Asocialist state,socialist republic, orsocialist country is asovereignstate constitutionally dedicated to the establishment ofsocialism. This article is about states that refer to themselves as socialist states, and not specifically aboutcommunist states that refer to themselves associalist states. It includes information onliberal democratic states withconstitutional references to socialism as well as other state formations that have referred to themselves as socialist.
A number of countries make references to socialism in their constitutions that are not single-party states embracing Marxism–Leninism and planned economies. In most cases, these are constitutional references to the building of a socialist society and political principles that have little to no bearing on the structure and guidance of these country'smachinery of government andeconomic system. The preamble to the 1976Constitution of Portugal states that the Portuguese state has, as one of its goals, opening "the way to socialist society".[1] Another broad example is that of Slovenia, which defines itself as a "state governed by the rule of law and a social state".[2] Algeria, the Congo, India, and Sri Lanka have directly used the termsocialist in their official constitution and name. Croatia, Hungary, and Poland directly denounce "Communism" in their founding documents in reference to their past regimes.[3][need quotation to verify][4][need quotation to verify][5]
In these cases, the intended meaning ofsocialism can vary widely and sometimes the constitutional references to socialism are left over from a previous period in the country's history. In the case of many Middle Eastern states, the termsocialism was often used in reference to anArab socialist/nationalist philosophy adopted by specific regimes, such as that ofGamal Abdel Nasser and that of the variousBa'ath parties. Examples of countries directly using the termsocialist in their names include the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, while a number of countries make references to socialism in their constitutions, but not in their names. These include India[6] and Portugal. In addition, countries such as Belarus, Colombia, France, Russia, and Spain use the varied termsocial state, leaving a more ambiguous meaning. In the constitutions of Croatia, Hungary, and Poland, direct condemnation is made to the respective past socialist regimes.[7] Theautonomous region ofRojava, which operates under the principles ofdemocratic confederalism, has been described as a socialist state.[8]
During thepost-war consensus era (1945-79),nationalization of large industries was relatively widespread and it was not uncommon for commentators to describe some European countries as democratic socialist states seeking to move their countries toward asocialist economy.[9][10][11][12] In 1956, leadingBritish Labour Party politician and authorAnthony Crosland claimed that capitalism had been abolished in Britain, although others such as WelshmanAneurin Bevan, Minister of Health in the firstpost-war Labour government and the architect of theNational Health Service, disputed the claim that Britain was a socialist state.[13][14] For Crosland and others who supported his views, Britain was a socialist state. According to Bevan, Britain had a socialistNational Health Service which stood in opposition to thehedonism of Britain's capitalist society, making the following point:
The National Health service and the Welfare State have come to be used as interchangeable terms, and in the mouths of some people, as terms of reproach. Why this is so it is not difficult to understand, if you view everything from the angle of a strictly individualistic competitive society. A free health service is pure Socialism and as such, it is opposed to the hedonism of capitalist society.[15]
Although, as in the rest of Europe, thelaws of capitalism still operated fully andprivate enterprise dominated the economy,[16] some political commentators claimed that during the post-war period, when socialist parties were in power, countries such as Britain and France were democratic socialist states and the same is now applied to theNordic countries and theNordic model.[9][10][11][12] In the 1980s, the government of PresidentFrançois Mitterrand aimed to expanddirigisme and attempted to nationalize all French banks, but this attempt faced opposition of theEuropean Economic Community because it demanded afree-market capitalist economy among its members.[17][18] Nevertheless,public ownership in France and the United Kingdom during the height of nationalization in the 1960s and 1970s never accounted for more than 15–20% ofcapital formation, further dropping to 8% in the 1980s and below 5% in the 1990s after the rise ofneoliberalism.[16]
The socialist policies practiced by parties such as the SingaporeanPeople's Action Party (PAP) during its first few decades in power were of a pragmatic kind as characterized by its rejection of nationalization. Despite this, the PAP still claimed to be asocialist party, pointing out its regulation of the private sector, state intervention in the economy, and social policies as evidence of this.[19] The Singaporean prime ministerLee Kuan Yew also stated that he has been influenced by the democratic socialist British Labour Party.[20]
Apeople's republic is a type of communist state with a republican constitution. Although the term initially became associated withpopulist movements in the 19th century such as the GermanVölkisch movement and theNarodniks in Russia, it is now associated with Communist Party ruled states. A number of the short-lived communist states which formed duringWorld War I andits aftermath called themselvespeople's republics. Many of these sprang up in the territory of the formerRussian Empire following theOctober Revolution.[22][23][24][25][26] Additional people's republics emerged following theAllied victory in World War II, mainly within theEastern Bloc.[27][28][29][30][31][32][33] In Asia, China became a people's republic following theChinese Communist Revolution[34] and North Korea also became a people's republic.[35] During the 1960s,Romania andYugoslavia ceased to use the termpeople's republic in their official name, replacing it with the termsocialist republic as a mark of their ongoing political development.Czechoslovakia also added the termsocialist republic into its name during this period. It had become a people's republic in 1948, but the country had not used that term in its official name.[36]Albania used both terms in its official name from 1976 to 1991.[37]
^The"Preamble to the 1976 Constitution of Portugal" stated: "The Constituent Assembly affirms the Portuguese people's decision to defend their national independence, safeguard the fundamental rights of citizens, establish the basic principles of democracy, secure the primacy of the rule of law in a democratic state, and open the way to socialist society."
^Tschentscher, Axel."Hungary Index".Servat.unibe.ch. Retrieved27 December 2019.
^Tschentscher, Axel."Poland – Constitution".Servat.unibe.ch. Retrieved27 December 2019.Article 13: Political parties and other organizations whose programmes are based upon totalitarian methods and the modes of activity of nazism, fascism and communism, as well as those whose programmes or activities sanction racial or national hatred, the application of violence for the purpose of obtaining power or to influence the State policy, or provide for the secrecy of their own structure or membership, shall be forbidden.
^The Preamble of the Constitution of India reads: "We, the people of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic, republic [...]". SeePreamble to the Constitution of India.
^abBarrett, William, ed. (1 April 1978)."Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy: A Symposium".Commentary. Retrieved 14 June 2020. "If we were to extend the definition of socialism to include Labor Britain or socialist Sweden, there would be no difficulty in refuting the connection between capitalism and democracy."
^abHeilbroner, Robert L. (Winter 1991)."From Sweden to Socialism: A Small Symposium on Big Questions".Dissident. Barkan, Joanne; Brand, Horst; Cohen, Mitchell; Coser, Lewis; Denitch, Bogdan; Fehèr, Ferenc; Heller, Agnès; Horvat, Branko; Tyler, Gus. pp. 96–110. Retrieved 17 April 2020.
^abKendall, Diana (2011).Sociology in Our Time: The Essentials. Cengage Learning. pp. 125–127.ISBN9781111305505. "Sweden, Great Britain, and France havemixed economies, sometimes referred to as democratic socialism—an economic and political system that combines private ownership of some of the means of production, governmental distribution of some essential goods and services, and free elections. For example, government ownership in Sweden is limited primarily to railroads, mineral resources, a public bank, and liquor and tobacco operations."
^abLi, He (2015).Political Thought and China's Transformation: Ideas Shaping Reform in Post-Mao China. Springer. pp. 60–69.ISBN9781137427816. "The scholars in camp of democratic socialism believe that China should draw on the Sweden experience, which is suitable not only for the West but also for China. In the post-Mao China, the Chinese intellectuals are confronted with a variety of models. The liberals favor the American model and share the view that the Soviet model has become archaic and should be totally abandoned. Meanwhile, democratic socialism in Sweden provided an alternative model. Its sustained economic development and extensive welfare programs fascinated many. Numerous scholars within the democratic socialist camp argue that China should model itself politically and economically on Sweden, which is viewed as more genuinely socialist than China. There is a growing consensus among them that in the Nordic countries the welfare state has been extraordinarily successful in eliminating poverty."
^Bevan, Aneurin (1952).In Place of Fear. New York: Simon and Schuster. p. 106.
^abBatson, Andrew (March 2017)."The State of the State Sector"(PDF). Gavekal Dragonomics. Retrieved8 December 2018.Even in the statist 1960s–70s, SOEs in France and the UK did not account for more than 15–20% of capital formation; in the 1980s the developed-nation average was around 8%, and it dropped below 5% in the 1990s.
^Cobham, David (November 1984). "The Nationalisation of the Banks in Mitterand's France: Rationalisations and Reasons". Journal of Public Policy. 4 (4).JSTOR3998375.
^Müller-Rommel, Ferdinand; Mansfeldová, Zdenka (2001). "Chapter 5: Czech Republic". In Blondel, Jean; Müller-Rommel, Ferdinand (eds.).Cabinets in Eastern Europe. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 62.doi:10.1057/9781403905215_6.ISBN978-1-349-41148-1.
