p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Polit Journal
Christopher Binetti
Independent Scholar

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Aristotle, Martin, and Grube: “Ajaws”, “Kings”, “Reges”, and the Unified Theory of Politics Christopher Binetti
Polit Journal Scientific Journal of Politics Vol 4 No 3 (2024): Polit Journal: Scientific Journal of Politics, August
Publisher : Britain International for Academic Research (BIAR-Publisher)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.33258/polit.v4i3.1180

Abstract

This paper applies the new concept of the Unified Theory of Politics, which states that any polity with writing can be compared with any other polity with writing, regardless of culture, place, and time. In this paper, we will look at political terms for rulers, particularly those for monarchs, in order both to compare them and to correct equivalences that do not make sense. The most distinct Civilization in the world is Mesoamerica. Its most well-known literate civilization is the Mayan civilization. Martin and Grube are the experts on the political institutions of the Classic Mayans. They are, in fact, the ones who best show the ability to compare Mayan monarchy to other monarchies from across the world. However, they mistranslate a key term, which is the core problem that this paper attempts to solve. Martin and Grube translate “ajaw” and its variants as “king”. The title for a stronger ruler, “kaloomte” and its variants, does not seem to be translated into a particular term by Martin and Grube. Their book is by far the most thorough look at Mayan political regimes, offices, and titles, though Coe and Houston also have something to say about this. The equation of “ajaw” with “king” seems to be uncontested. In order to compare rulers from different cultures, times, and places as the Unified Theory of Politics demands, we need analytically-comparable terms. In this paper, it will be argued that an “ajaw” is not “king”. Instead, an “ajaw” can be described as a legitimate ruler, a sovereign, or a monarch. In working towards this conclusion, this paper will argue that the term “king” should be used sparingly in historical-comparative studies and if possible, in common parlance. Not only is “ajaw” an inappropriate synonym for “king”, but even the term “rex”, which is usually translated as if unproblematic as “king” really should not be so translated. This is true essentially down the line of common equations with “king”. Some of these equations are comparable but never really equate to “king”. This paper uses Aristotle and the Unified Theory Politics to come up with a political taxonomy of monarchies that not only resolves the above problem, but allows for cross-cultural analysis of thirty-seven distinct monarchical offices.
Let Me Tell You a Story: History, Political Theory, and Mesoamerica, Part 1 Christopher Binetti
Polit Journal Scientific Journal of Politics Vol 4 No 4 (2024): Polit Journal: Scientific Journal of Politics, November
Publisher : Britain International for Academic Research (BIAR-Publisher)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.33258/polit.v4i4.1253

Abstract

This two-part article attempts to use a novel method- creative non-fiction (or story-telling) to make a serious point about History, Political Theory, and Mesoamerica. Since Mesoamerica is a politically-sensitive topic and because any attempt to apply Political Theory to the history of ancient Mesoamerica may be met with implicit biases, the novel use of creative non-fiction-style story-telling (where all of the facts are portrayed accurately and cited) has been employed before the formal theorization is presented. This combines one of the strengths of traditional Political Theory- the use of the thought experiment with actual historical and archaeological data. The names of places and persons are present not only in the citations throughout the paper but also in the second half of the paper, which analyzes the story and reveals three important themes. This is a natural experiment in which the psychological biases of the reader are tested and allows to compare ancient Mesoamerica to other places, in this case, ancient Italy. This leads to a third theme, that the rise of ancient Mesoamerica through the Mixe-Zoquean civilization (and not the Mayans as many scholars pretend) empirically proves that Aristotle’s theory of the origins of civilization is correct. This paper is in two clear halves to show these three themes from both the theoretical-narrative and historical-empirical perspectives.