Search This Blog

Thursday, April 13, 2023

Revolutionary Communist Party (UK, 1978)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Revolutionary Communist Party
Founded1978; 45 years ago
Dissolved1997; 26 years ago
Split fromRevolutionary Communist Group
NewspaperThe Next Step
Living Marxism
Ideology1978–1991
Communism
Trotskyism
1991–1997
Libertarianism
Political position1978–1991
Far-left
1991–1997
Syncretic
Colors  Red

The Revolutionary Communist Party, known as the Revolutionary Communist Tendency until 1981, was a Trotskyist political organisation formed in 1978. From 1988 it published the journal Living Marxism. It started with only a few dozen supporters; its membership peaked at 200 in the mid-1990s.

After 1991, the party abandoned Trotskyism and mainstream leftism before publicly taking a libertarian position. It was disbanded in 1997, although a number of former members maintain a loose political network to promote its ideas.

Beginnings

The "Workers March for Irish Freedom", taking the cause of Irish hunger strikers to the Trades Union Congress conference in 1981, was a turning point for the party

The party originated as a tendency in the Revolutionary Communist Group which had split from the International Socialists in the 1970s. This group had concluded that there was no living Marxist tradition in the left and Marxism would have to be re-established. The RCG saw the British working class and especially the labour movement as dominated by bourgeois ideology and chauvinist nationalism, and the IS as pandering to its low-level trade union consciousness and economism; they asserted that a purer vanguard party was needed, focusing on anti-imperialism rather than trade unionism.

Disagreements about the course the Revolutionary Communist Group should take in relation to support for the Anti-Apartheid Movement and the African National Congress led Frank Furedi, a sociologist at the University of Kent (better known then by his cadre name Frank Richards), to break off and form his own group in 1978. The Revolutionary Communist Tendency (RCT) hoped to draw together those militant working class leaders who were disappointed by the limitations of reformism to help to build a new working class leadership and develop an independent working class programme. The RCT renamed itself the Revolutionary Communist Party in 1981.

Stance

Taking a strong line which it considered to be inspired by Vladimir Lenin's work on the relationship between imperialism and reformism, the party originally held that the "only hope of securing any decent sort of life - or even guaranteeing survival - lies in the working class taking control over society". It further argued that traditional Stalinist and social-democratic appeals to the bourgeois state had undermined working-class independence and that as a result an independent vanguard party should be organized to campaign for a distinctly working-class politics. In 1978, for example, when the left was strong within the Labour Party, the RCP argued that "Labour is the party which attempts to resolve the crisis by integrating militant working class resistance into the capitalist system". This position included a rejection of support for the Labour Party and one that questioned the allegiances of the trade union movement. A consequence of this belief was a growing distrust of traditional statist left-wing struggles as reformist. According to some, the RCP took a view that reformism consolidated bourgeois ideology in the potential leadership layers of the working class. The RCP took a number of positions coined to distinguish independent working-class politics from statist reformism which included:

  • The rejection of all controls on immigration.
  • Opposition to any national economic recovery strategies, such as import controls, which aimed to pit British workers against those overseas.
  • Free abortion and contraception on demand.
  • Decriminalisation of homosexuality and complete equality under the law.
  • Unconditional support for the struggle against British imperialism in Northern Ireland on the grounds that "British workers cannot ignore the cause of Irish liberation without renouncing their own class interests".
  • A claim that the police occupied Brixton: "We have to organise on the streets and housing estates to keep the police out".
  • Opposition to no platforming fascists, but, through the campaign Workers Against Racism, aiming to organise physical defence against racist attacks.

The party's programme can be traced through the publications "Our Tasks and Methods" (a reprint of the Revolutionary Communist Group's founding document), the 1983 general election manifesto Preparing for Power and the article "The Road to Power" in the theoretical journal Confrontation (1986).

Historian Evan Smith suggests that there has been a debate about whether the RCP was part of the left. Frank Furedi later described the party's approach: “We tried to transcend the left-right divide. Lots of left-wingers said we were not really left-wing because we did not speak their language. We wanted to have an experimental approach and not repeat the problems of the past.” Andy Beckett of The Guardian wrote:

Despite its name, most of its stances were not communist or revolutionary but contrarian: it supported free speech for racists, and nuclear power; it attacked environmentalism and the NHS. Its most consistent impulse was to invoke an idealised working class, and claim it was actually being harmed by the supposed elites of the liberal left.

Front groups and campaigns

According to historian Evan Smith,

The RCT/RCP formed several front groups around single issues during the late 1970s and early 1980s, with the most prominent being the Irish Freedom Movement (which had begun as the Smash the Prevention of Terrorism Act Campaign) and Workers Against Racism (originally East London Workers Against Racism). SPTAC and ELWAR were both set up to rival the alleged chauvinism of the British left and larger campaign organisations around the issues of Irish solidarity and anti-racism, such as the Troops Out Movement and the Anti-Nazi League. From the beginning, it seemed that the RCT/RCP was more comfortable directing its own single-issue groups than joining other larger campaign groups.

Workers Against Racism

Beginning as East London Workers Against Racism (ELWAR) before it was launched as a national campaign, Workers Against Racism campaigned against state racism. Protests were organised against deportations and passport checks at hospitals and unemployment benefit offices. ELWAR also organised patrols and vigils to defend immigrants against racist attacks. In Parliament, Conservative MP Nicholas Winterton demanded of the Home Secretary "if he will seek to proscribe the East London Workers against Racism vigilante group". Workers Against Racism was criticised in the press for its activities during the 1981 Brixton riots. An internal Home Office report to then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher claimed:

[T]he Revolutionary Communist Party set up a Lambeth Unemployed Workers' Group shortly before the Riots, and has since formed a South London Workers Against Racism group, similar to the East London Workers Against Racism which attracted some notoriety for organising vigilante patrols.

Anti-deportation campaigns

George Roucou, marching to freedom, with his wife Kay and Workers Against Racism organiser Charles Longford

The party's Workers Against Racism campaign fought many deportation threats, like George Roucou's, on the grounds that British immigration law was racist. Roucou was a shop steward in the building workers' union UCATT in Manchester. Workers Against Racism helped to organise a campaign culminating in a one-day strike and demonstration by his fellow council workers on 6 February 1987. On 13 March 1987, with 500 protesting outside, the Home Office appeal panel reversed Roucou's deportation order. On 11 June 1985, Metso Moncrieffe was arrested and held by police pending a deportation order. Workers Against Racism campaigners raised the case, disrupting a test match at the Edgbaston cricket ground in July 1985 with a Metso Must Stay banner and helping to build a 1,000-strong march for him in December 1986. In September 1987, Moncrieffe's deportation order was overturned.

Supporting Irish republicanism

Supporting Irish republicanism was central to the work of the party. According to historian Jack Hepworth, "Advocating ‘unconditional support’ [for the IRA] enabled the RCP to challenge reformism on the British left and nationalism in the labour movement."

In 1978, the RCP organised the Smash the Prevention of Terrorism Act Campaign and held protests outside police stations where suspects were held. The party organised a conference of trade unionists opposed to Northern Ireland being part of the United Kingdom in Coventry in 1981 and later that year held a march to the TUC conference, the Workers March for Irish Freedom. On Saturday 6 February 1982, the Irish Freedom Movement (IFM) was founded at a meeting in Caxton House, Archway and TUC general secretary Len Murray wrote to the thirteen trades councils that sponsored the conference threatening them with disaffiliation if they attended. RCP Political Committee member Mick Hume, who edited The Next Step, recalls that the IFM were accused of complicity in the 1984 bombing of the Conservative Party conference. The IFM published a quarterly bulletin Irish Freedom and organised an annual march on the anniversary of internment. When the voices of Sinn Féin supporters were banned from the British broadcast media, Living Marxism carried a front page interview with its leader Gerry Adams and the IFM picketed Broadcasting House. After the Brighton bombing, an RCP editorial in the next step said:

We support unconditionally the right of the Irish people to carry out their struggle for national liberation in whatever way they choose. We neither support nor condemn any particular tactic the republican movement pursues, whether it is an electoral campaign or a bombing campaign.

Similarly, after the Enniskillen bombing in 1987, Hume reiterated that British radicals’ responses could "not be based on emotional revulsion at particular incidents of violence or terror".

By the end of the 1980s, according to historian Jack Hepworth, "the IFM was the largest radical solidarity movement in Britain, with an annual August march in London typically attracting an estimated 3,000 demonstrators" and an activist base beyond the party faithful; by 1990 it had twenty branches in the UK.

Student politics

The party primarily recruited amongst students. By 1984, it had 45 university and polytechnic branches.

Electoral involvement

The RCP stood candidates in the May 1981 local elections, under its own name and that of ELWAR. It stood a candidate in the 1983 Bermondsey by-election, its campaign mainly consisting of heckling Labour candidate Peter Tatchell, who lost the seat to the Liberal Party; the RCP candidate received 38 votes. It fielded four candidates in the 1983 United Kingdom general election, who achieved a total vote of nearly 1000. In 1983, the party began its annual "Preparing for Power" public conferences. In 1986, it launched a new theoretical journal, Confrontation. In the 1986 United Kingdom local elections, the RCP stood 38 candidates, including Claire Fox (under the name Claire Foster), who received a total of just under 2300 votes, with an average of 60 votes each. In the 1986 Knowsley North by-election, its candidate was also backed by the Workers Revolutionary Party and received 664 votes, its highest so far. In the 1987 Greenwich by-election, its candidate received 91 votes.

In 1987, it launched the Red Front electoral coalition, appealing to other anti-Labour groups to join it. its manifesto demanded work or full pay, the defence of trade union rights, equal rights for all, and opposition to war. It had a libertarian flavour and also argued that "The dangers from Aids have in fact been grossly exaggerated. The principal threat to homosexuals in Britain today is not from Aids, but from the safe sex campaign." Two other groups joined the campaign: Red Action and the Revolutionary Democratic Group. The Front stood 14 candidates, including Kenan Malik. The candidate in Knowsley North achieved 538 vote (1.37%); the others between 111 and 300. It stood its own candidates in the 1989 Glasgow Central by-election and 1989 Vauxhall by-election, receiving 141 and 171 votes respectively.

Campaign Against Militarism

Campaign Against Militarism protest in 1994

In 1993, the party helped launch the Campaign Against Militarism (CAM) to fight against western military intervention. CAM organised protests against the military interventions in Somalia, Bosnia and Iraq. On 10 September 1993, seventy Somalis and CAM supporters occupied the United States embassy after an alleged massacre of civilians in Mogadishu, the only time it has happened. After they were evicted by armed marines, eleven were convicted under the as yet untested criminal trespass laws, but charges were dropped after lawyer Mike Fisher sought to have the case tried in the United States, arguing that the offence, if any, was committed on American soil. CAM was the only left-wing group that joined British Serbs in their demonstrations over the military strikes on Yugoslavia in 1994.

In The Empire Strikes Back, Mike Freeman identified "the metamorphosis of what had long regarded itself as a peace movement into a war movement" after Labour rallied to support the First Iraq War. Later, this trend was called "humanitarian imperialism" in Living Marxism. The party opposed Western military intervention in Bosnia, Somalia, Kosovo, Iraq and East Timor.

Controversial positions

The party took a number of positions that were strongly criticised by others on the left:

  • In The Truth About the AIDS Panic, Michael Fitzpatrick and Don Milligan wrote that there is "no good evidence that Aids is likely to spread rapidly among heterosexuals in the West". The pamphlet argued that the government campaign warning of a heterosexual aids epidemic was a moral panic that would worsen prejudice against gay people.
  • When British miners struck against redundancies in 1984, the party argued that the union's refusal to hold a national ballot was a major problem: "The only way to win the passive majority for the strike was to launch an aggressive campaign around a national ballot".
  • In the struggle against Apartheid in South Africa, the party argued that "sanctions don't make sense" because it was wrong to call on the governments that had supported Apartheid to overthrow it. Rather, workers ought to "take direct action", like blocking South African imports at docks.

When the organisation re-thought its outlook in 1991, it adopted a number of positions that put it at odds with the New Labour milieu:

  • Living Marxism argued against what it called the "new authoritarianism", the greater official interference and surveillance of ordinary people by the state. The growth in "at-risk" registers and CCTV were examples.
  • The party opposed the increase in judicial and other kinds of non-majoritarian overriding of parliament as well as the subordination of parliament to the European Convention on Human Rights.

Criticism

In 1981, Alex Callinicos of the British Socialist Workers Party (SWP) took issue with the party's argument that "such issues as racism and Ireland form [...] a vital component of revolutionary propaganda". Callinicos claimed instead that "if most of the workers involved have reactionary views on questions such as race, the position of women, and so on", then that was less important than that they were fighting over pay and conditions. Callinicos also called into question the party's stress on "the connection between reformism and nationalism", saying they were "paleo-marxists". In 1984, the SWP and other left parties denounced the RCP for calling for a national ballot in the miners' strike.

The party's stance on AIDS was widely criticised by the gay rights movement. On 30 June 1990, Simon Watney and Edward King of the group OutRage! kicked over the party's stall at the Gay Pride march. Watney criticised Michael Fitzpatrick and Don Milligan for giving credence to the idea that AIDS was a "gay plague" by their insistence that there would be no epidemic amongst heterosexuals in the west. However, OutRage! was divided over the attack.

Nick Cohen, Marko Attila Hoare and Oliver Kamm strongly criticised the party and its former members after the dissolution for opposing the military interventions in Bosnia, Kosovo and Iraq. Hoare, Cohen and Kamm also rejected Noam Chomsky's defence of Living Marxism and its coverage of the Bosnian war.

In 1997, environmental journalist George Monbiot argued that the party had undue influence at Channel 4 in an article titled "Marxists found alive in C4" after two of its members contributed to the Against Nature television programme, whose director Martin Durkin is also connected to the group. Elsewhere, Monbiot took issue with Living Marxism for putting too much stress on freedom as if "there should be no limits to human action, least of all those imposed by 'official and semi-official agencies [...] from the police and the courts to social services, counsellors and censors'".

Andy Rowell and Jonathan Matthews of the Norfolk Genetic Information Network criticised the party for championing genetic engineering. Andy Rowell and Bob Burton along with Jonathan Matthews of the Norfolk Genetic Information Network charged Living Marxism with a history of attacking the environmental movement.

Re-orientation and disbandment

At the end of the 1980s, the party had moved away from its roots as a Trotskyist organisation, leading some critics to argue that they had abandoned the notion of the class struggle. In 1988, its weekly tabloid newspaper The Next Step carried an article arguing that "the disintegration of the official labour movement, and the apparent lack of a left-wing alternative, has consolidated an overwhelmingly defensive mood in the working class".

In the 1987 general election, party members stood as part of the Red Front, arguing that working people needed to break with the Labour Party, but no Red Front candidate retained their election deposit.

In 1988, the party made The Next Step into a bulletin for its supporters. Later that year, a monthly magazine called Living Marxism was set up for a wider readership. Despite its beginnings as a far-left outlet, the politics espoused by the magazine developed a pronounced libertarianism. In December 1990, Living Marxism ran an article by Furedi, "Midnight in the Century", which argued that the corrosive effect of the collapse of both Stalinism and reformism on the working class meant that "for the time being at least, the working class has no political existence".

In 1997, the point was put more forcefully:

In today's circumstances class politics cannot be reinvented, rebuilt, reinvigorated or rescued. Why? Because any dynamic political outlook needs to exist in an interaction with existing individual consciousness. And contemporary forms of consciousness in our atomised societies cannot be used as the foundation for a more developed politics of solidarity.

Between 1990 and 1997, the party developed the view that more than capitalism itself the danger facing humanity was the absence of a force for social change (in philosophical language, a "subject" of history) and the culture of low expectations that suppressed it. Prefacing a 1996 Living Marxism manifesto, Mick Hume argued:

Of course [...] we could have produced a familiar list of left-wing slogans complaining about problems like unemployment, exploitation and poverty which continue to scar our society. But that would be to ignore the transformation which has taken place in the political climate [...]. At different times, different issues matter most. Each era has thrown up its own great questions which define which side you are on [...]. [A]t Living Marxism, we see our job today as doing much more than criticising capitalism. That is the easy bit. There is a more pressing need to criticise the fatalistic critics, to counter the doom-mongers and put a positive case for human action in pursuit of social liberation. [...] [D]ealing with [...] unconventional questions, and puncturing the anti-human prejudices which surround them, is the precondition for making political action possible in our time.

In 1994, the Irish Freedom Movement was dissolved. As the Northern Ireland peace process unfolded, the RCP increasingly turned from unconditional support for the IRA towards scorn at its gradualism and reformism.

In February 1997, shortly after the party disbanded, Living Marxism re-branded as LM, possibly to further distance itself from its leftist origins. Articles in LM argued:

  • Against support for Tony Blair's New Labour project in 1997.
  • Against "humanitarian interventions" in the Balkans, East Timor and Iraq.
  • For freedom of speech and the "right to be offensive".
  • Against the "new authoritarianism" of CCTV cameras, anti-social behaviour orders and anti-harassment laws.
  • Against the demonisation of the white working class.

This magazine ran at least two articles in which the authors argued that the mass murder carried out in Rwanda in 1994 should not be described as genocide. In December 1995, LM carried a report by Fiona Fox from Rwanda which argued:

The lesson I would draw from my visit is that we must reject the term 'genocide' in Rwanda. It has been used inside and outside Rwanda to criminalise the majority of ordinary Rwandan people, to justify outside interference in the country's affairs, and to lend legitimacy to a minority military government imposed on Rwanda by Western powers.

LM continued to create controversy on a variety of issues, most notably on the British Independent Television News (ITN) coverage of the Balkan conflict in the 1990s. The controversy centred on LM featuring an article by Thomas Deichmann in which he alleged that the ITN coverage of a refugee detention centre in Trnopolje during the conflict gave the false impression that the Bosnian Muslims were being held against their will in Serbian concentration camps. The ensuing libel award and costs arising from legal action by the ITN against LM were estimated to total around £1 million. The action bankrupted the magazine and its publishers.

Later organisations

Many former members of the party and some of the people who contributed to LM magazine continue to be politically active, most notably in the Academy of Ideas (formerly the Institute of Ideas), a think tank led by Claire Fox; the online magazine Spiked, initially edited by Mick Hume and later by Brendan O'Neill; and the Manifesto Club in which a leading figure is Munira Mirza, appointed by Boris Johnson as London's Director of Policy for culture, the arts and creative industries, and subsequently as his head of Number 10 policy unit. Other groups produced by former members include Debating Matters, the Young Journalists' Academy, WorldWrite, Audacity.org, the Modern Movement, and Parents with Attitude. The Battle of Ideas has also been held annually since 2005 by the Academy of Ideas, which has been described as a "refuge" for former RCP members. Some commentators, such as George Monbiot, have pointed to apparent entryist tactics of having jobs and lives used by former RCP members designed to influence mainstream public opinion.

One party member from the 1990s explained in an article in Spiked:

I never left the RCP: the organisation folded in the mid-Nineties, but few of us actually 'recanted' our ideas. Instead we resolved to support one another more informally as we pursued our political tradition as individuals, or launched new projects with more general aims that have also engaged people from different traditions, or none. These include Spiked and the Institute of Ideas, where I now work. It must be said that this development annoyed our political opponents immensely, and a cursory Google search (try 'LM network' if you have time to kill) will return a plethora of exposés purporting to show that former members of the RCP are involved in various sinister conspiracies. [...] [T]he impossibility of simply doing away with a school of thought that is no longer attached to an organisation is perhaps what annoys our opponents most of all.

In April 2019, three former members of the Revolutionary Communist Party, Claire Fox, James Heartfield and Alka Sehgal Cuthbert were selected as candidates for Nigel Farage's Brexit Party in the 2019 European Parliament election in the United Kingdom. Stuart Waiton stood in Dundee West at the 2019 general election.

Secular state

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  States with no state religion
  States with state religion
  Ambiguous states or no data

A secular state is an idea pertaining to secularity, whereby a state is or purports to be officially neutral in matters of religion, supporting neither religion nor irreligion. A secular state claims to treat all its citizens equally regardless of religion, and claims to avoid preferential treatment for a citizen based on their religious beliefs, affiliation or lack of either over those with other profiles.

Although secular states have no state religion, the absence of an established state religion does not mean that a state is completely secular or egalitarian. For example, some states that describe themselves as secular have religious references in their national anthems and flags, or laws that benefit one religion or another.

Origin and practice

Secularity can be established at a state's creation (e.g., the Soviet Union, the United States) or by it later secularizing (e.g., France or Nepal). Movements for laïcité in France and separation of church and state in the United States have defined modern concepts of secularism, the United States of America being the first explicitly secular nation in history. Historically, the process of secularisation typically involves granting religious freedom, disestablishing state religions, stopping public funds being used for religion, freeing the legal system from religious control, freeing up the education system, tolerating citizens who change religion or abstain from religion, and allowing political leaders to come to power regardless of their religious beliefs.

In France, Italy, and Spain, for example, official holidays for the public administration tend to be Christian feast days. Any private school in France that contracts with Éducation nationale means its teachers are salaried by the state—most of the Catholic schools are in this situation and, because of history, they are the majority; however, any other religious or non-religious schools also contract this way. In some European states where secularism confronts monoculturalist philanthropy, some of the main Christian sects and sects of other religions depend on the state for some of the financial resources for their religious charities. It is common in corporate law and charity law to prohibit organized religion from using those funds to organize religious worship in a separate place of worship or for conversion; the religious body itself must provide the religious content, educated clergy and laypersons to exercise its own functions and may choose to devote part of their time to the separate charities. To that effect, some of those charities establish secular organizations that manage part of or all of the donations from the main religious bodies.

Religious and non-religious organizations can apply for equivalent funding from the government and receive subsidies based on either assessed social results where there is indirect religious state funding, or simply the number of beneficiaries of those organizations. This resembles charitable choice in the United States. It is doubtful whether overt direct state funding of religions is in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. Apparently, this issue has not yet been decided at a supranational level in ECtHR case law stemming from the rights in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which mandates non-discrimination in affording its co-listed basic social rights. Specifically, funding certain services would not accord with non-discriminatory state action.

Many states that are nowadays secular in practice may have legal vestiges of an earlier established religion. Secularism also has various guises that may coincide with some degree of official religiosity. In the United Kingdom, the head of state is still required to take the Coronation Oath enacted in 1688, swearing to maintain the Protestant Reformed religion and to preserve the established Church of England. The UK also maintains seats in the House of Lords for 26 senior clergymen of the Church of England, known as the Lords Spiritual. In Canada the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms affords secular freedoms of conscience and religion, thought, belief, opinion and expression, including communication, assembly and association yet the Charter's preamble maintains the concept of "the supremacy of God" which would appear to disadvantage those who hold nontheistic or polytheistic beliefs, including atheism and Buddhism. Italy has been a secular state since the enactment of the Constitution in 1948 (stressed by a Constitutional court's decision in 1985), but still recognizes a special status for the Catholic Church. The reverse progression can also occur, however; a state can go from being secular to being a religious state, as in the case of Iran where the secularized Imperial State of Iran was replaced by an Islamic Republic. Nonetheless, the last 250 years has seen a trend towards secularism.

Christian republic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A Christian republic is a government that is both Christian and republican. As of the 21st century, the only countries in the world with a republican form of government and with Christianity as the established religion are Argentina, Costa Rica, Finland, Greece, Armenia, Samoa, Iceland, and Malta. Some other republics, such as Georgia, Peru, Guatemala, Panama, El Salvador, and Paraguay, give some credit or preference to Christianity, but without establishing it as the religion of the state. Others, such as Hungary, and Zambia, describe themselves as Christian countries.

Concept

In A Letter Concerning Toleration, Locke wrote that "there is absolutely no such thing, under the Gospel, as a Christian Commonwealth". By this he meant that political authority cannot be validly founded upon Christianity. Rousseau, in On the Social Contract (in book 4, chapter 8), echoed this, saying that "I am mistaken in saying 'a Christian republic'; the two words are mutually exclusive.". However, Rousseau's point was subtly different, in that he was asserting that a civic identity cannot be moulded out of Christianity. David Walsh, founder of the National Institute on Media and the Family, acknowledges that there is a "genuine tension ... between Christianity and the political order" that Rousseau was acknowledging, arguing that "many Christians would, after all, agree with him that a 'Christian republic' is a contradiction in terms" and that the two live "in an uneasy relationship in actual states, and social cohesion has often been bought at the price of Christian universalism". Robert Neelly Bellah has observed that most of the great republican theorists of the Western world have shared Rousseau's concerns about the mutually exclusive nature of republicanism and Christianity, from Machiavelli (more on which later) to Alexis de Tocqueville.

Rousseau's thesis is that the two are incompatible because they make different demands upon the virtuous man. Christianity, according to Rousseau, demands submission (variously termed "servitude" or "slavery" by scholars of his work) to imposed authority and resignation, and requires focus upon the unworldly; whereas republicanism demands participation rather than submission, and requires focus upon the worldly. Rousseau's position on Christianity is not universally held. Indeed, it was refuted by, amongst others, his friend Antoine-Jacques Roustan in a reply to the Social Contract.

Rousseau's thesis has a basis in the prior writings of Niccolò Machiavelli, whom Rousseau called a "bon citoyen et honnête homme" and who alongside Montesquieu was one of Rousseau's sources for republican philosophy. In his Discoursi Machiavelli observes that Christianity in practice has not met the ideals of its foundation, and that the resultant corruption leads, when mixed with secular political ideals, to something that is neither good religion nor good politics. Further, he argues, whilst Christianity does not preclude love for one's country, it does require citizens to endure damage to republican government, stating that the best civic virtue in regards to a republic is to show no mercy to the republic's enemies and to put to death or to enslave the inhabitants of an opposing city that has been defeated.

Calvinist republics

Calvin's Geneva

  Cities in the Habsburg Netherlands where Calvinists seized control in 1577–8. Run by Committees of XVIII, the most prominent of these – Ghent, Antwerp and Brussels – are known as 'Calvinist republics' (1577–1585).

While the classical writers had been the primary ideological source for the republics of Italy, in Northern Europe, the Protestant Reformation would be used as justification for establishing new republics. Most important was Calvinist theology, which developed in Geneva (a city-state associated with the Old Swiss Confederacy – a powerful republic – since 1526 due to its anti-Savoy alliance treaty with Bern and Fribourg). John Calvin did not call for the abolition of monarchy, but he advanced the doctrine that the faithful had the right to overthrow irreligious monarchs. During 1536–8 and 1541–64, Calvin and his allies turned Geneva into the first so-called Calvinist republic. Calvinism also espoused egalitarianism and an opposition to hierarchy. Advocacy for republics appeared in the writings of the Huguenots during the French Wars of Religion.

Netherlands

Calvinism played an important role in the republican revolts in England and the Netherlands. Like the city-states of Italy and the Hanseatic League, both were important trading centres, with a large merchant class prospering from the trade with the New World. Large parts of the population of both areas also embraced Calvinism. During the Dutch Revolt (beginning in 1566), the Dutch Republic emerged from rejection of Spanish Habsburg rule. However, the country did not adopt the republican form of government immediately: in the formal declaration of independence (Act of Abjuration, 1581), the throne of king Philip, was only declared vacant, and the Dutch magistrates asked the Duke of Anjou, queen Elizabeth of England and prince William of Orange, one after another, to replace Philip. It took until 1588 before the Estates (the Staten, the representative assembly at the time) decided to vest the sovereignty of the country in itself. The Calvinist Dutch Reformed Church never became the official state church of the Dutch Republic, but it was publicly privileged over all other religions and churches, which did enjoy some level of tolerance, however.

Earlier during the Dutch Revolt, many autonomous cities in the Southern Netherlands also came under the control of radical Calvinists, especially in the years 1577–1578, and formed so-called Calvinist republics. Due to its extreme theocratic tendencies, the most notable was the Calvinist Republic of Ghent (1577–1584), but Antwerp and Brussels have also been characterised by historians as Calvinist republics between 1577 and 1585. One by one, these cities were reconquered by the Spanish Army of Flanders commanded by Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma. In the north, Amsterdam experienced the Alteratie, a bloodless coup in which Calvinists took control of the city, but mostly in order to end its economic isolation and resume trade; no Calvinist regime was established here.

English Commonwealth

In 1641 the English Civil War began. Spearheaded by the Puritans and funded by the merchants of London, the revolt was a success, and led to the Commonwealth of England and the execution of King Charles I. In England James Harrington, Algernon Sidney, and John Milton became some of the first writers to argue for rejecting monarchy and embracing a republican form of government. The English Commonwealth was short lived, and the monarchy soon restored. The Dutch Republic continued in name until 1795, but by the mid-18th century the stadtholder had become a de facto monarch. Calvinists were also some of the earliest settlers of the British and Dutch colonies of North America.

Islamic republic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term Islamic republic has been used in different ways. Some Muslim religious leaders have used it as the name for a theoretical form of Islamic theocratic government enforcing sharia, or laws compatible with sharia. The term has also been used for a sovereign state taking a compromise position between a purely Islamic caliphate and a secular, nationalist republic -- neither an Islamic monarchy nor secular republic. In other cases it is used merely as a symbol of cultural identity.

There are also a number of states where Islam is the state religion and that are (at least partly) ruled by Islamic laws, but carry only "republic" in their official names, not "Islamic republic" — examples include Iraq, Yemen and Maldives. Other supporters of strict sharia law, (such as the Taliban), prefer the title "Islamic emirate", as emirates were common throughout Islamic history and "republic" has a Western origin -- coming from the Roman (from Latin res publica 'public affair') indicating that the "supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives", with no mention of obedience to Allah or sharia law.

Currently, (as of 2022), the name is used in the official title of three states -- the Islamic Republics of Iran, Pakistan, and Mauritania. Pakistan first adopted the title under the constitution of 1956. Mauritania adopted it on 28 November 1958. Iran adopted it after the 1979 Iranian Revolution that overthrew the Pahlavi dynasty. Despite having similar names, the countries differ greatly in their governments and laws. Of the three, two of which, Iran and Mauritania are religious theocratic states. When Pakistan adopted the name in 1956, Islam was yet to be declared the state religion since gaining independence in 1947; they did so upon adopting a new constitution in 1973.

Iran officially uses the full title in all governance names referring to the country (e.g. the Islamic Republic of Iran Army or the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting); as opposed to its equivalents in Pakistan which are called the Pakistan Armed Forces and the Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation. Also unlike the other countries, Iran uses the IRI acronym (Islamic Republic of Iran) as part of official acronyms.

List of current Islamic republics

Map showing Islamic republic countries that use the title in their official names
State Date of name adoption Government type
 Islamic Republic of Iran 1 April 1979 Unitary theocratic republic
 Islamic Republic of Mauritania 28 November 1958 Unitary semi-presidential republic
 Islamic Republic of Pakistan 23 March 1956 Federal parliamentary republic

Iran

The creation of the Islamic Republic of Iran was a dramatic, historical event, following the overthrow of the Pahlavi dynasty in 1979 by the Islamic revolution led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. "Islamic" in the country's title was not a symbol of cultural identity, but indicated specific governmental system based on rule by Islamic jurists enforcing Islamic law. The system was based on The Jurist's Guardianship: Islamic Government, a work of the revolution's leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, written before Khomeini came to power, and known by Khomeini's followers but not by the general public. It argued that rather than elections and legislators, Islam required traditional Islamic law (sharia), and proper enforcement of sharia required a leading Islamic jurist (faqih) (such as Khomeini himself, who served as the first faqih "guardian" or Supreme Leader of Iran) to provide political "guardianship" (wilayat or velayat) over the people and nation (wilayat al-faqih). All the Muslim world should be united in such a state. With it, the entire non-Muslim world will evidentially "capitulate" to its courage and vigour; without it, Islam would fall victim to heresy, "obsolescence and decay".

The new government held a referendum for public approval to change Iran from a monarchy to an Islamic republic in March 1979, two months after the Islamic Revolution took power. While some political groups had suggested various names for the ideology of the Iranian revolution such as the Republic (without specifying Islam) or the Democratic Republic; Khomeini called for Iranians to vote for the name Islamic Republic, "not a word more and not a word less". When an Iranian journalist asked Khomeini what exactly Islamic Republic meant, Khomeini stated that the term republic has the same sense as other uses and Islamic republic has considered both Islamic ideology and the choice of people. The day after the vote was complete, it was announced that 98.2% of the Iranian voters had voted to approve the new name.

Unlike Khomeini's original vision, the Islamic Republic is a "republic" with elections (Khomeini had originally described his "Islamic government" as "not ... based on the approval of laws in accordance with the opinion of the majority"); it has a The Islamic Republic also contains many trapings of a modern state -- a president, cabinet and legislature (Khomeini mentioned none of these except for the legislature, which his government would not have because "no one has the right to legislate ... except ... the Divine Legislator"). Some, however, have argued that the legislature (and president, etc.) has been kept in a subordinate position in keeping with Khomeini's idea of government being a guardianship by jurists.

According to the constitution, the Islamic Republic of Iran is a system based on the following beliefs:

# the One God (as stated in the phrase "There is no other god except God"), His exclusive sovereignty and right to legislate, and the necessity of submission to His commands;

  1. divine revelation and its fundamental role in setting forth the laws;
  2. the return to God in the Hereafter, and the constructive role of this belief in the course of man's ascent towards God;
  3. the justice of God in creation and legislation;
  4. continuous leadership and perpetual guidance, and its fundamental role in ensuring the uninterrupted process of the revolution of Islam;
  5. the exalted dignity and value of man, and his freedom coupled with responsibility before God; in which equity, justice, political, economic, social and cultural independence, and national solidarity are secured by recourse to:
  • continuous leadership of the holy persons, possessing necessary qualifications, exercised on the basis of the Quran and the Sunnah, upon all of whom be peace;
  • sciences and arts and the most advanced results of human experience, together with the effort to advance them further;
  • negation of all forms of oppression, both the infliction of and the submission to it, and of dominance, both its imposition and its acceptance.

Mauritania

The Islamic Republic of Mauritania is a country in the Maghreb region of western North Africa. Mauritania was declared an independent state as the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, on November 28, 1960. Its legal system is "a mix of French civil law and Sharia Law", and its Penal Code punishes crimes against religion and “good morals” with "harsh sentences". "Heresy or apostasy (including in print) are "punishable by death".

Pakistan

Pakistan was created as a homeland for the Muslims of British India, when British India was given independence, making Islam its raison d'être. It was the first country to adopt the adjective Islamic to modify its republican status under its otherwise secular constitution in 1956. Despite this definition, the country did not have a state religion until 1973, when a new constitution, more democratic and less secular, was adopted. Pakistan only uses the Islamic name on its passports, visas and coins. Although Islamic Republic is specifically mentioned in the constitution of 1973, all government documents are prepared under the name of the Government of Pakistan. The Constitution of Pakistan, Part IX, Article 227 states: "All existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Quran and Sunnah, in this Part referred to as the Injunctions of Islam, and no law shall be enacted which is repugnant to such Injunctions".

Former

Chechen Republic of Ichkeria

The Chechen Republic of Ichkeria used an Islamic republic government system from 1996 to 2000.

Comoros

Between 1978 and 2001, the Comoros was the Federal and Islamic Republic of the Comoros.

East Turkestan

The Turkic Uyghur- and Kirghiz-controlled Turkish Islamic Republic of East Turkestan was declared in 1933 as an independent Islamic republic by Sabit Damulla Abdulbaki and Muhammad Amin Bughra. However, the Chinese Muslim 36th Division of the National Revolutionary Army defeated their armies and destroyed the republic during the Battles of Kashgar, Yangi Hissar and Yarkand. The Chinese Muslim Generals Ma Fuyuan and Ma Zhancang declared the destruction of the rebel forces and the return of the area to the control of the Republic of China in 1934, followed by the executions of the Turkic Muslim Emirs Abdullah Bughra and Nur Ahmad Jan Bughra. The Chinese Muslim General Ma Zhongying then entered the Id Kah Mosque in Kashgar and lectured the Turkic Muslims on being loyal to the Nationalist Government.

Afghanistan

Afghanistan was an Islamic republic from 1990 to 1996, and from 2001 to 2021. The 1990 constitution was imposed by the Mohammad Najibullah government and eliminated communism.

The constitution formed in 2004 was very similar to the 1964 Constitution of Afghanistan, created when Afghanistan was a constitutional Islamic monarchy. It consisted of three branches, the executive, the legislative and the judicial. The National Assembly was the legislature, a bicameral body having two chambers, the House of the People and the House of Elders. The Islamic prefix to Republic was considered symbolic as it was a name supported by pro-Mujahideen delegates during the assembly of forming the constitution.

From 1996 to the re-establishment of the Islamic republic in 2001, Afghanistan was ruled by the Taliban, a militant group based in Kandahar, who governed Afghanistan as an Islamic theocracy officially known as the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. In 2021, the Taliban initiated a month-long insurgency to effectively end the Islamic republic and ultimately, re-establish the Islamic Emirate in August 2021. The Islamic Republic continued to be recognized by the United Nations as the legitimate government of Afghanistan both from 1996 to 2001 and from 2021 onwards.

The Gambia

In December 2015, the then-president Yahya Jammeh declared The Gambia to be an Islamic republic. Jammeh said that the move was designed to distance the West African state from its colonial past, that no dress code would be imposed and that citizens of other faiths would be allowed to practice freely. However, he later ordered all female government employees to wear headscarves before rescinding the decision shortly after. The announcement of an Islamic republic has been criticized as unconstitutional by at least one opposition group. After the removal of Jammeh in 2017, his successor Adama Barrow said the Gambia would no longer be an Islamic republic.

People's republic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Map of states using the name people's republic:
  Current
  Former

People's republic is an official title, commonly used by some current and former communist states as well as other left-wing governments. It is mainly associated with soviet republics, socialist states following people's democracy, sovereign states with a democratic-republican constitution usually mentioning socialism, as well as some countries that do not fit into any of these categories.

A number of the short-lived socialist states that formed during World War I and its aftermath called themselves people's republics. Many of these sprang up in the territory of the former Russian Empire which collapsed following the Russian Revolution of 1917. Decades later, following the Allied victory in World War II, the name "people's republic" was adopted by some of the newly established Marxist–Leninist states, mainly within the Soviet Union's Eastern Bloc.

As a term, "people's republic" is associated with socialist states as well as communist countries adhering to Marxism–Leninism, although its use is not unique to such states. A number of republics with liberal democratic political systems such as Algeria and Bangladesh adopted the title, given its rather generic nature, after popular wars of independence. Nonetheless, such countries still usually mention socialism in their constitutions.

Marxist–Leninist people's republics

The first people's republics that came into existence were those formed following the Russian Revolution. Ukraine was briefly declared a people's republic in 1917. The Khanate of Khiva and the Emirate of Bukhara, both territories of the former Russian Empire, were declared people's republics in 1920. In 1921, the Russian protectorate of Tuva became a people's republic, followed in 1924 by neighbouring Mongolia. Following World War II, developments in Marxist–Leninist theory led to the appearance of people's democracy, a concept which potentially allowed for a route to socialism via multi-class, multi-party democracy. Countries which had reached this intermediate stage were called people's republics. The European states that became people's republics at this time were Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Yugoslavia. In Asia, China became a people's republic following the Chinese Communist Revolution and North Korea also became a people's republic.

Many of these countries also called themselves socialist states in their constitutions. During the 1960s, Romania and Yugoslavia ceased to use the term people's in their official name, replacing it with the term socialist as a mark of their ongoing political development. Czechoslovakia also added the term socialist into its name during this period. It had become a people's republic in 1948, but the country had not used that term in its official name. Albania used both terms in its official name from 1976 to 1991. In the West, these countries are often referred to as communist states. However, none of them described themselves in that way as they regarded communism as a level of political development that they had not yet reached. Terms used by communist states include national-democratic, people's democratic, socialist-oriented and workers and peasants' states. The communist parties in these countries often governed in coalitions with other progressive parties.

During the postcolonial period, a number of former European colonies that had achieved independence and adopted Marxist–Leninist governments took the name people's republic. Angola, Benin, Congo-Brazzaville, Ethiopia, Cambodia, Laos, Mozambique and South Yemen followed this route. Following the Revolutions of 1989, the people's republics of Central and Eastern Europe (Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Poland) and Mongolia dropped the term people's from their names as it was associated with their former communist governments and became known simply as republics, adopting liberal democracy as their system of government. At around the same time, most of the former European colonies that had taken the people's republic name began to replace it as part of their move away from Marxism–Leninism and towards democratic socialism or social democracy.

List of Marxist–Leninist people's republics

The current officially Marxist-Leninist states that use the term people's republic in their full names include:

Historical examples include:

Other titles commonly used by Marxist–Leninist and socialist states are democratic republic (e.g. the German Democratic Republic, the Somali Democratic Republic, or the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia between 1943 and 1946) and socialist republic (e.g. the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam).

Non-Marxist–Leninist people's republics

The collapse of the European empires during and following World War I resulted in the creation of a number of short-lived non-Marxist–Leninist people's republics during the revolutions of 1917–1923. In many cases, these governments were unrecognised and often had Marxist–Leninist rivals.

The Russian Empire produced several non-Marxist–Leninist people's republics after the October Revolution. The Crimean People's Republic was opposed to the Bolsheviks and the latter went on to capture its territory and establish the Taurida Soviet Socialist Republic. The anti-Bolshevik Kuban People's Republic was established in Russia's Kuban region and survived until the Red Army captured the area. The socialist-leaning Ukrainian People's Republic declared its independence from the Russian Republic, but it had a rival in the Ukrainian People's Republic of Soviets (later the Ukrainian Soviet Republic) whom it fought during the Ukrainian War of Independence. The Belarusian People's Republic tried to create an independent Belarusian state in land controlled by the German Imperial Army, but the Socialist Soviet Republic of Byelorussia replaced it once the German army had left. All of these territories finally became constituent parts of the Soviet Union.

In the former Austro-Hungarian Empire, the West Ukrainian People's Republic was formed in eastern Galicia under the political guidance of Greek Catholic, liberal and socialist ideologies. The territory was subsequently absorbed into the Second Polish Republic. Meanwhile, the Hungarian People's Republic was established, briefly replaced by the Hungarian Soviet Republic and eventually succeeded by the Kingdom of Hungary.

In Germany, the People's State of Bavaria (German: Volksstaat Bayern) was a short-lived socialist state and people's republic formed in Bavaria during the German Revolution of 1918–1919 as a rival to the Bavarian Soviet Republic. It was succeeded by the Free State of Bavaria which existed within the Weimar Republic.

During the 1960s and 1970s, a number of former colonies that had gained independence through revolutionary liberation struggles adopted the name people's republic. Examples include Algeria, Bangladesh and Zanzibar. Libya adopted the term after its Al Fateh Revolution against King Idris.

In the 2010s, Ukraine's pro-Russian separatist movements during the Russo-Ukrainian War declared the oblasts of Donetsk and Luhansk to be people's republics, but they did not receive diplomatic recognition from the international community. In 2022, during the prelude to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russia became the first UN member to formally recognise both the DPR and LPR.

List of non-Marxist–Leninist people's republics

Current non-Marxist–Leninist people's republics include:

Historical people's republics include:

Other uses

As a term, people's republic is sometimes used by critics and satirists to describe areas perceived to be dominated by left-wing politics, such as the People's Republic of South Yorkshire.

United States labor law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uni...