I think it's an honest question, even though it's controversial and attracts downvotes. (I noticed your question is in gray right now.) In my mind, it's a question of a "big enough difference" in a day-to-day-like mode of thinking. Since I'm not a biologist I'm only using my own version of how I think of it.

I personally think of the concept of species, etc., as "shades of gray" that change depending on the lighting. (If that makes sense.)

Look at the huge differences in dog breeds, for example. If I didn't know better I would think some dogs are a completely different class of animal when compared. (Think chiwawas and german shepherds, in their visual appearance.)

Sometimes I think of my dog as a person. Other times, not so much. Is it political? I think some people could make some sort of (weak) argument for that; in how I allocate resources to my dog, and why I do it. Why I even keep a dog around.

Also depends on how you'd define politics; how broadly and deeply. In this case I think your question it's a very interesting one, if we were to imagine running into a fresh population of neanderthals I bet there would be political ramifications between groups!