Instruct: Given a question, retrieve relevant passages that answer the question.
Query: What is meaning of politics?
Politics (from Greek: πολιτικά, romanized:Politiká, meaning "affairs of the cities") is the process of making decisions that apply to members of a group.[1]
Initially a political philosopher, he published "The Principles of World Citizenship" in 1954. He then pursued the question "What do you mean by...?"", in "The Diversity of Meaning" (1962). This involved linguistic philosophy and sociology.
An example of this effect occurred in England during the Renaissance, when oranges began to be imported from the Mediterranean. Yellow and red came to be differentiated from a new colour term, "orange". What was the meaning of these words before 1600? – What is their meaning afterwards? Such effects go on often in the use of language and frequently this effect forms the basis of language/meaning. Such changes of meaning are also often centres of political violence, as is apparent in the differences invested in male/female, master/slave, citizen/foreigner etc. Derrida seeks to modulate and question these "violent hierarchies" through deconstruction.
Aristotle famously described reason (with language) as a part of human nature, which means that it is best for humans to live "politically" meaning in communities of about the size and type of a small city state ("polis" in Greek). For example...
It is clear, then, that a human being is more of a political ["politikon" = of the "polis"] animal ["zōion"] than is any bee or than any of those animals that live in herds. For nature, as we say, makes nothing in vain, and humans are the only animals who possess reasoned speech ["logos"]. Voice, of course, serves to indicate what is painful and pleasant; that is why it is also found in other animals, because their nature has reached the point where they can perceive what is painful and pleasant and express these to each other. But speech ["logos"] serves to make plain what is advantageous and harmful and so also what is just and unjust. For it is a peculiarity of humans, in contrast to the other animals, to have perception of good and bad, just and unjust, and the like; and the community in these things makes a household or city ["polis"]. [...] By nature, then, the drive for such a community exists in everyone, but the first to set one up is responsible for things of very great goodness. For as humans are the best of all animals when perfected, so they are the worst when divorced from law and right. The reason is that injustice is most difficult to deal with when furnished with weapons, and the weapons a human being has are meant by nature to go along with prudence and virtue, but it is only too possible to turn them to contrary uses. Consequently, if a human being lacks virtue, he is the most unholy and savage thing, and when it comes to sex and food, the worst. But justice is something political [to do with the "polis"], for right is the arrangement of the political community, and right is discrimination of what is just. (Aristotle's Politics 1253a 1.2. Peter Simpson's translation, with Greek terms inserted in square brackets.)
During the 2016 election, she became increasingly politically active. In 2015, Silverman endorsed Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders for President of the United States, saying, "He says what he means & he means what he says & he's not for sale". She had previously introduced Sanders at a rally in Los Angeles, California that drew an audience of over 27,500 people.
"Normal means" – going through the same political process comparable with normal legislative processes. There is no overarching, accepted definition of the legislative pathways which constitute "normal means," but clarification about what an affirmative team regards as "normal means" can be obtained as part of cross-examination by the negative team.
During the Italian Renaissance, Niccolò Machiavelli established the emphasis of modern political science on direct empirical observation of political institutions and actors. In the Prince Machiavelli posits a realist viewpoint, arguing that even evil means should be considered if they help to create and preserve a desired regime. Machiavelli therefore also argues against the use of idealistic models in politics, and has been described as the father of the "politics model" of political science. Machiavelli takes a different tone in his lesser known work, the Discourses of Livy. In this work he expounds on the virtues of republicanism and what it means to be a good citizen. Later, the expansion of the scientific paradigm during the Enlightenment further pushed the study of politics beyond normative determinations.
Cochrane has research interests in animal ethics, bioethics, environmental ethics, rights theory, and human rights, as well as contemporary political theory more broadly. He is a leading figure in what Garner calls the "political turn in animal ethics", though precisely what this means is disputed. Similarly, Tony Milligan characterises Cochrane as a key figure in the "political turn in animal rights", while Svenja Ahlhaus and Peter Niesen identify a discipline of "Animal Politics", of which Cochrane's work is a major part, separate from animal ethics. The literature to which these authors variously refer explores the relationships of humans and nonhuman animals from the perspective of normative political theory.
A court cannot look to political speeches alone to determine factual and legal realities merely because doing so would be easier than looking at all the relevant evidence. The government may not always mean what it says or say what it means.
The term "political subjectivity" had been used in earlier literature, such as Steven Brown's book, "Political subjectivity: Applications of Q methodology in political science" to refer to individual political view points as affected by social and personal psychological processes. But the term was later re-appropriated to refer to the much more intricate idea that the very experience of subjectivity is fundamentally political. According to Sadeq Rahimi in "Meaning, Madness and Political Subjectivity", "Politicality is not an added aspect of the subject, but indeed the mode of being of the subject, that is, precisely what the subject is."
Schmidt's interest in institutional theory and epistemology, and her highly innovative "discursive institutionalism", began with her PhD dissertation, which was focused on the philosophy of science and its implications for explanation in the social sciences, and political science in particular. It argued that rather than looking at what philosophers of science say about science, which often idealizes the lawlike approach of physics, we should look at what they do, which is to use the four primary methodological approaches in the social sciences to explain science —lawlike, sociological, historical, and interpretive. This insight served her well when the "methodological wars" began in political science in the 1990s, and comparative political scientists were enjoined no longer to do what they had long done, which was to intertwine interests, institutions, culture, and ideas and discourse into problem-oriented research on politics and policy. Instead, they split into different "neo-institutionalist" camps, focused on rational institutionalist incentive structures, historical institutionalist path dependency, or sociological institutionalist cultural framing. Left out was any overarching institutionalist theory for the ideational constructs of meaning, let alone the discursive dynamics of communication. Schmidt sought to fill this gap with what she has called "discursive institutionalism", which she developed in stand-alone articles, most notably in two highly cited articles in the Annual Review of Political Science and the European Political Science Review, as well as in her work on democracy and political economy.
When asked why he had become interested in this topic, Artistic Director Steve Cosson said "one of the things I wanted to do was to go work on a subject that was very different from us in our company and one of the first ideas was to do something about conservative Christianity. After the 2004 election, the subject seemed more and more important and our company had grown and had more resources, so it seemed like the time had come… And there's no better place to do this project than Colorado Springs because of New Life, Ted and his relationship to politics, his presidency of the NAE during the Bush Presidency … Three of us came out in June and went to New Life and I think the first time we really sort of got it, like "Oh! this really seems to be the center of America right now. I mean, you're in the middle of this church with 7,000 people and the minister is talking about his relationship to George Bush and Ariel Sharon and other world leaders. I think the world we come from knows that the evangelical movement is this big influential thing in politics, but they don't really have an understanding of the scope of it or what it means, or what that kind of Christianity really means, or what it is beyond its political effect on the national elections. And other than that they find it kind of scary and freaky."
"Down and dirty is the theme but that doesn't necessarily mean nasty. What it means is no holds barred and we're bringing the funny!" said Barnhart in a recent interview. "When I hosted The Freedom of Speech Comedy Show, people thought that the title meant the show would be 'F this' and "F that' but what it meant was, we didn't hold back, we let loose and brought the funny with no political correctness, gimmicks or corporate overlord micro-managing what we could or could not say. The first rule was that it had to be funny!"
For me, these things are very deeply connected. I think politics really is rooted in political philosophy, is much better understood when it's understood in light of political philosophy. And that a lot of the policy debates we have make much more sense if you see that people are arguing about two ways of understanding what the human person is, what human society is, and especially what the liberal society is. The left and right in our country are both liberal, they both believe in the free society, but they mean something very different by that.
The is a local political party in Okinawa, Japan. "Seitō" means "political party", while "sōzō" may mean or . Contrary to what its official English name might suggest, the party is considered as largely conservative.
The second larger consideration for Habermas is the supplanting of what he calls "constitutional patriotism" for ethnic nationalism as the substantial glue holding a diverse, pluralistic society together. In a "postmetaphysical" age, worldview pluralism means that people cannot base agreements at a political level on particular religious values. Similarly, in an age of immigration and retreating racism, it is no longer appropriate to build political consensus in the state primarily upon one culture's values over another's. Consequently, the only way forward is to expand the emancipatory potential already present even in culturally- or religiously-grounded democratic institutions—namely, that people come by practice to see that their own interests are best safeguarded in procedural systems of law and politics that systematically protect the interests of all equally. A dedication to such a political-legal system is what Habermas means by "constitutional patriotism," as elaborated particularly in the essays later published as "The Postnational Constellation".
Skinner is regarded as one of the founders of the 'Cambridge School' of the history of political thought, best known for its attention to what J.G.A. Pocock has described as the ‘languages’ in which moral and political philosophy has been written. Skinner’s contribution has been to articulate a theory of interpretation in which leading texts in the history of political theory are treated essentially as interventions in on-going political debates, and in which the main focus is on what individual writers may be said to have been doing in what they wrote. One consequence of this view is an emphasis on the necessity of studying less well-known political writers as a means of shedding light on the classic authors – although it also consciously questions the extent to which it is possible to isolate so-called ‘classic’ texts. In its earlier versions this added up to what many have seen as a persuasive critique of the approach of an older generation, and particularly of Leo Strauss and his followers.
From what he presented as his miraculous conversion to Protestantism in 1994, Garotinho, although not himself a Pentecostalist - he is member of a Presbyterian Church - came to stand as a spearhead of the constantly growing involvement of the Pentecostalist Churches in Brazilian politics, as well as of their bid for the Federal Executive itself. Given the notorious ties between Pentecostalism and the urban unorganized poor - for which a conversion to Pentecostalism tends to stand for a newly found sense of community as well as for an aspiration at upward social mobility - one could say that Garotinho stood for the preferential social connections created by his political mentor Leonel Brizola, differing from him in that he gave such connections a more politically conservative hue, by means of a kind of Right-wing populism in what is seem by many as simply pandering for the bare needs of the poor by means of a shallow philanthropy reduced to the concrete minimum. Others, however, consider that, conversely, one could also say that Garotinho gave evangelical politics a leftist slant, in that his evangelicism is the "personal" choice of a recent and enthusiastic convert, who therefore acknowledges the most destitute ones by means not only of offering munificence, but of a shared identity.
The Kach lawyers presented what they claimed was a kind of "mirror image brief", in which they asserted that Kach had no objection to the democratic character of Israel, but asserted that that character must be interpreted as subject to Israel being a Jewish State—i.e., the democratic character of Israel could not mean any infringement of the pre-eminent position of Jews in all spheres of Israeli life, since such infringement would mean that Israel was not a Jewish state (at least, not what Kach regarded as "a Jewish state"). Rather, Kach held that it had no objection to state officials being elected in free elections and that political parties and organizations be granted freedom of speech, as long as political and economic power was kept exclusively in the hands of Jews.
The study and practice of political communication focuses on the ways and means of expression of a political nature. Robert E. Denton and Gary C. Woodward, two important contributors to the field, in "Political Communication in America" characterize it as the ways and intentions of message senders to influence the political environment. This includes public discussion (e.g. political speeches, news media coverage, and ordinary citizens' talk) that considers who has authority to sanction, the allocation of public resources, who has authority to make decision, as well as social meaning like what makes someone American. In their words "the crucial factor that makes communication 'political' is not the source of a message, but its content and purpose." David L. Swanson and Dan Nimmo, also key members of this sub-discipline, define political communication as "the strategic use of communication to influence public knowledge, beliefs, and action on political matters." They emphasize the strategic nature of political communication, highlighting the role of persuasion in political discourse. Brian McNair provides a similar definition when he writes that political communication is "purposeful communication about politics." For McNair this means that this not only covers verbal or written statements, but also visual representations such as dress, make-up, hairstyle or logo design. With other words, it also includes all those aspects that develop a "political identity" or "image". Reflecting on the relationship between political communication and contemporary agenda-building, Vian Bakir defines Strategic Political Communication (SPC) as comprising 'political communication that is manipulative in intent, that utilises social scientific techniques and heuristic devices to understand human motivation, human behavior and the media environment, to inform effectively what should be communicated – encompassing its detail and overall direction – and what should be withheld, with the aim of taking into account and influencing public opinion, and creating strategic alliances and an enabling environment for government policies – both at home and abroad'. 
Political subjectivity is an emerging concept in social sciences and humanities. Political subjectivity is a reference to the deep embeddedness of subjectivity in the socially intertwined systems of power and meaning. "Politicality," writes Sadeq Rahimi in "Meaning, Madness and Political Subjectivity", "is not an added aspect of the subject, but indeed the mode of being of the subject, that is, precisely what the subject "is"."
Firstly, it serves to elucidate upon claims to a ‘post-political impasse’. This is best understood through what Ranciere calls "the police", "the political" and "politics". It is within these three terms that Ranciere carves out what he calls the true meaning of political action, and of what it is to exercise political right. As Panagia neatly summarizes; ‘politics is the practice of asserting one’s position that ruptures the logic of arche’. Politics is about rediscovering the art of debate, conflict and struggle, and not merely about re-organizing the administrative framework of existing political structures (namely, the state apparatus)." The political" – in Ranciere’s words – is for ‘[t]he one who is ‘unaccounted-for’, the one who has no speech to be heard’. Democracy does not work towards an ‘idealized-normative condition’ of equal rights, but is built upon the very ontological notion of such. "Politics" brings the political into the foreground; rendering that which was previously noise, legitimate speech. Much of what is thought to be politics in the contemporary world is actually subsumed within "the police". Policy is not politics is this sense, then. This is what Ranciere calls "the partition of the sensible", or the established order of things.
Musalaha has developed a number of different projects, from desert encounters to conferences and training workshops, all designed to bring Israelis and Palestinians together. Officially, Musalaha as an organization has no political stance or agenda, however in the words of Salim J. Munayer, 
"It would be naive to say that Musalaha doesn't have one [a political agenda], because here in Jerusalem we are all involved in politics, as much as breathing or eating. Everything we say and do has political implications...So we do have a political agenda. We want to see nations in the Middle East, and especially the Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs, being reconciled by the gospel. What does that mean? Simply, it means to be reconciled to each other."
Although the album did not contain as many lyrics with overtly politically messages as songs from "The Score", there were still political intentions. Wyclef Jean describes the meaning of the title of their first album in a 1990 interview on the television program Lorna’s Corner: 
“when the cop is messing around with somebody for something that the person didn’t do and they try to set ‘em up, that makes me blunted on reality. When the government is taking money on arms…and that money could be going back to the community it makes me blunted on reality. It’s just awareness of what’s going on…that’s what blunted on reality means…It don’t mean that I smoke weed…cause I’m too paranoid as it is.”
Political theorist, Hannah Arendt argues that storytelling transforms private meaning to public meaning. Regardless of the gender of the narrator and what story they are sharing, the performance of the narrative and the audience listening to it is where the power lies.