Apocalypse Book of RevelationsBook of Life  Index Michael ReportJournal Directoryphoto gallerygamma index

Political Science Basics

There are three main branches of Political studies that is of utmost importance when studying this subject. Why? Because people can confuse others when they do not clarify between right vs. left in each of these departments. This confusion caused UC Berkeley to brand Communism and Fascism as rightwing political ideologies in general ( Comparative Charts). This is because they used only one of the branches for comparison. This is where the difficulty in modern day discussion on politics differ: Who is right? Who is left or wrong? Here are the three top-main branches.

Three main Branches of Politics

Italian Fascism’s original Roman meaning: Institutions and the Economy were  tied together (tethered) or bundled. Goebbels and Hitler argued how about tethering culture too? this became Nazism, or Socialism with an added tether to culture ( I call it biological determinism).

  • Communist Party of China runs exactly the same gov. system as USA.  The variations are localized, the  establishment remains on Capitol Hill for 40+ years and their cronies.
  • The masses wants guns/weapons so the Cops/patrol authority do not abuse and harass the *masses* ; and #2, the Military/King's wish, if the masses do not like the kind's actions. Since low intellect bruts can only be the peace keepers, they demand more resources and leave the intellectuals to fade away, and thereby goes your state's stability platform.


Stalin also performed NAZIsm, whereas Lenin only tethered Institutions and Economy. F.D.R. practiced Fascism, the Italian Form, and was a great admirer of Hitler, documents of history have shown. General Polls over 60+ years illustrate that Franklin Delano ( Satanic Demon) Roosevelt remains the most admired U.S.A. Democrat of American History. The facts, then, show that the majority of the Democratic members in U.S.A. society prefer Satan, therefore they must be eradicated from life if the Earth is to survive to host human forms in the near future.


Buddhism and during these Middle Ages, a pure evil was called the appetite or stomach. Hence 'desire' which remains myopic, unexplained due to a lack of definition.

doublehence: From all other forms of evil, these do apply.
This study is absent a third control subject, so necessary in the key to understanding our world's progress.

General Definitions

General Definitions

What is a state? A state is thus an institution of force within a territory, establishing order and deterring challengers from inside and out. Whatever threatens a state is also a threat to its citizens. To keep control the state observes trends in crime, external and internal attacks and  disorder – the state wants to keep control at all costs because if it doesn’t it knows that it will die. The states prime agenda is to survive at all costs.

Problems comes up for a survival of state from its interior if the state assumes too much control – central authority over a long period of time. Problems come up for survival of the state from its exterior if the state assumes too little control – non-central authority over a long period of time.

Great civilizations have seemed to balance this dilemma or tried to walk the middle path.

Nations: A large group of humans. A group that necessarily does not have to have a army or a defined territorial boarder.

If you are fighting an external threat one wants the state to go central control. It is necessary that central control in fighting an enemy from the outside to establish quick and authorities command from a central authority. One does not want to be bogged down with bureaucracy in a fight for life of a state.

 If you are fighting an internal threat one wants the state to go non-central control. This way the internals threat cannot get to your command center and claim power.

Politics is usually defined as the struggle in any group for power that will give a body of people or an individual the ability to make the decisions for the larger group. This group may range from a small organization to an entire country or even the entire global population. [copied p. 3]

Political Science is a subfield of politics that compares this struggle across countries. By this discipline  we can study a wide variety of issues pertaining to the timeline of systems of government from the beginning of that country to the ending of the country.

Goal: Comparativists hope to shed light on the countries under such studies as well as shed light on their own country. For example, one important question is why some countries are democratic while other countries are not? Are these results a function of cultural values or economic development? Is one system superior to another? Why do some countries concentrate the power into the hand of the few while others concentrate the power in the hands of the many? All these and many more questions make up the study of Political Science.


Many political officials have majored in education in the department of Political Science. The problems with officials while in office comes from the fact that they have only studied one small are of the world – while holding offices decision making which required them to have  a broader approach to decision making which required them to have a historical major background. Usually a statement like modern history is the only time for investigating healthcare issues is false. To many degrees of implementation healthcare was a political/economic issues in great civilizations. The relevant importance is the taxation of the people to fund such an endeavor. Healthcare in the past may not be what we in vision today, like hospitals and out patience programs – but decisions of the health and welfare of a king’s or government’s people and how to pay for it is evident in all of history. How does paying for elaborate systems bankrupt a society? What is the determent of continual progressive taxation? In nine out of eleven Chinese dynasties progressive taxation was a major cause of that dynasties fall from grace. Was healthcare of its people a factor? These historical facts all are issues dealt by philosophers and not political science majors who tend to focus on modern history only.


Comparison politics, one of the main departments in political science, stems from the paramount important issue of variation. Like all scientific methods - a controlled study in political science is hard or impossible to replicate by the same circumstances from one country to another. Therefore the key word and concept is variation. The causation and correlation are major factors in the concept of variation. This is most important when comparing two countries. The ideal is to break down all the facts and compare them. Variation runs in competition with time and factors. Every country does not have similar factors playing into its beginning and time periods in history are also a factor in determining the cause and effect of later developing political trends. For example, China dynastic history usually flows in cycles from beginning right-wing, with concepts like low taxes, decentralized power of the emperor, and courts adjusting to ethical and responsible judgments. Later as the dynasty crumbles, a left-wing political spear is all to evident: Progressive to suppressive high-taxes, too much central control with corruption, and judges who are paid off because central authority is too corrupt to police them.    Therefore two major methods are adopted that bitterly opposed one-another: Quantitative and Qualitative. Quantitative thus makes up the breath of a study and Qualitative thus makes up the depth of a study. These two methods are the most widely used approaches for gathering data for comparisons.  


A Quantitative studies are all about statistics and numbers. This system is viewed simpler in a larger sample, lets say of 22 countries population that live in dire circumstances. this study is considered broad or breath , meaning it is general and not specific. Whereas, a Qualitative study will hire 22 expert individuals who will all contribute their own chapters in a large volume book for study of why they think that these percentage of  people live in dire circumstances in their own country. Qualitative studies are considered more statistical  and varied in explanation than Quantitative studies. Factors play into the variations as to why these people live under these circumstances and what the goal of politics science is all about. Most seasoned and well to do political science investigators  will tend to aspire to the ultimate goal of "What is the most just state or best state for all? " "What is considered a good state to create for the benefit of all?" There are others who play by their own selfish rules of self aggrandizement. “What is the best system I can use to take control and become king?” These are all factors that are played out in politics science. There are many sub-divisions that we will get into. For now here are some historical figures of history and their contributions to the study of political science.


Movers and Shakers:


Aristotle (348-322 B.C.E.)

Aristotle began to separate the study of politics away from the study of philosophy - if the two were not the same in the beginning? He began to use comparison method to study the Greek city-states against the Persian empire. The Persian empire was centrally controlled socialism or entirely leftwing compared to the less centralized Greek city-states that were more-or-less right-winged, as far as governmental central control is concerned. Aristotle concluded that the reason that the Persian Empire could govern such a vast territory of its time was central control - more authoritarian in left-wing political outlook.

In Aristotle’s book "the Politics" he conceived of an empirical study of politics with a practical purpose.

Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527)

Often cited as the first modern political scientist because of his emphasis on statecraft and empirical knowledge; analyzed different political systems, believing the findings could be applied by statesmen; discussed his theories in The Prince. [copied]

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)

Developed the notion of a " social contract," whereby people surrender certain liberties in favor of order; advocated a powerful state in Leviathan. [copied]


John Locke (1632-1704)

Argued that Private property is essential to individual freedom and prosperity; advocated a weak state in his ‘Two Treaties of Government.’ [copied]



Charles Louis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu (1689-1755) Studies of government systems led to his advocating the separation of powers within government in The Spirit of Laws.


Kral Marx (1818-83) Elaborated a theory of economic development and inequality in his book Das Kapital; predicted the eventual collapse of capitalism and democracy.


  1. Inequality may increase as individual freedom increase. The renaissance that brought the western culture out of the middle ages also known as the dark ages because people were illiterate, the main factor was the call for individualism and each person personal approach to striving to be the best he could be. This was accompanied by capitalism.

  2. Redistribution as in communism or progressive socialism seeks to decrease inequality but is controlled by a central power of the state. The Roman empire increasingly went through a long progressive stage of socialism, resulting in a welfare state, and a trap on not being able to get out because to cut off the welfare would be alienate the majority of the population that was either conquered or immigrated and the leaders feared   riots and anarchy – thus the Roman aristocrat appeased the foreigners. Thus socialism/communism would lead the west to a dark age.

  3. American came close to economic and individual freedom, especially the onset of ‘Democracy of Goods’’ 1920s. There were two significant boom eras in America history the 1920s  ( Democracy of Goods) and the 1950s. This is gauged by the percentage of your own wealth expanding year-to-year.

  4. Carl Marx's hypothesis: Direction of path moves to the right - Primitive communism, feudalism, capitalism, socialism, communism.

  5. Politics must constantly seek to balance individual freedom and collective equality. This inevitably leads to questions of power and the role of the people in political life.

  6. Marxist complaints that communism did not work in the soviet Union because it was not economically advanced ( or past the stage of capitalism) is debated till this day. When Lenin ushered in his communist revolution, Marxist complained that he should have began a fierce capitalistic program. The main argument is that socialism can only be achieved after capitalism had run its course. Then naturally communism, the Marxist plateau of supreme political systems takes root. The same comparison can be applied to Communist China under Mao's communist revolution. October 1, 1949, China was a disaster and had not traveled the path of Marxist hypothesis.

  7. Not one person in the soviet Union on the street of Moscow wanted communism to continue Christmas day when Gorbachev signed a paper ending the Soviet Union.

  8. Communism can be thought of in terms of human behavior with a comparison of owning a car and renting a car. How do you treat a rental car compared to your own car? Only honest replies to this question understand the difference between collective property and private property. .

Comparative Politics

Note: Variations called variables in Political Science are of the supreme importance. In this observation, sometimes the Right is observed in history with major values of social equality and the left is sometimes observed with individual freedom.

  • Nations in history: Only some examples.

  • Some professors and historians will cite a person is a simpleton if he or she believes in absolutes in politics.

  • Reality shows that absolute perfect systems do not exist and compromises much be achieved. The best politics system between the three most used political systems in history is United States of America.

  • Philosophies belong to absolutes i.e. truisms. Political Science broke off into a separate category and changed the term philosophy of the state ( Socrates) to idealism. What are the shared idealism of a state?


Economic Ideals and practices:

  • Capitalism
    • Ability to control your own destiny. Emphasis is on one's own talents.
    • Government is supposed to stay out of your business.
    • Freedom to work and make as much as one wants.
    • Thrives off of competition, charity and low taxes.
    • Private property and self security emphasized.
    • Goal three classes: lower, middle, upper - with ability to social clime. (Always achieved in history)


  • Socialism
    • Lies of propaganda -> Emphasis of social equality.  Humane, Egalitarian.
    • Government is the surrogate parent.
    • Socialism closest sibling is Italian Fascism ( NAZIs only changed class warfare to racist shades of privileged.
    • Told where to work and how much one makes and pays in taxes.
    • Thrives off of hierarchical authority and progressive taxes.
    • Goal one class ( Never achieved in history)
    • Reality: Positive thinking spurns vamping corruption, socialism does not last.

  • Major Historical Terms

  • Conservative
    • Emphasis on preserving the past.
    • Any past of a nation or state of any type of political affiliation.
    • Warning! Any book that tells you that conservatism means rightwing without clarifying it to a particular state and period in time is absolutely wrong!
    • For example, China's communist party today is seen as the conservative party from 1989 onward to contrasts Deng Xiaoping's capitalist revolutionary measures to bring China out of total collapse. This means that conservative in China means extreme leftwing.


  • Liberalism
    • Individual Freedom.
    • Typical Liberals: Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher.
    • Out of this came the two parties of America: Democrat (left) and Republican (right)
    • Liberalism began as concepts in Sumeria, Egypt then onto Europe where it disappeared after the Greek and Roman periods and eventually reawakened in the in England about 10th Century to slowly come into full swing along side the Industrial Revolution in England. Modern Liberalism is always associated with English speaking countries.
    • Warning! Note that today's liberal party in America and many liberal parties in western civilization lean hard to the left and do not follow the definition of the word - freedom, individual freedom, and the American Creed. 


  • American Creed
    • Individual Freedom (Right-wing)
    • Limited power of the government.
    • Capitalism/ laissez faire [ let it be] Individuals left to their own devices.
    • Pragmatic; non-ideological views.
    • History: Liberalism begot Republicans who are liberal and Democrats who are socialists.
    • Also called American exceptionalism.


  • Progressive (meaning in politics only)
    • Never satisfied.
    • Linked to radicalism.
    • Wanting change for change sake.
    • Any past of a nation must be destroyed for sake of change.
    • Finances: Progressive taxes, progressive governmental control.
    • Modern day usage: extreme left verging on communism.

    History of civics

  • World History Pattern: States that formed right follow pattern to blend of right and left and then eventually end up full left and its ruin. Karl Marks notes this in his basic history theory.

    • Family head of a small clan or tribe. During the nomadic wandering state of existence for Homo-sapiens.
    • Tribal leader of a many families  whom form groups for protection and increased production needs.
    • Priests  the first civic  leaders in Sumeria and Mesopotamia - the earliest forms of civilizations in the Middle East.
    • Pharos the first leaders in the Egyptian civilizations, although the name did not come into distinction until the New Kingdom period. Historians differ on the exact name of the early kings of Egypt, but this was the basic structure in civics thus they were Kings.
      • Old Kingdom : Kings rule with absoluteness. Limited to none Social Mobility.
      • New Kingdom Priests have autonomous regional power. Yes, Social Mobility.
    • Europe
      • Tribes
      • Clans
    • Ancient Greece
      • Republic formed and city-states ( Right-Wing)
      • Classical Period: Direct Democracy. ( Blend of Right and Left)
      • Hellenistic age. Full-on leftwing policies which leads to  ethnic conflict and the downfall and to the Hellenistic age which wound up Greece falling into dictatorship and total ruin. .
    • Persian Empire
      • First huge socialist state ( Empire)  blending with absolute imperialistic ruler.
      • Two classes Slaves and Aristocracy.
    • Rome
      • Republic formed and city-states.
      • Republic era termed rightwing.
      • After Third Punic war switched to blend of right and left.
      • Roman Empire stage went to militant left with much socialism for citizens.
      • Plebeians social mobility very much involved after Third Punic war.
    • Patricians & Plebeians
      • The Patrician Class is Rome's elite aristocracy, the powerful Founding Families of Rome.
      • Plebeians sought to be the lower class party of Rome. However during socialism period they became the  powerful and rich and influenced many decision leading to the down fall of Rome. Ethnic Conflict was rampant. Including the old Religion and new - Christianity.
      • Government: "The Roman government was considered "bicameral" because it had two houses. The upper house consisted of the patricians in the senate [ this was the Socialist aspect] , while the lower house was composed of plebeian tribunes [the Democratic aspect]. About one hundred years ago, a group of Americans called "progressives" demanded that the people be allowed to vote directly for their senators. Voters amended the Constitution in 1913 to allow the direct election of senators. The people have always elected members to the lower house of Congress, the House of 'Representatives."
      • Social Mobility: Yes. Although a Roman citizen had preference during the Empiric stage of imperialism.
    • Feudalism
      • Barbaric Kingdoms
      • Only two classes: Haves and have-nots.
    • Aristocracy
      • The wealthy who did not have to work. Landowners 
    • Bourgeoisie
      • Upper middle class  ( But middle class)
      • Period: renaissance- age of enlightenment.
    • Peasantry
      • non-landowners, had to work for a living.
      • serfs (middle ages)
    • Renaissance
      • Italian Renaissance ( Small republic city-States) Tuscany only.
      • Northern Renaissance: The emergence of the modern age and bloodshed over Aristocracy and bloodline and general population slavery. Many aspects contributed including the Arabs who cut off all world trade to Europe.
    • Modern Age
      • Individual Freedom becomes the premise again and writings of how to implement theses spreads through much bloodshed.
      • Upper middle class  ( But middle class) called Bourgeoisie in history from the Italian renaissance period onward.
    • Republics
      • People representative by electorates.
      • Nations in history: early Islam ( the four rightly divine caliphs) , Italian renaissance city-states, early ancient Greece ( before classical Greece). Early Roman republic period ( Before end of third Punic War).
    • Dictatorships
      • Rule by one leader and/or a small group over the larger masses.
      • Nations in history: too many to write.
    • Kingship
      • Rule by one person. Usually hereditary.
      • Two classes.
      • Can be benevolent or not.
    • Third Way
      • Referred to use of term in Fascist Germany.
      • Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Gerhard Schröder term for new political way.
      • Basically have progressive (leftist) goals through (rightwing) conservative economics. In this time period conservative means capitalistic - pro liberal economics but over the years the state will work for socialist then communistic goals. A very good idea when the economies of the said countries are booming - however changes to how far the state goes relies on this continued booming economy and how the tax base increases without job loss.
    • Roosevelt
      • 1930s " the New Deal" America changed.
      • " Do you believe government is a responsible entity to take care of you? [ positive instrument in our lives]"
    • Aristocracy
      • the wealthy who didn't have to work and ruled the masses or were celebrated by sheer worship by the masses.



    • Anarchy

    • Rejects state completely [right]
    • Rejects private property [left]
    • Direction: Extreme Right and Extreme left
    • Possibly basic tribal barbarians
    • hates all structure and laws
    • Great emphasis in polarization of mind
    • Political ideology: Absence of order; Social equality and individual freedom emphasized; opposed to capitalism, but also socialism, communism and fascism. Although, they use the the language of the political left to get what they want.
    • History: Practiced in only complete meltdowns of states or barbaric circumstances: Russian revolution; Spanish Civil War.
    • Modern Times. none
    • Social Democracy ( Federal Representative Democracy)
      • Best described the Utilities companies of the United States prior to 1980s
      • Government funded and controlled major utilities.
      • Direction: Left institutions, but right in economy when the going gets tough.
      • Evolutionary socialism
      • Reform capitalism  - no need for revolution.
      • great emphasis in equality.
      • Political ideology: Social equality, but social movement possible ( regulate a three class system).
      • History: Italian Renaissance ( representatives in Florence)
      • Modern Times. Germany, Sweden.


    • Fascism
      • Key value is structural socialist control
      • Discipline, limited/controlled capitalism - but for the purposes of the enhancement of the state.
      • Direction: Extreme left [ institutions, culture] mild right [ state controlled capitalism]
      • Links to national member associations ( Called extreme nationalism)
      • Racism and intolerance usually stemming from economic exploitation by outside source.
      • Nations in history: Persia, China, Germany, Umayyad, Ottoman, Saudi Arabia, Iran.
      • Modern times: Denmark, Sweden; both countries here have dabbled in racism favoring the old timers in government handouts to new influx of foreigners into the country who want government handouts.


    • Feudalism
      • Masters and Slaves.
      • Suppression of the masses.
      • Direction: left [Instatution] .
      • Two class system ( Haves and Have-nots). Aristocracy vs. vassals & serfs
      • Western Civilization: Middle Ages.
      • Little if none ability to social clime.
      • History: The western Middle Ages c. 9th Century to c. 15th  Century.


    • Modern Socialism ( general )
      • Organizational information: Federal.
      • Highly structured system.
      • Direction:  very left [Institution, economy]
      • Progressive tax.
      • Public services.
      • Various degrees of private property.
      • Privatization and capitalism introduced when finances need restructuring.
      • Nations in history: Many modern European states. Canada.


    • Communism
      • Two Class System
      • Marx's five stage system: Primitive communism - feudalism-capitalism-socialism-communism. Communism seen as the heaven of all political systems.
      • Direction: Extreme left [Institution, culture, economy]
      • All Private Property is theft - so no one is aloud private property ( Except Army and Gov).
      • Historically: never been run correctly.
      • Revolution is inevitable and desirable.
      • Political Ideology: Social equality, communal property.
      • Rejects capitalism and individualism.
      • Very strong central control of government.
      • Individual liberty downplayed or abolished.
      • Nations in history: Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, North Korea.
    • Democracy ( Direct)
      • All people have one vote (results mob rules - Aristotle) 
      • Equality is emphasized.
      • Direction: extreme right [Institution]
      • Nations in history: Greece


    • International Society of Political Psychology
      • Organizational information
      • Links to psychology web sites particularly valuable


    • Neo-Conservative
      • Began as a political leftist; then changed as a liberal, then moved on to conservative (Wolfowitz). Warning! if true than Wolfowitz implies America is against Imperialism in any of its forms. And Isolation methods imposed. This contrasts others who think that it means imperialism. If it does mean imperialism, than both Democrats and Republicans are involved by way of economic menthols imposed on American policy  in the 20th Century. .
      • (Wolfowitz) Believes welfare state went too far. (U.S.A.)
    • Neo-Liberal
      • Hatred for Republican and Conservatives.
      • Wants full on communism and radical measures imposed in policy.
      • Thrives off idealism of social equality and not practicalism or the American creed..
      • Disgruntled about conservatives (U.S.A.)

    Ideologies and Goals:

    • Key Characteristics of all Ideologies
      • Organizational information.
      • Key Values ( What is the most important).
      • Conception of change.
      • Role of state.
      • Role of individual.

      Systems that Control Large Directions of States:

      Political patterns of creating a wealthy state happens when the country or nation begins to tax less their citizens. A Prime example, can be seen in Chinese dynastic history. Most of the eleven dynasties began to bring back a new government system that was destroyed fully by the preceding dynasty by tax incentives and over all tax relief.

      Voting in a Democracy.

      America followed a predictable pattern in history. Rome and Greece two semi types of democracies showed distinct districting and congregating political majorities in certain regions. These regions were also predictable in that they had one thing in common: The place where immigrants, and disenfranchised flocked too. In America, the two major  parties, or philosophies, just as in Rome and Greece, had terms to identify them in color and by name. Here we are dealing with colors as they identify easily in quantitative political science. Red is for republicans and Blue is for Democrats. Yet these color have changed back and forth in different groups who put out statistics. The Perdictable patterns have all to deal with big coastal cities where diversity and trade bring in people from all over the world. This applies to Athens, it applies to many Roman states that swung politically left. Still other factors played into which regions were geared toward voting or voicing consent in right vs. left political arena, the rural communities vs. the big cities almost played opposing parts. Why? Well immigrants come from all over and are usually poor. They need help financially and with living arrangements. The big cities caters to cheaper living quarters in the name of apartments and big cities have local governmental programs to cater to the needy. After a certain period, immigrants become powerful and hold local political office with promises to the needy more welfare. In this issue they lock-up the re-election votes and remain in power. They fight the federal government for more national tax dollars anyway they can threw the courts to pay-off constituents which also helps them stay in power. This game replays over and over until the money runs out.

      The countryside and rule areas compete with the big cities to keep their traditional taxes down. They work hard and usually do with less public services. They resent the big cities from taking much need federal tax dollars away from them. They traditionally vote for the candidate to take less takes away from them. Why? In the rule areas the immigrant problem and cheap housing are substantially small in comparison to the big cities. At at the same time, city dwellers who prefer candidates who tax less usually reestablishes themselves in a region that dictates the same likes as theirs. However, the right who decide to stick it out in the big city, citing various reasons and liking the hub-bub of city life, use a way of politicking that political parties begin when population rises in history. This is called gerrymandering.

    Athenian Empire Created, 470 B.C. - 448 B.C. with the induction of the Delian League. This league was formed to battle the Persian Empire who had been attacking Greece for a long time. This was a confederate of Greek city-states with the treasury placed in the main building of the acropolis in Athens. After a while many leftist politicians stole from the fund. This was one of Socrates outcries that got him in trouble with the government. In essence, Athens played an increasing role of authoritarian to all other confederate city-states with threats of harm if they did not follow Athenian orders. At first all went well. The league fleet maintained the security of  the Aegean and The Athenians were supported by a majority of the allies. After many victories and some key annexations of semi-sovereign islands questions arose to do those people have rights. Another factor played in the fall of Greece with members o the leagues not being able to provide ships which became a hardship. This was relived by financial contributions instead of ships. The money was stored in the Acropolis where only the Athenians had access too. As political parties split and many members decided to leave because of the looting of the money by the leftist officials in Athens, things began to deteriorate. For one thing, immigration and joblessness was up, because Athens stopped paying ship builders and began to pay into their own political constituency by creating welfare state based upon members donations that was kept secret. Because Socrates lived a life of justness he would not take bribe money to keep his mouth shut. He complained bitterly about the corruption of the Greek people and had access to confidential inner doings of the Athenian government who kept trying to silence him without suspicion. The situation in Athens at this time parallels the United States of America in the leftist arena who also take out much political money by the way of taxes and political contributions to payoff immigrants and the constituency. All this was unfortunate because Athens was, in other ways, the most  humane and liberal (Rightwing) state in Greece. Acts of imperialism were condemned by conservatives such as the statesman Thucydides, son of Melesias along with Socrates. Socrates was brought up on trumped up charges (Not true) and sentence to death). Athens moved away from pragmatism, an American conservative value to idealism. During the imperialist stage Pericles was filled with the vision of an idealized Athens. This was to let leftists in on its wealth and to pay for this by spreading democracy, forced sometimes, onto other regions. The same immigration happened in Athens that is happening in American big cities. The needy come and receive welfare from political newly immigrant operatives. The sharing of the wealth, that was in fact, looted in a 'Rob Peter to pay Paul' scam was overlooked as a major flaw in democracy. Democracy is not bad, but it has its kinks. Some after the the problems arose more people constituencies were districted and bitter fights erupted with the left winning letting more and more foreigners sway the political arena of Athens government playing the guilty decision card. This way the left was able to maintain and grow in numbers in power establishing a president that all foreigners were able to have a voice in politics. This began the downfall of democracy. The immigrants who are a needy group voted for the leftist candidates who promised the candy store. The candy store politicians in one who caters to every whim of the new populace. That populace wants more social funding that depletes the economic balance of a society. In retrospect, they came late and wanted everything right away.


    In America, redistricting regions ( many  precincts) to stay in power is a prime example of how a democracy is not doing its job. There is a  census every once and  a while and politicians look at this data to see who will most likely vote for their side. They make an agreement with both sides and redistrict the regions that in effect take away a balanced vote. This way the politicians stay in power and the immigrant welfare politicians ( The left) stay in power for decades and remain in power by catering to the new population. Deficits and borrowing usually occur and then the politicians go ask the federal government for money claiming a disaster if they do not get their money. This works and depletes the federal governments sources for other more important programs. This leads to political downfalls and bitterness between the left and the right. Another cause that happens in redistricting and coastal big cities is that one side wins all the time and causes people to rethink the electoral system. This way they get more of the new population a say in the vote and a repeat of Athens follow. The corruption of public funds, the staying in power by new population political and depleting of national funds and security breakdowns. This can only happen at this stage by a progressive tax system in which the left rallies 100% behind. The emotions of the new population, and the selfish ( For example, single women who raise children without wanting a father in the lives of the Children) will vote for the leftist. This goes toward the argument of social equality and the communistic extreme that is left in politics. This is always a disaster in history and leads to the slow evolution of dissolving that democracy until it is taken over by an outside force.

    So an inside force is the initial cause ( A democracy wanting to go left) then immigration by people who have no understanding of democracy and political cater to their vote, then progressive tax because of welfare state and idealism of social democracy caves in the system and an outside force takes over. This links into a movement that wants to abolsh the elevtorial process, or in older democracies the representation of the rural regions of a state.


    The Electoral Process.

    The electoral process in America is one of the most significant changes in western democracies. It gives voices to the rural areas and even out the process of equal representation. Many opponents disagree in that large states boils down to is a winner take all and the popular vote in a state will not be reflective of the over all census of the country once all the states are counted up. There is a reason why the founders chose this system over what is called a direct democracy ( Or popular vote). First, they studied both Roman and Greece democracies and the flaws that developed over time in the voting imbalances. For example, After the third Punic War, many Curians took advantage of making special  deals with Carthaginian businessmen to import agricultural goods cheaper than paying the Roman farmers who were left out of a job, and thus left out of representation. As more disenfranchised people migrated into the larger cities they called to have a voice in the election process of its leaders, both local and regional. Over time more and more people who were representative asked for the politician who would give him of her the most free handouts. As this occurred lies and corrupted ensued. This was one point the founder thought was a problem.  In America, the big cities is where many foreigners come to look for handouts by the U.S.A. government. The Democrats usually win elections because they pander to these needs. If the electoral process is thrown out and a direct democracy replaces the electoral process then the big city leftists will win every time. This will nullify the rural areas of the country who tend to vote rightwing for lower taxes. This is coupled by changes in non-production of manufacturing to a service economy that hangs on for a short period until the money from the larger corporations run out. When the money to pay for the welfare of the poor in the cities runs out then the nations reaches a crisis and must borrow money from the world bank or foreigners who can take land or influence in world deals. This destroys the host country as it did in Athens and Rome. This is because an imbalance of a two party system is destroyed and one party system takes over.

    America, United States of

    American party links from PolitInfo.com (world parties)

    Work Cited:

     1 (Mike Dowling "The Electronic Passport to the Legacy of Roman Government," available from http://www.mrdowling.com/702-legacy.html; Internet; updated Sunday, August 16, 2015 12:19 PM ).


    extreme acts of imperialism were condemned by conservatives
    such as the statesman Thucydides, son of Melesias, but by the 440's some
    thousands of Athenians received wages for various services from the annual
    payments of the allies.


    If your professors or anyone tells you differently, they are members of MEAMIC.

    Warning! All of these have one thing in common. That is the variables that come into play when analyzing politics as a whole. For example when comparing Hitler's Germany with, lets say, of  institutions one finds that it was a extreme left. When examining it under the branch of economy a blend between right and left is seen. When further examining it under the branch of culture one sees racism which is opposed to the ideology of extreme left  - equality of its people - is  in reality, as most communistic states were, racist in practice - thus making them extreme left. UC Berkeley argued that this was a mistake in prior studies and rightwing could only be viewed in regards to racism and thus deemed all communism in the 20th Century and the strict socialist institutions such as Hitler's Germany as right-wing in nature. This is in fact wrong. They left out the comparison variables of 'Institutions' in their argument thus giving comparative politics a slanted unrealistic view. For more...info on their study including how they deemed George Washington a right-winger alongside of Mao Tse-tung see link.

  • Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels both understood they were Not Conservative, Not Republican, Not Democratic, Not Capitalists,  they were socialists. London, UK, Telegraph Article 26 Feb 2014.


    Progressive[ism] is a term for the post  antebellum Democratic Party, formed after 1860s and the Civil War period, and progressive means Anti Democratic or Pro-Socialism and or in simple terms the dictatorship of the few ( we call this in America the 1%ers), elite, privileged, in power. A perfect example of a Progressive Society was the Third Reich, or NAZIs. The Democratic Party for over 75 years have been shouting to the world this has been their aim for ever, and ever to achieve a utopia based upon pure Fascism, that they call progressivism.

    progressivism never meant Anti Slavery!

    If Democracy and sharing were ideals formed in the beginning, Progressive terminology was first used to differentiate Democracy that were seen by colored people as inherently racist. However, the corrupted or real term is anti Democratic. It took anti Democratic Legislator and arm twisting to pass the Emancipation Act, and to replace it was the Minimum Wage, said to be the key to classism – the rich make money off the poor, come from parents that live together, perhaps or royalty, or privilege and are said to be rulers and the rest who do not have tight families, must be worker slaves at low wages. American slavery has not stopped, never, and was implemented in forcing Pakistani Children in the 1950s-‘60s to slave to make plastics for the U.S.A. and so much more till today, when Chinese and Latin Slave Labor camps work for blacks, Asians, whites and Browns, slaving for their privileged lifestyle. So now Blacks benefit by children in Chinese slave labor camps, so well documented and lied to be Washington D.C. and the local media. They convince these blacks entrepreneurs and rich black new business persons that using child labor in Latin America or China is moral and just. And these are the same blacks that decried ill treatment for their own slavery. So yes, the human is very flawed.


    Science ( variable) switch Rats to Americans, and it all make sense!
    There is that rat study that shows that overcrowding (with ample food) permanently makes changes to the individuals behaviors. This study a century older than another mice study on happiness. If you place a mouse or rat in an enclosed cage and give it two bottle liquid sources, one water, and one water with either diluted heroine or diluted cocaine. The mice all chose the drug water over the regular water, became addicted and kept ingesting until they died. Then a while later, someone redid the test but changed the ‘space and environment’, the enclosure became a larger playground for the mice to enjoy. Then these scientists or scientist replicated the liquid source and the mice miraculously chose the normal water over the drug water, a key to happiness and non-addiction.

    After day 600, the male mice just stopped defending their territory,
    listless mice congregated in the centres of the Universe. These gangs
    would burst into pointless and sporadic violence. Females stopped
    reproducing and even started attacking their own young. Mortality rose
    phenomenally. Roaming mice either attacked or attempted to mount others,
    irrespective of relation or gender, cannibalism and other acts of
    depravity consumed them.

    celebrity worship, government checks and food abundance and no purpose of life but to serve the rich fatsos. . What could go wrong?


    [[[ Leftists become incandescent when reminded of the socialist roots of Nazism , By Daniel Hannan Politics Last updated: February 25th, 2014]]]