Wikipedia

Politics

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Keepcalmandchill (talk | contribs) at 13:28, 30 April 2020 (Completely unnecessary info and breaks the structure of the lead). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Politics (from Template:Lang-gr, Template:Lang-gr) is the set of activities that are associated with making decisions that apply to groups of members[1] and achieving and exercising positions of governance—organized control over a human community.[2] The academic study of politics is referred to as political science.

Women voter outreach (1935)
For other uses, see Politics (disambiguation).


Politics is a multifaceted word. It has a set of fairly specific meanings that are descriptive and nonjudgmental (e.g. "the art or science of government" and "political principles"), but does often colloquially carry a negative connotation.[1][3][4] The word has been used negatively for many years: the British national anthem, as published in 1745, calls on God to "confound their politics,"[5] while the phrase "play politics," for example, has been in use since at least 1853, when abolitionist Wendell Phillips declared that "we do not play politics; anti-slavery is no half-jest with us."[6]

A variety of methods are deployed in politics, which include promoting one's own political views among people, negotiation with other political subjects, making laws, and exercising force, including warfare against adversaries.[7][8][9][10][11] Politics is exercised on a wide range of social levels, from clans and tribes of traditional societies, through modern local governments, companies and institutions up to sovereign states, to the international level. During the past decade two tendencies made it possible to overlook comparative politics: 1. concern for theoretical explication and methodological rigor; and 2. the emphasis on field studies of the “emerging,” “new,” and “non-Western” nations.[12]

A political system is a framework which defines acceptable political methods within a society. The history of political thought can be traced back to early antiquity, with seminal works such as Plato's Republic, Aristotle's Politics, Chanakya's Arthashastra and Chanakya Niti (3rd Century BCE), as well as the works of Confucius.[13]

Etymology

The English word "politics" derives from the Greek word politiká (Template:Lang-grc), the name of Aristotle's classic work, Politiká. In the mid-15th century, Aristotle's composition would be rendered in Early Modern English as "Polettiques",[a][14] which would become "Politics" in Modern English.

The singular politic first attested in English in 1430, coming from Middle French Template:Lang-fr—itself taking from Template:Lang-la,[15] a Latinization of the Greek Template:Lang-grc (politikos) from Template:Lang-grc (polites, 'citizen') and Template:Lang-grc (polis, 'city').[16]

Definitions

According to Harold Lasswell, politics is "who gets what, when, how".[17]

For David Easton, it is about "the authoritative allocation of values for a society".[18]

To Vladimir Lenin, "politics is the most concentrated expression of economics".[19]

Bernard Crick argued that "politics is a distinctive form of rule whereby people act together through institutionalized procedures to resolve differences, to conciliate diverse interests and values and to make public policies in the pursuit of common purposes".[20]

Adrian Leftwich gives the definition that "Politics comprises all the activities of co-operation, negotiation and conflict within and between societies, whereby people go about organizing the use, production or distribution of human, natural and other resources in the course of the production and reproduction of their biological and social life".[21]

History of politics

The history of politics spans human history and is not limited to modern institutions of government.

Prehistoric

Frans de Waal argued that already chimpanzees engage in politics through "social manipulation to secure and maintain influential positions".[22] Early human forms of social organization—bands and tribes—lacked centralized political structures.[23] These are called stateless societies.

State formation

Main article: State formation

There are a number of different theories and hypotheses regarding early state formation that seek generalizations to explain why the state developed in some places but not others. Other scholars believe that generalizations are unhelpful and that each case of early state formation should be treated on its own.[24]

Voluntary theories contend that diverse groups of people came together to form states as a result of some shared rational interest.[25] The theories largely focus on the development of agriculture, and the population and organizational pressure that followed and resulted in state formation. One of the most prominent theories of early and primary state formation is the hydraulic hypothesis, which contends that the state was a result of the need to build and maintain large-scale irrigation projects.[26]

Conflict theories of state formation regard conflict and dominance of some population over another population as key to the formation of states.[27] In contrast with voluntary theories, these arguments believe that people do not voluntarily agree to create a state to maximize benefits, but that states form due to some form of oppression by one group over others.

Some theories in turn argue that warfare was critical for state formation.[28]

Classical antiquity

Although state-forms existed before the rise of the Ancient Greek empire, the Greeks were the first people known to have explicitly formulated a political philosophy of the state, and to have rationally analyzed political institutions. Prior to this, states were described and justified in terms of religious myths.[29]

Several important political innovations of classical antiquity came from the Greek city-states and the Roman Republic. The Greek city-states before the 4th century granted citizenship rights to their free population, and in Athens these rights were combined with a directly democratic form of government that was to have a long afterlife in political thought and history.

Study of politics

Main article: Political science

Political science, the study of politics, examines the acquisition and application of power.[b][30] Related areas of study include political philosophy, which seeks a rationale for politics and an ethic of public behaviour, as well as examining the preconditions for the formation of political communities;[31] political economy, which attempts to develop understandings of the relationships between politics and the economy and the governance of the two; and public administration, which examines the practices of governance.[32] Philosopher Charles Blattberg (2001), who has defined politics as "responding to conflict with dialogue", offers an account which distinguishes political philosophies from political ideologies.[33]

Aspects of politics

 
Activism is a form of politics.

Forms of political organization

There are many forms of political organization, including states, non-government organizations (NGOs) and international organizations such as the United Nations. States are perhaps the predominant institutional form of political governance, where a state is understood as an institution and a government is understood as the regime in power.

According to Aristotle, states are classified into monarchies, aristocracies, timocracies, democracies, oligarchies, and tyrannies. Due to changes across the history of politics, this classification has been abandoned.

All states are varieties of a single organizational form, the sovereign state. All the great powers of the modern world rule on the principle of sovereignty. Sovereign power may be vested on an individual as in an autocratic government or it may be vested on a group as in a constitutional government. Constitutions are written documents that specify and limit the powers of the different branches of government. Although a constitution is a written document, there is also an unwritten constitution. The unwritten constitution is continually being written by the legislative and judiciary branch of government; this is just one of those cases in which the nature of the circumstances determines the form of government that is most appropriate.[34] England did set the fashion of written constitutions during the Civil War but after the Restoration abandoned them to be taken up later by the American Colonies after their emancipation and then France after the Revolution and the rest of Europe including the European colonies.

There are many forms of government. One form is a strong central government as in France and China. Another form is local government, such as the ancient divisions in England that are comparatively weaker but less bureaucratic. These two forms helped to shape the practice of federal government, first in Switzerland, then in the United States in 1776, in Canada in 1867 and in Germany in 1871 and in 1901, Australia. Federal states introduced the new principle of agreement or contract. Compared to a federation, a confederation has a more dispersed system of judicial power.[35] In the American Civil War, the argument by the Confederate States that a State could secede from the Union was deemed unconstitutional by the supreme court.[36]

According to professor A. V. Dicey in An Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, the essential features of a federal constitution are: a) A written supreme constitution in order to prevent disputes between the jurisdictions of the Federal and State authorities; b) A distribution of power between the Federal and State governments; and c) A Supreme Court vested with the power to interpret the Constitution and enforce the law of the land remaining independent of both the executive and legislative branches.[37]

Global politics

Main article: Global politics

Global politics include different practices of political globalization in relation to questions of social power: from global patterns of governance to issues of globalizing conflict. The 20th century witnessed the outcome of two world wars and not only the rise and fall of the Third Reich but also the rise and relative fall of communism. The development of the atomic bomb gave the United States a more rapid end to its conflict in Japan in World War II. Later, the hydrogen bomb became the ultimate weapon of mass destruction.

Global politics also concerns the rise of global and international organizations. The United Nations has served as a forum for peace in a world threatened by nuclear war, "The invention of nuclear and space weapons has made war unacceptable as an instrument for achieving political ends."[38] Although an all-out final nuclear holocaust is radically undesirable for man, "nuclear blackmail" comes into question not only on the issue of world peace but also on the issue of national sovereignty.[39] On a Sunday in 1962, the world stood still at the brink of nuclear war during the October Cuban Missile Crisis from the implementation of U.S. vs Soviet Union nuclear blackmail policy.[40]

After the Soviet Union collapsed in December of 1991 the world moved from being bi-polar to being uni-polar with United States firmly ahead. However this lead has been continuously shrinking in the 21st Century with the rapid economic growth of China threatening the current American hegemony. Other world powers such as India and a resurgent Russia are also threatening America's position as the leader of the world.[41]

According to political science professor Paul James, global politics is affected by values: norms of human rights, ideas of human development, and beliefs such as cosmopolitanism about how we should relate to each:[42]

Cosmopolitanism can be defined as a global politics that, firstly, projects a sociality of common political engagement among all human beings across the globe, and, secondly, suggests that this sociality should be either ethically or organizationally privileged over other forms of sociality.

Political corruption

Main article: Political corruption

William Pitt the Elder (1770), speaking before the British House of Lords on January 9th, stated that "unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it."[30] This was echoed more famously by John Dalberg-Acton (1887) over a century later: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."[43]

Political corruption is the use of legislated powers by government officials for illegitimate private gain. Misuse of government power for other purposes, such as repression of political opponents and general police brutality, is not considered political corruption. Neither are illegal acts by private persons or corporations not directly involved with the government. An illegal act by an officeholder constitutes political corruption only if the act is directly related to their official duties and/or power.[44] The corruption in third World dictatorships is usually more blatant. For example, government cronies may be given exclusive right to make arbitrage profit by exploiting a fixed rate mechanism in government currency. In democracies corruption is often more indirect. Trade union leaders may be given priority in housing queues, giving them indirectly a worth of millions.[45]

Forms of corruption vary, but include corruption, extortion, cronyism, nepotism, patronage, graft, and embezzlement. While corruption may facilitate criminal enterprise it may be legal but considered immoral.[46] Worldwide, bribery alone is estimated to involve over US$1 trillion annually.[47] A state of unrestrained political corruption is known as a kleptocracy, literally meaning "rule by thieves."[48]

Political parties

Main article: Political party

A political party is a political organization that typically seeks to attain and maintain political power within government, usually by participating in electoral campaigns, educational outreach or protest actions. Parties often espouse an expressed ideology or vision bolstered by a written platform with specific goals, forming a coalition among disparate interests.[49]

Political ideas

 
Two-axis political compass chart with a horizontal socio-economic axis and a vertical socio-cultural axis and ideologically representative political colours, an example for a frequently used model of the political spectrum[50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57]
 
Three axis model of political ideologies with both moderate and radical versions and the goals of their policies
 
Political views differ on average across nations. A recreation of the Inglehart–Welzel Cultural Map of the World based on the World Values Survey.
Main article: Political spectrum

Several different political spectra have been proposed.

Left–right

Political analysts and politicians divide politics into left wing and right wing politics, often also using the idea of center politics as a middle path of policy between the right and left. This classification is comparatively recent (it was not used by Aristotle or Hobbes, for instance), and dates from the French Revolution era, when those members of the National Assembly who supported the republic, the common people and a secular society sat on the left and supporters of the monarchy, aristocratic privilege and the Church sat on the right.[58]

The meanings behind the labels have become more complicated over the years. A particularly influential event was the publication of the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1848. The Manifesto suggested a course of action for a proletarian revolution to overthrow the bourgeois society and abolish private property, in the belief that this would lead to a classless and stateless society.[59][60][page needed]

The meaning of left-wing and right-wing varies considerably between different countries and at different times, but generally speaking, it can be said that the right wing often values tradition and inequality while the left wing often values progress and egalitarianism, with the center seeking a balance between the two such as with social democracy, libertarianism or regulated capitalism.[61]

According to Norberto Bobbio, one of the major exponents of this distinction, the Left believes in attempting to eradicate social inequality—believing it to be unethical or unnatural[62] while the Right regards most social inequality as the result of ineradicable natural inequalities, and sees attempts to enforce social equality as utopian or authoritarian.[63] Some ideologies, notably Christian Democracy, claim to combine left and right wing politics; according to Geoffrey K. Roberts and Patricia Hogwood, "In terms of ideology, Christian Democracy has incorporated many of the views held by liberals, conservatives and socialists within a wider framework of moral and Christian principles."[64] Movements which claim or formerly claimed to be above the left-right divide include Fascist Terza Posizione economic politics in Italy and Peronism in Argentina.[65][66]

Authoritarian–libertarian

Authoritarianism and libertarianism refer to the amount of individual freedom each person possesses in that society relative to the state. One author describes authoritarian political systems as those where "individual rights and goals are subjugated to group goals, expectations and conformities,"[67] while libertarians generally oppose the state and hold the individual as sovereign. In their purest form, libertarians are anarchists,[68] who argue for the total abolition of the state, of political parties and of other political entities, while the purest authoritarians are, by definition, totalitarians who support state control over all aspects of society.[69]

For instance, classical liberalism (also known as laissez-faire liberalism)[70] is a doctrine stressing individual freedom and limited government. This includes the importance of human rationality, individual property rights, free markets, natural rights, the protection of civil liberties, constitutional limitation of government, and individual freedom from restraint as exemplified in the writings of John Locke, Adam Smith, David Hume, David Ricardo, Voltaire, Montesquieu and others. According to the libertarian Institute for Humane Studies, "the libertarian, or 'classical liberal,' perspective is that individual well-being, prosperity, and social harmony are fostered by 'as much liberty as possible' and 'as little government as necessary.'"[71] For anarchist political philosopher L. Susan Brown (1993), "liberalism and anarchism are two political philosophies that are fundamentally concerned with individual freedom yet differ from one another in very distinct ways. Anarchism shares with liberalism a radical commitment to individual freedom while rejecting liberalism's competitive property relations."[72]

Critiques of political spectrum

The critics of political spectrum criticize the uni-dimensional and bi-dimensional nature of it. They also point towards its inability to incorporate other cultures. This rigidity leads to bizarre results. An example of this would be the fact that both fascist Adolf Hitler and libertarian Milton Friedman are on the far-right, yet Hitler advocated nationalism, socialism, militarism, authoritarianism and antisemitism while Friedman advocated internationalism, capitalism, pacifism, civil liberties and was himself a Jew. Another critic of political spectrum is its tendency to promote tribalism by needlessly sorting people into different groups.

There are also many alternatives to political spectrum and political compass. The popular among these being the ideological triangle, i.e a way of organizing political ideology using the values of liberty, equality, and fraternity. The location of a political ideology on the triangle is a function of its preference for the three values. As one moves closer to the bottom corner, the preference for liberty increases. As one moves closer to the upper left-hand corner, the preference for equality increases. As one moves closer to the upper right-hand corner, the preference for fraternity increases. The horseshoe theory asserts that the far-left and the far-right, rather than being at opposite and opposing ends of a linear political continuum, closely resemble one another, analogous to the way that the opposite ends of a horseshoe are close together.

See also

Template:Wikipedia books

References

Notes

  1. ^ "The book of Etiques and of Polettiques [sic]" (Bhuler 1961/1941:154).
  2. ^ "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely." (Safire 2008:566)

Citations

  1. ^ a b Hague, Rod; Harrop, Martin (2013). Comparative Government and Politics: An Introduction. Macmillan International Higher Education. p. 1. ISBN 978-1-137-31786-5. Archived from the original on 7 July 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
  2. ^ "Political". Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. Merriam-Webster. Archived from the original on 25 February 2018.
  3. ^ William A., Joseph (2014). Politics in China: An Introduction (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. p. 38. ISBN 978-0-19-938483-9. Archived from the original on 2 July 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
  4. ^ Birkland, Thomas A. (2015). Introduction to the Policy Process: Theories, Concepts, and Models of Public Policy Making (3rd ed.). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. p. 6. ISBN 978-0-7656-2731-5. Archived from the original on 8 July 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
  5. ^ "God save our lord the king" (sheet music) The Gentleman's Magazine, 15 October 1745.
  6. ^ Johnston, Alexander; Woodburn, James Albert (1903) [1903]. American Orations: V. The Anti-Slavery Struggle. G. P. Putnam and Sons. p. 233 – via Internet Archive.
  7. ^ Hammarlund, Bo (1985). Politik utan partier: studier i Sveriges politiska liv 1726-1727. Almqvist & Wiksell International. p. 8. Archived from the original on 3 July 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
  8. ^ P. Brady, Linda (2017). The Politics of Negotiation: America's Dealings with Allies, Adversaries, and Friends. University of North Carolina Press. p. 47. ISBN 978-1-4696-3960-4. Archived from the original on 2 July 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
  9. ^ Hawkesworth, Mary; Kogan, Maurice (2013). Encyclopedia of Government and Politics: 2-volume Set. London: Routledge. p. 299. ISBN 978-1-136-91332-7. Archived from the original on 2 July 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
  10. ^ Taylor, Steven L. (2012). 30-Second Politics: The 50 most thought-provoking ideas in politics, each explained in half a minute. Icon Books Limited. p. 130. ISBN 978-1-84831-427-6. Archived from the original on 6 July 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
  11. ^ L. Blanton, Shannon; Kegley, Charles W. (2016). World Politics: Trend and Transformation, 2016–2017. Cengage Learning. p. 199. ISBN 978-1-305-50487-5. Archived from the original on 2 July 2019. Retrieved 26 February 2018.
  12. ^ Almond, Gabriel A. (1986), "A Developmental Approach to Political Systems", Political System and Change, Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 41–72, doi:10.1515/9781400854462.41, ISBN 978-1-4008-5446-2
  13. ^ Political System and Change: A World Politics Reader. Princeton University Press. 1986. JSTOR j.ctt7ztn7s.
  14. ^ Buhler, C. F., ed. 1961 [1941]. The Dictes and Sayings of the Philosophers. London: Early English Text Society, Original Series No. 211.
  15. ^ Lewis, Charlton T.; Short, Charles. "A Latin Dictionary". Perseus Digital Library. Tufts University. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 19 February 2016.
  16. ^ Liddell, Henry George; Scott, Robert. "A Greek-English Lexicon". Perseus Digital Library. Tufts Library. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 19 February 2016.
  17. ^ Lasswell, Harold D. (Harold Dwight), 1902-1978. ([1963, ©1958]). Politics: who gets what, when how. : With postscript (1958). World. OCLC 61585455. {{cite book}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  18. ^ Easton, David, 1917- (1981). The political system : an inquiry into the state of political science. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-18017-4. OCLC 781301164.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  19. ^ Lenin, V. I. (1965). Collected works. September 1903-December 1904. OCLC 929381958.
  20. ^ Crick, Bernard, 1929-2008. ([1972]). In defence of politics. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-12064-3. OCLC 575753. {{cite book}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  21. ^ Leftwich, Adrian. (2004). What is politics? : the activity and its study. Polity. ISBN 0-7456-3055-3. OCLC 1044115261.
  22. ^ Waal, Frans de, (1948- ...)., Auteur. (2007). Chimpanzee politics power and sex among apes. Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 978-0-8018-8656-0. OCLC 493546705.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  23. ^ Fukuyama, Francis. (2012). The origins of political order : from prehuman times to the French Revolution. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. p. 56. ISBN 978-0-374-53322-9. OCLC 1082411117.
  24. ^ Spencer, Charles S.; Redmond, Elsa M. (15 September 2004). "Primary State Formation in Mesoamerica". Annual Review of Anthropology. 33 (1): 173–199. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.143823. ISSN 0084-6570.
  25. ^ Carneiro, Robert L. (21 August 1970). "A Theory of the Origin of the State: Traditional theories of state origins are considered and rejected in favor of a new ecological hypothesis". Science. 169 (3947): 733–738. doi:10.1126/science.169.3947.733. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 17820299.
  26. ^ Origins of the state : the anthropology of political evolution. Internet Archive. Philadelphia : Institute for the Study of Human Issues. 1978. p. 30.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  27. ^ Carneiro, Robert L. (21 August 1970). "A Theory of the Origin of the State: Traditional theories of state origins are considered and rejected in favor of a new ecological hypothesis". Science. 169 (3947): 733–738. doi:10.1126/science.169.3947.733. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 17820299.
  28. ^ Carneiro, Robert L. (21 August 1970). "A Theory of the Origin of the State: Traditional theories of state origins are considered and rejected in favor of a new ecological hypothesis". Science. 169 (3947): 733–738. doi:10.1126/science.169.3947.733. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 17820299.
  29. ^ Nelson, B.; Nelson, Brian R. (16 March 2006). The Making of the Modern State: A Theoretical Evolution. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 17. ISBN 978-1-4039-7189-0.
  30. ^ a b Safire, William, ed. (2008). Safire's Political Dictionary. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 566.
  31. ^ Laurie, Timothy; Stark, Hannah (2017), "Love's Lessons: Intimacy, Pedagogy and Political Community", Angelaki, 22 (4): 69–79.
  32. ^ Page, Edward C.; Chapman, Brian; Mosher, Frederick C. (2000) [1998]. "Principles of Public Administration | Public administration". Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 25 February 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2019.
  33. ^ Blattberg, Charles (2001). "Political Philosophies and Political Ideologies". Public Affairs Quarterly. 15 (3): 193–217. ISSN 0887-0373. SSRN 1755117.
  34. ^ "Britain's unwritten constitution". The British Library. Archived from the original on 1 April 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2019.
  35. ^ "Confederation vs. Federation". Diffen. Diffen LLC. Archived from the original on 26 June 2018. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
  36. ^ Texas v. White et al, 74 U.S. 700 (1869).Google Scholar. Retrieved February 25, 2019. Archived August 29, 2018, at the Wayback Machine.
  37. ^ Jenks, Edward (2007) [1900]. A History of Politics. Temple Primers 2 (2nd ed.). London: J.M. Dent & Company. pp. 1–164. Retrieved 19 February 2016 – via Internet Archive. politics history. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |lay-source= ignored (help); Unknown parameter |lay-url= ignored (help)
  38. ^ Rabinowitch, Eugene (1973). Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Educational Foundation for Nuclear Science, Inc. p. 13. ISSN 0096-3402. ...the rationale of traditional patterns of world politics.
  39. ^ Dulles, Allen (2006). The Craft of Intelligence. Globe Pequot. p. 224. ISBN 978-1-59921-577-8. ...using 'nuclear blackmail' as a threat to intimidate other countries.
  40. ^ "The Cuban Missile Crisis (article)". Khan Academy. Retrieved 26 April 2020.
  41. ^ Katz, Mark N. (2018). "Great Powers in the Twenty-first Century." Horizons Winter 2018(10). Center for International Relations and Sustainable Development.
  42. ^ James, Paul (2014). Globalization and Politics, Vol. 4: Political Philosophies of the Global. London: Sage Publications. p. x. Retrieved 19 February 2016 – via Academia.edu.
  43. ^ Dalberg-Acton, John. 1907 [1887]. "Acton-Creighton Correspondence: Letter I" in Lectures on Modern History, edited by J. N. Figgis and R. V. Laurence. London: Macmillan. — via Online Library of Liberty. Archived 3 August 2015 at the Wayback Machine.
  44. ^ "Political Corruption Law & Definition". USLegal. Archived from the original on 27 November 2016. Retrieved 26 November 2016.
  45. ^ Sanadaji, Tino. 2018. Tio tusen miljarder: Skuldkalaset och den förträngda baksmällan (Ten Thousand Billions: The Debt Party and the Repressed Hangover), edited by P. Tholin. Stockholm: Kuhzad Media. kapitel 8
  46. ^ "corruption". Merriam-Webster. Archived from the original on 26 February 2019. Retrieved 26 February 2019.
  47. ^ "African corruption 'on the wane'". BBC News. 10 June 2007. Archived from the original on 22 April 2009. Retrieved 7 May 2010.
  48. ^ Wedeman, Andrew (2012). Double Paradox: Rapid Growth and Rising Corruption in China. Cornell: Cornell University Press. p. 61. ISBN 978-0-8014-6474-4. Retrieved 26 February 2019 – via Internet Archive.
  49. ^ Pettitt, Robin T. (2014). Contemporary Party Politics. London: Macmillan International Higher Education. p. 60. ISBN 978-1-137-41264-5. Archived from the original on 3 July 2019. Retrieved 28 February 2019 – via Google Books.
  50. ^ Heywood, Andrew (2017). Political Ideologies: An Introduction (6th ed.). Basingstoke: Macmillan International Higher Education. pp. 14–17. ISBN 9781137606044. OCLC 988218349.
  51. ^ Love, Nancy Sue (2006). Understanding Dogmas and Dreams (Second ed.). Washington, District of Columbia: CQ Press. p. 16. ISBN 9781483371115. OCLC 893684473.
  52. ^ Petrik, Andreas (3 December 2010). "Core Concept "Political Compass". How Kitschelt's Model of Liberal, Socialist, Libertarian and Conservative Orientations Can Fill the Ideology Gap in Civic Education". JSSE – Journal of Social Science Education: 4–2010: Social Science Literacy I: In Search for Basic Competences and Basic Concepts for Testing and Diagnosing. doi:10.4119/jsse-541.
  53. ^ Sznajd-Weron, Katarzyna; Sznajd, Józef (June 2005). "Who is left, who is right?". Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications. 351 (2–4): 593–604. Bibcode:2005PhyA..351..593S. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2004.12.038.
  54. ^ Forman, F. N.; Baldwin, N. D. J. (1999). Mastering British Politics. London: Macmillan Education UK. pp. 8 f. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-15045-8. ISBN 9780333765487.
  55. ^ Fenna, Alan; Robbins, Jane; Summers, John (2013). Government Politics in Australia. Robbins, Jane., Summers, John. (10th ed.). Melbourne: Pearson Higher Education AU. pp. 126 f. ISBN 9781486001385. OCLC 1021804010.
  56. ^ Jones, Bill; Kavanagh, Dennis (2003). British Politics Today. Kavanagh, Dennis. (7th ed.). Manchester: Manchester University Press. p. 259. ISBN 9780719065095. OCLC 52876930.
  57. ^ Körösényi, András (1999). Government and Politics in Hungary. Budapest, Hungary: Central European University Press. p. 54. ISBN 9639116769. OCLC 51478878.
  58. ^ Knapp, Andrew; Wright, Vincent (2006). The Government and Politics of France. London: Routledge.
  59. ^ Shepard, Jon M. (2009). Cengage Advantage Books: Sociology (10th ed.). Cengage Learning. p. 214. ISBN 978-0-495-59901-2. Archived from the original on 12 July 2019. Retrieved 28 February 2019.
  60. ^ Marx, Karl; Engels, Friedrich (2002) [1848]. The Communist Manifesto. with introductions and notes by Gareth Stedman Jones. Penguin Books. ISBN 978-0-14-044757-6. Retrieved 7 September 2016 – via Internet Archive.
  61. ^ Daniel J. Levinson (2020). "Personality, Political II: Conservatism and Radicalism". International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Cengage. Archived from the original on 11 February 2016. Retrieved 19 February 2016.
  62. ^ Gelderloos, Peter (2010). Anarchy Works.
  63. ^ Bobbio, Norberto, Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction (translated by Allan Cameron), 1997, University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-06246-5
  64. ^ Roberts and Hogwood, European Politics Today, Manchester University Press, 1997
  65. ^ Tore., Bjorgo (2014). Terror from the Extreme Right. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. ISBN 9781135209308. OCLC 871861016.
  66. ^ "bale p.40" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 March 2017. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
  67. ^ Markus Kemmelmeier; et al. (2003). "Individualism, Collectivism, and Authoritarianism in Seven Societies". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 34 (3): 304–22. doi:10.1177/0022022103034003005.
  68. ^ Anarchists Writers. "An Anarchist FAQ: 150 years of Libertarian". Anarchists Writers. Archived from the original on 25 September 2018. Retrieved 25 September 2018.
  69. ^ "totalitarian". Dictionary.com Unabridged (Online). n.d. Retrieved 25 September 2018. Archived from the original on 25 September 2018.
  70. ^ Adams, Ian. 2001. Political Ideology Today. Manchester: Manchester University Press. p. 20.
  71. ^ IHS. 2019. "What Is Libertarian?." Institute for Humane Studies. George Mason University. Archived 24 March 2007 at the Wayback Machine.
  72. ^ Brown, L. Susan. 1993. The Politics of Individualism: Liberalism, Liberal Feminism, and Anarchism. Black Rose Books.

Further reading

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Politics&oldid=954060251"
  NODES
admin 3
COMMUNITY 2
Idea 5
idea 5
innovation 1
INTERN 15
Note 3
Project 3