Chapter on "Politics" (1) -- Anthropological Constant -- Preliminary Conclusions

Image credit.

Politics - Most Generally Speaking

Politics is the type of behaviour that is directed toward achieving acceptance of certain expectations - embodied in norms, status, and compliant action - in a social unit.

If A bows his head and doffs his head to B, while the latter is not deigning to look at A, this is the result of politics. 

A is complying with an accepted expectation embodied in 

• the rule (norm) that 

• a man of lowly rank (status) is supposed 

• to demonstrate respect (action)

for a higher-ranking member of the community.

Of course, such results of politics may appear as the fruits of tradition, but ultimately they are brought about by activities designed to ensure certain forms of social acceptance. If A failed to doff his hat, he would have to face severe sanctions, considering which he prefers to yield to the prevalent social norm.

Politics - A Trait of Human and Animal Behaviour

Given this definition of politics, it is surely true that other animals, such as dogs or horses, engage in politics too. 

For instance, the alpha animal expects compliance with, and if need be purposefully enforces, norms of deference in lower-ranking animals, based on the expectation of a proper matching of 

• rule (highest ranking animal is first to eat), 

• status (alpha animal has highest rank, betas have lower rank) and 

• compliant action (deference of lower ranking animals to alpha animal consuming food first).

The dominant behaviour of the alpha animal is political in nature in that it is intended to ensure socially accepted conduct.  

Scope of Politics - Human versus Animal

Needless to say, political behaviour in humans differs substantially from similar behaviour in other animals, especially when it comes to strategic differentiation, that is to say: humans are able to develop incomparably more variants of political manoeuvring compared to non-human animals, who cannot stray far from the ambit of their instincts. 

Animals command intelligence that allows them to create permutations of instinctual tolerances within which they can find creative strategies, but these Spielräume are narrowly circumscribed by instinctual prompts and limits. 

Which is the same as to say that their intelligence is more limited by the absence of higher functions of language only to be found in humans. 

They cannot engage in critical, constructive, cognition-enhancing communication. 

They cannot learn from one another in a process of ongoing cumulative knowledge-extension for they cannot publicise their inner experience (describe it to others and compare such descriptions, and describe the differences of their descriptions and so). Therefore, they cannot pass on knowledge, experience, and advancing insight to others, let alone to those that they are not personally acquainted with, including unborn generations. They cannot provoke and invite others - subjects outside their own subjectivity - to confirm, imitate, or challenge, reject, correct or complement their subjective experience.

Insuperable Politics - the Engine of Human Adaptation

However, the point of this post is to show that politics is a most basal given in the animal kingdom. Politics is an anthropological constant. We cannot escape from politics - not primitive man, nor modern man.    

The human capacity to differ on the kinds of social practices deemed desirable is infinite, and so is the range of options to exercise influence in favour of old and new social regularities. For that reason, ultimately, politics is indeterminate in its directions and outcomes. Which is one of the reasons why we do not know the future, and one of the reasons that politics cannot be replaced by principles. Observance of certain principles will tend to improve politics. Yet, politics cannot be fully determined by principles, for politics - human efforts at influencing what counts as valid in a human community - is the inexorable force that erodes and renews principles.

Ideologies that propose to reduce - in the sense of an absolute diminution - or even abolish politics are ill-conceived, and should be contrasted with those approaches that accept the irreducibility of politics and seek its relative improvement as opposed to its absolute repression / forcing back.

More here and here.

Admittedly, there is a danger in sliding from a metaphor over into insinuated reality. Quantitative diminution of politics is such a dangerous metaphor. Both sides should be aware of this - those who hope to depoliticise the world to give her freedom and those who argue that politics is the key to freedom, and that a free world will necessarily be a  highly politicised world.

Continued here.