1.
Jupiter (mythology)
–
Jupiter, also Jove, is the god of sky and thunder and king of the gods in Ancient Roman religion and mythology. Jupiter was the deity of Roman state religion throughout the Republican and Imperial eras. In Roman mythology, he negotiates with Numa Pompilius, the king of Rome, to establish principles of Roman religion such as offering. Jupiter is usually thought to have originated as a sky god, the two emblems were often combined to represent the god in the form of an eagle holding in its claws a thunderbolt, frequently seen on Greek and Roman coins. As the sky-god, he was a witness to oaths. Many of his functions were focused on the Capitoline Hill, where the citadel was located and he was the chief deity of the early Capitoline Triad with Mars and Quirinus. In the later Capitoline Triad, he was the guardian of the state with Juno. His sacred tree was the oak, the Romans regarded Jupiter as the equivalent of the Greek Zeus, and in Latin literature and Roman art, the myths and iconography of Zeus are adapted under the name Iuppiter. In the Greek-influenced tradition, Jupiter was the brother of Neptune, each presided over one of the three realms of the universe, sky, the waters, and the underworld. The Italic Diespiter was also a sky god who manifested himself in the daylight, usually, Tinia is usually regarded as his Etruscan counterpart. The Romans believed that Jupiter granted them supremacy because they had honoured him more than any other people had, Jupiter was the fount of the auspices upon which the relationship of the city with the gods rested. He personified the divine authority of Romes highest offices, internal organization and his image in the Republican and Imperial Capitol bore regalia associated with Romes ancient kings and the highest consular and Imperial honours. The consuls swore their oath of office in Jupiters name, to thank him for his help, they offered him a white ox with gilded horns. A similar offering was made by generals, who surrendered the tokens of their victory at the feet of Jupiters statue in the Capitol. Some scholars have viewed the triumphator as embodying Jupiter in the triumphal procession, Jupiters association with kingship and sovereignty was reinterpreted as Romes form of government changed. Originally, Rome was ruled by kings, after the monarchy was abolished and the Republic established, religious prerogatives were transferred to the patres, nostalgia for the kingship was considered treasonous. Those suspected of harbouring monarchical ambitions were punished, regardless of their service to the state, in the 5th century BC, the triumphator Camillus was sent into exile after he drove a chariot with a team of four white horses —an honour reserved for Jupiter himself. His house on the Capitoline Hill was razed, and it was decreed that no patrician should ever be allowed to live there, during the Conflict of the Orders, Romes plebeians demanded the right to hold political and religious office
2.
Imperial cult (ancient Rome)
–
The Imperial cult of ancient Rome identified emperors and some members of their families with the divinely sanctioned authority of the Roman State. Augustuss reforms transformed Romes Republican system of government to a de facto monarchy, couched in traditional Roman practices, the princeps was expected to balance the interests of the Roman military, Senate and people, and to maintain peace, security and prosperity throughout an ethnically diverse empire. A deceased emperor held worthy of the honor could be voted a state divinity by the Senate, in the development of Imperial rule from Principate to Dominate, the role of the Senate was increasingly marginalised and military loyalty became the key to Imperial authority. The Imperial cult was inseparable from that of Romes official deities, whose cult was essential to Romes survival, Traditional cult was a focus of Imperial revivalist legislation under Decius and Diocletian. Christian apologists and martyrologists saw the cult of the Emperor as a particularly offensive instrument of pagan impiety and it therefore became a focus of theological and political debate during the ascendancy of Christianity under Constantine I. The emperor Julian failed to reverse the declining support for Romes official religious practices, Romes traditional gods and Imperial cult were officially abandoned. However, many of the rites, practices and status distinctions that characterized the cult to emperors were perpetuated in the theology, for five centuries, the Roman Republic did not give worship to any historic figure, or any living man, although surrounded by divine and semi-divine monarchies. Romes legendary kings had been its masters, with their removal, Republican Romans could identify Romulus, similarly, Aeneas was worshipped as Jupiter Indiges. The aristocrats who held almost all Roman magistracies, and thereby occupied almost all of the Senate, among the highest of honors was the triumph. The triumphator rode in a chariot, bearing divine emblems, in a supposed to be inherited from the ancient kings of Rome. Whatever his personal ambitions, his victory and his triumph alike served the Roman Senate, people, in private life, however, tradition required that some human beings be treated as more or less divine, cult was due from familial inferiors to their superiors. A client could call his patron Jupiter on earth, the dead, collectively and individually, were gods of the underworld or afterlife. A prominent clan might claim divine influence and quasi-divine honors for its leader, death masks were made for all notable Romans and were displayed in the atria of their houses, they were used to represent their ghostly presence at family funerals. The mask of Scipio Africanus, Cornelias father and victor over Hannibal, was stored in the temple of Jupiter, a tradition arose in the centuries after his death that Africanus had been inspired by prophetic dreams, and was himself the son of Jupiter. There are several cases of unofficial cult directed at men viewed as saviors and this celebration, in Spain, featured a lavish banquet with local and imported delicacies, and a mechanical statue of Victory to crown Metellus, who wore a triumphators toga picta for the occasion. These festivities were organized by the quaestor Gaius Urbinus, but were not acts of the state, Metellus liked all this, but his older and pious contemporaries thought it arrogant and intolerable. After Gaius Marius defeated the Teutones, private citizens would offer food and drink to him alongside their household gods, when the Romans began to dominate large parts of the Greek world, Romes senior representatives there were given the same divine honours as were Hellenistic rulers. There were similar instances of divine cult to humans in the century, although some rulers, like Agesilaus
3.
Roman emperor
–
The Roman emperor was the ruler of the Roman Empire during the imperial period. The emperors used a variety of different titles throughout history, often when a given Roman is described as becoming emperor in English, it reflects his taking of the title Augustus or Caesar. Another title often used was imperator, originally a military honorific, early Emperors also used the title princeps. Emperors frequently amassed republican titles, notably Princeps Senatus, Consul, the first emperors reigned alone, later emperors would sometimes rule with co-Emperors and divide administration of the Empire between them. The Romans considered the office of emperor to be distinct from that of a king, the first emperor, Augustus, resolutely refused recognition as a monarch. Although Augustus could claim that his power was authentically republican, his successor, Tiberius, nonetheless, for the first three hundred years of Roman Emperors, from Augustus until Diocletian, a great effort was made to emphasize that the Emperors were the leaders of a Republic. Elements of the Republican institutional framework were preserved until the end of the Western Empire. The Eastern emperors ultimately adopted the title of Basileus, which had meant king in Greek, but became a title reserved solely for the Roman emperor, other kings were then referred to as rēgas. In addition to their office, some emperors were given divine status after death. The Western Roman Empire collapsed in the late 5th century, Romulus Augustulus is often considered to be the last emperor of the west after his forced abdication in 476, although Julius Nepos maintained a claim to the title until his death in 480. Constantine XI was the last Byzantine Roman emperor in Constantinople, dying in the Fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans in 1453, a Byzantine group of claimant Roman Emperors existed in the Empire of Trebizond until its conquest by the Ottomans in 1461. In western Europe the title of Roman Emperor was revived by Germanic rulers, the Holy Roman Emperors, in 800, at the end of the Roman Republic no new, and certainly no single, title indicated the individual who held supreme power. Insofar as emperor could be seen as the English translation of imperator, then Julius Caesar had been an emperor, however, Julius Caesar, unlike those after him, did so without the Senates vote and approval. Julius Caesar held the Republican offices of four times and dictator five times, was appointed dictator in perpetuity in 45 BC and had been pontifex maximus for a long period. He gained these positions by senatorial consent, by the time of his assassination, he was the most powerful man in the Roman world. In his will, Caesar appointed his adopted son Octavian as his heir, a decade after Caesars death, Octavians victory over his erstwhile ally Mark Antony at Actium put an end to any effective opposition and confirmed Octavians supremacy. His restoration of powers to the Senate and the people of Rome was a demonstration of his auctoritas, some later historians such as Tacitus would say that even at Augustus death, the true restoration of the Republic might have been possible. Instead, Augustus actively prepared his adopted son Tiberius to be his successor, the Senate disputed the issue but eventually confirmed Tiberius as princeps
4.
Divine right of kings
–
The divine right of kings, divine right, or Gods mandate is a political and religious doctrine of royal and political legitimacy. It asserts that a monarch is subject to no earthly authority, the king is thus not subject to the will of his people, the aristocracy, or any other estate of the realm. It implies that only God can judge an unjust king and that any attempt to depose, dethrone or restrict his powers runs contrary to the will of God and it is only an implication and the Bible states Iron sharpens iron, referring to accountability to each other. It also implies the higher accountability of Monarchs to implement policies in line with Christs commandment to Love one another and it is often expressed in the phrase by the Grace of God, attached to the titles of a reigning monarch. In the pagan world, kings were often seen as ruling with the backing of heavenly powers or perhaps even being divine beings themselves. However, the Christian notion of a right of kings could be traced to the biblical story found in 1 Samuel. And the anointing is to such an effect that the monarch became inviolable, adomnan of Iona is one of the earliest Christian proponents of this concept of kings ruling with divine right. He wrote of the Irish King Diarmait mac Cerbaills assassination and claimed that divine punishment fell on his assassin for the act of violating the monarch, the same angel then visited Columba on three successive nights, and then finally Columba agreed and Aedan came to receive ordination. Adomnans writings most likely influenced other Irish writers, who in turn influenced continental ideas as well, pepin the Shorts coronation may have also come from the same influence. The Carolingian dynasty and the Holy Roman Emperors also influenced all subsequent western ideas of kingship, the immediate author of the theory was Jean Bodin, who based it on the interpretation of Roman law. With the rise of nation-states and the Protestant Reformation, the theory of divine right justified the kings authority in both political and spiritual matters. The theory came to the fore in England under the reign of James I of England, louis XIV of France strongly promoted the theory as well. The Scots textbooks of the right of kings were written in 1597–98 by James VI of Scotland before his accession to the English throne. James I based his theories in part on his understanding of the Bible, the state of monarchy is the supremest thing upon earth, for kings are not only Gods lieutenants upon earth and sit upon Gods throne, but even by God himself they are called gods. There be three principal that illustrate the state of monarchy, one out of the word of God. In the Scriptures kings are called gods, and so their power after a certain relation compared to the Divine power, Kings are also compared to fathers of families, for a king is truly parens patriae, the politic father of his people. And lastly, kings are compared to the head of this microcosm of the body of man, jamess reference to Gods lieutenants is apparently a reference to the controversial text in Romans 13, where Paul refers to Gods ministers. Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers, for there is no power but of God, the powers that be are ordained of God
5.
Auctoritas
–
Auctoritas is a Latin word and is the origin of English authority. While historically its use in English was restricted to discussions of the history of Rome. In ancient Rome, Auctoritas referred to the level of prestige a person had in Roman society, and, as a consequence, his clout, influence. Auctoritas was not merely political, however, it had a numinous content, noble women could also achieve a degree of Auctoritas. For example, the wives, sisters, and mothers of the Julio-Claudians had immense influence on society, the masses, and their Auctoritas was exercised less overtly than their male counterparts due to Roman societal norms, but they were powerful nonetheless. According to French linguist Emile Benveniste, auctor is derived from Latin augeō, the auctor is is qui auget, the one who augments the act or the juridical situation of another. Auctor in the sense of author, comes from auctor as founder or, one might say, similarly, auctoritas refers to rightful ownership, based on ones having produced or homesteaded the article of property in question - more in the sense of sponsored or acquired than manufactured. This auctoritas would, for example, persist through an usucapio of ill-gotten or abandoned property, politically, auctoritas was connected to the Roman Senates authority, not to be confused with potestas or imperium, which were held by the magistrates or the people. In this context, Auctoritas could be defined as the power to authorize some other act. The 19th-century classicist Theodor Mommsen describes the force of auctoritas as more than advice and less than command, cicero says of power and authority, Cum potestas in populo auctoritas in senatu sit. In the private domain, those under tutelage, such as women, thus, auctoritas characterizes the auctor, The pater familias authorizes – that is, validates and legitimates – his sons wedding in prostate. In this way, auctoritas might function as a kind of passive counsel, much as, for example, the notion of auctoritas was often invoked by the papacy during the Middle Ages, in order to secure the temporal power of the Pope. Innocent III most famously invoked auctoritas in order to depose kings and emperors, hannah Arendt considered auctoritas a reference to founding acts as the source of political authority in Ancient Rome. She took foundation to include, the conservation and increase of principles handed down from the beginning. Arendt views a crisis of authority as common to both the American and French Revolutions, and the response to that crisis a key factor in the success of the former. Philosopher Giorgio Agamben suggests a relationship between the Roman auctoritas, Max Webers charismatic power, and Carl Schmitts theoretical/ideological basis for the Nazi Führertum doctrine, Agamben compares auctoritas to the Führer in their relationship to the observance of gramma, γράμμα, written law. William Smith, A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, alvaro dOrs, Derecho privado romano Rafael Domingo Osle, Auctoritas
6.
Glossary of ancient Roman religion
–
The vocabulary of ancient Roman religion was highly specialized. Its study affords important information about the religion, traditions and beliefs of the ancient Romans and this legacy is conspicuous in European cultural history in its influence on later juridical and religious vocabulary in Europe, particularly of the Western Church. For theonyms, or the names and epithets of gods, see List of Roman deities, for public religious holidays, see Roman festivals. For temples see the List of Ancient Roman temples, individual landmarks of religious topography in ancient Rome are not included in this list, see Roman temple. The verb abominari was a term of augury for an action that rejects or averts an unfavourable omen indicated by a signum, the noun is abominatio, from which English abomination derives. At the taking of formally solicited auspices, the observer was required to acknowledge any potentially bad sign occurring within the templum he was observing, regardless of the interpretation. He might, however, take actions in order to ignore the signa, including avoiding the sight of them. The latter tactic required promptness, wit and skill based on discipline, thus the omen had no validity apart from the observation of it. The aedes was the place of a god. It was thus a structure that housed the image, distinguished from the templum or sacred district. Aedes is one of several Latin words that can be translated as shrine or temple, for instance, the Temple of Vesta, as it is called in English, was in Latin an aedes. See also the diminutive aedicula, a small shrine, in his work On Architecture, Vitruvius always uses the word templum in the technical sense of a space defined through augury, with aedes the usual word for the building itself. The design of an aedes, he writes, should be appropriate to the characteristics of the deity. Thus in theory, though not always in practice, architectural aesthetics had a theological dimension, the word aedilis, a public official, is related by etymology, among the duties of the aediles was the overseeing of public works, including the building and maintenance of temples. The temple of Flora, for instance, was built in 241 BC by two aediles acting on Sibylline oracles, the plebeian aediles had their headquarters at the aedes of Ceres. In religious usage, ager was terrestrial space defined for the purposes of augury in relation to auspicia, there were five kinds of ager, Romanus, Gabinus, peregrinus, hosticus and incertus. The ager Romanus originally included the space outside the pomerium. According to Varro, the ager Gabinus pertained to the circumstances of the oppidum of Gabii
7.
Pietas
–
Pietas, translated variously as duty, religiosity or religious behavior, loyalty, devotion, or filial piety, was one of the chief virtues among the ancient Romans. It was the distinguishing virtue of the founding hero Aeneas, who is given the adjectival epithet pius throughout Virgils epic Aeneid. The sacred nature of pietas was embodied by the divine personification Pietas, cicero defined pietas as the virtue which admonishes us to do our duty to our country or our parents or other blood relations. The man who possessed pietas performed all his duties towards the deity and his fellow human beings fully and in every respect, Pietas erga parentes was one of the most important aspects of demonstrating virtue. Pietas extended also toward parents in the sense of ancestors, and was one of the principles of Roman tradition. Pietas as a virtue resided within a person, in contrast to a virtue or gift such as Victoria, Pietas, however, allowed a person to recognize the divine source of benefits conferred. The first recorded use of pietas in English occurs in Anselm Bayly’s The Alliance of Music, Poetry, Pietas can also be arranged in this order from the most important to the least, The gods, your city, your family, and lastly yourself. You should also take in mind that pietas includes knowing your place in this scale, Pietas was represented on coin by cult objects, but also as a woman conducting a sacrifice by means of fire at an altar. In the imagery of sacrifice, libation was the act that came to symbolize pietas. Pietas is first represented on Roman coins on denarii issued by Marcus Herennius in 108 or 107 BC, Pietas appears on the obverse as a divine personification, in bust form, the quality of pietas is represented by a son carrying his father on his back. Pietas is among the virtues that appear frequently on Imperial coins, one of the symbols of pietas was the stork, described by Petronius as pietaticultrix, cultivator of pietas. The stork represented filial piety in particular, as the Romans believed that it demonstrated family loyalty by returning to the same nest every year, as such, a stork appears next to Pietas on a coin issued by Metellus Pius. Pietas was the presence in everyday life that cautioned humans not to intrude on the realm of the gods. Violations of pietas required a piaculum, expiatory rites, a temple to Pietas was vowed by Manius Acilius Glabrio at the Battle of Thermopylae in 191 BC. According to a legend, a poor woman who was starving in prison was saved when her daughter gave her breast milk. Caught in the act, the daughter was not punished, mother and daughter were set free, and given public support for the rest of their lives. The site was regarded as sacred to the goddess Pietas because she had chosen to manifest her presence there, the story exemplified pietas erga parentes, the proper devotion one ought to show to ones parents. Pietas was often depicted as goddess on the reverse of Roman Imperial coins, with women of the family on the obverse
8.
Mos maiorum
–
The mos maiorum is the unwritten code from which the ancient Romans derived their social norms. It is the concept of Roman traditionalism, distinguished from. The mos maiorum was collectively the time-honoured principles, behavioural models, and social practices that affected private, political, the Roman family was hierarchical, as was Roman society. These hierarchies were traditional and self-perpetuating, that is, they supported and were supported by the mos maiorum, the risk and pressure of social censure if he failed to live up to expectations was also a form of mos. The distinctive social relationship of ancient Rome was that between patron and client, although the obligations of this relationship were mutual, they were also hierarchical. If the familia was the discrete unit underlying society, these interlocking networks countered that autonomy, patronage served as a model when conquerors or governors abroad established personal ties as patron to whole communities, ties which then might be perpetuated as a family obligation. In this sense, mos becomes less a matter of unchanging tradition than precedent, however, because the mos maiorum was a matter of custom, not written law, the complex norms that it embodied evolved over time. The ability to preserve a sense of identity while it adapted to changing circumstances permitted the expansionism that took Rome from city-state to world power. The preservation of the mos maiorum depended on consensus and moderation among the ruling elite whose competition for power, democratic politics, driven by the charismatic appeal of individuals to the Roman people, potentially undermined the conservative principle of the mos. Because the higher magistracies and priesthoods were originally the prerogative of the patricians, reform was accomplished by legislation, and written law replaced consensus. The plebs and their support of popular politicians continued as a threat to the mos and elite consensus into the late Republic, the auctoritas maiorum could be evoked to validate social developments in the name of tradition. Following the collapse of the Roman Republic after the death of Julius Caesar and it was an important concept in Roman law, as oral contracts were common. The concept of fides was personified by the goddess Fides whose role in the mos maiorum is indicated by the antiquity of her cult and her temple is dated from around 254 BC and was located on the Capitoline Hill in Rome, near the Temple of Jupiter. Pietas was the Roman attitude of respect towards the gods, homeland, parents and family. Cicero defined pietas as justice towards the gods. ”It went beyond sacrifice and correct ritual performance to inner devotion and righteousness of the individual, the use of the adjectival form Pius as a cognomen reflects its importance as an identifying trait. Like Fides, Pietas was cultivated as a goddess, with a temple vowed to her in 191 BC, related to the Latin verb religare, to bind, religio was the bond between gods and mortals, as carried out in traditional religious practices for preserving the pax deorum. Cultus was the observance and the correct performance of rituals. Religious practice, in sense, is to be distinguished from pietas
9.
Separatism
–
A common definition of separatism is that it is the advocacy of a state of cultural, ethnic, tribal, religious, racial, governmental or gender separation from the larger group. While it often refers to political secession, separatist groups may seek nothing more than greater autonomy. There is some debate about this definition, and in particular how it relates to secessionism. Separatist groups practice a form of identity politics, political activity, such groups believe attempts at integration with dominant groups compromise their identity and ability to pursue greater self-determination. However, economic and political factors usually are critical in creating strong separatist movements as opposed to less ambitious identity movements, groups may have one or more motivations for separation, including, emotional resentment and hatred of rival communities. Protection from ethnic cleansing and genocide, resistance by victims of oppression, including denigration of their language, culture or religion. Propaganda by those who hope to gain politically from intergroup conflict, Economic and political dominance of one group that does not share power and privilege in an egalitarian fashion. Economic motivations, seeking to end exploitation by more powerful group or, conversely. Preservation of threatened religious, language or other cultural tradition, destabilization from one separatist movement giving rise to others. Geopolitical power vacuum from breakup of larger states or empires, continuing fragmentation as more and more states break up. Feeling that the nation was added to the larger state by illegitimate means. The perception that the state can no longer support ones own group or has betrayed their interests, governments may respond in a number of ways, some of which are mutually exclusive. Settle for a confederation or a relationship where there are only limited ties among states. Some governments suppress any separatist movement in their own country, Ethnic separatism is based more on cultural and linguistic differences than religious or racial differences, which also may exist. Chechen separatism in the Caucasus, currently the Republic of Chechnya is part of the Russian Federation, serb separatism in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo. Albanian separatism in Kosovo and R. Macedonia Turkish separatism in Cyprus, South Ossetian and Abkhazian separatism in Georgia. Armenian separatists of Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan, azeri separatists in Iran want to unite the provinces of East Azerbaijan, West Azerbaijan, Zanjan and Ardabil with Azerbaijan. Kurdish separatism in Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran, silesian separatism in Poland and Czech Republic
10.
Dominion
–
Dominions were semi-independent polities under the British Crown, constituting the British Empire, beginning with Canadian Confederation in 1867. They included Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Newfoundland, South Africa, and the Irish Free State, and then from the late 1940s also India, Pakistan, and Ceylon. The Balfour Declaration of 1926 recognised the Dominions as autonomous Communities within the British Empire, earlier usage of dominion to refer to a particular territory dates to the 16th century and was used to describe Wales from 1535 to 1801 and New England between 1686 and 1689. At the outset, a distinction must be made between a British dominion and British Dominions, all territories forming part of the British Empire were British dominions but only some were British Dominions. At the time of the adoption of the Statute of Westminster, there were six British Dominions, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Newfoundland, at the same time there were many other jurisdictions that were British dominions, for example Cyprus. The Order in Council annexing the island of Cyprus in 1914 declared that, from 5 November, Dominion, as an official title, was conferred on the Colony of Virginia about 1660 and on the Dominion of New England in 1686. These dominions never had full self-governing status, the creation of the short-lived Dominion of New England was designed—contrary to the purpose of later dominions—to increase royal control and to reduce the colonys self-government. Under the British North America Act 1867, what is now eastern Canada received the status of Dominion upon the Confederation of several British possessions in North America. However, it was at the Colonial Conference of 1907 when the colonies of Canada. Two other self-governing colonies—New Zealand and Newfoundland—were granted the status of Dominion in the same year and these were followed by the Union of South Africa in 1910 and the Irish Free State in 1922. The Statute of Westminster 1931 converted this status into legal reality, following the Second World War, the decline of British colonialism led to Dominions generally being referred to as Commonwealth realms and the use of the word dominion gradually diminished. Nonetheless, though disused, it remains Canadas legal title and the phrase Her Majestys Dominions is still used occasionally in legal documents in the United Kingdom. The phrase His/Her Majestys dominions is a legal and constitutional phrase that refers to all the realms and territories of the Sovereign, thus, for example, the British Ireland Act,1949, recognised that the Republic of Ireland had ceased to be part of His Majestys dominions. The later sense of Dominion was capitalised to distinguish it from the general sense of dominion. The word dominions originally referred to the possessions of the Kingdom of England, oliver Cromwells full title in the 1650s was Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland, and the dominions thereto belonging. In 1660, King Charles II gave the Colony of Virginia the title of dominion in gratitude for Virginias loyalty to the Crown during the English Civil War, the Commonwealth of Virginia, a State of the United States, still has the Old Dominion as one of its nicknames. Dominion also occurred in the name of the short-lived Dominion of New England, in all of these cases, the word dominion implied no more than being subject to the English Crown. The foundation of Dominion status followed the achievement of internal self-rule in British Colonies, Colonial responsible government began to emerge during the mid-19th century
11.
Federalism
–
Federalism is the mixed or compound mode of government, combining a general government with regional governments in a single political system. It can thus be defined as a form of government in there is a division of powers between two levels of government of equal status. Leading examples of the federation or federal state include the United States, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Germany, Switzerland, some also today characterize the European Union as the pioneering example of federalism in a multi-state setting, in a concept termed the federal union of states. The terms federalism and confederalism both have a root in the Latin word foedus, meaning treaty, pact or covenant and their common meaning until the late eighteenth century was a simple league or inter-governmental relationship among sovereign states based upon a treaty. It was in this sense that James Madison in Federalist 39 had referred to the new United States as neither a national nor a federal Constitution, thus, this article relates to the modern usage of the word federalism. Modern federalism is a based upon democratic rules and institutions in which the power to govern is shared between national and provincial/state governments. The term federalist describes several political beliefs around the world depending on context, however, in some countries, those skeptical of federal prescriptions believe that increased regional autonomy is likely to lead to secession or dissolution of the nation. In Syria, federalization proposals have failed in part because Syrians fear that these borders could turn out to be the same as the ones that the parties have currently carved out. Federations such as Yugoslavia or Czechoslovakia collapsed as soon as it was possible to put the model to the test, cultural-historical theories, which hold that federal institutions are more likely to be adopted in societies with culturally or ethnically fragmented populations. Infrastructural power theories, which hold that federalism is likely to emerge when the subunits of a potential federation already have highly developed infrastructures. In Europe, Federalist is sometimes used to describe those who favor a federal government. Most European federalists want this development to continue within the European Union, European federalism originated in post-war Europe, one of the more important initiatives was Winston Churchills speech in Zürich in 1946. In the United States, federalism originally referred to belief in a central government. Constitution was being drafted, the Federalist Party supported a central government. This is very different from the usage of federalism in Europe. The distinction stems from the fact that federalism is situated in the middle of the spectrum between a confederacy and a unitary state. Constitution was written as a reaction to the Articles of Confederation, in contrast, Europe has a greater history of unitary states than North America, thus European federalism argues for a weaker central government, relative to a unitary state. The modern American usage of the word is closer to the European sense
12.
Federation
–
A federation is a political entity characterized by a union of partially self-governing states or regions under a central government. The governmental or constitutional structure found in a federation is known as federalism and it can be considered the opposite of another system, the unitary state. Federations are often multiethnic and cover an area of territory. The initial agreements create a stability that encourages other common interests, at some time, that is recognized and a movement is organized to merge more closely. At other times, especially when common cultural factors are at such as ethnicity and language. The Old Swiss Confederacy was an example of formal non-unitary statehood. Several colonies and dominions in the New World consisted of autonomous provinces, the oldest continuous federation, and a role model for many subsequent federations, is the United States. Some of the New World federations failed, the Federal Republic of Central America broke up into independent states ten years after its founding, others, such as Argentina and Mexico, have shifted between federal, confederal, and unitary systems, before settling into federalism. Brazil became a federation only after the fall of the monarchy, australia and Canada are also federations. Germany is another nation-state that has switched between confederal, federal and unitary rules, since the German Confederation was founded in 1815, the North German Confederation, the succeeding German Empire and the Weimar Republic were federations. The Russian Federation has inherited a similar system, Nigeria, Pakistan, India and Malaysia became federations on or shortly before becoming independent from the British Empire. In some recent cases, federations have been instituted as a measure to handle ethnic conflict within a state, such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Iraq since 2005. The component states are in some sense sovereign, insofar as certain powers are reserved to them that may not be exercised by the central government, however, a federation is more than a mere loose alliance of independent states. The component states of a federation usually possess no powers in relation to foreign policy, however, German Länder have that power, which is beginning to be exercised on a European level. Some federations are called asymmetric because some states have more autonomy than others, an example of such a federation is Malaysia, in which Sarawak and Sabah agreed to form the federation on different terms and conditions from the states of Peninsular Malaysia. A federation often emerges from an agreement between a number of separate states. The purpose can be the will to solve problems and to provide for mutual defense or to create a nation state for an ethnicity spread over several states. The former was the case with the United States and Switzerland, however, as the histories of countries and nations vary, the federalist system of a state can be quite different from these models
13.
Confederation
–
A confederation is a union of sovereign states, united for purposes of common action often in relation to other states. Confederalism represents a form of inter-governmentalism, this being defined as ‘any form of interaction between states which takes place on the basis of sovereign independence. The nature of the relationship among the member states constituting a confederation varies considerably, likewise, the relationship between the member states and the general government, and the distribution of powers among them is highly variable. Some looser confederations are similar to international organisations, other confederations with stricter rules may resemble federal systems. Since the member states of a confederation retain their sovereignty, they have a right of secession. … The deliberations in common will offer no violence to the sovereignty of each member’, under a confederal arrangement, in contrast with a federal one, the central authority is relatively weak. Decisions made by the government in a unicameral legislature, a council of the member states. They are therefore not laws acting directly upon the individual, also, decision-making in the general government usually proceeds by consensus and not by majority, which makes for a slow and inefficient government. For example, C. E. some aspects of a confederation in Le Soir, also in Le Soir, Professor Michel Quévit of the Catholic University of Leuven wrote that the Belgian political system is already in dynamics of a Confederation. Nevertheless, the Belgian regions lack the necessary autonomy to leave the Belgian state, as such, federal aspects still dominate. Also, for policy and public finances, the federal state dominates the other levels of government. The increasingly confederal aspects of the Belgian Federal State appear to be a reflection of the profound cultural, sociological. Parties that strongly advocate Belgian unity and appeal to voters of both communities play usually only a role in nationwide general elections. This makes Belgium fundamentally different from countries like Switzerland, Canada, Germany. In those countries, national parties regularly receive over 90% of voter support, in Canada, the word confederation has an additional, unrelated meaning. Confederation refers to the process of establishing or joining the Canadian federal state, in modern terminology, Canada is a federation and not a confederation. However, at the time of the Constitution Act,1867, confederation was the normal British, therefore, on July 1,1867, Canada became a self-governing dominion of the British Empire with a federal structure under the leadership of Sir John A. Macdonald. The provinces involved were the Province of Canada, Nova Scotia, later participants were Manitoba, British Columbia, Prince Edward Island, Alberta and Saskatchewan, and finally Newfoundland in 1949
14.
Devolution
–
Devolution is the statutory delegation of powers from the central government of a sovereign state to govern at a subnational level, such as a regional or local level. It is a form of administrative decentralization, devolved territories have the power to make legislation relevant to the area. Devolution differs from federalism in that the powers of the subnational authority may be temporary and are reversible. Thus, the state de jure unitary. Legislation creating devolved parliaments or assemblies can be repealed or amended by central government in the way as any statute. In federal systems, by contrast, sub-unit government is guaranteed in the constitution, the sub-units therefore have a lower degree of protection under devolution than under federalism. It has six states and two territories with power than states. The Northern Territory of Australia refused statehood in a 1998 referendum, the rejection was a surprise to both the Australian and Northern Territory governments. Territory legislation can be disallowed by the Commonwealth Parliament in Canberra, although Canada is a federal state, a large portion of its land mass in the north is under the legislative jurisdiction of the federal government. This has been the case since 1870, since the 1970s, the federal government has been transferring its decision-making powers to northern governments. This means greater local control and accountability by northerners for decisions central to the future of the territories, Yukon was carved from the Northwest Territories in 1898 but it remained a federal territory. Subsequently, in 1905, the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan were created from the Northwest Territories, other portions of Ruperts Land were added to the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, extending the provinces northward from their previous narrow band around the St. Lawrence and lower Great Lakes. The District of Ungava was an administrative district of Canadas Northwest Territories from 1895 to 1912. The continental areas of district were transferred by the Parliament of Canada with the adoption of the Quebec Boundary Extension Act,1898. The status of the interior of Labrador which was believed part of Ungava was settled in 1927 by the British Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which ruled in favour of Newfoundland. In 1999, the government created Nunavut pursuant to a land claim agreement reached with Inuit. The offshore islands to the west and north of Quebec remained part of the Northwest Territories until the creation of Nunavut in 1999, since that time, the federal government has slowly devolved legislative jurisdiction to the territories. Enabling the territories to become more self-sufficient and prosperous and to play a role in the Canadian federation is considered a key component to development in Canada’s North
15.
Supranational union
–
A supranational union is a type of multinational political union where negotiated power is delegated to an authority by governments of member states. The concept of union is sometimes used to describe the European Union. The EU is the entity which provides for international popular elections. The term supranational is used in a loose, undefined sense in other contexts. Another method of decision-making in international organisations is intergovernmentalism, in state governments play a more prominent role. He thought this might begin with the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union and he broached the idea in a November 1945 and November 1947 articles in The Atlantic Monthly that described how the constitution of such an organization might be written. In an April 1948 address at Carnegie Hall, he reiterated, There is only one path to peace and security, the term supranational occurs in an international treaty for the first time in the Treaty of Paris,18 April 1951. This new legal term defined the Community method in creating the European Coal and Steel Community and it defines the relationship between the High Authority or European Commission and the other four institutions. In the treaty, it relates to a new democratic and legal concept, the Founding Fathers of the European Community and the present European Union said that supranationalism was the cornerstone of the governmental system. This is enshrined in the Europe Declaration made on 18 April 1951 and this Europe remains open to all nations. We profoundly hope that other nations will join us in our common endeavour and it was made to recall future generations to their historic duty of uniting Europe based on liberty and democracy under the rule of law. Thus, they viewed the creation of a wider and deeper Europe as intimately bound to the development of the supranational or Community system. This Europe was open to all nations who were free to decide, a supranational union is a supranational polity which lies somewhere between a confederation that is an association of States and a federation that is a state. The EU has supranational competences, but it possesses these competences only to the extent that they are conferred on it by its member states. Within the scope of competences, the union exercises its powers in a sovereign manner, having its own legislative, executive. The supranational Community also has a chamber for organised civil society including economic and social associations, unlike states in a federal super-state, member states retain ultimate sovereignty, although some sovereignty is shared with, or ceded to, the supranational body. Supranational agreements encourage stability and trust, because governments cannot break international accords at a whim, the supranational action may be time-limited. This was the case with the European Coal and Steel Community, supranational accords may be permanent, such as an agreement to outlaw war between the partners
16.
Empire
–
An empire can be made solely of contiguous territories such as the Austro-Hungarian Empire, or of territories far remote from the homeland, such as a colonial empire. Aside from the formal usage, the term empire can also be used to refer to a large-scale business enterprise. The term empire is associated with words such as imperialism, colonialism. Empire is often used to describe a displeasure to overpowering situations, the former method provides greater tribute and direct political control, yet limits further expansion because it absorbs military forces to fixed garrisons. The latter method provides less tribute and indirect control, but avails military forces for further expansion, territorial empires tend to be contiguous areas. The term, on occasion, has applied to maritime empires or thalassocracies, with looser structures. Empires are usually larger than kingdoms and this aspiration to universality resulted in conquest by converting ‘outsiders’ or ‘inferiors’ into the colonialized religion. This association of nationality and race became complex and has had an intense drive for expansion. An empire is a multi-ethnic or multinational state with political and/or military dominion of populations who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the ethnic group. This is in contrast to a federation, which is a state voluntarily composed of autonomous states and peoples. An empire is a political party who rules over territories outside of its original borders. Definitions of what physically and politically constitute an empire vary and it might be a state affecting imperial policies or a particular political structure. Empires are typically formed from ethnic, national, cultural. Empire and colonialism are used to refer to relationships between powerful state or society versus a less powerful one, sometimes, an empire is a semantic construction, such as when a ruler assumes the title of emperor. That rulers nation logically becomes an empire, despite having no additional territory or hegemony, among the last of the empires in the 20th century were the Central African Empire, Ethiopia, Vietnam, Manchukuo, the German Empire, and Korea. Furthermore, empires can expand by both land and sea, Empires originated as different types of states, although they commonly began as powerful monarchies. Ideas about empires have changed over time, ranging from public approval to universal distaste, Empires are built out of separate units with some kind of diversity – ethnic, national, cultural, religious – and imply at least some inequality between the rulers and the ruled. Without this inequality, the system would be seen as commonwealth, many empires were the result of military conquest, incorporating the vanquished states into a political union, but imperial hegemony can be established in other ways
17.
Hegemony
–
Hegemony is the political, economic, or military predominance or control of one state over others. In ancient Greece, hegemony denoted the politico–military dominance of a city-state over other city-states, the dominant state is known as the hegemon. In the 19th century, hegemony came to denote the Social or cultural predominance or ascendancy, later, it could be used to mean a group or regime which exerts undue influence within a society. In contrast to authoritarian rule, cultural hegemony is hegemonic only if those affected by it also consent to and struggle over its common sense. From the post-classical Latin word hegemonia, from 1513 or earlier, or the Greek word ἡγεμονία, meaning authority, rule, political supremacy, likewise, the role of Athens within the short-lived Delian League was that of a hegemon. Ancient historians such as Xenophon and Ephorus were the first who used the term in its modern sense. In Ancient East Asia, Chinese hegemony existed during the Spring and Autumn period and they were appointed by feudal lord conferences, and thus were nominally obliged to uphold the imperium of the Zhou Dynasty over the subordinate states. 1st and 2nd century Europe was dominated by the peace of the Pax Romana. It was instituted by the emperor Augustus, and was accompanied by a series of military campaigns. From the 7th century to the 12th century, the Umayyad Caliphate and later Abbasid Caliphate dominated the vast territories they governed, with other states like the Byzantine Empire paying tribute. In 7th century India, Harsha, ruler of an empire in northern India from 606 to 647 AD. He preferred not to rule as a government, but left conquered kings on their thrones and contenting himself with tribute. From the late 9th to the early 11th century, the empire developed by Charlemagne achieved hegemony in Europe, with dominance over France, Italy and he lists several contenders for historical hegemony. Based on Portugals dominance in navigation, based on Dutch control of credit and money. Based on British textiles and command of the high seas, based on British industrial supremacy and railroads. To this list could be added the hegemony of Habsburg Spain in 16th century Europe, however, after an attempt by Phillip IV to restore it, by the middle of the 17th century Spains pretensions to hegemony had definitely and irremediably failed. This, in turn, made possible the Amsterdam stock market, in France, King Louis XIV and Napoleon I attempted French hegemony via economic, cultural and military domination of most of Continental Europe. However, Jeremy Black writes that, because of Britain, France was unable to enjoy the benefits of this hegemony, Britain also controlled the Indian subcontinent and large portions of Africa
18.
Unitary state
–
The majority of states in the world have a unitary system of government. Of the 193 UN member states,165 of them are governed as unitary states, unitary states are contrasted with federal states. In a unitary state, sub-national units are created and abolished, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is an example of a unitary state. Many unitary states have no areas possessing a degree of autonomy, in such countries, sub-national regions cannot decide their own laws. Examples are the Republic of Ireland and the Kingdom of Norway, in federal states, the sub-national governments share powers with the central government as equal actors through a written constitution, to which the consent of both is required to make amendments. This means that the units have a right of existence. The United States of America is an example of a federal state, under the U. S. Constitution, powers are shared between the federal government and the states
19.
Administrative division
–
Administrative divisions are granted a certain degree of autonomy and are usually required to manage themselves through their own local governments. Countries are divided up into smaller units to make managing their land. For example, a country may be divided into provinces, which, in turn, are divided into counties, which, in turn, may be divided in whole or in part into municipalities, and so on. Administrative divisions are separate from dependent territories, with the former being an integral part of the state. However, the administrative division can include dependent territories as well as accepted administrative divisions. For clarity and convenience the standard reference for the largest administrative subdivision of a country is called the first-level administrative division or first administrative level. Next smaller is called second-level administrative division or second administrative level, there is no fixed rule, for all politics is local as is perhaps well demonstrated by their relative lack of systemic order. In the realm of self-government, any of these can and does occur along a stretch of road—which for the most part is passing through rural unsettled countryside. In British cultural legacy, most territorial entities begin with fairly expansive counties which encompass a large area. Within those entities are the large and small cities or towns, many sister cities share a water boundary which quite often serves as a border of both cities and counties. For example, Cambridge and Boston, Massachusetts appear to the traveler as one large city, while locally they each are quite culturally different. Sovereign state, a national or supra-national division, country, a national or sub-national division. Administrative division codes of the Peoples Republic of China GADM, a database of country administrative areas. ISO 3166-2, specifically Codes for the representation of names of countries and their subdivisions — Part 2
20.
French and Raven's bases of power
–
In a notable study of power conducted by social psychologists John R. P. French and Bertram Raven in 1959, power is divided into five separate and distinct forms. In 1965 Raven revised this model to include a form by separating the informational power base as distinct from the expert power base. Relating to social studies, power in social influence settings has introduced a large realm of research pertaining to persuasion tactics. Through social communication studies, it has been theorized that leadership and it has been further presumed that different forms of power affect ones leadership and success. This idea is used often in organizational communication and throughout the workforce, in a notable study of power conducted by social psychologists John R. P. French and Bertram Raven in 1959, power is divided into five separate and distinct forms. They identified those five bases of power as coercive, reward, legitimate, referent and this was followed by Ravens subsequent identification in 1965 of a sixth separate and distinct base of power, informational power. Whereby, this is to be considered power in social influential situations, since then, the model has gone through very significant developments, coercion and reward can have personal as well as impersonal forms. Expert and referent power can be negative or positive, Legitimate power, in addition to position power, may be based on other normative obligations, reciprocity, equity, and responsibility. Information may be utilized in direct or indirect fashion, the French-Raven power forms are introduced with consideration of the level of observability and the extent to which power is dependent or independent of structural conditions. Using these considerations it is possible to link personal processes to structural conditions, French and Raven defined social power as the potential for influence (a change in the belief, attitude or behavior of a someone who is the target of influence. As we know leadership and power are closely linked and this model shows how the different forms of power affect ones leadership and success. This idea is used often in organizational communication and throughout the workforce, the French-Raven power forms are introduced with consideration of the level of observability and the extent to which power is dependent or independent of structural conditions. Dependency refers to the degree of internalization that occurs among persons subject to social control, using these considerations it is possible to link personal processes to structural conditions. The bases of power have evolved over the years with benefits coming from advanced research. On the basis of research and evidence, there have many other developments. French and Raven developed an original model outlining the change dependencies, though it is a common understanding that most social influence can still be understood by the original six bases of power, the foundational bases have been elaborated and further differentiated. Further Differentiating the Bases of Social Power As mentioned above, there are now six main concepts of power strategies consistently studied in social communication research and they are described as Coercive, Reward, Legitimate, Referent, Expert, and Informational. Additionally, research has shown that source credibility has an effect on the bases of power used in persuasion
21.
Democracy
–
Democracy, in modern usage, is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body, such as a parliament. Democracy is sometimes referred to as rule of the majority, Democracy was originally conceived in Classical Greece, where political representatives were chosen by a jury from amongst the male citizens, rich and poor. The English word dates to the 16th century, from the older Middle French, in the 5th century BC, to denote the political systems then existing in Greek city-states, notably Athens, the term is an antonym to aristocracy, meaning rule of an elite. While theoretically these definitions are in opposition, in practice the distinction has been blurred historically, the political system of Classical Athens, for example, granted democratic citizenship to free men and excluded slaves and women from political participation. In 1906, Finland became the first government to harald a more inclusive democracy at the national level. Democracy contrasts with forms of government where power is held by an individual, as in an absolute monarchy, or where power is held by a small number of individuals. Nevertheless, these oppositions, inherited from Greek philosophy, are now ambiguous because contemporary governments have mixed democratic, oligarchic, and monarchic elements. Karl Popper defined democracy in contrast to dictatorship or tyranny, thus focusing on opportunities for the people to control their leaders, No consensus exists on how to define democracy, but legal equality, political freedom and rule of law have been identified as important characteristics. These principles are reflected in all eligible citizens being equal before the law, other uses of democracy include that of direct democracy. In some countries, notably in the United Kingdom which originated the Westminster system, in the United States, separation of powers is often cited as a central attribute. In India, parliamentary sovereignty is subject to the Constitution of India which includes judicial review, though the term democracy is typically used in the context of a political state, the principles also are applicable to private organisations. Majority rule is listed as a characteristic of democracy. Hence, democracy allows for political minorities to be oppressed by the tyranny of the majority in the absence of legal protections of individual or group rights. An essential part of a representative democracy is competitive elections that are substantively and procedurally fair, i. e. just. It has also suggested that a basic feature of democracy is the capacity of all voters to participate freely and fully in the life of their society. While representative democracy is sometimes equated with the form of government. Many democracies are constitutional monarchies, such as the United Kingdom, the term democracy first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city-state of Athens during classical antiquity. The word comes from demos, common people and kratos, strength, led by Cleisthenes, Athenians established what is generally held as the first democracy in 508–507 BC
22.
Direct democracy
–
Direct democracy is a form of democracy in which people decide policy initiatives directly. This differs from the majority of democracies, which are representative democracies. Direct democracy is similar to, but distinct from, representative democracy, two leading forms of direct democracy are participatory democracy and deliberative democracy. Semi direct democracies in which representatives administer day-to-day governance, but the citizens remain the sovereign, the first two forms—referendums and initiatives—are examples of direct legislation. Compulsory referendum subjects the legislation drafted by political elites to a popular vote. This is the most common form of direct legislation, popular referendum empowers citizens to make a petition that calls existing legislation to a citizens vote. Institutions specify the frame for a valid petition and the number of signatures required. This form of direct democracy effectively grants the voting public a veto on laws adopted by the elected legislature, initiatives may be direct or indirect, With the direct initiative, a successful proposition is placed directly on the ballot to be subject to vote. Such a form of initiative is utilized by Switzerland for constitutional amendments. Power of Recall gives the public the power to elected officials from office before the end of their term. Some of the most important modern thinkers who were inspired by the concept of democracy are Cornelius Castoriadis, Hannah Arendt. The earliest known direct democracy is said to be the Athenian democracy in the 5th century BC, although it was not a democracy, women, foreigners. There were only about 30,000 male citizens, but several thousand of them were active in each year. Modern democracies, being representative, not direct, do not resemble the Athenian system, also relevant to the history of direct democracy is the history of Ancient Rome, specifically the Roman Republic, beginning around 509 BC. Rome displayed many aspects of democracy, both direct and indirect, from the era of Roman monarchy all the way to the collapse of the Roman Empire. As to direct democracy, the ancient Roman Republic had a system of citizen lawmaking, or citizen formulation and passage of law, and a citizen veto of legislature-made law. Many historians mark the end of the Republic with the passage of a law named the Lex Titia,27 November 43 BC, modern-era citizen lawmaking began in the towns of Switzerland in the 13th century. In 1847, the Swiss added the statute referendum to their national constitution and they soon discovered that merely having the power to veto Parliaments laws was not enough
23.
Representative democracy
–
Representative democracy is a type of democracy founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people, as opposed to direct democracy. Representative democracy is often presented as the most efficient form of democracy possible in mass societies and it arguably allows for efficient ruling by a sufficiently small number of people on behalf of the larger number. Government efficiency can be judged based on metric of cost effectiveness, representatives voting on behalf of the people allows for a monetary benefit as there is lessened use of polling stations, vote counters, etc. The government is responsible for paying for the wages of the representatives. This system of governance is also time efficient as decisions can be made by a select few and it is a system in which people elect their lawmakers, who are then held accountable to them for their activity within government. It has been described by political theorists including Robert A Dahl, Gregory Houston. In it the power is in the hands of the representatives who are elected by the people in elections. Representatives are elected by the public, as in elections for the national legislature. Elected representatives may hold the power to other representatives, presidents, or other officers of the government or of the legislature. The constitution may also provide for some deliberative democracy or direct popular measures, however, these are not always binding and usually require some legislative action—legal power usually remains firmly with representatives. Their wishes ought to have great weight with him, their opinion, high respect, their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs, and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiassed opinion, his judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man. These he does not derive from your pleasure, no, nor from the law and they are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you, not his only, but his judgment. The Roman Republic was the first government in the world to have a representative government. In Britain, Simon de Montfort is remembered as one of the fathers of representative government for holding two famous parliaments, the first, in 1258, stripped the King of unlimited authority and the second, in 1265, included ordinary citizens from the towns. Later, in the 17th century, the Parliament of England pioneered some of the ideas and systems of liberal democracy culminating in the Glorious Revolution, the American Revolution led to the creation of a new Constitution of the United States in 1787
24.
Liberal democracy
–
Liberal democracy is a liberal political ideology and a form of government in which representative democracy operates under the principles of classical liberalism. It is also called western democracy, to define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either formally written or uncodified, to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. After a period of sustained expansion throughout the 20th century, liberal democracy became the predominant political system in the world, a liberal democracy may take various constitutional forms, it may be a constitutional monarchy or a republic. It may have a system, a presidential system, or a semi-presidential system. Liberal democracies usually have universal suffrage, granting all citizens the right to vote regardless of race. Historically, however, some regarded as liberal democracies have had a more limited franchise. There may also be such as voters being required to register before being allowed to vote. The decisions made through elections are not by all of the citizens. The liberal democratic constitution defines the character of the state. The purpose of a constitution is seen as a limit on the authority of the government. Liberal democracy emphasises the separation of powers, an independent judiciary, Liberal democracies are likely to emphasise the importance of the state being a Rechtsstaat, i. e. a state that follows the principle of rule of law. Governmental authority is exercised only in accordance with written, publicly disclosed laws adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedure. In practice, democracies do have limits on certain freedoms, there are various legal limitations such as copyright and laws against defamation. There may be limits on speech, on attempts to undermine human rights. In the United States more than in Europe, during the Cold War, now they are more commonly applied to organisations perceived as promoting actual terrorism or the incitement of group hatred. Examples include anti-terrorism legislation, the shutting down of Hezbollah satellite broadcasts, critics claim that these limitations may go too far and that there may be no due and fair judicial process. The common justification for these limits is that they are necessary to guarantee the existence of democracy, for example, allowing free speech for those advocating mass murder undermines the right to life and security. Opinion is divided on how far democracy can extend to include the enemies of democracy in the democratic process, if relatively small numbers of people are excluded from such freedoms for these reasons, a country may still be seen as a liberal democracy
25.
Social democracy
–
In this period, social democrats embraced a mixed economy based on the predominance of private property, with only a minority of essential utilities and public services under public ownership. By 1868–1869, Marxism had become the official theoretical basis of the first social democratic party established in Europe, in this period, social democracy became associated with reformist socialism. The origins of social democracy have been traced to the 1860s, with the rise of the first major party in Europe. 1864 saw the founding of the International Workingmens Association, also known as the First International, another issue in the First International was the role of reformism. Although Lassalle was not a Marxist, he was influenced by the theories of Marx and Engels, however unlike Marxs and Engelss The Communist Manifesto, Lassalle promoted class struggle in a more moderate form. While Marx viewed the state negatively as an instrument of class rule that should only exist temporarily upon the rise to power of the proletariat and then dismantled, Lassalle accepted the state. Lassalle viewed the state as a means through which workers could enhance their interests, Lassalles strategy was primarily electoral and reformist, with Lassalleans contending that the working class needed a political party that fought above all for universal adult male suffrage. The ADAVs party newspaper was called Der Sozialdemokrat, Marx and Engels responded to the title Sozialdemocrat with distaste, Engels once writing, But what a title, Sozialdemokrat. Why dont they simply call it The Proletarian. Marx agreed with Engels that Sozialdemokrat was a bad title, there was a Marxist faction within the ADAV represented by Wilhelm Liebknecht who became one of the editors of the Die Sozialdemokrat. Friction in the ADAV arose over Lassalles policy of an approach to Bismarck that had assumed incorrectly that Bismarck in turn would be friendly towards them. This approach was opposed by the partys Marxists, including Liebknecht, opposition in the ADAV to Lassalles friendly approach to Bismarcks government resulted in Liebknecht resigning from his position as editor of Die Sozialdemokrat and leaving the ADAV in 1865. Though the SDAP was not officially Marxist, it was the first major organization to be led by Marxists and Marx. The party adopted stances similar to those adopted by Marx at the First International, there was intense rivalry and antagonism between the SDAP and the ADAV, with the SDAP being highly hostile to the Prussian government while the ADAV pursued a reformist and more cooperative approach. In spite of such militant rhetoric to appeal to the working class, in 1875 Marx attacked the Gotha Program that became the program of Social Democratic Party of Germany in the same year in his Critique of the Gotha Program. Marx was not optimistic that Germany at the time was not open to a means to achieve socialism. In addition he noticed a change over the relations between the two classes. The Reform Acts of 1867 and 1884 make an approach to universal suffrage. The Fabian Society was founded as a group from the Fellowship of the New Life due to opposition within that group to socialism
26.
Aristocracy
–
Aristocracy is a form of government that places power in the hands of a small, privileged ruling class. The term derives from the Greek aristokratia, meaning rule of the best, at the time of the words origins in Ancient Greece, the Greeks conceived it as rule by the best qualified citizens—and often contrasted it favourably with monarchy, rule by an individual. In later times, aristocracy was usually seen as rule by a group, the aristocratic class. The Greeks did not like the concept of monarchy, and as their democratic system fell, in Ancient Rome, the Republic consisted of an aristocracy—as well as consuls, a senate, and a tribal assembly. In the Middle Ages and early modern era, aristocracies primarily consisted of an aristocratic class, privileged by birth. Since the French Revolution, aristocracy has generally been contrasted with democracy, however, this distinction is often oversimplified. In exchange feudal aid is received from tenants or vassals, oaths of military allegiance, however an oligarchy, nobility or royalty had the right to set taxes, assemble or raise armies and command loyalty by virtue of traditional authority. In the 1651 book Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes describes an aristocracy as a commonwealth in which the representative of the citizens is an assembly by part and it is a system in which only a small part of the population represents the government. Modern depictions of aristocracy tend to regard it not as the ancient Greek concept of rule by the best, history, John Cannon, Oxford University Press,1997, ISBN 978-0-19-866176-4 Aristocracy in the Modern World, Ellis Wasson, Palgrave Macmillan,2006
27.
Geniocracy
–
Geniocracy is the framework for a system of government which was first proposed by Raël in 1977 and which advocates problem-solving and creative intelligence as criteria for governance. The term geniocracy comes from the genius, and describes a system that is designed to select for intelligence. The thresholds proposed by the Raëlians are 50% above the mean for an electoral candidate and this method of selectivity is deliberate so as to address what the concept considers to be flaws in the current systems of democracy. The primary object of criticism is the inability of majoritarian consensus to provide a platform for intelligent decision making for the purpose of solving problems permanently. In this respect, Geniocracy derides Liberal Democracy as a form of Mediocracy, in a geniocracy Earth would be ruled by a worldwide Geniocratic government. In line with this, geniocracy proposes a different economic model called Economic Humanitarianism, primarily, this discrimination is against minors, incarcerated felons, and the mentally incapacitated. This is on the basis that their ability to contribute to the making process is either flawed or invalid for the purpose of the society. The current difficulty in the ideas of geniocracy is that the means of assessing intelligence are ill-defined and they should be designed to measure intellectual potential rather than accumulation of knowledge. Other components deemed necessary for a rounded understanding of intelligence include concepts like emotional intelligence. As such, geniocracys validity cannot really be assessed until better, the lack of scientific rigour necessary for inclusion of geniocracy as properly testable political ideology can be noted in number of modern and historical dictatorships as well as oligarchies. Because of the controversies surrounding geniocracy, Raël presents the idea as a utopia or provocative ideal. The author of Geniocracy recommends a world government with 12 regions, inhabitants would vote for which region they want to be part of. After the regions are defined, they are divided into 12 sectors after the same principle of democracy is applied. While sectors of the region are defined as having equal numbers of inhabitants, the regions themselves may have different levels of population. Idiocracy, a comedy film depicting the United States in 2505 where the vast majority are mentally backwards despite widespread use of IQ tests. Platos Republic Meritocracy Netocracy Noocracy Transhumanism Technocracy Palmer, Susan J. Geniocracy, Geniocracy. org Geniocracy Review on RaelNews Geniocracy piece on RaelRadio Geniocracy is the solution - article on Raelnews
28.
Despotism
–
Despotism is a form of government in which a single entity rules with absolute power. That entity may be an individual, as in an autocracy, or it may be a group, the English dictionary defines despotism as the rule of a despot, the exercise of absolute authority. The root despot comes from the Greek word despotes, which means master or one with power, the term has been used to describe many rulers and governments throughout history. Due to its reflexive connotation throughout history, the word despot cannot be objectively defined, colloquially, the word despot applies pejoratively to those who abuse their power and authority to oppress their populace, subjects, or subordinates. More specifically, the term applies to a head of state or government. In this sense, it is similar to the connotations that are associated with the terms tyrant. Of all the ancient Greeks, Aristotle was perhaps the most influential promoter of the concept of oriental despotism. He passed this ideology to his student, Alexander the Great, who conquered Persia, which at the time was ruled by the despotic Darius III, Aristotle asserted that oriental despotism was not based on force, but on consent. Hence, fear could not be said to be its motivating force, but rather the nature of those enslaved. Within ancient Greek society, every Greek man was free and capable of holding office, in contrast, among the barbarians, all were slaves by nature. Another difference Aristotle espoused was based on climates, possessing both spirit and intelligence, the Greeks were free to govern all other peoples. The story of Croesus of Lydia exemplifies this, leading up to Alexanders expansion into Asia, most Greeks were repelled by the Oriental notion of a sun-king, and the divine law that Oriental societies accepted. Herodotuss version of history advocated a society where men became free when they consented lawfully to the contract of their respective city-state. His eyebrows were tinged with black, and his cheeks painted with an artificial red, in its classical form, despotism is a state in which a single individual holds all the power and authority embodying the state, and everyone else is a subsidiary person. This form of despotism was common in the first forms of statehood and civilization, the word itself seems to have been coined by the opponents of Louis XIV of France in the 1690s, who applied the term despotisme to describe their monarchs somewhat free exercise of power. The word is ultimately Greek in origin, and in ancient Greek usage, the term now implies tyrannical rule. This movement was probably triggered by the ideas of the Age of Enlightenment. The Enlightenment philosopher Montesquieu believed that despotism was a government for large states
29.
Dictatorship
–
A dictatorship is a type of authoritarianism, in which politicians regulate nearly every aspect of the public and private behavior of citizens. Dictatorship and totalitarianism societies generally employ political propaganda to decrease the influence of proponents of alternative governing systems, in the past different religious tactics were used by the dictators to maintain their rule. Like the Monarchy system in the west, in the 19th and 20th centuries, traditional monarchies gradually declined and disappeared. Dictatorship and constitutional democracy emerged as the two major forms of government. Since World War II a broader range of dictatorships have been recognized including Third World dictatorships, theocratic or religious dictatorships, in the Roman Empire, a Roman dictator was the incumbent of a political office of legislate of the Roman Republic. Roman dictators were allocated absolute power during times of emergency and their power was originally neither arbitrary nor unaccountable, being subject to law and requiring retrospective justification. There were no such dictatorships after the beginning of the 2nd century BC, and later such as Sulla. After the collapse of Spanish colonial rule, various dictators came to power in many liberated countries, such dictators have been also referred to as personalismo. The wave of military dictatorships in Latin America in the half of the twentieth century left a particular mark on Latin American culture. In Latin American literature, the dictator novel challenging dictatorship and caudillismo is a significant genre, there are also many films depicting Latin American military dictatorships. After World War II, dictators established themselves in the new states of Africa and Asia. These constitutions often failed to work without a middle class or work against the preexisting autocratic rule. Some elected presidents and prime ministers captured power by suppressing the opposition and installing one-party rule, whatever their form, these dictatorships had an adverse impact on economic growth and the quality of political institutions. Dictators who stayed in office for a time period found it increasingly difficult to carry out sound economic policies. The often-cited exploitative dictator is the regime of Mobutu Sese Seko, the global dynamics of democratization has been a central question for political scientists. The Third Wave Democracy was said to turn some dictatorships into democracies, the DD index is seen as an example of the minimalist approach, whereas the Polity data series, relatively more substantive. The most general term is despotism, a form of government in which a single entity rules with absolute power and that entity may be an individual, as in an autocracy, or it may be a group, as in an oligarchy. Despotism can mean tyranny, or absolutism, or dictatorship, dictatorship may take the form of authoritarianism or totalitarianism
