individual well-being, prosperity, and social harmony are fostered by 'as much liberty as possible' and 'as little government as necessary.''[https://www.theihs.org/about/id.1084/default.asp What Is Libertarian?], Institute for Humane Studies. Likewise, anarchists may be left-wing ([[anarcho-syndicalism]]) or right-wing ([[anarcho-capitalism]]).

These three forms of authority are said to appear in a "hierarchical development order"; [[state]]s progress from charismatic authority, to traditional authority, and finally reach the state of rational-legal authority which is characteristic of a modern [[liberal democracy]].

These three forms of authority are said to appear in a "hierarchical development order"; [[state]]s progress from charismatic authority, to traditional authority, and finally reach the state of rational-legal authority which is characteristic of a modern [[liberal democracy]].

[[Category: General Reference]]

[[Category: General Reference]]