This week, I discuss a broad question that I like to start off each semester with when I’m teaching my undergraduate World Politics course: “What is the difference between politics and government?” This is an important question to consider in an American media landscape that is largely dominated by news about politics, and we hear very little about government.
As I discussed in the introductory episode of this podcast, I want to go beyond the news cycle’s fixation on political drama to discuss the ideas, trends and government structures that shape the political drama that plays across our newsfeeds and screen. This episode is an initial foray into discussion.
The transcript below is edited for clarity.
Main topic: What is the difference between government and politics?
I think this is an important question because when I look at my social media feeds and news sites, what I see most often are conversation about politics not government, and I think that’s dangerous.
So what is government? What is politics? They’re related, but very different.
Simply put, government can be defined as the set of laws, institutions, traditions and agreements that organize a society. Some may also use the term “governance” to include the day to day running of a society.
Politics refers to processes and relationships that animate those laws, institutions, traditions and agreements. In other words, the questions of politics largely revolve around who should exercise power and authority within government, why and how. Put another way, the organs of Government confirm, legitimates and enforces authority, so politics seeks to influence, guide and/or control that authority. It’s easy to reduce all of this down to questions of power and the struggle to achieve it, but that would be inaccurate. Power is certainly part of the political equation, but it’s a pretty inexact word with quite a bit of baggage. In fact, the definition and nature of power is a central question of political philosophy that has been debated for millennia. It’s a question that I’ll probably discuss at different points, but for purposes of this initial introduction, understand that I’m referring to power generally, not with any particular reference, so, no Nietzschean “will to power” or anything like that.
So when we see discussions about politics, what we are essentially watching is an epic reality TV show of negotiated relationships. Unfortunately, the drama and personalities make it easy to forget that what’s giving meaning to this drama is a very dry and boring, yet necessary, set of laws, institutions, traditions and agreements…. A government.
Failing to understand the structure of a government and the reasons behind that structure leads to misunderstanding of politics. However, over focusing on government means that we run the risk of missing trends, changes, threats, etc.
So a responsible citizen needs to be engaged in the political process, but not without knowledge of the system of government at issue – it’s design, purpose and scope. Especially in a democracy, to be familiar with the political process, but not understand the government that political process is to sustain contributes to the undermining of that government.
Joe Klein, in an interview on Art of Manliness, noted that we’re living in an age where we’re “trying to do democracy without citizens,” which suggests an unhealthy fixation on politics for politics sake, rather than politics for government’s sake.
That statement begs the question, “where did the citizens go?”
I think a partial answer can be made by saying that by and large, Americans are more concerned with watching politics, than discussing and participating in government. So we talk about and value democracy and democratic forms, but we leave the hard work of government to a paid elite.
Conversation starters: How should this influence our political conversations?
Political conversations, the more polarizing kind, are usually super emotional for people because we intrinsically understand that we’re debating a relationship, whether or not someone should or should not have a particular ability. We intuit advantages and disadvantages, which then engage our core values and emotions.
Government conversations, on the other hand talk about why processes and systems should circumscribe the power. It doesn’t ask, “Should we pass X law?” but rather asks, “How should we go about passing and enforcing any law?” The first question inquires into the pros and cons of a particular policy action, the second question merely asks, how should we set policy?
How do politics and government interact? Assumptions about one influence how we think about the other. So what assumptions do you make? About people? Power? Organizations?
If you can, draw/imagine a triangle. At the top point write “the State” at another point write the “citizens”, and at the last point write “the government.”
Now here’s something that could prompt some good conversations: Ask your friends to do the same, then compare your triangles. At which point were you putting each item? Which item is on the top? Why?
The spoken and written word (podcasts and reading)
If you want a highbrow-lowbrow view of how citizens interact with politics-government dichotomy, I recommend that you check out the following:
- The Babylon Bee podcast’s first couple of episodes explore the role of satire in political discourse
- As part of my 2019 reading, I recently finished Volume 1 and Volume 2 of the presidential inaugural addresses, which provide this ongoing discussion of leaders navigating this often fraught relationship between politics and government
The last word
“That is our generation’s task – to make these words, these rights, these values – of life, and liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness – real for every American. Being true to our founding documents does not require us to agree on every contour of life; it does not mean we will all define liberty in exactly the same way, or follow the same precise path to happiness. Progress does not compel us to settle centuries-long debates about the role of government for all time – but it does require us to act in our time”
Barack Obama, Second Inaugural Address, 2013