according to the text, what is the goal of politics?

Activities associated with group decisions

Politics (from Greek: Πολιτικά, politiká , 'affairs of the cities') is the set of activities that are associated with making decisions in groups, or other forms of ability relations amidst individuals, such as the distribution of resources or status. The branch of social scientific discipline that studies politics and government is referred to as political science.

It may be used positively in the context of a "political solution" which is compromising and irenic,^[1] or descriptively as "the art or science of government", but also often carries a negative connotation.^[2] For case, abolitionist Wendell Phillips declared that "nosotros practice non play politics; anti-slavery is no one-half-jest with us."^[three] The concept has been divers in various ways, and different approaches accept fundamentally differing views on whether information technology should be used extensively or limitedly, empirically or normatively, and on whether conflict or co-performance is more essential to information technology.

A variety of methods are deployed in politics, which include promoting ane'due south own political views among people, negotiation with other political subjects, making laws, and exercising force, including warfare against adversaries.^[iv] ^[v] ^[6] ^[7] ^[viii] Politics is exercised on a broad range of social levels, from clans and tribes of traditional societies, through mod local governments, companies and institutions upwardly to sovereign states, to the international level. In modern nation states, people ofttimes form political parties to represent their ideas. Members of a party often agree to take the same position on many issues and hold to support the same changes to law and the aforementioned leaders. An ballot is ordinarily a competition between dissimilar parties.

A political system is a framework which defines adequate political methods within a order. The history of political thought can be traced back to early on antiquity, with seminal works such equally Plato's Democracy and Aristotle'southward Politics in the West, and Confucius'southward political manuscripts and Chanakya's Arthashastra in the Eastward.^[9]

Etymology [edit]

The English politics has its roots in the proper name of Aristotle's classic work, Politiká, which introduced the Greek term politiká ( Πολιτικά , 'affairs of the cities'). In the mid-15th century, Aristotle's composition would be rendered in Early Mod English equally Polettiques [sic],^[a] ^[10] which would get Politics in Modern English.

The singular politic commencement attested in English in 1430, coming from Middle French politique —itself taking from politicus ,^[11] a Latinization of the Greek πολιτικός ( politikos ) from πολίτης ( polites , 'citizen') and πόλις ( polis , 'city').^[12]

Definitions [edit]

In the view of Harold Lasswell, politics is "who gets what, when, how."^[13]
For David Easton, it is virtually the authoritative allotment of values for a society."^[14]
To Vladimir Lenin, "politics is the most concentrated expression of economic science."^[15]
Bernard Crick argued that "politics is a distinctive course of dominion whereby people human activity together through institutionalized procedures to resolve differences, to deactivate diverse interests and values and to brand public policies in the pursuit of mutual purposes."^[16]
Co-ordinate to Adrian Leftwich "Politics comprises all the activities of co-operation, negotiation and conflict within and betwixt societies, whereby people go almost organizing the utilise, production or distribution of human, natural and other resources in the class of the production and reproduction of their biological and social life."^[17]
Politics is the sphere of activeness involved in running a state. According to Max Weber, the "land can be defined equally a human community that successfully claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical forcefulness within a given territory".
In the view of Manjunath Hegde, politics is " the ability, to rule the people."^{[ citation needed ]}

Approaches [edit]

There are several ways in which budgeted politics has been conceptualized.

Extensive and limited [edit]

Adrian Leftwich has differentiated views of politics based on how all-encompassing or limited their perception of what accounts every bit 'political' is.^[eighteen] The extensive view sees politics as present beyond the sphere of human social relations, while the limited view restricts it to certain contexts. For example, in a more restrictive way, politics may be viewed as primarily about governance,^[19] while a feminist perspective could argue that sites which have been viewed traditionally every bit non-political, should indeed be viewed as political too.^[20] This latter position is encapsulated in the slogan the personal is political, which disputes the distinction betwixt individual and public issues. Instead, politics may be defined by the use of power, as has been argued past Robert A. Dahl.^[21]

Moralism and realism [edit]

Some perspectives on politics view information technology empirically every bit an exercise of power, while others encounter it as a social part with a normative basis.^[22] This distinction has been called the difference between political moralism and political realism . ^[23] For moralists, politics is closely linked to ethics, and is at its extreme in utopian thinking.^[23] For instance, according to Hannah Arendt, the view of Aristotle was that "to exist political…meant that everything was decided through words and persuasion and not through violence;"^[24] while according to Bernard Crick "[p]olitics is the fashion in which free societies are governed. Politics is politics and other forms of rule are something else."^[25] In contrast, for realists, represented by those such as Niccolò Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, and Harold Lasswell, politics is based on the use of power, irrespective of the ends being pursued.^[26] ^[23]

Disharmonize and co-operation [edit]

Agonism argues that politics essentially comes down to conflict between conflicting interests. Political scientist Elmer Schattschneider argued that "at the root of all politics is the universal linguistic communication of conflict,"^[27] while for Carl Schmitt the essence of politics is the stardom of 'friend' from foe'.^[28] This is in direct dissimilarity to the more than co-operative views of politics by Aristotle and Crick. Still, a more mixed view betwixt these extremes is provided by Irish political scientist Michael Laver, who noted that:

Politics is most the characteristic blend of conflict and co-operation that can be found so frequently in human interactions. Pure conflict is war. Pure co-operation is true love. Politics is a mixture of both.^[29]

History [edit]

The Greek philosopher Aristotle criticized many of Plato's ideas as impracticable, but, like Plato, he admires balance and moderation and aims at a harmonious city under the rule of law^[30]

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

Prehistoric [edit]

Frans de Waal argued that chimpanzees appoint in politics through "social manipulation to secure and maintain influential positions."^[31] Early human forms of social organization—bands and tribes—lacked centralized political structures.^[32] These are sometimes referred to equally stateless societies.

Early states [edit]

In ancient history, civilizations did non have definite boundaries as states have today, and their borders could be more than accurately described equally frontiers. Early on dynastic Sumer, and early dynastic Arab republic of egypt were the start civilizations to ascertain their borders. Moreover, up to the 12th century, many people lived in non-state societies. These range from relatively egalitarian bands and tribes to complex and highly stratified chiefdoms.

State germination [edit]

There are a number of different theories and hypotheses regarding early state formation that seek generalizations to explain why the land developed in some places but not others. Other scholars believe that generalizations are unhelpful and that each case of early on state germination should be treated on its own.^[33]

Voluntary theories contend that diverse groups of people came together to form states every bit a issue of some shared rational involvement.^[34] The theories largely focus on the development of agriculture, and the population and organizational pressure that followed and resulted in country formation. One of the most prominent theories of early and primary state formation is the hydraulic hypothesis, which contends that the country was a outcome of the need to build and maintain large-calibration irrigation projects.^[35]

Conflict theories of state germination regard conflict and potency of some population over another population equally fundamental to the germination of states.^[34] In dissimilarity with voluntary theories, these arguments believe that people exercise not voluntarily concur to create a state to maximize benefits, but that states grade due to some form of oppression past one group over others. Some theories in turn fence that warfare was critical for land germination.^[34]

Aboriginal history [edit]

The first states of sorts were those of early on dynastic Sumer and early dynastic Egypt, which arose from the Uruk period and Predynastic Egypt respectively around approximately 3000 BCE.^[36] Early dynastic Arab republic of egypt was based around the Nile River in the north-e of Africa, the kingdom's boundaries beingness based around the Nile and stretching to areas where oases existed.^[37] Early dynastic Sumer was located in southern Mesopotamia with its borders extending from the Persian Gulf to parts of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers.^[36]

Egyptians, Romans, and the Greeks were the first people known to take explicitly formulated a political philosophy of the land, and to have rationally analyzed political institutions. Prior to this, states were described and justified in terms of religious myths.^[38]

Several important political innovations of classical antiquity came from the Greek city-states (polis) and the Roman Republic. The Greek city-states earlier the quaternary century granted citizenship rights to their gratuitous population; in Athens these rights were combined with a directly autonomous form of government that was to take a long afterlife in political idea and history.^{[ citation needed ]}

Modern states [edit]

Women voter outreach (1935)

The Peace of Westphalia (1648) is considered by political scientists to be the starting time of the modern international system,^[39] ^[40] ^[41] in which external powers should avoid interfering in another country's domestic diplomacy.^[42] The principle of non-interference in other countries' domestic affairs was laid out in the mid-18th century by Swiss jurist Emer de Vattel.^[43] States became the chief institutional agents in an interstate organization of relations. The Peace of Westphalia is said to accept ended attempts to impose supranational authority on European states. The "Westphalian" doctrine of states as independent agents was bolstered past the ascension in 19th century thought of nationalism, under which legitimate states were assumed to correspond to nations—groups of people united past language and civilisation.^[44]

In Europe, during the 18th century, the archetype non-national states were the multinational empires: the Austrian Empire, Kingdom of French republic, Kingdom of Republic of hungary,^[45] the Russian Empire, the Castilian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and the British Empire. Such empires also existed in Asia, Africa, and the Americas; in the Muslim world, immediately afterward the decease of Muhammad in 632, Caliphates were established, which developed into multi-ethnic trans-national empires.^[46] The multinational empire was an absolute monarchy ruled by a king, emperor or sultan. The population belonged to many ethnic groups, and they spoke many languages. The empire was dominated by 1 ethnic group, and their language was usually the linguistic communication of public administration. The ruling dynasty was normally, but not always, from that group. Some of the smaller European states were not so ethnically diverse, but were likewise dynastic states, ruled by a royal house. A few of the smaller states survived, such equally the independent principalities of Liechtenstein, Andorra, Monaco, and the republic of San Marino.

Near theories come across the nation land equally a 19th-century European phenomenon, facilitated by developments such as land-mandated education, mass literacy, and mass media. However, historians^{[ who? ]} also note the early emergence of a relatively unified state and identity in Portugal and the Dutch Republic.^[47] Scholars such as Steven Weber, David Woodward, Michel Foucault, and Jeremy Blackness have advanced the hypothesis that the nation land did not arise out of political ingenuity or an unknown undetermined source, nor was it an blow of history or political invention.^[48] ^[34] ^[49] Rather, the nation country is an inadvertent byproduct of 15th-century intellectual discoveries in political economy, capitalism, mercantilism, political geography, and geography^[l] ^[51] combined with cartography^[52] ^[53] and advances in map-making technologies.^[54]

Some nation states, such as Federal republic of germany and Italia, came into existence at least partly as a result of political campaigns by nationalists, during the 19th century. In both cases, the territory was previously divided among other states, some of them very small. Liberal ideas of free trade played a function in German language unification, which was preceded past a customs wedlock, the Zollverein. National self-determination was a key aspect of United States President Woodrow Wilson'southward Xiv Points, leading to the dissolution of the Austria-hungary and the Ottoman Empire after the First Earth War, while the Russian Empire became the Soviet Union subsequently the Russian Ceremonious War. Decolonization atomic number 82 to the creation of new nation states in place of multinational empires in the Third World.

Globalization [edit]

Political globalization began in the 20th century through intergovernmental organizations and supranational unions. The League of Nations was founded later on World War I, and after World War Two it was replaced by the Un. Various international treaties have been signed through information technology. Regional integration has been pursued by the African Wedlock, Association of southeast asian nations, the European Matrimony, and Mercosur. International political institutions on the international level include the International Criminal Courtroom, the Imf, and the Earth Trade Organization.

Political science [edit]

The study of politics is called political science, or politology. Information technology comprises numerous subfields, including comparative politics, political economy, international relations, political philosophy, public administration, public policy, gender and politics, and political methodology. Furthermore, political scientific discipline is related to, and draws upon, the fields of economics, law, folklore, history, philosophy, geography, psychology/psychiatry, anthropology, and neurosciences.

Comparative politics is the science of comparison and teaching of different types of constitutions, political actors, legislature and associated fields, all of them from an intrastate perspective. International relations deals with the interaction between nation-states as well as intergovernmental and transnational organizations. Political philosophy is more concerned with contributions of various classical and contemporary thinkers and philosophers.

Political science is methodologically various and appropriates many methods originating in psychology, social research, and cerebral neuroscience. Approaches include positivism, interpretivism, rational option theory, behavioralism, structuralism, mail service-structuralism, realism, institutionalism, and pluralism. Political science, as one of the social sciences, uses methods and techniques that relate to the kinds of inquiries sought: primary sources such as historical documents and official records, secondary sources such equally scholarly journal articles, survey research, statistical analysis, case studies, experimental research, and model building.

Political system [edit]

Systems view of politics.

The political arrangement defines the process for making official regime decisions. It is ordinarily compared to the legal system, economic system, cultural system, and other social systems. According to David Easton, "A political system can be designated every bit the interactions through which values are authoritatively allocated for a society."^[14] Each political system is embedded in a society with its own political culture, and they in plough shape their societies through public policy. The interactions between unlike political systems are the basis for global politics.

Forms of government [edit]

Forms of government tin can be classified by several ways. In terms of the structure of power, there are monarchies (including constitutional monarchies) and republics (unremarkably presidential, semi-presidential, or parliamentary).

The separation of powers describes the caste of horizontal integration betwixt the legislature, the executive, the judiciary, and other independent institutions.

Source of power [edit]

The source of power determines the departure between democracies, oligarchies, and autocracies.

In a democracy, political legitimacy is based on pop sovereignty. Forms of democracy include representative democracy, direct republic, and demarchy. These are separated by the way decisions are made, whether by elected representatives, referendums, or by citizen juries. Democracies can be either republics or constitutional monarchies.

Oligarchy is a power structure where a minority rules. These may be in the grade of anocracy, aristocracy, ergatocracy, geniocracy, gerontocracy, kakistocracy, kleptocracy, meritocracy, noocracy, particracy, plutocracy, stratocracy, technocracy, theocracy, or timocracy.

Autocracies are either dictatorships (including military dictatorships) or absolute monarchies.

The pathway of regional integration or separation

Vertical integration [edit]

In terms of level of vertical integration, political systems tin be divided into (from to the lowest degree to nigh integrated) confederations, federations, and unitary states.

A federation (also known as a federal country) is a political entity characterized by a union of partially cocky-governing provinces, states, or other regions under a central federal government (federalism). In a federation, the self-governing status of the component states, besides as the partitioning of power between them and the central authorities, is typically constitutionally entrenched and may not be contradistinct past a unilateral decision of either party, the states or the federal political body. Federations were formed first in Switzerland, then in the United States in 1776, in Canada in 1867 and in Federal republic of germany in 1871 and in 1901, Australia. Compared to a federation, a confederation has less centralized power.

State [edit]

All the in a higher place forms of authorities are variations of the aforementioned bones polity, the sovereign state. The land has been divers by Max Weber as a political entity that has monopoly on violence within its territory, while the Montevideo Convention holds that states demand to have a defined territory; a permanent population; a authorities; and a capacity to enter into international relations.

A stateless society is a society that is not governed past a state.^[55] In stateless societies, in that location is trivial concentration of authority; almost positions of potency that do be are very limited in power and are generally not permanently held positions; and social bodies that resolve disputes through predefined rules tend to be small.^[56] Stateless societies are highly variable in economic organization and cultural practices.^[57]

While stateless societies were the norm in human prehistory, few stateless societies be today; almost the entire global population resides within the jurisdiction of a sovereign state. In some regions nominal country authorities may be very weak and wield little or no actual ability. Over the course of history virtually stateless peoples have been integrated into the country-based societies around them.^[58]

Some political philosophies consider the state undesirable, and thus consider the formation of a stateless society a goal to be accomplished. A fundamental tenet of riot is the advocacy of club without states.^[55] ^[59] The type of society sought for varies significantly between anarchist schools of thought, ranging from extreme individualism to consummate collectivism.^[threescore] In Marxism, Marx's theory of the country considers that in a post-capitalist society the country, an undesirable institution, would be unnecessary and wither away.^[61] A related concept is that of stateless communism, a phrase sometimes used to draw Marx's anticipated postal service-capitalist gild.

Constitutions [edit]

Constitutions are written documents that specify and limit the powers of the different branches of government. Although a constitution is a written document, in that location is also an unwritten constitution. The unwritten constitution is continually being written by the legislative and judiciary branch of government; this is just 1 of those cases in which the nature of the circumstances determines the form of regime that is almost appropriate.^[62] England did set the fashion of written constitutions during the Civil War but after the Restoration abandoned them to exist taken up later on by the American Colonies later their emancipation and then France after the Revolution and the residue of Europe including the European colonies.

Constitutions ofttimes set out separation of powers, dividing the government into the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary (together referred to as the trias politica), in club to accomplish checks and balances inside the state. Additional contained branches may also be created, including ceremonious service commissions, election commissions, and supreme audit institutions.

Political culture [edit]

Political civilization describes how civilization impacts politics. Every political organization is embedded in a particular political culture.^[63] Lucian Pye's definition is that "Political culture is the set of attitudes, beliefs, and sentiments, which give order and meaning to a political process and which provide the underlying assumptions and rules that govern behavior in the political system".^[63]

Trust is a major factor in political civilisation, equally its level determines the capacity of the state to function.^[64] Postmaterialism is the caste to which a political culture is concerned with bug which are not of immediate physical or textile concern, such every bit man rights and environmentalism.^[63] Religion has as well an impact on political civilization.^[64]

Political dysfunction [edit]

Political corruption [edit]

Political corruption is the use of powers for illegitimate individual gain, conducted by government officials or their network contacts. Forms of political corruption include blackmail, cronyism, nepotism, and political patronage. Forms of political patronage, in turn, includes clientelism, earmarking, pork barreling, slush funds, and spoils systems; every bit well as political machines, which is a political organization that operates for decadent ends.

When abuse is embedded in political culture, this may be referred to every bit patrimonialism or neopatrimonialism. A form of government that is built on abuse is chosen a kleptocracy ('rule of thieves').

Levels of politics [edit]

Macropolitics [edit]

Macropolitics tin can either describe political problems that affect an unabridged political system (e.g. the nation state), or refer to interactions between political systems (e.g. international relations).^[65]

Global politics (or world politics) covers all aspects of politics that bear on multiple political systems, in practise meaning any political phenomenon crossing national borders. This tin can include cities, nation-states, multinational corporations, non-governmental organizations, and/or international organizations. An important element is international relations: the relations between nation-states may be peaceful when they are conducted through affairs, or they may exist tearing, which is described as war. States that are able to exert strong international influence are referred to equally superpowers, whereas less-powerful ones may be called regional or middle powers. The international system of power is chosen the world order, which is affected past the balance of power that defines the degree of polarity in the system. Emerging powers are potentially destabilizing to it, especially if they display revanchism or irredentism.

Politics inside the limits of political systems, which in gimmicky context correspond to national borders, are referred to as domestic politics. This includes most forms of public policy, such as social policy, economical policy, or law enforcement, which are executed by the state hierarchy.

Mesopolitics [edit]

Mesopolitics describes the politics of intermediary structures inside a political system, such as national political parties or movements.^[65]

A political party is a political system that typically seeks to attain and maintain political power within authorities, usually by participating in political campaigns, educational outreach, or protestation deportment. Parties often espouse an expressed ideology or vision, bolstered by a written platform with specific goals, forming a coalition among disparate interests.^[66]

Political parties within a particular political arrangement together course the party system, which tin exist either multiparty, ii-party, dominant-party, or one-party, depending on the level of pluralism. This is afflicted past characteristics of the political system, including its electoral system. Co-ordinate to Duverger'south constabulary, first-past-the-mail service systems are probable to lead to two-political party systems, while proportional representation systems are more than probable to create a multiparty system.

Micropolitics [edit]

Micropolitics describes the deportment of individual actors inside the political system.^[65] This is often described every bit political participation.^[67] Political participation may accept many forms, including:

Activism
Boycott
Civil defiance
Demonstration
Petition
Picketing
Strike activeness
Revenue enhancement resistance
Voting (or its opposite, abstentionism)

Political values [edit]

Commonwealth [edit]

Commonwealth is a system of processing conflicts in which outcomes depend on what participants practice, but no single forcefulness controls what occurs and its outcomes. The dubiousness of outcomes is inherent in democracy. Democracy makes all forces struggle repeatedly to realize their interests and devolves power from groups of people to sets of rules.^[68]

Among modern political theorists, at that place are three contending conceptions of republic: aggregative, deliberative, and radical.^[69]

Aggregative [edit]

The theory of aggregative republic claims that the aim of the democratic processes is to solicit the preferences of citizens, and amass them together to determine what social policies the society should adopt. Therefore, proponents of this view hold that democratic participation should primarily focus on voting, where the policy with the most votes gets implemented.

Different variants of aggregative democracy exist. Nether minimalism, commonwealth is a system of authorities in which citizens accept given teams of political leaders the right to rule in periodic elections. According to this minimalist conception, citizens cannot and should not "rule" because, for example, on most bug, most of the fourth dimension, they have no clear views or their views are not well-founded. Joseph Schumpeter articulated this view most famously in his book Commercialism, Socialism, and Democracy.^[lxx] Contemporary proponents of minimalism include William H. Riker, Adam Przeworski, Richard Posner.

According to the theory of direct democracy, on the other hand, citizens should vote directly, not through their representatives, on legislative proposals. Proponents of direct democracy offer varied reasons to support this view. Political activity tin be valuable in itself, information technology socializes and educates citizens, and popular participation tin check powerful elites. Most importantly, citizens do not dominion themselves unless they direct determine laws and policies.

Governments will tend to produce laws and policies that are close to the views of the median voter—with half to their left and the other half to their correct. This is not a desirable outcome equally it represents the action of self-interested and somewhat unaccountable political elites competing for votes. Anthony Downs suggests that ideological political parties are necessary to act every bit a mediating broker between private and governments. Downs laid out this view in his 1957 book An Economical Theory of Democracy.^[71]

Robert A. Dahl argues that the fundamental democratic principle is that, when it comes to binding collective decisions, each person in a political community is entitled to have his/her interests exist given equal consideration (non necessarily that all people are equally satisfied by the collective determination). He uses the term polyarchy to refer to societies in which at that place exists a sure ready of institutions and procedures which are perceived as leading to such democracy. First and foremost among these institutions is the regular occurrence of gratis and open elections which are used to select representatives who and then manage all or nigh of the public policy of the society. However, these polyarchic procedures may not create a total republic if, for example, poverty prevents political participation.^[72] Similarly, Ronald Dworkin argues that "commonwealth is a substantive, non a merely procedural, ideal."^[73]

Deliberative [edit]

Deliberative commonwealth is based on the notion that democracy is government past deliberation. Unlike aggregative commonwealth, deliberative democracy holds that, for a democratic decision to exist legitimate, information technology must be preceded by authentic deliberation, not just the aggregation of preferences that occurs in voting. Authentic deliberation is deliberation amid determination-makers that is gratis from distortions of unequal political power, such as power a decision-maker obtained through economic wealth or the support of interest groups.^[74] ^[75] ^[76] If the conclusion-makers cannot attain consensus after authentically deliberating on a proposal, and then they vote on the proposal using a form of bulk rule.

Radical [edit]

Radical democracy is based on the thought that there are hierarchical and oppressive ability relations that be in society. Commonwealth's role is to make visible and challenge those relations past assuasive for difference, dissent and antagonisms in controlling processes.

Equality [edit]

2-axis political compass chart with a horizontal socio-economical axis and a vertical socio-cultural centrality and ideologically representative political colours, an example for a frequently used model of the political spectrum^[77] ^[78] ^[79] ^[lxxx] ^[81] ^[82] ^[83] ^[84]

Iii axis model of political ideologies with both moderate and radical versions and the goals of their policies

Equality is a state of affairs in which all people within a specific society or isolated grouping take the same social status, especially socioeconomic status, including protection of human rights and dignity, and equal access to certain social goods and social services. Furthermore, it may too include wellness equality, economic equality and other social securities. Social equality requires the absence of legally enforced social class or degree boundaries and the absence of bigotry motivated by an inalienable part of a person'south identity. To this stop there must be equal justice under law, and equal opportunity regardless of, for example, sex activity, gender, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, origin, caste or grade, income or holding, linguistic communication, religion, convictions, opinions, health or inability.

Left–correct spectrum [edit]

A mutual way of understanding politics is through the left–right political spectrum, which ranges from left-wing politics via centrism to correct-wing politics. This classification is comparatively recent and dates from the French Revolution, when those members of the National Assembly who supported the republic, the common people and a secular society sabbatum on the left and supporters of the monarchy, aristocratic privilege and the Church sat on the right.^[85]

Today, the left is by and large progressivist, seeking social progress in society. The more extreme elements of the left, named the far-left, tend to support revolutionary ways for achieving this. This includes ideologies such as Communism and Marxism. The center-left, on the other manus, advocate for more than reformist approaches, for example that of social democracy.

In contrast, the correct is generally motivated by conservatism, which seeks to conserve what it sees as the of import elements of gild. The far-right goes beyond this, and often represents a reactionary turn against progress, seeking to undo it. Examples of such ideologies accept included Fascism and Nazism. The center-correct may be less clear-cut and more mixed in this regard, with neoconservatives supporting the spread of gratuitous markets and capitalism, and one-nation conservatives more than open to social welfare programs.

Co-ordinate to Norberto Bobbio, one of the major exponents of this distinction, the left believes in attempting to eradicate social inequality—assertive it to be unethical or unnatural,^[86] while the right regards most social inequality as the event of ineradicable natural inequalities, and sees attempts to enforce social equality as utopian or disciplinarian.^[87] Some ideologies, notably Christian Democracy, claim to combine left and right-fly politics; co-ordinate to Geoffrey K. Roberts and Patricia Hogwood, "In terms of ideology, Christian Democracy has incorporated many of the views held by liberals, conservatives and socialists inside a wider framework of moral and Christian principles."^[88] Movements which claim or formerly claimed to be above the left-right divide include Fascist Terza Posizione economic politics in Italian republic and Peronism in Argentina.^[89] ^[90]

Freedom [edit]

Political freedom (also known equally political liberty or autonomy) is a fundamental concept in political thought and one of the most important features of democratic societies. Negative liberty has been described as liberty from oppression or compulsion and unreasonable external constraints on action, often enacted through civil and political rights, while positive liberty is the absence of disabling conditions for an individual and the fulfillment of enabling conditions, e.g. economic coercion, in a club. This adequacy approach to liberty requires economic, social and cultural rights in order to be realized.

[edit]

Authoritarianism and libertarianism disagree the corporeality of private freedom each person possesses in that society relative to the state. One author describes disciplinarian political systems as those where "individual rights and goals are subjugated to group goals, expectations and conformities,"^[91] while libertarians generally oppose the state and hold the private as sovereign. In their purest form, libertarians are anarchists,^[92] who fence for the total abolition of the state, of political parties and of other political entities, while the purest authoritarians are, past definition, totalitarians who support country control over all aspects of club.^[93]

For instance, classical liberalism (likewise known as laissez-faire liberalism)^[94] is a doctrine stressing private freedom and limited government. This includes the importance of human rationality, individual holding rights, free markets, natural rights, the protection of ceremonious liberties, ramble limitation of government, and individual liberty from restraint equally exemplified in the writings of John Locke, Adam Smith, David Hume, David Ricardo, Voltaire, Montesquieu and others. According to the libertarian Plant for Humane Studies, "the libertarian, or 'classical liberal,' perspective is that individual well-beingness, prosperity, and social harmony are fostered by 'as much liberty as possible' and 'as little authorities as necessary.'"^[95] For agitator political philosopher Fifty. Susan Brown (1993), "liberalism and anarchism are two political philosophies that are fundamentally concerned with individual liberty withal differ from ane some other in very distinct ways. Riot shares with liberalism a radical delivery to private freedom while rejecting liberalism'southward competitive property relations."^[96]

See as well [edit]

Political history of the earth
Horseshoe theory
Alphabetize of police articles
Index of politics articles – alphabetical listing of political subjects
Listing of politics awards
List of years in politics
Outline of police
Outline of political science – structured listing of political topics, arranged by bailiwick
Political lists – lists of political topics
Politics of present-day states
List of political ideologies

References [edit]

Notes [edit]

^ "The book of Etiques and of Polettiques [sic]" (Bhuler 1961/1941:154).

Citations [edit]

^ Leftwich 2015, p. 68.
^ Hague & Harrop 2013, p. 1.
^ Johnston & Woodburn 1903, p. 233
^ Hammarlund 1985, p. viii.
^ Brady 2017, p. 47.
^ Hawkesworth & Kogan 2013, p. 299.
^ Taylor 2012, p. 130.
^ Blanton & Kegley 2016, p. 199.
^ Kabashima & White III 1986.
^ Buhler, C. F., ed. 1961 [1941]. The Dictes and Sayings of the Philosophers. London: Early English Text Society, Original Series No. 211 Archived 5 September 2016 at the Wayback Machine.
^ Lewis & Curt 1879, online.
^ Liddell, Henry George; Scott, Robert. "A Greek-English Lexicon". Perseus Digital Library. Tufts Library. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 19 February 2016.
^ Lasswell 1963.
^ ^a ^b Easton 1981.
^ Lenin 1965.
^ Crick 1972.
^ Leftwich 2004.
^ Leftwich 2004, pp. 14–fifteen.
^ Leftwich 2004, p. 23.
^ Leftwich 2004, p. 119.
^ Dahl 2003, pp. 1–11.
^ Morlino 2017, p. two.
^ ^a ^b ^c Atkinson 2013, pp. one–5.
^ Leftwich 2004, p. 73.
^ Leftwich 2004, p. 16.
^ Morlino 2017, p. 3.
^ Schattschneider, Elmer Eric (1960). The semisovereign people : a realist'south view of democracy in America. Dryden P. p. 2. ISBN0-03-013366-one. OCLC 859587564.
^ Mouffe, Chantal (1999). The Challenge of Carl Schmitt. Verso. ISBN978-1-85984-244-7. Archived from the original on 26 January 2021. Retrieved 28 Oct 2020.
^ van der Eijk 2018, pp. 11, 29.
^ "Constitutional Rights Foundation". Crf-united states of america.org. Archived from the original on 16 Feb 2022. Retrieved 20 Feb 2022.
^ de Waal, Frans (2007). Chimpanzee politics power and sex among apes. Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN978-0-8018-8656-0. OCLC 493546705.
^ Fukuyama, Francis (2012). The origins of political order : from prehuman times to the French Revolution. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. p. 56. ISBN978-0-374-53322-ix. OCLC 1082411117.
^ Spencer, Charles S.; Redmond, Elsa M. (15 September 2004). "Primary State Formation in Mesoamerica". Annual Review of Anthropology. 33 (1): 173–199. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.143823. ISSN 0084-6570.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d Carneiro 1970, pp. 733–738.
^ Origins of the country : the anthropology of political evolution. Philadelphia : Institute for the Written report of Human Issues. 1978. p. 30 – via Internet Archive.
^ ^a ^b Daniel 2003, p. xiii.
^ Daniel 2003, pp. nine–xi.
^ Nelson & Nelson 2006, p. 17.
^ Osiander 2001, p. 251.
^ Gross 1948, pp. 20–41.
^ Jackson, R. H. 2005. "The Evolution of World Order" in The Globalization of Globe Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, edited by P. Owens. J. Baylis and S. Smith. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 53. ISBN 1-56584-727-10.^{[ verification needed ]}
^ Kissinger 2014.
^ Krasner, Stephen D. (2010). "The immovability of organized hypocrisy". In Kalmo, Hent; Skinner, Quentin (eds.). Sovereignty in Fragments: The Past, Present and Hereafter of a Contested Concept. Cambridge University Printing.
^ "From Westphalia, with love – Indian Express". archive.indianexpress.com. Archived from the original on vi August 2020. Retrieved 30 July 2020.
^ ^ Eric Hobsbawm, Nations and Nationalism since 1780 : programme, myth, reality (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1990; ISBN 0-521-43961-2) chapter II "The popular protonationalism", pp.80–81 French edition (Gallimard, 1992). According to Hobsbawm, the chief source for this subject is Ferdinand Brunot (ed.), Histoire de la langue française, Paris, 1927–1943, 13 volumes, in particular volume IX. He also refers to Michel de Certeau, Dominique Julia, Judith Revel, Une politique de la langue: la Révolution française et les patois: 50'enquête de 50'abbé Grégoire, Paris, 1975. For the problem of the transformation of a minority official language into a widespread national language during and after the French Revolution, run into Renée Balibar, 50'Institution du français: essai sur le co-linguisme des Carolingiens à la République, Paris, 1985 (also Le co-linguisme, PUF, Que sais-je?, 1994, but out of print) The Establishment of the French language: essay on colinguism from the Carolingian to the Commonwealth. Finally, Hobsbawm refers to Renée Balibar and Dominique Laporte, Le Français national: politique et pratique de la langue nationale sous la Révolution, Paris, 1974.
^ Al-Rasheed, Madawi; Kersten, Carool; Shterin, Marat (eleven Dec 2012). Demystifying the Caliphate: Historical Retentivity and Gimmicky Contexts. Oxford University Press. p. iii. ISBN978-0-19-932795-9. Archived from the original on 10 July 2020. Retrieved 5 May 2020.
^ Richards, Howard (2004). Agreement the Global Economy. Peace Education Books. ISBN978-0-9748961-0-6. Archived from the original on 21 May 2021. Retrieved 28 Oct 2020.
^ Blackness, Jeremy.1998. Maps and Politics. pp. 59–98, 100–47.
^ Foucault, Michel. [1977–1978] 2007. Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France.
^ Rizaldy, Aldino, and Wildan Firdaus. 2012. "Straight Georeferencing: A New Standard in Photogrammetry for High Accurateness Mapping Archived 26 September 2020 at the Wayback Machine." International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences 39(B1):5–ix. doi:10.5194/isprsarchives-XXXIX-B1-5-2012
^ Bellezza, Giuliano. 2013. "On Borders: From Aboriginal to Postmodern Times Archived 26 September 2020 at the Wayback Machine." Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci. 40-4(W3):ane–7. doi:10.5194/isprsarchives-Twoscore-4-W3-1-2013
^ Mikhailova, Due east. 5. 2013. "Appearance and Appliance of the Twin-Cities Concept on the Russian-Chinese Border Archived 26 September 2020 at the Wayback Machine." Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci. forty-4(W3):105–10. doi:10.5194/isprsarchives-Xl-iv-W3-105-2013
^ Pickering, S. 2013. "Borderlines: Maps and the spread of the Westphalian state from Europe to Asia Office One – The European Context Archived 26 September 2020 at the Wayback Auto." Int. Curvation. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci. forty-four(W3):111–xvi. doi:10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-4-W3-111-2013
^ Branch 2011.
^ ^a ^b Craig 2005, p. fourteen.
^ Ellis, Stephen (2001). The Mask of Chaos: The Destruction of Liberia and the Religious Dimension of an African Civil War. NYU Press. p. 198. ISBN978-0-8147-2219-0. Archived from the original on 24 February 2021. Retrieved 4 May 2020 – via Google Books.
^ Béteille 2002, pp. 1042–1043.
^ Faulks, Keith (2000). Political Sociology: A Disquisitional Introduction. NYU Printing. p. 23. ISBN978-0-8147-2709-6. Archived from the original on 16 Nov 2020. Retrieved four May 2020 – via Google Books.
^ Sheehan, Sean (2004). Anarchism. London: Reaktion Books. p. 85.
^ Slevin, Carl (2003). "Riot". In McLean, Iain & McMillan, Alistair (eds.). The Concise Oxford Lexicon of Politics . Oxford University Press. ISBN978-0-19-280276-7.
^ Engels, Frederick (1880). "Function III: Historical Materialism". Socialism: Utopian and Scientific. Archived from the original on 7 February 2021. Retrieved 4 May 2020 – via Marx/Engels Net Archive (marxists.org). State interference in social relations becomes, in one domain after another, superfluous, then dies out of itself; the regime of persons is replaced by the administration of things, and by the carry of processes of production. The Land is non "abolished". It dies out...Socialized production upon a predetermined programme becomes henceforth possible. The evolution of production makes the existence of different classes of guild thenceforth an anachronism. In proportion as anarchy in social production vanishes, the political authority of the Country dies out. Man, at last the chief of his own form of social organization, becomes at the same time the lord over Nature, his ain master—costless.
^ "United kingdom's unwritten constitution". The British Library. Archived from the original on 1 Apr 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2019.
^ ^a ^b ^c Morlino, Berg-Schlosser & Badie 2017, pp. 64–74
^ ^a ^b Hague 2017, pp. 200–214.
^ ^a ^b ^c Morlino, Berg-Schlosser & Badie 2017, p. xx
^ Pettitt 2014, p. 60.
^ Morlino, Berg-Schlosser & Badie 2017, p. 161
^ Przeworski, Adam (1991). Republic and the Marketplace . Cambridge University Press. pp. x–xiv.
^ Springer, Simon (2011). "Public Space as Emancipation: Meditations on Anarchism, Radical Republic, Neoliberalism and Violence". Antipode. 43 (2): 525–62. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8330.2010.00827.ten. Archived from the original on 18 August 2021. Retrieved 14 June 2020.
^ Joseph Schumpeter, (1950). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. Harper Perennial. ISBN 0-06-133008-6.
^ Downs 1957.
^ Dahl 1989.
^ Dworkin, Ronald. 2006. Is Democracy Possible Here? Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-13872-5. p. 134.
^ Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis Thompson. 2002. Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-12019-5
^ Cohen, Joshua. 1997. "Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy." In Essays on Reason and Politics: Deliberative Democracy, edited by J. Bohman and Due west. Rehg. Cambridge: The MIT Press. pp. 72–73.
^ Ethan J. 2006. "Can Direct Democracy Be Made Deliberative?" Buffalo Law Review 54.
^ Heywood 2017, pp. fourteen–17.
^ Love 2006, p. 16.
^ Petrik 2010, p. four.
^ Sznajd-Weron & Sznajd 2005, pp. 593–604
^ Forman, F. Due north.; Baldwin, N. D. J. (1999). Mastering British Politics. London: Macmillan Education U.k.. pp. eight f. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-15045-8. ISBN978-0-333-76548-7.
^ Fenna, Alan; Robbins, Jane; Summers, John (2013). Government Politics in Australia. Robbins, Jane., Summers, John. (tenth ed.). Melbourne: Pearson Higher Pedagogy AU. pp. 126 f. ISBN978-one-4860-0138-5. OCLC 1021804010.
^ Jones & Kavanagh 2003, p. 259.
^ Körösényi, András (1999). Government and Politics in Hungary. Budapest, Hungary: Key European University Printing. p. 54. ISBN963-9116-76-9. OCLC 51478878.
^ Knapp, Andrew; Wright, Vincent (2006). The Government and Politics of French republic. London: Routledge.
^ Gelderloos, Peter (2010). Anarchy Works.
^ Bobbio 1997.
^ Roberts & Hogwood 1997.
^ Tore 2014.
^ "bale p.forty" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 March 2017. Retrieved 25 Feb 2018.
^ Kemmelmeier et al. 2003, pp. 304–322
^ "An Anarchist FAQ: 150 years of Libertarian". Anarchists Writers. Archived from the original on 25 September 2018. Retrieved 25 September 2018.
^ "totalitarian". Dictionary.com Entire (Online). n.d. Retrieved 25 September 2018. Archived from the original on 25 September 2018.
^ Adams, Ian. 2001. Political Credo Today. Manchester: Manchester University Press. p. twenty.
^ IHS. 2019. "What Is Libertarian?." Institute for Humane Studies. George Mason University. Archived 24 March 2007 at the Wayback Machine
^ Brown, L. Susan. 1993. The Politics of Individualism: Liberalism, Liberal Feminism, and Anarchism. Black Rose Books.

Bibliography [edit]

Atkinson, Sam (2013). The politics volume. DK. pp. 1–5. ISBN978-one-4093-6445-0. OCLC 868135821.
Béteille, André (2002). "Inequality and Equality". In Ingold, Tim (ed.). Companion Encyclopedia of Anthropology. Taylor & Francis. pp. 1042–1043. ISBN978-0-415-28604-6. Archived from the original on 19 August 2020. Retrieved 4 May 2020 – via Google Books.
Blanton, Shannon L.; Kegley, Charles Westward. (2016). World Politics: Trend and Transformation, 2016–2017. Cengage Learning. ISBN978-1-305-50487-5. Archived from the original on two July 2019. Retrieved 26 Feb 2018.
Bobbio, Norberto (1997). Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction. Translated by Cameron, A. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN978-0-226-06246-4.
Brady, Linda P. (2017). The Politics of Negotiation: America's Dealings with Allies, Adversaries, and Friends. Academy of North Carolina Press. p. 47. ISBN978-1-4696-3960-4. Archived from the original on 2 July 2019. Retrieved 25 Feb 2018.
Co-operative, Jordan (2011). "Mapping the Sovereign State: Technology, Authorization, and Systemic Change". International Organization. 65 (1): one–36. doi:10.1017/S0020818310000299. ISSN 0020-8183. JSTOR 23016102. S2CID 144712038. Archived from the original on 10 November 2021. Retrieved 7 February 2021.
- "How Maps Made the World". The Wilson Quarterly. Summertime 2011.
Branch, Jordan Nathaniel (2011). Mapping the Sovereign State: Cartographic Technology, Political Potency, and Systemic Modify (PhD thesis). University of California, Berkeley. Archived from the original on 4 January 2018. Retrieved 5 March 2012.
Carneiro, Robert 50. (21 August 1970). "A Theory of the Origin of the State: Traditional theories of country origins are considered and rejected in favor of a new ecological hypothesis". Science. 169 (3947): 733–738. doi:10.1126/scientific discipline.169.3947.733. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 17820299. S2CID 11536431. Archived from the original on 17 November 2019. Retrieved xxx April 2020.
Craig, Edward, ed. (2005). "Anarchism". The Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. p. xiv. ISBN978-ane-134-34409-3. Anarchism is the view that a gild without the state, or government, is both possible and desirable.
Crick, Bernard (1972). In defence force of politics. University of Chicago Press. ISBN0-226-12064-3. OCLC 575753.
Dahl, Robert A. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN0-300-04938-2.
Dahl, Robert A. (2003). Modernistic political analysis. Prentice Hall. ISBN0-13-049702-9. OCLC 49611149.
Daniel, Glyn (2003) [1968]. The First Civilizations: The Archaeology of their Origins. New York: Phoenix Press. xiii. ISBN1-84212-500-ane. Archived from the original on 29 June 2014. Retrieved 3 May 2020.
Downs, Anthony (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper Collins Higher. ISBN978-0-06-041750-5.
Easton, David (1981). The political system: an inquiry into the country of political scientific discipline (3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press. ISBN978-0-226-18017-5. OCLC 781301164.
Gross, Leo (January 1948). "The Peace of Westphalia" (PDF). The American Periodical of International Law. 42 (1): 20–41. doi:10.2307/2193560. JSTOR 2193560. S2CID 246010450. Archived (PDF) from the original on half dozen August 2020. Retrieved v May 2020.
Hague, Rod; Harrop, Martin (2013). Comparative Authorities and Politics: An Introduction. Macmillan International College Didactics. ISBN978-1-137-31786-5. Archived from the original on 7 July 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
Hague, Rod (14 October 2017). Political Science: A Comparative Introduction. pp. 200–214. ISBN978-1-137-60123-0. OCLC 970345358.
Hammarlund, Bo (1985). Politik utan partier: studier i Sveriges politiska liv 1726–1727. Almqvist & Wiksell International. ISBN978-91-22-00780-seven. Archived from the original on 3 July 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
Hawkesworth, Mary; Kogan, Maurice (2013). Encyclopedia of Government and Politics: ii-book Set up. London: Routledge. ISBN978-1-136-91332-7. Archived from the original on 2 July 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2018.
Heywood, Andrew (2017). Political Ideologies: An Introduction (sixth ed.). Basingstoke: Macmillan International Higher Pedagogy. ISBN978-1-137-60604-4. OCLC 988218349.
Johnston, Alexander; Woodburn, James Albert (1903) [1903]. American Orations: V. The Anti-Slavery Struggle. Yard. P. Putnam and Sons. – via Cyberspace Archive.
Jones, Bill; Kavanagh, Dennis (2003). British Politics Today. Kavanagh, Dennis. (7th ed.). Manchester: Manchester University Press. ISBN978-0-7190-6509-5. OCLC 52876930.
Kabashima, Ikuo; White Iii, Lynn T., eds. (1986). Political System and Change: A Earth Politics Reader. Princeton University Press. ISBN978-0-691-61037-5. JSTOR j.ctt7ztn7s.
Kemmelmeier, Markus; et al. (2003). "Individualism, Collectivism, and Absolutism in Seven Societies". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 34 (3): 304–322. doi:ten.1177/0022022103034003005. S2CID 32361036.
Kissinger, Henry (2014). World Order. ISBN978-0-698-16572-4.
Lasswell, Harold D. (1963) [1958]. Politics: who gets what, when how. : With postscript. World. OCLC 61585455.
Leftwich, Adrian (2004). What is politics? : the activity and its study. Polity. ISBN0-7456-3055-iii. OCLC 1044115261.
Leftwich, Adrian (2015). What is politics? : the activity and its study. Polity Press. ISBN978-0-7456-9852-half-dozen. OCLC 911200604.
Lenin, Vladimir I. (1965). Collected works. September 1903 – December 1904. OCLC 929381958.
Lewis, Charlton T.; Short, Charles (1879). "pŏlītĭcus". A Latin Lexicon. Clarendon Printing. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved nineteen February 2016 – via Perseus Digital Library.
Love, Nancy Sue (2006). Understanding Dogmas and Dreams (Second ed.). Washington, District of Columbia: CQ Press. ISBN978-1-4833-7111-5. OCLC 893684473.
Morlino, Leonardo (2017). Political science. Sage Publications Inc. ISBN978-ane-4129-6213-i. OCLC 951226897.
Morlino, Leonardo; Berg-Schlosser, Dirk; Badie, Bertrand (half dozen March 2017). Political science : a global perspective. London, England. pp. 64–74. ISBN978-1-5264-1303-1. OCLC 1124515503.
Nelson, B.; Nelson, Brian R. (sixteen March 2006). The Making of the Modern State: A Theoretical Evolution. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN978-one-4039-7189-0. Archived from the original on 19 August 2020. Retrieved 30 April 2020.
Osiander, Andreas (2001). "Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth". International Organization. 55 (2): 251–287. doi:x.1162/00208180151140577. S2CID 145407931.
Petrik, Andreas (3 December 2010). "Cadre Concept 'Political Compass'. How Kitschelt'south Model of Liberal, Socialist, Libertarian and Conservative Orientations Can Fill the Credo Gap in Civic Education". JSSE – Journal of Social Science Education: four. doi:10.4119/jsse-541. Archived from the original on 22 June 2019.
Pettitt, Robin T. (2014). Contemporary Party Politics. London: Macmillan International College Educational activity. ISBN978-i-137-41264-v. Archived from the original on 3 July 2019. Retrieved 28 February 2019 – via Google Books.
Roberts and Hogwood, European Politics Today, Manchester University Press, 1997.
Sznajd-Weron, Katarzyna; Sznajd, Józef (June 2005). "Who is left, who is right?". Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications. 351 (2–iv): 593–604. Bibcode:2005PhyA..351..593S. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2004.12.038.
Taylor, Steven Fifty. (2012). 30-2d Politics: The 50 almost thought-provoking ideas in politics, each explained in one-half a infinitesimal. Icon Books Limited. p. 130. ISBN978-1-84831-427-6. Archived from the original on vi July 2019. Retrieved 25 Feb 2018.
Tore, Bjorgo (2014). Terror from the Extreme Correct. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. ISBN978-one-135-20930-8. OCLC 871861016.
van der Eijk, Cees (2018). "What Is Politics?". The Essence of Politics. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Printing. pp. 9–24. doi:x.2307/j.ctvf3w22g.4. JSTOR j.ctvf3w22g. S2CID 157611448. Archived from the original on 2 Feb 2021. Retrieved five February 2021.