This is an attempt to explore "political science" and preferably its wisdom and bare its bones free from party bondage. I am not an expert in politics but because somebody has aligned science as a prefix to make it more attractive to the ordinary, I have the right to dissect it in current context.
From Plato's Republic to now what emerges is the conventional wisdom of "the right view" is the view of those who are currently holding power, this dissection would not come favorable to any G.O.P (Grand Old Party) in power, whether, republican, democratic or socialist.
First of all, I dug into the definition of political science, true to its credentials I have not found a worthwhile definition. In any case, I found that the term scientific cannot be applied to politics.
When Socratic's philosophical dilemmas were terminated, let alone science even philosophy was not accommodated by the rulers. When Jesus was crucified, the first anomaly of democracy was born.
If politics is to silence the contrary view there is no semblance of science in its inception.
The appendage "science" was a clever instrument by which rulers, the powerful ones, found a way to dub the innocent masses.
The westerners' obsession to democracy is simple and cunning. It gives them a subtle tool to insinuate their ideas to alien cultures. The fact of the matter is that mankind has not found a foolproof method to govern itself in prosperity or in adversity.
What is current and vogue takes precedence to prudence in politics. Invariably politic is not scientific in its origin or its evolution.
My stress in this short provocation is simple.
How can one arrive at the term of office in years?
Isn't it arbitrary?
It varies from three to four to five to six years to almost infinity for some.
Since I am using a scientific argument, the term of office should be related to the biological life of the voter.