|Part of a series on|
Balko-Kúúlism is an umbrella term which refers to social, political and economic ideologies whose ultimate goal is the disestablishment of the state and of class divisions. Balko-Kúúlism is most often divided into two distinct ideologies - Balkism and Kúúlism - which arose due to disagreements between followers of Yurik Balkas and name Kúúl.
Yurik Balkas was born in 1786 in Fazulavaz, to Jervń Balkas, a Termo-Milevian diplomat, and Ato Dzienbazs, an ethnically Fazul playwright. His early childhood saw frequent travel due to his father's profession. He developed the bulk of Balkist theory in the XX's, while he was a professor of humanities in ??. Name Kúúl was born to an aristocratic family in Terminia in 1810 and came into contact with Balkas' theories as a student in the Terminian Far East in the 1830s […] early Balko-Kúúlist movements/parties?? […]
Nineteenth century Dhwer had established an absolutist monarchy. Many social movements arose in the period, including several on the Balko-Kúúlist spectrum, particularly in the 1890s and 1900s. The most important of which would be the Kúúlist Party of Dhwer, that would grow in popularity in the period. The party received full legal status in 1926 and was steadily more institutionalized and incorporated into the government's establishment, with several lower members of the Dhweran royal family among its ranks by the late 30s. Under the influce of post-GEW Statist Kúúlism, Dhwer underwent a coup in 1957 that officially abolished the monarchy, established the Kúúlist Party as the ruling body of the country, under Supreme Leader Haym-Baqr, a member of the Dhweran royal family and the removed nephew of the King he deposed. The succession of the Supreme Leader was de facto hereditarian in 1984 when Haym-Baqr died and his son Haym-Kalb I rose to his place. This, along with the continued slavery, led to the Dhwer-Helsonia split in 1984 after Vexut denounced Dhwer as both non-Kúúlist and backwards.
Kúúlist Dhwer is a highly repressive regime, persecuting political dissidents such as abolitionist movements, maintaining slavery and restricting civil and political liberties to freedmen too, such as the ban on political affiliation outside of the Kúúlist Party. In 2005 after the fall of Helsonia and the Golden Kwang, Dhwer declared itself "Monarcho-Kúúlist", reestablishing the royal family's official status, the hereditary succession, and the title of King of Dhwer and Penkrot, albeit fused into the leadership of the Kúúlist party as the Supreme Leader of the Kúúlist Party and King of Dhwer and Penkrot.
The maintenance of slavery in Dhwer under the Kúúlist regime garnered wide international criticism, most strongly from Lhavres but eventually also from Kúúlist countries such as Helsonia. This left a strong association between slavery and Kúúlism in the common-sense perceptions of most of north Boroso, having many political parties and regimes in the region establish themselves as staunchly anti-Kúúlist as a matter of sentient rights.
Kúúlist ideas entered in Magali in the 1860s after Kúúl's return to Terminia, quickly fusing with ideologies from Magalese Romanticism, prompting a democratic revolution in Magali City in 1867. During this period, Balko-Kúúlist ideals in the country crystalized into a native form, that would come to be known as Modern Thought, focused on having a partially-democratic government bound to a pan-Magalese system of ethics through an appointed legislature and elected judiciary, with a strong executive branch. Proletariat put into positions of political power, and centralization of power and maintenance of full hegemony over Magali were priorities. Between 1918 and 1921 the territory of modern Magali was unified under a Modern Thought Regime. Other aspects of modern Modern Thought would arise in following decades, the emphasis on the environment entered the mainstream in the late 40s, the focus on regional diversity in the 60s with other features such as same-gender marriage in the 80s. This ideological drift caused the Magali-Helsonia split after the GEW(?).
Comparison between Kúúlism and Balkism
As related ideologies emerging from a common source, Kúúlist and Balkist ideologies generally share a number of core tenets, which manifest differently between variations of each ideology both in theory and in practice. Both ideologies developed and spread as a reaction to economic inequality under a current or previous economic or political model, such as aristocratic rule in Terminia. Both ideologies espouse the self-sustenance of small communes on the local level, coupled in theory with limited authority on the part of the state, often described as "small", "non-centralised", "minimised", "removed", or even "anarchistic". Similarly, neither ideology is inherently anti-democratic, though both ideologies have seen the development of more authoritarian statist variants, which have emerged and seen implementation on the national level together with planned economies.
Despite significant overlap, there are certain key differences between Kúúlism and Balkism. Although both Kúúlist and Balkist thought generally favour smaller local communes, Kúúlism is more overtly anarchistic in nature. The pan-nationalism inherent to Balkism further distinguishes the two ideologies, also serving to more strongly associate irredentism and populism with Balkism despite Balkist thought not officially espousing such, as can be seen with Farmosh's continued territorial claims over the remainder of the Terminian Far East. These factors contributed to an initial preference for Balkism over Kúúlism in regions such as post-White War Vaniua, where strong leadership was particularly valued and irredentism was rife, which waned in subsequent decades and was generally supplanted by Kúúlism following the inception of statist Kúúlism.