Editing Government (section)

==Political science==
{{main|Political science}}
{{Politics sidebar|expanded=Subseries}}

=== Classification ===
In political science, it has long been a goal to create a typology or taxonomy of [[polities]], as typologies of political systems are not obvious.{{sfn|Lewellen|2003|p={{page needed|date=July 2022}}}} It is especially important in the [[political science]] fields of [[comparative politics]] and [[international relations]]. Like all categories discerned within forms of government, the boundaries of government classifications are either fluid or ill-defined.

Superficially, all governments have an official ''[[de jure]]'' or ideal form. The United States is a federal constitutional republic, while the former [[Soviet Union]] was a federal [[socialist republic]]. However, self-identification is not objective, and as Kopstein and Lichbach argue, defining regimes can be tricky, especially ''[[de facto]]'', when both its government and its economy deviate in practice.{{sfn|Kopstein|Lichbach|2005|p=4}} For example, [[Voltaire]] argued that "the [[Holy Roman Empire]] is neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire".{{sfn|Renna|2015}} In practice, the Soviet Union was a centralized autocratic one-party state under [[Joseph Stalin]].

Identifying a form of government can be challenging because many [[political system]]s originate from socio-economic movements, and the parties that carry those movements into power often name themselves after those ideologies. These parties may have competing political ideologies and strong ties to particular forms of government. As a result, the movements themselves can sometimes be mistakenly considered as forms of government, rather than the ideologies that influence the governing system.<ref>Hague, R., & Harrop, M. (2013). Comparative government and politics: An introduction (9th ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.</ref>

Other complications include general non-consensus or deliberate "[[Disinformation|distortion or bias]]" of reasonable technical definitions of political ideologies and associated forms of governing, due to the nature of politics in the modern era. For example: The meaning of "conservatism" in the United States has little in common with the way the word's definition is used elsewhere. As Ribuffo notes, "what Americans now call conservatism much of the world calls liberalism or [[neoliberalism]]"; a "conservative" in Finland would be labeled a "[[socialist]]" in the United States.{{sfn|Ribuffo|2011|pp=2–6|loc=quote on p. 6}} Since the 1950s, conservatism in the United States has been chiefly associated with [[right-wing politics]] and the [[History of the Republican Party (United States)|Republican Party]]. However, during the era of [[Racial segregation in the United States|segregation]] many [[Southern Democrats]] were conservatives, and they played a key role in the [[conservative coalition]] that controlled Congress from 1937 to 1963.{{sfn|Frederickson|2000|p=12}}{{efn|{{harvnb|Frederickson|2000|p=12}}, quote: "...conservative southern Democrats viewed warily the potential of New Deal programs to threaten the region's economic dependence on cheap labor while stirring the democratic ambitions of the disfranchised and undermining white supremacy."}}

===Social-political ambiguity===
Opinions vary by individuals concerning the types and properties of governments that exist. "Shades of gray" are commonplace in any government and its corresponding classification. Even the most liberal democracies limit rival political activity to one extent or another while the most tyrannical dictatorships must organize a broad base of support thereby creating difficulties for "[[pigeonholing]]" governments into narrow categories. Examples include the claims of the [[Plutocracy#United States|United States as being a plutocracy]] rather than a democracy since some American voters believe elections are being manipulated by wealthy [[Super PACs]].{{sfn|Freeland|2012}} Some consider that government is to be reconceptualised where in times of climatic change the needs and desires of the individual are reshaped to generate sufficiency for all.<ref>"[http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:839526/FULLTEXT01.pdf Governing the "Enough" in a Warming World The Discourse of "Sufficiency" from a Climate Governmentality Perspective]". Deflorian, Michel (2015). Retrieved 2 October 2023</ref>