:: wikimiki.org ::

One Party States

One party states

A single-party state or one-party system or single-party system is a type of party system and form of government where only a single political party dominates the government and no opposition parties are allowed. This is by many viewed as creating a dictatorship, and many (though not all) actual dictatorships represent themselves as one-party states. Examples of dictatorships that are not one-party states include military dictatorships, which often attempt to ban all party politics during their rule. A one-party system should not be confused with a dominant-party system in which an opposition is not officially prohibited, but it is largely ineffective (has no realistic chance of becoming the government), nor should it be confused with a non-partisan democracy which, by the consent of the electorate, prohibits all political parties. Where the ruling party subscribes to a form of Marxism-Leninism, the one-party system is by many called a communist state. Single-party states often pay lip service to democracy (and this is especially true in the case of Communist-party led states, who often insert the word "democratic" in their official name, largely because the Marxist-Leninist ideology which they claim to uphold does call for democracy), but without a choice of different parties, elections in single-party states are usually largely symbolic. Although other political parties are sometimes allowed by the government, these other parties must subordinate themselves to the dominant party and cannot function as an opposition. The existence of other parties is sometimes justified by appeals to a united front. Also, some one-party states may allow non-party members to run for legislative seats, as was the case with Taiwan's Tangwai movement in the 1970s and 1980s. In most cases, single-party states have arisen from fascist, capitalist, Leninist or nationalist ideologies, particularly in the wake of independence from colonial rule. One-party systems often arise from decolonization because one party has had an overwhelmingly dominant role in liberation or in independence struggles. One-party states justify themselves in various ways. One common justification is that multi-party systems introduce too much division and are unsuitable for economic and political development. This argument was particular popular during the mid-20th century, as many developing nations sought to emulate the Soviet Union, which had transformed itself from a backward, agrarian nation into a superpower. A common counter-argument is that one-party systems have a tendency to become rigid and unwilling to accept change, which renders them unable to deal with new situations and may result in their collapse. This counter-argument became more widely held as the 20th century drew to a close and the Soviet Union and the countries of the Warsaw Pact collapsed. Finally, one-party states are often criticized for their disrespect towards human rights.

Examples

The following countries are single-party states as of 2005:
- Burma / Myanmar¹
- People's Republic of China (Communist Party of China leads the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference)
- Cuba (Communist Party of Cuba)
- Egypt (second parties exist but face various restrictions)
- Eritrea (People's Front for Democracy and Justice)
- North Korea (Korean Workers' Party leads the Democratic Front for the Reunification of the Fatherland)
- Laos (Lao People's Revolutionary Party leads the Lao Front for National Construction)
- Syria (Ba'ath Party leads the National Progressive Front)
- Turkmenistan (Democratic Party of Turkmenistan)
- Vietnam (Communist Party of Vietnam leads the Vietnamese Fatherland Front) Examples of former single-party states include:
- many governments in Sub-Saharan Africa after independence, although all except Eritrea have converted to a multi-party system.
- Angola (Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola-Labour Party) 1975-1991
- Benin (Benin People's Revolutionary Party) 1975-1990
- Burundi (Union for National Progress) 1966-1976, 1979-1992
- Cameroon (Cameroonian National Union 1966-1985/Cameroon People's Democratic Movement 1985-1990)
- Cape Verde (African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde 1975-1981/African Party for the Independence of Cape Verde 1981-1990)
- Central African Republic (Movement for the Social Evolution of Black Africa) 1962-1979, (Central African Democratic Union) 1980-1981, (Central African Democratic Rally) 1987-1991
- Chad (Chadian Progressive Party 1962-1973/National Movement for the Cultural and Social Revolution 1973-1975), (National Union for Independence and Revolution) 1989-1990
- Comoros (Comorian Union for Progress) 1982-1990
- Congo-Brazzaville (National Revolutionary Movement) 1964-1968, (Congolese Labour Party) 1969-1990
- Côte d'Ivoire (Democratic Party of Côte d'Ivoire-African Democratic Rally) 1960-1990
- Djibouti (People's Rally for Progress) 1981-1992
- Equatorial Guinea (Worker's National United Party) 1970-1979, (Democratic Party of Equatorial Guinea) 1987-1991
- Ethiopia (Worker's Party of Ethiopia) 1987-1991
- Gabon (Gabonese Democratic Party) 1968-1990
- Ghana (Convention People's Party) 1964-1966
- Guinea (Democratic Party of Guinea) 1958-1984
- Guinea-Bissau (African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde) 1974-1991
- Kenya (Kenya African National Union) 1982-1990
- Madagascar (National Front for the Defence of the Revolution) 1976-1989
- Malawi (Malawi Congress Party) 1966-1993
- Mali (Sudanese Union-African Democratic Rally) 1960-1968, (Democratic Union of the Malian People) 1979-1991
- Mauritania (Mauritanian People's Party) 1961-1978
- Mozambique (Mozambique Liberation Front) 1975-1990
- Niger (Nigerien Progressive Party-African Democratic Rally) 1960-1974, (National Movement for a Developing Society) 1989-1991
- Rwanda (Democratic Republican Party-Party of the Hutu Emancipation Movement) 1965-1973, (National Revolutionary Movement for Development) 1978-1991
- São Tomé and Príncipe (Movement for the Liberation of São Tomé and Príncipe) 1975-1990
- Senegal (Socialist Party) 1966-1974
- Seychelles (Seychelles People's Progressive Front) 1979-1991
- Sierra Leone (All People's Congress) 1978-1991
- Somalia (Somali Revolutionary Socialist Party) 1976-1991
- Sudan (Sudanese Socialist Union) 1971-1985
- Tanzania (Tanganyika African National Union) 1965-1975; Zanzibar (Afro-Shirazi Party 1965-1992; TANU and ASP merged to form (Chama Cha Mapinduzi) 1975-1992
- Togo (Rally of the Togolese People) 1969-1991
- Uganda (National Resistance Movement/Party) 1987-2005
- Upper Volta (Voltaic Democratic Union-African Democratic Rally) 1960-1966
- Zambia (United National Independence Party) 1972-1990
- Zaïre (Popular Movement of the Revolution) 1967-1990
- many Middle Eastern and North African governments such as
- Algeria (FLN)
- Iraq (Ba'ath Party)
- South Yemen (YSP)
- Tunisia (ND/RCD)
- Western Sahara (Polisario)
- the former Soviet Union and the governments of the countries of the Warsaw Pact at that time as well as Mongolia, which were ruled by Communist parties.
- Germany under the Nazi Party
- Spain under Francisco Franco (Falange Española y de las JONS, also called National Movement).
- Portugal under Salazar and Marcello Caetano
- Taiwan under the Kuomintang
- Indonesia under the New Order government of former president Suharto (Golkar Party).

Notes

- The Burmese / Myanmar military, which has ruled the country since 1988, created a "National Unity Party" to give the régime a civilian façade. An election held in 1990 was nullified. The legal status of the winner of that election, the National League for Democracy (NLD), is in flux.
- Northern Ireland, although it remained part of the United Kingdom, had devolved government between 1921 and 1972. During this time it was always controlled by the Ulster Unionist Party.

External links

- [http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/oneparty.htm Map of One Party States, 1945-95]
- [http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/africa/features/storyofafrica/14chapter11.shtml Single party states in Africa] Category:Political parties Category:Elections ja:一党制

Party system

A party system is a concept in political science concerning the system of government in a state where political parties exist. The party system of a state determines how many political parties in a state have a realistic chance of becoming the government, usually through winning elections. Party systems are usually created by a variety of factors, such as the type of electoral system used in a state. For example, the use of First Past the Post in elections to a state's primary legislative assembly (for example general elections) usually results in a two-party system. There are four distinct types:
- Single-party system – when only one party can be the government because all other parties are banned;
- Two-party system – when only two parties can realistically compete to become the government;
- Dominant-party system – when only one party can realistically compete to become the government because of the weakness of other parties;
- Multi-party system – when more than two parties can realistically compete to become the government.

Government

A government is the body that has the power to make and enforce laws within an organization or group. In its broadest sense, "to govern" means to administer or supervise, whether over an area of land, a set group of people, or a collection of assets. The word government is derived the Greek Κυβερνήτης (kubernites), which means "steersman", "governor", "pilot" or "rudder".

Definitions

One approach is to define government as the decision-making arm of the state, and define the latter on the basis of the control it has over violence and the use of force within its territory. Specifically, the state (and by extension the government) has been considered by some to be the entity that holds a monopoly on the legitimate use of force within a territory. This view has been taken by the political economist Max Weber and subsequent political philosophers. The exact meaning of it depends on what is understood by “legitimate”. If we use the term in an ethical sense, then this definition would suggest that an organisation might be considered a state by its supporters but not by its detractors. An alternative definition is to take "legitimate" violence to be simply that which has active or tacit acceptance by the vast majority of the population. In this view, the presence of insurrection or civil war against an entity would jeopardise its claim to be a state, provided the insurrection enjoyed significant popular support. Similarly, an entity that shared military or police power with independent militias and bandits could be considered to have a monopoly on “legitimate” violence but to be failing to enforce it, reducing its claim to statehood. In practice, such situations are often described as "failed states". Government can also be defined as the political means of creating and enforcing laws; typically via a bureaucratic hierarchy. Under this definition, a purely despotic organization which controls a territory without defining laws would not be considered a government. Another alternative is to define a government as an organisation that attempts to maintain control of a territory, where "control" involves activities such as collecting taxes, controlling entry and exit to the state, preventing encroachment of territory by neighbouring states and preventing the establishment of alternative governments within the country. In Commonwealth English, the word "Government" can also be used to refer only to the executive branch, in this context being a synonym for the word "administration" in American English (e.g. the Blair Government, the Bush Administration). In countries using the Westminster system, the Government (or party in Government) will also usually control the legislature. The French use of the word gouvernement covers both meanings, whereas Canadian French generally uses it to mean the executive branch. The German word Regierung refers only to government as the executive branch; the wider meaning of the word, government as a system, can be translated as Staatsgewalt.

Forms of government

Various forms of government have been implemented. A government in a developed state is likely to have various sub-organisations known as offices, departments, or agencies, which are headed by politically appointed officials, often called ministers or secretaries. Ministers may in theory act as advisors to the head of state, but in practice have a certain amount of direct power in specific areas. In most modern democracies, the elected legislative assembly has the power to dismiss the government, but in those states that have a separate head of government and head of state, the head of state generally has great latitude in appointing a new one.

Theories

There are a wide range of theories about the reasons for establishing governments. The four major ones are briefly described below. Note that they do not always fully oppose each other - it is possible for a person to subscribe to a combination of ideas from two or more of these theories.

Greed and oppression

Many political philosophies that are opposed to the existence of a government (such as Anarchism, and to a lesser extent Marxism), as well as others, emphasize the historical roots of governments - the fact that governments, along with private property, originated from the authority of warlords and petty despots who took, by force, certain patches of land as their own (and began exercising authority over the people living on that land). Thus, it is argued that governments exist to enforce the will of the strong and oppress the weak.

Order and tradition

The various forms of conservatism, by contrast, generally see the government as a positive force that brings order out of chaos, establishes laws to end the "war of all against all", encourages moral virtue while punishing vice, and respects tradition. Sometimes, in this view, the government is seen as something ordained by a higher power, as in the divine right of kings, which human beings have a duty to obey.

Natural rights

Natural rights are the basis for the theory of government shared by most branches of liberalism (including libertarianism). In this view, human beings are born with certain natural rights, and governments are established strictly for the purpose of protecting those rights. What the natural rights actually are is a matter of dispute among liberals; indeed, each branch of liberalism has its own set of rights that it considers to be natural, and these rights are sometimes mutually exclusive with the rights supported by other liberals.

Social contract

One of the most influential theories of government in the past two hundred years has been the social contract, on which modern democracy and most forms of socialism are founded. The social contract theory holds that governments are created by the people in order to provide for collective needs (such as safety from crime) that cannot be properly satisfied using purely individual means. Governments thus exist for the purpose of serving the needs and wishes of the people, and their relationship with the people is clearly stipulated in a "social contract" (a constitution and a set of laws) which both the government and the people must abide by. If a majority is unhappy, it may change the social contract. If a minority is unhappy, it may persuade the majority to change the contract, or it may opt out of it by emigration or secession.

Operations

Governments concern themselves with regulating and administering many areas of human activity, such as trade, education, medicine, entertainment, and war.

Enforcement of power

Governments use a variety of methods to maintain the established order, such as police and military forces, (particularly under despotism, see also police state), making agreements with other states, and maintaining support within the state. Typical methods of maintaining support and legitimacy include providing the infrastructure for administration, justice, transport, communication, social welfare etc., claiming support from deities, providing benefits to elites, holding elections for important posts within the state, limiting the power of the state through laws and constitutions (see also Bill of Rights) and appealing to nationalism. Different political ideologies hold different ideas on what the government should or should not do.

Territory

The modern standard unit of territory is a country. In addition to the meaning used above, the word state can refer either to a government or to its territory. Within a territory, subnational entities may have local governments which do not have the full power of a national government (for example, they will generally lack the authority to declare war or carry out diplomatic negotiations).

Scale of government

Main articles: government ownership, government spending The scale to which government should exist and operate in the world is a matter of debate. Government spending in developed countries varies considerably but generally makes up between about 30% and 70% of their GDP.

Dictatorship

Dictatorship, in contemporary usage, refers to absolute rule by a leadership (usually one dictator) unrestricted by law, constitutions, or other social and political factors within the state. In Classical usage, dictatorship referred to magistrates in Ancient Rome that were allocated absolute power during times of emergency. Their power was neither arbitrary nor unaccountable, however, being subject to law and requiring retrospective justification. There were no such dictatorships after the beginning of the 2nd century BC, and later dictators such as Sulla and the Roman Emperors exercised power much more personally and arbitrarily. Dictatorships in the modern sense tend to exert their power without any regard to the moral or ethical consequences of their actions. They hardly ever come to power by democratic means, often being installed by a coup d'état or revolution. Often they will assert that they are using their powers, like ancient roman dictators, to deal with the enormity of some emergency, real or imagined. However, dictators and their governments rarely lay down their power once any such crisis has abated. In the lack thereof, they sometimes invent their own, such as in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin. Such regimes survive out of the fear the people have for the government. Dictatorships often use armed force, propaganda, and arbitrary detention to enforce their will, and usually suppress any opinion which runs counter to their own. Dictators in single-party states, as opposed to military juntas, often create single-party states without elections, or with rigged or heavily biased ones.

Absolute power

Dictatorships rely on the absolute power which they hold over their citizens. Without it, they usually disintegrate or are completely ineffectual, such as the Bolshevik government of Russia shortly after it came to power. Modern dictatorships have used not only force and coercion, but also the mass media as tools of control. In China for instance, a communist single-party state, the government controls all news broadcast in the country, censors the internet, and often simply detains those who resist. The cultures created by many dictatorships foster what has been termed the "cult of personality", where not only is the media controlled by the state, but serves to glorify it and its leader. In Nazi Germany, a picture of Adolf Hitler appeared in nearly every building. Under Saddam Hussein, every news broadcast in Iraq began with a reference to himself. Entire art museums were filled with paintings of the leader. The underlying tendency to want absolute power and control has been termed megalomania.

The 20th century

Intrawar era

In the twentieth century, dictatorship has been an essential pillar of single-party states, military regimes, and other forms of authoritarianism. In the interwar era (between the First World War and the Second World War), fascist regimes, such as Mussolini's Italy and Hitler's Germany, incorporated principles of dictatorship with a single-party state, mass mobilization and regimentation of social and economic activity, and arbitrary exercise of police power. The prototype of the fascist dictatorship was fashioned in Italy after 1922, and later emulated by Nazi Germany (beginning in 1933), as well as by a number of other fascist or quasi-fascist European governments during the 1930s. Fascist dictatorships were dealt a fatal blow by the defeat of the Axis Powers in World War II. Also during the interwar era, the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin fused dictatorship with single-party rule, mass mobilization, and arbitrary use of power. Stalin was the first modern dictator who created cult of personality around himself. The Soviet Union emerged victorious in the Second World War and entered a new phase after Stalin's death, by shifting from a personal dictatorship to a collective, though still authoritarian, leadership.

Postwar era

In the postwar era (that is, after the Second World War), dictatorships formed in many newly independent countries. In the case of most African or Asian former colonies, after achieving their independence in the postwar wave of decolonization, presidential regimes were gradually transformed into personal dictatorships. These regimes often proved unstable, with dictators being frequently overthrown and replaced in coups. Military dictatorships were very common, particularly in Latin America and Africa. Many of the military dictators and their senior staffs were graduates of the School of the Americas, comprised of an US military base in Costa Rica and Fort Benning, GA.

Military dictatorship

in Chile in 1973.]] :For related terms, see Military rule A military dictatorship is a form of government wherein the political power resides with the military; it is similar but not identical to a stratocracy, a state ruled directly by the military. Like all dictatorships, a military dictatorship may be official or unofficial, and as a result may not actually qualify as stratocratic (some military dictators, like Manuel Noriega, are nominally subordinate to the civil government). Mixed forms also exist, where the military exerts a very strong influence without being entirely dominant. The typical military dictatorship in Latin America was ruled by a junta (derived from a Spanish word which can be translated as "conference" or "board"), or a committee composed of the military's most senior leadership. Other military dictatorships are entirely in the hands of a single officer, usually the senior army commander. In either case, the chairman of the junta or the single commander may often personally assume office as head of state. In the Middle East and Africa, military governments more often came to be led by a single powerful person, and were autocracies in addition to military dictatorships. Leaders like Idi Amin, Muammar al-Qaddafi, and Gamal Abdul Nasser worked to develop a personality cult and became the face of the nation inside and outside their countries. Most military dictatorships are formed after a coup d'état has overthrown the previous government. One very different pattern was the one followed by Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, which began as a one-party state ruled by the Ba'ath Party, but over the course of its existence turned into a military dictatorship (as its leaders donned uniforms and the military became closely involved in the government). In the past, military juntas have justified their rule as a way of bringing political stability for the nation or rescuing it from the threat of "dangerous ideologies". This is a form of threat construction. In Latin America the threat of communism or capitalism was often used, while in the Middle East the desire to opose Israel and later Islamic fundamentalism proved an important motivating pattern. Military regimes tend to portray themselves as non-partisan, as a "neutral" party that can provide interim leadership in times of turmoil, and also tend to portray civilian politicians as corrupt and ineffective. One of the almost universal characteristics of a military government is the institution of martial law or a permanent state of emergency. Although there are exceptions, military regimes usually have little respect for human rights and use whatever means necessary to silence political opponents. A military regime is also rarely willing to leave power unless forced to by popular revolt, whether active or imminent. Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East have been common areas for military dictatorships. One of the reasons for this is the fact that the military often has more cohesion and institutional structure than most of the civilian institutions of society. Military dictatorships can be contrasted with other forms of dictatorship. For example, in most current and historical Communist states, the center of power rests among civilian party officials, and very careful measures (such as political officers and frequent rotations) are taken to prevent the military from exercising independent authority. Since the 1990s, military dictatorships have become less common. Reasons for this include the fact that military dictatorships no longer have much international legitimacy, as well as the fact that many militaries having unsuccessfully ruled many nations are now inclined not to become involved in political disputes. Furthermore, the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union made it more difficult for military regimes to use the threat of communism as justification for their actions, or to gain support from foreign sources. As the Cold War began to wind down, military regimes throughout Latin America were replaced with democracies. In the Middle East, regimes such as those of Syria and Egypt that were once clearly military dictatorships have switched to other forms of despotism.
Nations currently under military rule:

- Libya
- Myanmar (Burma)
- Sudan
- Mauritania- on August 3, 2005, the military staged a coup and declared a two year transitional military dictatorship
Nations with legacies of military dictatorships:

- Algeria (1965-1994)
- Argentina (1943-1958; 1966-1973; 1976-1983)
- Bangladesh (1975-1979; 1982-1990)
- Brazil (1964-1985)
- Burkina Faso (1966-1991)
- Burundi (1966-1993)
- Central African Republic (1966-1993)
- Chad (1975-1991)
- Chile (1973-1990)
- China (1916-1927)(or 1920-1922)
- Colombia (1953-1957)
- Republic of the Congo (1968-1992)
- Congo-Kinshasa (1965-2001/present)
- Dominican Republic (1844-1978 with a few exceptions)
- El Salvador (1931-1992)
- England under Oliver Cromwell (1649-1658, disputed)
- Equatorial Guinea (1968-1982)
- Ethiopia (1974-1991)
- France under Napoleon
- Ghana (1966-1969; 1972-1979; 1981-1993)
- Greece (1967-1974)
- Guatemala (1931-1944; 1954-1986)
- Guinea (1984-1991)
- Haiti (1957-1990; 1991-1994)
- Honduras (1963-1971; 1972-1982)
- Indonesia (1967-1998)
- Iraq (1958-1968)
- Liberia (1980-1990)
- Madagascar (1972-1975)
- Mauritania (1978-1992) (2005-present)
- Niger (1974-1989; 1996-1999)
- Nigeria (1966-1979; 1983-1999)
- Pakistan (1958-1971; 1978-1988; 1999-present)
- Panama (1968-1989)
- Paraguay (1940-1948; 1949-1989)
- Peru (1948-1956; 1968-1980)
- Philippines (1972-1981)
- Poland (1981-1983)
- Sierra Leone (1992-1996; 1997-1998)
- Somalia (1969-1991; then local militia rule)
- Spain (1923-1930; 1939-1975)
- Sudan (1958-1964; 1969- )
- Suriname (1980-1988)
- Thailand (1938-1992 with a few exceptions)
- Turkey (1960-1962; 1971-1973; 1980-1982)
- Uganda (1962-1986)
- Uruguay (1973-1985)
- Venezuela (1952-1958)
See also:

- Police state
- Dictator
- The Generals Category:Forms of government Category:Military Category:Civil-military relations ja:軍事国家

Dominant-party system

A dominant-party system, or one party dominant system, is a party system where only one political party can realistically become the government, by itself or in a coalition government. While opposition parties are legally allowed to operate, they are considered too weak or ineffective to seriously take power. In contrast to single-party systems, which tend to be authoritarian, dominant-party systems can occur within a context of a democratic system. Dominant-party systems have been criticized because corruption and insensitivity to public demands tend to arise for lack of an effective opposition. A further distinction from a single-party system is that under the latter, other parties cannot compete to become the government because they are banned. Dominant-party systems exist only in states where other political parties are tolerated, but do not receive enough votes to have a realistic chance of winning. However, in some dominant-party systems, opposition parties are subject to varying degrees of official harassment and most often deal with rules and electoral systems designed to put them at a disadvantage or in some cases outright electoral fraud. On the other hand, some dominant-party system occur in countries that are widely seen, both by their citizens and outside observers, to be textbook examples of democracy. The reasons why a dominant-party system may form in such a country are often debated: Supporters of the dominant party tend to argue that their party is simply doing a good job in government and the opposition continuously proposes unrealistic or unpopular changes, while supporters of the opposition tend to argue that the electoral system disfavors them (for example because it is based on the principle of first past the post), or that the dominant party receives a disproportionate amount of funding from various sources and is therefore able to mount more persuasive campaigns. Examples of dominant-party systems include the National Democratic Party in Egypt, the Partido Revolucionario Institucional in Mexico from the 1920s until 2000, the People's Action Party in Singapore since 1959, the Democratic Party in the southern United States from about 1880 until the 1960s, Democrazia Cristiana in Italy from 1948 to 1992, and the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan from the 1950s until the present. Dominant-party systems can occur temporarily. This can often occur when a two-party system is the norm, but one of the two parties sees a massive drop in support, often due to scandal or similar massive upset. An example of this is, arguably, the United Kingdom between 1979 and 1997 (18 years) where the Conservative party won all four elections in that period. Previously, in the post-war period, the government had rotated from Labour Party to Conservative Party five times. Contemporary Canada could also qualify as a dominant-party system, with the Liberal Party ruling almost three quarters of the time since 1896, and continuously since 1993. In the party's history, Edward Blake is the only leader of the Liberal Party ever to not have been Prime Minister of Canada at some time. However, for some of the period, including today, the Liberals have ruled in a minority government, and the various opposition parties, most notably the large Conservative Party (formerly the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservatives), draw significant support and at points have had a decisive impact on national politics and policy. Ireland is another example, with Fianna Fáil ruling more than two-thirds of the time since independence. All six of Fianna Fáil's leaders have served as taoiseach (prime minister) at some point in time. Though the United States as a whole is characterized by a competitive two-party system, some individual states may qualify as a dominant-party system.

Current dominant-party systems

The following countries are claimed by many to be dominant-party systems:

Africa

Angola
- Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola - Workers' Party
- Movimento Popular da Libertação de Angola - Partido do Trabalho (MPLA-PT)
- Led by President José Eduardo dos Santos, in office since 10 September 1979
- In power since independence, 11 November 1975
- Sole legal party, 1977-1991
- Presidential election, 1992: José Eduardo dos Santos (MPLA-PT) 49.6%
- Parliamentary election, 1992: MPLA 53.7% and 129 of 220 seats Botswana
- Botswana Democratic Party (BDP)
- Led by President Festus Gontebanye Mogae, in office since 1 April 1998
- In power since independence, 30 September 1966
- Parliamentary election, 2004: BDP 51.7% and 44 of 57 seats Burkina Faso
- Congress for Democracy and Progress
- Congrès pour la Démocratie et le Progrès (CDP)
- Led by President Blaise Compaoré, in office since 15 October 1987
- In power, under various names, since 24 December 1991
- Presidential election, 1998: Blaise Compaoré (CDP) 87.5%
- Parliamentary election, 2002: CDP 49.5% and 47 of 91 seats Cameroon
- Cameroonian People's Democratic Movement
- Rassemblement démocratique du Peuple camerounais (RDPC)
- Led by President Paul Biya, in office since 6 November 1982
- In power, under various names, since independence, 1 January 1960
- Sole legal party, 1966-1990
- Presidential election, 2004: Paul Biya (RDPC) 70.9%
- Parliamentary election, 2002: RDPC 133 of 180 seats Chad
- Patriotic Salvation Movement
- Mouvement patriotique du Salut (MPS)
- Led by President Idriss Déby, in office since 2 December 1990
- In power since 2 December 1990
- Presidential election, 2001: Idriss Déby (MPS) 63.2%
- Parliamentary election, 2002: MPS 110 of 155 seats Congo-Brazzaville
- Congolese Labour Party
- Parti congolais du Travail (PCT)
- Led by President Denis Sassou-Nguesso, in office from 8 February 1979 to 31 August 1992 and since 15 October 1997
- In power from 1 January 1969 to 31 August 1992 and since 15 October 1997
- Sole legal party, 1970-1990
- Presidential election, 2002: Denis Sassou-Nguesso (PCT) 89.4%
- Parliamentary election, 2002: PCT 53 of 137 seats Djibouti
- Popular Rally for Progress
- Rassemblement populaire pour le Progrès (RPP)
- Led by President Ismail Omar Guelleh, in office since 8 May 1999
- In power since its formation in 1979
- Sole legal party, 1979-1992
- Presidential election, 2005: Ismail Omar Guelleh (RPP) re-elected unopposed
- Parliamentary election, 2003: RPP in coalition, 62.4% and 65 of 65 seats Egypt
- National Democratic Party (NDP)
- Hizbi ad-Dimuqratiya al-Wataniya
- Led by President Hosni Mubarak, in office since 14 October 1981
- In power since its formation in 1978
- Presidential election, 2005: Hosni Mubarak (NDP) 88.6%
- Parliamentary election, 2000: NDP 388 of 444 seats Equatorial Guinea
- Democratic Party of Equatorial Guinea
- Partido Democrático de Guinea Ecuatorial (PDGE)
- Led by President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, in office since 3 August 1979
- In power since its formation in 1987
- Sole legal party, 1987-1991
- Presidential election, 2002: Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo (PDGE) 97.1%
- Parliamentary election, 2004: PDGE 47.5% and 68 of 100 seats (91.9% and 98 of 100 seats including allies) Ethiopia
- Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF)
- Led by Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, in office since 28 May 1991 (as prime minister since 22 August 1995)
- In power since 28 May 1991
- Parliamentary election, 2005: EPRDF 327 of 547 seats Gabon
- Gabonese Democratic Party
- Parti démocratique gabonais (PDG)
- Led by President Omar Bongo, in office since 28 November 1967
- In power, under various names, since independence, 17 August 1960
- Sole legal party, 1968-1991
- Presidential election, 1998: Omar Bongo (PDG) 66.9%
- Parliamentary election, 2001: PDG 88 of 120 seats The Gambia
- Alliance for Patriotic Reorientation and Construction (APRC)
- Led by President Yahya A. J. J. Jammeh, in office since 22 July 1994
- In power since its formation in 1996
- Presidential election, 2001: Yahya A. J. J. Jammeh (APRC) 52.8%
- Parliamentary election, 2002: APRC 45 of 53 seats Guinea
- Party of Unity and Progress
- Parti de l'Unité et du Progrès (PUP)
- Led by President Lansana Conté, in office since 3 April 1984
- In power since its formation in 1991
- Presidential election, 2003: Lansana Conté (PUP) 95.6%
- Parliamentary election, 2002: PUP 61.6% and 47 of 76 seats Mozambique
- Mozambican Liberation Front
- Frente da Libertação de Moçambique (FRELIMO)
- Led by President Armando Guebuza, in office since 2 February 2005
- In power since independence, 25 June 1975
- Sole legal party, 1975-1990
- Presidential election, 2004: Armando Guebuza (FRELIMO) 63.7%
- Parliamentary election, 2004: FRELIMO 62.0% and 160 of 250 seats Namibia
- South-West African People's Organisation (SWAPO)
- Led by President Hifikepunye Pohamba, in office since 21 March 2005
- In power since independence, 21 March 1990
- Presidential election, 2004: Hifikepunye Pohamba (SWAPO) 76.4%
- Parliamentary election, 2004: SWAPO 55 of 72 seats Nigeria
- People's Democratic Party (PDP)
- Led by President Olusegun Obasanjo, in office as civilian since 29 May 1999 (non-partisan military dictator from 14 February 1976 to 1 October 1979)
- In power since 29 May 1999
- Presidential election, 2003: Olusegun Obasanjo (PDP) 61.8%
- Parliamentary election, 2003: PDP 54.8% and 198 of 318 seats Rwanda
- Rwandese Patriotic Front
- Front patriotique rwandais (FPR)
- Led by President Paul Kagame, in office since 24 March 2000
- In power since 19 July 1994
- Presidential election, 2003: Paul Kagame (FPR) 95.1%
- Parliamentary election, 2003: FPR 73.8% and 40 of 53 seats Seychelles
- Seychelles People's Progressive Front (SPPF)
- Led by President James Alix Michel, in office since 14 April 2004
- In power since 5 June 1977
- Sole legal party, 1979-1993
- Presidential election, 2001: France-Albert René (SPPF) 54.2% (René retired, 14 April 2004)
- Parliamentary election, 2002: SPPF 54.3% and 23 of 34 seats South Africa
- African National Congress (ANC)
- Led by President Thabo Mbeki, in office since 16 June 1999
- In power since 10 May 1994
- Parliamentary election, 2004: ANC 69.7% and 279 of 400 seats Sudan
- National Congress Party (NCP)
- Led by President Omar Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir, in office since 30 June 1989
- In power since its formation, 16 October 1993
- Presidential election, 2000: Omar Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir (NCP) 86.5%
- Parliamentary election, 2000: NCP 355 of 360 seats Tanzania
- Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM)
- Led by President Benjamin William Mkapa, in office since 23 November 1995
- In power, under various names, since independence, 9 December 1961
- Sole legal party, 1975-1992 (unofficially from independence in 1961)
- Presidential election, 2000: Benjamin William Mkapa (CCM) 71.7%
- Parliamentary election, 2000: CCM 244 of 269 seats Togo
- Rally of the Togolese People
- Rassemblement du Peuple togolais (RPT)
- Led by President Faure Gnassingbé, in office since 5 February 2005
- In power since its formation in 1980
- Sole legal party, 1979-1991
- Presidential election, 2005]]: Faure Gnassingbé (RPT) 60.2%
- Parliamentary election, 2002: RPT 72 of 81 seats Tunisia
- Democratic Constitutional Rally
- Rassemblement constitutionnel démocratique (RCD)
- Led by President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, in office since 7 November 1987
- In power since 25 July 1957
- Sole legal party, 1957-1988
- Presidential election, 2004: Zine El Abidine Ben Ali (RCD) 94.5%
- Parliamentary election, 2004: RCD 87.6% and 152 of 189 seats Zambia
- Movement for Multiparty Democracy (MMD)
- Led by President Levy Patrick Mwanawasa, in office since 2 January 2002
- In power since 2 November 1991
- Presidential election, 2001: Levy Patrick Mwanawasa (MMD) 29.1%
- Parliamentary election, 2001: MMD 27.5% and 69 of 150 seats Zimbabwe
- Zimbabwe African National Union - Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF)
- Led by President Robert Gabriel Mugabe, in office since 18 April 1980 (as president since 31 December 1987)
- In power since independence, 17 April 1980
- Presidential election, 2002: Robert Gabriel Mugabe (ZANU-PF) 56.2%
- Parliamentary election, 2005: ZANU-PF 59.6% and 78 of 120 elective seats (30 additional seats reserved for appointees)

Americas

Canada
- Liberal Party of Canada (LPC)
- Parti libéral du Canada (PLC)
- Led by Prime Minister Paul Martin, in office since December 12, 2003
- In power 1873-1878, 1896-1911, 1921-1926, 1926-1930, 1935-1957, 1963-1979, 1980-1984, 1993-present (in government for 72% of the time during the modern era, i.e. the period since 1896)
- In the 2004 federal election, the Liberals received 36.7% of the popular vote and won 135 of the 308 seats in the House of Commons and formed a minority government
- See above in intro as to why Canada may not be a dominant-party system El Salvador
- Nationalist Republican Alliance
- Alianza Republicana Nacionalista (ARENA)
- Led by President Antonio Saca, in office since 1 June 2004
- In power since 1 June 1989
- Presidential election, 2004: Antonio Saca (ARENA) 57.7%
- Parliamentary election, 2003: ARENA 32.0% and 27 of 84 seats (FMLN 33.8% and 31 of 84 seats) Paraguay
- Republican National Association - Colorado Party
- Asociación Nacional Republicana - Partido Colorado (ANR-PC)
- Led by President Nicanor Duarte, in office since 15 August 2003
- In power 1880-1904 and since 1947
- Sole legal party, 1947-1962
- Presidential election, 2003: Nicanor Duarte (ANR-PC) 38.3%
- Parliamentary election, 2003: ANR-PC 35.3% and 37 of 80 seats

Asia

- Cambodia (KPK)
- East Timor
- Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor or FRETILIN
- Led by Prime Minister Mari Alkatiri, in office since May 20 2002
- In power since 2002
- Parliamentary election, 2001: FRETILIN 57.37% and 55 out of 88 seats
- Japan (LDP)
- Kazakhstan (OTAN)
- Malaysia
- United Malays National Organization (UMNO)
- In power since 1957 (as part of a coalition called the Barisan Nasional, or National Front)
- Led by Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, in office since October 31, 2003
- Parliamentary election, 2004: UMNO 35.9% and 109 of 219 seats, total for Barisan Nasional 63.9% and 198 out of 219 seats
- Palestinian Authority (PLO)
- Samoa (HRPP)
- Singapore
- People's Action Party (PAP)
- In power since May 30, 1959
- Led by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, in office since August 12, 2004
- President S R Nathan was elected unopposed in the 2005 presidential election
- The PAP received 75.3% of the vote and won 82 out of 84 seats in the 2001 parliamentary election
- Syria (Ba'ath)
- Tajikistan (PDPT)
- Uzbekistan (FID)
- Yemen (GPC)

Europe

- Andorra (PLA)
- Armenia (RPA)
- Azerbaijan (YAP)
- Republic of Ireland
- Fianna Fáil-The Republican Party (FF)
- Led by Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Bertie Ahern, since 1997
- In power 1932-48, 1951-54, 1957-73, 1977-82, 1987-94, and since 1997 (in power for 68% of the time since 1921)
- Parliamentary election, 2002: FF 81 seats (three short of an absolute majority)
- Republic of Georgia (NM-D)
- Russia (United Russia)
- Sweden (SAP)

Marxism-Leninism

Marxism-Leninism, strictly speaking, refers to the version of Marxist theory developed by Vladimir Lenin; see Leninism. However, in various contexts, different (and sometimes opposing) political groups have used the term "Marxism-Leninism" to describe the ideologies that they claimed to be upholding. The purpose of this article is to give an account of the historical and present uses of the label "Marxism-Leninism".

History of the term

Lenin himself never used the term "Leninism," nor did he refer to his views as "Marxism-Leninism." However, his ideas diverged from classical Marxist theory on several important points (see the articles on Marxism and Leninism for more information,) and it became evident that a new name was required to describe his ideology. Thus, after Lenin's death, his ideology and contributions to Marxist theory were termed "Marxism-Leninism," or sometimes only "Leninism." Marxism-Leninism soon became the official name for the ideology of the Comintern and of communist parties around the world. Within 5 years of Lenin's death, Joseph Stalin completed his rise to power in the Soviet Union. Stalin, in contrast to many contemporary revolutionaries, did not write a significant body of theoretical work. "Stalinism," strictly speaking, refers to a style of government or political structure, rather than an ideology per se; during the period of Stalin's rule in the Soviet Union, Marxism-Leninism was proclaimed the official ideology of the state. Whether Stalinist practices actually followed the principles of Marxism-Leninism is still a subject of debate amongst historians and political scientists. Trotskyists in particular believe that Stalinism contradicted Marxism-Leninism, and have used the term "Marxism-Leninism" to describe their own ideology of anti-Stalinist and anti-Maoist communism. After the Sino-Soviet split, the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China each claimed to be the sole intellectual heir to Marxism-Leninism. In China, the claim that Mao had "adapted Marxism-Leninism to Chinese conditions" evolved into the idea that he had updated it in a fundamental way applying to the world as a whole; consequently, the term "Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought" (commonly known as Maoism) was increasingly used to describe the official Chinese state ideology as well as the ideological basis of parties around the world who sympathized with the Communist Party of China. Following the death of Mao, American Maoists associated with the Revolutionary Communist Party (USA) subsequently coined the term Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, arguing that Maoism was a more advanced stage of Marxism. Maoist and Maoist-oriented parties today generally believe that the current leadership of China has abandoned Maoism. In North Korea, Marxism-Leninism was officially superseded in 1977 by Juche, in which concepts of class and class struggle, in other words Marxism itself, play no significant role. However, the government is still sometimes referred to as Marxist-Leninist - or, more commonly, Stalinist - due to its political and economic structure (see History of North Korea). The other three communist states existing today - Cuba, Vietnam and Laos - hold Marxism-Leninism as their official ideology, although they give it different interpretations in terms of practical policy.

Current usage

Most communist parties continue to regard Marxism-Leninism as their basic ideology, although many have modified it to adapt to new political conditions. Several communist parties, especially those previously associated with Eurocommunism, have distanced themselves from the concept of 'Marxism-Leninism' and in many cases omitted it from their official documents. Some have started identifying themselves as 'Marxist, Leninist' or 'Marxist and Leninist' rather than 'Marxist-Leninist'. The difference in such cases is that the historical connotation of 'Marxism-Leninism' is avoided. In party names, the appellation 'Marxist-Leninist' is normally used by a communist party who wishes to distinguish itself from some other (and presumably 'mainstream') communist party in the same country. Most often, parties who place the term 'Marxist-Leninist' in their official name are those originating from the anti-revisionist tradition, such as Maoist groups. Popular confusion abounds concerning the complex terminology describing the various schools of Marxist-derived thought. The appellation 'Marxist-Leninist' is often used by those not familiar with communist ideology in any detail (e.g. many newspapers and other media) as a synonym for any kind of Marxism.

Communist state

:This article is about one-party states governed by Communist parties. For information regarding communism as a form of society, as an ideology advocating that form of society, or as a popular movement, see the main Communism article. A Communist state is a term for a state governed by a single political party which declares its allegiance to the principles of Marxism-Leninism. It is claimed by some that this term is technically an oxymoron because Communism's ultimate goal is the creation of a classless society, without a state. Marxist-Leninists, however, consider such a state a necessary transitional phase and a means for the proletariat to establish power beforehand in what they call a Socialist state. The term "Communist state" originated from the fact that most of such states are or were run by Communist parties. However most of these states called themselves socialist (such as in the name Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), since in Marxist political theory, socialism is the intermediate stage in reaching communism.

Definition of a "Communist state"

:See also: Socialist republic A "Communist State" is defined as a state ruled by a Communist Party. But the term Communism as defined by Marx is a classless and stateless utopian society where the resources and means of production are owned by communities rather than by individuals and provides for equal sharing of all freedoms, all work and all benefits. The intermediate stage of Socialism is meant to create a 'new man' who voluntarily acts in the best interest of the community. In an ever stricter sense of Communism, there is no ownership, not even by communities, and everyone works according to their ability, and takes according to their needs of their own volition. Certain socialists and social democrats reject historical "Communist states", viewing them as representing a distortion or rejection of socialist values. Trotskyists, communists who follow the ideology of Bolshevik leader Leon Trotsky, became especially opposed to the official ideology of the Soviet Union following Joseph Stalin's consolidation of power. Trotsky criticized the Soviet Union under Stalin as a degenerated workers state and, following World War II, Trotskyists coined the term deformed workers state to refer to the governments in Eastern Europe as well as other Communist states that arose. Other communists went even further; anarchist communists and left- / council communists went very far in their critique of marxism-leninism and the communist (pseudo-)parties and they were often a driving part in uprisings against the communist states, for example the Hungarian revolution. Alternative terms for a "Communist state" include Communist Party-run state and Marxist-Leninist state. These terms are not used by Marxist-Leninists, who describe them as Socialist states, or societies in the transition of the dictatorship of the proletariat. They consider the term Communist state an oxymoron. Libertarian socialists and communists, left communists and anarchists often use terms such as "state socialism" or "state capitalism".

Historical examples

As noted in the introduction, a "Communist state" is a state where a Communist Party holds power within the context of a single-party system of government. In this definition, 'Communist State' and Democracy are mutually exclusive. Thus, a country where a Communist party is part of the government is not automatically a "Communist state." Furthermore, the historical states of the Hungarian Soviet Republic, Slovak Soviet Republic and Bavarian Soviet Republic were short-lived revolutionary entities that are difficult to define as Communist states, because the status of non-Communist political parties and movements within them remained unclear. Communist governments have typically arisen during times of general political instability. Most have come to power through revolutions led by Communist parties. Several of these parties operated illegally for a long period of time before the revolution, and developed disciplined and effective structures, together with a cadre of committed leaders able to mobilize elements of society dissatisfied with the current government. The support base of the communists typically consisted of poor laborers, intellectuals, and, especially in the case of China, peasants. Following a successful revolution, the Communist Party took on the goal of building a new society.

Early examples of communist societies

:See also: Communism: Other forms of communism Societies based on communism and ideologies similar to communism have existed throughout history, and many exist today, but it was not until the 20th century that highly organized Communist Parties based on Marxist-Leninist ideology gave rise to Communist states. Information regarding early, traditional and/or religious forms of communism (as well as information on other socialist societies in the Marxist meaning of the word, such as the Paris Commune) is to be found in the Communism article. Many researchers prefer to use the term communalism to distinguish various communal societies from communism, which is generally associated with Marxism.

20th century

communalism In the 20th century, a number of Communist Parties based on Marxist-Leninist ideology established governments in various countries. In those countries, the aforementioned Communist parties made themselves the only legal political parties. The history of Communist states is often closely related to the history of non-Communist governments, and to the history of the Communist movement in general. As such, the following historical account is not restricted to Communist states: Following the October Revolution in 1917, which established what later became the Soviet Union, there was a revolutionary wave throughout Europe. Communist revolutions, uprisings or attempted uprisings took place in many European countries. However, Russian Communists, engaged in the Russian Civil War, were unable to provide any significant support to communist movements outside Russia. Eventually, in the first decades after the Russian revolution, only five revolutions outside Russia were able to take power, and these for short periods of time. They resulted in the Finnish Socialist Workers' Republic in 1918, the Bavarian Soviet Republic from November 1918 until May 3 1919, the Slovak Soviet Republic in 1919, the Hungarian Soviet Republic in 1919, and the Persian Soviet Socialist Republic from 1920 to 1921. All of them were soon abolished, and with the defeat of the Red Army in the Polish-Soviet War in 1920, the Russian Communists were forced to abandon any plans of military aid to Communist movements in Europe. On the other side of the world, Mongolia had been a protectorate of the Russian Empire from 1912 until 1919, when the Chinese took control during the Russian Civil War. The Russian monarchist White Army took control in 1921, but was driven out by the Red Army that same year. Mongolia was not absorbed into the Soviet Union, but was renamed the People's Republic of Mongolia and became the Soviet Union's first satellite state in 1924. From 1924 until World War II, there were no successful Communist revolutions, and no more Communist states were established. Most of the Communist states in the world were established in the aftermath of World War II in Eastern Europe, either in countries which were liberated from the Nazis by the Soviet Red Army and subsequently occupied by Soviet troops, or in countries where Communist-led partisans succeeded in driving out the Nazis and taking power themselves. The Red Army arranged for the establishment of Communist governments in Poland, East Germany, Hungary, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia and Romania, which became Soviet satellites. Communist partisans established Communist governments which were initially pro-Soviet in Albania and Yugoslavia. Furthermore, in East Asia, the Red Army joined the war against Japan and established a Communist state in North Korea. With extensive Soviet military aid, Mao Zedong's Communist Party of China emerged victorious in the Chinese Civil War and established the People's Republic of China in 1949. The First Indochina War led to the establishment of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam in northern Vietnam in 1954. Later, the Vietnam War ended with the takeover of South Vietnam by the North Vietnamese Army and the establishment of a unified Socialist Republic of Vietnam in 1975. The broader Indochina conflict also saw Communist states established in Laos and Cambodia in 1975, though the latter government (known as Democratic Kampuchea) was toppled in a Vietnamese invasion and denounced by Vietnam and its Communist allies. (see Khmer Rouge) In 1959, the Cuban Revolution eventually led to the first Communist state being established in the Western Hemisphere, the Republic of Cuba. Some also call Nicaragua under the Sandinista National Liberation Front and Grenada under the New Jewel Movement "Communist States" as both nations came under Marxist military junta control in 1979. A civil war led to the establishment of the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen in southern Yemen in 1969. For several years, Communist states also existed in Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Angola, Mozambique, Benin, Somalia, and the Republic of the Congo, although these were short-lived. By the early 1980s, nearly one third of the world's population in 25 nations was ruled by Communist governments (due largely to the size of Russia and China). There have been several wars or military conflicts between Communist states: the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the Prague spring, the Ogaden War, the Cambodian-Vietnamese War, the Sino-Soviet border conflict, and the Sino-Vietnamese War. However, due to internal economic problems, foreign entanglements, and pressures for reform, the Soviet Union itself was growing increasingly unstable. In the late 1980s, Eastern Europe grew increasingly unstable as people rose up against their governments, and in 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed. None of the Eastern European Communist governments survived these events. As of 2005, there are five Communist states in the world: China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam. Despite a common Communist ideology, they possess certain distinct characteristics, both politically and economically.

Communist theories and ideologies of government

:See also the articles on Marxism, Leninism, Trotskyism, Stalinism and Maoism. Communist states base themselves on a form of Marxist-Leninist ideology. All historical Communist states that existed for significant periods of time during the 20th century had their roots in either Soviet-inspired Marxism-Leninism or Maoism. Whether these states were faithful to Marxism is a matter of dispute. Trotskyists have been vocal communist opponents of the Stalinist and post-Stalinist Soviet Union, and Maoism on the grounds that they were perversions of Marxism-Leninism and communist ideals. Marxism holds — among other things — that human history has had and will have a developmental structure, alternating between slow development of technology/economy (and the according philosophy/religion) and short periods of rapid change in technology and economy (as well as philosophy and, sometimes, religion.) The short periods of rapid change take place immediately after revolutions of one kind or another. Marx envisioned communism as the final evolutionary phase of society at which time the state would have withered away. He specified that the workers should rise up to destroy capitalism and replace it with socialism, a transitional stage during which the state is to gain control over all means of production on behalf of the proletariat. Marx theorized that socialism would give way to communism, a classless society in which full collective ownership has been attained and the state no longer plays a role. Communist states have never actually claimed to have reached communism. They described themselves as socialist states in which the working people's will was represented through the Communist Party and (affiliated) mass organizations. This is because Marxist theory says a society cannot advance from capitalism to communism overnight. A transitional stage is needed. (see dictatorship of the proletariat). Leninist theory, developed by Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin, emphasises the role of a well-organized group of revolutionaries in planning and carrying out the transition to socialism. According to Leninism, a Communist party must be organized along the principles of democratic centralism in order to maximize efficiency. Leninism departs from original Marxist theory in arguing that the revolution will not begin in the most advanced capitalist countries, but in poor, underdeveloped countries where the capitalist ruling class is weakest. From there, the revolution would need to spread quickly to the advanced industrialized nations, who would provide the underdeveloped country with the resources necessary to build socialism. With these principles in mind, right after the Russian Revolution, Lenin argued that the success of socialism in Russia depended on the victory of socialist revolutions in other countries (most notably the German Revolution.) However, all the socialist revolutions that flared up across Europe in the years 1918-1922 were crushed. Russia found itself alone in its attempt to build socialism. Lenin did not live long enough to formulate a solution to this problem. Instead, the role fell on his successors, the most notable of whom were Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. Trotsky proposed his thesis of the "permanent revolution," while Stalin proposed "socialism in one country." Over the following years, Stalin gradually succeeded in eliminating his ideological opponents (including Trotsky) and taking over the Soviet government. He upheld and implemented the idea of "socialism in one country," which argued that socialism could and should be built in the Soviet Union without the help of other nations. Throughout the 1930s, Stalin created the State and Party structure on which all subsequent Communist states were to be based. Power was centralized in his hands, and democratic centralism was gradually removed from the decision-making process of the Communist Party (a process which culminated in the Great Purge.) Later, the ideology of Mao Zedong in the People's Republic of China (Maoism) diverged from traditional Stalinism by emphasizing the peasantry over the urban proletariat in both the revolution and post-revolutionary development. Communist governments have historically been characterized by state ownership of productive resources in a planned economy and sweeping campaigns of economic restructuring such as nationalization of industry and land reform (often focusing on collective farming or state farms.) While they promote collective ownership of the means of production, Communist governments have been characterized by a strong state apparatus in which decisions are made by the ruling Communist Party. Dissident communists have characterized the Soviet model as state socialism or state capitalism. Further, critics have often claimed that a Stalinist or Maoist system of government creates a new ruling class, usually called the nomenklatura.

Relationship between party and state

Political scientists have developed the concept of the Communist state to reflect claims made by Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, and others that the revolutionary state must be led by the dictatorship of the proletariat, in which the working class is represented by the Communist Party. In practice, according to this theory, state and the party are effectively identical, and govern all aspects of the society. In the Soviet Union for example, the General Secretary of the Communist Party did not necessarily hold a state office. Instead party members answerable to or controlled by the party held these posts, often as honorific posts as a reward for their long years of service to the party. On other occasions, having governed as General Secretary, the party leader might assume a state office in addition. For example, Mikhail Gorbachev initially did not hold the presidency of the Soviet Union, that office being given as an honor to a former Soviet Foreign Minister. Within Communist states there have rarely been restrictions on state power, resulting in state structures which are either totalitarian or authoritarian. Marxist-Leninist ideology views restrictions on state power to be an unnecessary interference in the goal of reaching communism. Dissident communists have argued that a state with absolute power naturally becomes corrupt and is thus incapable of moving society toward communism. Communist states have maintained a large secret police apparatus to closely monitor the population and silence those deemed "enemies of the state." Arrest, torture, "reeducation," and summary execution are all methods that have been employed. Some political scientists have argued that there are deep similarities between Communist states and fascist ones and that both are examples of totalitarian states. The nature of each individual Communist state differs widely both between countries and within each individual state. States that incorporate the policies and techniques of the orthodox Stalinist state of the 1930s are characteristically more totalitarian, impoverished, militaristic, and static, as can be seen in North Korea and Communist Albania. States such as China have benefitted from market reforms introduced by the Communist Party, but attempts to dramatically reform the Soviet Union under Mikhail Gorbachev contributed to its collapse as the Communist Party was unable to maintain its grip on power. The People's Republic of China and to a lesser extent Vietnam and Laos have all moved toward market reforms after the command economy failed to produce necessary development.

Criticism and advocacy

:See also: Criticisms of communism Advocates of Communism praise Communist parties for running countries that have sometimes leapt ahead of contemporary "capitalist" countries, offering guaranteed employment, health care and housing to their citizens. Critics of communism typically condemn Communist states by the same criteria, claiming that all lag far behind the industrialized West in terms of economic development and living standards. Central economic planning has in certain instances produced dramatic advances, including rapid development of heavy industry during the 1930s in the Soviet Union (a belated industrialisation) and later in their space program. Another example touted by Communists is the development of the pharmaceutical industry in Cuba. Early advances in the status of women were also notable, especially in Islamic areas of the Soviet Union. See Gregory J. Massell, The Surrogate Proletariat: Moslem Women and Revolutionary Strategies in Soviet Central Asia: 1919–1929, Princeton University Press, 1974, hardcover, 451 pages, ISBN 069107562X. Critics however cite counter-examples: the failure of the Soviet Union to achieve the same kind of development in agriculture (forcing the Soviet Union to become a net importer of cereals after the Second World War), as well as the continued poverty of other Communist states such as Laos, Vietnam or Maoist China. Indeed, they point out that China only achieved high rates of growth after introducing Capitalist economic reforms — a sign, claim the critics, of the superiority of Capitalism. The rigid execution of economic plans has had negative results, such as the 5 year plans in the Soviet Union, the total focus on agrarian reform at the expense of industrialisation in China and the plans to achieve an enormous sugar production at all cost in Cuba in the 1960's, which left the rest of the economy in shambles. Other claims include generous social and cultural programs, often administered by labor organizations. Universal education programs have been a strong point, as has the generous provision of universal health care. This is illustrated by the high levels of literacy enjoyed by Eastern Europeans (in comparison, for instance, with Southern Europe), Cubans or Chinese. Critics charge that Communist compulsory education was replete with pro-Communist propaganda and censored opposing views. Critics also note that the Communist states do not compare fa

One party states

Examples

Notes

See also

External links

Party system

See also

Government

Definitions

Forms of government

Theories

Greed and oppression

Order and tradition

Natural rights

Social contract

Operations

Enforcement of power

Territory

Scale of government

See also

Relevant lists

Dictatorship

Absolute power

The 20th century

Intrawar era

Postwar era

See also

Military dictatorship

Nations currently under military rule:

Nations with legacies of military dictatorships:

See also:

Dominant-party system

Current dominant-party systems

Africa

Americas

Asia

Europe

See also

Marxism-Leninism

History of the term

Current usage

See also

Communist state

Definition of a "Communist state"

Historical examples

Early examples of communist societies

20th century

Communist theories and ideologies of government

Relationship between party and state

Criticism and advocacy