A TERM PAPER ON POLITICAL IDEOLOGY

COURSE TITLE
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY

COURSE CODE
PSY408

SUBMITTED BY:
GROUP 10

TO

DR. A. T. AYINDE
COURSE CORDINATOR

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY,

FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE,

OBAFEMI AWOLOWO UNIVERSITY, ILE-IFE, OSUN STATE, NIGERIA

DECEMBER 2019
 LIST OF GROUP MEMBERS

NAMES MATRIC NUMBER

1. Oguntola Farouk Oluwatosin BCH/2014/078

2. Olowoseunre Ibukun Daniel PSY/2015/061

3. Popoola Tomola Oluwajuwon PSY/2016/083

4. Uduak Mfon Grace PSY/2015/074

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE NUMBER

Definition of political ideology 1

History of political ideology 3

Political ideologies in the world: Absolutism 8

Anarchism 9

Communism 10

Conservatism 10

Environmentalism (or Ecologism) 11

Fascism 12

Liberalism 13

Nationalism 14

Socialism 15

Social capitalism 16

Marxism 17

Capitalism 18

Aristocracy 19

Autocracy 20
Political ideologies in the world: Democracy 20

Egalitarianism 21

Imperialism 21

Maoism 22

Oligarchy 22

Populism 23

Theocracy 23

Totalitarianism 24

Social democracy 25

Christian democracy 26

Green ideology 27

Republicanism 27

Feminism 28

Islamism 30

Multiculturalism 32

Fundamentalism 33

References
DEFINITION OF POLITICAL IDEOLOGY

A political ideology is a set of ideas, beliefs, values, and opinions, exhibiting a recurring

pattern, that competes deliberately as well as unintentionally over providing plans of action for

public policy making in an attempt to justify, explain, contest, or change the social and political

arrangements and processes of a political community. The concept of ideology is subject to

partly incompatible conceptual interpretations. Ideology is totalistic, that is, it presents, at least in

its fullest form, a broad range of views, which cover the central aspects of how society should be

organized, answering such questions as what the role of the state should be, what forms of

difference or differentiation between people should be accepted, and which rejected. In the

widest possible sense, an ideology thus offers answers to the question of what kind of society is

desirable. Political ideologies thus present a view of the good society, and further than that, they

seek to mobilize people in support of political projects designed to bring about that particular

kind of society. A political ideology is a set of ideas, which is normative, setting out an ideal,

aiming at arousing support on a mass basis for those ideas, seeking to agitate in their favour.

Ideologies are therefore projects, or at least encapsulate practical projects, which give rise to

political strategies and tactics, models of political action, which seek to transform the real world.

Freeden sees ideologies as assemblies of concepts, which ‘decontest’ the meaning of key words.

What he calls his ‘morphological approach’ defines ideologies as ‘groupings of decontested

political concepts’ (Freeden, 1996), or again as ‘multi-conceptual constructs, and as loose

composites of decontested concepts with a variety of internal combinations’ (Freeden, 1996).

Thus there seem two central points to this concept of political ideologies: one is that ideologies,

or the concepts contained in them, ‘decontest’ the meanings of certain words, so that liberalism,

for example, says that ‘freedom’ must have a certain meaning, and can have no other, i.e. it

1
privileges one meaning of freedom and denies the validity of alternative interpretations.

Secondly, Freeden also operates with the idea that each ideology has its own morphology, or

inner structure. According to the Chambers dictionary the term ‘morphology’ means ‘the science

of form, especially that of the outer form, inner structure, and development of living organisms

and their parts: also the external forms of rocks and land features: also of the forms of words’. So

each ideology has its form, consisting firstly of core concepts, supplemented by ones which are

adjacent, in turn linked to less central or peripheral ones. An ideology establishes more or less

coherent connections between these sets of core, adjacent and peripheral concepts. The use of

this definition is that it opens up the way to see the complexity of ideologies, and to indicate that

they do indeed employ concepts in a certain (‘decontested’) way, so that it is necessary to see

exactly what their core concepts are and how they are related to other ideas or concepts in the

deployment of the particular ideology.

Political ideology aims at mobilizing support, building up a constituency for a set of

ideas, which aim at the realization of a certain vision of the good society. So ideologies cannot

be divorced from movements, whether political parties or broader social movements, which

move in the ‘real world’ of politics, and require a certain constituency or social base. The

implication of this is that an ideology is not just an abstract philosophy, or set of ideas dreamed

up by one person, but something which links such general ideas to political action, whether by a

few or, more typically for an ideology, many people. An example can be presented using the

case of nationalism. Political ideologies are essentially practical forces, which are used to

mobilize citizens to action. This does not suggest that political ideologies are nothing other than

tools or instruments used by cynical political leaders to arouse support for their drive to power,

though this is how they are seen by some. On this instrumental view of political ideologies, they

2
are seen as part of the armory or apparatus of political leaders. It fails to explain why certain

ideas, or ideological configurations of ideas, do have this power to move masses of people to

political action. People are not passive recipients of elite propaganda who respond to promptings

from leaders who press certain ideological buttons to achieve their ends. Political ideologies are

also critical perspectives, which seek to transform social and political reality as it currently is, in

the name of the ideal, which they affirm. Among the meanings that have been attached to

ideology are the following:

1. A political belief system

2. An action-orientated set of political ideas

3. The ideas of the ruling class

4. The world-view of a particular social class or social group

5. Political ideas that embody or articulate class or social interests

6. Ideas that propagate false consciousness among the exploited or oppressed

7. Ideas that situate the individual within a social context and generate a sense of collective

belonging an officially sanctioned set of ideas used to legitimize a political system or regime

8. An all-embracing political doctrine that claims a monopoly of truth

9. An abstract and highly systematic set of political ideas.

Ideas and ideologies influence political life in a number of ways such as structure

political understanding and so set goals and inspire activism, shape the nature of political

systems, and act as a form of social cement.

HISTORY OF POLITICAL IDEOLOGY

Antoine Destutt de Tracy first coined the term ‘ideology’ between 1796 and 1798 in

papers read in instalments to the National Institute in Paris under the title “Mémoire sur la faculté
3
de penser”. The term ideology was launched in the turbulent period before and after the French

Revolution. The term was coined in an attempt to label a new science outlined in the framework

of the Enlightenment programme, the teaching of ideas. The assumption was that ideas could be

studied as universal and nomothetic categories. Auguste Comte would later use this approach to

the study of the society with a similar ambition, himself coining the term ‘sociology’ (from the

Latin socius: society and the Greek logos: law, principle). The assumption of the Enlightenment

philosophers was that ideas and societies were of the same category as nature and that they

therefore followed regular and general patterns that conformed to laws. The target of the two

new sciences of ideology and sociology was to explore these laws. Developed as parallel

approaches in line with an optimistic Enlightenment belief in the possibility of discovering the

universality of the world, they soon became opposed to one another. One pretended to explore

the reality as it really was, the other was accused of ascribing power to evasive and illusionary

ideas. Napoleon transformed the term ideology from an expression of an academic imagining of

a new science exploring how ideas conformed to laws into a political concept of conflict. The

term lost its philosophical-apolitical connotation and became a polemic catchword in the public

debate. The term ideology became, so to speak, ideologized and politicized. The term ideology,

which had originally indicated a new science, became a condescending catchword that served to

demarcate political enemies. Ideology and ideologue began to connote the unwarranted

interference of philosophical theory in political practices. Ideology became a label for unrealistic

theories that tried to intervene in the spheres of government and political action. However,

during the nineteenth century and parallel to the belief in progress through positivism and

sociological exploration of societies conforming to law, the term also retained its original

4
meaning of a scientific discipline, and this constituted another kind of discursive sub-current

(Dierse 1982).

In the USA, there was great interest in the French debate. There was widespread

familiarity with Napoleon’s curse of the ideologues and it was commented upon in American

public debate. Thomas Jefferson was influenced by the ideologues and corresponded with

Destutt de Tracy and others. He distributed their works. However, he was more interested in their

outlines and designs of economics and politics than their theory of ideas. John Adams, in turn,

was influenced by Napoleon’s view. The dreams of the ideologues to establish a free, republican

constitution for a people, of whom the majority was illiterate, was unnatural, irrational, and

impractical in the eyes of Adams. Indeed, Adams referred to all those who dreamt of a future

better constitution (Franklin, Turgot, Rochefoucauld, Condorcet, and others) as ‘Idiologians’. In

the USA as well as in Germany, the main question to arise in the wake of the French debate was

whether politics was decoupled from theory or whether true politics only can be based on

principles, that is, ideologies. In the British debate, however, the term ideology received little

attention during the first half of the nineteenth century (Dierse 1982). The reinterpretation of the

concept of ideology initiated by Napoleon was noticed in the debate in Germany even earlier

than in the USA. In 1804 a reference was made to the fact that across the French debate the terms

protestant, philosopher, encyclopedist, economist, principalist, ideologue, illuminist, democrat,

jacobine, terrorist, and homme de sang were used synonymously. Conservatives deemed as

ideologues those who wanted to realize the principles of the French Revolution and argued for

liberalization, people’s sovereignty, press freedom, emancipation of the Jews, and a constitution.

Political theoreticians were referred to as visionaries, sticklers for principles, doctrinaire

professors, and ideologues. Ferdinand Lassalle defined ideology as unrealistic thinking. In

5
dictionaries at the end of the 1830s, ideology was defined both in the original sense of a theory

of ideas and in the sense of Napoleon as uncoupled from political realities.

However, in the long term, Napoleon’s insistence on separating ideology and politics

allowed for the emergence of an intelligentsia, which confronted political practices with a series

of programmes and claims. This intelligentsia did not restrict itself to combating or defending

particular rights and privileges. Instead, they wrote abstract principles like freedom, equality,

progress, and so on their banners. By the mid-nineteenth century, these principles had become a

characteristic of modern political parties. They presented general principles and goals departing

from a general idea. The ideology concept was transformed into a concept that epitomized a set

of principles. Ideology became an action-oriented concept for shaping the future. The concept

moved away from its original meaning of studying ideas conforming to law, although this

meaning still played a certain role in the debate. Around 1900 the ideology concept transcended

to become a general and rather value-neutral term in philosophy and sociology. Value was

infused through amendments like socialist, liberal, conservative, nationalistic, false, and right.

The view that people are products of their environment became more widespread. From this

point on ideologies were analyzed in the discipline of history of ideas as long, coherent chains of

thought. The debate dealt with the degree of coherence and the degree of deviation from the

imagined argumentative chain. The twentieth century saw ongoing debate on the question of the

nature of the connection between ideological outlines and political practices. At the same time,

as a kind of sub-current, the older pejorative connotation of ideology remained and was

politically mobilized through frequent references to terms like reality, interest politics, result

politics, pragmatism, and compromise. Mannheim’s approach of ideology had both a social and a

psychological dimension and was more than just an instrument of manipulation. The

6
psychological dimension referred to the integration of unconscious assumptions that guided

human thinking and action. Karl Mannheim aimed at a science of politics surveying and

assessing the various truths of a society.

Another sociological and socio-psychological trend, which affected the ideology concept

after the Second World War, focused on the function of ideologies for political and social action.

Ideologies were seen as instruments for managing societies and social processes. According to

this view, they function as the media for the socialization of individuals. They provide the

framework in which reality, and the huge amounts of information on which it is based, is

negotiated in processes of social work. They justify social conditions as they are or provide tools

to change them. They are thus endowed with crucial political functions. They order the social

world and provide action orientation. They legitimate and delegitimate political practices.

Concepts and ideologies are developed by social actors to establish interpretative frameworks

and to orient action. These concepts and ideologies produce interests and meanings. If key

ideological concepts like freedom, citizen, solidarity, class, etc. are treated as a discursive

category without essence rather than as an ontological reality, the implication is that ideological

languages are explained through the nature of politics instead of social structures. Ideologies

make sense of the world and in this respect; we cannot do without them, although they

do not represent an objective external reality. Therefore, political ideologies are necessary

elements in a democratic society, and should not be viewed simplistically as instruments of

totalitarian power or tools used by leaders to manipulate credulous masses. The framework for

understanding the contemporary ideological world is presented in terms of two basic concepts:

the hegemony or dominance of one ideology, and the resistances and opposition to those

7
dominant ideas, which take very different forms and show both the fragmentation of the

contemporary ideological scene as well as its vitality.

POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES IN THE WORLD

The following are the list of some major political ideologies that exist in the world and

they are:

1. Absolutism: This is the belief that a single ruler have control over every aspect of

government and the people’s lives. Varieties of titles are given to the rulers and they include

chieftain, king, shah, pharaoh, emperor, sultan, and prince. The ruler in this political ideology

is perceived as a god in human form in some cultures, while others see the ruler as having the

divine right of kings, that is, God choose the ruler to govern the rest. Many cultures practice

some form of Caesaropapism, which means that the ruler is both the head of religious

authority and governmental authority. Political philosophers that advocated for this political

ideology were Plato (a Greek philosopher), and Thomas Hobbes (an English Philosopher).

The emphasis of absolutism are as follows:

a) A clear-cut law of nature (or law of God): This talks about a power structure in which

some people have authority over others, that is, the superior rules the inferior. This

general view is called Elitism, or Elite theory.

b) A strong sense of order: This talks about how everything including the society should be

carefully structured. Disorder and chaos are generally considered dangerous.

c) The wisdom of traditional values and institutions: This talk about the acceptance of

traditional ideas and values, while new ideas are considered dangerous to the order of

things.

8
2. Anarchism: This is amongst the most difficult of the ideologies to identify and explain

precisely. The word ‘anarchy’ comes from the Greek word “anarkhos” and literally means

‘without rule’. In everyday language, anarchy implies chaos and disorder. Anarchists

themselves fiercely reject such associations. It was not until Pierre-Joseph Proudhon proudly

declared in what is Property? ([1840] 1970), ‘I am an anarchist’, that the word was clearly

associated with a positive and systematic set of political ideas. There are a number of

different formations of anarchism, many of which share the same principles, although in

different contexts, different principles take priority. For instance, anarchist communisms and

anarcha-feminisms reject gender discrimination, but anti-sexism is more central to most

anarcha-feminist practice than figuring in the selection of anarchist communist tactics. The

most significant, but contested, division is that between social anarchism on the one side

(broadly within the socialist political tradition) and that of individualist anarchism on

the other.

Anarchist ideology is defined by the central belief that political authority in all its

forms, and especially in the form of the state, is both evil and unnecessary. Anarchists

therefore look to the creation of a stateless society through the abolition of law and

government. In their view, the state is evil because, as a repository of sovereign, compulsory

and coercive authority, it is an offence against the principles of freedom and equality.

Principled opposition to certain forms of social hierarchy thus characterizes anarchism.

Scholars that advocated for this political ideology were Colin Ward, Paul Goodman, Todd

May, Newman, etc. The features of anarchy are anti-statism, natural order, anti-clericalism,

and economic freedom.

9
3. Communism: This is an extreme left-wing ideology based on the revolutionary socialist

teachings of Marx. It is based on collective ownership and a planned economy. Its motto is

that everyone should work to their capability and receive according to their needs.

Communist ideology developed a number of distinctive characteristics, which set it clearly

apart from democratic socialism. These characteristics are six in number and may be

regarded as the most essential defining features of Communist ideology, and they include the

necessity of the monopoly of power, democratic centralism, commitment to state ownership

of the means of production, a centrally planned economy, sense of belonging, and classless

and stateless society.

4. Conservatism: The term ‘conservative’ has a variety of meanings. It can refer to moderate

or cautious behaviour, a lifestyle that is conventional, even conformist, or a fear of or refusal

to change, particularly denoted by the verb ‘to conserve’. ‘Conservatism’ was first used in

the early nineteenth century to describe a distinctive political position or ideology. In the

USA, it implied a pessimistic view of public affairs. By the 1820s, the term was being used

to denote opposition to the principles and spirit of the 1789 French Revolution. In the UK,

‘Conservative’ gradually replaced ‘Tory’ as a title of the principal opposition party to the

Whigs, becoming the party’s official name in 1835. As a political ideology, conservatism is

defined by the desire to conserve, reflected in a resistance to, or at least a suspicion of,

change. However, while the desire to resist change may be the recurrent theme within

conservatism, what distinguishes conservatism from rival political creeds is the distinctive

way in which this position is upheld, in particular through support for tradition, a belief in

human imperfection, and the attempt to uphold the organic structure of society. The chief

distinction within conservatism is between traditional conservatism and the New Right.

10
 Traditional conservatism defends established institutions and values on the ground that they

safeguard the fragile ‘fabric of society’, giving security seeking human beings a sense of

stability and rootedness. The New Right is characterized by a belief in a strong but minimal

state, combining economic libertarianism with social authoritarianism, as represented by

neoliberalism and neo-conservatism.

Conservatism is neither simple pragmatism nor mere opportunism. It is founded on a

particular set of political beliefs about human beings, the societies they live in, and the

importance of a distinctive set of political values. As such, like liberalism and socialism, it

should rightfully be described as an ideology. The most significant of its central beliefs are

tradition, human imperfection society, human fallibility, property, stability, concreteness,

unique circumstances, hierarchy and authority.

5. Environmentalism (or Ecologism): The ecology movement developed in the public domain

from the 1970s. Environmentalism (or ecologism) is an ideology, which rejects the human-

centered core of other political theories, and emphasizes instead the priorities of the

biosphere. It sees humanity as only one part of an interrelated web of life, which incorporates

the living planet itself. Environmentalism stresses that current human economic and political

activity has come with an unacceptable 'price tag' of environmental damage and irreparable

harm. It advocates a radical directional change in humanity's view of 'progress' based on

economic expansionism and sees a 'higher morality' of living in harmony with nature,

reducing human consumption and accepting a consequent altering of living standards. As

environmental crises such as global warming and depletion of fossil fuels have become more

evident, environmental ideology has featured more significantly in political parties in

11
 Western nations, particularly in Australia, where the first 'green parties' emerged, and

Europe, where they have experienced significant electoral successes.

There are a number of problems in dealing with ecology as a political ideology,

which are tied to the comparative newness of the movement (comparative to ideologies such

as liberalism or socialism, which formed in the immediate post-French Revolution era). First,

there is the problem that some in the movement believe that ecology is not an ideology.

Ecology is seen to transcend ideology. Second, there is the troublesome relationship between

contemporary eco-philosophy and the political ideology and practical movement of ecology.

Finally, there is the issue of diversity within the movement, which raises the issue of

classifying ecological schools of thought. Thus the task is to go beyond ideology altogether

towards an ecological consciousness. The above view obviously has inspired some in the

movement.

6. Fascism: Fascism is derived from the Italian word “fasces”, meaning a bundle of rods with

an axe-blade protruding that signified the authority of magistrates in Imperial Rome. By

the 1890s, the word fascia was being used in Italy to refer to a political group or band,

usually of revolutionary socialists. It was not until Mussolini employed the term to describe

the paramilitary-armed squads he formed during and after the First World War, that fascism

acquired a clearly ideological meaning. The defining theme of fascism is the idea of an

organically unified national community, embodied in a belief in ‘strength through unity’. The

fascist ideal is that of the ‘new man’, a hero, motivated by duty, honour and self-sacrifice,

prepared to dedicate his life to the glory of his nation or race, and to give unquestioning

obedience to a supreme leader. Values such as rationalism, progress, freedom and equality

were thus overturned in the name of struggle, leadership, power, heroism and war. Fascism

12
 therefore has a strong ‘anti-character’: it is anti-rational, anti-liberal, anti-conservative, anti-

capitalist, anti-bourgeois, and anti-communist and so on.

Whereas liberalism, conservatism and socialism are nineteenth-century ideologies,

fascism is a child of the twentieth century, some would say specifically of the period between

the two world wars. In Fascist Italy, slogans such as ‘Believe, Obey, Fight’ and ‘Order,

Authority, Justice’ replaced the more familiar principles of the French Revolution, ‘Liberty,

Equality and Fraternity’. Although the major ideas and doctrines of fascism can be traced

back to the nineteenth century, they were fused together and shaped by World War I and its

aftermath, in particular by a potent mixture of war and revolution. Others, however, regard

fascism as an ever-present danger, seeing its roots in human psychology, or as Erich Fromm

(1984) called it, ‘the fear of freedom’. Political instability or an economic crisis could

therefore produce conditions in which fascism could revive. Fascism is a difficult ideology to

analyze, for at least two reasons. First, it is sometimes doubted if fascism can be regarded, in

any meaningful sense, as an ideology. Second, so complex has fascism been as a historical

phenomenon that it has been difficult to identify its core principles or a ‘fascist minimum’,

sometimes seen as generic fascism. The most significant features of fascism includes anti-

rationalism, struggle, socialism, ultra-nationalism, leadership and elitism.

7. Liberalism: The term ‘liberal’ has been in use since the fourteenth century but has had a

wide variety of meanings. The Latin liber referred to a class of free men; in other words, men

who were neither serfs nor slaves. It has meant generous, as in ‘liberal’ helpings of food and

drink; or, in reference to social attitudes, it has implied openness or open-mindedness. It also

came to be associated increasingly with the ideas of freedom and choice. The term

‘liberalism’, to denote a political allegiance, made its appearance much later: it was not used

13
 until the early part of the nineteenth century, being first employed in Spain in 1812. The

central theme of liberal ideology is a commitment to the individual and the desire to

construct a society in which people can satisfy their interests and achieve fulfilment. Liberals

believe that human beings are, first, individuals, endowed with reason. This implies that each

individual should enjoy the maximum possible freedom consistent with a like freedom for

all. However, although individuals are entitled to equal legal and political rights, they should

be rewarded in line with their talents and their willingness to work. Liberal societies are

organized politically around the twin principles of constitutionalism and consent, designed to

protect citizens from the danger of government tyranny. Nevertheless, there are significant

differences between classical liberalism and modern liberalism. Classical liberalism is

characterized by a belief in a ‘minimal’ state, whose function is limited to the maintenance of

domestic order and personal security. Modern liberalism, in contrast, accepts that the state

should help people to help themselves.

The moral and ideological stance of liberalism is embodied in a commitment to a

distinctive set of values and beliefs. Features of liberalism are individualism, freedom,

equality, rationalism, free market, toleration and justice. These basic characteristics of

liberalism have led liberals to argue in favor of a limited government, which draws its power

from the people. In practice, this has meant favoring a democratic government.

8. Nationalism: The anti-Jacobin French priest Augustin Barruel first used the term

‘nationalism’ in print in 1789 by. By the mid-nineteenth century, nationalism was widely

recognized as a political doctrine or movement. Nationalism can be defined broadly as the

belief that the nation is the central principle of political organization. As such, it is based on

two core assumptions. First, humankind is naturally divided into distinct nations and, second,

14
 the nation is the most appropriate, and perhaps only legitimate, unit of political rule.

However, nationalism is a complex and highly diverse ideological phenomenon. Although

nationalism has been associated with a principled belief in national self-determination, based

on the assumption that all nations are equal, it has also been used to defend traditional

institutions and the established social order, as well as to fuel programmes of war, conquest

and imperialism. Nationalism, moreover, has been linked to widely contrasting ideological

traditions, ranging from liberalism to fascism. To treat nationalism as an ideology in its own

right is to encounter at least three problems. The first is that nationalism is sometimes

classified as a political doctrine rather than a fully-fledged ideology. Second, nationalism is

sometimes portrayed as an essentially psychological phenomenon (usually as loyalty towards

one’s nation or dislike of other nations) instead of as a theoretical construct. Third,

nationalism has a schizophrenic political character. At different times, nationalism has been

progressive and reactionary, democratic and authoritarian, rational and irrational, and left

wing and right wing. The core features of nationalism are the nation, organic community,

self-determination, and culturalism.

There are different types of nationalism, such as liberal nationalism, conservative

nationalism, expansionist nationalism, anti-colonial and postcolonial nationalism; and this

became an issue central for all ideological discussion of nationalism during the twentieth

century.

9. Socialism: Socialism, as an ideology, has traditionally been defined by its opposition to

capitalism and the attempt to provide a more humane and socially worthwhile alternative. At

the core of socialism is a vision of human beings as social creatures united by their common

humanity. This highlights the degree to which individual identity is fashioned by social

15
 interaction and the membership of social groups and collective bodies. Socialists therefore

prefer cooperation to competition. The central, and some would say defining, value of

socialism is equality, especially social equality. Socialists believe that social equality is the

essential guarantee of social stability and cohesion, and that it promotes freedom, in the sense

that it satisfies material needs and provides the basis for personal development. Socialism,

however, contains a bewildering variety of divisions and rival traditions. These divisions

have been about both ‘means’ (how socialism should be achieved) and ‘ends’ (the nature of

the future socialist society.

One of the difficulties of analyzing socialism is that the term has been understood in

at least three distinctive ways. From one point of view, socialism is seen as an economic

model, usually linked to some form of collectivization and planning. Socialism, in this sense,

stands as an alternative to capitalism, the choice between these two qualitatively different

productive systems traditionally being seen as the most crucial of all economic questions.

The second approach treats socialism as an instrument of the labour movement. Socialism, in

this view, represents the interests of the working class and offers a programme through which

the workers can acquire political or economic power. Socialism is understood in a third and

broader sense as a political creed or ideology, characterized by a particular cluster of ideas,

values and theories. The most significant features of socialism are collectivism, central

economic planning, cooperation, economic equality, class politics, and public ownership

10. Social capitalism: This refers to the economic and social system in which the means of

production are social, creative, and intellectual assets. Social Capitalism can be defined as a

socially minded form of capitalism, where the goal is making social improvements, rather

than focusing on accumulating of capital in the classic capitalist sense. It is a utilitarian form

16
 of capitalism with a social purpose. Social capitalist is a person who invests in building social

capital. They build a network of relationships because they believe that social capital is the

most important factor to an organization or individual’s success. Social capitalism features

includes the following:

a) Non-profit companies and for-profit companies working to solve social or environmental

issues, or redirecting profit back to the public good.

b) Investment in companies/working for or with companies that are socially and/or

environmentally responsible and ethical, or at least those that do not create social or

environmental problems or exploit these for profit, and care for the public good.

c) Actively seeking out and purchasing products from companies that are socially and

environmentally ethical and care for the public good while boycotting companies that do

not.

d) Actively talking about and sharing information about ethical companies to encourage

others to engage with or buy from them, and about unethical companies to discourage

others from engaging with them.

e) Valuing people for more than their labour or profit, they can make a company. It is about

creating a positive empowering culture that allows people to be happy and reach their

potential.

f) Replacing short-term goals that result in exploitation with long-term goals that support

investment, growth, and sustainable prosperity.

11. Marxism: Marxism is a body of doctrine developed by Karl Marx and, to a lesser extent, by

Friedrich Engels in the mid-19th century. It originally consisted of three related ideas: a

philosophical anthropology, a theory of history, and an economic and political program.

17
 Marx distinguishes social classes based on two criteria: ownership of means of production

and control over the labour power of others. Following this criterion of class based on

property relations, Marx identified the social stratification of the capitalist mode of

production with the following social groups:

a) Proletariat: "the class of modern wage labourers who, having no means of production of

their own, are reduced to selling their labour power in order to live." The capitalist mode

of production establishes the conditions enabling the bourgeoisie to exploit the proletariat

because the workers' labour generates a surplus value greater than the workers' wages.

b) Bourgeoisie: those who "own the means of production" and buy labour power from the

proletariat, thus exploiting the proletariat. They subdivide as bourgeoisie and the petite

bourgeoisie. Petite bourgeoisie: are those who work and can afford to buy little labour

power i.e. small business owners, peasant property owners, trade workers and the like.

c) Lumpen proletariat: the outcasts of society such as the criminals, vagabonds, beggars, or

prostitutes without any political or class-consciousness. Having no interest in

international or national economic affairs, Marx claimed that this specific sub-division of

the proletariat would play no part in the eventual social revolution.

d) Landlords: a historically important social class who retain some wealth and power.

e) Peasantry and farmers: a scattered class incapable of organizing and effecting socio

economic change, most of whom would enter the proletariat while some would become

property owners.

12. Capitalism: Capitalism is an economic system in which private individuals or businesses

own capital goods. The production of goods and services is based on supply and demand in

the general market known as a market economy rather than through central planning known

18
 as a planned economy or command economy. The purest form of capitalism is free market or

laissez-faire capitalism. Here, private individuals are unrestrained. They may determine

where to invest, what to produce or sell, and at which prices to exchange goods and services.

The laissez-faire marketplace operates without checks or controls. Today, most countries

practice a mixed capitalist system that includes some degree of government regulation of

business and ownership of select industries. Functionally speaking, capitalism is one process

by which the problems of economic production and resource distribution might be resolved.

Instead of planning economic decisions through centralized political methods, as with

socialism or feudalism, economic planning under capitalism occurs via decentralized and

voluntary decisions. Critics of capitalism associate the economic system with social

inequality; unfair distribution of wealth and power; materialism; repression of workers and

trade unionists; social alienation; economic inequality; unemployment; and economic

instability. Many socialists consider capitalism to be irrational in that production and the

direction of the economy are unplanned, creating many inconsistencies and internal

contradictions. Capitalism and individual property rights have been associated with the

tragedy of the anti-commons where owners are unable to agree.

13. Aristocracy: As conceived by the Greek philosophers Plato (c. 428/427–348/347 BCE) and

Aristotle (384–322BCE), aristocracy means the rule of the few best the morally and

intellectually superior governing in the interest of the entire population. Such a form of

government differs from the rule of one (by a monarchy or by a tyrant), of the ambitious,

self-interested, or greedy few (oligarchy or timocracy), or of the many (democracy or

mobocracy). Because “the best” is an evaluative and subjective notion, it is difficult to

distinguish aristocratic from oligarchic or timocratic governments objectively. Because a

19
 monarchical system has its own aristocracy and because the people try to elect the best as

their rulers in democracies, an aristocratic element also is present in those regimes. For those

reasons, the term aristocracy often is used to mean the ruling upper layer of a stratified group.

Thus, the upper ranks of the government form the political aristocracy of the state; the

stratum of the highest religious dignitaries constitutes the aristocracy of the church; and the

richest captains of industry and finance constitute an aristocracy of economic wealth.

14. Autocracy: An autocracy is a system of government in which a single person or party (the

autocrat) possesses supreme and absolute power. The decisions of this autocrat are subject to

neither external legal restraints nor regularized mechanisms of popular control (except

perhaps for the implicit threat of a coup d'état or mass insurrection). Both totalitarian and

military dictatorship are often identified with, but need not be, an autocracy. Totalitarianism

is a system where the state strives to control every aspect of life and civil society. A supreme

leader, making it autocratic, can head it but it can also have a collective leadership such as a

commune, junta, or single political party.

15. Democracy: Democracy is a form of government in which the people have the authority to

choose their governing legislation. Who people are and how authority is shared among them

are core issues for democratic development and constitution. Some cornerstones of these

issues are freedom of assembly and speech, inclusiveness and equality, membership, consent,

voting, right to life and minority rights. Generally, there are two types of democracy: direct

democracy (where the people directly deliberate and decide on legislature) and representative

democracy (where the people elect representatives to deliberate and decide on legislature,

such as in parliamentary or presidential democracy). Liquid democracy combines elements of

these direct democracy and representative democracy. The most common decision-making

20
 approach of democracies has been the majority rule, while others are supermajority and

consensus.

16. Egalitarianism: Egalitarianism is a trend of thought in political philosophy. It relies on

equality of some sort, that is: people should get the same, or be treated the same, or be treated

as equals, in some respect. Egalitarianism may focus on income inequality and distribution,

which are ideas that influenced the development of various economic and political systems.

Karl Marx used egalitarianism as the starting point in the creation of his Marxist philosophy,

and John Locke considered egalitarianism when he proposed that individuals had natural

rights. An egalitarian might rather be one who maintains that people ought to be treated as

equals (as possessing equal fundamental worth and dignity and as equally morally

considerable). Egalitarianism can be instrumental or non-instrumental. The instrumental

egalitarian values equality as a means to some independently specifiable goal; the non-

instrumental egalitarian values equality for its own sake—as an end, or as partly constitutive

of some end. Philosophers break down egalitarianism into several types and they are

economic egalitarianism, legal egalitarianism, and social egalitarianism.

17. Imperialism: Imperialism, sometimes called empire building, is the policy of a nation to

forcefully impose its rule or authority over other nations. Typically involving the unprovoked

use of military force, imperialism has historically been viewed as morally unacceptable. As a

result, accusations of imperialism, whether factual or not, are often used in propaganda

denouncing a nation’s foreign policy. Imperialism is the forceful extension of a nation's

authority by territorial conquest or by establishing economic and political domination of

other nations that are not its colonies. In various forms, imperialism may be as old as

humanity. Throughout recorded history, imperialism has been justified or at least rationalized

21
 under one or more of five general theories and they are Conservative economic theory,

Liberal economic theory, Marxist-Leninist economic theory, Political theory, and the warrior

class theory.

18. Maoism: Also known as Mao Zedong Thought. It is the Chinese communist variety of

Marxism–Leninism that Mao Zedong developed for realizing a socialist revolution in the

agricultural, pre-industrial society of the People's Republic of China. The philosophic

difference between Maoism and Marxism–Leninism is that the peasantry are the

revolutionary vanguard in pre-industrial societies, rather than the proletariat. Maoism as a

political ideology represents Mao's theories and methodologies about how China and the

world should be transformed in revolutionary ways. Three important features distinguished

Mao's concept of revolution from other revolutionary theories in the tradition of Marxism-

Leninism. The first is characterized by a unique notion of permanentness in time and

unlimitedness in space. Secondly, Mao's perception of revolution reflected the profoundly

voluntarist belief that human consciousness, rather than the material conditions of society,

would determine the orientation of historical development. Third, and closely connected with

the above two features, the Maoist notion of revolution put greater emphasis on destruction

than on construction.

19. Oligarchy: An oligarchy is a power structure that allows a few businesses, families, or

individuals to rule. Throughout history, oligarchies have often been tyrannical, relying on

public obedience or oppression to exist. Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as meaning

rule by the rich, for which another term commonly used today is plutocracy. They have

enough power to turn the country to benefit them to the exclusion of other member, that is,

nobility, wealth, education or corporate, religious, political, or military control may

22
 distinguish them. They maintain their power through their relationships with each other.

Oligarchy is from the Greek word “oligarkhes” meaning, "few governing." They become an

organized minority as opposed to the unorganized majority. They groom protégés who share

their values and goals. It becomes more difficult for the average person to break into the

group of elites. Despite the spread of democracy in the 20th century, oligarchies continued to

exist, including in countries that were nominally democratic in form. Among industrialized

countries that have been identified as oligarchies are Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union

and China since that country’s embrace of capitalism in the late 1970s.

20. Populism: Populism refers to a range of political stances that emphasize the idea of "the

people" and often juxtapose this group against "the elite". The term developed in the 19th

century and has been applied to various politicians, parties, and movements since that time,

although has rarely been chosen as a self-description. In the words of the leading populism

scholar Cas Mudde, it is “a thin-centered ideology that considers society to be ultimately

separated into two homogenous and antagonistic camps, ‘the pure people’ versus ‘the corrupt

elite’”. The term populism can designate either democratic or authoritarian movements.

Populism is typically critical of political representation and anything that mediates the

relation between the people and their leader or government. In its most democratic form,

populism seeks to defend the interest and maximize the power of ordinary citizens, through

reform rather than revolution.

21. Theocracy: Theocracy (literally ‘rule by God’) is the principle that religious authority should

prevail over political authority. A theocracy is therefore a regime in which government posts

are filled based on people’s position in the religious hierarchy. Theocratic rule is illiberal in

two senses. First, it violates the public/private divide, in that it takes religious rules and

23
 precepts to be the guiding principles of both personal life and political conduct. Second, it

invests political authority with potentially unlimited power because, as temporal power

derived from spiritual wisdom, it cannot be based on popular consent, or be properly

constrained within a constitutional framework. Strict theocratic rule is therefore a form of

autocracy, while limited theocratic rule may co-exist with democracy and constitutionalism.

22. Totalitarianism: This indicates a certain type of society (for example, Soviet Russia or Nazi

Germany) where the state, governed by one party, regulates every aspect of people’s public

and private lives. Totalitarianism is a form of government that theoretically permits no

individual freedom and that seeks to subordinate all aspects of individual life to the authority

of the state. Italian dictator Benito Mussolini coined the term “totalitario” in the early 1920s

to characterize the new fascist state of Italy, which he further described as “all within the

state, none outside the state, and none against the state.” By the beginning of World War II,

totalitarian had become synonymous with absolute and oppressive single-party government.

Other modern examples of totalitarian states include the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin,

Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler, the People’s Republic of China under Mao Zedong, and

North Korea under the Kim dynasty. Totalitarianism is characterized by strong central rule

that attempts to control and direct all aspects of individual life through coercion and

repression. Historical examples of such centralized totalitarian rule include the Mauryan

dynasty of India (c. 321–c. 185 BCE), the Qin dynasty of China (221–207 BCE), and the

reign of Zulu chief Shaka (c. 1816–28). Nazi Germany (1933–45) and the Soviet Union

during the Stalin era (1924–53) were the first examples of decentralized or popular

totalitarianism, in which the state achieved overwhelming popular support for its leadership.

24
 Totalitarianism is often distinguished from dictatorship, despotism, or tyranny by its

supplanting of all political institutions with new ones and its sweeping away of all legal,

social, and political traditions. The totalitarian state pursues some special goal, such as

industrialization or conquest, to the exclusion of all others. All resources are directed toward

its attainment, regardless of the cost. Whatever might further the goal is supported; whatever

might foil the goal is rejected. This obsession spawns an ideology that explains everything in

terms of the goal, rationalizing all obstacles that may arise and all forces that may contend

with the state.

23. Social democracy: Social democracy is a political ideology that originally advocated a

peaceful evolutionary transition of society from capitalism to socialism using established

political processes. In the second half of the 20th century, there emerged a more moderate

version of the doctrine, which generally espoused state regulation, rather than state

ownership, of the means of production and extensive social welfare programs. Based on

19th-century socialism and the tenets of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, social democracy

shares common ideological roots with communism but eschews its militancy and

totalitarianism. Social democracy was originally known as revisionism because it represented

a change in basic Marxist doctrine, primarily in the former’s repudiation of the use of

revolution to establish a socialist society.

The social democratic movement grew out of the efforts of August Bebel, who with

Wilhelm Liebknecht co-founded the Social Democratic Workers’ Party in 1869 and then

effected the merger of their party with the General German Workers’ Union in 1875 to form

what came to be called the Social Democratic Party of Germany (Sozialdemokratische Partei

25
 Deutschlands). Bebel imbued social democracy with the belief that socialism must be

installed through lawful means rather than by force.

24. Christian democracy: Christian democracy is a political ideology that emerged in 19th

century Europe under the influence of Catholic social teaching. Christian democratic political

ideology advocates for a commitment to social market principles and qualified

interventionism. It was conceived as a combination of modern democratic ideas and

traditional Christian values, incorporating the social teachings espoused by the Catholic,

Lutheran, Reformed, and Pentecostal traditions in various parts of the world. After World

War II, the Protestant and Catholic movements of the Social Gospel and Neo-Thomism,

respectively, played a role in shaping Christian democracy. Christian democracy continues to

be influential in Europe and Latin America, although it is also present in other parts of the

world. In practice, Christian democracy is often considered center-right on cultural, social

and moral issues, and is a supporter of social conservatism, but it is considered center-left

"with respect to economic and labor issues, civil rights, and foreign policy" as well as the

environment. Specifically with regard to its fiscal stance, Christian democracy advocates a

social market economy. Worldwide, many Christian democratic parties are members of the

Centrist Democrat International and some of the International Democrat Union. Examples of

major Christian democratic parties include the Christian Democratic Union of Germany, the

Austrian People's Party, Ireland's Fine Gael, the Christian Democratic Party of Chile, the

Aruban People's Party, the Dutch Christian Democratic Appeal, the Christian Democratic

People's Party of Switzerland and the Spanish People's Party. Today, many European

Christian democratic parties are affiliated with the European People's Party. Those with soft

Eurosceptic views in comparison with the pro-European EPP are members of the Alliance of

26
 Conservatives and Reformists in Europe, or the more right-wing European Christian Political

Movement. Many Christian democratic parties in the Americas are affiliated with the

Christian Democrat Organization of America.

25. Green ideology: Green politics, or eco-politics, is a political ideology that aims to foster an

ecologically sustainable society rooted in environmentalism, nonviolence, social justice and

grassroots democracy. It began taking shape in the western world in the 1970s; since then

Green parties have developed and established themselves in many countries around the globe

and have achieved some electoral success. The political term "green" was used initially in

relation to die Grünen (German for "the Greens"), a green party formed in the late 1970s. The

term "political ecology" is sometimes used in academic circles, but there it has come to

represent an interdisciplinary field of study, as the academic discipline offers wide-ranging

studies integrating ecological social sciences with political economy in topics such as

degradation and marginalization, environmental conflict, conservation and control and

environmental identities and social movements. Supporters of green politics share many

ideas with the ecology, conservation, environmentalism, feminist and peace movements. In

addition to democracy and ecological issues, green politics is concerned with civil liberties,

social justice, nonviolence, sometimes variants of localism and tends to support social

progressivism. Green party platforms are largely considered left in the political spectrum.

The green ideology has connections with various other eco-centric political ideologies,

including eco-socialism, eco-anarchism and eco-feminism, but to what extent can these be

seen, as forms of Green politics is a matter of debate.

26. Republicanism: The republican tradition occupies a signal place in the Euro-Atlantic

political heritage. Centered round ideals of political liberty, self-government, citizenship,

27
 equality, and virtue, it migrated from its ancient Athenian and Roman roots to flourish in

medieval and Renaissance Europe. It provided a powerful language of political mobilization

for French and American revolutionaries, and for the anti-imperial, anti-monarchical, and

anti-capitalist struggles, which punctuated the nineteenth century. To some extent,

republicanism was a victim of its own success. From the 1980s onwards, the fortunes of

republican theory were dramatically reversed. As historians of political ideas unburied the

republican roots of the Euro-Atlantic political tradition, American constitutional lawyers,

German critical theorists, French public intellectuals, British social democrats, Italian

leftwing patriots, and Spanish reformers all began to talk the language of republicanism, in

self-conscious opposition to the dominant liberal approach to politics. The republican revival

has been spectacular and multi-faceted. It has affected real-world political life as well as

academic discussions, across the various fields of history, law, philosophy, criminology, and

political science. After the relative demise of socialism, communitarianism, and various

postmodern alternatives, republicanism is now widely seen as the most plausible competitor

(or interlocutor) to liberalism. Many liberals have expressed the view that (either much like

the older republican movement) neo-republicanism can be incorporated into liberalism, and

is therefore redundant; or it has deeply illiberal tendencies, and is therefore unappealing.

Republicanism is both an academic theory and a public ideology, and it is at the interaction

of these two levels of analysis that its most fruitful contribution to the study of politics can be

found.

27. Feminism: As a political term, ‘feminism’ was a twentieth-century invention and has only

been a familiar part of everyday language since the 1960s. ‘Feminist’ was first used in the

nineteenth century as a medical term to describe either the feminization of men or the

28
masculinization of women. In modern usage, feminism is invariably linked to the women’s

movement and the attempt to advance the social role of women. Feminist ideology is defined

by two basic beliefs that: women are disadvantaged because of their sex; and that this

disadvantage can and should be overthrown. In this way, feminists have highlighted what

they see as a political relationship between the sexes, the supremacy of men and the

subjection of women in most, if not all, societies. In viewing gender divisions as ‘political’,

feminists challenged a ‘mobilization of bias’s that has traditionally operated within political

thought, by which generations of male thinkers, unwilling to examine the privileges and

power their sex had enjoyed, had succeeded in keeping the role of women off the political

agenda. Nevertheless, feminism has also been characterized by a diversity of views and

political positions. The women’s movement, for instance, has pursued goals that range from

the achievement of female suffrage and an increase in the number of women in elite positions

in public life, to the legalization of abortion, and the ending of female circumcision.

Similarly, feminists have embraced both revolutionary and reformist political strategies, and

feminist theory has both drawn on established political traditions and values, notably

liberalism and socialism, and, in the form of radical feminism, rejected conventional political

ideas and concepts. However, feminist ideology has long since ceased to be confined to these

‘core’ traditions, modern feminist thought focusing on new issues and characterized,

generally, by a more radical engagement with the politics of difference.

However, the emergent ideology of feminism was a crosscutting ideology,

encompassing, from the outset, three broad traditions: liberal feminism; Marxist or socialist

feminism; and radical feminism. In addition, the ‘core’ feminist traditions each contain rival

tendencies and have spawned hybrid or ‘dual-system’ feminisms (such as the attempt to

29
 blend radical feminism with certain Marxist ideas), and new feminist traditions have

emerged, particularly since the 1980s. It is thus easy to dismiss feminism as hopelessly

fragmented, to argue that it is characterized more by disagreement than by agreement. A

range of ‘common ground’ themes can nevertheless be identified within feminism and they

are redefining ‘the political’, patriarchy, sex and gender, and equality and difference.

28. Islamism: Islam is not merely a religion. It is a total and complete way of life, providing

guidance in every sphere of human existence, that is, individual and social, material and

moral, legal and cultural, economic and political, national and international. In Islam, politics

and religion are two sides of the same coin. However, the notion of a fusion between Islam

and politics has assumed a more radical and intense character due to the rise, since the early

twentieth century, of ‘Islamism’ (also called ‘political Islam’, ‘radical Islam’ or ‘activist

Islam’). Although only a small minority of Muslims worldwide embraces its ideas, Islamism

has had a dramatically disproportionate impact. Its central belief is in the construction of an

‘Islamic state’, usually viewed as a state based on divine Islamic law, the sharia. As such,

Islamism extracts a political programme from the religious principles and ideals of Islam. A

distinction is therefore usually drawn between the ideology of Islamism and the faith of

Islam, although the relationship between Islamism and Islam is deeply contested. A variety

of developments contributed to the rise of Islamism, it includes the following:

a) The end of colonialism in the early post-1945 period brought little benefit to the Arab

world, both because Middle Eastern regimes tended to be inefficient, corrupt and

dictatorial, and because traditional imperialism (see p. 166) was succeeded by neo-

imperialism, particularly as US influence expanded in the region.

30
b) The protracted Arab–Israeli conflict, and especially the 1967 Six-Day War, which led to

the seizure by Israel of the Occupied Territories and greatly increased the number of

Palestinian refugees, sparked disillusionment with secular Arab nationalism and Arab

socialism, and created opportunities for religiously based forms of politics.

c) The 1973 oil crisis boosted the economic strength and ideological importance of Saudi

Arabia and the Gulf states, allowing them to finance the spread of their distinctive brand

of fundamentalist Islam, Wahhabism, across the Arab world.

d) The war in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, during 1979–89, led to the growth of

the Mujahideen, a loose collection of religiously inspired resistance groups, out of which

developed a collection of new jihadi groups, the most important of which was al-Qaeda,

founded in 1988.

e) The 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq fomented bitter sectarian rivalry between Sunni and

Shia (or Shi’ite) Muslims, which both spread across the region and contributed to the

emergence of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham or ISIS (also called Islamic State (IS)

or Daesh), whose influence later expanded due to the seemingly intractable civil war in

Syria.

Islamists view religion as a body of ‘essential’ and unchallengeable principles, which

dictate not only personal conduct but also the organization of social, economic and political

life. Religion cannot and should not be confined to the ‘private’ sphere, but finds its highest

and proper expression in the politics of popular mobilization and social regeneration. The

most significant themes in Islamism are the fundamentalism and modernity Islamism and

Islam, revolt against the West, the Islamic state, and jihadism.

31
29. Multiculturalism: Although multicultural societies have long existed – examples include the

Ottoman Empire, which reached its peak in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries,

and the USA from the early nineteenth century onwards – the term ‘multiculturalism’ is of

relatively recent origin. It was first used in 1965 in Canada to describe a distinctive approach

to tackling the issue of cultural diversity. In 1971, multiculturalism, or ‘multiculturalism

within a bilingual framework’, was formally adopted as public policy in Canada, providing

the basis for the introduction of the Multiculturalism Act in 1988. Australia also officially

declared itself multicultural and committed itself to multiculturalism in the early 1970s.

Multiculturalism is more an arena for ideological debate than an ideology in its own right. As

an arena for debate, it encompasses a range of views about the implications of growing

cultural diversity and, in particular, about how cultural difference can be reconciled with

civic unity. Its key theme is therefore diversity within unity.

A multiculturalist stance implies a positive endorsement of communal diversity,

based on the right of different cultural groups to recognition and respect. In this sense, it

acknowledges the importance of beliefs, values and ways of life in establishing a sense of

self-worth for individuals and groups alike. However, there are a number of competing

models of a multicultural society, which draw on, variously, the ideas of liberalism, pluralism

and cosmopolitanism. On the other hand, the multiculturalist stance has also been deeply

controversial, and has given rise to a range of objections and criticisms. The term

‘multiculturalism’ has been used in a variety of ways, both descriptive and normative. As a

descriptive term, it refers to cultural diversity that arises from the existence within a society

of two or more groups whose beliefs and practices generate a distinctive sense of collective

identity. As a normative term, multiculturalism implies a positive endorsement, even

32
 celebration, of communal diversity, typically based on either the right of different cultural

groups to respect and recognition or to the alleged benefits to the larger society of moral and

cultural diversity. The three main models of multiculturalism are liberalism multiculturalism,

pluralist multiculturalism, and cosmopolitan multiculturalism. The most significant themes

within multiculturalism are politics of recognition, minority rights, diversity, and culture and

identity.

30. Fundamentalism: The words ‘fundamentalism’ and ‘fundamentalist’ are products of the late

nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Fundamentalism has often made its public mark by

attempting to set the social and political agenda and by defining what should carry weight in

public discourse. It has done this by claiming to represent true Islam (or alternatively true

Judaism or true Christianity). This notion of true Islam (or true Judaism or ‘born again’

Christianity) is sometimes set against a conception of traditional Islam (or Judaism or

Christianity), which has either become too accommodating and accepting of secular

ideologies, or has simply lost the fundamentals of the faith. The conceptual issues about the

fundamentalist view of religion are as follows:

a) Certain scholars contend that Abrahamic monotheisms are more prone to fundamentalism

than polytheisms.

b) Concerns on literalism and inerrancy (indicating freedom from any error).

c) Distinctive way the central texts are often read by fundamentalists, that is, whether it is a

literalist reading or a drawing out of the inerrant word of God.

d) It is not an individualist, private or subjective practice.

33
REFERENCES

Adams, Ian (2001). Political Ideology Today. Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-0-7190-

6020-5.

Althusser, L. (1969). For Marx. London: Penguin Books.

Anderson, P. (1980). Arguments within English Marxism. London: Verso.

Andre Munro (2019). Populism: Political Program or Movement. https://www.britannica.com

Badiou, A. (2001). Ethics: An Essay on the Understanding of Evil. London: Verso.

Barrington Moore, Jr, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the

Making of the Modern World (1966). More worldwide comparisons.

Behan, B. (1991). With Breast Expanded. London: Select Books.

Benton, T. (1984). The Rise and fall of Structural Marxism: Althusser and His Influence.

London: Macmillan.

Bernard D/Jello (2009). What is Maoism? https://monthlyreview.org/commentary/what-is-

maoism/

Blackledge, P. (2005). Freedom, Desire and Revolution: Alasdair MacIntyre’s Early Marxist

Ethics.

Brian, D. (2019, December 15) totalitarianism. Retrieved from www.britannica.com

Britannica (2015, February 14) social democracy. Retrieved from www.britannica.com

Destutt de Tracy, Antoine. 1804–15. Éléments d’Idéologie. Paris: Didot.

Frederic Cople Jaher (ed.), the Rich, the Well Born and the Powerful (1973). Wide chronological

range of informative essays.

Freeden, M. (1996) Ideologies and Political Theory: A Conceptual Approach. Oxford and New

York: Oxford University Press.

Jack Goody, Joan Thirsk, and E. P. Thompson (eds.), Family and Inheritance: Rural Society in

Western Europe, 1200–1800 (1976). Contains essays of first-rate importance.

Jian Chen (2001). Mao's China and the Cold War. University of North Carolina Press. Chapel

Hill, N. C.

Jonathan Powis, Aristocracy (1984). Brief, elegant, and thoughtful pioneering synthesis.

Laura BrunellElinor Burkett (2009, June 12) feminism.

Michael Mann, The Sources of Social Power (2 vols, 1986–93). Worldwide comparisons.

Mohan Ram (1971). Maoism in India. New York: Barnes & Noble.

Mortimer N. S. Sellers. American Republicanism: Roman Ideology in the United States

Constitution. (New York University Press, 1994. p. 71.)

Mudde, Cas (2004). "The Populist Zeitgeist". Government and Opposition. 39 (4): 541–63. Doi:

10.1111/j.1477-7053.2004.00135.x

Richard Arneson (2013). Egalitarianism. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/egalitarianism/

Robert Lacey, Aristocrats (1983). Book of a popular television series on rich surviving families.

Robert Longley (2019). What Is Imperialism? Definition and Historical Perspective.

https://www.thoughtco.com/imperialism-definition-4587402
Roemer, John (2008). "Socialism vs Social Democracy as Income-Equalizing Institutions".

Eastern Economic Journal. 34 (1): 14–26.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica (2019). Imperialism.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica (2017). Oligarchy.

Tindall, George (1966). A Populist Reader. New York: Harper Torchbooks.

Uri Friedmam (2017). What is a Populist?

Vallentyne, P. (2005). "Of mice and men: Equality and animals". Journal of Ethics. 9: 403–433.

Whibley, Leonard (1896). Greek oligarchies, their character and organizations. G. P. Putnam's

Sons.

Will Kenton (2019). Egalitarianism. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/egalitarianism.asp.