This is a republic? Maybe not

In matters of politics, passion drives more than fact. Words and labels fly publicly hither and fro, unfettered by specificities as they assail all in their wake. Yet historically, few politicians, policies, or political systems have in fact been so easily categorized to fit the molds of impassioned perception. President Reagan led one of the biggest tax hikes in history and President Obama has deported the most immigrants in one term. No man is a stereotype and every president learns that his job and society are too complex to follow a purist's path.

Truer still for political systems. A series of "My Turns" and letters have bandied about terms such as "democracy," "communism," "federalism," and "socialism," some with little understanding of their definitions. For most of us, decades have passed since political science class, and memories fade as fast as passions flare. The lines blur. So this column and Thursday's will attempt to redraw them.

Treatises have been written on what classification describes our own political system - a hybrid and moving blend. Americans are nothing if not creative; then again, many countries have blended longer than have we. Some began this way; others discover by series of successes and failures that no political philosophy in its purity is sufficient - optimal function lies in bits and pieces of several.

The U.S. is neither direct democracy, nor pure republic, nor socialist economy, yet we have long-established elements of all three. Consider our systems of education and policing - both are government-run and directly provide services to citizens. That in essence is (a form of) socialism. Long gone are the days when only those who could pay received both. Profit motives can not support all basic needs.

"Pure" political systems of any form tend to be unrealistic. There are many forms of democracy, many of socialism, and many more between.

One "My Turn" attempted to temper the discussions with reminders that some of the terms of political science have been used incorrectly, e.g., that Stalin differed from Marx, and that today the two major U.S. parties do not mirror their origins. Watching "Lincoln" recently, a movie about the politics behind the 13th Amendment, was a stark reminder of how much "Democrat" and "Republican" have changed in two centuries, in some ways swapping arguments entirely.

Political science is just that - a science. Responsible scientists make no conclusion considering only one factor; they consider many, pulling from various resources to discover nature's combined truth to apply it for the benefit of mankind.

So Thursday, back to basics - a look at the scientific terms of political systems. Call it Professor Webster's contribution to the flames of political passion.

Sholeh Patrick is a columnist for the Hagadone News Network with degrees in international studies and law. Contact her at [email protected].