When ancient Greek scholars “invented” democracy, the theory could not have been more beautiful. Politics, as they saw it, was derived from the “polis,” a sort of metaphorical public place where all could gather and interact with one another. The interaction, it was thought, would be reasoned and bring about educated change. It was from this and only this interaction that politics could exist. Let me be clear on this: Politics is the interaction of two or more people in order to bring about action.

For quite some time, however, we have used politics in the pejorative — as an insult. Politics, over the years, has taken on an air of disdain, as people watched dishonest politicians manipulate the system in order to get their way. In that same way, we watch our representatives play the system daily through a number of mechanisms in order to achieve the aims of a niche group of people. This — the creation of law based on the wishes of a few, not through the interactions of the many — by definition, is not action. This is not politics.

Passing legislation requiring all people appearing to be Hispanic to carry proof of citizenship at all times is not politics. At its foundation, politics exists within the polis, whose boundaries are dictated by law. If the Constitution sets the boundaries for politics, then passing legislation outside of this law is not politics. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution reads that the Congress will have power “to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations and among the several states …” This means that John Boehner’s recent arguments in an NPR interview that Arizona’s law should stand because they possess the ability to make their own laws under the 10th Amendment is, at best, wrong — at worst, a misrepresentation of fact.

Playing to the fears of tea party conservatives in order to reinforce this law is not politics. Boehner’s argument reflects a growing trend among conservative voices in which lines of attack mirror tea party views as they grow in influence. The tea party’s demonstrably white supremacist roots, fears of losing national sovereignty to China, and subsequent bigotry against foreign cultures represent a divorce from the reasoned interaction of the people. Conservative politicians playing to this fear are creating a huddled mass who, according to renowned political science scholar Hannah Arendt, become easier to control as their reason is abandoned and therefore lose all political power in the process.

Media outlets coloring language and perpetuating fear are not engaging in politics. A recent view of the Fox News website touted stories about how ethnic studies programs perpetuate the racial divide, Arizona’s new immigration law is garnering multi-state support, and crime rates are higher in border states did not once question the constitutionality of the law or the inherent racism involved in the law’s enforcement — criteria for inspecting residents for citizenship paperwork is based on physical appearance and race. Misinforming the public, preventing reasoned debate and freezing the political process through fear cause the legislative process to break down entirely.

Engaging in warrantless filibusters in order to buy time so that widespread fallacious messages can permeate the public is not politics. Politics, by its definition, involves reasoned debate. Therefore, not interacting at all under any circumstances eliminates the basis upon which legislation must be formed. Furthermore, doing so purely out of opposition to another party while continuously appearing on television in order to perpetuate fear of a “government takeover” that doesn’t exist anywhere approaches reasoned interaction between people with their personal faculties in order.

Campaigning from a legislative seat is not politics. In fact, making votes based on the perceived public reaction with an eye toward midterm elections is not politics. Republican senators who once supported certain Health Insurance Reform measures during the Clinton era, voting against the exact same provisions under a Democratic Congress are not using reason and debate to make choices, but instead making them based on the possibility of public support in coming elections. In the American system of representative democracy, power is to be garnered through public support of legislative action. Therefore, voting on emotional appeals and even making emotional appeals is simply not politics.

Simply ignoring the state of the system and choosing a side that best fits your views is not politics. The current acute polarization of political views represents a deviation from the values of politics, in which people meet, make reasoned arguments and find a fruitful compromise between differing perspectives. Stubbornly decrying opposing perspectives, shutting your ears and, instead, clinging to any piece of evidence, no matter how errant, that confirms your beliefs, no matter how errant, threatens the existence of too many American dreams.

Abandoning the people for “politics” is not politics. Crowding the American “public” — an oversimplification of many citizens from many walks of life — into viewpoints based on fear and misinformation robs them of their political power to affect the change they need. Creating a structure of news outlets, pundits and “politicians” in order to perpetuate this fear is, at best, manipulation. Doing so at the expense of the less fortunate is, at best, tyranny. Doing so behind the veil of friendly news networks is, at best, dishonest.

Doing so on an everyday basis so brazenly is, at its deepest core, not politics.

Ian Barker is a senior in chemical engineering from Des Moines.