Encyclopedia
In a broad definition, a
republic is a state or country that is led by people whose political power is based on principles that are not beyond the control of the people of that state or country. Several definitions, including that of the
1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, stress the importance of autonomy and the rule of law as part of the requirements for a republic.
Often
republics and
monarchies are described as mutually exclusive. Defining a republic as a
non-monarchy, the most common short definition, is based on this idea. Although largely covering what is usually understood by a republic such definition has some borderline issues, for example while the distinction between
monarchy and
republic was not always made as it is in modern times, while
oligarchies are traditionally considered neither
monarchy nor
republic, and while such definition depends very much on the
monarch concept, which has various definitions, not making clear which of these is used for defining
republic. In his 1787 book, "Defence of the Constitutions,"
John Adams used the definition of "republic" in
Samuel Johnson's 1755 "
Dictionary" , but in the same book, and in several other writings, Adams made it clear that he thought of the British state as a republic because the executive, though single and called "king," had to obey laws made with the concurrence of the legislature .
The detailed organization of republics' governments can vary widely. The first section of this article gives an overview of the distinctions that characterise different
types of non-fictional republics. The second section of the article gives short profiles of some of the most influential republics, by way of illustration. A more comprehensive List of republics appears in a separate article. The third section is about how republics are approached as state organisations in political science: in political theory and political science, the term "republic" is generally applied to a state where the government's political power depends solely on the consent, however nominal, of the people governed.
Characteristics of republics
Heads of state
In most modern republics the
head of state is termed
president. Other titles that have been used are consul, doge, archon and many others. In republics that are also
democracies the head of state is appointed as the result of an election. This election can be indirect, such as if a council of some sort is elected by the people, and this council then elects the head of state. In these kinds of republics the usual term for a president is in the range of four to six years. In some countries the
constitution limits the number of terms the same person can be elected as president.
If the head of state of a republic is at the same time the head of government, this is called a
presidential system . In
Semi-presidential systems, where the head of state is not the same person as the head of government, the latter is usually termed
prime minister, premier or chancellor. Depending on what the president's specific duties are , and varying by convention, the president's role may range from the ceremonial and apolitical to influential and highly political. The Prime Minister is responsible for managing the policies and the central government. The rules for appointing the president and the leader of the government, in some republics permit the appointment of a president and a prime minister who have opposing political convictions: in
France, when the members of the ruling cabinet and the president come from opposing political factions, this situation is called cohabitation. In countries such as
Germany and
India, however, the president needs to be strictly non-partisan.
In some countries, like
Switzerland and
San Marino, the head of state is not a single person but a committee of several persons holding that office. The
Roman Republic had two consuls, appointed for a year by the senate. During the year of their consulship each consul would in turn be head of state for a month at a time, thus alternating the office of consul maior and of consul suffectus for their joint term.
Republics can be led by a head of state that has many of the characteristics of a monarch: not only do some republics install a president for life, and invest such president with powers beyond what is usual in a representative democracy, examples such as the post-1970
Syrian Arab Republic show that such a presidency can apparently be made hereditary. Historians disagree when the Roman Republic turned into
Imperial Rome: the reason is that the first
Emperors were given their head of state powers gradually in a government system that in appearance did not originally much differ from the Roman Republic.
Similarly, if taking the broad definition of republic above , countries usually qualified as monarchies can have many traits of a republic in terms of form of government. The political power of monarchs can be non-existent, limited to a purely ceremonial function or the "control of the people" can be exerted to the extent that they appear to have the power to have their monarch replaced by another one.
The often assumed "mutual exclusiveness" of monarchies and republics as forms of government.
- For full-fledged representative democracies ultimately it generally does not make all that much difference whether the head of state is a monarch or a president, nor, in fact, whether these countries call themselves a monarchy or a republic. Other factors, for instance, religious matters can often make a greater distinguishing mark when comparing the forms of government of actual countries.
For this reason, in political science the several definitions of "republic", which in such a context invariably indicate an "ideal" form of government, do not always exclude monarchy: the evolution of such definitions of "republic" in a context of political philosophy is treated in republicanism. However, such theoretical approaches appear to have had no real influence on the everyday use of the terminology regarding republics and monarchies.
The least that can be said is that Anti-Monarchism, the opposition to monarchy as such, did not always play a critical role in the creation and/or management of republics. For some republics, not choosing a monarch as head of state, could as well be a practical rather than an ideological consideration. Such "practical" considerations could be, for example, a situation where there was no monarchial candidate readily available. However, for the states created during or shortly after
the Enlightenment the choice was always deliberate:
republics created in that period inevitably had anti-monarchial characteristics. For the
United States the opposition of some to the
British Monarchy played a role, as did the overthrow of the French Monarchy in the creation of the first French Republic. By the time of the creation of the Fifth Republic in that country "anti-monarchist" tendencies were barely felt. The relations of that country to other countries made no distinctions whether these other countries were "monarchies" or not.
Role of religion
Before several
Reformation movements established themselves in Europe, changes in the religious landscape rarely had any relation to the form of government adopted by a country. For instance the transition from polytheism to
Christianity in
Ancient Rome maybe had brought new rulers, but no change in the idea that monarchy was the obvious way to rule a country. Similarly, late Middle Age republics, like
Venice, emerged without questioning the religious standards set by the
Roman Catholic church.
This would change, for instance, by the cuius regio, eius religio from the
Treaty of Augsburg : this treaty, applicable in the
Holy Roman Empire and affecting the numerous states of
Germany, ordained citizens to follow the religion of their ruler, whatever Christian religion that ruler chose - apart from
Calvinism . In France the king abolished the relative tolerance towards non-Catholic religions resulting from the Edict of Nantes , by the Edict of Fontainebleau . In the
United Kingdom and in
Spain the respective monarchs had each established their favourite brand of Christianity, so that by the time of
the Enlightenment in Europe there was not a single
absolute monarchy that tolerated another religion than the official one of the state.
Republics reducing state religion impact
An important reason why people could choose their society to be organized as a
republic is the prospect of staying free of
state religion: in this approach living under a monarch is seen as more easily inducing a uniform religion. All great monarchies had their state religion, in the case of pharaohs and some emperors this could even lead to a religion where the monarchs were endowed with a god-like status . On a different scale, kingdoms can be entangled in a specific flavour of religion: Catholicism in
Belgium,
Church of England in the
United Kingdom, Orthodoxy in
Tsaristic
Russia and many more examples.
In absence of a monarchy, there can be no monarch pushing towards a single religion. As this had been the general perception by the time of
the Enlightenment, it is not so surprising that republics were seen by some Enlightenment thinkers as the preferable form of state organisation, if one wanted to avoid the downsides of living under a too influential state religion.
Rousseau, an exception, envisioned a republic with a demanding state "civil religion":
- United States: the Founding Fathers, seeing that no single religion would do for all Americans, adopted the principle that the federal government would not support any established religion, as Massachusetts and Connecticut did.
- Besides being anti-monarchial, the French Revolution, leading to the first French Republic, was at least as much anti-religious, and led to the confiscation, pillage and/or destruction of many abbeys, beguinages, churches and other religious buildings and/or communities. Although the French revolutionaries tried to institute civil religions to replace "uncivic" Catholicism, nevertheless, up to the Fifth Republic, laïcité can be seen to have a much more profound meaning in republican France than in neighbouring countries ruled as monarchies.
Several states that called themselves republics have been fiercely anti-religious. This is particularly true for
communist republics like the Soviet Republics,
North Vietnam,
North Korea, and
China.
Republics highlighting state religion impact
Some countries or states prefer or preferred to organise themselves as a republic,
precisely because it allows them to inscribe a more or less obligatory state religion in their constitution: Islamic republics generally take this approach, but the same is also true for example in the
Jewish state of
Israel, in the Protestant republic that originated in the
Netherlands during the
Renaissance, and in the Catholic
Irish Republic, among others. In this case the advantage that is sought is that no
broad-thinking monarch could push his citizens towards a less strict application of religious prescriptions or change to another religion altogether . Such approach of an ideal republic based on a consolidated religious foundation played an important role for example in the
overthrow of the regime of the
Shah in
Iran, to be replaced by a
republic with influential ayatollahs , the most influential of which is called "
supreme leader".
Concepts of democracy
Republics are often associated with
democracy, which seems natural if one acknowledges the meaning of the expression from which the word "republic" derives . This association between "republic" and "democracy" is however far from a general understanding, even if acknowledging that there are
several forms of democracy. This section tries to give an outline of which concepts of democracy are associated with which types of republics.
As a preliminary remark, the concept of "one equal vote per adult" did not become a generically-accepted principle in democracies until around the middle of the
20th century: before that in all democracies the right to vote depended on one's financial situation, sex,
race, or a combination of these and other factors. Many forms of government in previous times termed "democracy", including for instance the
Athenian democracy, would, when transplanted to the early 21st century be classified as plutocracy or a broad oligarchy, because of the rules on how votes were counted.
In a
Western approach, warned by the possible dangers and impracticality of direct democracy described since antiquity, there was a convergence towards representative democracy, for republics as well as monarchies, from
the Enlightenment on. A direct democracy instrument like referendums is still basically mistrusted in many of the countries that adopted representative democracy. Nonetheless, some republics like
Switzerland have a great deal of direct democracy in their state organisation, with usually several issues put before the people by referendum every year.
Marxism inspired state organisations that, at the height of the
Cold War, had barely more than a few external appearances in common with Western types of democracies. That is, not withstanding that on an ideological level Marxism and
communism sought to empower proletarians. A Communist republic like
Fidel Castro's Cuba has many "popular committees" to allow participation from citizens on a very basic level, without much of a far-reaching political power resulting from that. This approach to democracy is sometimes termed Basic democracy, but the term is contentious: the intended result is often something in between direct democracy and grassroots democracy, but connotations may vary.
Some of the hardline totalitarianism lived on in the East, even after the
Iron Curtain fell. Sometimes the full name of such republics can be deceptive: having "people's" or "democratic" in the name of a country can, in some cases bear no relation with the concepts of democracy that grew in the West. In fact, the phrase "People's Democratic Republic" was often synonymous with Marxist dictatorships during the Cold War. It also should be clear that many of these "Eastern" type of republics fall outside a definition of a republic that supposes control over who is in power by the people at large – unless it is accepted that the preference the people displays for their leader is in all cases authentic.
Influence of republicanism
Like
Anti-monarchism and
religious differences, republicanism played no equal role in the emergence of the many actual republics. Up to the republics that originated in the late middle ages, even if, from what we know about them, they also can be qualified "republics" in a modern understanding of the word, establishing the kind and amount of "republicanism" that led to their emergence is often limited to educated guesswork, based on sources that are generally recognised to be partly fictitious reconstruction.
Over time there were various mixtures of republicanism along with democratic theories of the rights of individuals, which would find expression in the formation of liberal and socialist parties. What both
liberalism and
socialism shared was the belief in the self-determination of peoples, and in individual human dignity. But they disagreed and continue to disagree on whether this required a republic, what is the
exact use of the term "republic", and how economic life should be organized. This latter conflict is often described in terms of socialism versus
capitalism . The compromise between democracy and having an hereditary head of state is called
constitutional monarchy.
There is however, for instance, no doubt that republicanism was a founding ideology of the
United States of America and remains at the core of American political values. See Republicanism in the U.S.
In antiquity
In ancient India, a number of
Maha Janapadas were established as republics by the 6th century BC. In the
ancient Near East, a number of cities of the
Levant achieved collective rule.
Arwad has been cited as one of the earliest known examples of a republic, in which the people, rather than a monarch, are described as sovereign.
The important politico-philosophical writings of antiquity that survived the middle ages rarely had any influence on the emergence or strengthening of republics in the time they were written. When
Plato wrote the dialogue that later, in English speaking countries, became known as
The Republic , Athenian democracy had already been established, and was not influenced by the treatise . Plato's own experiments with his political principles in
Syracuse were a failure.
Cicero's
De re publica, far from being able to redirect the Roman state to reinforce its republican form of government, rather reads as a prelude to the
Imperial form of government that indeed emerged soon after Cicero's death.
In the renaissance
The emergence of the
Renaissance, on the other hand, was marked by the adoption of many of these writings from Antiquity, which led to a more or less coherent view, retroactively termed "classical republicanism". Differences however remained regarding which kind of "mix" in a mixed government type of ideal state would be the most inherently
republican. For those republics that emerged after the publication of the Renaissance philosophies regarding republics, like the
United Provinces of the Netherlands, it is not always all that clear what role exactly was played by republicanism - among a host of other reasons - that led to the choice for "republic" as form of state .
Enlightenment republicanism
The Enlightenment had brought a new generation of political thinkers, showing that, among other things, political
philosophy was in the process of refocusing to political
science. This time the influence of the political
thinkers, like Locke, on the emergence of republics in America and France soon thereafter was unmistakable: Separation of powers,
Separation of church and state, etc were introduced with a certain degree of success in the new republics, along the lines of the major political thinkers of the day.
In fact, the Enlightenment had set the standard for republics, as well as in many cases for monarchies, in the next century. The most important principles established by the close of the Enlightenment were the rule of law, the requirement that governments reflect the self-interest of the people that were subject to that law, that governments act in the national interest, in ways which are understandable to the public at large, and that there be some means of self-determination.
Proletarian republicanism
The next major branch in political thinking was pushed forward by
Karl Marx, who argued that classes, rather than nationalities, had interests. He argued that governments represented the interests of the dominant class, and that, eventually, the states of his era would be overthrown by those dominated by the rising class of the proletariat.
Here again the formation of republics along the line of the new political philosophies followed quickly after the emergence of the philosophies: from the early 20th century on
communist type of republics were set up , many of them standing for about a century - but in increasing tension with the states that were more direct heirs of the ideas of the Enlightenment.
Islamic Republicanism
Following decolonialization in the second half of 20th century, the
political dimension of the Islam knew a new impulse, leading to several Islamic republics. As far as "Enlightenment" and "communist" principles were sometimes up to a limited level incorporated in these republics, such principles were always subject to principles laid down in the
Qur'an. While, however, there is no apparent reason why sharia and related concepts of Islamic political thought should emerge in a
republican form of government, the strife for Islamic republics is generally not qualified as a form of "republicanism".
Economical factors
The ancient concept of res publica, when applied to politics, had always implied that citizens on one level or another
took part in governing the state: at least citizens were not indifferent to decisions taken by those in charge, and could engage in political debate. A line of thought followed often by historians is that citizens, under normal circumstances, would only become politically active if they had spare time above and beyond the daily effort for mere survival. In other words, enough of a wealthy middle class is often seen as one of the preconditions to establish a republican form of government. In this reasoning neither the cities of the
Hanseatic League, nor late 19th century
Catalonia, nor the Netherlands during their Golden Age emerging in the form of a republic comes as a surprise, all of them at the top of their wealth through commerce and societies with an influential and rich middle class.
Here also the different nature of republics inspired by Marxism becomes apparent: Karl Marx theorised that the government of a state should be based on the proletarians, that is on those whose political opinions never had been asked before, even less had been considered to really matter when designing a state organisation. There was a problem Marxist/Communist types of republics had to solve: most proletarians were lacking interest and/or experience in designing a state organisation, even if acquainted with
Das Kapital is an extensive treatise on political economy [i] written by Karl Marx [i] in German [i] ...
or
Engels' writings. While the
practical political involvement of proletarians on the level of an entire country hardly ever materialised, these communist republics were more often than not organised in a very top-down structure.
Aggregations of states
When a country or state is organised on several levels several models exist:
- Both over-arching structure and sub-states take the form of a republic
- The over-arching structure is a republic, while the sub-states are not necessarily ;
- The over-arching structure is not a republic, while the sub-states can be .
Sub-national republics
In general being a republic also implies sovereignty as for the state to be ruled by the people it cannot be controlled by a foreign power. There are important exceptions to this, for example, Republics in the
Soviet Union were member states which had to meet three criteria to be named republics,
- 1) Be on the periphery of the Soviet Union so as to be able to take advantage of their theoretical right to secede,
- 2) Be economically strong enough to be self sufficient upon secession, And
- 3) Be named after at least one million people of the ethnic group which should make up the majority population of said republic.
Republics were originally created by Stalin and continue to be created even today in Russia. Russia itself is not a republic but a federation.
It is sometimes argued that the former
Soviet Union was also a supra-national republic, based on the claim that the member states were different nations.
States of the
United States are required, like the federal government, to be republican in form, with final authority resting with the people. This was required because the states were intended to create and enforce most domestic laws, with the exception of areas delegated to the federal government and prohibited to the states. The founding fathers of the country intended most domestic laws to be handled by the states, although, over time, the federal government has gained more and more influence over domestic law. Requiring the states to be a republic in form was seen as protecting the citizens' rights and preventing a state from becoming a dictatorship or monarchy, and reflected unwillingness on the part of the original 13 states to unite with other states that were not republics. Additionally, this requirement ensured that only other republics could join the union.
In the example of the
United States, the original 13 British
colonies became independent states after the
American Revolution, each having a republican form of government. These independent states initially formed a loose confederation called the United States and then later formed the current United States by ratifying the current
U.S. Constitution, creating a union of sovereign states with the union or
federal government also being a republic. States joining the union later were also required to be a republic. The United States could be argued to be a supra-national republic on the grounds that the original states were independent countries and was formed of several nations, most notably the original 13 colonies/states, the Republic of
Texas, and the Kingdom of
Hawaii, all of which would be considered "nations" under a strict definition of the word.
Supra-national republics
Sovereign countries can decide to hand in a limited part of their sovereignty to a supra-national organisation. The most famous example of this, since the second half of the 20th century, is the emergence of the
European Union, which models its organisation as a republic. That it would be a republic in a strict sense can be debated while the European Union is not a "country" in a strict sense. Being a republic is not part of the admission criteria for the member states. Although the largest political family of EU parlementaries has a Christian denomination, the
European constitution would establish its form of government as secular.
The
European Union, like the United States, is also formed by independent states creating a union, except that the member states of the European Union are not required to be a republic. The European Union currently is not classified as a country, however it is starting to exhibit behaviors similar to a state. Regardless, the European Union could still be classified as a supra-national republic even if it were to exhibit powers similar to a state because it is made of many nations.
Examples of republics
In the early 21st century, most states that are not monarchies label themselves as republics either in their official names or their constitutions. There are a few exceptions: the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, the State of
Israel, the
Union of Myanmar and the
Russian
Federation. Israel and Russia, and even Myanmar and Libya, would meet many definitions of the term
republic, however.
Since the term
republic is so vague by itself, many states felt it necessary to add additional qualifiers in order to clarify what kind of republics they claim to be. Here is a list of such qualifiers and variations on the term "republic":
Throughout history, Iran has been of great geostrategic [i] importance because of its centr ...
are republics governed in accordance with Islamic law.
- Arab Republic - for example, Syria its name reflecting its theoretically pan-Arab Ba'athist government.
- People's Republic - Countries like China, North Korea are meant to be governed for and by the people, but generally without direct elections. Thus, they use the term People's Republic, which was shared by many past Communist states.
- Democratic Republic - Tends to be used by countries who have a particular desire to emphasize their claim to be democratic; these are typically Communist states and/or ex-colonies. Examples include the German Democratic Republic and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
- Commonwealth - Both words are derived from the Latin word res publica . Used in Poland for the current Republic of Poland, and historical Nobles' Rzeczpospolita.
- Free state - Sometimes used as a label to indicate implementation of, or transition from a monarchical to, a republican form of government. Used for the Irish Free State under an Irish Republican government, while still remaining part of the British Empire.
- Other modifiers are rooted in tradition and history and usually have no real political meaning. San Marino, for instance, is the "Most Serene Republic" while Uruguay is the "Eastern Republic".
Republics in political theory
In political theory and political science, the term "republic" is generally applied to a state where the government's political power depends solely on the consent, however nominal, of the people governed. This usage leads to two sets of problematic classification. The first are states which are oligarchical in nature, but are not nominally hereditary, such as many dictatorships, the second are states where all, or almost all, real political power is held by democratic institutions, but which have a monarch as nominal head of state, generally known as
constitutional monarchies. The first case causes many outside the state to deny that the state should, in fact, be seen as a Republic. In many states of the second kind there are active "republican" movements that promote the ending of even the nominal monarchy, and the semantic problem is often resolved by calling the state a
Democracy.
Generally, political scientists try to analyse underlying realities, not the
names by which they go: whether a political leader calls himself "king" or "president", and the state he governs a "monarchy" or a "republic" is not the essential characteristic, whether he exerces power as an autocrat is. In this sense political analysts may say that the
First World War was, in many respects, the death knell for monarchy, and the establishment of republicanism, whether de facto and/or de jure, as being essential for a modern state. The
Austro-Hungarian Empire and the
German Empire were both abolished by the terms of the peace treaty after the war, the Russian Empire overthrown by the
