Psir P1 S A

Contents
Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches .................................................................. 3

Theories of state .......................................................................................................... 12
Political Ideologies ...................................................................................................... 27
Postmodernism ................................................................................................................................... 28
Liberalism........................................................................................................................................... 31
Socialism ............................................................................................................................................ 43
Marxism ............................................................................................................................................. 48
Fascism............................................................................................................................................... 56
Feminism ............................................................................................................................................ 61
Justice .......................................................................................................................... 69
Equality........................................................................................................................ 87
Rights ...........................................................................................................................94
Power and Legitimacy ...............................................................................................105
Democracy ................................................................................................................. 114
Western Political Thought .........................................................................................124
Plato ................................................................................................................................................. 124
Aristotle ........................................................................................................................................... 134
Machiavelli ....................................................................................................................................... 143
Hobbes ............................................................................................................................................. 152
Locke ................................................................................................................................................ 160
JS Mill............................................................................................................................................... 168
Marx ................................................................................................................................................. 174
Gramsci ............................................................................................................................................ 183
Hannah Arendt ................................................................................................................................. 188
Indian Political Thought ............................................................................................ 192
Sir Syed Ahmed Khan ....................................................................................................................... 198
Sri Aurobindo Ghosh ........................................................................................................................ 200
Gandhi .............................................................................................................................................. 204
MN Roy ............................................................................................................................................. 211
Ambedkar ......................................................................................................................................... 216
Note:
!1
1. This has SR notes as well as OP Gauba. Strictly no new material.
2. Italics in bracket– don’t know why I have written, but scared to delete.
3. Write a crisp definition for each title.
4. Content should be reduced. No more reading any book or content.
5. After reading for the second time completely, print this and read again.
6. Totally memorise UPSC PYQs
Answer Writing:
1. Always define the keywords in the question.

2. Always provide suitable criticism.
3. This year also there were repeated questions. This much content is enough. Perfect the art of answer
writing.
SR suggestions:
1)Use scholars and schools of thought to substantiate your answer.
2)Write the answers in the form of debate between schools of thought.
3)Understand the terminologies attached to the question like Comment, Elucidate, Critically examine,
Substantiate and Explain.
4)Majority of the students are not maintaining the chronology in their answer. You should focus on
structuring the answer.
You should try to maintain introduction-body-conclusion format.
Your presentation will matter a lot.
If each question fetches 1 mark extra just because of presentation, then for 19 questions in a paper you will
get 19 extra marks. You can enhance your score by 40 marks just by having a common sense of presentation.
Your answer can have 8 paras for a 200 words answer.

1st para: Introduction
2nd-6th paras: Body
7th para: Critical evaluation(if needed)
8th para: Conclusion.
5)Majority of the students are writing in long paragraphs. Make small paras that are logically connected.
For every new point make para.
Make your answer sheet more reader friendly.
6)Under line only the key words.
7)Before starting any answer, do brainstorm all possible points related to the question. Think for a proper
introduction and logical conclusion before you start the answer.
8)Introduction should have the entire crux of the question.

Try to write what is the soul of the question.
Establish the essence of the question.
9)You should conclude all your answers properly in optional paper.

Be constructive or critical; but conclude it.
12)Some students have neither written the assignments nor have read the additional material that was given.
They have just copied the class notes. This will not help in anyway.
!2
Political Theory: Meaning and
Approaches
Nature is to determine whether political science is science, art or
philosophy?
OR
Is the discipline scientific in nature or applied or philosophical.
- Debate is not only on the nature of discipline but also on the title of discipline.
- Maitland – “When I see a question paper with the title political science I am troubled not with the
questions but with the title.”
- Political science – most democratic discipline.
• Lack of agreement on basic terminologies.
- Status of political science as a scientific discipline – highly contested.
- Under behavioural movements – technique of science was introduced in political science. Later
discarded.
• Political theories – interpretations from various points of views.
• Political science deals with worlds of humans – emotions. No need to make it pure science.
• Aristotle – father of political science – says political science is a master science.
Science of organising and governing collective life.
• Edmund Burke – all other disciplines take their cue from political science.
Evolution of political science as a discipline

Ancient Greece:
- Polis –> city state
- All activities of city state within the scope of political enquiry.
- Interdisciplinary in nature.
Medieval period:
- religion dominated.
- Political studies were part of religious studies.
- Prominent scholar – St. Augustine
!3 Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches

Modern times:
- Machiavelli – made political science autonomous.
- Freed from ethics and religion.
- State become the core area of analysis.
- Study of ideas of classical thinkers and study of constitutions.
After WWII:
- Behavioural movement
- In 1960s – post behaviouralism
Methods in political science
Philosophical approach
- Philosophy? Understanding idea
- Plato – father of political philosophy
- Influenced by Socrates’ theory of knowledge – two types of knowledge:
• True knowledge – transcendental, unchallengeable. Dialectics is the method.
• Second category – not knowledge but belief. Weak and challengeable.
- Plato developed theory of ideas.
• Idea is essence.
• World of ideas is superior to world of matter.
• Thus philosophical investigation is superior to empirical observations.
Method of philosophical approach – Logical reasoning.

Nature of philosophical theories: Normative i.e. what ought to be
Limitations:
- Disconnected with reality.
- Mere speculations
Present status:
- Was on decline because of behaviouralism
- Post-behaviouralism brought back values.

Historical approach
- Machiavelli – one of the earliest exponent.
• History is the best guide to politics and politics is not a philosophy.
- Often said that history is past politics.
- History and politics are like root and fruit.
- Laski: Every thinker is a child of his times.
• No idea is ever intelligible save in the context of time.
- Sabine:
• Most easy and common-sense based.
• It is good approach – has three factors – factual, causal, prescriptive
Limitations:
- Too vast
- All that has happened may not be relevant. Idea which never existed – important eg: philosopher
king, communism, etc
- Biases. One should not be overlooking history but one should not be prisoner of history.
- Historicism by Hegel and Marx.
Legal institutional approach

- Study of different constitutions and institutions.
- This approach dominated discipline of comparative government and politics.
- Scholars like Montesquieu, AV Dicey, KC Wheare, etc
- State – core area
- Approach was static. Therefore behavioural political scientists rejected.
- Behaviouralists said focus on processes rather than institution–> recommended systems approach
and structural functional approach.
Present status:
- Revived in the form of neo-institutionalism.
- Prominent scholars- James March and Johan Olsen
- Emphasis on understanding institutional structures, rules, norms and cultures.

Position of behaviouralists on institutions:
- Institutions are nothing but behaviour of the people running them. Therefore study behaviour.
- Neo-institutionalist:
• But institution also constrains the choices of actors.
• Therefore study both behaviour and institution.
• Need to study informal as well as formal aspects of politics.
Empirical approach
- Study observable facts.
- Aristotle’s classification of constitutions and theory of revolution – one of the oldest works.
- Machiavelli warned Prince against the world of ideas. Look at the things as they are.
- John Locke: observation is the source of knowledge.
- Did not believe in Socrates theory that knowledge is inherent in human soul.
- Mind is ‘tabula rasa’ i.e. blank slate
Normative approach Empirical approach

Deals with ideas Facts
Reasoning Observation
Right v. Wrong True v. False
Prescriptive Descriptive
Future oriented Present oriented. (status quoist)
Difference between empirical and scientific

- Empirical approach – very crude form of scientific approach.
• Maybe just starting point.
- Scientific approach is rigourous. Includes verification, measurement, systemisation, etc.
Oakeshott says that, politics is bottomless and borderless sea. No single approach is
sufficient – go for combination.

Debate on the decline of political theory
Behaviouralists:
- David Easton: in his “Political System” –> traditional political theory based on mere speculation.
• It is a product of turmoil that characterised the past ages. No relevance in contemporary
society.
• No outstanding philosopher after Marx and JS Mill.
- Alfred Cobban: in “Decline of Political Theory” – political theory has lost its significance
in capitalist as well as communist systems.
- Seymour Martin Lipset: values of the contemporary society had already been achieved. United
States is already a good society.
- Behavioural political scientists tried to delink political philosophy from political theory.
Champions of political philosophy:
- Leo Strauss: new science of politics is a symptom of the alleged decline of political theory.
- Dante Germino: two major causes of the decline of political theory – rise of positivism
and prevalence of Marxism.
• Positivism believes that scientific knowledge is the only source of true knowledge.
• Political philosophy involves study of right order in society. It is necessary in political theory.
- Herbert Marcuse: the risk involved in removing political philosophy –> status quo.
Conclusion:
- The debate largely subsided in 1970s.
- David Easton launched his post behavioural revolution.
- Political science strengthen our means and political philosophy determine our ends. Means and
ends are interdependent.
Features of behaviouralism:
- David Easton – his lecture to APSA – gave eight “intellectual foundation stones” of
behaviouralism
- technique of regularly verifying the system, measures the pure value of systems integrity.
- technique: mathematical and statistical techniques
- Regularities: observable regularities in human behaviour
- Verification: our hypothesis should pass the test of verification.
- Systematic: social science research should also be systematic.
- Measurement: results should be quantified for the sake of precision

- Value neutrality: avoid bringing his or her preferences.
- Integration: use interdisciplinary approach. Use the methods and concepts of other disciplines.
- Pure science: above ideas can make political science a pure science.
Contribution of behaviouralists:
- Election studies.
- Developed models like systems approach, structural functional approach.
- Useful in understanding the politics of developing areas.
- Useful in comparative politics.
- Methods proposed i.e. field investigation, survey, etc has potential to throw new light on existing
issues. –> Understanding problems at the ground level.
Demerits:
- In very few areas of political science, factual study is possible.
- Traditionalist – unnecessary jargons.
- Extremely costly.
- Only cosmetic change.
- After such a rigorous methodology – same conclusions as traditionalists.
Marxist criticism of behaviouralism:

- Behaviouralists insist on value neutrality (meaning removing values) – leads to status quo.
- Trying to shift the attention from exploitation existing in western countries. It is just a subtle
defence of liberalism.
- Models like system approach are developed considering western political systems as ideal types.
- Most of empirical researches are against socialist countries. eg, empirical theory of democracy.
- Concept like political development and political modernisation – biased in favour of liberal
values.
Post-behaviouralism
- David Easton – seven features of post behaviouralism –> “credo of relevance”
- Why? 1960s – social movements – necessitated debate on normative issues. Behavioural political
scientist had nothing to offer.

Features of post-behaviouralism:
- Realities will hit hard, if you do not value the purpose of human life. Change your actions to
protect and promote yourself.
- Hard realities of political life.
- Political science should not be value free.
- Technique is important but the purpose for which technique is employed is more important.
- Protect the values important for human civilisation.
- Focus on social change.
- Action oriented. He has given the concept of creative theory – It is guided by action and
relevance.
- Protect and promote the discipline.
Nature of post behaviouralism

- Not adoption of traditionalism nor rejection of behaviouralism.
- Correcting the mistakes of behaviouralism.
- Be as scientific as possible rather than making it pure science.
- Traditionalism –> thesis. Behaviouralism –> Anti-thesis. Post behaviouralism –> synthesis.
What is falsification?
- Concept given by Popper.
- Social science theory can be treated as scientific as long as it is open for falsification i.e
critical examination.
- Thoughts like Marxism which claims to be absolute knowledge do not qualify the test of
falsification. Thus, not scientific.
- Scientific knowledge only possible in open societies.
(What is positivism?
- Result of enlightenment.
- Positivism believes that scientific knowledge is the only source of true knowledge.)
What is logical positivism?

- Promoted by Max Webber and Austrian scholars of Vienna Circle.

- Also scientific approach but associated with linguistics.
- Words and sentences should have definite meaning.
- Logical positivism is rejected by post structuralist and post modernist – language cannot be
completely objective.
- Advocates of positivism, logical positivism and behaviouralism try to confine political theory to
political science.
OP GAUBA content
What is political?
- Political refers to something related to polity that is public, distinguished from private.
What is the significance of political theory?

- Control of social life – it helps us to understand the causes of conflict and thus preventing their
outburst.
- Social criticism and reconstruction – Something wrong in our society and polity, we criticise and
speculate about the creation of a good society. For example, Plato exposed the modus operandi of
selfish and cunning politicians in a democracy.
- Clarification of concepts – Determining meanings of terms like authority, social class, liberty,
equality, justice, etc acceptable to upholders of different ideologies. So that they can have
meaningful debate.
- Mutual respect and toleration – Andrew Hacker –> political theory is a never-ending
conversation among theorists. 

Assignment:
1. What is Positivism ?
2. What is Logical positivism ?
3. What is the significance of political Theory ?
4. What is the causes of decline of Political theory according to David Easton ?
5. Causes of decline of Political Theory according to Alfred Cobban?
6. What is the opinion of Leo Strauss on Political Philosophy ?
7. What is the opinion of Dante Germino on political Philosophy?
8. What does politics as authoritative allocation of value means ?
9. What is Communitarian view of politics ?
10. What is difference in empirical and Normative approach ?
11. Who are supporters of Legal approach ?
12. Who are supporters of intellectual precursor of political behaviouralism ? What are their
contributions ?
13. What is political Socialism ?
14. What is political Culture ?
15. Write eight intellectual foundation storms of behaviouralism?
16. Write differences between behavioural and port behavioural approaches?
17. What are criticism of system approach?
18. What are criticism of structural functional approach?
19. Write scopes of political Theory?
20. What are criticism of behaviouralism?
21. What is the debate between traditionalists and behaviouralists?
22. What is deconstruction?
23. What is discourse?
24. What is Critical Theory?

Theories of state
What is state?
- State – central concept in political science.
- RG Gettel – political science begins and ends with state.
- State – abstract concept. Government – concrete manifestation of state.
Evolution of state:
- City-state –> Roman empire –> nationstate –> transnational governance (EU)
- Still dominating authority is nationstate.
What is the nationstate?

- France – first nationstate.
- Specific ethnic identity like race, religion, language, etc.
- Territorial concept – population, territory, government, sovereignty.
- Roman Empire – federal and pluralistic concept of authority.
- Medieval times – multilevel governance.
- Modern nation states – centralised system of authority.
• Hobbes – Not more than one sovereign
• Hobbes – State has monopoly over instrument of coercion.
- Traditionally international society comprised of only nation states. Now, non-state actors also a
part of it.
States in non-western world

- Before colonisation – under Oriental empires – Federal.
- Colonial masters introduced modern state system.
- At present undergoing nation building or the crisis of nationalism.
- Artificial nations – incorporation of the western concept in the non-western world.
- Many ethnic groups club together. Hence undergoing continuous re-organisation and
disintegration.
Sovereignty
- Latin – super anus meaning supreme authority.
!12 Theories of State

- Two dimensions: external and internal.
- External – freedom to conduct foreign policy.
- Internal – freedom to conduct domestic policy and authority over domestic organisations.
Legal sovereignty
- Given by Hobbes
- Laws made by the state are supreme.
Political sovereignty
- Given by Locke
- Power of state is enjoyed by government.
- Party which has majority in Parliament will form the government.
Popular sovereignty
- Given by Rousseau.
- Sovereignty lies with the people.
Theories of sovereignty
Monistic theory of sovereignty

- Origin in Hobbes
- Theory developed by John Austin – “The Province of Jurisprudence Determined”
- Determinate human superior – supreme authority.
Pluralists on monistic theory

- Monistic theory is fiction rather than reality.
- Also dangerous –> too much concentration of power in the hands of state.
- May result into:
1. Violation of human rights. Because international community will not be able to intervene in
the domestic affairs.
2. Not conducive for international peace because the state official will be responsible only to
the state.

What pluralists propose?
- Laski – Entire concept of sovereignty should be expunged from the discipline.
- The concept of sovereignty (monistic) is misguiding.
• State cannot exercise sovereignty in the Hobbesian sense. Because there are restrictions:
external and internal.
• External restrictions by international community, public opinion, international law, etc
• Internal by domestic public opinion, culture, religion, etc
• Federalism also imposes restrictions.
- Laski – impossible misadventure to find a sovereign in federal state.
- Federalism – multiple level of governance and multiple authorities
- Normative reasons i.e. threat to international peace and human rights also a reason to expunge
sovereignty.
“Since society is federal, therefore the authority must also be federal”

- By Laski
- Federal society:
• Man has multiple needs. State cannot fulfil all.
• Man creates associations.
• All these associations part of society. Therefore basic structure of society is Federal.
- Federal authority:
• Every association has a specific task.
• State cannot perform all task with equal efficiency. State should not claim monopoly over
authority.
Pluralistic theory of sovereignty

- For them – State is an association.
- Association means artificial that is created by man.
- State – mechanist view (artificial) not organic view (natural creation)
- Pluralism is a part of liberalism.
Types of pluralists:
1. Extreme pluralists – MacIver

- State just one among other associations.
- Many associations prior to state, not dependent on state, not created by state. Eg, church
- Like other associations state also performs specific task.
2. Moderate pluralists – Laski

- In favour of state supremacy.
- State automatically gains supremacy because of the specific nature of the task which it
performs – resolution of conflicts – equilibrium maker
- State as the keystone of social architecture
Impact of globalisation on state
What is globalisation?
- Borderless world (Kenichi Ohmae)
- Global village (Marshall McLuan)
Nation state v. Globalisation

- Nation state – demarcation of borders, restricts the movement of people, goods, ideas etc.
- Both ideas are contradictory.
- Forces of globalisation have penetrated inside the hard shell of nation state and made it porous.
Ultimate idea is dissolving the shell.
Impact of globalisation on state

- Globalisation emerged in full force after “Washington Consensus” when neo-liberal model of
governance was given to several nations as shock-absorber.
- Impact on state is debatable.
- Against state – Kenichi Ohamae, Marshall McLuan
• They are hyper-globalists.
• Concept of sovereignty – dead and dysfunctional. Multiple centres of authority have emerged.
• Scholars like Scholte has proclaimed the emergence of “post-sovereign governance”
- State centric view – Robert Gilpin, Ethan Kapstein
• State is in charge of globalisation. It can only take place with the consent of state.

• What happens within the borders is determined by the state and state continues to remain the
principal actor at the global stage.
- Neutral view – David Held, Bob Jessop
• Not zero-sum game.
• Neither state is winning nor globalisation. There is transformation of state but not withering
away of state.
• However the rise of migration and spread of cultural globalisation has given rise to “supra-
territoriality”. It means declining importance of geographical locations and territories.
• On one hand, international organisations such as IMF, WTO, NATO, etc have reduced the
capacity of states to exercise their sovereignty.
• On the other hand, states through “pooled sovereignty” exercises greater sovereignty through
these bodies.
Marxist theory of state

- There are two theories:
• Instrumentalist theory and structural theory.
Instrumentalist theory:
- Marx through historical materialism – state is a part of superstructure.
- State is an instrument of bourgeoisie class.
Structuralist theory/ relative autonomy theory

- Marx in his book “18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte” –> concept of relative autonomy.
• Relative autonomy refers to the condition when multiple modes of production exists and
therefore, state gains relative autonomy.
- It is known as the structuralist theory because:
• Structure means something which is really an important unit of analysis.
• Instrumentalist theory – state is just the reflection of base (economic structure).
• Here state is not just a reflection, but a structure. At least relative autonomy.
Ralph Miliband v. Nicos Poulantzas

- Analysed the nature of state in post-capitalist societies.
- Post-capitalist –> workers have right to vote, welfare state, managerial revolution.

- Managerial revolution?
• By James Burnham
• A new class that is managerial class has emerged.
• Decision-making power has shifted from the capitalist class to the managerial class.
• It is an open class. Anybody can enter it on the basis of merit.
- Ralph Miliband:
• There is no change in the nature of state in the post capitalist society.
• The class which controls the economic power continues to control the political power.
• Managerial revolution is just a myth.
• Management education is unaffordable for the working class.
• Even civil services and judiciary is dominated by the elite.
- Nicos Poulantzas:
• State is not an instrument of a particular class.
• State has to appear neutral and equilibrium maker.
• Why neutral? Mass democracy – competitive party system and competitive electoral
system – party has to appeal to all the sections of the society.
• State is only relatively autonomous. In crisis situation, state will always favour the propertied
class.
Feminist theory of state

- Catherine MacKinnon – no feminist theory of state. Feminist theory is about power,
gender, patriarchy.
- Feminist approach towards the state is ambivalent.
- On one hand they criticise state as an institute of patriarchy, on the other hand they expect state
to take actions for the upliftment of women.
- Catherine in her book “Towards a feminist theory of the state”
• State is an institutionalised form of male violence.
• Analysed various laws – made by the state in the interest of men.
• Analysed rape laws – extremely difficult to prove the incident – harassment of victim
• But still she expects the state to play proactive role in the upliftment of women.
- No systemic theory of state from the feminist point of view, but they express their views on the
state. Eg, Iris Marion Young – State should go for differential treatment of women.

- Feminist perspective of state is too general. They need more sophisticated understanding of the
state.
Postcolonial state
- Having colonial past, colonial legacy or under neocolonialism.
- Countries of Africa, Asia, Latin America.
- Two perspectives:
• Liberal perspective
- Prismatic society
- Soft state
• Marxist perspective
- Instrumentalist theory – core and peripheral countries
- Structural theory – overdeveloped state
Liberal perspective
- Prismatic society
- Soft state
Prismatic society
- Concept given by FW Riggs
- Transitioning from under-developed towards developed
- Co-existence of modernity and tradition
- 8 features:
- Trick – When administration formally attains and functions as a heterogeneous model,
communalism will not be a norm.
- Administrative system – SALA model (latin term) – system runs not only on rules but also
family, community considerations
- Formalism – gap between theory and practice
- Attainment norms – both ascriptive (birth based) or achievement (merit)
- Functional overlapping – Fusion of functions. Eg military involved in civilian task.
- Heterogeneity – coexistence of modernity and tradition
- Economic model – bazaar canteen model – prices vary
- poly-communalism – various communities coexist and interact with each other but suspicious

- poly-normativism – multiple layers of norms
Soft state
- By Gunnar Myrdal – book “Asian Drama”
- Analysed the nature of state in Asia esp India.
- Soft state? Soft on those who defy laws.
- Former US ambassador to India John Kenneth Galbraith – India is “functional anarchy”
Why India is a soft state?

- Colonial legacy
- Corruption
- Legacy of civil disobedience
- Culture: lawbreaker has more respect
Consequences of soft state

- Failure in policy implementation. Even charismatic leaders like Nehru failed to implement land
reforms.
- Social indiscipline
- No respect for law.
Marxist view on postcolonial state

- Instrumentalist theory (countries in the periphery are instrument of bourgeois sitting in the core
countries)
- Structural theory (overdeveloped state)
Instrumentalist theory
- By scholars of Latin America and Africa – Samir Amin, Immanuel Wallerstein.
- Source of inspiration: Historical materialism of Marx
- Marxist theory is not theory of international politics but international political economy.
- Lenin – expansion of capitalism has linked all states – Therefore the term “system”
View of instrumental/dependency school

- All countries into two categories: core countries and peripheral countries

- Core – economic power, political power, technological power, military power.
- Periphery – having colonial past, colonial legacy, neocolonialism
• Puppet regimes
• Act as an instrument of the bourgeoise class sitting in core countries.
• Freedom is nominal – Producer and supplier of raw materials and consumer of finished goods.
• Core countries benefits at the expense of periphery
Instrumentalist and dependency school – highlight the exploitation of peripheral countries by
MNCs of western countries. There is neither development nor real democracy.
Structural theory
- Hamza Alavi – Pakistani scholar – Analysis of state in Pakistan –> “military bureaucratic
oligarchy”
- His analysis is applicable to other South Asian states including India.
- In India there is no military intervention in the civilian affairs but strong executive. Just like
inspector raj.
- Things have changed after 1990s.
- Pakistan – overdeveloped state
Overdeveloped state?
- Nature of the state in western countries is different from postcolonial states –> because of the
difference in history.
- History in the western world:
• Synchronisation between the development of economic structure and superstructures.
• When economic structure was feudal, political authority was decentralised.
• When capitalism came, modern territorial nation state came.
- History in the postcolonial state:
• Do not have independent modern history.
• Their history is linked to the western world.
• For the protection of colonial interest, they introduced the modern territorial states.
• Mismatch between economic, social and political development. Basic structure remained
traditional whereas political structure was modern.
• Political system is more developed than economic system –> overdeveloped state.

Nature of overdeveloped state
- Very powerful state.
- Just like Bonapartism where executive is very strong.
In contemporary times:
- There is no major change. Societal divide and relative deprivation continues to exist.
- Gap between the citizens and state is further widening due to bonapartist executives.
- Presence of autocracies and dictatorships in Africa and Asia signals the presence of
overdeveloped states.
- Despite the tall claims of “rolling back of the state” by neo-liberals, functioning of states prove
otherwise.
Reasons for being overdeveloped state:

- Colony legacy: lot of powers and protection to the authorities.
- Party prominent in the freedom struggle acquired power after independence. Enjoyed huge
legitimacy. Misused power.
- Concentration of economic resources in the hands of executive.
OP GAUBA content
Organic theory of the state

- State – organism. Individuals – organs.
- Existence of individuals depend on the existence of state.
- Different organs are free to perform different functions – some are superior to others.
- Aristotle – man by nature is a political animal. One who lives without state is either a beast or
God.
- State is prior to man.
Critical evaluation
- Subordination of man to the state: in actual practice, man is subordinated to the state officials.
- Distorted view of freedom: man can have no rights against the state. Authoritarianism like under
Hitler.
- Denial of equality: Some are superior. Toes cannot dictate to the brain.

Welfare state perspective
- Negative liberalism had promoted capitalism.
- Created large inequalities.
- Not the greatest happiness of the greatest number.
- JS Mill:
• Started with a defence of laissez-fairre individualism. Later modified it.
• Agreed with Bentham in identifying happiness with pleasure and unhappiness with pain.
• But disagreed that happiness is not qualitative. It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than
a pig satisfied.
JS Mill’s defence of liberty

- He is an ardent champion of liberty.
- Liberty of thought and expression as well as liberty of conduct.
- Liberty of conduct: self regarding and other regarding actions.
• In self regarding actions – complete freedom except when individual is harming himself.
• In other regarding actions – individual should not harm the interests of other individuals.
- Role of state:
• Role of state in other regarding actions.
• Positive role for the state in securing community welfare.
• Right to property was not absolute – man did not make the land – therefore rent is not a
product of an individual's effort –> therefore subject to taxation.
• Profit from rent should be given to the working class.
Green’s theory of rights

- Rights emanate from the moral character of man himself.
- Each individual recognises in his fellow the power of pursuing ideal objects and vice-versa.
- There is a difference between society and state.
- Rights are not dependent on the presence of the state, but presence of moral consciousness of the
community.
Class perspective of state

- State comes into existence when society is divided into two antagonistic classes: dominant and
dependent.

State as an instrument of the dominant class
- With the emergence of private property – society is divided into dominant and dependent classes.
- Dominant class invents a new form of power – political power.
- Thus state neither originates in the will of the people nor for the benefit of society.
What is society and state?

- According to class theory society is a natural institution.
- State is an artificial device.
- Man is by nature a social animal not a political animal.
- Society is an essential condition for the production of material goods which are necessary for the
survival of man.
- Under primitive communism – means of production are meagre – society is not divided into
antagonistic classes.
- When the means of production are well-developed –> surplus production-> results into dominant
and dependent classes.
- Structure of society is always determined by the prevalent form of production.
• Hand mill gives you the society of feudal lord, steam mill gives you society with the industrial
capitalist.
- Whatever the form of the state, it is always an instrument of the dominant class.
Criticism of class perspective:

Positive points:
- Discovering and demonstrating the role of economic forces in shaping history.
- It is a very powerful attack on the complacency of social thinkers who held that state existed for
the benefit of all social groups and that the different conditions of the rich and the poor were of
their own making.
Negative points:
1. No rigid class division
• Liberal thinkers have pointed out to the changing status of men and woman with the help of
their talents.

• Class theory holds that under the capitalist system middle-class will eventually disappear.
Liberal researchers – under the capitalist system the size of the middle class is actually
increasing.
2. Capitalism with a human face.
• Champions of capitalism – 20th century capitalism is different from the 19 century capitalism.
• Capitalism has transformed itself – welfare state.
3. No signs of classless society in the Socialist countries
• Former USSR and People Republic of China – no indications of the emergence of classless
and stateless society.
• Many thinkers have even called class theory as utopian theory.
Gramsci and civil society

- Gramsci make a clear distinction between two levels of superstructure: political society and civil
society.
- Gramsci pointed out that the structures of domination in the capitalist society comprised of two
elements:
• Structures of coercion which belong to political society.
• Structures of legitimation which belong to civil society (family, church, school, etc)
- This institutions familiarised the individual with the rules and regulations of the state.
- Political society –> direct domination.
- Civil society –> hegemony throughout the society.
- Thus civil society legitimised the rule of the bourgeoise.
- Only when the civil society fails to prevent the dissent the political society is required to use
coercion.
(Pluralist perspective
- State is to serve the interests of various groups simultaneously.
- Pluralist state is against the single centre of power in society.
- State must act as an impartial arbitrator between the claims of several social groups.
- Democratic state – freedom of association to its citizens. Associations for pursuing their specific
interest as well as common interest. Thus, comes different groups.
- Laski and MacIver – treat various social groups as different centres of power in society.
- Robert Dahl – gave the concept of polyarchy.

- Polyarchy?
• It means “rule by many”.
• Power is distributed among the numerous interests and groups. Role of government in such a
situation is little more than that of an honest broker.
• In Dahl’s view, the extent to which those societal actors can and do operate autonomously, as
well as independently from the state, will enhance the democratic quality of a polity.
- However some groups may lack internal democracy.
- Eg, Business and property enjoy a privileged position in the market dominated polyarchies of
the west.
- Dahl adopts normative approach and recommends that in such cases there should be policies
to redistribute power in society.) 

Assignment
1. What is Post-Colonial State?

2. What is Over Developed State?
3. Why state become so powerful in post-colonial societies?
4. What is Periphery?
5. What are Core States?
6. What is Metropolitan Bourgeois?
7. What is Unequal Exchange?
8. What is Uneven Development?
9. What is imperialism?
10. What is Neo Colonialism?
11. What is Prismatic Society?
12. Why India is a soft state?
13. What is Relative Autonomy of State?
14. What is Borderless World?
15. What is Popular Sovereignty?
16. What is Pluralistic Theory of State?
17. Why state is keystone of social architecture?
18. What is evolutionary theory of origin of state?
19. Why State is known as Mutual Arbitrator?
20. What is relationship between state and class struggle?
21. Why state appears to be Male?

Political Ideologies
Ideology as a science of ideas
- French scholar Destutt de Tracy – first used the word ideology.
• He defined it as the science of ideas.
- Contrary to Tracy, Marx called ideology as non-scientific.
• Marx– ideology is a manifestation of ‘false consciousness’
• Marx and Engels held that ideology is an instrument of state and for the exploitation of
working class.
• According to Marx, Marxism is not an ideology but science.
- When Lenin came he modified Marxism into an ideology much against the position of
Marx.
• According to him, ideology is not necessarily a distortion of truth.
• He argued that class struggle will continue for a long time during the socialist phase, therefore
proletariats also need an ideology. Otherwise they will be overpowered by bourgeois ideology.
- Gramsci made further changes.
• According to him, liberalism –> hegemony; Marxism –> counter hegemony
- Liberal scholars like Karl Popper started asserting that liberal societies are open societies and
scientific studies are possible only in open society.
• He categorised communism as totalitarian ideology.
View of Karl Mannheim

- Gave the concept of sociology of knowledge.
- According to him, every theory has its sociology i.e. social context.
- Both liberalism and Marxism are ideologies.
- He classified ideology into two types: ideology and utopia.
• Ideology – it is the thought system of dominant class. Eg, liberalism in the west. According to
him ideology is status quoist.
• Utopia – thought system of the subjugated class. Eg, Marxism. Inspires the depressed classes
for action.
!27 Political Ideologies: Introduction

Postmodernism
Lyotard
- Book “The Postmodern Condition”
- He describes postmodernism as incredulity towards meta-narratives.
- Rejects the claims of enlightenment about the possibility of knowing the absolute truth.
- He questions the objectivity of science.
- Expects us to recognise differences, diversity, multiplicity.
- Meta-narrative:
• Grand theories.
• An overarching theory about the universe and all aspects of universe – physical, philosophical,
social, economical, spiritual.
• According to post-modernist view, reality is too complex and chaotic. It is impossible to
understand the complete reality.
• Rejection of meta-narratives implies rejection of foundationalism and universalism.
- They reject the view that knowledge is final. What we consider final is actually the limit of our
understanding.
- Universe is not static but dynamic and expanding.
- Hence the theories which proved correct earlier can be proved wrong in the future.
- No theory is transcendental.
- They gave the concept of deterritorialisation – it means fluidity; no fixed meaning.
Foucault
- He gives the concept of discourse.
- Theories are discourses. They are “regimes of truth” and construction rather than
discoveries.
- He has emphasised on the connection between knowledge and power.
- Different theories serve the purpose of power and as a means of control.
Derida
- Concept of deconstruction
- It is an approach to understanding the meaning of words by contrasting it with their

opposite concepts which they seek to suppress.
- Eg, masculine does not denote some concrete reality. Its meaning can be understood only when it
is contrasted with feminine.
- He says, “ there is no such thing as outside the text”.
What is paradigm shift?

- Concept given by Thomas Kuhn.
- He has shown that scientific theories are paradigms and paradigms change.
Comparison between modern and post-modern thinking
Modernism Post-modernism
There is an objective reality Rejects objectivity and suggests that knowledge
is subjective. Source of knowledge is not
observation but experience.
Constructs meta-narratives Sceptical about metanarratives

Believes in authority of science Doesn't believe in any discipline
Describes one way of life as superior Supports diversity and plurality

Prescribes hierarchy, order and centralism. Prescribes anarchy, dispersal of power and
democracy
Stands for control Stands for freedom

There is a transcendental truth meant for Every person has his own truth
everyone
Postcolonialism
- Started getting recognition in 1980s
- Influenced by postmodernist.
- It challenges "Eurocentrism in academics”
- It is the voice of scholars of the third world countries.
- Edward Said:
• His book “Orientalism” is regarded as the first text of postcolonialism.
• He is influenced by Foucault
• Has applied Foucault’s theory of knowledge and power in context of western interpretation of
Islam and non-western countries.

• The purpose of colonialism is not just economic and political control but also social and
cultural control.
• Colonial masters used knowledge to justify colonialism as “civilising mission” and “white
man's burden”.
• In the name of anthropological research, they concluded that people in East were feminine,
childish and barbarian.
• Even people in the East accepted.
- Gayatri Spivak:
• She is influenced by Derida and his theory of deconstruction.
• Book – “can subaltern speak?” – it is difficult to find out any true speech of subalterns.
Purpose of post-colonialism
- It is both political philosophy and political activism.
- Speaks from the perspective of a person living in the periphery.
- Speaking from the point of view of the person from Baghdad and not Berlin.
- It stands for those who do not qualify the norm, who are not authorised to speak.
- It makes us conscious about the dominant ways in which people in western and non-western
world have been projected and understood.
- It is an attempt to understand the world differently, to talk different language and to act different
politics.
- Points towards the world of inequalities not just in economics sphere but also cultural.
- They say that despite the end of colonialism people in South are still under subordination.
- It asserts the rights of people in Asia, Africa, Latin America to access resources and to develop
feeling of material and cultural well-being.

Liberalism
Introduction
- Ideology of modern times & West.
- Dominant culture of the west
- Not just a political ideology but a way of life.
- Origin can be traced to Glorious Revolution of 1688, American Revolution 1776 and French
revolution 1789.
- It has faced challenges –> from Conservatism and socialism (longest)
- But the most durable ideology because of its liberal character.
Classical liberalism
Concept of man:
- Man is a rational being – knows his self interest and protects it
- Therefore he can challenge the authority of state, church, customs.
- Conservatism – man is not rational to the extent challenging age old customs and traditions.
Wisdom of person is not superior to the wisdom of collectivity.
- Since man is rational –> minimal state.
- Liberalism respects diversity and stands for pluralism and toleration (not tolerant towards the
illiberal values or fundamentalism).
- Right is prior to good – instead of society or state deciding what is good for a man, man should
be given the rights to decide his good and goal.
- Against paternalism.
- Liberal concept of man – atomistic man – possessive individualism.
- For Marxist – such man is an alienated man.
Equality
- Liberalism is the first school to acknowledge equality between men.
- Bentham – for happiness man needs freedom. Equal freedom to all.
- Liberals give the principle of equality before law, equality of opportunity (not outcomes).
- Marxism – social and economic equality.
!31 Political Ideologies: Liberalism

Justice
- Distributive justice
- Merit and market is the criteria
Concept of society
- Society is a creation of man. To fulfil his interest.
- We can call society as a market, also as an aggregative view of society.
- Aggregative view – man is prior to state
- Organic view – state is prior to man
Concept of state
- Night watchman or necessary evil
- Necessary – to maintain law and order
- Evil – puts constraints on the liberty of individual.
- Spencer – survival of the fittest
- Sumner – drunkard in the gutter is where he ought to be
Modern liberalism
- Utilitarianism came under attack because of its exploitative nature.
- It undermined dignity for utility.
- JS Mill – started in the defence of utilitarianism but later modified it. Brought idealism in it.
- TH Green – gave the concept of positive liberty.
Positive liberals concept of man

- Classical liberalism – atomistic man
- Modern liberalism – developmental man
- JS Mill – while he was revising utilitarianism, he finds that man gains happiness by sacrificing
his immediate self-interest.
- This is more enlightened progressive view of man. Not just “economic man” but also concerned
about flourishing of human civilisation.
Concept of liberty

- Taken from the ideas of Rousseau.
- Positive liberals differentiate between real will and actual will.
- Liberty is following the real will.
- Liberty is the absence of external constraints and also internal constraints.
Views on state
- Classical liberals – necessary evil.
- Positive liberals – source of virtue
- Role of the state is to remove both internal and external impediments – hinder the hindrances.
- Positive liberals gave the concept of affirmative action. Role of the state is capacity building.
Equality
- Classical liberals and positive liberals – EBL and equality of opportunity. Both oppose equality
of outcomes.
- Classical liberals – no affirmative action.
- Positive liberals – affirmative action
Difference between idealist and positive liberals

- Idealist – state is prior to man
- Positive liberals – society maybe prior to man but not state.
Welfare state in the west

- USA – in 1930s by Roosevelt’s New Deal Acts
- Britain – 1942 after the publication of Beveridge report
- Welfare state is almost like a socialist state.
TH Green
“Liberty is capacity of doing something worth doing”

- Father of positive liberty.
- First person to explicitly describe liberty in terms of capacity.

- This statement is targeted against utilitarians who went beyond human dignity and justified
exploitation for the sake of pleasure.
- Green recognises moral freedom as the distinct quality of men.
- Negative freedom –> involves satisfaction of one's desire.
- Positive freedom –> acting according to reason – achieving self-realisation
- True liberty or positive freedom of men consist in the act of “good will”.
- Therefore, Green says that liberty is – positive power of doing or enjoying something worth
doing or enjoying.
Difference between JS Mill and TH Green

- Mill also understands the consequences of absolute liberty i.e. license to do what one wants
without any ethical parameters.
- However, he did not give the idea of positive liberty.
- He differentiated between self regarding and other regarding actions. In terms of other regarding
actions he gave the necessity of state.
- But, he does not talk about the development of person. Green very explicitly gives capacity
building role to the state.
Role of state – TH Green

- Human consciousness needs liberty, liberty involves rights, rights demand state.
- Man exercises his moral freedom within the social organisation, for which he needs rights.
- But rights are maintained by the state. Therefore state is necessary for exercising moral freedom.
- He is in favour of subordinating individual to the community. He also asks the individual to
follow the general will of the community.
- But community and state are not the same.
- The real authority behind the rights is the moral consciousness of the community.
- State cannot serve the end of moral freedom directly but it can create favourable conditions.
- This does not mean that Green is the champion of negative liberalism.
- Green is definitely an exponent of positive liberalism. Because he says that the function of the
state is removing obstacles in the way of man's pursuit of ideal objects. –> Welfare state.
“An individual is free only when he has capacity to fulfil the law of his being”

- Like JS Mill, Green also suggests that there is a natural urge in man for liberty and freedom.
- Thus he is against utilitarians who give primacy to utility.
- Father of positive liberty.
- Negative freedom – achieve one’s desires
- Positive freedom – act according to reason – self-realisation
- True liberty – act in the good will.
- Mill – role of state in other regarding action but not in the development of person.
- Green explicitly gives this role to the state.
“Will, not force, is the basis of state”

- From Green’s “Principles of political obligation”
- Political obligation is an obligation of citizen towards the state.
- Hobbes –> state has monopoly over the instrument of coercion
- People obey state due to fear of punishment.
- Marx –> State is an instrument of capitalist class.
• Origin of state is not in the will of the people but in force.
• Social contract is false consciousness.
• Marx appeal to the working class to develop true consciousness.
- Green comes in the defence of state.
- State is continuing because of the utility of the state for the people.
- He has given the role of capacity building to state.
- State hinders the hindrances. It performs many useful functions.
- State continues because there is a will of the people for the state.
- The debate does not end here. The so-called will of the people is considered as “manufactured”
by Gramsci.
Habermas:
- Neo-marxist
- Welfare state is just a temporary solution. It is bound to face legitimation crisis.
- Legitimation crisis will compel the state to use force.
What is legitimation crisis?

- Capitalist have introduce the welfare state to protect itself from the revolution by working class.

- But according to Habermas – welfare state is unsustainable.
- Welfare state is based on two contradictory principles: socialism in politics and capitalism in
economics.
- To avoid revolution, working class were given the right to vote. With that came promises and
other freebies by the politicians.
- To offer freebies state has to tax the productive sector.
- With every successive elections the amount of freebies will increase which cannot be sustained
for a longer time.
- When state fails to fulfil the promises there will be crisis of legitimacy.
Laski
- Source of inspiration for Nehru.
- Inspiration for Fabian socialism.
- Fabian Socialism is a socialism nearest to liberalism.
- It is socialism by middle classes while other socialisms are by working class/poor.
“Rights are not claims empty of duties” (not understood)

- Laski – without rights no person can develop himself.
- Rights are not claims without responsibility.
- It is a functional theory of rights.
- Rights and duties are interlinked.
- If there is right to property then it is also the duty to contribute for the well-being of the society.
- Important function of the state is protection of rights.
- Every state is known by the rights it maintains.
- Green – Rights demand state.
- The social and economic rights mentioned in DPSP of Indian Constitution is inspired from the
scheme of rights given by Laski.
- Laski – States has to intervene otherwise it will become the instrument of the rich.
- Any state which neglect such order cannot continue for long.
Neoliberalism

Neo-liberal perspective of state
- Laissez-fairre individualism is revived in the form of neoliberalism or libertarianism.
- Beginning of 20th century – liberalism accommodated certain principles of socialism – welfare
state.
- Welfare state had grown too big. Nanny state. Cradle to grave.
- However second half of 20th century, some thinkers –> welfare state inimical to individual
liberty.
- Libertarianism – Man is the maker of his own destiny.
- It is hostile to all social and legal restrictions on individuals freedom of action.
- Inspired from natural rights theory of John Locke. Libertarians – certain rights of the individual
cannot be surrendered to the state eg. property rights
- They are against taxation of the rich – forced transfer of fruit of one man's labour to another.
- Extreme form of libertarianism – all forms of government are illegitimate.
- Moderate libertarianism – Government may engage in police protection and enforcement of
contract.
- Chief exponents – Hayek, Milton Friedman, Nozick.
- It was advised that the state should rollback.
- First introduced in Britain by Margaret Thatcher.
- In USA by Ronald Reagan.
- In communist countries as shock therapy.
- As structural adjustment programs in India and other developing countries.
- Peak is the conclusion of Uruguay talks which led to the formation of WTO.
What is neo-liberalism?
- Market fundamentalism.
- No liberalism in new liberalism.
- Actually rightism in the cloak of liberalism.
Difference between classical liberals and neo-liberals

- Classical liberals – freedom in market
- Neo-liberals – market is God
- Adam Smith – non-intervention of state in the economy.

- Milton Friedman – market doesn't need freedom, freedom needs market. If there is no capitalism
there will be no freedom.
Washington consensus
- Neo-liberalism started with Washington consensus.
- Principles of neo-liberalism can be understood from this.
• Reduce fiscal deficit
• Pro-industry tax reforms
• Only targeted subsidies
• Market determined interest rates
• Competitive exchange rates to promote exports
• Promotion of FDI
• Disinvestment of PSU
• Deregulation
Friedrich Hayek:
- Book – Constitution of Liberty
- Father of neo-liberalism.
- Influence on Margaret Thatcher
- Planning – road to serfdom
- Even the most intelligent planner cannot think like a market.
- Social justice:
• Is a mirage
• In the name of social justice state increases its power. Money doesn't reach to the targeted
section. It is pocketed by politicians and bureaucrats – black money and corruption.
• If a person is rich or poor it is not the question of social justice, it's a matter of luck.
- Progressive taxation –> forced labour
- Rich will donate if they want to do charity.
- The concept of freedom is very simple –> absence of interference.
- There is nothing like higher freedom, real freedom, inner freedom, etc.
Robert Nozick

- Book – “Anarchy, state and utopia”
- Critic to Rawls theory of Justice (entitlement…oil well and all that)
- Revival of nightwatchman state – minimal state –> it inspires man to work.
Milton Friedman:
- Book – “Capitalism and Freedom”
- Market doesn't need freedom. Freedom needs market.
Present status of neo-liberalism

- Attack from socialist.
- Protest against WTO – even meetings could not happen in Seattle – moved to Doha
- It created interstate and intra-state disparities
- Led to the jobless growth, feminisation of poverty, environmental crisis.
- Against the World Economic Forum emerged World Social Forum
- It has brought crisis in Southeast Asia, Latin America, Russia. Sub-prime mortgage crisis in
USA.
Social liberalism
- Joseph Stiglitz
- He has given post-Washington consensus –> redistributive justice.
- Book – "Globalisation and Its Discontents” – he has shown the weaknesses of neo-liberal
policies.
- Book – “Making Globalisation Work” – pointed the lack of democracy and transparency in
institutions of global governance.
- Amartya Sen:
- Gave the concept of humane governance in place of World Bank, IMF’s concept of good
governance.
- He has emphasised on human development.
- He demands democratisation of development.
- He has suggested capacity building approach.
OP Gauba Content

End of ideology debate
- Mid 1950s – In western liberal democratic countries, it was declared that the age of ideology had
come to an end.
- For them ideology – tool of totalitarianism which has no place in open society.
- Ralf Dahrendorf – “Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society” – in capitalist society,
lines of industrial and political conflict were superimposed. However in post-capitalist
society industrial conflicts do not influence politics and other spheres of life.
- Daniel Bell – “End of Ideology” – Post-industrial societies are prone to similar
development irrespective of the ideology they follow.
- This was a message to the new nations of Asia, Africa, Latin America to focus on their
industrial development and should not run after the mirage of communism.
- After the end of CW – no better system of governance, no better economics and no better way of
life than liberalism.
- Francis Fukuyama – “end of history” paper – failure of socialism and supremacy of
liberalism.
- In short, end of ideology debate projects the supremacy of liberal-democratic system.
- CB Macpherson – End of ideology thesis makes a futile attempt to solve the problem of
equitable distribution within the market society.
- MacIntyre – End of ideology is itself an ideology of the time and place where it arose.
- It is an immature argument – liberalism is challenged in the western world by
communitarianism, post-modernism, multiculturalism.
- Outside the western world by Islamic fundamentalism, Confucianism and cultural relativism.
- Also challenges by global economic crisis, Brexit, rise of rightists, neo-fascists, and leftist.
Broad streams of liberalism

- Individualism
• Individual is a rational being
• Individual’s dignity, freedom and judgement should be given priority while making public
policy.
• Only individual can have rights.
• Exponents – John Locke father of liberalism, Adam Smith father of economics.
- Utilitarianism
• greatest happiness of the greatest number.

• By Jeremy Bentham – father of utilitarianism.
• Pleasure and pain. No qualitative difference.
- JS Mill – there is a qualitative difference.
• Liberty of the individual has the highest value.
• Also proposed taxation of the rich for the benefit of the poor.
- TH Green – added moral dimension to liberalism.
• Advanced a full fledged theory of welfare state.
Contribution of Liberalism
- Replaced traditionalism by modern rationalism
- It transformed itself when it faced challenges. Eg, transformed into welfare state when
challenged by socialism.
- This led to new insights as regards the principle of freedom, equality, democracy, justice, etc.
- Liberalism is invoked in two forms: theory of capitalism and theory of constitutionalism.
- When liberalism is invoked as a theory of constitutionalism it embodies lasting political values.

Assignment
1. What is an Atomistic Man?

2. What is Negative Liberty?
3. Why society is an aggregate, what is aggregative view of society?
4. What is liberal view of civil society?
5. Why state is a necessary evil?
6. What is Green’s view on liberty?
7. What rights Laski proposed?
8. What is a developmental state?
9. Why state is known as child and guardian of law?
10. What is rolling back of a state?
11. What is Shock Therapy?
12. What are Structural Adjustment Programs?
13. What is Washington Consensus?
14. What is Post Washington Consensus?
15. Why planning will fail according to Hayek?
16. Why Social Justice is a mirage?
17. What is liberty for Hayek?
18. Explain Night Watchman State.
19. What is Milton Friedman’s view on capitalism?
20. Why Joseph Stiglitz criticise globalisation?
21. What is developmental individualism?
22. What is liberal theory of revolution?
23. Do you think liberalism has won the battle of ideology, give argument against?

Socialism
Introduction
- Hat that has lost its shape because everyone wears it – CEM Joad
- Introduction of universal adult franchise – poor got right to vote – socialism became
relevant ideology.
- Wherever poor are more in number socialism comes up.
- Endless varieties of socialism – country specific like Chinese model, Cuban model – person
specific like Nehruvian socialism by Ram Manohar Lohia.
- Yet we can recognise the hat i.e. we can understand the basic assumptions of socialism
- In short, socialism can be defined as economic system under which major means of social
production are under the ownership of public authority.
Socialist assumptions:
- Human nature – man is social by nature. Man is not an island but a part of continent.
- Equality – social and economic equality. Absolute equality. Equality of outcomes.
- Rights – social and economic rights
- State:
- Disagreement among socialist on the role of state. For Karl Marx – state is an instrument of
exploitation.
- For Fabian socialist – state is an instrument of virtue.
Difference between evolutionary and revolutionary socialism
Evolutionary socialism Revolutionary socialism

Socialism by degrees Total transformation of society
Attitude of compromise Overthrow the capitalist in a single stroke

Relies on democratic method, Violent class struggle
Types of evolutionary socialism:

- Parliamentary socialism: workers have got right to vote – no need of revolution. Revolution is
neither possible nor required.
- Fabian socialism
!43 Political Ideologies: Socialism

- Guild socialism
- Syndicalism
Fabian socialism
- It is nearest to liberalism.
- Socialism by middle-class. Others by poor/working class.
- Based on the ideas of Roman general Fabius – strike when iron is hot.
- Socialism cannot come overnight. It will come only when it becomes common sense.
- Till then middle-class should work on creating awareness. Hence, they established societies.
- It is not anti-state but partnership with the state in bringing social reforms.
- They believe in Marxist principles except the necessity of class struggle.
- Objectives of Fabianism:
• Emancipation of land and industrial capital from individual and class ownership, and giving it
to the community.
• Equality of opportunity: after emancipation of land and industrial capital, the rent and interest
would be given as a reward to the labour. Idle class would disappear and political equality of
opportunity will be maintained.
• Dissemination of socialist ideas
• Universal education: Sydney Olivier – universal education is an essential means of
emancipation of the working class.
Guild socialism
- By GDH Cole
- British variety
- Functional representation: real interest of man is economic. Representation should be based
on economic lines –> representation by various groups like workers, farmers, industrialist, etc.
- Functional Parliament: like political Parliament there should be an economic parliament to
consider economic interests.
- Industrial democracy: greater participation of workers in management.
- Peaceful in nature.
- It believes in the basic principles of Marxism including class struggle but no violence.

Syndicalism
- By George Sorel
- French variety
- It does not end in communism. It is rule by workers.
- Complete independence of labour unions from political parties.
- Strategy – strikes, lockouts, slow work. Idea is to frustrate the capitalist.
- Syndicalist state is abolition of political state but continuation of state led by workers.
- It believes in the basic principles of Marxism including violent struggle.
Do you think socialism can emerge as anti-capitalism in 21st-

century?
- End of CW – Francis Fukuyama – end of history –> liberalism is the supreme ideology.
- Ralph Miliband – “Socialism in sceptical age” –> to consider that capitalism has been
truly transformed and is the best for humankind is a “slur on the human race”.
- Terry Eagleton – it is fashionable to say that Marx is irrelevant, outdated and dangerous.
The nature of inequalities existing in 18th and 19th century are reemerging because of
capitalist globalisation.
- Thomas Piketty known as modern Marx – has provided data to suggest that the global
inequalities are not rising but soaring.
• Since neo-liberal globalisation inequalities have grown much faster.
• r > g – r is rate of formation of wealth and g is national income/ growth.
• There are no natural forces to deal with inequality, only government can prevent such
inequalities.
- Bill Gates – globalisation has undermined the egalitarian nature of our society.
- Immanuel Wallerstein – world has only two options – barbarism or socialism
- Growth of counter globalisation movements.
- Growth of ideological stands known as anti-capitalism.
- It is said that we may not shift to the socialist mode of production but socialism will re-emerge as
the critic of neoliberalism.
- Socialism cannot be considered as "dustbin of history”.

OP Gauba Content
Critical appraisal of evolutionary socialism

- No coherent doctrine: many varieties of evolutionary socialism.
- Not based in the working class: some like syndicalism and guild socialism are based on the
working class but others like Fabian socialism – intellectuals of middle-class
- Legitimisation of the Bourgeoise society: it seeks to accommodate socialist goals in the operation
of the capitalist system.
• Even pure socialist systems introduced market principles – “market socialism” eg, China,
former Soviet union, etc. This led to bureaucratic corruption and eventual collapse of socialist
systems.
Conclusion:
- In the present age of disillusionment with the “revolutionary socialism”, evolutionary socialism
is the only hope to promote social justice.
- In highly industrialised modern states – armed revolution is not possible.
- Constitutional method of securing the goals of socialism is possible provided the exploited
classes are alert and well-organised.

Assignment
1. What is Human Nature according to socialists?

2. What is significance of society in socialism?
3. What is socialist view of freedom?
4. What is Absolute Equality?
5. What is Proportionate Equality?
6. What is Substantive equality?
7. Why socialism has a Hat that has lost its shape?
8. Mention ideas of evolutionary socialist.
9. Why Marx called evolutionary socialist utopians?
10. Why Bernstein rejects revolution?
11. What is functional representation?
12. What is functional parliament?
13. What is difference between Guild and Syndicate?
14. What Is Industrial Democracy?
15. What are common things in Marxism and Guild system?
16. What is common between Fabianism and Marxism?
17. What type of state will be in syndicalism? 

Marxism
Orthodox Marxist
- Historical materialism is the core principle of Marxism.
- Marx is the God who can never fail.
- Marx
• had given communism for capitalist society.
• No role for peasants in revolution.
• No communist party
Lenin
- Russia – primarily a feudal society
- He modified Marxism into an ideology much against the position of Marx.
• According to him, ideology is not necessarily distortion of truth.
• He argued that class struggle will continue for a long time during the socialist phase, therefore
proletariats also need an ideology. Otherwise they will be overpowered by bourgeois ideology.
- Book – "Imperialism: the highest stage of capitalism"
- Imperialism protected capitalism from revolution.
- Surplus goods –> exported to the colonies.
- Surplus capital –> invested in colonies
- Excess wealth from colonies –> for the benefit of workers in mother countries – revolutionary
potential of workers is killed.
- According to him imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism.
- WWI was capitalist war among the capitalist nations struggling for markets.
- His theory led to the growth of Marxist School of political economy in the context of
international politics.
Rosa Luxemburg
- Critique of Lenin and Bernstein
- According to her Lenin brought the concept of Communist party.
- She criticised Bernstein for choosing parliamentary method.
- According to her capitalism is imperialist from the beginning and not just in the highest state.
!48 Political Ideologies: Marxism

- Imperialism, nationalism, militarism are inherent in capitalism.
Stalin
- Top down approach to bring communism.
- Till communism is not established –> State should exist and Communist party should
control the state.
- He established a very strong state.
- USSR became a bureaucratic state.
Trotsky
- Critique of Stalin.
- Stalin –> betrayed the goals of revolution.
- Give the theory of permanent revolution.
- He believed that socialism was not safe in USSR because it is surrounded by capitalist
countries.
- Stalin’s action –> will reduce Marxism to the “dustbin of history”.
Mao
- First successful implementation of Marxism in purely agricultural-feudal society.
- He was influenced by Marx and Machiavelli.
- Modified Marxism to suit the Chinese conditions– China was an international colony and
feudal society.
- Peasantry was extremely exploited by feudalism and imperialism.
- Modified concept of dialectics – two types of dialectics: antagonistic (cannot be reconciled) and
non-antagonistic (can be reconciled)
- Maoism is not against capitalism but against feudalism and imperialism.
Marx Mao
No role for peasants in revolution. Primary role

Only one revolution permanent revolution
- Started various campaigns like “hundred flowers campaign”

- Started cultural revolution.
- Believed in the theory of violence – power flows through barrel of gun.

Difference between Gandhi and Mao
Gandhi Mao
Contemporaries
Successful mass leaders

Faced similar circumstances
Influence beyond the country.

Believed in nonviolence Believed in the power of gun
Idealist Realist
Update later
Neo-Marxism
Marxism:
- Method – historical materialism
• Economic structure is the base structure.
• Other structures are reflections of base.
• Therefore Max Webber called Marxism as monocausal explanation of history.
• Marx– determinist (not scientific)
• Marxism– economic reductionism
Neo-Marxism:
- It analyses the subtle aspects of dominance and dependence, distortions in the contemporary
civilisation and the possible ways to human emancipation.
- Two schools – structuralism and critical school
Structuralism
Contribution of Gramsci:
- Gave more importance to other structures also.
- Civil society creates hegemony of dominant class.
Althusser:
- French Marxist.

- Developed multi structural analysis –> Change can happen from any structure. Eg, Russian
revolution started from political structure.
- Economic factor – overdetermined in Marxism.
- However economic factor is the ultimate determinant.
Critical School (Frankfurt School)

- (Trick – Focus is on how technology and culture is used for domination)
- They were hostile to capitalism.
- Disillusioned with Soviet socialism.
- Ideas of Frankfurt School is called as the critical theory.
- Max Horkheimer: goal of critical school is emancipation of human beings. (Inspired by
Young Marx)
- Marxism is not positive science but normative science.
- According to critical school, Marx is a political philosopher.
- Most important idea in Marx was of Young Marx i.e. alienation of man and emancipation of
man.
- Critical school is critical of:
1. Soviet Marxism – resulted into establishment of totalitarian state.
2. Critical of post-capitalist societies (transformation in original capitalism and establishment
of welfare state)
Problem in welfare state:

- Taken away the revolutionary potential of working class.
- Provided economic benefits to them
- They now find happiness in commodities – slaves of consumerist culture.
- Capitalist oriented working class towards satisfaction of material needs and protected themselves
from revolution.
- Finer ways of exploitation – controlling the human consciousness of the workers.
- Workers would have got real freedom if communism was established as a way of life.
Criticism of science
- Scientific rationality has undermined the meaning of rationality.
- It is just a technological rationality.

- It only says how to produce and how to satisfy ones wants.
- Nothing about what ought to be done.
- Science has undermined the importance of values.
One-dimensional man
- By Herbert Marcuse
- Man is multi dimensional but the kind of society we are living in has reduced him to one
dimension – dimension of a consumer.
- Capitalists are using intelligent means of communication – communication that focusses on
satisfaction of lower order physical needs. Eg, web series culture promoted by Netflix and
Amazon provides entertainment on personal devices.
- No creative freedom – we are like herds of sheep and goats.
- Rise of mass culture.
- Man has lost emotions and sensitivity towards exploited sections.
Criticism of enlightenment
- It has led to the type of rationality which alienated man from others.
- Tendencies like fascism happens because of the feeling of insecurity and isolation.
- Fascism is an outcome of lack of rationality, consciousness and sensitivity.
Source of inspiration:
1. Young Marx
2. Sigmund Freud:
• For Marxists, psychology is a bourgeoise discipline – it treats man as an individual.

• He has analysed causes behind the irrational social behaviour, regressive structures, etc.
What did critical school analyse?

- Marxist analysis – no more relevant to understand contemporary problems.
- Nature of society has changed and methods of domination also.
- Capitalist are now using culture and technology for domination.
- Culture is now produced, sold and purchased.
- Capitalist have dominated human consciousness by promoting consumerist culture.

- Domination of human consciousness is the most effective form of domination. Even the
exploited person finds his happiness in his own exploitation.
Adorno:
- He has analysed the impact of capitalism on music.
- Music has been reduced to seismographic regulated traumatic shocks.
- Only our body moves, mind sleeps.
Conclusion:
- Critical school is pessimistic as they see no hope.
- If any change can happen it can happen only through the most exploited sections like subaltern
class i.e. tribals, Dalits, etc
OP Gauba content
Who is young Marx?

- Early work of Marx which remained unpublished during his lifetime.
- Focuses on the concepts of alienation and freedom.
- Exposes the dehumanising effect of capitalism.
Conclusion:
- Collapse of socialism in 1991, necessary changes were made in People's Republic of China –
now there is no scope for rigid communist systems.
- Experience has shown that instead of “withering away of the state” in socialist countries, there
has been a collapse of socialist state.
- Dominant and dependent classes are no longer limited to working and capitalist class.
- Dependency theory argues that the forces of struggle has shifted to the fight between the
developing nations and forces of colonialism and neo-colonialism.
- Marxism should be modified according to the contemporary situation.
What is dependency theory?

- Continued impoverishment of the underdeveloped countries is not generated by their internal
conditions.

- It is the consequence of the colonialism and neo-colonialism.
- Solution is – adopt Western technology but exert independence in international relations and
international trade. 

Assignment

Fascism
Introduction
- Fascism is a bad word.
- Treated as political opportunism.
- More of a propaganda than political ideology.
- Borrowed ideas from various scholars – “hodgepodge” of ideas.
- Pure power politics. Machiavellianism in its extreme form – ends justify means.
- It is difficult to explain what fascism exactly is.
- Against liberty, equality, reason, progress, democracy, capitalism, communism, modernity.
- It is the type of political system which established into various countries during the interwar
period.
- Especially under Hitler in Germany and Mussolini in Italy. (also in Japan, Portugal, Spain,
Argentina)
- Both have similar types of political system.
- Only difference: Mussolini gave primacy to the state (Risorgimento) and Hitler talked about race
(lebensraum)
Features of fascist political system

- Against democracy: Mussolini – democracy is luxury for rich nations and Parliament is a talking
shop.
- Fascist state is led by a small group of elites called junta.
- Elites are led by the leader. Leader is a superman.
- It relies on faith and emotion.
- Focus is on "duty, discipline and order”.
- Individual is means and state is end.
- Conventional view on woman.
- Economic system:
• autarky (self-sufficiency)
• corporatism: idea is vague. State is the mediator between capital and labour. Both should
work under the leadership of state.
- Foreign policy: Imperial foreign policy. For eg, Hitler called lebensraum.
!56 Political Ideologies: Fascism

Intellectual origins of fascism
- Other ideologies – ideology came first and then changes were made.
- Fascism – Fascist state came first and then scholars were appointed to write to the philosophy of
fascism.
- Mussolini appointed Giovanni Gentile as an official philosopher.
- Fascist scholars borrowed ideas from multiple sources:
• Plato: Rule of philosopher king. Rule of reason. Subordination to reason.
• Machiavelli: supremacy of nation, national integration, separation between the ethics and
politics.
• Rousseau: State represent the general will. Men should be forced to be free.
• Hobbes – State has monopoly over power of coercion
• Hegel – State is the march of God on earth. He also justified war. Looked at war from the
functionalist perspective.
• George Sorel – role of violence in politics. Also talked about myths – create myths, myths
appeal to emotions and emotion leads to actions.
• Nietzsche – gave the concept of superman. Also gave the concept of "will to power" which
suggest that will is more important than reason. There is a will in man for power.
• Herder – give the concept of cultural nationalism.
Nature of fascism as an ideology

- Various scholars have described different aspects of fascism.
1. Anti-rationalism or anti-enlightenment:
• Slogan of fascist – “1789 is dead”. Against the values of enlightenment and liberty, equality,
fraternity given by French revolution.
• It is "creative destruction" – it aims to destroy all values which polluted the western societies
since the beginning of modern age.
• Modernity destroyed social solidarity and created atomistic man.
• Fascism will create “new man” – one who is organically linked to his community or nation.
• It stands for Palingenetic ultranationalism – rebirth of nation.
2. Middle-class:
• Fascist came to power by mass support – concept of “revolt of masses” by Ortega Gasset
• It is a direct consequence of democracy turning into mobocracy.

• Fascism is manipulation of the frustration of middle class. Middle-class is suppressed between
capitalist and labour movement.
3. Reaction to capitalism:
• Socialism – reaction to capitalism in the 19th century.
• Fascism – reaction to capitalism in the 20th century.
• If socialism is a leftist response, fascism is the rightist response to capitalism.
• Laski: called fascism as counter revolution. In the light of workers gaining powers, it is an
attempt by the elite and the bourgeoise class to clinch power and protect their interest by
supporting the fascists.
• Besides middle class, fascist got huge support from the business class.
4. Opponents:
• Since fascism is a bad word, it is associated with opponents.
• Liberals call socialist and totalitarian societies as fascist.
• Socialist link fascism with capitalism and hold that fascism is an attempt by capitalism to
protect itself.
Conditions that give rise to fascism

- Two schools of thought:
1. Historical phenomena related to specific historical conditions
• Scholars - Nolte
• Historical conditions that were prevailing in countries like Italy and Germany during
the interwar period.
• Italy was dissatisfied with the share they got after WWI. While Germany was humiliated with
conditions of Treaty of Versailles like heavy war reparations.
• If democracy is introduced in a society where democracy has not become a culture, political
values are not democratic and social order is traditional and autocratic, then democratic
government will fail to work.
• Economic crisis gave rise to unemployment and economic failures.
• Pessimism was prevailing – which led to demagogic leaders.
• WWI had generated militaristic nationalism and militaristic values. Also left a bitter
inheritance of frustrated nationalism and desire for revenge.
2. Psychological
• Scholars – Eric Fromm

• He gives psychological reasons.
• Fascism was not rejected by the people but ended by the war.
• It got support from the people.
• The attraction for fascism lies in human psychology.
• He gives the concept of fear. There is a feeling of fear, insecurity and isolation in man.
• Hence they look towards a strong leader who can overcome their insecurity. The attraction for
charismatic personality exist in human nature.
• The fear of fascism is a permanent fear.
• Fascism can emerge any time because of the weakness of human nature. Hence, we should be
wary of conditions which increases insecurity in human nature.
Neo-fascism
- In contemporary times we see different manifestations of fascism. Eg, Islamic fundamentalism,
rise of rightist party, anti-immigration movements, etc.
- In short, rightism is fascism.
OP Gauba content
Liberal critique of fascism:

- Liberalism is primarily a philosophy of capitalism. Fascism also.
- But fascism removed the democratic traditions from liberalism and reduced it to mere capitalism.
- Main liberal objection:
• destroyed individual liberty by subordinating individual to the absolute authority of the state.
• Accentuates the irrational element in human nature.
• Cult of hero worship, superiority of the elite and racist doctrine.
• Monopoly of a single political party.
• Demolishes constitutional government which is the sole guarantee of human freedom.
Marxist critique of fascism

- According to Marxist – fascism is an attempt to protect capitalism.
- Gramsci – Italian Marxist who was tortured by the fascist regime of Mussolini – fascist sought to
preserve capitalist “hegemony” and “structures of domination”. 

Assignment
1. Explain historical factors giving rise to fascism.

2. What is anti-rationalism?
3. What are the sources of inspiration for fascist leaders?
4. What is fascist view on leader?
5. What is integral nationalism?
6. What is corporatism?
7. Why fascism is known as extremism of the right?
8. Is fascism dead?
9. What is fascist view on state? Hegel- State is march of god on earth
10. What is fascist view on democracy?

Feminism
- Umbrella ideology.
- Common concern – ending social discrimination against women.
- Feminism is both a philosophy and movement.
First wave of feminism

- From French revolution till 1960s.
- Mary Wollstonecraft – mother of feminism.
- Book – "Vindication of the Rights of Woman”
• Questioned the exclusion of women from citizenship rights and duties.
• Presented the charter of rights for women.
- First wave is dominated by liberal feminists.
- They demanded equality of opportunity and right to vote for women.
- Therefore also known as suffragette movement.
- Seneca Falls Convention of 1848 – demanded the right to vote for woman for the first time.
- Efforts of activists like Elizabeth Cody Stanton (USA) and Emmeline Pankhurst (UK) helped in
getting the right to vote for women.
- In USSR – equality of status to the woman was started under the leadership of Lenin. First
woman cabinet minister in the world – Alexandra Kollontai
Second wave (1960s–1990s)

- Rise of radical feminism.
- Simone de Beauvoir – Book “The Second Sex”
- Betty Friedan – Book “The Feminine Mystique”
- They treated as mothers of radical feminism.
- They have attacked the patriarchal structure of society.
- It is a feminist ideology in a real sense because it is original feminist thinking.
- Liberal feminism and socialist feminism is just an application of liberalism and socialism
thoughts on women condition.
!61 Political Ideologies: Feminism

Third wave (1990s onwards)
- It was realised that the problems of black woman and white woman, rich woman and poor
woman, etc are different.
- Thus feminism got divided on the lines of colour, ethnicity, religion, etc.
Schools of feminism
Liberal feminism
- Dependent on civil and political rights of women.
- They looked at the state in a positive sense.
- They believed that through state, efforts can be made for improving the status of woman.
Marxist socialist feminism

- Engels – “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State”
- Subjugation of women is linked to the institution of private property.
- Liberation of women is possible only when capitalism ends.
- Socialist feminist – Sheila Rowbotham and Iris Marion Young –> economic dependence
of women and the sole burden of motherhood is responsible for the subordinate status of
woman.
Criticism on liberal and Marxist socialist feminism

- Liberal and Marxist socialist feminism is it it is rejected by radical feminism as a feminist
philosophy.
- According to them it is just an application of liberal and socialist philosophies on the condition
of women.
- There is a need to construct feminist discourse based on women’s experience.
Sartre and existentialism

- "Existence is prior to essence”.
- Essence is the identity given by others or society to a person.
- While existence is a recognition of persons autonomy.
- Society doesn't give recognition to the existence of a person.
- It doesn't treat person with subject of his consciousness. But treats person as an object.

- It gives essence to a person.
- We have to understand the priority of a person and his choice rather than views of the society.
- He was a critique of religion because the tradition of giving essence has emerged from the
religious text.
- Religion portrays human beings as robots and the remote control as if in the hands of the God.
- He said – believing in God is a bad faith and believing in oneself is a good faith.
“Women are made, they are not born”

- By Simone de Beauvoir – book “The Second Sex”
- She has applied Sartre’s concept of existence, essence, good faith and bad faith.
- According to her being woman is a process.
- Process of becoming woman starts from the birth.
- At each stage i.e. birth, childhood, adolescence, adulthood woman is forced to leave the claims of
her “subjectivity”.
- Society gives essence to the woman.
- Women are understood with reference to men. They are treated as “the other” or “the second
sex”. Later –> the secondary sex.
- According to her woman has become incidental and non-essential while man is essential.
- Explored various myths associated with woman which are not natural but created by patriarchal
society.
- One of the biggest myths –> woman enjoy motherhood
- She interviewed large section of woman –> most of them hated process of childbirth.
- She blamed medical science and psychology for strengthening the myths.
- Blames Sigmund Freud. He said –> most important goal of woman is to appear attractive to men.
Women suffer from penis envy, men suffer from castration complex.
- Thus patriarchy is bad for both women and men.
- She says that men and woman can work together to end patriarchy.
- She wants woman to come out of the comforts of patriarchy and develop good faith (Believe in
themselves)
- Take help of technology to overcome subordination.
Views of Betty Friedan

- Book – “The Feminine Mystique”

- Surveyed white women from well-off and happily married families – most of them were
not satisfied because something was missing –> "a problem which has no name”
- She concluded – right to vote and social and economic rights are not enough.
- Woman will not have happiness and freedom till we live in a patriarchal society.
- Patriarchy is the real source of exploitation. It generates myths – so called feminine qualities.
- Woman magazines – often portray that career woman are frustrated and housewives are happy.
- Because of the myth of marriageable age, few woman pursue higher studies.
- Scholars like Kate Millett and Shulamith Firestone – suggest to recognise the politics, violence
and dominance within family.
- Patriarchy, and not economy, is the basic structure.
- Irony – specific biological capacities have made woman subordinate.
- Radical feminist suggest dissolution of heterosexual families – state should take up the
responsibility of child rearing.
Postcolonial feminism
- Scholar – Chandra Talpade Mohanty – Book “Under Western Eye”
- Criticised the reductionist view of feminist in the western world.
- Woman in non-western world suffer from both patriarchy and impact of colonialism
specifically in economic sphere.
- Feminists in the western world failed to understand the specific problems of woman in the non-
western world.
Eco-feminism
- Scholar – Vandana Shiva
- Nature and woman both have been exploited by men.
- Woman are closer to nature.
- Suffer more because of environmental degradation.
- They play most prominent role in sustainable development.
- Environmental movements in India was started by woman.
Concept of gender
- Radical feminist distinguish between sex and gender.
- Sex – biological term. Gender – social term

- We live in a gendered society which favours men.
- This distinction results into discrimination and violence.
- Women and children are the most affected in war and conflicts. Rape is weapon commonly and
systematically used in war times. Nadia Murad’s life reflects the horror that women goes through
in conflict zones.
- Human Development Report 2014 – human rights of woman are violated not only during war
times but also during peacetime.
- Inhuman cultural practices like FGM in African countries and Khatna in India.
- Developmental gap – majority of the worlds poor are women. Women form half of the world
population, does 2/3rd of the work, earns 1/10th of salary and owns 1/100th of property.
- Malala and physiotherapist Nirbhaya have suffered because of their sex.
- Biggest issue is violence which woman face because of their sex.
- Violence in the form of female infanticide, domestic violence, honour killings and rapes.
- Susan Brown Miller – Book “Against Our Will”
• rape an is institution of patriarchy. It has nothing to do with natural sexual impulses. It
is to keep woman under the constant fear of men.
Concept of patriarchy
- Literal meaning – authority of father
- Dominance of males in the society.
- Hegemony of patriarchy is much stronger than hegemony of capitalism.
- Universal feature of almost all societies – appears natural and common.
- Heterosexual families are the first institutes of patriarchy.
- Radical feminist are therefore against heterosexual families.
Concept of politics
- Not only politics but also political philosophy has remained male dominated.
- Classical political scholars, except Plato and JS Mill, have neglected woman in their works.
- Rousseau and Kant – critical of women's participation in politics
- Marx was also indifferent woman. Engels – raised the issue of exploitation of women.
- Cynthia Enloe asks, “where are the women?”
- Tradition of neglect of woman starts from Aristotle. He separated public and political
sphere. Confined woman within the four walls of family.

- Woman doesn't qualify in his theory of citizenship.
- Thus political philosophy neglected the exploitation of women within the four walls of family.
- Traditionally the role of state was limited to public sphere.
- Feminist challenge Hegel’s view that family represents altruism.
- Domestic Violence Act by GoI is a recognition that woman face violence within family.
“Personal is political”
- It was used as slogan during the second wave of feminism in 1960s to highlight the connection
between the experiences of women in the personal sphere and larger social and political
structures.
- Susan Moller Okin – book “Justice, gender and the family” –> gave 4 interpretations of
the term.
- Trick – labour in the family is based on power laws
1. Personal sphere is not free from power.
• There is domination and subordination within family
• State must take cognisance of domestic violence.
2. State made laws influence the status of woman.
• Separation between personal and political is maintained to generate the illusion that state is
neutral. State is not neutral.
• State laws like divorce, inheritance, adoption, etc impact the status of woman.
3. Attack on family as an institution of patriarchy.
• Patriarchal values of society comes from patriarchal family.
• Child living in heterosexual family see the exercise of male authority and therefore when he
sees the same outside he finds it common.
4. Labour market
• Woman are under dual burden – domestic as well as professional.
• Economic subordination results into social discrimination.
Concept of equality and citizenship

- Feminists support differentiated equality and not absolute equality.
- Equity is more important –> equality with justice.
- They say that state should go for positive discrimination in favour of women.
- Iris Marion Young –> go for differentiated citizenship. Universal citizenship is colour blindness.

What is universal citizenship?
- It means universal treatment –> no discrimination on the basis of sex, class, religion.
- Based on the idea of universal adult franchise.
- Feminist do not support universal citizenship. They say state should go for positive
discrimination in favour of woman.
- Universal citizenship is not same as global citizenship / cosmopolitan approach.
What is the global citizenship?

- Global citizenship –> In the age of globalisation, person is not just citizen of his country but has
responsibility towards global community also.
- Similarly protection of person is not just the responsibility of the state but also the responsibility
of international community.
Difference between radical and liberal feminism

Liberal feminism Radical feminism
Derived from the philosophy of liberalism - Original feminist discourse
- Of woman, for woman and by woman
- Developed their own concepts like gender,
patriarchy and reject separation between
personal and political.
Upliftment of women Liberation of women

Equality of status Against patriarchy
Individualism Sisterhood
Do not object public-private divide personal is political
Believes in political struggle and gradual - Consciousness raising

changes - Supports radical changes like abolishing
heterosexual families.

Assignment
1. What is First Wave of Feminism?

2. Why Radical Feminism is a pure feminist theory?
3. Why Existence is prior to essence?
4. Discuss the process of becoming the women.
5. Mention some myths related to women.
6. What is Eco Feminism?
7. What is Post Feminism?
8. What is Black Feminism?
9. What is Dialectics of sex?
10. What is Patriarchy?
11. What is difference between Sex and Gender?
12. What are four meanings of personal is political?
13. What is Differentiated Citizenship?

Justice
Conventional view of justice
- Conventionally – Justice associated with legal system.
- Ancient Greece – Thrasymachus –> equated justice with law
- Action according to law is right else wrong and unjust.
- Plato – justice is the quality of soul. Therefore, principle of justice should be based on the
idea of justice found in human soul.
- There can't be separation between principle of ethics and politics. Therefore justice
belongs to ethics and not law.
- State has to provide for distributive justice (distribution of benefits according to our notion of
justice)
Distributive justice:
- Add from OPG (page 516)
- Desert: what a person deserves because of his capabilities.
- Merit: according to Rawls it is a social construction. Depends how society values a particular
action.
- Need based: socialism is a need-based distribution.
Rawls’ theory of justice
Introduction.
- Greatest philosopher of 20th century.
- At par with Plato
- He is a reference point whether it is Nozick or Sen or Kymlicka or communitarians.
- He was writing at a time when US society was facing social movements – black rights
movement, feminist movements, environmental movements, etc. -> needed a theory to address
these concerns.
- Before Rawls – political theory was in decline.
- His book “A Theory of Justice”–> revival of normative political philosophy.
!69 Justice
Concern of Rawls in his Theory of Justice
- Like Plato – he wanted ultimate idea of justice
- One that is accepted as rational by the people all over the world – universal idea of justice.
“Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is the first

virtue of the system of thoughts”
- In his “A Theory of Justice” – he proposed justice as the first virtue of a social system.
- Like Plato – for him justice is the architectonic principle.
- He suggest that society has to be based on the principles of justice as fairness else society can’t
continue.
“Natural distribution is neither just nor unjust”

- For him – Justice or injustice is a social fact – not a natural fact.
- There is no justice or injustice in the scheme of nature.
- It is devised by society – based on the possession of some qualities or resources.
- Eg, sex-based discrimination against women. Not because of nature but because we live in a
gendered society.
- Social system put some persons in the state of disadvantage where they have no role. Similarly it
puts some people in the state of advantage which is not solely on the basis of merit and desert.
- For him – merit is the most misunderstood concept.
• We do not start from the position of equality.
• Our achievements are because of effort’s and also luck. Example, person born in a rich family
has advantage over a person born in a poor family.
• "Justice as fairness" takes into account luck factor and expects us to compensate the least
advantaged.
• Concept of chain connection. Society–> chain whose strength depends upon the strength of the
weakest link.
“Each person possesses inviolability founded on justice that even the

welfare of whole society cannot override”
OR
“Loss of freedom of some cannot be made right for the greater good of
others”
- According to him – principle of justice has to be based on the principle of human dignity.
!70 Justice
- He is critical of utilitarian argument – greatest happiness of the greatest number.
- Dignity of person cannot be violated for the sake of even greater good of community.
- His ideas are closer to Kant– no one is to be treated as a means for someone's ends.
Criticism by communitarians
- According to them justice is not the first virtue of social system but a remedial virtue.
- Other virtues are better – like social solidarity.
- If virtues like social solidarity are present, justice is not even required.
- Kymlicka comes to the defence of Rawls.
- Justices as fairness as first virtue does not dislocate feelings like solidarity.
- It only assures that, rights of people are not violated.
Sources of influence on Rawls

- Locke – theory of natural rights and a method of social contract
- Kant – concept of human dignity
Objective of Rawls’ theory

- According to him utilitarianism – end state theory –> ends or consequences will shape the
preference.
- His theory – deontological –> action is morally right or wrong depending on the action itself and
not on the basis of consequences.
- Eg, a person is honest without thinking of consequences.
Principle of Justice by Rawls

- Principle of justice should come from the concept of morality that we have.
- It is universal – not dependent on time and space. (communitarian criticise this)
Rawls methodology
- Social contract – People in state of rationality and freedom will choose principles of justice.
What is original position?

- State of nature or situation before contract.
!71 Justice
Purpose of Theory of Justice
- To decide the principles of distribution of primary goods.
- Five primary goods – liberty, equality of opportunity, dignity, income, wealth.
- Primary goods are means to achieve secondary goods.
What type of persons are entering into the contract?

- Rational negotiators
- Indifferent to each other – no feeling of love or envy. Free from biasses.
- In the words of Rawls – mutually disinterested
Problem of Distribution
- Problem of Justice – ensuring a just distribution of primary goods
- He has described his theory as theory of pure procedural justice – once certain principles of
justice are unanimously accepted, the distribution will necessarily be just.
- For him – moral worth of individual is important.
- He has attacked theories which do not consider the moral worth of an individual for the
attainment of a predetermined goal. Eg, utilitarianism is based on greatest happiness of the
greatest number, it doesn’t care if it leads to extreme hardship to any particular individual.
- He has evolved a unique methodology for arriving at a unanimous procedure of justice – veil of
ignorance
Veil of ignorance
- Thought experiment. Hypothetical situation.
- People behind the veil of ignorance – unaware about particular facts about themselves as well as
the society.
- They do not know the pattern of distribution in the society.
- However, elementary knowledge of human psychology & economics and also a sense of justice.
- According to him – in such a state of uncertainty, rational negotiators will choose the least
dangerous path.
- Hence, each of them will demand greatest benefit for the least advantaged.
(Reflexive equilibrium
- Method adopted by Rawls – to show how we proceed towards morality and justice.
!72 Justice
- Three steps:
- We identify our judgement
- In the light of actual situations we try to explain and justify.
- Then if required we modify them. We move back and forth on our position to align our
understanding with the higher order understanding.)
Principles of distribution
- According to him – three principles of justice will be accepted by all:
1. Principle of equal liberty
2. Principle of fair equality of opportunity
3. Difference principle:
Explanation of Rawls’ principles of justice

- According to him the principles are perfectly rational because they are result of purely rational
procedure.
- It is fair to give priority to equal liberty – nobody’s liberty will be compromised for any other
benefit. Liberty in this sense implies equal right to political participation, freedom of expression,
religious liberty, equality before law, etc.
- Fair equality of opportunity – it will ensure fair competition and bring more efficiency and
productivity.
- Difference principle – more advantaged should work for the least advantaged.
• Any departure from the equal distribution of primary goods can be justified only when it is
for the benefit of least advantaged.
• Gives the idea of chain connection – society is as strong as the strength of the weakest link.
- Rawls is a libertarian because his rational negotiators are those who try to maximise their self-
interest. Also he is giving priority to liberty.
- He also comes very close to communitarians because of the importance he gives to strengthening
the weakest link of the chain.
- Rawls considered these set of principles to be overarching and acceptable to all cultural, religious
and ideological groups.
- (In spite of these principles – there will be inequalities – because people differ in talent.
- Such inequality is justified.
- He doesn't support equality of outcomes – not desirable for efficiency.
!73 Justice
- He believes in the concept of human dignity.
- Inequalities are justified only when it contributes for the well-being of least advantaged.
- He supports the role of state in redistribution – Thus welfare state.)
“Right is prior to good”

- Right > good
- Self > community
- This is the basic principle of liberalism based on the value of individual’s autonomy.
- Assumption – man is rational and knows the best for him.
- Instead of society/state deciding what is good for him, he should be given the right to decide his
goals and goods.
- In social contract of Rawls – people have assembled to to decide the principles of distribution of
only primary goods.
- Each person should have the freedom to pursue secondary goods. Others should not decide.
Communitarian criticism and position on rights and goods

- By Michael Sandel
- Rawls "rational negotiators" have assembled behind the veil of ignorance.
- Rawls tries to understand them devoid of all activities, desires, ideas, roles that
characterise human lives in actual society.
- Michael says – what will be left of the person when we remove all this from his personality?
- Rawlsian view of a person is highly impoverished.
- He argues that liberal political philosophy sought to justify a form of individualism which is not
based on concrete social institutions.
- Liberal perspective – self is prior to its ends.
- Sandel – self is not prior to its ends, it is rather constituted by its ends.
- Ends which are not chosen but discovered by the self in some shared social context.
Problem with Rawls

- He is not free from biases.
- His meaning of rationality depends upon the society in which he lives.
- He belongs to the liberal society. Therefore, finds the principle of “justice as fairness” as
common-sense, universal and rational.
!74 Justice
Criticism by Marxist
- Justice in Marxist thought is controversial.
- One view is that Marxism wants to replace capitalism by socialism.
- Inclination towards justice would mean maintaining the existing system with minor changes.
- Therefore the question of Justice is irrelevant for Marxist theory.
Criticism by feminists
- Carole Pateman – Book “The Sexual Contract”
- Criticised social contract thinkers for not giving importance to women perspective.
- In Rawls – contract members are the heads of families – they are men.
- If women participate in the contract, much better principles.
- Susan Moller Okin – book “Gender, Justice and Family”
- Criticised Rawls – for not considering personal is political.
- He takes family for granted.
Criticism by libertarians
- Scholar: Nozick
- He has criticised Rawls for compromising liberty for the sake of equality.
- For him – three sources through which various goods are acquired by individuals: their
selves (body, mind, etc), natural world and labour.
- People should have complete ownership over their selves.
- entitlement over the objects of natural world and the products of their labour – based on
principles of justice.
- He identifies three principles:
1. Initial acquisition – based on “first come first serve”. However, it should not create scarcity
for others.
2. Voluntary transfer – it applies to all property whether obtained through initial acquisition or
one’s labour. It should be based on voluntary contract – not forced.
3. Rectification – if someone has gained control over rare natural resources creating scarcity
for others –> State should intervene.
- Progressive taxation – immoral and "forced labour"
- Rich can do charity if they want to do welfare of the poor.
!75 Justice
- He rejects welfare state and suggest nightwatchman state.
- There might be injustices in the past but we cannot stretch this injustice too far in the present – it
will disturb the present order.
Assessment of Nozick’s theory

- Actually not a theory of justice but theory of right, liberty or entitlement.
- Justice is thought to be the voice of the oppressed. But he wants to maintain the prevailing
oppression in the name of justice.
- Eg, through rectification he wants to justify aggression over the only assets of oil producing
countries. Because oil is needed all over the world and it is scarce.
- For him welfare of the poor is dependent on charity of rich, not on justice!
Criticism by social liberal

- By Dworkin
- We cannot force people to implement the principles accepted under ignorance.
- Eg, artist not knowing the price of his art.
- He proposes thin veil of ignorance and not thick.
Amartya Sen
- Appreciates Rawls for:
• Significant departure from the utilitarian view of justice by Bentham.
• Rawls has given immense importance to public reasoning.
• He also gives priority to the concept of freedom or liberty.
Criticism by Amartya Sen

- Example of three children (Ann, Bob, Carla)
- (Quarrelling over a flute.
- Anne – knows how to play it
- Bob – poor – has no other toys
- Carla – made it with her own labour.
- There isn’t one right answer to this problem. No such thing as “perfect” justice.
- Instead we should focus on removing more manifest forms of injustice.)
- It is impossible to arrive at such transcendental view of justice.
!76 Justice
- Trick – Just compare the substantial deprivations
- Rawls think that just institutions are needed for just society.
• Sen – Instead of just institutions, focus on just society.
• Even in just institutions – not necessary that just society will emerge.
• Sen applies the principle of Neeti (procedural) and Nyaya (substantive).
• Nyaya is superior to Neeti.
- Also inspired by Buddha – realisation focused approach.
• Focusing on practical approach instead of debating on universally acceptable formula.
- Sen calls his theory of Justice as the comparative theory of justice.
• According to him we should make social choice rather than rational choice.
• Rational choice – based on abstract persons.
• Social choice – based on actual persons.
• Comparative theory of justice doesn't aim for perfectly just society, it wants a society as just as
possible.
- Sen appreciates Rawls concern of freedom but says that Rawls freedom is not substantive view
of freedom.
• Freedom from various types of deprivations like hunger, poverty, medical neglect are more
important than personal liberty.
• Example of person fasting – one out of choice and other out of deprivation.
• SECC includes various deprivations faced by Indian citizens. Depending on it, they are
entitled to various schemes eg, Ayushman Bharat
• Rawls suggests taking care of least advantaged but doesn't specify actions.
• Sen suggests state should invest in capacity building – substantive freedom.
• Thus affirmative action.
Criticism by communitarians
- They give importance to community.
Why communitarians emerged?

- Western societies – growing individualism – isolation, psychological problems and social
problems (crimes).
- Individualism can undermine the legitimacy of political system.
!77 Justice
- Hannah Arendt – emphasised on civic participation.
- Western societies – problem of decline of social capital – Australia and Belgium introduced
compulsory voting.
- Monetary capital is necessary for running the industry, social capital is necessary for running the
society.
- State cannot provide good governance without the involvement of people.
- Communitarianism is more prominent as a movement and less as a philosophy.
Difference between communitarian and libertarians

- Liberals including Rawls:
• man as an “unencumbered self”
• rights prior to goods
- Communitarians:
• Self is not prior to end. Self is constituted by ends.
• They questioned the logic of taking liberty as the most important value.
• Freedom of choice in itself is not value but what we choose is more important.
• Eg, person marrying 10 times is exercising his freedom but that doesn't mean his life is better
than person marrying once.
Concept of community
- Liberal concept of community:
• Doesn't recognise the importance of community.
• Community – aggregation of individuals.
• There is nothing like common good. Common good – collection of individual goods.
• They recognise politics as the politics of individual interests.
- Communitarians:
• They recognise common good – it goes beyond the sum of individual goods.
• Recognises politics of community along with autonomy of individual.
Universalism v. particularism debate

- Liberals and Rawls in particular – principles of justice can be universal.
• It is a product of man's reason.
!78 Justice
• Universalism is based on atomistic concept of man.
- Communitarian suggest that justice is human creation.
• It is pluralistic – varies from society to society.
• Man is situated in time and space – not independent of the influence of his family, culture.
Debate on state
- Liberals:
• Support value neutrality
• Separation between personal and political
• Universal citizenship
• Nationalism as a means of solidarity
• Non-intervention of state with respect to religion
- Communitarians:
• State need not be neutral but need to promote values which promotes social solidarity.
• State should adopt cultural relativistic perspective rather than depending on homogenisation
for solidarity.
• Justice is not universalising but art of differentiation.
• No need to keep religion out of public sphere – not possible. Better to recognise it.
- Kymlicka in defence of liberals:
• Many cultural practices – derogatory to human rights. Eg, FGM
• For cultural relativist and communitarian – every custom has its rationality. Eg, caste system in
India.
View of Michael Walzer

- Book "The Spheres of Justice”
- Concept of justice should be pluralistic.
- According to him, the shared understanding in our society require us to apply the principle
of complex equality in the distribution of social goods. Whereas Rawls applies principle of
simple equality.
- Complex equality means – no social good X should be distributed to people who possess some
other social good Y merely because they possess Y and without regard to the meaning of X.
!79 Justice
- If we maintain the boundaries between different spheres then one person's pre-eminence in a
certain sphere, like money, will be offset by another’s higher social prestige and another’s
education.
- This type of social pluralism will lead to equality in which no one outranks anyone else.
- If Walzer’s suggestion are adopted in actual practice, we will certainly have a just society.
- But there is no reliable method to quantify non-economic factors like reputation, political power,
education, health, etc.
- He has also not indicated the way to convince the dominant people in different spheres.
- (According to him – Justice is not an abstract concept, Justice is what people subscribe to.
- Eg, caste system in India is continuing because it subscribes to peoples sense of justice .
- We should not impose our meanings or values on those who can't identify themselves with these
values.)
Rawls response to communitarians

- Rawls has responded to communitarians through his book "Political Liberalism”
- (He accepts that we cannot force people to subscribe to a particular way of life. Different people
have different conception of good. Yet he believes that liberal conception of good is superior.)
- In this book he gives “political conception of justice”.
Political conception of justice

- In his first book “The Theory of Justice” – conception of justice is the conception of ethics.
- Second book “Political Liberalism” – limits concept of justice to the political sphere –> political
conception of justice.
- People having different comprehensive doctrines can continue to live with their comprehensive
doctrines in personal sphere, but can agree on justice as fairness principle in political sphere.
- People can develop "overlapping consensus" – it means they will have different reasons rather
than identical reasons to accept political conception of justice.
- Existence of people with different comprehensive doctrines and agreeing for political conception
of justice signifies the presence of "reasonable pluralism”.
- Thus, he separates personal and political life:
• According to him, we can secure cooperation on the basis of mutual respect.
• He distinguishes between citizen and person. He appeals to the sense of citizenship duty.
!80 Justice
• In modern democratic society, people are reasonable and they are willing to reconcile with
"burdens of judgement".
Criticism of Rawls’ political conception of justice by Feminist:

- Even in the second book – silent on woman's perspective.
- Susan Moller Okin – Separated personal and political
- Martha Nussbaum – suggests that he should have put development of women’s
capabilities.
Criticism of Rawls’ political conception of justice by Communitarians:

- Michael Sandel asks:
• Why should we take political conception of justice?
• Why should we separate our personal and political life?
- How can we secure cooperation on the basis of mutual respect when our moral and religious
beliefs are in conflict?
- Had it been possible to separate, problem would not have emerged.
- Rawls should have accepted that religious belief cannot be separated from human life.
- Idea of Justice has to engage with moral and religious questions. They are a part of
deliberation.
Criticism of Rawls’ political conception of justice by cosmopolitan thinkers:

- Thomas Pogge:
• There is increase in global injustice because of unjust institutions imposed on the
people of South by the people of North.
• According to him people in North should accept the responsibility and take care of the needs
of the people in South.
- Charles Beitz:
• We are witnessing a rise of global civil society.
• He wants to know whether Rawls will agree for the application of difference principle
between societies also.
- Rawls says no, but he has given parameters for interaction between societies.
- In his book “The Laws of People” he has given parameters for interaction between societies:
!81 Justice
• Respect each others freedom
• Observe treaties
• Turn binding commitments into agreements
• Non interference in domestic affairs
• Honour human rights, etc.
OP Gauba Content
Philosophical context of justice

- Justice is primarily about distinguishing between ‘right’ and ‘wrong’.
- It is sometimes confused with ‘good’ and ‘evil’.
- Something may be partly good or partly bad.
- Good and bad are two extremes between which our view moves – continuum.
- But right and wrong are absolute categories. Something can’t be partly right or partly wrong.
- In the present context, Justice corresponds to right; injustice corresponds to wrong.
Justice – dynamic idea

- It depends upon the development of our social consciousness.
- Eg, slavery was widely justified in ancient and medieval Europe. Now it is regarded as unjust.
- Conception of Justice is always based on reason. But man develops his faculty of reasoning
according to the social consciousness of his age.
Relation between liberty, equality and justice

- Ernest Barker– justice is synthesis of the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity.
- Justice is the basic idea behind this value.
- Justice and liberty:
- Liberty goes hand in hand with justice when justice is equally extended to every
individual of the society.
- Liberty is defined as the absence of restraint and it will become universal principle only when
it is qualified by the principle of equality.
- Justice and equality:
!82 Justice
- Equality calls for such restraints on liberty so that liberty of one does not become a threat to
another’s equal and similar liberty. Unrestrained liberty of one will become slavery for the
rest.
- Equality may be defined as the "absence of discrimination". This interpretation of the equality
doesn't pose any difficulty in legal and political sphere.
- But in the economic sphere mere "absence of discrimination" will become difficult for the
provision of justice.
- When society is divided into different classes based on income, wealth, prestige, etc – the
cause of justice will not be served by treating everyone without discrimination.
- Hence principle of justice requires that the deprived and underprivileged section should be
given special protection in competitive situations.
- Thus, principle of justice doesn't postulate mere formal liberty and equality, but the
transformation of the social conditions which obstruct achievement of substantive freedom and
equality of the underprivileged section.
- This view brings liberty and equality very close to justice.
Subaltern perspective on justice

- Subaltern? Those groups who are in subordinate position because of various constraints imposed
by the social structure.
- Concept of subaltern is given by Gramsci.
- Marxist Class theory divides the society into two classes on the basis of ownership of means of
production.
- Elite theory in the 20th century has challenged the Marxist class theory.
- By Pareto, Mosca, Robert Michels.
- According to them, society is divided into elite and masses on the basis of specific abilities or
organisational capacities.
- It implies that if ordinary people get a lesser share of the cake, they deserve it – “to each
according to his work”.
- The concept of the subaltern contradicts the elite theory.
- The ruling class evolves a value system to suit its own interest.
- The subaltern group is made to believe that they are being ruled with their consent.
- Gramsci described this quality of ruling class as “hegemony”.
!83 Justice
- Hegemony signifies the ability of the ruling class to convince the subaltern classes that their rule
represents common interest.
Elite perspective Subaltern perspective
Division of society into Elites and masses Dominant and subaltern

Reason of division Competence Hegemony of dominant class
Nature of division Natural Artificial

Is division alterable? no yes– revolution
!84 Justice
Assignment
1. What is the difference between procedural justice and substantive justice?

- Procedural justice – If the just procedure is first decided, then the outcomes of it will necessarily
be just. Eg, it focusses on laying down the rules of a race which will be equally applicable to all,
later who wins doesn’t matter.
- It rejects all discrimination on the grounds of caste, creed, sex, race, religion, language, etc.
- It accepts equal dignity and moral worth of all human beings.
- It is a progressive idea, but it stretches the principle of open competition too far.
- Substantive Justice – philosophy of socialism.
- Primary issue – allocation of social advantages among various sections should be just.
- Procedure for making such allocation is a secondary issue.
- Justice is when everyone including poor and the underprivileged have adequate opportunity to
improve their life.
2. How desert, merit and need differ from each other?

3. What is liberal egalitarian principle of justice? - Chain connection. Strengthening all weak
connections.
4. Why justice is the first virtue of social institutions?
5. What does justice as fairness means?
6. What is veil of ignorance? - Rawls…people don’t know their qualities, beliefs, etc.
7. What is original position? - state of nature or before social contract
8. What is modus vivendi?
9. What is lexical order?
10. What is political conception of justice?
11. What is a comprehensive doctrine?
12. What is overlapping consensus?
13. What is reasonable pluralism?
14. What is reflexive equilibrium?
15. What is deontological theory? - not dependent on consequences
16. What is teleological theory?
17. What is libertarianism? - market fundamentalism or market is god
18. What is entitlement theory of justice?
!85 Justice
19. What is night-watchman state? - only providing security
20. What is entitlement theory of justice?
21. Who are communitarians? - importance to community
22. What is the difference between communitarian and libertarian view of self?
23. What is complex equality? - Michael Walzer
24. What are the spheres of justice according to Walzer?
25. Name some prominent communitarian thinkers and their books
26. What is Amartya Sen’s idea of justice? - no universal idea of justice. Removing prevalent gross
injustices.
27. On what grounds Amartya Sen criticises Rawls? -just compare the substantial deprivations
28. What is proportionate justice? - in proportion to the efforts or merit
29. What is distributive justice? - just distribution of goods, services, etc
30. What is Aristotle’s idea of justice? - treating equals equally and …
31. What is Marx’s idea of justice? - no justice because it means minor changes in the existing
system.
32. What is global justice?
!86 Justice
Equality
Modern times
- Idea of equality is a modern concept.
- Deliberation of US independence, French Declaration of rights of man – God has created
everyone as equal.
- Locke – all of us are children of God.
- Kant – people are equal in terms of dignity.
- Hobbes – every person is hedonistic. Everyone has equal capacity to destroy each other – some
has physical power, some has mental power.
- Rousseau – blames growth of civilisation and origin of private property for the origin of
inequalities.
- Marx also blamed private property.
- At present, scholars have gone beyond legal and economic equality and talk about gender
equality and multiculturalism.
Concept of equality
- Liberal concept: equality before law and equality of opportunity
- Marxist concept: equality of outcomes – absolute equality
Relationship between equality and liberty

- The principle of liberty stipulates ‘equal and similar’ liberty for every one.
- If freedom of one becomes unfreedom for another, it would be against the spirit of freedom itself.
- Thus, scholars like Laski and Macpherson regard liberty and equality as complimentary
principles.
- However, some regard equality as impediment to Liberty:
- Alexis de Tocqueville – “Principle of equality” where all distinctions of social status
are generally eroded, leads to the subordination of an individual to the public opinion
– “tyranny of majority”
- Isaiah Berlin opposed equality in the economic sphere.
• According to him, state can protect only negative liberty of individual.
• Positive liberty – individual is his own master. If one cannot fly like an Eagle, doesn’t
mean that he is deprived of political liberty.
!87 Equality
• He tried to compare socio-economic inequalities with natural inequalities. But natural
inequalities are unalterable while socio-economic inequalities are the product of social
conditions which can be changed.
- Hayek:
• Achieve higher excellence in few rather than marginal improvement in majority.
• Social justice is a mirage. Liberty alone is worth pursuing.
- Milton Friedman – society which tries to achieve both equality and freedom, gets none of
them.
- Marxist – primacy to equality. According to them liberty in capitalist society is false
consciousness. –> results into alienation.
• Real freedom is freedom from necessities – it requires social ownership over means of
production.
Positive liberals and social liberals on equality v. liberty

- They redefined the concept of liberty in terms of capacity.
- Green, Laski, LT Hobhouse – support social and economic rights and welfare state.
- Rawls in his “A Theory of Justice” has shown that liberty and equality are complimentary to each
other and are foundation of justice as fairness.
• Human dignity cannot be violated.
• People should have liberty to do what they want but at the same time there should be a fair
equality of opportunity. As well as provisions for the least advantaged section.
- Dworkin – talks about equality of initial resources
- Sen – equality of capabilities
• Development is freedom
Equality v. Justice
- Aristotle – “Treating equals and unequals unequally”
- This is in favour of maintaining the existing inequalities of society – between master and
slave, poor and rich, etc.
- According to him, and those who are equal in one sense are inclined to believe that there
should be equal in all respects.
- Example, those who are equal as citizens of the state, may think that they are entitled to equal
power, prestige and wealth.
!88 Equality
- When they fail to gain these privileges they feel deprived which results into rebellion.
- This feeling should not be encouraged in the society to maintain peace. So the state should not
promote the idea of equality.
- However, modern idea of equality seeks reduction in inequalities whenever they are proved to be
unjust according to the prevailing social consciousness.
- It is now widely held that equality will be meaningful only when it is accompanied by a sense of
justice.
- If we forget the principle of justice we might crush the principle of equality. Eg, if a ruler
chooses to shoot everyone including himself “without discrimination” he might be following the
rule of equality, but his decision is crazy because it is without a sense of justice.
- Equality without a sense of justice becomes oppression.
- Hobbes – State of nature was the state of natural equality but without a sense of justice where life
of man was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short”.
- Thus, principle of equality cannot be separated from the principal of justice.
Dworkin’s theory of equality

- Rawls – justice as the first virtue of social institutions.
- Dworkin – suggest equality is the sovereign virtue in his book "Sovereign Virtue”
- The most important concern of the political system is equality, without equality government
becomes tyranny.
- He contradicts libertarians.
- Acc to Nozick – people are responsible and should be held responsible for the choices
they make.
- Acc to Dworkin – people should not be held responsible for the choices they make under
unchosen circumstances.
- Those who suffer from disadvantages because of natural endowments or circumstances should be
compensated to make the initial distribution of resources fair.
- He has given the envy test – distribution of resources in such a way that it does not create envy
among others.
- The best system of distribution of resources is the market system. Market can decide actual value
of any resource or talent.
- But there should be equality at the initial level of distribution.
!89 Equality
Difference between Rawls and Dworkin
- Rawls – thick veil of ignorance – people do not know the advantages and disadvantages.
- Dworkin – thin veil of ignorance – they know their advantages and disadvantages but they do not
know the actual worth of their talents which will be decided by the market.
- Rawls – compensation is after it is known that who is least advantaged
- Dworkin – compensation is during the initial distribution of resources.
Amartya Sen
- It is not enough to make people equal in terms of resources.
- Go for realisation focused approach.
- He suggest equality of capabilities.
- They may have equal resources but it doesn't mean that they have equal chance. For equal chance
they need equal capabilities.
Communitarian concept of equality

- Michael Walzer
- Book "The Spheres of Justice”
- According to him, the shared understanding in our society require us to apply the
principle of complex equality in the distribution of social goods.
- Complex equality means – no social good X should be distributed to people who possess some
other social good Y merely because they possess Y and without regard to the meaning of X.
- If we maintain the boundaries between different spheres then one person's pre-eminence in a
certain sphere, like money, will be offset by another’s higher social prestige and another’s
education.
- Even within one sphere we need differentiation. For eg, differentiation between primary,
secondary and higher education.
- Universalisation of education in primary and secondary. Maybe privatisation in higher education.
- This type of social pluralism will lead to equality in which no one outranks anyone else.
- If Walzer’s suggestion are adopted in actual practice, we will certainly have a just society.
- But there is no reliable method to quantify non-economic factors like reputation, political power,
education, health, etc.
- He has also not indicated a way to convince the dominant people in different spheres.
!90 Equality
What is simple equality?
- Simple equality means just distribution of the same goods to different persons (eg, income,
wealth, power, etc)
- It seeks to avoid anyone's dominance over any good which deprives others of their fair share.
- The distribution is according to uniform criteria. Eg, talent, effort, need, etc.
Affirmative action
- Public policy which grants special concessions to certain groups in order to compensate for the
injustice meted out to them in the past.
- In every society – group of persons who have been historically disadvantaged. Eg, blacks in USA
and Dalits in India.
- In order to address this we need to go for positive discrimination or affirmative action in favour
of groups.
- It is realised that without external catalysts, it is not possible to treat their disadvantages.
- (Affirmative action is not preferential action.
- preferential action– language policy of government of Sri Lanka – Sinhalese is the only official
language)
- Affirmative action is often criticised as reverse discrimination. It means that discrimination in
favour of ‘hitherto deprived sections’ results in discrimination against the general category.
- It is also believed that affirmative action compromises merit and in most of the situation it gets
politicised.
- The issue of reverse discrimination is not raised in India as loudly as in America, because people
in India are more sympathetic towards the deprived sections.
- However there is always a danger that more alert and vocal sections of the so-called backward
classes might corner all the benefits meant for the deprived sections.
- SC of India– reservation is a strongest form of affirmative action, should be seen as enabling
policy.
- It can’t continue forever. Objective is to uplift the disadvantaged. Hence, it must end one day.
- We should be in a position to declare that we have been successful in enabling such groups and
now they don’t require such actions.
- PB Mehta– reservation in India has created a paradoxical situation– race to bottom. Eg, Maratha
reservation
!91 Equality
OP Gauba Content
Equality means fair treatment rather than equal treatment

- Equality doesn’t imply literal equalisation. It demands progressive reduction of inequalities when
they are thought to be unreasonable.
- Inequality in society may be reasonable or unreasonable depending on the prevalent idea of
justice. Eg, in ancient slave owning society difference between master and slave were considered
reasonable. But today in the age of democracy and human rights, slavery can not be justified no
matter how useful it is portrayed.
- The idea of equality does not contemplate that all material goods should be equally distributed
among all members of society.
- It rather means that everyone should be given equal opportunities for development of their
personal qualities and capacities.
- RH Tawney in his powerful book “Equality” has argued that the opponents of equality have tried
to portray a view of equality which was not maintained by defenders of equality. Egalitarians
didn’t wish abolishing all difference in the incomes. They only wanted to pool the surplus
income through taxation and use it for the well being of all.
- The principles on which just distribution of goods, services, honours, etc is determined, is
described as distributive equality.
- People differ in talents, efforts and needs. However, all human beings have similar basic needs.
State should take care of the basic needs of everybody and also of specific needs of certain
disadvantaged sections, eg, people with disabilities.
- Thus, distributive equality aims to create “equality of opportunity” but it does not favour
“equality of outcome”.
- Equality of opportunity means creating conditions in which everyone has the same starting point.
- Thus equality is not literal equality. It accepts discrimination on certain grounds of reason or
logic. This reason and logic is dependent on the prevalent idea of justice.
!92 Equality
Assignment
1. What is procedural equality?

2. What is substantive equality?
3. What is equality of opportunity?
4. What is equality of outcome? - Marxists
5. What is proportionate equality?
6. What is differentiated equality? - Feminists
7. What is complex equality? - Michael Walzer
8. What is difference between affirmative action and preferential policy?
9. What are demerits of affirmative action? - reverse discrimination and cornering of benefits
10. What are merits of affirmative action? - upliftment of historically disadvantaged
11. What is equality of resources? - Dworkin
12. What is equality of capabilities? - Amartya Sen
13. Why Amartya Sen calls development as freedom?
14. What is ambition sensitive auction?
15. What is endowment sensitive auction?
16. What is functioning according to Amartya Sen?
17. What is the relationship between equality and liberty? - Impediments to liberty and positive
liberals’ view
!93 Equality
Rights
What are rights?
- Rights are interpreted in two ways:
• Entitlement – means it is my privilege and I have no obligation.
• Morality – which implies right and wrong
- The discourse on rights of man, woman, children, animals is a feature of modern and post-
modern world.
- Medieval times – discourse was the divine rights of the King.
- Dworkin – Rights are trumps –> foremost priority to rights.
- Joseph Raz – Right means holding others responsible to their duties.
- Additionally, liberalism is considered as the strongest tradition of rights.
- At present, it is facing challenge from multiculturalism.
- Now there is a need to recognise the rights of cultural groups, rights of communities.
- Karel Vasak: three generation of rights:

• 1st: civil and political
• 2nd: social and economic
• 3rd: cultural and developmental rights
• Add from OPG Pending
Theory of natural rights

- Origin of rights is in the nature as suggested by John Locke – man is born with natural rights.
- Origin of natural rights is in the reason of man.
- Two traditions in the theory of natural rights:
- First: social contract tradition
• Hobbes – man has absolute rights in the state of nature but in the absence of government
might becomes right.
• Man has transferred all of his rights to the Commonwealth except right to self preservation.
• Locke – man has transferred only three natural rights.
• Life, liberty and property are inalienable rights.
- Second: Teleological approach
!94 Rights
• Teleological argument is for the justification of normal rights.
• TH Green: human consciousness postulates liberty, liberty involves rights.
- Natural rights theory become the basis for recognition of fundamental rights and human rights.
- This theory is criticised by utilitarians and conservatives.
Utilitarian arguments on theory of natural rights

- Bentham – in Book “Anarchical Fallacies” has attacked human rights.
- Natural rights are nonsense, nonsense upon stilts.
- Rights are the creation of law and law properly called (law made by state).
- Bentham belongs to utilitarianism based on the idea of Hobbes.
- Hobbes – man cannot enjoy rights in the absence of state – life becomes solitary, nasty, poor,
brutish and short.
- Man enjoys rights only when state exists. Hence, the real source of rights is state.
- This theory is called as the legal theory of rights.
- Bentham – natural rights are terrorising discourse. Claim of natural rights can draw us back into
anarchy.
Conservative’s argument on theory of natural rights

- Scholar – Edmund Burke
- Natural rights are metaphysical abstractions.
- Real source of rights is society.
Human rights
Historical context of theory of human rights

- Human rights became a matter of concern after WWII – atrocities committed by Hitler.
- Theory of human rights takes its inspiration from the theory of natural rights.
- Till WWII legal theory of rights dominated.
- Legal theory of rights goes hand-in-hand with the theory of sovereignty of the state.
- Monistic theory: state is sovereign in internal and external sphere.
- Thus, no right for international community to intervene in domestic affairs.
- State to decide what rights it can give to the people based on the capacity of the state.
- After WWII – UDHR in 1948.
!95 Rights
- UDHR + International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights + International Covenant on Social
and Cultural Rights = International Bill of Rights
- Human rights are advocated on the basis of two theories:
- Theory of natural rights – Locke
- Concept of human dignity – Kant
Features of human rights

- Equal universe in pertek individual
- equality
- Universality
- Inalienability
- Permanence
- Individuality
What is the problematic aspect in theory of human rights?

- The very set of ideas which are at the root of philosophy of human rights is problematic.
- There is a need of basic minimum rights. No agreement on this basic minimum yet.
- Even difficult to get an agreement over right to life, because liberal conception of right to life
which includes pursuit of happiness which requires freedom and liberty may not be acceptable to
all.
Debate within human rights

- On the definition:
- Who is to be treated as humans and when human life starts.
- Some say exclude terrorist. While others say that everyone should be included irrespective of
how barbaric they have become.
- Some fight for the rights of women in case of abortion, while others say that human life starts
from the embryo.
- Hence, foeticide cannot be justified.
- These are moral disagreements which cannot be reconciled.
How to remove the differences of opinion?

- Value neutrality:
!96 Rights
• Traditional liberals suggest that state should go for value neutrality between two conflicting
values.
• It is an old idea of liberalism based on Locke’s idea of toleration.
• Society where different religious communities exist, state should adopt attitude of indifference
or neutrality.
• Religion should not be brought into public sphere.
• It is practiced in countries like France. Debate regarding the wearing of burqa.
• Value neutrality is criticised because it is indirectly imposing the values of the dominant
section on non-dominant section – violation of human rights of minority.
• The issue of neutrality emerges from the liberal concept of individual i.e. atomistic man
• Communitarians – man is “situated self”
- Criticism:
• The way liberals look at man is quite abstract.
• Liberals are undermining the role of culture and religion in shaping one's identity.
• What liberals consider as neutral is actually biased.
• In countries like France culture of majority is treated as common sense.
Value pluralism
- Scholar – Isaiah Berlin
- Value pluralism is against: value monism and value neutrality.
- Value monism – treating a particular value as ultimate determinant. Example, utilitarians treat
utility as the ultimate determinant.
• Isaiah Berlin rejects value monism because we cannot agree on the hierarchy of values.
- Value neutrality promotes indifference.
- Value pluralism is based on following assumptions:
• Several values may be equally correct and fundamental and yet in conflict with each other.
Example, liberty and equality.
• Values cannot be quantified – can't be put in order.
• Berlin – there can be some general values over which we can achieve consensus. Example,
right to life, honesty, bravery, etc.
- Value pluralism is optimistic about evolution of human civilisation where more and more
agreements on fundamental values may emerge.
!97 Rights
Criticism of Isaiah Berlin
- He is biased towards liberalism.
- He expects that societies will gradually develop consensus about superiority of the fundamental
values of liberalism like right to life, liberty and autonomy of individual.
- He suggests toleration only between conflicting values and not cultures.
Multiculturalism
- Recognition of culture, not just recognition but giving respect to different cultures and granting
them protection.
- Way of managing diversity.
- Issue of diversity – important today because of globalisation, migration, environmental and
political crisis, ethnic conflicts.
Why multiculturalism?
- Necessary for a peaceful coexistence.
- Existing liberal ideas of accommodation of diversity is not enough
How liberal societies accommodated diversity?

- Medieval times: could not manage diversity –> religious wars, crusades.
- Europe has suffered 30 years of war.
- To deal with diversity they invented following conditions:
• Concept of sovereignty of state through Treaty of Westphalia
• Separation of religion and politics.
• No external interference
- To deal with the religious diversity – Locke proposed policy of toleration
• According to him as far as matters of soul are concerned, authority of magistrate not to be
trusted.
• Provision of freedom of conscience comes from this idea – Art 25
- Why policy of toleration with religious diversity?
• People are not harmed by the religious beliefs and practices.
• Scholars like Voltaire, Kant and Spinoza also emphasised on toleration and the right to dissent.
!98 Rights
What is toleration?
- To accept the ideas of others which we do not agree with.
Liberal idea of toleration: Religious neutrality/value neutrality

- For state, religion should be of equal importance.
- The idea of religious neutrality is linked with the idea of universal citizenship.
- Universal citizenship – no special concessions with respect to a particular religion.
- Original liberal idea of dealing with diversity – homogenisation or the concept of melting pot.
- Where homogenisation is not possible, eg religion, it should be confined in the private sphere.
France does this.
- However the above method is proving inadequate at present.
- Why?
• Demographic changes due to huge migration.
• Growing consciousness about human rights.
• Minorities are becoming conscious and assertive
- Liberals responded by value pluralism.
- It accepts the diversity of values, but doesn't accept the diversity of culture.
- Isaiah Berlin – toleration and value pluralism can be practised only in liberal societies.
- Liberal concept of toleration is declining because of the rise of religious fundamentalism
and terrorism.
- Bruce Bawer – Book “Surrender: Appease Islam, sacrifice freedom”: idea of
multiculturalism is not good for security.
- Liberal view of toleration is considered as projection of superiority of the west.
• Edward Said – Liberal view involves incorrect understanding of Islam.
Multiculturalism
- Liberal MC – Kymlicka
- Post colonial MC – Bhiku Parekh
- Cosmopolitan MC – Jeremy Waldron, Seyla Ben Habib
- Acc to Bhiku – it is neither a political doctrine nor a political philosophy.

- It is a perspective of looking at human life.
- Three insights:
!99 Rights
1. Human beings are not atomistic. Culturally embedded. Liberals believe that cultural identities
will evaporate under the influence of market economy and democracy, but it won't happen.
2. Culture provides meaning and understanding to life. It is a glass through which people look at
reality and understand reality and themselves.
3. Culture is inherently plural, fluid and open. Consciously and unconsciously cultures interacts
with each other. There is no pure culture. Culture is also a way by which we develop our
identity and understand the differences from other.
- Biodiversity – good for environment.
- Social diversity – good for society
Liberal multiculturalism
- Kymlicka – Book “Multicultural Citizenship”
- Context of this theory: Many states in the western world – started adopting
multiculturalism.
• Eg, Canada and Australia
• Such policies were considered as compromising with liberal values.
• But Kymlicka suggested that it is not compromising liberal value but inevitable evolution of
liberalism.
• It is the response to new challenges.
Contribution of Will Kymlicka

- Originally liberalism – autonomy of individual.
- No recognition to collective identities like culture or religion.
- Liberated man from the clutches of religion and culture.
- But communitarians – man is “situated self”.
- Kymlicka has accepted the role of culture in the personality of man.
- Culture is the context in which people make choices.
- There is a deep connection between culture and self-respect.
- If human dignity is the principle of liberalism, culture has to be respected.
- He suggests multicultural citizenship. It means giving special rights to minorities.
- He has prescribed three rights to be given to minorities.
1. Special representation in the legislative assemblies or policy making bodies.
!100 Rights
2. If the group is considered as a legitimate group it can be given self-governance right. Eg,
Maoris in NZ, Nagas in India.
3. Poly-ethnic rights: it means special rights for the protection of culture of the minorities. He
suggest to give exemptions eg, allow Muslim girls to wear scarves in schools.
- However, he give this right only to the domestic minorities, not to the immigrants and refugees.
Why only to nationals?

- National minorities – Not choice, but luck. They took birth in a minority community. – need to
compensate
- Immigrants – matter of choice. It is their obligation to adopt the cultural values of societies
where they have immigrated.
- Refugees – Not justified to take the burden of some other state. International community should
force the state to take care of their minorities.
- Kymlicka’s theory is based on Rawlsian theory of justice which suggest to rectify the unchosen
inequalities.
- Rawls’ Theory of Justice is also limited to the domestic sphere.
Reasons for the necessity of multiculturalism

- Kymlicka gives following reasons:
• Increasing consciousness of rights
• Demographic changes
• Multiple access points for communication
Bhiku Parekh’s idea : postcolonial perspective

- Liberalism – arrogant about liberal values.
- It doesn't see all cultures with equal respect.
- In the name of value neutrality – imposes liberal values.
- Liberalism and socialism – narrow view of good life.
- It misses many important dimensions of man's identity.
- Aim is homogenisation and mono-cultural.
- Liberal discourse on multiculturalism – confined to nationalist discourse.
- He recommends intercultural dialogue.
!101 Rights
- Whatever values we choose to govern our lives, it must be the result of dialogue between
cultures where all cultures are equally respected.
- He does not accept Kymlicka’s view –> special rights only to national minorities and not to
immigrants and refugees.
- Suggests harm principle – those practices in a particular culture which do not do any concrete
harm to others should be.
- From this perspective banning the wearing of burqa in France is wrong.
- Similarly Muslims and Jews can be given holidays on Friday instead of Sunday.
- He is optimistic that human beings are capable of arriving at consensus on some common values.
Eg, human dignity, equality, etc.
- Kymlicka – thin theory of multiculturalism
- Bhiku – thick theory
Critics of multiculturalism
- Feminist critique: Susan Moller Okin – multiculturalism is bad for woman because
majority of cultures have been patriarchal.
- Liberal criticism: Brian Barry, Chandran Kukathas – They accept that there are
certain internal minorities like woman, dissenters, sexual minorities, etc. but
multiculturalism diverts the attention from politics of development to politics of identity.
- Certain communities have inhuman practices like FGM. We may end up overlooking such
human rights.
- Seyla Benhabib – multiculturalism stops diffusion of cultures.
- Amartya Sen – multiculturalism leads to ghettoisation which results in to “miniaturisation”
of humanity.
- In contemporary times, multiculturalism is creating threats for security.
- Bruce Bawer- Book “Surrender: Appease Islam, sacrifice freedom” – idea of multiculturalism is
not good for security.
- Andrew Murphy – toleration only towards tolerant. Islam is not open for generous politics of
accommodation.
Future of multiculturalism
- Biggest threat to multiculturalism from terrorism and religious extremism.
!102 Rights
- Trend is the growth of nationalism and fundamentalism, rise of right wing and decline of
toleration.
Globalisation and its impact

- It is full of paradoxes.
- The more we are coming near the more we are falling apart.
- Ideally – it should have strengthened human rights and resulted into dialogue between
civilisations.
- At present:
- The present nature of globalisation is neoliberal.
- Globalisation has increased consciousness about democracy and human rights but at the same
time it has weakened the power of people.
- Power has shifted from the hands of people into the hands of corporate classes.
- It has led to growth but not development. Growth without justice.
- It has increased inequalities within and between societies.
- In order to secure commercial rights, states in metropolitan cities went to the extreme steps of
military intervention.
- Present instability in Middle East and human rights violation is linked to neo-liberal form of
capitalism.
- Attempts to impose the western culture in the name of human rights has generated backlash
against human rights. Clash of civilisations.
- Many studies show extremely negative impact on social and economic rights of people.
- It has led to race to bottom – Global investors are looking for countries where there are poor
labour rights and environmental standards.
- It has led to jobless growth and adversely affected agriculture which is the backbone of
economy in the countries of South.
- It has adversely impacted the environment and rights of indigenous communities and tribals.
Increase in informal labourer and child labour.
- Adversely impacted woman.
- Rolling back of subsidies impacted the vulnerable sections like disabled.
- It has weakened the power of nation states and shifted power outside, into the hands of
corporate class, non-state actors like human rights organisation and terrorist groups.
- Commercialisation of human rights – led to growth of human rights industry. 
!103 Rights
Assignment
1. What are natural rights?

2. What is the difference between natural and human rights? Natural rights in state of nature and
due to reason… human rights after WWII
3. Who are the exponents of legal theory of rights? Bentham, Hobbes, etc
4. Why Bentham calls natural rights as nonsense? - inspired by Hobbes… SoN poor, solitary,…
5. Mention the rights scheme given by Laski.
6. What are three generations of rights?
7. What is social welfare theory of rights?
8. What is international bill of rights? - UDHR + ICCPR + ICSCR
9. What is multiculturalism? - tolerance and equal respect to all cultures
10. What is the difference between multiculturalism and cultural relativism?
11. What is the difference between multiculturalism of Will Kymlicka and Bhiku Parekh? -
Kymlicka confines to national minorities…Bhiku intercultural dialogue
12. Mention the special rights Kymlicka gives to minorities? - legislature, self governance, poly
ethnic (wear burqa)
13. How liberal multiculturalism is different from communitarian approach to multiculturalism?
14. What is Iris Marian Young’s view on citizenship? - differentiated citizenship
15. What is the relationship between rights and duties?
!104 Rights
Power and Legitimacy
Significance of concept of power
- It is understood only in relation of person with the other.
- Objective of power is to get things done from others either willingly or against their will.
Elitist theory of power

- According to this theory, power always lie with the elites.
- It divides people into two categories: elites and masses.
- Quality of elites:
- Plato, Aristotle – reason and courage are the qualities of guardian class and masters.
- Machiavelli – Prince has to be fox and lion.
- Pareto – Has given the elitist theory of power.
• Even in democratic societies – power always lie with the elites.
• “History of mankind is to be seen in the graveyard of aristocracy”
• He has given the theory of circulation of elites.
• Elites can be divided into two sections: governing and non-governing elites
• Non-governing elite try to replace governing elite. Thus the circulation of power is between
governing and non-governing elites.
- Mosca – Book “Ruling Class”
• People can be divided into two classes: ruling class and governed class.
• Ruling class – organisational skills.
- Robert Michels – Book “Political Parties”
• Analysed the nature of working of socialist political parties.
• Every organisation, whatever may be the reason for its set up, ends up being dominated
by experts.
• They become so prominent that –> very difficult to replace them.
• Growth of oligarchy in every organisation is so inevitable as if this process is governed by an
“iron law” – iron law of oligarchy
• According to him all forms of government including democracy are destined to be reduced to
oligarchy.
!105 Power and Legitimacy

• Critics – Iron law of oligarchy cannot be applied to all organisations. Some of the
organisations have more vigilant, vocal and assertive members.
Elitist theory of democracy

- Scholars: Webber, Schumpeter, Anthony Downs, etc.
- According to them, power with masses is a myth.
- Power always lie with the elites.
- Nature of power is oligarchical.
- Instead of getting dispersed power gets concentrated.
- Many of the scholars have studied communist societies.
- In reality communist societies are dictatorships – dictatorship of communist party.
- According to this theory, elites are always in power whether it is communist society or liberal
society.
- Democracy is for namesake, reality is aristocracy.
- However, western countries are better than communist countries.
- Because people can make choices. At least, circulation of power takes place.
- In communist countries - no choice. Communist party has hegemony.
What is democracy according to the elitist scholars?

- Democracy is nothing but competitive electoral system with the objective of election of elites.
- Democracy is like a market where politicians and political parties are political entrepreneurs and
voters are consumers.
- Masses cannot play any bigger role.
- It is enough to say that country is democratic country if it has free and fair elections and a
competitive party system.
- USA is led by power elites.
Who are power elites?

- Concept by C Wright Mills.
- In every society – there are key institutions – people holding top positions in them are
power elites.
- In USA – big business houses, top military officials and federal politicians

- According to him, USA was not always led by power elites.
- Initially – fairly democratic. Gradually power started getting concentrated in the hands of elites.
- Reason:
• Civil War in USA which strengthened the power of federal government.
• Increased role of USA in international politics.
- According to him – decision of bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki taken by power elites.
Pluralist theory of power and democracy

- Scholar- Robert Dahl
- He has challenged C Wright Mill’s view that USA is led by power elites.
- According to him USA is not oligarchy, but polyarchy.
- Oligarchy – rule of few.
- Democracy – rule of all
- Polyarchy – rule of many.
- Democracy is ideal whereas polyarchy is practical.
- Eg: USA, Britain, France, Japan, India.
Features of polyarchy
- fundamental rights
- Freedom to form associations, freedom of press
- Competitive electoral system
- Judicial independence
- Rule of law
- Right to dissent
What is Dahl’s view on democracy in USA?

- Decisions like bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki may have been taken by elites but such
decisions are taken in specific situations.
- Conducted a survey in Connecticut state of USA – found out that interest groups of people enjoy
a lot of powers.
- Day-to-day related affairs – people exercise enough power.
- However, people exercise power not as an individual but as a member of a group.

- USA is strongest examples of pluralist democracy – Power is not concentrated in the hands of
few but fairly distributed among various associations of people.
- Pluralist democracy and polyarchy are same.
What is deformed polyarchy?

- Dahl – fair distribution of power among different groups in USA – pluralist democracy
or polyarchy.
- Later on he modified his views and gave the concept of deformed polyarchy.
- He admitted that all pressure groups in USA do not have equal powers.
- The most powerful pressure groups belong to capitalist or corporate class.
- Polyarchy is deformed and tilted in favour of the big corporate houses.
- Neo-pluralist theory of power (deformed polyarchy) comes very near to Marxist theory of power.
Hannah Arendt’s concept of power and politics

- Conventional understanding of power:
• Power is a possession. Possessed either by those in authority (Hobbesian) or those
controlling economic structure (Marxist).
- Hannah Arendt – power is not a possession.
- It is not linked to possession of economic power or authority. Power is “sui generis”.
- It emerges automatically when people act in concert.
- It disappears when we go to personal sphere.
Conventional Hannah
Means for domination Means of empowerment or emancipation
Belongs to the elite Belongs to people

Belongs to the domain of state Belongs to the domain of civil society
- She takes a very constructive view of power.
Post modernist/ Post structuralist/ Foucault’s view of power

“Knowledge is Power”
“Power is everywhere… Power circulates throughout the society like capillaries”
- Michel Foucault – known as the greatest intellectual after Marx and Sartre.
- Written in vast areas – philosophy to psychology, history to sociology.

- In all of his works – most important concept – power.
- He has challenged the view that there is an ultimate reality which can be understood.
- He is critical of claims of science and scientific theories.
- Like all post-modernist he believes that we do not discover truth but construct truth.
- The so-called theories are stories. They hide more than reveal.
His concept of discourse

- He gives the concept of discourse.
- So called ultimate truth – not the truth but regime of truth.
- We see nominalism in him when he suggests that truth is the function of language.
- Truth is shaped by the manner in which something is told about the reality.
- Some person gives a particular view –> this will get support from others –> majority starts
supporting –> view becomes reality.
- The view which gets accepted by majority becomes the discourse or regime of truth.
- He has analysed the discourse on sexuality in his book "The History of Sexuality".
- According to him treating persons as normal or abnormal depending on their sexual orientation is
just the construction rather than reality.
Relationship between power and knowledge – Foucault

- Knowledge is used for the function of power.
- No power can be exercised without knowledge.
- He treats knowledge and power as same.
What type of power is he analysing?

- Analysing the changing nature of power.
- The purpose of power has always been similar but the manner of its exercise is changing.
- In his book "Madness and Civilisation", "Discipline and Punish" – he has explored the
techniques of power.
Ancient Times Present

Monarch represented power Powers is diffused
Punishment – explicit and inhuman Behind the closed doors

Torturous punishment – hatred for state Subtle – generates goodwill for state

- Societies have grown in size. Therefore new techniques of power are invented.
- Not possible to control such a huge population directly.
- “Economy of power” invented – power to be exercised in the most economical and effective way
–> disciplinary power.
- Difference between disciplinary power and explicit form of power – people think that discipline
is in their own interest.
- He has highlighted the role of disciplinary institutions (like hospital, schools, etc) and knowledge
systems (medical science, psychology, etc) in the growth of disciplinary power.
- He has linked the modern system of discipline with the requirements of capitalist society.
- Actions and behaviours useful for the society are considered as normal.
- Rest – abnormal and criminalised.
- The objective of discipline – to make our bodies productive and useful for society.
- He has given the theory of panopticism based on Panopticon of Bentham.
• It is an idea of surveillance system to keep watch on people.
• Just like surveillance in the prison.
• It is to discipline the members of the society.
Types of power- Foucault

- Bio-power – it is the power exercised on human bodies. To make our body useful for the society.
- Govern mentality – it is management of people by the state.
- Governance in democratic society it is not by the use of police force, but by developing the
mentality that people keep themselves in discipline.
- State achieved govern mentality by homogenisation, by creating identities, by keeping the
record, etc.
Characteristics of power
- He disagrees with Hobbes theory that power lies with the state.
- He also disagrees with Marx that power is a possession and it is used for exploitation.
- According to him, power is everywhere.
- It acts like capillary. Reaches every point.
- Power is not limited to the state nor the application of power is vertical or hierarchical.
- Power is multidirectional.

- For eg, if we go by Marx theory that power lies with the capitalist and is used for exploitation,
we may not be fully right. Even capitalists are under the power of society.
- Power is not a possession, it cannot be quantified.
- Power is a strategy. There is a purpose behind the power.
- Power is not just oppressive, rather power is productive – produces identity.
- According to him, where there is a power there is resistance also.
- He doesn't believe in Marxist view of revolution.
- Even after revolution people will not get freedom. However, he believes that resistance can
become the basis for freedom. (What?)
- According to him against the social narrative of sexuality, the resistance of homosexuals in the
form of gay rights movement is emerging.
- He believes that discipline is not bad, because it ultimately helps in the maintenance of system.
But where there is the discipline there is the potential for resistance also.
Power is everywhere
- He has given post structuralist and post-modernist view of power.
- Existing theories by Marx and Hobbes – conceal more than revealing about power.
- Forces us to think as if power lies with the state.
- He suggested that power is multidirectional, present everywhere and reaches everywhere through
capillaries.
- He is inspired by Bentham’s “panopticon” to suggest society’s surveillance mechanism – to keep
people in the state of discipline by internalising the values of society.
- The objective of power is to develop govern mentality.
- Power is productive, relational, systematic and generates resistance.
- It is maintained through disciplines and disciplinary institutions of society.
OP Gauba Content
Relation between power and authority

- Authority = Power + legitimacy
- Legitimacy implies that the members of the society consider the arrangement as beneficial to the
society and themselves.
- It is different from legality. Legality – exercise of power on the basis of law.

- Power alone implies capacity to get the decision obeyed by others irrespective of their will.
- It may involve the use of force.
- Authority is legitimate power.
- If we think power as the naked sword, then authority may be envisaged as sword in scabbard.
- Power is based on fear or force, legitimacy is based on respect and willing compliance.
- Rousseau – even the strongest man is never strong enough unless he converts his strength into
right and power into authority.
Max Weber on authority

- He was a critic of Marx.
- Marx – State represents coercive force – exploitation of the working class.
- However, scholars like TH Green and Max Weber – state exercises authority.
- Green – Will, not force, is the basis of the state.
- In every society the basis of legitimacy may vary.
- Webber has given three models of legitimacy and authority:
• Traditional basis: Authority is because of traditions and customs. Eg, authority of the Queen of
Britain.
• Charisma: Personality factor can also provide legitimacy. It has greater role when society is in
crisis. However, the authority is of temporary nature.
• Rational legal basis of authority: Most prominent. Found in modern societies where rationally
produced laws becomes the basis of authority. Eg, bureaucracy.
- However, Marxists continue to challenge the liberal-capitalist concept of authority. Gramsci calls
it hegemony and Habermas warns against legitimation crisis. 

Assignment

Democracy
Introduction
- Democracy is a form of government as well as a way of life.
- Ambedkar – Democratic society is a necessary precede to democratic politics.
- Fareed Zakaria – Constitutionalism should come before democracy. Eg, in Britain
constitutionalism first became the way of life then came democracy.
• Democratic experiment did not work well in third world countries because
democracy was introduced without constitutionalism.
- Samuel P Huntington – Waves of democracy
•First wave: when countries of the West like Britain, France, USA became democratic.
•First reverse wave: In interwar period Germany and Italy went back to dictatorship.
•Second wave: After WWII, result of decolonisation – countries in the third world
became democratic. Germany and Italy again Democratic.
•Second reverse wave: Democratic experiments in third world countries failed, except
India.
• Third wave: Former Communist countries in East Europe including Russia and third world
countries like Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal became democratic.
- Present age – age of democracy. The number of democracies are maximum.
- However, present age is also an age of democratic confusion.
Democracy as a way of life

- John Dewey – Book “Democracy and Education”
- Chief exponent of this school of thought.
- It involves scientific method of enquiry, discussion and experimentation before arriving
at the conclusion. This shows people are democratic.
- For this purpose,
• we should organise our society into small and coherent communities.
• And bring democratisation at all levels. Eg, teachers and students having a say in education
policy.
!114 Democracy
Relationship between democracy and globalisation
- Globalisation has expanded democracy as well as reduced democracy.
- Expanded democracy – number of democracies have increased. Rise of global civil society,
social movement and growing consciousness about their rights in the marginalised sections of the
society.
- Reduced democracy – Institutions of global governance are not democratic (UNSC, IMF, WB)
• Nationstate is so far the highest level body elected by the people. Globalisation has
undermined the power of nationstate.
• Transferred the power from the people to the rich class.
• There is a complicated relationship between democracy and globalisation.
- David Held – proposed cosmopolitan model of democracy.
Cosmopolitan model of democracy

- Idea is to increase the representativeness in the institutions of global governance.
- To address the democratic deficit in the institutions.
- He has proposed following reforms:
• In the long term – world government. Short-term – reform UNSC.
• Regional parliaments elected by the people should be established. Eg, EU
• Transparency and accountability in IMF and World Bank.
• Strengthening freedom of press.
• Promoting grassroots democracy.
Development and democracy

- Debate is whether democracy is conducive or problematic for development.
- Lee Kuan Yew:
• Western model of democracy is not compatible with Asian values.
• Slow decision-making, poor governance.
• India will not be able to achieve development by democracy.
• Some other scholars believe that authoritarianism (Chinese model) is a better model.
- Amartya Sen:
• Appreciates Kerala model of development.
• Believes that democracy is a prerequisite for development.
• Development needs to democratised.
!115 Democracy
• Benefits of economic growth should reach to the people. It requires empowerment and
capacity building of the people.
Theories of democracy
- CB Macpherson: classified theories of democracy into two types – classical and modern
- Classical theory: two models – protective and developmental
• Protective model – democracy protects rights and liberty. (Bentham and Locke)
• Developmental model – democracy offers the opportunity for development. (JS Mill)
• According to Macpherson, above theories have little empirical basis. It doesn't tell about the
democracy in practice.
- Modern theory: elitist and pluralist
• Elitist theory – iron law of oligarchy (Schumpeter, Weber)
• Pluralist – polyarchy or deformed polyarchy (R Dahl)
• According to Macpherson, Dahl and Schumpeter limit democracy to the level of procedure.
• For elitists, democracy is all about competitive elections.
• For pluralists, democracy is about pressure group politics.
- Marxist theory of democracy:
• Democracy in capitalist society – democracy of minority and dictatorship of minority over
majority.
• Democracy in socialist society – dictatorship of proletariat. Democracy of majority.
• Communalism – perfect democracy. Classless and stateless society.
- Gandhian idea of democracy:
• Democratic decentralisation.
• Gandhi’s Ramrajya is a stateless society.
• He aims at empowerment of masses.
• Gave the concept of oceanic circles of power. It means the society should not be organised on
hierarchical lines. The distribution of power should be horizontal not vertical.
Macpherson’s theory of democracy

- He identifies three variants of democracy:
• Liberal democracy
• Communist countries with full intra-party democracy and open bureaucratic systems
• Third world countries
!116 Democracy
- According to him traditional democracy emphasised on developmental process.
- However, the elitist-pluralist democracy reduced it to market equilibrium system.
- He has developed a new theory of democracy based on moralist and humanist vision. He focuses
on the emancipation of human beings and promotion of creative freedom.
- According to him there are two types of power: developmental power and extractive power.
• Development power implies man's ability to use his own capacity for fulfilment of his goals.
• Extractive power implies power over others.
- He advocates to combine a system of socialist ownership with the institutions of liberal
democracy. This will prevent the use of extractive power and promote developmental power of
all.
- According to him, ideal society is where extractive power is zero and developmental power is
equal.
Models of democracy
Representative democracy
- It is inevitable with the rise of modern societies.
- Supporters: Bentham, JS Mill, Nehru, Ambedkar, founding fathers of US Constitution.
- The biggest issue in representative democracy is how to make it representative in true sense.
- Representative democracy and its quality depends on the nature of electoral system and the party
system.
Issue of representation:
- Enlightened representation:
• JS Mill – representatives are more experienced and they should have greater freedom with
respect to their decisions.
• Edmund Burke – Representatives should be given more flexibility because Parliament is an
assembly of a nation rather than a place for fulfilment of narrow interest of the constituency.
- Delegate model:
• Bentham – representatives do not have any original power. They should stick to the mandate.
Issue of electoral system

- Types of electoral system: majoritarian systems and proportional representation.
!117 Democracy
Majoritarian system:
- Plurality system/FPTP system
• Least democratic system.
• The person elected maybe one for whom majority may not have voted. In effect, it may be a
minority representation.
• Wastage of votes.
- Second ballot system:
• Idea is, elected person must represent at least 50% of the voters. Absolute majority.
• First round – if no candidate gets absolute majority, top two will be selected and others
eliminated.
• Second round – between the two at least one will get more than 50%.
• Weakness: voting for second time – unnecessary expenditure and electoral fatigue.
- Alternative vote system:
• Absolute majority. Also avoiding second time elections.
• Transfer of votes.
• Voters will mark their preferences.
• In the first round, if no candidate gets absolute majority, then the candidate getting least votes
will be eliminated.
• The voters who have marked first preference for the eliminated candidate, their second
preferences will be transferred to others.
• This rotation will continue till a particular candidate gets absolute majority.
- Majoritarian system – still not so representative because of the concept of winner takes all.
- So proportional representation is proposed.
Proportional Representation
- Alternative vote system is majoritarian i.e winner takes all - only one candidate is elected.
- In proportional representation, winning candidate requires a quota of votes.
- Formula for quota may vary.
- All those candidates who get the quota of votes will be elected.
- Majoritarian systems are for single member constituency.
- Proportional representation results into multimember constituency.
!118 Democracy
- Single transferable vote system and List system
- STV:
• Like alternative vote system, voters have to give their preferences and if required votes are
transferred.
- List system – most representative system.
• In list system, entire country will be treated as one constituency.
• Each party will give the list of the candidates. People will vote for the party.
• Party will get seats in parliament in proportion of its vote share.
Criticism of proportional representation

- Advantages: Due representation to all types of groups.
- Disadvantages:
• if a nation is deeply divided into different groups – proportional representation would hardly
results in clear majority in legislature.
• Coalition government –> unstable and ineffective
• It encourages formation of political parties on the basis of narrow interest rather than national
interest.
• This system is not conducive to national integration.
Methods of minority representation

- Proportional representation may solve the problem of minority representation to some extent but
not fully.
- Some other devices:
1. Concurrent majority – if the decision taken on the basis of numerical majority affects
minority then minority should have the power to veto that decision. At present, veto power
used in UNSC.
2. Consociational democracy– It involves representation to all segments in executive organs,
autonomy to minorities in issues concerning them, veto power to minority, etc.
- However, in order to promote true understanding and cooperation between different sections, it is
necessary that differences are resolved at intellectual and emotional levels.
Participative democracy
- Rousseau– Englishmen are free only once in five years.
!119 Democracy
- Founding fathers of US Constitution like George Washington – were against parties because
parties bring factionalism.
- Gandhi compared parties with prostitutes. He called for party less democracy. Also MN Roy and
JP Narayan.
- Contemporary scholars like Benjamin Barber – participatory democracy is necessary to tackle
corruption.
- Large number of scholars with a Leftist leanings support radical democracy.
• Radical democracy is also a type of participative democracy with the key theme of anti-
politics and anti-party. They focus on social movement.
• Habermas – Give the concept of public sphere and idea of communicative action.
• Public sphere is a theatre of political participation. Space for dialogue where people
freely discuss and identify societal problems with the objective of influencing public
policy.
• Communicative action reflects mutual deliberation and argumentation in ideal speech
situation. (Ideal speech situation is a situation wherein individuals can discuss
rationally with no coercive force.)
• Nancy Fraser– Marginalised section should form their own public sphere. She gave
the concept of "counter public”.
Importance of participative democracy

- The idea of participative democracy is, individual and institutions are not separate but a part of
one another.
- Participation of people is a value in itself. It gives them necessary skills to become leaders.
- Also gives them understanding of the problems in administration.
- Participation also requires capacity building and conducive environment. Here comes the role of
state and civil society.
- Govt can create institutions like gram sabhas and mohalla sabhas.
- Rights like RTI, social auditing, citizens charter encourages public participation.
- It is well established fact that without popular participation neither good governance is possible
nor inclusive growth not sustainable development.
- Agenda 21 adopted at Rio 1992– recognises democracy as a central strategy for environment and
development.
!120 Democracy
- 2nd ARC recommends citizen centric government, strengthening of RTI, local self-government
and watchdog bodies like NHRC, NCW, NCSC, NCST, etc.
Deliberative democracy
- We have forgotten the essence of democracy.
- In present times, democracy has become a game of numbers or as JS Mill says tyranny of
majority.
- According to JS Mill – if the opinion of even a single individual is different from the rest of the
society, society has no right to silence him. Because truth can emerge from anywhere.
- Deliberative democracy emphasises that policies and laws governing peoples life should be the
result of active deliberation or as Habermas suggests communicative action in ideal speech
situation.
- Deliberative democracy results into consensus.
- Both representative as well as participative democracy requires to be deliberative.
- Deliberation makes democracy consociational.
- It is the best way to address the crisis of legitimacy.
- Around the world there is a decline in the deliberative platforms like Parliament.
- However, social media is a new platform.
- Idea of deliberative democracy – roots in ancient Greece.
- Aristotle – people deliberating can arrive at a better decisions rather than experts acting alone.
• For him state is not a family but family of families.
- Rousseau– The only way to filter out the general will is by direct participation in law making.
- Rawls in his theory of justice as fairness – emphasised on the formulation of principles in the
state of deliberation.
• In his second book "Political Liberalism" – suggested that people having different
comprehensive doctrines can develop “overlapping consensus” through public reasoning.
- Amartya Sen– Supports the idea of public reasoning.
• In his book “Uncertain Glory”, he points towards the neglect of public health by GoI because
health was never an issue of public debate.
- Habermas theory of communicative action and Hannah Arendt’s theory of action and necessity of
participation in civic sphere are also treated as features of deliberative democracy.
- Contemporary times – scholars like Joshua Cohen, Seyla Ben Habib, Benjamin Barber, David
Held have developed the theory of deliberative democracy.
!121 Democracy
Advantages of deliberative democracy- Joshua Cohen
- Best way to deal with moral disagreements.
- Best way to secure legitimacy of collective actions.
- Encourages public perspective.
- Better policies
- Public education
- Develops trust
- Way to know our genuine preferences 
!122 Democracy
Assignment
!123 Democracy
Western Political Thought
Plato
All that is Platonic is Socratic

- Plato was disciple of Socrates whom he considered wisest man
- Plato was impressed by his ideas and methodology (dialectics) and also his life.
- Socrates was accused of misleading the youth and was given poison. Plato was therefore against
democracy – government of ignorants.
- Also influenced by his view that "knowledge is virtue”.
- His theory of an ideal state ruled by the philosopher king has a direct linkage with Socrates view
that knowledge is virtue.
- Plato’s work are in the form of dialogue through the character of Socrates.
- Undoubtedly, Socrates had biggest influence on Plato.
- Still saying that “all that is …” is not correct.
- Plato also influenced by Pythagoras, Heraclitus, Parmenides.
- Also original thinker – philosopher king and theory of communism.
Knowledge is virtue
- Plato was disciple of Socrates whom he considered wisest man
- Influenced by his view that "knowledge is virtue”.
- Socrates theory of knowledge – criticism of sophism.
- Sophists – first political educationist. Politics is a source of money and power – good life.
- According to Socrates, sophists were propagating rhetoric rather than real knowledge.
- Socrates – purpose of life is happiness. Good life.
- Knowledge leads to excellence and excellence is a source of happiness.
- Plato made Socrates’ idea that knowledge is virtue as a foundational principle of his theory of an
ideal state.
- If Athens wants to become a virtuous state, it has to be ruled by knowledge.
- Root cause of problem in Athens – ignorance of the ruling class. They were using public offices
for private ends.
!124 WPT: Plato

- Therefore, Plato – until philosophers are rulers or rulers learn philosophy there is no end to the
predicament of human life.
Plato’s Theory of Ideas

“Reality is the shadow of ideas”
- Plato – father of political philosophy because of his theory of ideas.
- It is based on Socrates theory of knowledge.
- Socrates – true knowledge is possible about the things of permanent nature. E.g., idea.
- Idea – essence of something. Eternal and transcendental. Manifestation of perfection.
- Plato – When we look at worldly things we consider them as real.
- It is due to our ignorance that we consider material pleasures as ultimate reality.
- He gives an allegory of cave – example of man with his front towards the wall. Hand and feet
tied with chains.
- For him figures on the wall – reality.
- When he's pushed out of the den of ignorance in the sunlight (state of knowledge) – initially he
will feel pain in his eyes but later on realises reality and gains true happiness.
- We can link his theory of reality with his theory of ideal state and justification of philosopher
king.
- The debate on nature of reality is non-conclusive.
- Idealist – idea is real. Materialist – matter is real.
- Postmodernist – reality is too vast and diverse to be understood by human mind.
Plato’s Theory of Justice

- Most important political idea.
- Every state is based on some idea of justice. Eg, Indian state’s justice is given in the preamble –
social, economic and political justice.
- Plato’s obj – ultimate idea of justice.
- Location of perfect idea of justice is in human soul or kingdom of god.
- Just man – at peace with himself and others
- Just soul – where reason dominates
- Just state – men of reason rule
- For him, three types of men – dominated by reason, courage and appetite.
- Principle of justice –
!125 WPT: Plato

- Functional specialisation i.e. perform task acc to natural qualities.
- Proper stationing i.e. reason at top
- Non-interference i.e. each part of the soul should function without interfering with other
elements. Reason should rule and appetite shouldn’t interfere.
- For him, objective of justice can never be to harm others and it is always in the interest of all.
- This will lead to just society – where there is peace, harmony, and excellence.
Criticism:
- Popper – not given importance to rights – Plato is father of totalitarianism.
- Sacrifices individual for the sake of state.
- Plato’s philosophy – bad philosophy and also bad psychology (forcing someone to do
some job because of natural qualities)
“Justice is the interest of stronger”

- Thrasymachus belongs to sophist school.
- Self-interest is prior to collective interest.
- Politics is a source of money and power.
- They represent a realist view.
- According to him – reality of the world politics – justice is actually the interest of the stronger.
Might is right.
- Hence, people should aspire to achieve power to lead a good life.
- In a particular state, power is concentrated in the hands of ruling class.
- Ruling class makes law in their self-interest rather than interest of people.
- Hence if our interest is achieved by not following the law, we should disobey the law.
- According to him it is better to be unjust than just.
- If we are just – we are not serving our interest but interest of ruling class.
- Plato’s response:
• According to him, decline of Athens due to ignorance of ruling class.
• However, Thrasymachus’ argument is so strong that it is difficult for him to counter it.
• Thrasymachus is expressing reality.
• Plato – Might is right can't be the idea of justice.
!126 WPT: Plato

• It is wrong to think that laws of state are in the interest of ruling class. Unjust man cannot be
happier than just man.
• Thrasymachus represents realist view and Plato represents idealist view.
• Realism supports status quo while idealism gives opportunity to make improvements. Both
complement each other.
State is individual writ large

- It suggests that state is a magnified version of an individual.
- If individual is small letter then state is capital letter.
- Inherent message – state is an abstraction.
- It is the people living in the state who together form the state.
- We cannot expect state to be just if people are unjust.
- Plato – state doesn't come out of oak or rock, but inhere in the mind of people who live in the
state.
- It implies – principles that should govern the life of an individual also applies to state.
- Hence, principle of justice found at the level of individual – can also be applied at the level of
state.
- Hence if just man is one in which reason dominates, then just state – one where knowledge rules.
Plato’s theory of education

- It is logical result of his theory of Justice.
- He has observed the merits and demerits of Spartan and Athenian system of education.
- Demerits of Athenian system with respect to Spartan:
• No system of public education. Opportunity to get educated depends on the willingness and
capacity of guardian class.
• Women – no opportunity.
• Neglect of physical education.
• No check on the content.
- Merits:
• Focus on developing logical and creative faculty.
- Timespan of education – upto 50 years.
- At appropriate stages people will be absorbed in producer class and soldier class.
- Compulsory military education.
!127 WPT: Plato

- After 50 years – eligible to become philosopher king.
- One who wants to become a philosopher king will have no interest in power.
- He very reluctantly will become the ruler as a duty towards the state.
Criticism of theory of education

- Rousseau– Plato’s Republic is best book ever written in the field of education.
- Focussed on all aspects of personality: mental, physical, spiritual.
- Focussed on all aspects of knowledge: theory and practical
- Gave equal opportunity to women.
- Most important function of state is to impart education.
- He realised the strategic importance of education and suggested that state should keep a watch on
the educational content.
Theory of communism
- Communism means common ownership
- He talks about communism of property and family.
- Communism of property:
• Only for the rulers, guardians and soldier class.
• He deprives guardians class from owning any property.
• Ruler is a philosopher in whom reason dominates. He has no lust for property or worldly
things yet Plato recommends Communism. It is an additional safeguard. The ruler might get
corrupt.
• No communism for producer class – It is not needed because they are not in power. Cannot
misuse power. Also not possible because they are men of appetite. They will never leave their
love of appetite.
- Communism of family:
• No private family. Because family is a bigger evil than property. For family people earn
money. Also family causes nepotism.
• Features:
- No freedom to choose partner. State will select most able men to marry most able woman –
will give best race.
- Woman are relieved from child rearing. They can devote themselves in the service of the
state.
!128 WPT: Plato

Criticism of communism of Plato
- Aristotle – greatest disciple and greatest critic
- In defence of private property:
• Private property has disadvantages but also advantages.
• Plato is overlooking psychological benefits of private property.
• It is a source of motivation for people to work harder. Sense of achievement and well-being.
• Positive social consequences. Allows people to do charity. Men of property are men of reason
– they prefer stability.
- In defence of family:
• Plato is undermining the institution of marriage.
• Not just an institution for procreation.
• It is needed for emotional stability – important for ordered social life.
• He is not taking us forward but barbaric ages when man was not involved in social life.
Institution of philosopher king

“Until philosophers are rulers or rulers learn philosophy there is no end to the predicament of
human life”
- Plato’s concern: Athens in the state of decline
- His diagnosis: ignorance of ruling class.
- Solution: Socrates idea – knowledge is virtue. Role of philosopher king.
Power and limitation of philosopher king

- No limitation. Absolute power.
- Neither law nor public opinion is limitation.
- Masses are ignorant.
- Law is no match to the wisdom of philosopher king. Law is rigid and silent on many cases. It
represents average wisdom.
- It is foolish to limit the expert practitioner of medicine to the book of medicine.
- “For no law ordinance is mightier than knowledge”
- Only one limitation – can’t change Constitution of Republic
Criticism of philosopher king
!129 WPT: Plato

- His diagnosis are correct. Prescription is wrong.
- Root cause of corruption – self-interest of ruling class.
- He says philosopher king – no interest in power. Reluctantly will accept to rule.
- In order to perform a task well – one should have interest in it.
- Aristotle:
• Rule of philosopher king – best but not best practicable.
• It is impossible to find the philosopher king, no guarantee that he will not become corrupt.
• Philosopher king is an idea, practical form will be tyranny.
• He recommends rule of law.
- Plato tried to implement his ideas but failed. He revised his ideas in his second best state – Laws.
Plato as forerunner of fascism/ totalitarianism

- Fascism:
• It is a bad word in politics. Extreme form of power politics.
• It is considered as threat to humanity.
• It is not treated as political ideology but as propaganda.
• It denotes the political system that originated in Italy and Germany during interwar period.
- Features:
• State is supreme institution
• Focus on duty and discipline
• People are subservient to state
• Leader is superman
- On the basis of above features we can say that Plato was forerunner of fascism.
- Liberal scholars wanted to trace the origins of totalitarianism in the west. They found it in the
works of Plato.
- Warner Fite in 1934 – compared Plato’s Republic with iron clad system of communist Russia.
- Richard Crossman – Plato was wrong for his times and our times because of his anti-democratic
philosophy.
- Strongest criticism by Popper – Book “Open society and its enemy”
• Enemy of open society because:
- Liberal democracy is open society where scientific thinking is possible.
- Plato’s society – regimented society with focus on duty and discipline.
- That is why he calls Plato as a forerunner of totalitarianism.
!130 WPT: Plato

• According to him, there is a long tradition of respect for Plato which stops us from looking at
his thinking towards totalitarianism.
• He doesn't express humanitarian tendencies of democracy of Socrates.
• He was the victim of his vanity. He had the designs to become the philosopher king.
- Gilbert Ryle – Appreciated Popper. Said after Popper’s work Plato will not be looked in the same
way again.
- Levinson – “In Defence of Plato”
• We are comparing incomparable.
• They differ in time and space. Fascist state was reality, Plato’s republic was utopia.
• We cannot say with certainty that had Plato’s state come into existence it would have
been as exploitative as Hitler's and Mussolini’s.
• Plato – rational. Fascism – irrationality
• Plato – idealist. Fascism – extreme form of materialism.
• Fascist never supported the idea of communism.
- Hannah Arendt in her book "Origins of totalitarianism" – she describes it as a rule of terror,
violence, ideology.
- His ideal state was ruled by reason. There is peace, excellence, harmony.
- There was no intention of him to exploit citizens which totalitarian states do.
Other criticism by Popper

- Holism:
- Against Plato’s holism, Popper has proposed piece meal social engineering.
- He believes that changes in gradual way are better than overnight changes as done in former
USSR.
- It results into totalitarianism.
- Also criticised his utopianism. Results into totalitarianism.
- Rajeev Bhargava - Critical of Popper’s understanding of Plato. He says that Popper’s work is
ideologically motivated.
Plato as first communist

- Communism: It is the philosophy associated with the ideas of Marx. It is criticism of capitalism
and is against the exploitation of working class.
- Fascism and communism are projected as enemies of open society.
!131 WPT: Plato

- Tradition among the liberal scholars to find traces of communism in Plato.
- Scholars like Popper and Prof. Maxey call Marx and Plato as communist.
- Similarities between Plato and communism:
• Both critique of private property.
• Both Plato and Marx talk about classes.
- Differences:
Plato Marx
Idealist Materialist
State is a source of virtue Source of expolitation
Classes on the basis of spirituality. (reason, Classes on the basis of ownership of means of
courage, appetite) production.
Wants continuation of classes Classless society
Communism is dependent on education system Violent revolution
Plato as first feminist

- Feminism is an umbrella ideology. Common concern is upliftment of women and ending
discrimination against them.
- His status as first feminist is a matter of debate.
- First feminist:
- First person in political philosophy to recognise that women do not suffer from natural
disabilities with respect to joining civic sphere.
- Gives equality of opportunity to women in the field of education and governance.
- His theory of communism frees women from the responsibility of child rearing.
- Not first feminist:
- His aim was not liberation but using services of half of the population.
- However, it can be said that Plato was far ahead of his time.
- Greek society of that time was patriarchal.
- Political philosophy as well as politics is considered as the masculine discipline.
!132 WPT: Plato

Assignment 
!133 WPT: Plato

Aristotle
Introduction
- Similarities between Plato and Aristotle:
• Both belong to socratic tradition and are critique of sophism.
• Both are against democracy.
• Both believe man is by nature political animal. State is natural.
• Both believe that nature has created different types of men.
- Differences:
Plato Aristotle
Father of political philosophy Father of political science
Utopian Practical
Goes for extreme golden mean
Radical Functionalist
Equality of opportunity for women Conservative – patriarchal attitude
Rule of philosopher king Rule of law

State is a family State is a family of families
- Unique to Aristotle:
• Aristotle – father of constitutionalism.
• He is functionalist.
• Believes in the school of teleology – Believe in destiny.
• His theory of forms differ from Plato’s. For him idea is not independent of matter rather
inherent in matter.
• All reality can be understood in this world itself there is no need to move into the world of
ideas.
Theory of state
“Man is by nature a political animal”
- According to him, state is the natural institution.
- Nature has made a man in such a way that he cannot live without state.
- Like Plato, he is also critique of sophism and believed in Socratic view that state is prior to man.
- He traces the origin of state in the needs of man.
!134 WPT: Aristotle

- Man has various types of needs which he cannot fulfil on his own.
- For fulfilling basic needs – he forms family.
- To fulfil social needs – he forms village
- Even village cannot fulfil all of his needs. Hence he creates state.
- In state, he achieves self fulfilment.
- Thus state comes into existence for the sake of preservation of life but continues for the sake of
good life.
- According to him, one requires superhuman qualities of either beast or God to be able to live
without state.
- Chronologically man has created state but logically state has created man.
- Also gives teleological argument – it is in the destiny of man to be a member of any political
community.
- Matter of debate among political scholars whether state is a necessity.
• For idealist like Plato and Aristotle – state is a necessity.
• For liberals – state is a necessary evil.
• Anarchists like Gandhi – state is an unnecessary evil.
- Lack of agreement among political scholars over the nature of man.
• Aristotle – man by nature is a political animal.
• Hobbes – Man is neither political nor social by nature. He is social and political only out of
necessity.
Theory of citizenship
- Contemporary times – citizenship is a right.
- But in time of Aristotle citizenship was the duty.
- Duty towards the state. To participate in the affairs of the state (deliberative role and judicial
role)
- For him following are not citizens:
• Woman, old people, children, slaves.
• Women – They are absorbed in family and cannot play any role in affairs of the state.
• Old people – do not have the physical energy
• Children – Lack maturity and reason
• Slaves – lack reason
- Thus only adult Greek males possessing property are citizens.
!135 WPT: Aristotle

Criticism of theory of citizenship
- In contemporary times of democracy and human rights – we cannot accept Aristotle's narrow
concept of citizenship.
- However we need to appreciate his emphasis on the duties of the citizen.
- He is a source of inspiration for scholars like Hannah Arendt who emphasised on the necessity of
participation in civic affairs.
Theory of slavery
- He has functionalist approach
- Justified slavery on two grounds: slavery is natural and slavery is useful
- Slaves by law (prisoners of war) are not slaves.
- Those not masters by nature are slaves.
- Nature has made two types of person – some has characteristics of masters and some has
characteristics of slaves.
- Characteristics of Masters: the most important characteristic is ability to take decisions and
courage to standby the consequences. Masters have reasons and courage.
- Slaves do not have a reason and courage.
- According to him those who are mentally strong should do intellectual labour and those who are
physically strong should do physical labour. Nature has decided the destiny of every person.
- We can see the influence of Plato on Aristotle. Plato also held that reason and courage are natural
qualities of guardian class.
- Machiavelli also – Prince should be clever like fox and brave like lion.
Utility of slavery
- To the economic system: since slave is physically strong he can work for longer hours – more
productivity.
- To political system: since the slave is working for master, master can devote himself to the state
affairs.
- For Master: master gets free time which he can utilise for developing his virtues and fulfilling his
duties.
!136 WPT: Aristotle

- To slave: slave cannot live without master. Under master he can develop his virtues. Since
Aristotle talks that slaves are by nature, he recommends the master to set the slave free when he
develops virtues like courage and reason. Also recommends the master to treat the slave well.
Criticism of theory of slavery

- He has been heavily criticised.
- In the age of democracy and human rights, there can be no justification for slavery no matter how
useful it is.
- It is against human dignity.
- Kant – Each man is an end in itself, no one ought to be treated as means to an end.
- Theory of slavery becomes justification for myths like “benevolent despotism”, “white man's
burden”, “civilising mission”.
Theory of property
- Legitimate property: acquired by one's labour.
- Illegitimate property: not through labour but exploiting someone's circumstances.
- Three systems of property:
• Common ownership and common use: no one's responsibility. Not productive. (he doesn’t
favour communism)
• Common ownership and individual use: very exploitative
• Individual ownership and common use: more productive. Better maintenance.
- He was aware of the negative consequences of private property – Inequalities in the society.
- According to him inequality is not good.
- Therefore he suggested that everyone should contribute a part of his income or property for the
well-being of society since man is by nature, social and political animal.
- Society and state perform various types of function for the man.
- One of the earliest ideas of welfare state and progressive taxation.
- We can see similarity between Aristotle and Gandhi theory of trusteeship. Gandhi did not favour
communism. He appeals to the capitalist class to consider themselves as trustees of the capital
and not as owners.
Theory of justice
“It is unjust to treat equals unequally, as it is unjust to treat unequals equally”
!137 WPT: Aristotle

- He suggests principle of proportion – reward a person in proportion to the contribution he has
made to the society.
- His theory of justice is called as theory of proportionate justice.
- His theory of justice is linked to the theory of equality or fairness.
- Like Plato, he doesn't believe in the concept of absolute equality. There is presence of natural
inequality. Some are meant to be masters and some slaves.
- Like Plato, he believes that justice is in proper stationing. It will be injustice if society treats men
of reason and men of appetite equally. He also says that state should not commit the mistake of
treating unequals equally. Recognise the merit and reward accordingly.
- He supports meritocratic society.
- His theory of Justice can be accepted as the principle of justice only in those society where
extreme inequalities do not exist. Not in Indian society where there is no level playing field and
historical injustices exist.
- Hence, Constitution of India incorporates the principle of affirmative action in right to equality.
Theory of revolution
- Aristotle prefers stability and sceptical of changes.
- Even a small change is a revolution for him.
- He has studied 158 constitutions and dealt with the issue of revolution in a very detailed manner.
- He has given the general causes behind the revolution.
- The most common cause behind a revolution is the feeling of inequality – real or imaginary.
Hence the ruling class should be very careful about the feeling of inequality.
- Aristotle – “Treating equals equally and unequals unequally”
• This is in favour of maintaining the existing inequalities of society – between master and
slave, poor and rich, etc.
• According to him, those who are equal in one sense are inclined to believe that they should be
equal in all respects.
• Example, those who are equal as citizens of the state, may think that they are entitled to equal
power, prestige and wealth.
• When they fail to gain these privileges they feel deprived which results into revolution.
• This feeling should not be encouraged in the society to maintain peace. So the state should not
promote the idea of equality.
- Solution:
!138 WPT: Aristotle

• Cultivate the spirit of obedience of law.
• Educate citizens about civic virtues and love for motherland
• Moderation in exercise of power
- However, modern idea of equality seeks reduction in inequalities whenever they are proved to be
unjust according to the prevailing social consciousness.
Theory of Constitution
- studied 158 constitutions.
“Polity is the best practicable form of government”

- According to him – monarchy is the best form of government. In monarchy, there is a rule of
philosopher king.
- However it is not best practicable. Practical form is tyranny.
- According to him, polity is the best practicable form of government.
- Rule of middle class – golden mean.
- Middle class is neither too rich nor too poor.
- Perverted form of polity is democracy – rule of many ignorant poor.
- Polity is the golden mean of oligarchy and democracy. Golden mean of rich and poor.
- Both rich and poor are inclined to do crimes. Rich due to arrogance and poor due to ignorance.
- Poor do not trust rich and rich do not trust poor. Therefore neither of the system will work.
- In comparison, they trust middle-class more. Middle-class have a reason, obedience for law.
- Hence, polity is the best practicable form of government.
Criticism of theory of Constitution

- Present age of democracy – we may criticise him because he prefers to exclude poor from
participation in governance.
- However, we must understand the hidden message when he justifies the rule of middle class. He
actually means that extreme inequalities of income and wealth are not good for the stability of
society.
- Therefore it is better for state, if more people are in the middle class.
- He doesn't mean that state should leave poor in the state of poverty and ignorance. State should
bring policies to uplift people from poverty.
!139 WPT: Aristotle

“The authority of master differs from the authority of statesman”
- Above statement is by Aristotle in the context of philosopher king.
- According to Aristotle, Plato thinks as if state is a family.
- Institution of philosopher king is like father or master.
- Plato emphasises on excessive unity and also sacrifice their interest for the sake of state.
- Aristotle – state is not a family but family of families. State doesn't represent unity but unity in
diversity.
- Authority of master in the family is different from the authority of a statesman in the state.
- Aristotle doesn't prefer one man institution as best practicable. He rather prefers polity where
people representing different interest and families come together to deliberate.
- Participation and deliberation results into achieving equilibrium among conflicting interests.
Aristotle on Rule of law

“Law is the reason without passion”
- It is in criticism of Plato’s ideal state where philosopher king is above the ordinary law.
- Plato – No law or ordinance can be mightier than knowledge.
- Aristotle doesn't prefer giving absolute power to one person.
- According to him law is reason. Purpose of both the law and reason is to guide man. Both are
interrelated.
- Law is in the book of law and reason is within soul. Law is outward manifestation of something
whose inward manifestation is reason.
- Advantages of rule of law:
• Law is impersonal. Philosopher king has a reason as the dominant characteristic but he's also a
human being with appetite. It may happen that sometimes his appetite may dominate his
reason. Hence it is always better to go for rule of law rather than rule of person.
• Rule of law represents collective wisdom of ages which is more dependable than wisdom of
one person.
- Aristotle doesn't prefer to sacrifice good for the best. Best is unachievable.
Aristotle as father of political science

- Plato – father of political philosophy. Aristotle – father of political science.
- Title is for many reasons but the most important reason is his attitude. He looks at things from a
practical perspective.
!140 WPT: Aristotle

- According to him politics is not precise science rather art based on common sense.
- According to him a ruler doesn't require to be wise in the world of ideas, but should be worldly
wise. He gives importance to this world over the world of ideas which makes him a scholar with
attitude.
- Even his theory of forms is different from Plato’s theory of ideas.
- Besides we can call him as father of political science because he brought realism in politics –
theory of revolution.
- He was also influenced by his father who was a physician. Classified constitutions as per the
specimens of biology.
- He is also an originator of many ideas like civic republicanism, rule of law, and welfare state.
- Whitehead – entire WPT is footnotes to Plato and Aristotle.
- Aristotle’s book “Politics” deals with state and governance, while Plato’s “Republic” is
encyclopaedic.
Central concern to Aristotle’s political thoughts is the classification of

governments
- Central concern of Plato – ideal state
- Aristotle concern – best practicable state.
- Thus, studied 158 constitutions.
- On the basis of understanding he gave the theory of constitutions, classification of constitutions,
theory of revolution.
- He has analysed the practicability, merits and demerits of different forms of government.
Concluded that polity is the best practicable form of government.
- He has dealt with other ideas also in his book “The Politics” like theory of property, theory of
forms, but the most exhaustive work is on theory of constitution and revolutions.
- His various concepts from slavery to justice can be linked with the state. 
!141 WPT: Aristotle

Assignment
!142 WPT: Aristotle

Machiavelli
Introduction
- Belonged to transition period: medieval to modern
- Many call him as modern thinker. But appropriate – transitional thinker.
- Nation states were emerging. Italy not yet.
- Divided into five principalities fighting among each other. Vulnerable to foreign invasion.
- Concerns: unification of Italy. Respect and glory.
- Italy: seat of renaissance. But backward due to vested interest of Roman church.
- Church was corrupt. Direct impact of corruption on people.
His work – “Discourses”

- He favours democracy where people are virtuous.
- Rule of strong prince where people are corrupt.
Perspective of Machiavelli as thinker

- Realist
- Materialist
- Nationalism
- Employs history and psychology.
Machiavelli’s first advice to Prince - on nature of profession

“How we live is far removed from how we ought to live”
“Those who abandon ‘what is’ for the sake of ‘what ought to be’ will ruin themselves”
“A man who wishes to make a profession of goodness in everything must necessarily
come to grief as he lives with many who are not so good”
- His book “The Prince” – best book in the field of statecraft – contains instructions for an aspiring
prince or one who wants to remain in power.
- First advice – understand nature of profession.
- He is a realist and suggest prince to look at things as they are rather than as prince wants them to
be.
- Person who sacrifices ‘is' for ‘ought to be’ – brings destruction to his state, people and also
himself.
!143 WPT: Machiavelli

- Plato – Ruler to understand the world of ideas. Machiavelli – understand the material world as it
is.
- Plato – Instructs the king to attain virtue by understanding the meaning of good life. Machiavelli
– warns Prince against seeking goodness in every profession especially politics.
- Politics – not a profession of goodness. Not ethics nor religion. Specific field having autonomous
character.
- Prince needs to know how to be bad because in the field of politics he will interact with people
who are not so good.
Second advice – On human nature

- Prince should deal with human beings as they are rather than as prince wants them to be.
- Source of understanding human nature – in history to look how human beings actually behaved.
Not philosophy.
- According to him, throughout history human nature has remained same.
- Essential characteristic of human nature:
- Ungrateful
- Deceitful
- Coward
- Fickle minded
- Avaricious
- Wise prince should not touch woman and property of other men. Because these are the two
things of which human beings are very emotional.
- Thus according to him, man is materialistic.
Critical evaluation
- Sabine: Machiavelli is narrowly dated and narrowly located. His pessimistic view of
human nature is because of the observations of Italy during his time.
- It is held that he is deductive. Looks only at those examples of history which are suitable
for his arguments.
Advice on statecraft
- For Plato and Socrates – statecraft is soul-craft.
- Plato – Those rulers are undesirable who run behind money and power.

- For Machiavelli – statecraft is management of power.
- Prince needs to know how to exercise power. Both hard power and soft power.
- Power? Ability to influence other either willingly or against their will.
- Violence also. In extreme situations Prince has to use violent methods.
- Better for a prince to be feared than loved. People love at their own will but fear at the will of the
prince.
- Between fear and love prince should ultimately rely on fear.
- He should not use hard power in the first instance because it will develop revenge. Revenge is a
very powerful sentiment. Person dominated by revenge doesn’t care about his self-interest.
- However, should not hesitate from using hard power.
- When used, use it in totality and crush the enemy completely. Enemy should not be left to take
revenge.
- Not to use directly but through subordinates.
- Hard power is more dependable than soft power.
- Human nature is ungrateful. Prince should act as per his will not how others want.
- He should know how to control both man and beast.
Critical evaluation
- Sabine: narrowly dated and narrowly located.
- Irony- heavily criticised but practiced most.
Qualities of Prince
- Clever like a fox. Brave like a lion
- Continuity between Machiavelli and earlier greek scholars.
- Plato – guardian class should have reason and courage.
- Aristotle – master should have reason and courage.
- Present times – countries have military and intelligence.
Advice on religion and ethics

“In politics ends justify means”
- Important for prince to take decision. That too correct and quickly.
- Ethics and religion – create dilemmas which may stop prince from taking decisions.
- Thus, harms national interest.

- Gives concept of dual morality.
• Ordinary man can die for his principles.
• Prince can’t put life of his people in danger for his principles.
• Morality of both are different.
- Yardstick of politics can’t be measured by ethics or religion.
- Politics has its own morality. What may be ethically wrong, maybe politically correct.
- In politics, ends justify means.
- In dilemmas, prince should apply any means for the interest of state.
- In politics, not to worry of what is universally correct but what is correct in given situation.
- If prince is able to achieve aims, people will not question his means. But if he fails for the sake
of his principles then people will not forgive him.
Critical evaluation
- Criticised for separating ethics from politics.
- Accused of teaching immorality.
- Gandhi – politics without ethics and politics without religion is death trap.
Was he immoral?
- He wasn’t immoral. He was amoral.
- He suggests that nothing is superior to national interest.
- He suggests that politics has its own morality. Political actions to be judged by political standards
and not ethical standards.
Was he anti-religious?
- He was not against religion like Marx.
- He was only against interference of Church in the affairs of state.
- He adopted utilitarian approach towards religion. He recognises role of religion in disciplining
people.
- In public appearances, prince should show that he is religious.
- Use religion, if national interest demands.
Other advices:

- Prefer common men over nobility. Because common men don’t have ambitions to come to
power. No threat.
- Keep army of nationals rather than depending on mercenary soldiers which was prevalent then.
- He also supported expansionist foreign policy.
“Machiavelli is a child of his times”

- Every thinker considered as child of his times. Most appropriate to Machiavelli.
- According to Laski, Machiavelli is rightly called as child of renaissance.
- All historical developments of his times – reflected in his writings.
- Belonged to the time of Renaissance. It represents the spirit of enquiry and humanism.
• We can see the impact of Renaissance on him. He is building his political theory not on
the basis of what God expects but on the natural elements of human nature.
• Renaissance gave rise to reformation. He criticises the role of church in state, emerging as the
father of European secularism.
- Belonged to the time when modern nation states very emerging. He wanted Italy to become a
strong nation state. He is realism can be considered as the impact of his age.
- Belonged to the time when capitalism was about to start. He emerges as the critique of feudalism
and scholar of capitalist class.
• He explains that human nature is selfish and materialistic. He justifies the belief of bourgeois
class that there is nothing wrong in making profits.
- Belonged to the age of geographical explorations. He recommends expansionist foreign policy.
- Thus, right to call him as the child of his times.
“Machiavelli's thoughts are narrowly dated and narrowly located” –

Sabine
- Most criticised. But most practised.
- He told the reality.
- Machiavelli become synonymous to evil.
- Sabine has criticised him in general but in particular because of his attitude towards religion.
- His criticism of church and the role of church in state was because of his experiences in Italy.
- According to Sabine, if he belonged to different time and space his assumptions about human
nature, church and politics would not have been so pessimistic.
- He came to be associated with all that is evil and his book “the prince” was prohibited by church.

- But Prince is also regarded as one of the best books ever written in the field of statecraft.
- It is true that he was a child of his times and his assumptions about politics, religion and human
nature have been shaped by the circumstances in Italy during this time. But we cannot say that
there is no universalism or transcendentalism in him.
- Kautilya who belong to different time and space had similar assumptions about politics and
statecraft.
- He influenced many like Hobbes, Mao, Marx.
- He is known as father of realism. Source of inspiration for realist scholars like Morgenthau.
Machiavelli v. Kautilya
- Tradition among political scholars to compare them.
- Pandit Nehru in his book “Discovery of India” has called Kautilya as Indian Machiavelli.
- Western scholars Jaszi and Moriz Winternitz tried to compare western realist scholars like
Thucydides and Machiavelli with oriental scholars like Kautilya and Sun Tzu.
- Kautilya – 3rd century BC of India. Machiavelli – 16th century Italy.
- Lot of similarities:
• Kautilya’s famous work Arthashastra – gives techniques of power and also detailed analysis of
foreign relations.
• Both were concerned with the situation of their motherland – vulnerable to foreign invasions.
• Both inspired political entrepreneurs to rise to the occasion, unify motherland and secure its
borders.
• Both had a pessimistic view of human nature. Both believe in force. In Indian politics is
known as Dandaneeti.
• Both were supporters of expansionist foreign policy.
• Kautilya’s Vijigishu and Machiavelli’s Prince aim at expanding their states because it gives an
opportunity for the material well-being of people.
• Both give similar advices on the qualities required by the prince. Like Machiavelli, Kautilya
suggest king to use religion.
• Kautilya suggests number of harsh measures to be taken by king.
- In many ways, Kautilya what is more realist than Machiavelli.
- Max Webber – When we look at Kautilya, Machiavelli’s Prince look harmless.
- Henry Kissinger – in his recent book “World order” mentions that Arthashastra is
combination of Machiavelli and Clausewitz. He says that when we look at Kautilya and

find similarities it diminishes the false notion of intellectual divide between East and West.
- However there are differences between them. Kautilya doesn't keep the king above Dharma.
Machiavelli does.
Explain how Machiavelli’s application of empirical method to human

affairs marks an important stage in the evolution of political science
- Father of political realism.
- Prince – best book in the field of statecraft.
- He enjoys a very significant position in the evolution of the Western political science and
evolution of political science as a discipline.
- We trace the origin of political science to ancient Greece.
- Plato – father of political philosophy.
- Initially political science was a sub-discipline of philosophy or ethics.
- Plato proposed dialectical method to discover the laws of politics.
- Political science as a discipline started distancing from philosophy and became more specialised
in the hands of Aristotle.
- Aristotle used both dialectical method and empirical method.
- Medieval times – study of politics got eclipsed under religion.
- Discipline gained autonomy again in the hands of Machiavelli.
- He advocated that politics is not ethics, it is autonomous in nature.
- He depended on history, psychology and empirical observations.
- In the hands of Machiavelli discipline developed more empirical and scientific character.
- Later on post behaviouralist scholars tried to incorporate scientific methodologies in political
science. We can see the impact of Machiavelli on them.
Machiavelli as first modern thinker

- He is treated by many political scholars as the first modern thinker.
- However it is contested.
- For many scholars Hobbes – first modern thinker.
- Machiavelli belonged to the time when medieval age was coming to an end and modern age was
about to start.
- Modern political life is organised around sovereign nationstate.
- We get the first idea of nation state, centralised authority and nationalism in his works.

- However he did not give details ideas about the principles of functioning of modern states. He
talks about centralised authority but has not given detailed theory of sovereignty.
- Machiavelli – Galileo of political science. Hobbes – Newton of political science.
- However we can say that Machiavelli was non-medieval if not entirely modern. He was against
the interference of church in the state which was a characteristic feature of medieval age. He was
critic of feudalism and the scholar of emerging bourgeoise class.
Machiavelli on republicanism
“Wherever possible Republic, wherever necessary monarchy but in no situations
aristocracy”
- Child of his times
- Belonged to time when feudalism was collapsing and capitalism was about to start.
- His distrust towards the feudal class and aristocracy is very distinct.
- He suggests prince to favour common man over nobility. He considered aristocracy as a threat to
national unity and a parasite class.
- We find influence of Aristotle on him. But there is a difference between the two with respect to
aristocracy.
- He preferred centralised authority of Prince for the society which was corrupt.
- However like Aristotle, he also favours civic republicanism only where people are virtuous.
- Thus Aristotle’s best practicable state is Machiavelli’s ideal state. 

Assignment
1. What is universal egoism?

2. What is Machiavelli method?
3. What are the qualities of Prince?
4. Why Machiavelli is known as father of realism?
5. Why Machiavelli is known as child of renaissance?
6. Why Machiavelli is narrowly dated?
7. Why Price should be clever like fox and brave like lion?

Hobbes
(all about pessimistic human nature…avoid pain and enjoy pleasure…limited reason…state
absolutism except right to life)
Introduction
- Belonged to England
- Witnessed puritan revolution 1641 – civil war
- Complete anarchy – no security of life. His main concern – order and preservation of life.
- Materialist, self-centred, utilitarian.
- Utilitarianism – philosophy of common man or capitalist class. Enjoying pleasure and avoiding
pain.
- First person to say – every man is utilitarian. Nothing like higher or lower soul. All are equal.
- First to give complete theory of sovereignty of the state.
- First to establish that right to life is a fundamental right.
- Belongs to the school of social contract tradition.
Social contract tradition

- Feudalism is based on birth and capitalism is based on contract.
- In capitalist society – political life is based on contract.
- State is created by man.
Hobbes on human nature

- Man is pleasure seeking or utilitarian.
- Human actions are shaped by motion of particles in the brain. It creates two basic emotions: love
and aversion.
- We love the things that gives us pleasure and avoid the things that gives pain.
- After one pleasure is satisfied search of bigger pleasure starts.
- Dilemma of man – limited goods and unlimited desires.
- To acquire the goods everyone needs power.
- Since the search for pleasure is never ending, and search for power is also never ending.
- Since motion of particles are individualistic experiences it is beyond the capacity of human mind
to understand the pleasure and pain of others.
- Therefore one person looks at the other person as a source of insecurity.
!152 WPT: Hobbes

- Man is individualistic and power seeking by nature.
Critical evaluation
- He tries to be scientific but is also deductive.
- Doesn't take the balanced view of human nature.
- Like Machiavelli his assumptions on human nature are shaped by anarchical situations in
England of his times.
- Like Machiavelli he also represents the psychology of the emerging bourgeoise class.
On state of nature
“State of nature is a state of war of all against all”
“In the state of nature life of man is solitary, nasty, poor, brutish and short.”
“In the state of nature there is no scope for art or letters, navigation or culture”
- State of nature is a hypothetical concept created by the scholars of social contract tradition.
- It is to show how human life will be without state.
- Human nature – Materialist, self-centred, utilitarian.
- Man in the state of nature cannot lead a social life.
- We love the things that gives us pleasure and avoid the things that gives pain.
- Dilemma of man – limited goods and unlimited desires.
- In the state of nature – no law or authority. Therefore man has to depend on self help to protect
the things that he likes.
- In such situation only way to acquire goods and protect himself is by acquiring power.
- When one man acquires power it creates the dilemma of security for another making him
insecure. He will also search for power.
- He doesn't have the capacity to understand pleasure or pain of others. Thus, man is not social by
nature but individualistic.
- For one man other man is a source of insecurity.
- In the state of nature struggle for power is unending.
- In such situation where a man is insecure about his life and positions there is no scope for finer
aspects of human life. He will be busy protecting his life and will not get time for industry and
culture.
- His life will be solitary, nasty, poor, brutish and short.
- His description of the state of nature is shaped by his experiences of civil war in England.
!153 WPT: Hobbes

“Fear and I were born twins together”
- He is not only among the greatest political scholars, but also one of the greatest writers which
English race has produced.
- Book “Leviathan” – masterpiece
- In the above statement he has metaphorically established the origin of state in the feeling of
insecurity of man.
- According to him man is born with fear.
- Historical event – Spanish armada created fear in England.
- His mother gave him premature birth.
- That is why he says so.
- Actually he means to say that man is insecure by nature.
- Insecurity by human nature has its roots in the utilitarian nature of man. He fears the loss of
things which gives him pleasure. Biggest fear – loss of life. For preservation of life he enters into
social contract.
- Created state and invest absolute authority in the state.
- State cannot take away the life of men except according to the procedure established by law. It
also implies that the foremost duty of state is to protect the life of man. The state which fails to
do so are failed states.
Hobbes’ conception of rights

- State of nature – no state, no limitations on the rights of person. Free to do anything. No external
impediments to motion.
- Theoretically – all rights, practically – no rights.
- Rights is a social or political concept.
- In state of nature there is no right or wrong. Might is right. Those who have power will enjoy
rights. Anarchy.
- He prefers to call rights in the state of nature not as rights but as power. Man can enjoy rights
only in the presence of state.
- This is legal theory of rights.
- Social contract – man transferred all of his powers to the state except right of self preservation.
State represents collective power.
- Thus man becomes powerless and state power is absolute.
!154 WPT: Hobbes

- Hobbes is utilitarian. For him pleasure is more important than liberty, so order is more important
than liberty.
- According to him man has only two options – live under absolute authority of state or under
anarchy.
- Those who break the law – state will punish.
- Not more than one sovereign in one territory.
- Those breaking law made by state asserted that they are the state which is not permissible.
- One breaks law others will also do therefore punish him.
Social contract
- Only one contract.
- Man becomes social and political.
- Contract is irreversible.
Theory of law
“Covenants without swords are nothing but words”
- He belongs to the school of positive law.
- According to him law is the command of sovereign.
- If law is not backed by enforcement it cannot be treated as law in proper sense.
- Those who break the law should be punished. Otherwise no one will observe the law.
- Man is utilitarian – follow the law if it is in his interest else will not follow the law.
- To support Hobbes we can say that international law is a weak law because it lacks the power of
enforcement. In the absence of world government it is in the state of anarchy.
- In the state of nature – natural law was not enough to establish law and order. Anarchy.
- Problem in natural law – lack of definiteness. Man doesn't have reason to understand the pleasure
and pain of others.
- He prefers to call natural law as “counsels of prudence” or “articles of peace”.
- If followed there will be peace but it cannot be followed in the absence of fear of punishment.
Sovereignty
- Supreme power
- Emerged in modern times
- Medieval times – Authority distributed among Kings, Roman emperor, church.
!155 WPT: Hobbes

- No clear centre of power.
- Emerged the concept of sovereignty.
- State was declared sovereign
- Command of sovereign – law
- It is the supreme power of the state to determine the domestic policy and external relations.
- State has monopoly to use force
“Liberty is where law is silent”

- He defines liberty in negative sense.
- For him liberty is absence of interference of state.
- Man had absolute liberty in the state of nature.
- But life – solitary, nasty, poor, brutish and short.
- State of nature – painful. Man tries to avoid pain therefore he creates state.
- Transferred all of his rights except self-preservation.
- State becomes absolute. Command of state – law.
- People have no liberty wherever state has made laws. They have to observe the law.
- If they don't – punish.
- Not observing law – asserting sovereignty. Can't be more than one sovereign.
- Thus man has no liberty where sovereign has made law and can exercise liberty where laws are
not made and individuals are free to act as per their choice.
Assessment of Hobbes as thinker

“Leviathan is useless as a book on politics and fruitless as a book of history” –
Vaughan
- Hobbes like Machiavelli – criticised most.
- His book “Leviathan” like “Prince” among the books prohibited by church.
- In a report of committee to British parliament – Leviathan full of poison.
- It was burnt. He was called as dangerous man full of poison.
- It is criticised as fruitless from the perspective of history of the origin of the state.
- It is to be noted that his purpose was not to give anthropological account of the origin of the
state.
- His only purpose was to show the nature of human being in the absence of state.
!156 WPT: Hobbes

- First person – theory of sovereignty. Utilitarian, materialistic, power seeking nature of man.
Right to life.
- Without understanding Hobbes it is difficult to understand the principles and practices of modern
nation states.
- Regarded as the first modern thinker.
- Marx – Hobbes was father of all of us.
Hobbes as first modern thinker

“While Jean Bodin was standing on the gate of modernity it was Hobbes who jumped
inside the gate.”
- Status of Hobbes as first modern thinker – Contested
- For some Machiavelli is first.
• 1st to make separation between church and state.
• Earliest idea of nation state by him. However he did not give the detailed theory of
sovereignty.
• We can call him non-medieval.
- Bodin – Also regarded as first by some.
• 1st to give the theory of state sovereignty.
• But made a state supreme only in the secular sphere.
- Hobbes gave the complete theory of state sovereignty. Clearly subordinated church to the state.
- Suggest that in a particular territory there can be only one sovereign. Thus, sovereignty as the
feature of the modern state completely defined by him.
- Therefore first modern thinker.
“Hobbes as greatest of all individualists”

- Individualist – individual is prior to state.
- Two types: methodological and normative
- Methodological – who use individualistic nature of man as a method to build their political
theory.
- Normative – not consider individualism as sin or bad
- He is both methodological and normative.
- He has built his political theory to justify absolute power of the state on the self-centred nature of
man.
!157 WPT: Hobbes

- First person to remove the sense of guilt from being self-centred. It is a fact like earth revolving
around sun.
- All men are similar. All are utilitarians and self-centred.
- He doesn't sacrifice individuals even after the creation of absolute state. It is for the self-
preservation that man has created state. Man has the right to resist against the state if state fails to
protect his life. 
!158 WPT: Hobbes

Assignment
1. What is nature according to Hobbes?

2. Why state of nature is state of war?
3. What are the powers of sovereign?
4. Why man can’t surrender right to life?
5. What is due process of law and how it is different from due procedure of law?
6. Why law should have power of enforcement?
7. Why there can’t be two sovereign in a territory?
8. What restrictions Bodin has placed on state’s sovereignty?
9. Why Hobbes is greatest of all individualists?
10. What is the difference between methodological individualist and normative individualist?
11. Why man’s life is struggle for power? 
!159 WPT: Hobbes

Locke
(man has reason… limited state…only make, exec, adjudicate law to state…not LLP)
Introduction
- Father of liberalism.
- Core value of liberalism – liberty
- Limited state
- Liberal states are democratic, secular.
- Witnessed Glorious Revolution 1688 – Peaceful transition from absolute monarchy to
constitutional monarchy
- Belongs to the school of social contract, school of natural law.
- Utilitarian
- Mind is ‘tabula rasa’ – clean slate
Works of Locke
- Two treatises on Civil government.
- 1st – criticised Filmer’s “Patriarcha”
- 2nd – explained the theory of social contract
• Hobbes – theory of social contract is about the origin of the state.
• Locke – theory of social contract is about the origin of government.
First treatise on civil government

- Filmer’s book ‘Patriarcha’
- State – large family of God.
- God created Adam and invested in him all powers – State absolutism and supernatural creation of
state.
- He questioned the contractual theory of the origin of state:
• If we assume state is the product of contract – why successive government should be tied to
the contract entered into by forefathers.
• Theory of contract makes it difficult to justify right to inherit property.
- Locke criticism:
• Against state absolutism and supernatural creation of state.
• Family is a natural institution, not state. It is a product of contract.
• Rejects that God created Adam and gave him absolute authority.
!160 WPT: Locke & Rousseau

• Even if we assume God created Adam and give him absolute authority why should his heirs
also have same authority.
• And how to identify who is the actual heir.
• God created Adam long ago. This theory doesn't suit the present time.
• He also questions the parallel drawn between the authority of king and father.
• Father has absolute authority on children because children are totally dependent on him.
• Adult citizens are not so much dependent on the states. Any rational person will not agree to
give all his rights and accept absolute authority of the state.
• The only acceptable basis of state’s authority is contract.
Locke on human nature

- Every thinker is a child of his times.
- His description of man is shaped by his observations of glorious revolution.
- According to him, man is self-centred but also has reason.
- Reason guides him to take care of his interest as well as of others.
- He talks about "enlightened self-interest” – all being equal and independent one should not harm
others.
- Man is guided by desires but also has reason. Reason for getting the things he desires and also to
live in peace with others.
- Reason teaches man that God has created everyone equal and free.
- No one should harm other person's life, liberty, property. If we will harm others, others will also
harm us.
- Even Hobbes held that all men are equal and have equal capacity to destroy each other either by
physical or mental strength.
- Equality is a feature of modern way of life.
- In comparison to Hobbes, his view on human nature is balanced and not so pessimistic.
Locke on state of nature

- State of nature is a hypothetical concept created by the scholars of social contract tradition.
- It is to show how human life will be without state.
- Every thinker has a particular view on human nature which shapes his view about state of nature.
- For Hobbes, state of nature is anarchy where life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.

• According to him human actions are guided by passion.
• Man has limited reason only to understand his pleasure and pain. He cannot understand the
pleasure and pain of others.
• Hence, man cannot lead a social life.
- For Locke, state of nature is a state of peace, goodwill and mutual assistance.
• He has witnessed Glorious Revolution and therefore takes that enlightened view of self-
interest.
• Reason and passion are present in human beings in a more balanced way.
• In the state of nature, natural law i.e. reason exist.
• Because of reason man can live in peace with others.
- Hobbes’ state of nature was pre-social and pre-political. Locke state of nature is only pre-
political and not pre-social. Man was living a social life.
Need of social contract

- State of nature is a state of peace, goodwill and mutual assistance.
- But there are certain inconveniences.
• State of nature – no common authority to make, execute and adjudicate law.
• Each person was lawmaker, executor and judge.
• Common sense suggest that no one should be a judge in his own case.
• Hence people enter into contract to create government.
- Only three natural rights are transferred: right to make, execute and adjudicate law.
- Rest of the rights are property of man. They are inalienable.
- Thus man has not transferred right to life, liberty and property.
- The three functions of government are independent of each other. Because of their fusion in the
state of nature there were inconveniences.
- Thus Locke lays the foundation of theory of separation of power which is later developed
by Montesquieu.
- Second inconvenience:
• There was no assurance that the state of nature would remain peaceful forever.
• Man has reasons and also passion.
• Hence, state/government is needed, it will ensure that people continue to live in peace forever.
• State is created only for convenience. Hence, state has limited powers – nightwatchman (only
security and not welfare)

Locke’s right to property
- Man has reason – all are equal and independent.
- They claimed right to equality as a natural right. God has created everyone equal and free.
- One should not harm others in life, liberty and property.
- However for liberals, the equality is just legal equality not economic equality.
- Locke – man has not transferred right to life, liberty and property to the state.
- State cannot make laws which limits these rights. Else it will be a breach of trust.
- He uses the term right to property in an inclusive sense to include life and liberty.
- Right to property is a sacred right given by God.
- God wants man to live happily that is why he has created Apple, milk and meat. God wants man
to eat, drink and enjoy. Thus, right to property provides basis of good life.
“The great and chief end for which man created commonwealth is preservation of
property to which in the state of nature many things are in waiting”
- Locke father of liberalism.
- Every ideology – interest of particular class. Liberalism – capitalist class.
- He is an advocate of capitalist class and a scholar of possessive individualism.
- He defends for absolute right to property.
- Man was enjoying natural rights in the state of nature.
- State of nature – state of peace, goodwill and mutual assistance but there are certain
inconveniences. Eg, absence of common authority or government – Chances of peace getting
converted into war.
- Hence man created state. Man has not transferred right to property.
- State cannot take away man's property. Else breach of trust.
- Purpose of the state is to protect property. He calls state as a night watchman.
“Where there is no law there is no liberty”

- Here he is talking about the natural law i.e. reason.
- Man was enjoying liberty in the state of nature because of reason.
- But certain inconveniences.

- Even after creation of State man can enjoy liberty only when law made by state is subjected to
law of reason.
- Any law which goes against the principle of reason is not acceptable.
- From his point of view any law made by the state which limits life, liberty and property is
unacceptable because it does not conform to the principle of natural law.
- Thus emerged two traditions of law:
• British tradition based on supremacy of Parliament and principle of procedure established by
law and
• American tradition based on supremacy of Constitution and due process of law.
- SC of India initially rejected the doctrine of due process of law in AK Gopalan case.
- But later accepted the doctrine in Maneka Gandhi case when it became necessary to check the
executive overreach. Supreme Court – law has to be fair, just and reasonable.
Locke as a scholar of possessive individualism

- Possessive individualism implies absolute ownership over the product of one's labour. No
obligation to give back to society.
- This theory got support from capitalist class. Thus, he emerged as the scholar of capitalist class.
Locke is an individualist out and out

- He has given the theory of natural rights.
- He is a scholar of possessive individualism and claims absolute right to property.
- Unlike Hobbes who starts as an individualist and ends as an absolutist, he remains individualist
out and out.
- He is individualist in both methodological and normative sense.
Rousseau
- State of nature – perfect bliss
- Private property emerged and the bliss disappeared.
General will
- Two types of will: real will (original/good) and actual will.
- Real will of all together is general will. General will also called as popular sovereignty.

- It represents body politic i.e. state.
- In the field of politics – general will is a myth.
- And according to the myth, laws made by the state represents our real well. Hence we are truly
free when we obey the state and not when we disobey.
- Rousseau – Man can be forced to be free. Punish who disobey.
- Eg, constituent assembly – real will of Indians. If anyone disobey the Constitution, punish.
- He is bringing idealism back.
- Theory of general will has been misused by totalitarian rulers like Hitler to legitimise the
exploitation of people by the state.
Paradoxes of Rousseau
- Inspiration for Democrats – advocated direct democracy and criticised representative democracy
- Inspiration for socialist – suggested that society has to change not man. Socialist started
demanding for change in the industry and society.
- Misused by totalitarian rulers like Hitler for the exploitation of people by the state.
How general will will emerge?

- People deliberating will result into consensus.
- This consensus that emerges out of direct participation of people of free will is general will.
“Rousseau’s General will is Hobbes Leviathan with its head chopped off”
- Rousseau’s general will – Least understood and most misused.
- He is a scholar of paradoxes. Inspired Democrats for participatory democracy. Got misused by
totalitarian rulers.
- Often general will is compared with Leviathan. Only difference – Hobbes Leviathan (state) is
sovereign and sitting on top of the society.
- On the other hand, Rousseau’s general will is diffused throughout the body.
- Hobbes – state can use coercive force to make people obey the state.
- Rousseau – man should be forced to be free.
- But they differ from each other.
• Hobbes gives theory of sovereignty of the state. Rousseau – theory of popular sovereignty.
• Though Hobbes doesn't prescribe form of govt but he prefers monarchy.

• Rousseau – direct democracy is prerequisite for formation of general will.
- Maciver clarifies that general will is not will of the state but will of the people of the state. 

Assignment
1. Why peace is prevailing in Locke’s state of nature?

2. Why Locke criticise Filmer?
3. What is civil-society according to Locke?
4. What rights man has transferred to government?
5. What is night watchman state?
6. What is definition of property according to Locke?
7. What are three limitations on right to property?
8. What is linking between right to property and creation of government?
9. Why liberals call state as necessary evil?
10. What are the conditions in which man can revolt against the state?
11. What is Lock’s view on Toleration?

JS Mill
Introduction
- John Locke – father of liberalism.
- Mill – true liberal
- Liberty – core value of liberalism.
- He gave an exhaustive concept of the idea of liberty in his book “On liberty”.
- Isaiah Berlin – is the second person after him to write on the concept of liberty in his work
"four essays on liberty” . He was influenced by Mill.
- John Locke makes a reference for right to LLP as natural and inalienable. But he has dealt
only with absolute right to property not right to liberty.
- If anyone is liberal in true sense it is Mill.
- Also written on representative government.
- After Plato, first person to emphasise on the participation of women in public sphere. Right to
vote for woman.
- Belong to time – classical liberalism coming to end and welfare state about to start.
- Thinker with a lot of inconsistencies:
• Champion of liberty – prophet of empty liberty
• Champion of democracy – reluctant Democrat
• Utilitarian – destroyed utilitarianism. “Peter who denied his master”.
Utilitarianism by Bentham
- Utilitarianism – origin in the works of Hobbes, David Hume, Priestley.
- Bentham converted it into a systematic school of thought – father of utilitarianism.
- Most popular philosophy in Britain in 18th and 19th century. Philosophy of common man.
- Principles of utilitarianism:
• Human actions are guided by pleasure and pain.
• All humans are same. No difference between common man and Socrates.
• Pleasures do not differ in quality but only quantity. Pushpin is as good as reading poetry.
• State should adopt policy which increases pleasure and reduces pain. Greatest happiness of the
greatest number.
• He has given felicific calculus to measure pleasure.
!168 WPT: JS Mill

“Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters: pleasure
and pain. It is for them alone to guide what we ought to do and determine what we
shall do.”
- Bentham – Human actions are guided by pleasure and pain. Also he establishes that, this is what
man is supposed to do.
- Converts utilitarianism into principle of ethics.
- Mill, like Hobbes, also suggested that man has no control over pleasure and pain rather they are
sovereign masters.
- It is not possible to act otherwise, also it is not desirable to act otherwise.
- Similarly Hume held that ethics is just a sentiment.
“Greatest happiness of the greatest number”

- Most misunderstood principle.
- Socialist have criticised utilitarianism because – gives priority to pleasure.
- Bentham – state policy – to increase pleasure and reduce pain.
- According to him state intervention in economy – counter-productive – instead of increasing
pleasure it will increase pain. States should leave economy free.
- Utilitarianism provides justification for the exploitation of the working class for the sake of
pleasure/profit of capitalist.
- Therefore criticised by socialist.
- It converts worker into the object of utility for capitalist. Dehumanising philosophy.
- Carlyle – Utilitarianism is a pig's philosophy.
Revision of utilitarianism by Mill

“Mill was Peter who denied his master”
- Utilitarianism came under attack because of its exploitative nature. Carlyle – Utilitarianism is a
pig's philosophy.
- Mill tried to defend utilitarianism but ends up modifying it.
- He brought idealism into utilitarianism. He was influenced by Bentham and also Greek idealists
like Socrates and Plato.
- Pleasure differs in both quantity and quality. Thus, pushpin is not as good as poetry.
!169 WPT: JS Mill

- Even human beings differ in quality. It is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a man satisfied.
- He renders felicific calculus devised by Bentham useless, because quality cannot be measured.
- He differentiates between pleasure and happiness.
• For him happiness is prior to pleasure.
• Pleasure – materialistic, happiness – spiritualistic
• One gets pleasure by experience, whereas happiness by sacrificing pleasure.
• Realisation of pleasure – direct. Realisation of happiness – indirect.
- Mill regards utility as an ultimate appeal on all ethical questions. Here utility is in its widest
sense.
- By suggesting pleasure differs in quality, he brings ethical dimensions to utility.
- Hobbes and Bentham – pessimistic view of human nature. Mill – progressive view
- With the growth of reason man's understanding of pleasure and happiness also changes.
- Critics say that he has destroyed the foundations of utilitarianism.
Mill on liberty
- According to him liberty is freedom to act according as per one's choice without external
interference.
- It is a necessary condition for happiness.
- No state becomes great by dwarfing its own people. For states should give maximum freedom to
people.
- Only limitation – no harm to other’s liberty.
- He gives harm principle:
• Two types of action: self regarding and other regarding actions
• No interference by the state in self regarding actions except when individual is harming
himself.
• Other regarding actions which harm the liberty of others – state can restrict my liberty.
- Ernest Barker – Mill is a “prophet of empty liberty” and a scholar of “abstract
individualism”.
- Prophet of empty liberty:
• In reality almost all actions are other regarding.
• In the name of other regarding actions Mill has created a huge scope for state intervention to
restrict individuals liberty.
- Abstract individualism:
!170 WPT: JS Mill

• Mill’s individual is not real but imaginary.
• Real man is a member of society. There is hardly any scope of liberty in the way Mill
describes.
On freedom of speech and expression

- Gives foremost importance to FOSE.
- It includes the freedom to act as per one's own idea and freedom to form associations for better
articulation of ideas.
- It is the God’s gift to man. No other species can communicate with each other through speech.
- State should give maximum possible FOSE. Only limitation not to harm others.
- He was impressed by Tocqueville. Mill held that if the opinion of even a single
individual is different from the rest of the society, society has no right to silence him
- Objective of life is to understand the truth. Truth can emerge from anywhere.
- He also gives teleological argument. Truth will come automatically, it cannot be
suppressed.
- There is no point postponing truth, no point stopping the person with whom we disagree.
- If that person is wrong – he will understand and keep quiet.
- If we are wrong – opportunity to correct ourselves.
Mill as reluctant democrat - CL Wayper

- According to him – democracy is the best form of government.
- Because gives liberty in general and FOSE in particular.
- Direct democracy is best. But not possible in modern societies due to size.
- So representative democracy is second best.
- He was aware of the problems that got associated with democracy.
- He was uncomfortable with the growth of mass democracy, eg, in USA.
- He was fearful of the tyranny of majority.
- According to him democracy was not a free gift, it was achieved after a long struggle.
- Certain reforms were necessary for the safe future of democracy:
• Instead of simple majoritarian system of election– proportional representation
• Suggested weighted voting – educated and property class to get more than one vote.
• Plural voting – right to vote in all constituencies where one owns property.
• Recommended open ballot system.
!171 WPT: JS Mill

• Right to vote for women
- He is bringing aristocratic elements to protect democracy from turning into mobocracy.
- That is why he is called reluctant democrat.
- His opinion on governance of colonies also makes him a reluctant democrat:
• Despotism is a legitimate form of government for barbarians provided the end is for their
improvement
• He is reluctant to introduce a democracy anywhere anytime. There are some prerequisites for
introducing democracy. Eg civic culture, without them it will be a false democracy.
• He admitted that China and India were once great civilisations but not now.
- In comparison to him, Nehru emerges as passionate democrat.
- In the words of Nehru – if people cannot come to democracy we can take democracy to the
doorsteps of people.
- Indian democracy is an exception. India made a tryst with destiny.
On women
- After Plato, Mill is the second person in West to advocate for participation of women in the
public sphere.
- He admits that – we have abolished all forms of slavery but slavery of half of the human race still
continues.
- He was a supporter of suffragette movement. 
!172 WPT: JS Mill

Assignment
1. Why for Mill liberty is important for individual?

2. What is the utility of liberty for the state?
3. What is harm principle?
4. What is the difference in self and other regarding action?
5. Why Mill is known as prophet of empty liberty?
6. What are false democracies?
7. Why Mill is worried about democracy’s future?
8. What are the prerequisite for the democracy?
9. Why democracies not suitable for barbarians?
10. What are the features of liberal state?
11. What is possessive individualism?
12. What is the difference in natural law and positive law?
13. What Mills means when he says utility in widest sense?
14. What is abstract individualism?
15. What is the difference in pleasure and happiness?
16. Why Bentham’s ideas is called pig’s philosophy?
17. Why utilitarianism is philosophy that appeals to common man?
18. Why utilitarianism is called philosophic radicals?
19. How according to Bentham state can generate greatest happiness?
20. What is felicific calculus? 
!173 WPT: JS Mill

Marx
Introduction
- Greatest influence on theory as well as real world of politics.
- His concern – exploitation of workers by the capitalist.
- Solution – communalism
- Method – violent revolution. Violence is the midwife of change.
- School of thought – School of socialism.
Sources of influence
- French Revolution – idea of equality and fraternity
- British School of political economy – critique of Adam Smith and Ricardo who where advocates
of free market economy.
- German philosophy – critique of Hegel and Feuerbach
What is utopian socialism?

- It came as a response to the exploitative conditions created by capitalist system in 18th century.
- Exponents – Saint Simon, Louis Blanc
- Blanqui in his book “History of political economy” called them as utopian socialist.
- All these thinkers knew clearly what was wrong but their solutions were visionary – far away
from the reality.
What is scientific socialism?

- Marx and Engels tried to replace utopian socialism by scientific socialism.
- Analysed the problem and also gave the solution.
- Solution is Marxism.
- Marx had no faith in the methods of early socialist.
- During French revolution – the failed because they lacked theory.
- Later despite good intentions of socialist like Robert Owen socialism could not come because
they lacked theory as well as action.
- Marxism is praxis - theory plus action.
- It is based on scientific understanding of capitalism. Therefore called scientific socialism.
!174 WPT: Marx

Political philosophy of Hegel
- Official philosopher of Prussian state
- He suggested that human history is the movement of ideas or consciousness.
- Marx contradicted him – matter is the source of history not idea.
- For Marx matter is real. Hegel – Idea is real.
- Hegel – real is rational, rational is real.
• What is real can be understood through reason.
• Hence idea is real because idea can be understood by reason. Ultimate reality – God which is
an absolute idea. It can be understood through reason.
• His view is very similar to Plato who held that reality is the shadow of ideas.
• And what can be understood by reason is reality.
- Marx – Hegel is standing on his head, we have to make him stand on his feet.
State is a march of God on earth

- According to Hegel human history is movement of absolute idea or god.
- He revived idealist tradition – superiority of state.
- God expressed himself first in plants – birds – animals – man – family – civil society – state.
- March of God stops here. This is the end of history.
- Marx challenges the idea of God itself.
- He is influenced by Feuerbach.
• God is human creation. All good qualities are put in God.
• God reminds us about our weakness.
- Marx also held that God is human creation.
- Since God is an idea, idea is false consciousness. State is the march of God on earth is also false
consciousness.
- In reality – state is an instrument of dominant class.
- He even called religion as opium of masses.
- He has taken the concept of dialectics from Hegel.
- He converted the dialectics of idea into dialectics of matter.
- Dialectics denote contradiction. Till contradiction exists, movement exists. Once contradiction
ends, movement stops. When movement stops, history ends.
!175 WPT: Marx

- Communism is an end of history for Marx.
- Supremacy of German state was end of history for Hegel.
- Disintegration of USSR was the end of history for Francis Fukuyama.
- Samuel Huntington challenged Fukuyama’s end of history. New contradictions have emerged.
Dialectical materialism
- Marx has borrowed his dialectical method from Hegel.
- Hegel – idea or consciousness is the essence of universe.
- Thesis (partial truth) and antithesis (partial truth) clash to give synthesis (nearer to truth) –> it
continues to give truth in the form absolute idea or consciousness.
- Marx – matter, not idea, is the essence of universe.
- Matter underwent dialectical process until rational mode of production comes into existence.
- Engels in “Anti-Diihring” – three laws of material:
1. Transformation of quantity into quality.
2. Inter-penetration of opposites.
3. Negation of negation.
Historical materialism by Marx

- Followers of Marx – consider him as scientist and Marxism as scientific because of historical
materialism.
- According to him – historical materialism is scientific view of history.
- It is objective understanding of history rather than philosophical.
- (If programme of action is not based on sound theory and theory is not followed by action, it is
useless. Marxism is praxis.)
- We have to trace the history of evolution of human society.
- We have to see what was the historical act of man – thinking or production?
• "In order to make history one has to live, in order to live one has to eat, in order to eat one has
to produce”
• Thus origin of society is in production.
• Economic structure is the basic structure of society.
• According to him – between thinking and production, production is more important.
• Plato who is to be blamed for spreading the false consciousness that man of reason should rule
the ideal state.
!176 WPT: Marx

• (Plato and Aristotle instituted the differential system of awards.
• Disproportionate gains to the intellectual class and injustice to the manual labour.
• Intellectual class is the exploiter class. Workers should not be guided by the intellectual class
and their theories.)
- Thus the historical act of man was production.
- Mode of production has two components: forces of production and relations of production.
• Forces of production includes – means of production and labour power. It keeps changing.
• Relations of production – determined by the pattern of ownership of the means of production.
• Relations of production gives rise to haves and have-nots.
• Haves – exploiters, have-nots – exploited.
• The relationship between them is dialectical, inherently contradictory. It leads to class
conflicts.
• When capitalism is overthrown by socialist revolution, classless society will emerge. Then no
class conflicts.
Structuralism
- He has studied society by structural approach.
- Economic structure is the basic structure because origin of society is in the act of production.
- Economic structure is shaping all other structures which are just a reflection of base.
- (Economic structure is also called as a mode of production.
- Three components of production:
• Means of production
• Forces of production
• Relation of production )
(What is relation of production?

- It is determined by the pattern of ownership of means of production.
- Also called as class.
- Owner – haves; Non-owners – have-nots
- Haves are exploiters. Have-nots are exploited.
- The relationship between them is dialectical. No reconciliation )
Religion is opium of masses
!177 WPT: Marx

- Exploiters have weakened solidarity of the working class in the name of nation or religion.
- Those who control the economic structure controls all other structures.
- They become the dominant class. They try to legitimate the domination.
- “In every epoch the ideas of the ruling class have been the ruling ideas”
- For him state is an instrument of dominant class.
- He was extremely critical of religion – religion is opium of masses.
- Calls for the workers to unite.
“It is not consciousness that determines our existence. It is our existence that
determines our consciousness.”
- Hegel – Idea/consciousness is ultimate reality.
- Marx – Hegel is standing on his head.
- Matter is ultimate reality.
- Basic structure of society – economic structure.
- All other structures are just reflection of the base.
- Ideas, ideology are part of superstructure. They generate false consciousness.
- Religion is worst – opium of masses.
- Workers should not be misguided by the philosophers or church fathers.
- Capitalism – philosophers have constructed the idea that there is liberty, equality, justice. But in
reality it is false consciousness.
- Workers should understand their real existence. They should develop objective consciousness of
objective reality.
- Once workers understand the objective reality they will change from class in itself to class for
itself.
- They will rise and revolt. That is the only way to end exploitation.
Criticism of historical materialism

- Popper – Book “open society and its enemies”
- Called Plato, Hegel and Marx as enemies of open society.
- According to him both Marx and Hegel committed the mistake of historicism – Explanation of
history as ideology rather than objective.
- He also criticised them for suggesting holistic social engineering.
!178 WPT: Marx

- Gramsci and Althusser – Economic factor is over determined.
- Max Webber – His explanation of history is oversimplification of history.
- Thus historical materialism is economic reductionism.
Class struggle theory

“The history of all hitherto existing societies has been history of class struggle”
- Influenced by Hegel’s dialectics. Converted dialectics of idea into dialectics of matter.
- Also influenced by Darwin's origin of species and struggle for survival.
- In primitive communism, property was held in common. Hunters and gatherers. No classes – no
class struggle.
- Ancient history – Masters and slaves. Class struggle – state exists.
- Feudal society – Lords and serfs. Class struggle – state exists.
- Capitalist society – capitalist and worker. Class struggle – state exists.
- Socialism – it is outcome of violent overthrow of capitalism. Two classes will be there: workers
and capitalist.
- Workers will be exploiters and capitalists will be exploited.
- In capitalism, democracy of minority and dictatorship over majority. Bourgeoisie democracy.
- In socialism democracy of majority and a dictatorship over minority. It is peoples democracy.
- Socialism is transitional phase. It will gradually transform into communism.
- Once workers occupy state, they will make necessary changes. Private property will be abolished
– everything will come under common ownership – classes will end – class struggle end –
history will end – state will wither way.
- Distribution will be from each according to his ability to each according to his need.
- In reality: Marx’s socialism as well as communism remains utopia.
- Because of the fear of communist revolution, political and economic reforms took place. Workers
were given right to vote and government intervened in economic to increase wages and improve
working conditions.
- The necessity and possibility of communist revolution became too remote.
What is labour according to Marx?

- Not just act of production for survival but man also produces for pleasure or happiness.
- Man gains pleasure in creation.
- Through labour man constructs his world around him.
!179 WPT: Marx

- In capitalism, essence of labour is undermined. Joy of work has been taken out. Worker produces
want to market demands.
- Market determines everything. Engine of capitalism is profit. There is cutthroat competition.
- Capitalism dehumanises human.
Capitalist law of wages

- In order to maintain the profit capitalist has to reduce the cost of production.
- In order to reduce the cost of production, he reduces the wages.
- Wages cannot be more than what is necessary for worker to survive and come back next day for
work.
Theory of surplus value

- Four factors of production – land, labour, capital and organisation.
- Labour is the only element which produces value in the society.
- Value produced by the worker can be divided into two parts– wages and profit
- Profit is taken by capitalist. Marx called this as surplus value.
- The paradox is more worker is working more power he is losing and adding to the power of
capitalist.
Concept of alienation - Hegel

- Alienation is estrangement. Person becomes stranger to himself.
- End of alienation – happiness or freedom.
- Universe has two dimensions – spiritual and material.
- Spiritual part – God. Material part – physical world.
- God has created material world.
- God can exist without matter. Matter cannot exist without idea.
- Plato also: reality is the shadow of ideas.
- Every person is a part of God. In this world man is alienated from God.
- Man is also alienated from other man.
- This happens because our consciousness is low. When our consciousness is elevated we are
liberated. Liberated from the illusions that others are our enemies and source of insecurity.
- We become a part of the whole. This realisation is freedom and happiness.
- In this world alienation ends in state. State is the march of God on earth.
!180 WPT: Marx

Concept of alienation – Marx
- It is idea of young Marx.
- End of alienation – happiness or freedom
- Influenced by Hegel and Feuerbach.
- Alienation is estrangement. Person becomes stranger to himself.
- For Hegel alienation ends in state.
- Feuerbach has reinterpreted Hegel’s theory of alienation.
• According to him if man has to be free and happy he has to come out of the influence of
religion and God.
• Man has created God. Put all good qualities in the God.
• Got it reminds us of our imperfections and makes us unhappy.
- Marx felt that it is not enough to come out of the influence of religion and God. For alienation to
end it is necessary that capitalism ends.
- Bourgeois values: liberty, social contract and free will generate false consciousness of freedom.
- Freedom is when man works for his happiness which is not present in capitalism.
- Alienation is experienced by both worker and capitalist. But pain is more for worker.
- In capitalism man faces alienation in four ways:
• From process of production: system of production – too specialised. Man just produces a part.
He feels like a cog in the wheel.
• From the product of labour: man doesn't enjoy the product of his labour. He is forced to
produce what market demands. No creative freedom.
• From social nature: he has no time to realise his social nature.
• From himself: cumulative effect of all this makes him alienated from himself. He doesn't have
real happiness.
- Solution – communism. 
!181 WPT: Marx

Assignment
1. Mention main ideas of Marx.

2. What is Bonapartism?
3. What is Structuralism?
4. What is Law of over Determination?
5. Critical School is critical school of what.
6. What is Instrumental Rationality?
7. What is Legitimation Crises?
8. What is an Economic Man?
9. Who is One Dimensional Man?
10. How Sigmund Freud influence critical school?
11. What is theory of praxis? Why Marx called socialism as scientific socialism?
12. Write sources of influence on Karl Marx.
13. Differences between young and mature Marx.
14. What are the three laws of dialectics? 
!182 WPT: Marx

Gramsci
Introduction
- Italian Marxist
- Mussolini sentenced him to jail
- Contemporary of Gandhi. We can see similarities in Gandhi's strategy of satyagraha and Gramsci
passive revolution.
- His work "Prison Notebooks”
- Influenced by Lenin but modified his revolutionary strategies.
- He tried to remove the defects in ideas of Marx.
Gramsci’s model
- In Gramsci, economic structure remains basic structure, but elements of superstructures are not
just reflection of base.
- For Marx, state is an instrument of bourgeois class. It uses coercive power in the interest of
bourgeois class.
- For Gramsci, state is an instrument of capitalist class and uses coercion in the interest of
capitalist class but capitalist class maintain its domination not through state but civil society.
- State comes into picture only during crisis.
- Civil society acts in a subtle manner. It manufactures consent in the favour of the capitalist class.
- Capitalist class rules by generating power of attraction. They rule by establishing their
ideological domination.
- In normal situation state appears relatively autonomous. Its instrumental character comes to
surface only during crisis.
- Civil society is an intermediate layer between economic structure and state.
- Civil society gives the impression that state is neutral.
Civil society
- It is an intermediate layer between economic structure and state.
- It acts as a cushion. Protects both the structures.
- Civil society gives the impression of neutrality but it is more closely aligned with the economic
structure.
- Liberal scholars like Locke projects civil society as a neutral. But neutrality is just an illusion.
!183 WPT: Gramsci

- It is a site for manufacturing consent, place for creation of hegemony.
Hegemony
- Dominant ideology is hegemonic ideology.
- Ideology of the dominant class.
- Marx – Ideas of the ruling class are the ruling ideas.
- It is soft power, invisible power.
- It acts on the human mind. It appeals to the common sense.
- Majority regards it as natural and just.
- Institutions of civil society create hegemony.
Gramsci on intellectuals
- For common people:
• Intellectual class is neutral class. It tells the truth and guides us towards reality.
- Gramsci:
• He has shown the political role played by intellectual class.
• All men are intellectuals but not all play the role of intellectuals.
• There are some intellectuals who perform specific social function.
• Two types of intellectual: traditional and organic.
Traditional intellectual
- In capitalist society clergy, church fathers, men/women of letters, philosophers, professionals are
traditional intellectuals.
- They give the impression of being neutral.
- Their social position is derived from the past. Their present position critically dependent on
status quo.
- As a result they are essentially conservatives, generally aligned with the dominant group.
Organic intellectuals
- They have grown organically with the growth of capitalism.
- It can be bureaucracy, managerial class, professionals, business leaders, etc.
- They are required to manage the functions of capitalism.
!184 WPT: Gramsci

- They are the deputies of the dominant class and help to maintain the hegemony of dominant
class.
- Noam Chomsky – In "The responsibility of intellectuals" demonstrate that intellectuals have
been subservient to power and perform the functions of propagandist for state policies.
Gramsci’s theory of revolution

- Workers have to understand the techniques through which the capitalist class maintains its
domination.
- Gives the concept of historical bloc.
- Bourgeois class maintained its domination by forming coalition of classes and providing them
leadership. The coalition of classes forms the historical bloc.
- Workers should also form coalition of classes and provide them leadership.
- The strategy of revolution will depend upon the types of states – opaque state and transparent
state.
- Opaque:
• Where is civil society is present.
• It is difficult to bring revolution. Because it is difficult to understand the true nature of state.
- Transparent:
• Civil society is absent.
• Exploitative character of state is visible.
What workers in need to do in opaque states?

- Fight battle at two levels: war of position and water of manoeuver.
- War of position:
• This is ideological war.
• It means capture civil society and control it.
• Workers need to develop coalition of subaltern class and give leadership to them to gain
legitimacy for their cause.
• Workers need to build counter hegemony.
• They should have their own organic intellectuals.
• They should try to win over the traditional intellectuals.
• Eg, Gandhi can be treated as organic intellectual. His criticism of western civilisation in Hind
Swaraj can be considered as an attempt to build a counter hegemony.
!185 WPT: Gramsci

• This war will be a long war.
- Once depressed classes are able to establish their hegemony, it is possible to go for direct attack
and capturing state i.e. war of manoeuver. Eg, Quit India movement by Gandhi. 
!186 WPT: Gramsci

Assignment
1. What is super structure?

2. What is civil society?
3. What is historical class?
4. What is the meaning of sub alter class?
5. What is war of position?
6. What is war of manoeuvre?
7. Who are traditional intellectuals?
8. Who are organic intellectuals?
9. What is economic determinism?
10. Mention scholars who have influenced Gramsci?
11. What is passive revolution?
12. Difference between domination and hegemony? 
!187 WPT: Gramsci

Hannah Arendt
Introduction
- Her methodology is phenomenology.
- Controversies – branded as Cold War intellectual.
- German Jew.
- Influence of scholars like Aristotle, Heidegger, Karl Jasper
- Concern – participation in civic affairs.
- Scholar of civic republicanism.
- Also a source of inspiration for deliberative democracy scholars.
On totalitarianism
- She has analysed that totalitarianism of 20th century – nazism, fascism, Stalinism
- In her words – 20th century totalitarianism is a novel form of government.
- Earlier despotic regimes – use the terror as a means to power. 20th century totalitarianism – made
terror not only means but end in itself.
- There was no strategic rationality in the use of terror by the states.
- Terror – dominating human beings from within – killing the bodies as well as the soul.
- Not only one must avoid expressing dissenting thoughts, but mere possessing them is also a
crime.
Reasons for the rise of totalitarianism

- She describes it as bureaucratically centralised violence made possible by 20th century
technology in service of 19th century ideology.
- Reasons: romanticism and racism
- Scholars like Rousseau provided ideological justification for despotism. Eg, myths like general
will and man should be forced to be free.
- Racism:
• Rise of racism is in context of threat of disintegration of nation states after Napoleon.
• 19th century was the century of turbulence which turned people towards identity of
clans, race, tribe.
• She blamed Gobineau who gave the theory of racial superiority of Aryans.
• He has explained the fall of civilisation due to intermixing of blood with inferior races
!188 WPT: Hannah Arendt

like Africans and Jews.
- Imperialism:
• When Europe came in contact with other civilisation developed the feeling of racial
superiority.
- Modernity:
• It made nation more important than state.
• Resulted into killing of humanity.
• In metaphorical sense she says that modernity starts with bombing of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki.
• It gave rise to atomised individual. Atomised man is insecure and looks for leaders which
allowed them to gain identity.
• It made economic sphere most important. Political sphere was neglected.
• When stable context of our life gets disturbed – rise of totalitarianism.
Concept of power
- Force – belongs to the world of nature. Power – belongs to the world of humans.
- Strength – characteristic of an individual. Power – characteristic of collectivity.
- Authority – belongs to the state. Power – belongs to people.
- Power doesn't belong to state or bureaucracy it belongs to people “acting in concert”.
- When people work together or participate in the political sphere and understand each other, act in
harmony and speak with one voice.
- Participation in political life is a human condition as man is Zoon Politikon. It is a state of
freedom.
- Neither control over economic resources nor political offices give power.
- Power cannot be stored, power is sui generis.
- One is powerful when one participates in the political life. One loses power when he goes back
to personal sphere.
- Scholars till now understood power in terms of domination. She has given innovative view of
power.
- Power is not domination rather it is empowerment.
- The feeling of empowerment comes when we act in concert.
- It implies only legitimate use of power is, when people act in concert not as a mob.

Banality of Evil
- The concept of banality of evil is given in her book "Eichman in Jerusalem”.
- He was the chief architect of Hitler's Endloslung i.e. final solution for the Jewish problem.
- During the trial she realised that that most heinous crime are often assumed as committed by
psychopaths or sadists. However, in reality they are committed by perfectly normal people.
- He had no regrets about his acts. His answer was "duty is duty" – befehl ist befehl.
- He said that he was simply following his orders.
- According to her, he was an innocuous person and operating without thinking.
- It was not even hatred towards Jews rather absence of moral judgements that led him to do such
acts.
- If he had applied his moral judgement, the suffering of his victims would have become real.
- The real problem lies in the society which promotes culture of obedience towards authority.
- According to her evil becomes banal when it acquires unthinkable and systematic character.
- It becomes banal when people participate in it and justify it in countless ways.
- In such situation there are no moral conundrums. Evil doesn't look evil, it becomes faceless.
- In her book, she demands rethink of established ideas of moral responsibility. 

Assignment
1. What are the causes of totalitarianism ?

2. What is the nature of totalitarianism?
3. On what grounds Arendt criticises modernity?
4. What is human condition according to Arendt?
5. How power differs from violence?
6. What is banality?
7. What is the cause of evil?
8. Why it is important that people should act in concert with each other?
9. What are the influences on Arendt?
10. Mention the types of actions in Hannah Arendt’s theory. 

Indian Political Thought
Discuss the debate on existence of IPT?
- There is a question mark on the existence of IPT because of general impression that Indian text is
religious in nature.
- Indian texts have dealt with spiritual aspects of life and are more concerned with life after death
rather than life in this world.
- Field of politics is related to this world.
- However, Indologists like Max Mueller – no one else in the world human mind has been dealt
with the questions of all aspects of life in such a depth as in India.
- Morris-Jones – Neglect of Indian political thinking will result in to impoverishment of the west.
- Bhiku Parekh has given falling reasons for the neglect:
- West has ethnocentric attitude.
- Recognition of Indian political thinking would have questioned the civilising mission.
- None of the European languages can exactly translate the terms like jati, varna, dharma,
sanskara, etc.
- Prof VR Mehta – there are some fundamental differences in the way of thinking of the west and
east.
- People in the west look at things in dialectical manner – Nature and culture, politics and ethics,
individual and society.
- While in India things are being looked that in an integrated manner.
Kautilya
- Arthashastra also deals with concept of dharma but focus is on the statecraft and geopolitics.
- Bhiku Parekh – Dharmashastra represents idealist tradition while arthashastra represents realist
tradition of India.
- According to Indian way of life, Artha and dharma are both the key aspects.
- Therefore his focuses on giving strategies to acquire land. Land at that time was the main source
of material welfare.
- In the words of Kautilya, material well-being is supreme – spiritual good and sensual pleasure all
depends on material well-being.
!192 IPT
On statecraft
- Origin of state is in quasi-contractual theory.
- People suffering from matsyanyaya/arajakta requested God to bring them out of the situation.
- In return God has created Manu, the first King and invested in him the elements of his
personality.
- His theory of state is known as the satang theory.
- He has explained the interdependence between King and other elements as well as the
importance of the king.
- King alone is not the state rather state is the system of interdependence.
- King is dependent on other elements – in his words "single wheel cannot tell the chariot”
- King is the nabhi of the state – central position.
- If other elements of sovereignty are weak but King is strong, he can convert the weak elements
into the elements of strength.
- Amatyas:
- It means ministers. Generally Brahmins.
- Necessary that king consults them. At least three.
- King should keep on testing their commitments from time to time. He even suggest the use
of women as spies.
- He gives a special importance to ambassadors. Ambassadors should be knowledgeable,
tactful, dedicated, handsome, etc
- Durga:
- It means fort. Fort present offensive as well as defensive capacity of the state.
- Strength of the Mauryan empire was dependent on the forts.
- Janpada: where common man lives
- Bala: army. He recommends the army of Kshatriyas. Recommends hereditary system.
- Kosha:
- Treasury
- It should be enough to meet any natural calamities as well as foreign aggression.
- It should also be enough to construct wells, roads, places of shelter, patronise art and take
care of orphans and destitute, etc.
- Mitra: allies. It is the symbol of power.
On strategy, diplomacy, foreign policy
!193 IPT
- Kshatriya Dharma: it means to go for war.
- After the coronation, king has to go for expansion of empire.
- War is inevitable fact among relation of states.
- Indian thought talks about Chakravarthin Samrat – One who is going to win in all directions.
- Hindu texts prescribes various rituals like Ashwamedha, rajasuya yagnya, etc.
Mandal Siddhant:
- It is a strategy of war.
- According to him relations among states are like that of jungle where only the strength of lion
prevails.
- It is an earliest example of geopolitics – acquiring territories through militaristic means.
- It is a strategic framework to measure king’s power and power of other kings to make proper
policies.
- There are 12 mandals and each mandal has 84 elements.
- Sequence of kings:
- Vijigishu– Main King
- Ari – Immediate neighbour – Natural enemy
- Mitra – Ari’s immediate neighbour – vijigishu’s Mitra
- Kings in the backside
- Parshvnigraha – Natural enemy
- akranda – Friend in the back
- Madhyama – Buffer states
- Udasin – Neutral
Which policy should vijigishu pursue?

- depending on the status of power he has following options known as sixfold policy or shadunga
siddhant:
- Sandhi
- Vigraha
- Asana
- Yana
- Samashrya
- Dvaidh Brava
!194 IPT
- he has also proposed a fourfold policy of diplomacy – saam, daam, danda, bhedh.
Relevance of Mandal Siddhant

- It's relevance can be understood from the perspective of treating it as a principle of geopolitics.
- After the end of Cold War – assumed that geopolitics will lose relevance and geo-economic will
shape interstate relations.
- However geopolitics has not lost relevance.
- Geopolitics always determined the relations between states in Middle East, South Asia and far
east.
- Geo economics has rather gone to the back seat since 2008 Global financial crisis, failure of
multilateralism at WTO.
- Since 2008 there is a return of geopolitics as evident in Russia's actions in Crimea and Syria, and
Chinese actions in the South China Sea and East China Sea.
On corruption
- According to him corruption means use of public offices for private ends.
- It directly impacts the well-being of the people. It leads to disaffection among the masses. It is
easy for the enemies to use the subjects to overthrow the king.
- Corruption is inevitable and fact of political administrative life – Because it is "honey on the
tongue" which is impossible to not to be tasted.
- Public officials have access to public funds and they will use it for the private needs.
- He has mentioned at least 40 ways in which officials can misappropriate public funds.
Methods to control corruption

- Extremely difficult to control corruption because it is difficult to detect corruption.
- According to him – easy to detect the movement of birds flying in the sky but not easy to detect
the act of corruption.
- Just like the fish swimming in the water it is not easy to find when fish has taken water inside.
- Measures:
- Right sizing the bureaucracy.
- Transfer at regular intervals before the official understands all the loopholes.
- Whistleblowers need to be protected and rewarded.
- Fine and punishment for character officials.
!195 IPT
- Compensation to the persons affected by corruption.
- Reward honest official.
- Surveillance
Buddhism
Introduction
- It is a otherworldly religion whereas politics belongs to the material world. Hence there is a
question mark on existence of Buddhist political thought.
- However scholars like Gail Omvedt and Kancha Illaih recognise Buddha as a political
philosopher and we get politically significant ideas in Buddhist literature.
- Many kings used to approach him and Buddhist monks to learn good governance.
Origin of state
- Origin of state is linked with the growth of materialism.
- Private property which resulted into social conflicts required state.
- Even in Buddhism, State is the result of contract. However the contact is not between God and
people but among the people only. In the assembly of people, people elect the most noble of all
as the king.
- Buddhism also talks about Chakravarthin Samrat or world monarch. He wins people not by force
but by love. He conkers hearts not lands.
- Chakra in Buddhism is not the chakra of chariot but Dhamma chakra.
- It is also known for one of the earliest practices of deliberative democracy in Buddhist Sanghas.
Hindu tradition v. Buddhist tradition
Hinduism Buddhism
Believes in four goals of life. Not against Materialism is a source of evil.
materialism.
believes in existence of god. Agnosticism
Has varna and jati system Protested against caste

Reflects coalition of brahmins and kshatriya Kshatriya and vaishya
Supports monarchy Republican tradition
!196 IPT
Hinduism Buddhism
supports expansionism Against territorial expansion. Conquer with
love
Strategic culture Against war
- Bhiku Parekh – Indian traditionally represents continuity in comparison to change.

- Buddhism share some beliefs of Hinduism – soul, karma, rebirth
- Buddhism is considered as Protestants of East.
!197 IPT
Sir Syed Ahmed Khan
Introduction
- Not regarded as a political philosopher in the conventional sense. Though leader of Muslim
community.
- Social reformer and educationist.
- Status at par with Rajaram Mohan Roy. Wanted to introduce modernisation among Muslims.
- Attacked outdated customs and traditions through his magazine Tehzeeb-ul-Akhlaq.
- Criticised by Hindus because he asked Muslims to remain loyal to British rule. Not to join
Congress.
- "The loyal Mohammedans of India” – Criticised by orthodox section among Muslims as he
attacked updated principles of Islam.
- He attempted modernist interpretation of Quran.
- Founded scientific society at Gazipur in UP.
- Brought a journal titled “Indian Institute Gazette” to promote scientific research.
- Used to say that Muslims should hold Quran in one hand and book of science in other.
Evolution in his ideas

- Phase 1 – champion of Hindu Muslim unity
• Hindus and Muslims are two eyes of a beautiful bride.
• Advised Muslims not to eat beef.
• Language controversy: there was a movement in United provinces to replace Urdu in Persian
script by Hindi in Devanagari script as the official language of the state.
• He became convinced that Hindus will not agree to what Muslim wants and vice versa.
• He believed that differences are going to increase and we should recognise them as separate
communities.
• His ideas have been treated as the beginning of the two nation theory which led to the partition
of India.
- Phase 2 – leader of the community
• Witness to the decline of Muslim power in India.
• Muslim community was also discriminated against Hindus by the British.
• British considered them as the conspirators behind the revolt of 1857.
!198 IPT: Sir Syed Ahmed Khan

His realisation
- Britishers are the emerging force in India and it is fruitless to be in the conflict.
- What is urgent for the Muslim community was modernisation and educational empowerment.
- He wrote a book titled “Asbab-i-Bagawate Hind”. Tried to prove that the real cause of the revolt
of 1857 was the exploitative rule of British and not the conspiracy by Muslims.
- He has also shown instances where Muslims have helped the British during the revolt.
- Advice to Muslim youth not to join Congress – to assure British.
- He was convinced that Congress was going to emerge as a major force in coming years, hence
Muslim should not do any such things that will antagonise British.
- He wrote an article titled “the loyal Mohammedans of India” giving further assurance about the
loyalty of Muslims.
- He was successful in changing the British policy towards Muslims. He could get official help for
the establishment of Mohammedan – Anglo Oriental College which later on became AMU.
- He is treated as the leader of his community while leaders like Maulana Azad are regarded as the
leader of the nation.
- We still cannot undermine the importance of him. He re presents the ideal of a leader which
Muslim community in India requires at present.
- Muslim minority remains the most backward section of the Indian society. Sachar committee
reports not even 2% in higher education.
- Necessity of educational empowerment of Muslim. 
!199 IPT: Sir Syed Ahmed Khan

Sri Aurobindo Ghosh
Introduction
- Known as the Prophet of Indian Nationalism
- Rabindranath Tagore held that the world will get the message of India from him.
- Known as the great synthesiser. He has synthesised the different philosophical systems: eastern
and western into one integrated system.
- According to him, people in the west neglected spiritualism and people in the east neglected in
the material well-being.
- He was influenced by French philosophy, ideas of French revolution, German philosophy, ideas
of German nationalism, neo-Vedantism of Vivekananda and nationalism of Bankim Chandra
Chatterjee.
- He was the source of influence for Gandhi.
- He advocated passive resistance.
- He was considered as the most dangerous man by Britishers.
- He was trapped by the Britishers in Alipur conspiracy. He was put in jail.
- There he had a mystical experiences. After this he left the political career and went for
philosophy and spiritualism.
Theory of nationalism
- There is always a question mark on the legitimacy of India as a nation and the legitimacy of
Indian national movement.
- For Britishers India was not more than mere geographical expression.
- Response of ugly Nationalist:
• Early nationalists like Dadabhai Nowrojee, Sudhindranath Banerjee adhered to the view that
India is not a nation but a nation in making.
• They believed that Congress should focus on strengthening the emerging nationalist
consciousness.
• They considered British rule as a blessing in disguise is.
• They did not want to antagonise the British and hence preferred constitutional methods of
struggle – prayers, petitions and protest.
- When he entered the political scene there was dissatisfaction with the achievement of moderates.
- He thought there is a need for more bold theory of nationalism.
!200 IPT: Sri Aurobindo Ghosh

- He has attempted the critique of early nationalists through his articles published in “Induprakash”
paper under the series known as "new lamps for old”.
- Here he has criticised the moderates method and called it as political mendicancy. He proposed
passive resistance.
- He suggested Swadeshi and boycott to strike at the root of colonial interest of foreign rule.
- He criticised the moderates for educating the British rule is a blessing in disguise. If moderates
will appreciate the British it will weaken the morale of those who are fighting against Britishers.
- British rule is never a blessing. It stops the natural growth of a nation.
- He did not accept the view that India is a nation in making. Moderates are unable to see the spirit
of India as a nation.
- The existence of India as a nation is not dependent on Congress pandals.
- He is influenced by Herder and Hegel.
- Herder – Nation is a natural concept. Hegel – Nation has a spirit.
- He held that India is a natural nation. It is not a nation in making but it has always been a nation.
What is the basis of his arguments?

- Like all nations India also has a spirit.
- The spirit was sleeping but now it is awakened.
- He was also inspired by Bankim Chandra Chatterjee who gave the concept of Bharat Mata – the
symbol of Shakti/power. Indians as the children of Bharat Mata.
- Now the millions of Indians representing the power has awakened and standing against the
foreign rule.
- He was also influenced by Vivekananda:
• Vivekananda started neo-vedantism. It is anti-Brahminism.
• Brahminism is the biggest obstacle in the realisation of unity in India.
• Vivekananda advocated for realising the importance of human dignity.
• Vivekananda held that amidst the diversity there exist the unity. Unity exist at the spiritual
level.
• There is a representation of God in the soul of all human beings.
- He also based in the unity of India on the basis of common spirit.
- Vivekananda appealed to the youth – to arise, awake and stop not till the goal is achieved.
- He also appealed to the youth to make nationalism as their religion.

Goal of India as a nation
- He held that emergence of India as a nation is not just in the benefit of Indians but it is in the
benefit of humanity.
- India has a message to spread for the welfare of humanity which it cannot give from the status of
slavery.
- Like Hegel, he held that the rise of India as a nation is inevitable. No human force can stop the
rise of India.
- The universal spirit is with India today. Universal spirit has been on the journey. It has started
from India travelled to Rome, Britain, Germany and now it has come back to its original home.
- He has brought mystical and spiritual elements in the theory of nationalism and his theory is
called as cultural nationalism because he established India as a natural nation.
Theory of freedom/Swarajya
- Goal of human life is freedom and to understand the reality. Reality is Sacchidanand.
- Human beings are capable of mental evolution – evolution of consciousness.
- This comes by yoga, tapa and sacrifice. Results into the revolution of mind to the stage of super
mind.
- Only with super mind we can realise Brahma and can experience Anand.
- According to him – the longing for freedom is lodged in such a deep layer of human heart that
thousands of arguments are powerless to uproot it.
- He has analysed the conception of freedom as found in capitalism – very mechanical notion.
- Capitalist idea of freedom creates difficulty for others.
- He has also criticised the socialistic view of freedom because socialism results in creation of
entirely oppressive state.
- The Indian idea of swarajya takes a holistic view and is based on the interdependence between
individual, nation and humanity as a whole.
On human unity
- Indian tradition is based on the Cosmopolitan vision.
- Indian text talks about the ideals of “vasudhaiva kutumbakam” and “Sarve bhavantu sukhinam”.
- He was influenced by the neo-vedantic ideals of Vivekananda who emphasised unity in diversity.
- The unity exist among human beings irrespective of caste, colour, creed, nation.
- All are the children of God or Brahma.

- He was convinced that the interest of India is in nation is not divorced from the collective
interest. Rise of India as the nation is for the well-being of humanity.
- Why human unity?
• Aggregation is the law of nature.
• If we do not go according to the nature, nature will destroy us.
• There is no other option but to come together and only India can teach the values.
Relevance of his ideas

- We are passing through the phase where problems have become global dimensions.
- It is beyond the capacity of a single nation.

Gandhi
Introduction
- Deserves to be called as the father of the nation.
- Under him freedom movement became national movement in the true sense because it acquired
mass base.
- Professor Humayun Kuber – He was a great psychologist who had exceptional understanding of
mass psychology.
- Bipan Chandra – Master strategist who left British clueless.
- Gandhi himself denied the existence of Gandhism.
- He never claimed to know the truth. He is own life was experiments with truth. He was a man of
action.
- However we cannot deny the existence of Gandhism.
- Large number of people all over the world recognise themselves as Gandhian.
Influences on Gandhi
- His mother. Inclination towards religion was because of his mother.
- Influenced by vaishnavism, Hinduism, Jainism, Christainity, and other religions.
- Anarchists like Leo Tolstoy, Thoreau, Emerson.
- Influenced by great thinkers like Socrates and Plato.
- Edward Carpenter’s critic of modern system of medicine and its adverse impact on human
health.
Ahimsa
- Foundational principle of his philosophy of life.
- Goal of his life – attain the truth of God.
- He believed in the continuity of ends and means. If the goal is to attain the God, then the path
and the method has to be the one which has been adopted by God or persons treated as God.
- Nonviolence should not be understood in a limited sense of not committing violence. It is feeling
of love and fraternity.
- According to him, himsa belongs to the world of animals because their soul is sleeping.
- There is no role of himsa in the world of humans.
- According to him nonviolence should be practised in thoughts, speech and action.
!204 IPT: Gandhi

- It should be practised not only towards human beings but birds, animals and environment.
- According to him, my enemy is a part of myself. I have done something that has converted other
person into my enemy. I have to rectify myself.
Satyagraha
- Two components – truth and nonviolence.
- He has given a bigger picture to the freedom struggle.
- It was not an ordinary struggle but it was satyagraha, dharmayudha i.e. fight between good and
evil or insistence for the truth.
- His movements were termed as satyagraha.
- He first experimented in South Africa and then at a small-scale in Kheda, Champaran and
Ahmedabad Mill and then applied at the all India level.
- He kept on perfecting the techniques.
- He talked about individuals satyagraha and mass satyagraha.
- He has clarified the difference between passive resistance and satyagraha.
- Passive resistance is an alternative to armed resistance. It is not using force or violent means.
- Satyagraha is also not using force. However every peaceful resistance cannot qualify to be a
satyagraha.
• It is always for the right cause.
• Not using violence should not be situational. It should be a matter of faith.
• Not to have ill feelings against whom he is doing satyagraha.
• Fight is against evil and not the evil doer.
• It is not the weapon of week. It is the weapon of strong. Only those who are morally strong
can go for it.
• It should not be considered as cowardice. Between violence and cowardice, Gandhi preferred
violence.
Swarajya/ Self rule

- It is understood as the Indian version of liberty.
- It has been goal of freedom movement.
- Meaning – kept on changing.
- For early nationalist – self governments like in other British colonies – Canada and Australia.
- For cultural nationalist – also self-governance.
!205 IPT: Gandhi

- Aurobindo Ghosh – Give new meaning to it as he started talking about the liberation at the level
of individual.
- There is a continuity in Gandhi's concept of Swaraj and his concept of Swaraj.
- Gandhi's battle was not limited to the liberation from foreign rule.
- Wanted Swaraj for the individual.
- His ideal was Hind-Swaraj
- Multiple dimensions at the level of individual. Based on Mundaka Upanishad’s ideal of
liberation from desires or control on self.
- Social dimension – end communal violence and practices like untouchability.
- Economic dimensions – principle of Swadeshi, revival of cottage industries.
- Cultural Swaraj – respect other cultures but don't forget own culture.
- Political Swaraj not enough to gain independence from the foreign rule. Only way to achieve
Swaraj at the political level is democratic decentralisation or Panchayati Raj. When we are able
to give life of dignity to the poor living in rural areas – our goal of Swaraj fulfilled.
- His concept of Swaraj is linked to oceanic circle of power. It is the version of the society which
is free from exploitation and hierarchy.
- It can be achieved only through democratic decentralisation. Individual is at the core of Circle.
Sarvodaya
- Upliftment of all. Gandhian socialism.
- His constructive program.
- Components include:
- Bread labour
- Trusteeship
- Economic approach of revival of Village industries, khadi, etc.
Bread labour
- Idea is to understand the dignity of labour.
- He did not believe in violence solution.
- Nothing will change without changing the consciousness.
- The idea of dignity of labour comes from John Ruskin's “Unto this lasts”
- Everyone should perform some amount of physical labour to understand the importance and
hardships of the persons who are performing the manual works.
!206 IPT: Gandhi

- He held that most important thing is human dignity. We need to make people equal in terms of
dignity.
- The work of barber and work of lawyer both are of equal importance and should be treated with
equal respect.
Trusteeship
- It is Gandhian alternative to Marxist solution with respect to the concerns of the working class
and poor.
- He did not believe in the concept of class conflict. Not necessary that the relations between the
capital and labour have to be inherently dialectical.
- He was optimistic about the harmony between classes.
- According to him capitalist should not consider them as owners of the capital but as the trustees.
Because capital has social origin.
- They should keep what is required for fulfilment of their needs as well as for running the
industry. Surplus should be used for the well-being of the workers and society at large.
- His program was criticised by Marxist like MN Roy. He criticised Gandhi as the supporter of
bourgeoise class.
- It is not possible to bring change even through violent means. The ultimate resolution of conflict
is enlightenment of our consciousness.
- There are examples of industrialist and capitalist who have contributed for the social well-being
by the establishment of trusts.
Constructive program
- Gandhi’s Sarvodaya has economic as well as social program.
- Included abolition of untouchability, promotion of communal harmony, revival of village cottage
industries, etc.
Essence of Sarvodaya
- revolves around the idea of achieving human dignity.
Critique of modern civilisation

- Influenced by Edwards Carpenter’s View on the negative consequences of modern medicines on
human health.
!207 IPT: Gandhi

- Gandhi used to call modern civilisation as Satanic.
- According to him modern civilisation degrades human being to the level of animals or “saitan”.
- Imperialism and fascism are the manifestations of that evil consequences of modern civilisation.
- Modern civilisation not only expected human beings but also nature.
- According to him if we adopt the path of development as that of the West in the last 200 years,
we will require more than nine earths.
- He was critical of modern civilisation because of its values: Individualism, materialism,
consumerism, utilitarianism.
- Excessive materialism reduces a human being to mere consumer of utilities.
- We are reduced to animals or saitan as we do not feel bad to exploit a fellow human being for the
sake of our material pleasures.
Critical of Machiavellianism
- separation of ethics and politics. It reduces politics to power politics.
- Politics without religion is like a death trap.
On machines
- he was not against machines but he was against to the displacement of labour by machines.
- Charkha itself was a machine.
- He gave preference to production by masses over mastered action.
- He was also critical of nuclear weapons and called it as the most diabolical use of science.
True civilisation according to Gandhi

- True civilisation is not which degrades human being to the level of animals but it consist of
elevation of us as a human being.
- True civilisation doesn't teach us multiplication of wars rather minimisation of means.
- Criticism of of modern civilisation was Gandhi's war of position. It was his attempt to establish
the counter hegemony challenging western legitimisation of imperialism in the name of civilising
mission.
Ends and Means

- He belonged to the tradition of Socrates and Plato.
- Did not believe in the separation of ethics from politics.
!208 IPT: Gandhi

- Like plato and Socrates, he did not accept the dichotomy between good life and good politics.
- He was also influenced by Gokhale who was talking about spiritualisation of politics.
- According to him it is logical to expect rose the flower by sowing the seeds of babul.
- He could not accept is the separation between ends and means or the priority of ends over means.
- If Indian struggle is satyagraha the means cannot be violent.
Rights and duties

- he represents Indian tradition when he suggest that duties have priorities over rights.
- He was influenced by the philosophy of Gita – do your duty, reward is not thy concern.
- Rights are present in the duties performed in embryonic sense.
On education
- Only education can be a means for social change.
- Like Socrates and Plato, he also believes in the knowledge of good life from the book of life.
- Education throughout life.
- He wanted everyone to learn home science, nursing, forestry. Suggest vocational training.
- Earn and learn.
On women
- Woman were at the forefront of Gandhi’s constructive program.
- They can play prominent role in abolition of untouchability as every mother performs cleaning
jobs for their children.
- Ideal for women in India: Sita symbol of moral strength and Draupadi of courage.
On State
- He was anarchist.
- For him state is the symbol of my weakness.
- Ideal of state is incompatible with the idea of Swaraj.
- He called state as the soulless machine. Since state does not have a soul it cannot practice
Ahimsa.
- Even the minimal state has to have minimal force.
- His ideal state – Ramrajya – Stateless society.
!209 IPT: Gandhi

- In ramrajya individual is at the centre. It requires a democratic decentralisation as it is the only
way to ensure the life of dignity to the millions of Indians living in villages.
!210 IPT: Gandhi

MN Roy
Stage one – till 1920s
- Involved in the revolutionary movement in Bengal
- Inspired by Jatin Das and was a member of Anushilan Samiti.
- Send abroad to procure arms – USA.
- Got a chance to attend a meeting addressed by Lala Lajpat Rai.
- He asked Rai as to what solution national list are having for the upliftment of poor in India.
- During his search came to know about Karl Marx. Came his admirers.
- Critical of revolutionaries – do not have scientific programme of action. They are relying on the
individual acts of heroism.
- He became the founding member of the Communist party of Mexico.
- Critical of Gandhi and Congress.
- Lenin invited him to the second Communist International. – which was to decide the strategy of
Communist International freedom movement going on in colonies.
- Lenin’s view:
- He favoured supporting freedom movement in colonies. Also supporting the nationalist parties
like Indian National Congress and KMT (China).
- Once they are successful in ending colonialism, Communist party should work for bringing
communism.
- This was the two stages strategy of Lenin.
- MN Roy’s view:
- He did not support Lenin’s two stage revolution.
- He assured that masses in India are ready for the communist revolution.
- He was expelled from Communist International.
Stage two 1920s – 1930s

- Remained Marxist and critical of Gandhi and Congress.
Stage three 1930s – 40s

- member of INC and sympathetic to Gandhi.
- Tried to radicalise Congress from within and started revising Marxism.
!211 IPT: MN Roy

Stage 4 1940s it onward
- left Congress and became critique of Gandhi and Marx.
- Gave his own philosophy – humanism, later changed it to radical humanism.
Criticism of Gandhi
- Called him as a bourgeoise leader.
- His nonviolence is a cloak. He is trying to protect the interest of writ.
- Nonviolence of Gandhi is a violence on poor.
- Inequality and capitalism will not collapse because of Gandhi sentimentalism. He is not a leader
of masses. It is nothing more than his rhetoric.
- He used to call off the moment whenever masses were in a position to lead.
- He's a weak and watery man looking for appointments with Viceroy.
- There was an understanding between Gandhi and colonial masters. Putting Gandhi Indian was
just a drama.
- He was not only the instrument of rich but also of the colonial interest.
- He is full of contradictions. He will become a victim of his own contradictions.
- He failed to understand the changing nature of social and political forces in India.
- MN Roy had no faith in Gandhi’s swaraj. Swaraj can't be realised in the absence of revolutionary
programme.
- He had no faith in charkha because khadi was unaffordable for poor.
- Gandhi destroyed the secular character of Indian national movement by bringing religion in
politics. He was not progressive but it reactionary man with medieval outlook.
- Quit India movement was unfortunate because it will lead to the victory of fascist forces over
democratic forces.
Criticism of Marx
- He continued to believe himself to be Marxist even while criticising Marx.
- He was thinking that he was correcting Marxism and making it more relevant.
- Basically he was criticising Soviet Marxist.
- Marxism has no ethical moorings.
- It has neglected the values and ideas of history. He has criticised historical materialism because it
did not acknowledge the role of ideas.
!212 IPT: MN Roy

- Rejected Marxist theory of class struggle. According to him, human history is not the result of
class struggle but class cooperation. He held dialectical materialism as idealism.
- He did not believe that surplus value is bad. It is bad but not distributed equitably.
- No faith in voluntary pollution. He believed that change can be brought through education.
Radical humanism
- joined Congress in 1930s. Wanted to promote Marxist ideas by remaining within Congress.
- However he came out of Congress after Congress decision to start quit India movement.
- He called the Gandhis quit India movement as unfortunate.
- He founded the radical Democratic party. Very soon realised that parties are evil and pursue
power politics. Dissolved the party.
- Humanism:
- It is the western tradition which has origins in ancient Greece.
- Oppose it to spiritualism. For spiritualist – centre of universe is God.
- For humanist – centre of universe is human being.
- For Greek philosophers, human being and human life was the core of philosophy.
- They were concerned with improvement of life in this world rather than life after death.
- Humanism believes in rationalism and a rational basis of social order rather than religious
basis.
- It revived during the time of renaissance.
- MN Roy was an admirer of Renaissance because according to him the basic origin all human
beings is freedom. There was a role of Renaissance which promoted the spirit of enquiry and
scientific reasoning which led to the liberation of man from the clutches of religion, customs and
traditions.
- He believed that India should also have Renaissance. He established Indian renaissance Institute
in Dehradun for the promotion of renaissance in India.
- Was influenced by European tradition. Influenced by scholars like Protagoras (humanism),
Hobbes (materialism), Spinoza (ethics), Locke (secularism), Bentham (utilitarianism)
- He called his philosophy as new humanism – most advanced because it is based on the centuries
of experience. Later changed the name to radical humanism.
Why Radical humanism?

- not satisfied with either capitalism or communism.
!213 IPT: MN Roy

- This philosophy celebrate man in only partial sense.
- Capitalism or liberalism liberates man from religion but has subjugated man to nation.
- Communism has liberated man from National prejudices but subjugated him to the identity of
class.
- Communism talks in terms of class but humanism talks in terms of human beings.
- Scientific knowledge is the method to achieve the state of freedom.
- Ultimate idea is achieving Cosmopolitan union of liberated man.
Components of radical humanism

- freedom:
- Freedom is the ultimate origin all human beings.
- Common aim by which we can integrate humanity.
- He doesn't have faith in the spiritualistic aspect of freedom as given in the ideas of Ghosh and
Gandhi.
- Radical humanism is materialistic in nature. According to him, man is physiological unit rather
than spiritualistic unit.
- His views are similar to Sartre – Freedom is made of protein.
- He did not want freedom only from foreign rule or necessities but freedom from fear of all
sorts – prejudices, superstition, etc.
- Reason:
- Reason has materialistic origin.
- Reasoning in man is a result of the struggle for existence.
- It is the rationality that is present in all human being which can provide the basis for human
unity.
- Ethics:
- It means norms and values governing individual’s conduct.
- Basis in society. It is society’s norms and values.
- It does not have origin in the Scriptures. Everything is a human creation in this world.
Whatever was considered relevant became ethics or norms.
- Since it is a human creation, humans can change the norms also.
- Thus the rules governing our lives and social system should be based on our reason – scientific
reason.
!214 IPT: MN Roy

- Thus his ultimate aim is to challenge outdated customs and traditions on the basis of science and
reason and create a community of liberated persons.
- He is a source of inspiration for rationalist in India.
- He gave the blueprint of future Indian society which he called as radical democracy.
- He considers himself as humanist and distanced from crude materialism and determination of
orthodox Marxism.
- He supported Gandhi’s idea of party-less democracy.
- His party-less democracy is radical democracy.
- He was not against industrialisation rather he wanted it but industries to be owned by people not
by the state.
- Instead of economic revolution he emphasised on mental revolution.
!215 IPT: MN Roy

Ambedkar
Introduction
- Dhananjay Keer – He is the tallest among all Dalit leaders.
- Chairperson of drafting committee of the Constitution.
- Some scholars addressed him as modern Manu. However not appropriate.
- He opposed Manu Smriti. Was not satisfied with the Constitution – held that he would be the first
person to burn the constitution. It reflected ideas of Nehru, Patel and Maulana Azad.
Views on caste
- Annihilation of caste
- Believed that untouchability cannot end without ending the caste system.
- Caste system is the foundation of Brahmanism.
- Hinduism is a myth. Brahmanism is a reality.
- Rejected the explanation of origin of caste system as given in "Purush Sukta” hymn of Rigveda.
- It is creation of Brahmins.
- Initially Varna system based on work. It degraded into caste system based on birth. Later
Brahmins made it hereditary to maintain their dominance.
- He has attacked the institution of endogamy. It is the core institution of Brahmins.
- End endogamy – end caste system-based discrimination.
- Earlier beef eating not prohibited. Brahmins started the tradition to show that they are pure.
- Hinduism has such beliefs which would never let Hindus to emerge as a nation. They are warring
caste. Each caste is the world in itself.
Who were untouchables?

- Ambedkar called untouchables as broken men.
- Untouchability was not a practice in the beginning. Invented by Brahmins to establish their
domination.
- Since it is in the benefit of all, all varnas has started following untouchability.
- According to him – without ending Hinduism or leaving Hinduism it is not possible to end it.
- Bhakti saints and other social reformers tried but could not.
- Even Gandhi will not be successful. People will respond to Gandhi's political programme but not
his call to end untouchability.
!216 IPT: Ambedkar

- 14th Nov 1956 – Converted into Buddhism.
- According to him Hinduism is not a religion but madness.
- He suggested to put dynamite on Vedas and Manusmriti.
Ambedkar’s debate with Gandhi

- Views of Gandhi:
- Abolition of untouchability was one of the prominent agendas of Gandhi is constructive
program and Swaraj.
- He was against caste-based discrimination and untouchability. However not supporter of
conversions.
- Divine Will that a person is born in a particular religion. People should accept a good points
from other religion.
- Varna system is the feature of Vedic religion or Hinduism.
- It is just a division of labour and Vedic religion doesn’t suggest untouchability.
- Coined the term Harijan.
- Est Harijan Sevak Sangh for the penance of upper caste Hindus.
- Views of Ambedkar:
- Varna is only textual view, caste is the reality.
- Caste is not just the division of labour – division of labourers.
- System of social stratifications based on purity and pollution. Heaven for Brahmins and hell
for Shudras.
- Harijan term is misguiding.
- Ambedkar proposed that the term Dalit – the most depressed and exploited section.
- He compared to Harijan Sevak Sangh to ‘Putna’.
- Gandhi did not support Ambedkar’s Mahad Satyagraha – Satyagraha only against foreign rule.
- Gandhi kept no fast for abolition of untouchability but fast unto death for abolition of
communal electorate.
Critic of Marxism by Ambedkar

- Both concerned with ending exploitation of weaker sections.
- Accepted theory of class struggle and exploitative nature of private property.
- He stood for rights of working class.
- But, marxism not suitable for India.
!217 IPT: Ambedkar

- Didn’t support historical materialism.
- Basic structure of Indian society is not economic but ideological.
- Ideology of Brahmanism that forms the basic structure.
- Even when economic structure will change it will not bring change in the society towards Dalits.
- Ambedkar – democratic in his ideas. Could not support dictatorship of the proletariat.
- Not support that state is an evil. Society is the bigger evil. State may act as positive agency for
addressing social injustice.
- Great critic of Marx's approach towards religion. It is not opium but necessity for human beings.
- Marx do not have understanding of all religions. Buddhism is not opium.
- It has lot for nourishment of human soul. Did not favour violent methods. Only peaceful
constitutional methods.
Criticism of Ambedkar
- Arun Shourie - “worshipping false gods” – Called him antinational
- Because:
- His attitude towards freedom movement.
- Antagonism with Gandhi.
- Support for Jinnah
- Call to Dalits for not participating in national movement
- Insistence that British should stay in India
- in 1929 – Purna Swaraj resolution by Congress. Later Ambedkar openly opposed the resolution.
- In 1930 – at all India depressed classes Congress in Nagpur – opposed the project of
independence.
- He welcomed British as a they freed depressed classes from the tyranny and oppression by
orthodox Hindus. (Phule also)
- After Congress formed ministries in 8/11 provinces in 1937, Ambedkar made his stand clear in
1939 – conflict of interest between the country and untouchables he will give preference to the
interest of untouchables.
- Collaborated with colonial powers, opposed quit India movement, joint defence advisory
committee and viceroys executive council.
- Christopher Jeffrelot – Absurd to call him as antinational. Leader of the community which found
the majority of Indian society if we include shudras, minorities, tribals and all depressed sections.
!218 IPT: Ambedkar

How can a person with constant dedication for the well-being of the majority be called as
antinational?
- Ambedkar like Phule – practical approach. He could not understand how people divided into so
many castes can constitute a nation without annihilation of caste.
- Nationalism is also an ideology and can become a weapon in the hands of elite to delegitimise
any protest by the weaker section.
- In the heart of Ambedkar – wish that India should emerge as a nation.
- During his address to constituent assembly in 1946 – he said we are divided politically, socially
and economically but a day will come when we will become one nation.
***************************************************************************
!219 IPT: Ambedkar

Psir P1 S A

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Psir P1 S A

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Psir P1 S A

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Contents

Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches .................................................................. 3

1. Always define the keywords in the question.

1)Use scholars and schools of thought to substantiate your answer.

2)Write the answers in the form of debate between schools of thought.

Your answer can have 8 paras for a 200 words answer.

6)Under line only the key words.

8)Introduction should have the entire crux of the question.

9)You should conclude all your answers properly in optional paper.

Evolution of political science as a discipline

!3 Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches

Methods in political science

Method of philosophical approach – Logical reasoning.

!4 Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches

Legal institutional approach

!5 Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches

Normative approach Empirical approach

Difference between empirical and scientific

!6 Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches

!7 Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches

Marxist criticism of behaviouralism:

!8 Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches

Nature of post behaviouralism

What is logical positivism?

!9 Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches

What is the significance of political theory?

!10 Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches

!11 Political Theory: Meaning and Approaches

What is the nationstate?

States in non-western world

!12 Theories of State

Monistic theory of sovereignty

Pluralists on monistic theory

!13 Theories of State

“Since society is federal, therefore the authority must also be federal”

Pluralistic theory of sovereignty

!14 Theories of State

2. Moderate pluralists – Laski

Impact of globalisation on state

Nation state v. Globalisation

Impact of globalisation on state

!15 Theories of State

Marxist theory of state

Structuralist theory/ relative autonomy theory

Ralph Miliband v. Nicos Poulantzas

!16 Theories of State

Feminist theory of state

!17 Theories of State

!18 Theories of State

Why India is a soft state?

Consequences of soft state

Marxist view on postcolonial state

View of instrumental/dependency school

!19 Theories of State

!20 Theories of State

Reasons for being overdeveloped state:

Organic theory of the state