Weaknesses of Indian Election System
What are the Weaknesses of Indian Election System?Since the
adoption of the Indian Constitution in 1950, 14 general elections
and many elections of various State Legislative Assemblies have
been held. Although these elections were generally free and fair,
yet some weaknesses of our election system have been noticed. Some
of these weaknesses (challenges) are as under:
(a) Expensive elections:In India, elections are very expensive
and a common man, however, intelligent and honest he may be, cannot
fight elections. As a result only the rich people can fight
elections and they make use of political power first to serve their
own interests. They also try to make more money through illegal
methods.
(b) Misuse of official machinery:Though some steps have been
taken by the Election Commission and the election laws to check the
misuse of official machinery during the elections, yet the ruling
party makes use of government servants, vehicles and discretionary
grants to win the voters in their favour.
(c) Use of caste and religion in election:In India, a large
number of votes are cast on the basis of caste and religion. As a
result people get divided on the basis of caste, religion and
community which is very harmful for national unity.
(d) Rigging of election and booth capturing:With the connivance
of the government officials, the ruling party tries to rig the
elections. Some candidates also capture the polling booths and make
use of their muscle powers to do it. It is alleged that in J&K
Assembly elections held in 1987, many candidates of the opposition
front were declared losers even though they had got maximum number
of votes.
(e) Misuse of mass media:During elections the ruling party uses
various means of mass media-Radios, Television and Newspapers
etc.-to propagate their policies and programmes.
(f) Low polling percentage:In India, many voters do not cast
their votes. The voting percentage generally is almost 50 to 60
percent. Therefore, the representative bodies are not truly
representative.
(g) Delay in the disposal of election petitions:In India, it
takes a long time in the disposal of election petitions and
sometimes the very purpose of election petition gets defeated.
Remedies:(a) To minimise the role of money in election,
provisions should be made for state funding of elections.
(b) Misuse of official machinery should be checked strictly.
(c) Candidates making use of caste or religions during elections
should be debarred from contesting elections.
(d) Rigging of elections by the use of muscle power and booth
capturing should be strongly checked.
(e) Every party or candidate should be given a chance to make
use of mass media.t(f) Voting should be made compulsory.
(g) Election petitions should be disposed off without any
delay.
The above issues should be a matter of concern to all those who
believe in democracy. Many citizens, political leaders and
organisations are trying to curb such tendencies by launching
agitations against these malpractices. Besides voters need to
become more aware of the value of their right to vote.
\Caste politics in India
Castein Indian society refers to a social group where membership
decided by birth. Members of such local group areendogamous, i.e.
they tend to enter into marital relationships among themselves.
They often have related political preferences, similar to the
racial preferences for the Democratic and Republican parties in
USA.[1]For political/government purposes, the castes among the
Hindus are broadly divided into[2]
HYPERLINK "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_politics_in_India"
\l "cite_note-3" [3] Forward Caste Other Backward Class(OBC) (about
41% of population)
Scheduled Caste(about 20% of population)
Scheduled Tribe(about 9% of population)
The Indian Muslims (13.4%), and Christians (2.3%) often function
as a caste since they too marry among themselves.
Official lists are compiled by states recognizing the OBC,
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled tribes. The dividing lines can
be ambiguous, several castes have demanded a lower rank so that
they can avail of the privileges offered. The term "Upper caste"
often includes Forward castes and the OBCs, when news reports refer
to the Scheduled castes in relation to the two upper groups.
It was institutionalized into government organizations by
British colonizers.[citation needed]The removal of the boundaries
between "civil society" and "political society" meant that caste
now played a huge role in the political arena and also influenced
other government-run institutions such as police and the judicial
system. Though caste seemed to dictate one's access to such
institutions, the location of that caste also played a pivotal
role. If alower castewere concentrated enough in one area, it could
then translate that pocket of concentration of its caste members
into political power and then challenge thehegemonyof locally
dominantupper caste. Gender also plays a significant role in the
power dynamic of caste in politics. Women's representation within
the political system seems to also be tied to their caste. Lower,
more conservative castes have less female participation in politics
than upper, more socially liberal, castes. This has caused a
disproportionately large number of upper-caste women to occupy
political office when compared to their lower caste counterparts.
The hierarchy of caste and its role in politics and access to power
and resources has created a society of patron-client relationships
along caste lines. This staunchly rigid structure was most
prevalent during the Congress-dominating period[citation needed].
This eventually led to the practice ofvote banking, where voters
back only candidates that are in their caste[1], or officials from
which they expect to receive some kind of benefits.
Historically it has been very hard to change the structure
ofcaste politics in India. More recently[when?]however, there has
been a flux in caste politics, mainly caused byeconomic
liberalization in India. This upsurge in lower-caste empowerment
was accompanied in some regions by a spike in the level of
corruption. This was partly due to lower caste perceiving
development programs and rule of law as tools used by the upper
caste to subjugate lower castes.[citation needed]More contemporary
India, however, has seen the influence of caste start to decline.
This is partly due to the spread of education to all castes which
has had a democratizing effect on the political system. However,
this "equalizing" of the playing field has not been without
controversy. TheMandal Commissionand its quotas system has been a
particularly sensitive issue.
Besides voting, the caste is an important factor, influencing
the selection of candidates in elections, appointment of ministers,
transfer and posting of public officials etc. the policy of
reservation has given further impetus to the role of caste in
politics, particularly in the last few years. The role of caste in
the different aspects of politics is given below:
Caste has influenced the policy-making of the government, for
example the policy of reservation in favour of certain castes.The
programmes, policies and declarations of political parties are
made, keeping in view the caste factor. Even different positions
within a political party are distributed in terms of caste
configurations.
Caste plays a very important role in elections and voting.
Political parties select their candidates on the basis of caste
composition in the constituency. The voting in elections and
mobilisation of political support from top to bottom moves on the
caste lines.
The caste factor also influences the formation of the council of
ministers and making appointments to various political positions in
the government.
Caste also functions, as a pressure group in politics. Political
bargaining is also done on the caste lines. Caste organisations
have emerged to organise caste members for collective bargaining
with each other.
The administration has not escaped the influence of the caste in
India. The postings, transfers and appointments of public officials
are influenced by caste considerations.
Even the behaviour of public officials in carrying out
administrative duties get influenced by caste considerations.
The political leadership in many political parties emerges and
survives in politics on the basis of the support of certain caste
groups.There are many political experts who consider the increasing
influence of caste in politics as a negative tendency, not helpful
in the development of democracy. Experts like D.R. Gadgil and
famous sociologist M.N. Srinivas hold this view.
However, there are commentators and thinkers who hold that the
role of caste is essential to give momentum to the political
process. American political experts I.Rudolf and S.H. Rudolf in
their book, Modernity and Tradition hold the view that caste
politics in India has reduced the distinction among castes and has
brought about political equality among the members of different
castes.
ethinic minority and politicss usual, some of the figures are
open to debate. The implications for the political parties are not.
The centre-right thinktankPolicy Exchangegrabbed headlines this
week by saying, in a new report, that ethnic minorities will make
up a third of Britain by 2050. In fact, this was howsome
newspaperschose to headline the story. The report itself,A Portrait
of Modern Britain, was more cautious. It rehearses differing
estimates that black and minority ethnic communities will represent
"between 20-30% of the UK's population" by 2051. This is rather
different. There is a big gap between 20% and 30% and 30% is both a
maximum estimate and not the same thing as a third. Since the
current figure for BME communities is already 14%, the increase
over the next 35 years could actually be relatively modest if the
figure turns out to be closer to the 20% thatone expert cited in
the reporthas estimated.
Butthe political implications of Britain's changing
demographyremain challenging, irrespective of the precise nature of
the figures that give rise to them. In Britain, as in most other
developed economies in the western world, changing demographics are
already a reality. They are also already shaping the agendas,
assumptions and methods of the old politics. That change will
intensify, as the second and third generations of migrants reach
voting age and as differential birthrates recast the ethnic map.
Crucially, as the report stresses, Britain's political parties are
unprepared for the lasting importance of such changes.
Ethnic minorities in Britain share roughly similar levels of
partisanship identification with a political party to the white
population. In many other respects, however, the political and
electoral profile of BME voters is very different from that of
whites. BME citizens are less often registered to vote than whites,
a divergence that may increase when individual voter registration
is introduced. But the biggest difference is in the degree to which
all BME groups identify with and overwhelmingly vote for Labour.In
the 2010 election, in which Labour lost and did badly, 68% of all
BME voters nevertheless voted Labour, compared with 31% of white
voters. On the other hand, only 16% of BME voters voted
Conservative, compared with 37% of whites.
Combine the increasing size and proportion of the BME electorate
with that striking difference in political identification, and it
soon becomes clear that these figures pose a historic challenge for
both Labour and the Tories as well as for other political parties.
The challenge is, of course, the reverse one for the two main
parties. For Labour the challenge is to retain its grip on BME
voters. For theConservativesit is to increase its appeal. But since
only around two-thirds of the electorate now identify with either
of the two main parties, the possibility of a majority government
of either stripe may hang on the outcome.
For Labour the problem is complacency. But the challengefacing
the Toriesis much more acute. Any strategist who looks at the
figures as Lord Ashcroft has also done will see that the Tories
need to appeal more consistently to BME voters in order to win
enough seats to form a government. So the first thing any
strategist's memo to David Cameron would say in the light of the
Policy Exchange report is to beware the impact on these vital BME
voters of any sudden lurch towards Ukip and its predominantly white
electorate in the aftermath of the European elections later this
month.
That is not the same as saying, for example, that the Tories
should do a U-turn on an issue such as immigration. That is
unlikely to be what BME voters want anyway. But it does mean that
the Tory party needs to avoid lazy stereotypes and to reach out to
the different ethnic groups on the issues that concern them. The
party also needs to be much more self-critical and humble than
parts of it are often tempted to be about a range of the party's
stances on issues from education to policing. A party of white
people speaking only to white people is no longer an option for any
party that seeks to speak for the new Britain.
Post-Colonialism: Definition, Development and Examples from
India
This speech deals with the phenomenon of post-colonialism. It
presents general definitions of the post-colonial theory and
provides some information about its development as well as
illustrating background knowledge about basic landmarks of Indias
colonial past. It then concentrates on the post-colonial
development of India which was a British colony until 1947.1.
Post-colonialism in general1.1 DefinitionPost-colonialism is an
intellectual direction (sometimes also called an era or the
post-colonial theory) that exists since around the middle of the
20thcentury. It developed from and mainly refers to the time after
colonialism. The post-colonial direction was created as colonial
countries became independent. Nowadays, aspects of post-colonialism
can be found not only in sciences concerning history, literature
and politics, but also in approach to culture and identity of both
the countries that were colonised and the former colonial powers.
However, post-colonialism can take the colonial time as well as the
time after colonialism into consideration.
1.2 DevelopmentThe term decolonisation seems to be of particular
importance while talking about post-colonialism. In this case it
means an intellectual process that persistently transfers the
independence of former-colonial countries into peoples minds. The
basic idea of this process is the deconstruction of old-fashioned
perceptions and attitudes of power and oppression that were adopted
during the time of colonialism.First attempts to put this long-term
policy of decolonising the minds into practice could be regarded in
the Indian population after India became independent from the
British Empire in 1947.
However, post-colonialism has increasingly become an object of
scientific examination since 1950 when Western intellectuals began
to get interested in the Third World countries. In the seventies,
this interest lead to an integration of discussions about
post-colonialism in various study courses at American Universities.
Nowadays it also plays a remarkable role at European
Universities.
A major aspect of post-colonialism is the rather violent-like,
unbuffered contact or clash of cultures as an inevitable result of
former colonial times; the relationship of the colonial power to
the (formerly) colonised country, its population and culture and
vice versa seems extremely ambiguous and contradictory.This
contradiction of two clashing cultures and the wide scale of
problems resulting from it must be regarded as a major theme in
post-colonialism: For centuries the colonial suppressor often had
been forcing his civilised values on the natives. But when the
native population finally gained independence, the colonial relicts
were still omnipresent, deeply integrated in the natives minds and
were supposed to be removed.So decolonisation is a process of
change, destruction and, in the first place, an attempt to regain
and lose power. While natives had to learn how to put independence
into practice, colonial powers had to accept the loss of power over
foreign countries. However, both sides have to deal with their past
as suppressor and suppressed.This complicated relationship mainly
developed from the Eurocentric perspective from which the former
colonial powers saw themselves: Their colonial policy was often
criticised as arrogant, ignorant, brutal and simply nave. Their
final colonial failure and the total independence of the once
suppressed made the process of decolonisation rather tense and
emotional.
Post-colonialism also deals with conflicts of identity and
cultural belonging. Colonial powers came to foreign states and
destroyed main parts of native tradition and culture; furthermore,
they continuously replaced them with their own ones. This often
lead to conflicts when countries became independent and suddenly
faced the challenge of developing a new nationwide identity and
self-confidence.As generations had lived under the power of
colonial rulers, they had more or less adopted their Western
tradition and culture. The challenge for these countries was to
find an individual way of proceeding to call their own. They could
not get rid of the Western way of life from one day to the other;
they could not manage to create a completely new one either.On the
other hand, former colonial powers had to change their
self-assessment. This paradox identification process seems to be
what decolonisation is all about, while post-colonialism is the
intellectual direction that deals with it and maintains a steady
analysis from both points of view.
So how is this difficult process of decolonisation being done?
By the power of language, even more than by the use of military
violence. Language is the intellectual means by which post-colonial
communication and reflection takes place. This is particularly
important as most colonial powers tried to integrate their
language, the major aspect of their civilised culture, in foreign
societies.A lot of Indian books that can be attached to the era of
post-colonialism, for instance, are written in English. The
cross-border exchange of thoughts from both parties of the
post-colonial conflict is supported by the use of a shared
language.
To give a conclusion of it all, one might say that
post-colonialism is a vivid discussion about what happened with the
colonial thinking at the end of the colonial era. What legacy
arouse from this era? What social, cultural and economical
consequences could be seen and are still visible today? In these
contexts, one examines alternating experiences of suppression,
resistance, gender, migration and so forth. While doing so, both
the colonising and colonised side are taken into consideration and
related to each other. The main target of post-colonialism remains
the same: To review and to deconstruct one-sided, worn-out
attitudes in a lively discussion of colonisation.
2. The post-colonial experience in India2.1 History of Indian
colonialismIn the 16thcentury, European powers began to conquer
small outposts along the Indian coast. Portugal, the Netherlands
and France ruled different regions in India before the British East
India Company was founded in 1756.The British colonialists managed
to control most parts of India while ruling the key cities
Calcutta, Madras and Bombay as the main British bases. However,
there still remained a few independent regions (Kashmir among
others) whose lords were loyal to the British Empire.
In 1857, the first big rebellion took place in the north of
India. The incident is also named First war of Indian Independence,
the Sepoy Rebellion or the Indian Mutiny, depending on the
individual perspective. This was the first time Indians rebelled in
massive numbers against the presence and the rule of the British in
South Asia. The rebellion failed and the British colonialists
continued their rule.
In 1885, the National Indian Congress (popularly called
Congress) was founded. It demanded that the Indians should have
their proper legitimate share in the government. From then on, the
Congress developed into the main body of opposition against British
colonial rule. Besides, a Muslim anti-colonial organisation was
founded in 1906, called the Muslim League.
While most parts of the Indian population remained loyal to the
British colonial power during the First World War, more and more
Muslim people joined the Indian independence movement since they
were angry about the division of the Ottoman Empire by the
British.
The non-violent resistance against British colonial rule, mainly
initiated and organised by Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru,
finally lead to independence in 1947.
At the same time, the huge British colony was split into two
nations: The secular Indian Union and the smaller Muslim state of
Pakistan. The Muslim League had demanded for an independent Muslim
state with a majority of Muslims.
India became a member of the British Commonwealth after
1947.
2.2 Post-colonial development in IndiaThe Partition of India
(also called the Great Divide) lead to huge movements and an ethnic
conflict across the Indian-Pakistani border. While around 10
million Hindus und Sikhs were expelled from Pakistan, about 7
million Muslims crossed the border to from India to Pakistan.
Hundreds of thousands of people died in this conflict. Ever since
these incidents, there have been tensions between India and
Pakistan which lead to different wars particularly in the Kashmir
region.
For decades the Congress Party ruled the democratic country
which had become a republic with its own constitution in 1950. In
1977 the opposition gained the majority of votes. In 1984, after
the Congress Party had regained the majority, conflicts with the
cultural minority of the Sikhs lead to the assassination of the
Indian prime minister Indira Ghandi.
Today, apart from the significant economic progress, India is
still facing its old problems: Poverty, overpopulation,
environmental pollution as well as ethnic and religious conflicts
between Hindus and Muslims. Additionally, the Kashmir conflict has
not come to an end yet, while both Pakistan and Indian are
threatening each other with their arsenals of atomic weapons.
Concerning post-colonial literature, Edward Saids book
Orientalism (published in 1978) is regarded as the beginning of
post-colonial studies. In this book the author analyses how
European states initiated colonialism as a result of what they
called their own racial superiority.
The religious-ethnic conflicts between different groups of
people play an important role in the early years of
post-colonialism. Eye-witnesses from both sides of the
Indian-Pakistani conflict wrote about their feelings and experience
during genocide, being confronted to blind and irrational violence
and hatred. The Partition is often described as an Indian
trauma.One example for a post-colonial scriptwriter who wrote about
this conflict is Saddat Hasan Manto (1912 1955). He was forced to
leave Bombay and to settle in Lahore, Pakistan. He published a
collection of stories and sketches (Mottled Dawn) that deal with
this dark era of Indian history and its immense social consequences
and uncountable tragedies.
Furthermore, there are many different approaches to the topic of
intercultural exchange between the British and the Indian
population. Uncountable essays and novels deal with the ambiguous
relationship between these two nations. One particularly
interesting phenomenon is that authors from both sides try to write
from different angles and perspectives and in that way to show
empathy with their cultural counterpart.The most famous novelist
who wrote about these social and cultural exchanges is Salman
Rushdie. Rushdie, who won the booker prize among various others,
was born in India, but studied in England and started writing books
about India and the British in the early eighties. His funny,
brave, metaphoric and sometimes even ironical way of writing offers
a multi-perspective approach to the post-colonial complex. This can
be also seen in his book Midnights Children. In the past, Salman
Rushdie was also repeatedly threatened by Irani fundamentalists
because of his critical writing about Muslim extremism in the
Middle East.
Another famous post-colonial novel is Heat and Dust (published
in 1975) by Ruth Prawer Jhabvala that contains two plot set in
different times: One about a British lady starting an affair with a
local Indian prince in the 1920s, the other one set in the 1970s,
featuring young Europeans on a hippie trail who claim they have
left behind Western civilisation and are trying to some spiritual
home among Indian gurus.
Bollywood has become a notorious synonym for the uprising Indian
film industry in recent years. Young Indian scriptwriters have
discovered post-colonial issues as themes for their movies and as a
way of dealing with the changeful past of their country.
Concerning the integration of Western values in the Indian
population and culture, one can say that the British influence is
still omnipresent in the Asian subcontinent. The reason for this
can be also found in the persistence of the English language.Many
Indians are conversant with the English language, because the
British colonialists intended to export their values and culture by
teaching the Indian population their language. This was regarded as
the basic fundament for further education.
What about the relationship between India and the United Kingdom
today? It is a special one, and of course still not without
tensions between these two nations that refer to the time of
colonialism which from our retro perspective is not at all so far
away.India has managed to become an independent state with its own
political system and is still working to find its own identity. The
longer the process of decolonisation lasts, the more we get the
impression that only a middle course between the acceptance of
British legacies and the creation of a new unique Indian
self-confidence will be the right way to go for India.
BREAKDOWN OF CONGRESS SYSTEM
What are the most convincing factors that help explain the
decline in dominance of the Congress Party in Indias political
system? Indias political system is commonly described as being a
multi-party system. This is a system of political representation
involving 3 or more political parties. Each political party has the
capacity to control government either by its own or through
coalitions with other parties. India is a federal republic;
therefore, this multi-party structure is implemented at both the
regional and national levels.Rajni Kothari offers a more in-depth
analysis and definition of Indias political system. The author
accepts the common notion of Indias political system being a
multi-party one, but also goes further to qualify the system as a
multi-party system with one party dominance, (Kothari 1964: 1162).
Kothari defines a one-party dominant system as, a competitive party
system but one in which the competing parts pay dissimilar roles
and one which consists of, parties of pressure and parties of
consensus. Parties of pressure operate within the margin of
pressure. This is comprised of opposition parties to the ruling
party or parties. Their main role is to, pressure, criticize,
censure and influence the ruling party and act as a balance of
power on the ruling party, by exerting the latent threat to
displace the ruling party if it strays too far from a balance of
public opinion, (Kothari 1964: 1162). The parties of consensus are
the political parties, which are part of the ruling consensus. The
system depends on the sensitivity of the margin of pressure, where
the parties of pressure operate, ensure suitable checks and balance
on the ruling consensus and ensure the accountability of the
parties of consensus. Kothari writing in 1964 identifies the
Congress Party as the main consensus and therefore the dominant
party through which the Indian political system operates. The
Congress Party, officially known as the Indian National Congress
(INC), was founded in 1885 as a nationalist movement to achieve the
independence of the Indian state from British colonial rule and
domination. It spearheaded the movement, which eventually
culminated in Indias independence in 1947. Post-independence, the
Congress Party became the dominant party in the electoral system,
dominating the Lok Sabha, the legislative branch of the Indian
government and the state assemblies. It also formed the first
executive government with Jawaharlal Nehru as Prime Minister. Over
the years however, the Congress Party appears to be on a downward
trend in terms of its electoral dominance and has even been ousted
more than once from majority control of seats in the Indian
Parliament. This essay aims to critically assess the decline in the
dominance of the Congress Party, a party that is more or less
synonymous with the Indian state. It will explore various possible
reasons for the decline in the partys dominance, such as
association of the party with its political leader, emergence of
viable rival political parties and breakdown of the Congress Party
into different factions, essentially reducing its political power.
It will also attempt to assess the nature of the decline of the
party, as a political party control is measured by the percentage
of political votes captured during elections. This measurement
method might fail to depict the true nature of the dominance or
decline. It focuses solely on one arena and in the Indian case,
where corruption and election fraud is common case; dependence on
such limited data might present a skewed analysis. The Congress
Party, as previously stated, developed as a nationalist movement to
ensure the acquisition of an autonomous, sovereign Indian state,
devoid of any control and intervention of the British government,
of which it was formerly a colony. Post-independence, the Congress
Party acquired a new role. As the dominant political party
responsible for the first Indian government, it also had an
obligation towards nation building. Kothari argues that in many
respects, post-independence, the Congress Party continued to be a
movement and not only a political party and evidence of this is
present in its nation building objective, an objective which, has
determined many of the present characteristics of the Indian
political system, (Kothari 1964: 1167). Therefore, an extreme
argument or conclusion could be that a decline of the Congress
Party would also mean a decline of the Indian state as they can be
described as one and the same, since the Congress Party was more or
less responsible for its development. This points to the ambiguity
of the term decline.Political dominance, weakness and decline are
usually measured in terms of electoral votes, i.e., the percentages
of votes won by a political party in elections. The role of a
political party is to represent the public demand. Therefore
elections are direct measurement of the power and influence of a
political party, as it measures how much it represents the publics
demands. Public approval is the key element in determining party
dominance or decline.Figure 1: Percentage of total seats obtained
by the Congress Party in the Lok Sabha and the State Assemblies in
1952, 1957 and 1962. [1] As illustrated in Graph 1, it is evident
that the Congress Party in the early years of political governance
in India was the dominant political party. It acquired at least 70%
of votes in the Lok Sabha in 1952, 1957 and 1962. Its dominance was
not limited to the national level. It was reflected also in state
level assemblies, where although their dominance was not as strong
as it was nationally, it was still a reckoning force. However, this
trend of party dominance does not continue for the Congress party
and from the late 1960s and early 1970s, there is a noted decline
in their political power. Subsequent paragraphs will attempt to
provide some explanation as to the reasons behind this potential
decline in the political power of the Congress Party. A potential
reason for the decline of Congress Party dominance could the
over-association of the political party with the political leader.
It is a fairly common occurrence for a political party to be
associated and in some ways shaped by the ideals and ideologies of
its political leader, e.g., the Labour Party in the United Kingdom
became re-defined by the its leader, Tony Blair in 1997. There are
also instances where the political leader in many respects
over-shadows the political party completely. They become forces in
their own right, e.g., the Late John F. Kennedy developed a
political persona, which superseded his political party, the
Democrats. In the case of the Congress Party, its political leaders
have had a greater impact on its organisation and development, to
the extent that stages in its timeline are defined by the
personality of its political leaders. Kothari argues that the
nature of the post of the leader in the Congress Party is such that
a lot of power in centralised in the singular position, which in
effect weakened the political party. Evidence of this can be found
even at its inception and beginning as a political party. Its first
leader, Jawaharlal Nehru was Mahatma Gandhis appointed successor
after his death. Therefore, he had a legitimacy, which although
might have been personally objected, was publicly revered and
declared both by the public and other potential competitors. The
legitimacy wielded by Nehru served as both a blessing and curse for
the Congress Party. It provided it with public approval and
acceptance but in terms of its internal organizational structure,
it proved, at worst, destructive. Kothari states, in a sense, the
Nehru period was an exceptional period in Indias history, one that
was so necessary, but not so normal. This had its effect on the
working of the party system. While the congress gained in strength
owing to factors described above, Nehru in another way weakened the
party by concentrating power in his own hands and through acting as
if only he could hold the country together, (Kothari 1964: 1171).
The impact of the leadership position on the Congress Party was not
limited to Nehru. Although attempts were made to re-enforce the
partys internal organizational structure in the form of the Kamaraj
Plan, the Congress Party continued to be manipulated and perceived
in accordance with its leader; a trait, which has been both
advantageous and harmful to the party. Leading from the
centralisation of power in the post of political leader, another
potential reason for the decline in the dominance of the Congress
Party could be the growing unpopularity of the partys leaders and
policies. A direct example of this is the regime of Indira Gandhi
and subsequently her son, Rajiv Gandhi. The reign of Indira was a
period, which saw the break-up of the Congress party, the
institution of a state of emergency, (1975-1977), in which the
military was frequently used to curb civil unrest or disobedience.
It was also a period in which the Congress Party, by nature of its
political leader was associated with corruption and electoral
malpractice. The Supreme Court of India declared the Premiership
won by Indira in 1971 void in 1975 on the grounds of electoral
malpractice, after being found guilty of misappropriating
government funds for party campaigning. The illegitimacy and
growing unpopularity of Indiras government and effectively, the
Congress Party was one shared by the Indian public and external
speculators.Figure 2: Authority Trends, 1950-2006: India[2] Figure
2 is a depiction of the measurement of the level of democracy of
the India government since independence in 1947on an index with 10
being the highest level of a democratic state. During the reign of
Indira (1966-1984), India experienced a fall in the index as a
result of undemocratic use of power, authoritarianism and
increasing levels of corruption in Indira Gandhis government.
Indiras reign also saw the Congress Party being ousted from
political leadership. The 1977 elections saw the downfall of the
Congress Party from a majority position in the Indian Parliament,
the Lok Sabha by the Janata Party. It was essentially an ad hoc
party, an amalgamation of political parties opposed to the
institution of the state of emergency and the violent methods
adopted during its tenure. Morarji Desai, a former member and
dissident of the Congress Party, led the Party. The Janata Party
achieved 41.32% of the votes, while the Congress Party only managed
34.52%[3]. The Congress Party did not suffer electoral decline and
defeat solely based on the perception and popularity of its
leaders. The development of worthy competitors to the dominance of
the Congress Party also supported its decline. The Janata Party
formed during the state of emergency in India and its main
successor, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which is currently a
major political party in India and as of the most recently
political elections, with 21.36% of the seats, is the main
opposition to the Congress Party who has 37.94%. The breakup of the
Congress Party during the reign of Indira Gandhi and the internal
political rivalries during this period was also another potential
reason for its decline. One of the main appeals of the Congress
Party was its ability to accommodate and absorb different political
parties within its mandate. This was a tactic, which became
established during the reign of Nehru, whose main political tactic
was to assimilate conflict rather than suppress it. This tactic is
in tune with the argument of Atul Kohli and the effect of a
leadership strategy and the level of institutionalization of the
state. An extension of his argument could be that the be applied to
the strategy adopted by Nehru, coupled with a relatively high level
of institutionalization of the Congress Party, the outcome is
inline with the authors inverse U effect, wherein the demands of
the opposition once assimilated into the ruling party, reduce. The
breakup of the Congress Party and Indiras tactic of repression only
escalated their decline. The break-up reduced their level
representation as instead of the votes being awarded to a single
party, it was dispersed amongst smaller parties. Indiras tactic of
repression prevented the potential assimilation of opposition
groups and the strengthening of the Congress Party, culminating in
a total loss for the Congress Party. Automatic assumption or
supposition that the Congress Party has in fact declined should be
avoided as the nature in which its decline has been measured could
be contested. Majority of the data presented in preceding
paragraphs indicate the decline of the Congress Party in terms of
electoral votes. Measurement of the Congress Party based on a
single source, a source which is not only limited, but also whose
validity could also be questioned. The Congress Party as previously
stated is extremely entrenched in the political structure of the
Indian state. It was responsible for establishing the norms and
ideology on which the current Indian state rests on. The Congress
Party ideals of secularism, social democracy and social liberalism
are ideologies, which are embedded in the Indian constitution and
government. Therefore a decline of the Congress Party would surely
mean a decline in these values and ideologies also. Furthermore,
the use and focus on electoral data to determine the level of
dominance or decline of a political party, in the case of the
Congress Party, it would also prove to be insufficient. This is
because, analysis of the data would present evidence supporting the
dominance of the Congress Party as well as its decline, i.e., the
most recent election figures saw the Congress Party acquiring
majority of votes cast, in an era where it is claimed to be in
decline. The data therefore is such that, depending on the
interpretation, it can be manipulated to support either scenario as
decline or dominance is a relative concept. In conclusion, it is
extremely difficult to assess the level of decline of the Congress
Party in Indian national politics. It is a historical pervasive
party that has been a constant source of admiration and
disapproval. It has provided India with some of its most prominent
Prime Ministers and is its longest standing political party.
Therefore it would be inappropriate to use the term decline to
define the state of the party. A more suitable term to define it
would be evolving. As with most processes, the evolutionary process
is a learning one with highs and lows, of which the Congress Party
is no exception.POLITICS OF WATER DISPUTES IN INDIA
TheInterstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956(IRWD Act) is
anActof theParliament of Indiaenacted under Article 262
ofConstitution of Indiaon the eve ofreorganization of stateson
linguistic basis to resolve the water disputes that would arise in
the use, control and distribution of an interstate river[1]or river
valley.[2]Article 262 of theIndian Constitutionprovides a role for
the Central government in adjudicating conflicts surrounding
inter-state rivers that arise among the states/regional
governments.[3]This Act further has undergone amendments
subsequently and its most recent amendment took place in the year
2002.
IRWD Act (section 2c2) validates the previous agreements (if
any) among the basin states to harness water of an interstate
river/ river valley. River waters use / harnessing is included in
states jurisdiction (entry 17 of state list, Schedule 7of Indian
Constitution).
Water disputes[edit]IRWD Act is applicable only to interstate
rivers / river valleys. An action of one state should affect the
interests of one or more other states. Then only water dispute has
arisen under IRWD Act (section 3).[4]It can be divided into two
independent parts for clarity purpose in understanding the
techno-legal application of IRWD Act
Actions of a downstream state affecting the interest of an
upstream state[edit]A downstream states action can affect the
upstream state interest only in one case. I.e. when a downstream
state is building a dam / barrage near its state boundary and
submerging the territory of an upstream state on permanent /
temporary basis. Other than this action, no other action of a
downstream state could affect the upstream states interest which
they have been using for economical, ecological and spiritual/
religious aspects. The meaning of the word interest in this context
is concern / importance / significance / relevance / consequence of
losing the prevailing water use / purpose.
Actions of an upstream state affecting the interest of a
downstream state[edit]Whereas all the actions of an upstream state
to use or control or distribute the water of an interstate river
can affect the downstream states in one way or other. The following
are some examples but not complete:
1. Consuming river water for any beneficial use such as
irrigation, drinking water, industrial, recreation, recharging of
ground water, ground water use, enhanced evaporation losses,
enhancing rain water use efficiency, obstructing non flood flows of
the river, transferring water to outside the river basin, etc.
(i.e. any manmade /aided action of converting water into water
vapor & losing to atmosphere byevapotranspiration/ evaporation
processes and also transferring river water outside the river
basin). This is generally done by constructing water storage
reservoirs and subsequently using water for above purposes.
2. Quality of water can also be diminished / altered/ controlled
in the action of using water. It would take place by accumulating
the dissolved salts in the remaining water after its use. The
dissolved salts content of water increases due to its consumption
and also addition of more salts by anthropogenic activity. Also
causing water more silt laden / turbid is a manmade water quality
alteration which can be caused by mining and deforestation
activities. Bringing water from other river basins for upstream
states use also effects water quality in downstream
states.[5]Generally river water is transferred to water deficit
areas for use after creating the infrastructure for its storage
(water reservoirs) and distribution network (canals, pipelines,
ground water charging, etc.). All these acts fall under river water
distribution and control category under IRWD Act. All the above
actions of an upstream state are legal causes of water dispute to
the downstream states since their existing interests are affected
as given below:
Decrease in water availability:- When an upstream state
contemplates water use, it would block the lean season river flows
initially by constructing low cost barrages and tries to store the
peak flood waters ultimately by constructing massive water storage
reservoirs. In this process the river flow regime is altered
drastically converting it ephemeral / dry in most of the time
except during floods.[6]It also alters the ecology of the river
located in downstream states affecting its riverine vegetation and
aquatic flora & fauna. Already the delta area of rivers are
eroding / shrinking when adequate river water is not reaching sea.
This process of river water harnessing affects the downstream
states interests as they are deprived of constantly available river
water which they had been using for their interests. Alternatively,
downstream state needs to store more flood water in reservoirs to
cater to the existing water use.
Deterioration in water quality:- If the water use is 67% of the
total available water in the river, the dissolved salts in the
river water increases by three folds. Alteration in river water
quality / alkalinity /salinityeffects growth of traditionally
cultivated crops as they are not best suitable with the
enhancedsoil alkalinityand orsoil salinity. They either give lesser
yield or consume more saline water for the same yield.[7]Also the
aquatic flora & fauna would face survival threat / diminished
growth with the enhanced water salinity and or alkalinity. If the
river is blocked to reach the Sea (i.e. basin closure) in most of
the years, the ecology / fisheries of the surrounding Sea / river
mouth area is also affected. Also there is threat of Sea water
ingress into estuaries / delta of the river contaminating ground
water.[8]The use or control or distribution of river water in an
upstream state is invariably denial of prevailing use / purpose in
the downstream state as it is altering natural flow regime of river
water with respect to quantity, quality and time of availability in
downstream states. Alsodam failuresin upstream states can create
flash floods or further dam failures in downstream states causing
unprecedented property damage and loss of human lives. IRWD Act
(section 3) clearly stipulates that mere anticipation of a riparian
state actions which can affect other riparian state interests is
enough to raise interstate water dispute.
The activities of an upstream state without effecting downstream
states interests are peak flood control measures by impounding the
flood waters only (not base flows) in 100% or more capacity storage
reservoirs for use and run off hydro power generation taken up in
its territory.
Constitution of Tribunal[edit]Whenever the riparian states are
not able to reach amicable agreements on their own in sharing of an
interstate river waters, section 4 of IRWD Act provides dispute
resolution process in the form of Tribunal.[9]As per section 5.2 of
the Act, the tribunal shall not only adjudicate but also
investigate the matters referred to it by the central government
and forward a report setting out the facts with its decisions. It
implies that the tribunal responsibility is not limited
toadjudicationof issues raised by the concerned states and also
investigation of other aspects which are in public domain such as
water pollution, salt export requirement, water quality
deterioration, flood control, sustainability of river basin
productivity & its ecology, environmental flow requirements,
climate change effects, etc.[10]The tribunals verdict is equivalent
to Supreme Court verdict when pronounced in the ambit of IRWD Act.
When the tribunal final verdict issued based on the deliberations
on the draft verdict is accepted by central government and notified
in the official gazette, the verdict becomes law and binding on the
states for implementation.
Amendment 2002[edit]This amendment specifically does not permit
altering the prevailing tribunal verdicts issued before the year
2002 (i.e. but not the tribunal awards issued after the year 2002).
Thus this amendment bars the tribunals to give any time
period/validity for constituting a new tribunal. This is to keep
provision to resolve fresh water disputes which were not addressed
by earlier tribunals/ agreements as and when they surface. A
permanent water dispute tribunal is contemplated to resolve the
growing number of interstate river water disputes
expeditiously.[11]The Tribunal Awards[edit]Till now three tribunal
awards are notified in official gazette by the Government of India.
These are water dispute tribunals allocating river water use by the
riparian states for Krishna (tribunal
1),[12]Godavari[12]andNarmada[12]rivers. All these tribunal awards
were issued before the year 2002 which cannot be altered by the new
tribunals. The tribunals formed on sharing water ofRavi& Beas
rivers, Cauvery /Kaveririver,[13]Vamsadhara River,[14]Mahadayi
/Mandovi River[15]andKrishna River(tribunal 2)[16]are either yet to
pronounce the verdicts or the issued verdicts are to be accepted by
the Government of India.
Recently,Cauvery water disputes tribunalorder was notified by
the GoI on 20 February 2013.
Establishment of authorities to implement a tribunal
verdict[edit]Under Section 6A of this Act, central government may
frame a scheme or schemes to give effect to the decision of a
tribunal. Each scheme has provision to establish an authority for
implementation of a tribunal verdict. However, every scheme and all
its regulations shall be approved by parliament.
In the case of Cauvery River basin,SCdirected theGoIto set up a
temporary Supervisory Committee to implement the tribunal order
till the constitution of Cauvery Management Board by GoI. GoI
established the said temporary Supervisory Committee on 22 May
2013.[17]In the case ofBabli barragedispute, SC itself constituted
the Supervisory Committee to implement the water sharing agreement
betweenMaharashtraandAndhra Pradeshin middle Godavari sub
basin.[18]Data bank and information system[edit]Under Section 9A of
this Act, central government shall maintain a data bank and
information system at national level for each river basin. State
governments shall provide all the data regarding water resources,
land, agriculture and matters related thereto as requested by the
central government. Central government is also vested with powers
to verify the data supplied by the state governments. However, many
state governments (ex: Maharashtra,Chattishgarh, etc) have not been
furnishing the land use data in their states (Tables 14 to 16 of
Integrated Hydrological Data Book, 2012) andCentral Water
Commission of MoWRis not pursuing the matter earnestly to get the
data which is vital in water resources planning.[ARISTOTLE THEORY
OF REVOLUTION
Aristotles Theory of Revolution: Causes and Methods to Prevent
Revolution!Aristotle explained in great detail the theory of
revolution. It is his study of nearly 158 constitutions that helped
him understand the implications of revolutions on a political
system. In his work, Politics, he discussed at length all about
revolutions. Based on his study, Aristotle gave a scientific
analysis and expert treatment to the subject of revolutions. He
gave a very broad meaning to the term revolution which meant two
things to him.
Firstly, it implies any major or minor change in the
constitution such as a change in monarchy or oligarchy and so on.
Secondly, it implies a change in the ruling power even though it
did not lead to a change in the government or the constitution. He
further stated that a revolution could be either direct or
indirect, thereby affecting a particular institution.
Causes of Revolution:According to Aristotle, the two categories
of causes of revolution are general and particular.
The following is a brief explanation of each of the causes of
revolutions:General Causes:According to Aristotle, revolutions take
place when the political order fails to correspond to the
distribution of property and hence tensions arise in the class
structure, eventually leading to revolutions. Arguments over
justice are at the heart of the revolution.
Generally speaking, the cause of revolution is a desire on the
part of those who are devoid of virtue and who are motivated by an
urge to possess property, which is in the name of their opponents.
In other words, the cause of upheaval is inequality.
Aristotle listed certain general causes of revolutions that
affect all types of governments and states. They are: the mental
state or feelings of those who revolt; the motive, which they
desire to fulfill; the immediate source or occasion of
revolutionary outburst.
The mental state is nothing but a desire for equality and it is
a state of disequilibrium. Another clear objective of those rebel
or revolt is to gain honour. Apart from these, Aristotle provided
some more reasons, which are psychological as well as political in
nature that lead to revolutions. As far as psychological factors
are concerned.
They are as follows:1. Profit means that the officers of the
state try to make illicit gains at the expense of the individual or
of the public. It puts the latter to an undeserved loss and creates
a mood of discontent.
2. Rebellions occur when men are dishonored rightly or wrongly
and when they see others obtaining honors that they do not deserve.
If like-minded people join the movement when the government fails
to redress their grievances.
3. Revolutions occur when insolence or disrespect is displayed
by the other members. A revolutionary climate would be soon
created, especially when the state officials become haughty,
arrogant and drunk with power, or pay no attention to the genuine
problems of the people.
This leads to a deep divide in the society, especially between
the state and the people. Over a period of time, peoples complaints
against corrupt officials increase which culminate into
revolutions.
4. Fear is a genuine and a worst enemy of man and human
institutions. It disturbs peace of mind and other emotions.
Revolutions can occur either out of fear of punishment for a wrong
actually committed or a fear of an expected wrong to be inflicted
on the person who is afraid.
5. Contempt is closely related to revolution. This contempt can
be towards rules, laws, political and economic situations, social
and economic order. The contempt is also due to inequalities,
injustices, lack of certain privileges and the like.
6. Finally, revolutions are also the result of imbalances in the
disproportionate increase in the power of the state that creates a
gap between the constitution and the society. In the end, the
constitution reflects social realities, the balances of social and
economic forces.
If this balance is disturbed, the constitution is shaken and it
will either get modified or will perish. For instance, if the
number of poor people increases, the polity may be destroyed.
Similarly, if there are more numbers of rich in the government, it
may lead to an oligarchical set-up. Thus, any sharp differences in
the polity would result in revolutions.
As regards the political factors, issues such as elections
intrigues, carelessness, neglecting small changes, growth in
reputation and power of some office, or even balance of parties
lead to deadlock and finally foreign influence.
A brief explanation of these factors is as follows:1. Election
maneuvering greatly disturbs peoples faith in the constitutional
process. If they succeed, they prevent the constitution from
functioning efficiently or else they create much more troubles.
These election manipulations not only frustrate the public opinion,
but also destroy virtue and good life and they generate new social
issues such as corruption, bribery, nepotism, favoritism and the
like.
2. The foundations of the state can be devastated due to
carelessness or willful negligence leading to revolutions. If the
rulers are careless while selecting the officials, anti-social
elements would creep in and subvert the entire constitution. In
such conditions, a trivial matter of just selecting suitable
officials with little care proves to be the most fatal.
3. A statesman must never neglect any small issue relating to
the governance. If decisions are made in haste without considering
its implication such actions are likely to lead to an uproar. It is
for this reason; Aristotle stated that a need for overhauling the
entire system actually comes when small changes are overlooked. He
also warned leaders that appearances are deceptive and can create
problems.
4. As regards the influence of the powerful neighbouring states,
which have an impact on the constitution, especially when the
constitution of the other nation happens to be of a different
type.
Particular Causes:Apart from the general causes of revolution,
Aristotle also gave certain specific causes in various types of
states. For instance, in democracies, discontentment is bred by the
demagogues who attack the rich either individually or collectively
and build hatred among the people who become revengeful and violent
and this situation leads to conflicts.
In oligarchies, revolutions occur when masses experience an
unpleasant treatment by the officials resulting in dissensions
within the governing class. Personal disputes may further the
flames of fire and though imperceptible, changes in the class
structure of society may invisibly alter the ethos.
Aristotle further believed that it is not necessary that
oligarchy become democracy or vice versa, but they might change
into a completely different system altogether. In aristocracies,
revolutions occur when the circle of the rulers get narrowed down
and become thinner and thinner. It is, in fact, the disequilibrium
in the balance of the different elements or parts of the
constitution that causes revolutions.
As far as the monarchies and the tyrannies are concerned,
revolutions are caused by insolence, resentment of insults, fears,
contempt, desire for fame, influence of neighbouring states, sexual
offences and physical infirmities.
Methods to Prevent Revolutions:Aristotle in order to ensure that
there are lesser chances of revolutions suggested the following
methods to prevent them:Aristotle called upon the kings to believe
in one principle maxim that prevention is better than cure. He
wanted the rulers to obey laws even in smallest matters. He
believed that transgression, of even in small amounts, would sooner
or later result in total disrespect and violation. Further taking
cue from the rulers, if people start breaking the laws, the entire
social order would be at stake.
He strongly advised the rulers that they must believe that they
can fool some people all the time, all the people for some time and
not all the people all the time. In other words, people should not
be taken for granted, and sooner or later they will explode with
suddenness that might take the rulers by surprise.
He also stated that the rulers must provide due care to all
those people in their domain. They should not discriminate between
the officer and commoner, between governing and non-governing and
the like. The principle of democratic equality must be
followed.
Further, every citizen must be given a chance to express their
opinions about the government and that the tenure of the officials
must be short-term. By this method, oligarchies and aristocracies
would not fall into the hands of the families.
As the internal feuds among the rulers would sap the energy and
unity of a state, the ruler must be on constant vigil and keep all
quarrels and seditions among rulers at a distance. No person or
official should either be raised to the highest position or
suddenly stunned. There has to be a balance.
Those who have acquired too much wealth or amassed great wealth
must be ostracized or banished and no single society should be
allowed to establish its dominance over the other. To achieve this,
offices must be given to the opposite elements like the rich and
the poor, in order to maintain a balance. Aristotle further stated
that public offices must not be made lucrative. By doing this, the
poor would not be attracted and the rich might occupy them without
any additional advantage.
The poor then stick to their work and grow rich, and the rich
would occupy offices without getting richer. Under these
conditions, the poor would have satisfaction that they all have
jobs, and the rich, on the other hand, would be satisfied that they
occupied high positions.
Thus, democracy and aristocracy would be combined to produce a
stable polity. The retiring officer should hand over the charge of
public funds to another in public, and the officers whose
performance was good must be honoured.
He further stated that the rich should not be allowed to exhibit
their riches as it rouses jealousies among others. Finally, a
statesman interested in avoiding revolution must prevent extremes
of poverty and wealth, as it is this condition that leads to
conflicts. He must encourage colonization as an outlet for a
dangerously congested population and he should foster and practice
religion.
Secondly, Aristotle opined that quality ruler would never be
able to stop revolutions. So to ensure this quality, rulers, must
be first loyal to constitution, secondly, they should be competent,
able and worthy and perform their duties, thirdly, they must have
goodness and justice that is suitable to the nature of each
constitution, if there is any lack of an able person to serve as
the ruler, a combination of persons will also help to prevent
revolutions.
Finally, Aristotle argues that a correct system of education is
the most effective instrument for curbing the revolutionary
instinct and preserves social order.
POLITICAL THOUGHT AND POLITICAL SCIENCE
Relationship between Political Science and Philosophy!(1)
Initially, Political Science was called Political Philosophy.
(2) Study of philosophy of State i.e. Political Thought is a
part of the study of Political Science.
(3) Philosophy provides to Political Science knowledge of ideal
human behaviour, political values, good and bad in political
theory, right and wrong laws, policies and governmental decisions
and theory of ideal social-political institutions.
(4) Philosophy also studies ideal political behaviour, good
political values, ideal political institutions and ideal political
conduct. Ideal political reforms and political ideologies
Individualism liberalism socialism, communism and others. It is a
part of the study of Political Science. Each political ideology is
a particular and distinct philosophy of state.
Thus Political Science and Philosophy are related but two
different and distinct disciplines of study. Each uses the
knowledge of other.
Difference in the Nature and Scope of Philosophy and Political
Science:Philosophy is much broader subject of study than Political
Science. It involves the study of ideal, values and the good of
human behaviour in its all dimension Social, Economic, Political,
Cultural, Religions, Educational and others. It specifies what is
good and what should be done in each aspect of human behaviour and
relations. It prescribes universal values for all human beings. It
is a normative science of human behaviour and values.
Compared to it, Political Science studies both political facts
and values but gives primary importance to the study of facts (i.e.
what is there and what is actually observed and observable). It
also studies political values of each society and state of the
world, but such a study enjoys only a limited importance in the
study of Political Science. In contemporary times Political Science
is being built as a science of politics and not as a philosophy of
state.
Conclusion:In ancient times Political Science was defined as
Political Philosophy. Political Science is the science of Politics
-State, Government, Nation, all political institutions and
political relations i.e. power relations in society. While studying
the concepts of state, government, political institutions,
constitutions, law, rights, freedom and political reforms,
Political Science makes a normative study of all these
concepts.
Political Science seeks to answer such questions as: What is the
best State? What should the state do and what it should not do?
Which are best laws and policies? What social and political reforms
should be introduced by the State? Which is the best form of
government?
What is the right and ideal political conduct? While answering
these questions, Political Science enters the realm of Philosophy.
It depends on philosophy for finding answers to these normative
questions.
However, in contemporary times, Political Science is defined as
the science and not philosophy of state, government and politics.
It is held to be an empirical science of politics and not a
normative philosophy of State. Political Science is projected as a
science and not as a philosophy.
Philosophy involves a normative study of Human Conduct and
Relations and which includes a study of State and Human Political
Relations:Philosophy is the study of what is good and bad? What is
the ideal? What is highest good? It specifies values which should
govern human conduct and relations in society. Study of moral
values and norms (Ethics) is a part of the scope of philosophy.
Study of Philosophy of State, Study and prescription of
political values, Study of best political institutions, Theory of
best state, ideal political reforms, normative i.e. value-based
theory of state, political ideologies and, in fact a normative
study of similar other topics and issues stand included in the
scope of philosophy. Hence it is related to Political Science but
its approach is different.
A large number of modern political scientists accept the
relationship between Political Science and Philosophy.
Plato
IntroductionPlato was born in Athens in 427 BC when the
civilization of ancient Greece was at the zenith of glory and
eminence. He belonged to royal blood of aristocracy, from his
mothers side he was related to Solan, the law giver. He made
efforts to discover the eternal principles of human conduct i-e
justice, temperance and courage which alone imbibed the happiness
to the individual and stability to the states. In 399 BC, the
turning point came in the life of Plato, the defeat of Athens by
Sparta made him to despise democracy.He wandered abroad for twelve
years in Persia, Egypt, Africa, Italy and Sicily in the hours of
disillusionment, absorbing wisdom from every source and tasting
every creedal dogma. Then he returned to Athens and opened an
academy. He wrote about 36 treaties all in the form of dialogues.
His academy became the best school in Athens.
Work of PlatoThe Republic is the most important and authentic
work of Plato. It was about political philosophy, ethics, education
and metaphysics.Other works of Plato include: The Politicus, The
Apology, The Meno, The Protagoras, The Gorgias, and The
Critias.
The Republic and Plato
The true romance of the Republic is the romance of free
intelligence, unbound by custom, untrained indeed by human
stupidity and self will, able to direct the forces, even of customs
and stupidity themselves along the road to a national life.(Prof.
Sabine)
The Republic is an excellent product of Platos maturity. It is a
major contribution to political philosophy, education, economics,
moral aspects of life and metaphysics.
Platos Republic known as Respublica in Latin is translated from
Greek word Politeia or Polity which means a political constitution
in general. It is an achievement of comprehension, perfection and
universality of thought. It presents a picture not of any existing
state in Greek but of an ideal state in which weakness of the
existing states were to be avoided.
Rousseausaid,The Republic is not a mere work upon politics but
the finest treatise on education that ever was written.
Main feature of the Republic is the virtue of knowledge. Plato
was of the view that different classes and individuals had
different capacities for the attainment of virtues. The labor class
showed the least capacity. Philosophers were the best entitled to
rule the state because of their superiority in virtue. Plato
considered justice to be the supreme virtue and his ideal state be
dwelt with it. We can say that the Republic is his master piece.
Platos Republic is the crowning achievement of art, science and
philosophy.
According toBaker,The mainspring of the Republic is Platos
aversion to contemporary Capitalism and his great desire to
substitute a new scheme of Socialism.
CriticismThe Republic contains a good deal of criticism on
contemporary institutions, opinions and practices. The Republic
represents a strong protest against the teachings of Sophists and
the existing social and political corruption.
Plato stresses that state should not be an assembly of corrupt
and selfish individuals but be a communion of souls united for the
pursuit of justice and truth and also for the welfare of the
people.Platos Achievement
Platos greatest achievement may be seen firstly in that he, in
opposing the sophists, offered to decadent Athens, which had lost
faith in her old religion, traditions, and customs, a means by
which civilization and the citys health could be restored: the
recovery of order in both the polis and the soul.
The best, rational and righteous political order leads to the
harmonious unity of a society and allows all the citys parts to
pursue happiness but not at the expense of others. The
characteristics of a good political society, of which most people
can say it is mine (462c), are described in theRepublicby four
virtues: justice, wisdom, moderation, and courage. Justice is the
equity or fairness that grants each social group its due and
ensures that each does ones own work (433a). The three other
virtues describe qualities of different social groups. Wisdom,
which can be understood as the knowledge of the whole, including
both knowledge of the self and political prudence, is the quality
of the leadership (428e-429a). Courage is not merely military
courage but primarily civic courage: the ability to preserve the
right, law-inspired belief, and stand in defense of such values as
friendship and freedom on which a good society is founded. It is
the primary quality of the guardians (430b). Finally, moderation, a
sense of the limits that bring peace and happiness to all, is the
quality of all social classes. It expresses the mutual consent of
both the governed and the rulers as to who should rule (431d-432a).
The four virtues of the good society describe also the soul of a
well-ordered individual. Its rational part, whose quality is
wisdom, nurtured by fine words and learning, should together with
the emotional or spirited part, cultivated by music and rhythm,
rule over the volitional or appetitive part (442a). Under the
leadership of the intellect, the soul must free itself from greed,
lust, and other degrading vices, and direct itself to the divine.
The liberation of the soul from vice is for Plato the ultimate task
of humans on earth. Nobody can be wicked and happy (580a-c). Only a
spiritually liberated individual, whose soul is beautiful and well
ordered, can experience true happiness. Only a country ordered
according to the principles of virtue can claim to have the best
system of government.
Platos critique of democracy may be considered by modern readers
as not applicable to liberal democracy today. Liberal democracies
are not only founded on considerations of freedom and equality, but
also include other elements, such as the rule of law, multiparty
systems, periodic elections, and a professional civil service.
Organized along the principle of separation of powers, todays
Western democracy resembles more a revised version of mixed
government, with a degree of moderation and competence, rather than
the highly unstable and unchecked Athenian democracy of the fourth
and fifth century B.C.E., in which all governmental policies were
directly determined by the often changing moods of the people.
However, what still seems to be relevant in Platos political
philosophy is that he reminds us of the moral and spiritual
dimension of political life. He believes that virtue is the
lifeblood of any good society.
Moved by extreme ambitions, the Athenians, like the mythological
Atlantians described in the dialogueCritias, became infected by
wicked coveting and the pride of power (121b). Like the drunken
Alcibiades from theSymposium, who would swap bronze for gold and
thus prove that he did not understand the Socratic teaching, they
chose the semblance of beauty, the shining appearance of power and
material wealth, rather than the thing itself, the being of
perfection (Symposium, 218e). To the seen eye they now began to
seem foul, for they were losing the fairest bloom from their
precious treasure, but to such who could not see the truly happy
life, they would appear fair and blessed (Critias, 121b). They were
losing their virtuous souls, their virtue by which they could prove
themselves to be worthy of preservation as a great nation. Racked
by the selfish passions of greed and envy, they forfeited their
conception of the right order. Their benevolence, the desire to do
good, ceased. Man and city are alike, Plato claims (Republic,
577d). Humans without souls are hollow. Cities without virtue are
rotten. To those who cannot see clearly they may look glorious but
what appears bright is only exterior. To see clearly what is
visible, the political world out there, Plato argues, one has first
to perceive what is invisible but intelligible, the soul. One has
to know oneself. Humans are immortal souls, he claims, and not just
independent variables. They are often egoistic, but the divine
element in them makes them more than mere animals. Friendship,
freedom, justice, wisdom, courage, and moderation are the key
values that define a good society based on virtue, which must be
guarded against vice, war, and factionalism. To enjoy true
happiness, humans must remain virtuous and remember God, the
perfect being.
Platos achievement as a political philosopher may be seen in
that he believed that there could be a body of knowledge whose
attainment would make it possible to heal political problems, such
as factionalism and the corruption of morals, which can bring a
city to a decline. The doctrine of the harmony of interests,
fairness as the basis of the best political order, the mixed
constitution, the rule of law, the distinction between good and
deviated forms of government, practical wisdom as the quality of
good leadership, and the importance of virtue and transcendence for
politics are the political ideas that can rightly be associated
with Plato. They have profoundly influenced subsequent political
thinkers.
26 | Page