The necessity of people to live together has also necessitated an organization based on management. Politics, on the other hand, aims to run this organization on a certain system. Trying to live collectively in a system brings along the ruler-managed dilemma. Against the privilege of the ruler to hold the power stemming from the state apparatus, the ruled must also have a feature that can balance this power. In today's understanding of politics, there are many mechanisms that provide this opportunity to the governed.
The most obvious of these is the acceptance of a style of politics in which administrators are determined by election. In this way, even in the worst democracies, elections are a report card for their rulers. The governed have the right to punish, change or appreciate their rulers if they deem it necessary. Such a control mechanism ensures that the administrators do not remain silent against the wishes of the people, even if it is periodic, despite all the negativities. The existence of elections based on will prevents politicians from using power uncontrollably.
Second, perhaps most important, is the rule of law. The acceptance of law as a value within a political organization is an important opportunity for politics. Because the restraint of the power in politics by an external power is valuable for the political organization. It may be limiting for the manager's range of action, but it is an important door for the governed to take shelter in the face of this power.
When the law was produced as civil, the political power had to feel itself subject to this law. The existence of schools of fiqh in Islamic societies is a good example of this. For this reason, we can say that the effort to include these scholars in the state mechanism from time to time stems from the desire of politics to overcome this. Abu Hanifa's experiences show us this fact. Over time, the success of the inclusion of jurists in the state mechanism, and then the ineffectiveness of civil law production with the discussions on ijtihad, broke the control of the law over the rulers. The principle of separation of powers, which developed in the West in this medium, is important in this respect.
Another is the stance of intellectuals/scholars/intellectuals against the discourse and actions of politicians. What makes the intellectual so meaningful and responsible is that his knowledge and perspective are in front of politicians. Therefore, the intellectual has/should have a characteristic that guides politics, guides, sheds light, offers solutions to question marks, shows the truth against wrong practices, resists insistence on wrong and struggles. Although the intellectual considers the social benefit, it is very difficult to withstand the appeal of politics in the eyes of the public. For this reason, we come across many intellectuals who prefer to be subject to the direction of politics when they should be directing politics.
The existence of elections, the rule of law and the leading stance of the intellectuals ensure that the political institution functions in its own internal dynamics. If these mechanisms cannot fulfill their duties properly, the destination of politics is the uncontrolled domination of individuals, parties or groups. If those who have unity and certain relations in the international structure cannot achieve the necessary balance of power, it is inevitable that others will intervene in these societies to balance this power.