Party
3 articles filed under this keyword.
The Role and Participation of Women in the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (PDKI) (1945-1990).
Kwestan Ahmad Khdir, Hoshmand Ali Mahmood
This research focuses on the role and participation of women in the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (PDKI) (1945-1990), which is a period of enormous significance in the history of women's struggle in Eastern Kurdistan in general and within the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan in particular. During this historical phase, censorship and patriarchal traditions deprived women in Iranian society and Eastern Kurdistan specifically of their rights and freedoms. During the final stages of the Second World War, a number of international and domestic factors led to significant changes in Iranian society, politics, and social life, under the leadership of the newly empowered Mohammad Reza Shah. Among these changes was the establishment of the Democratic Party of Kurdistan-Iran and subsequently the Kurdistan Republic (also known as the Republic of Mahabad), where women from Eastern Kurdistan entered the scene for the first time within their own political and organizational frameworks, playing an influential and active role. The primary research question is: To what extent did women in the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan participate in political, national, and armed struggle in Eastern Kurdistan? What were the internal and external obstacles and factors that impeded these steps? What role did they play in raising awareness in society? This study further emphasizes the roles and responsibilities of women within the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan in political, military, organizational, health, educational, and training domains.
Volume 8 · Issue 3 · September 2021The Character of Abdulkarim Qasim is Between National and Communist Discourse
Suzan Karim Mustafa
In the revolutions of history, an individual or leader is always given a higher role than all perpetrators of events, leaders have always been recognized as heroes in history, and a leader has faced all the factors of success and failure. In all societies, one or more people have always appeared and dominated the entire political and economic spheres of the country, a factor in the self-perception of history, or the hegemony of history, while the achievements of history belong only to one or the first leader, the total number of participants in the process of changing roles and his Impact on the direction of events. Abdul Karim Qasim is an example of a leader in Iraq who went from revolution to dictatorship, while people looked at him with hope and described him as a leader who changed the course of history, the reason for his failure was the conflict between political parties and the international community. This study is the gateway to getting to know Abdul Karim Qasim's personality from the point of view of his opponents. In this two-part study, we discussed the beginnings of Abdul-Karim Qasim’s relations with political parties, and the views of the nationalist and communist parties towards Abdul-Karim Qasim, relying on several sources of different ideologies.
Volume 6 · Issue 1 · June 2019Sociological Comparative Study to Vladimir Lenin and Antonio Gramsci's views on the State
Mahir A Aziz, Saleem P Elias
This theoretical study tries to illustrate, evaluate and compare Vladimir Lenin and Antonio Gramsci’s views on the state. In doing so the study will try to answer this vital question: to what extent Gramsci’s ideas were dependent upon those of Lenin and more specifically, to what extent is Gramsci’s analysis of the capitalist state ultimately no more powerful than that of Lenin? It should be emphasised that this study has been done according to a comparative methodology of the history of theory applied in the fields of sociology in general and political sociology in particular. Basically, this study has been done according to an explanatory approach applied in both fields of politics and political sociology. This study divided into eight sections. The first section devoted to the introduction. The second section deals with Lenin’s view on the revolution, power and the socialist state. The third section explains Gramsci’s view on the hegemony of the party and the state. Section four treats Gramsci’s view on hegemony and the civil society. Section five, however, is explaining Gramsci’s view on the proletariat, the leadership and the passive revolution. Section six will be dealing with Gramsci’s view on Western countries and his conception of civil society. Section seven evaluates and reviews both Lenin and Gramsci’s theories of the state. The last section presents the conclusion of the study.