Research Methodology:

This project work uses Qualitative methodology. The method of inquiry is deductive in
nature. Also, the approach of study is Analytical in nature in which the collection of data
is done from the secondary sources.

Research Objectives:

This project work aspires to develop a deeper understanding of Indian political system by
studying its political culture. What is the political culture, how it has undergone changes
throughout the history of India, from one of the oldest civilizations of the world known by
the name of Indus valley civilization to the modern Indian nation-state. It is a well-known
fact that history is moulder and designer of the present and from the past experience we
learn to develop in more positive direction by avoiding the mistakes done in the past. Also,
political cultural approach to study Indian state will lead to better understanding about
how the Indian political system works, how it is unique in its form and how to deal with the
challenges confronting it by having a coherent understanding about the roots of problems.
Study of political culture and its evolution in India does this work effectively.

Research Questions:

What is political culture? How has political culture evolved in India? These are the
questions which have been aspired by this project to be answered.

Introduction:

Political culture as a concept has become vital in the study of political systems. In fact,
many pioneering scholars of comparative politics have done the morphological study of
political systems using the concept of political culture. The term political culture was first
popularized by the American writers like Samuel H. Beer, Adam B. Ulam and G. A.
Almond. The behaviour and orientation of people are shaped by culture of a political
community which in turn orient the nature of political processes. Since then, it has become
an important variable to study political systems. Base for differentiation of political
systems is political culture. The political culture helps to understand the failure of political
systems in post-colonial nation-states. The political processes are shaped by the behavior
and orientations of the people living in political system. That’s why studying political
culture along with the structure of the political system becomes important.

1. Political Culture:

1.1 Meaning and Definition:

In order to study the political system of India through political cultural aspect, it is important
to understand and look into the term political culture itself. What is political culture? Is it
same as the general culture and why is important to study the political system? The
political culture is actually derived from the general culture of the system. In other words,
political culture is the subset of the general culture. General culture of a society is the
aggregate of the common human nature of people living in that society. The beliefs,
values and emotional attitudes on the basis of which a person performs actions or
behaves comprise the nature of that person. But, we can’t consider those individual
values, beliefs and emotional attitudes as general culture of that society. General culture
expresses itself in the form of common orientations of the people regarding some action
due to their mutually shared attitudes, beliefs and values which are transferred from one
generation to another with some modifications, greater or lesser. So, in brief it can be
said that the commonly shared values, beliefs, sentiments and emotional attitudes
regarding the political aspect of that society is its political culture. Also as defined by A. R
Ball, political culture “is composed of the attitudes, beliefs, emotions and values of society
that relates to the political system and a political issues”. (Ball, 1971, p. 56)

G.A. Almond and G.B. Powell have defined political culture as, it is “the pattern of
individual attitudes and orientations towards politics among the members of a political
system.” (Almond & Powell, Comparative Politics: A Developmental Approach, 1966, p.
50) “Certain aspects of the general culture of a society are especially concerned with how
government ought to be conducted and what it shall try to do. This sector of culture we
call political culture.” (Beer & Ulam, 1962, p. 32) According to R. C. Madrid’s “the
commonly shared goals and commonly accepted rules” (Macridis, 1961, p. 40) constitute
a political culture. “The set of attitudes, beliefs and sentiments that give order and
meaning to a political process and that provides the underlying assumptions and rules
that govern behaviour in the political system” (Pye, Aspects of Political Development,
1966, p. 104) make the political culture of a society.

Talcott Parsons is of the view that “Orientations are pre-dispositions to political action and
are determined by such factors as traditions, historical memories, motives, norms,
emotions and symbols.” (Parsons & Shills, 1962, p. 55) So, the political culture can be
described as “a short-hand expression to denote the emotional and attitudinal
environment within which the political system operates.” (Kavanagh, 1972, p. 11) Lucian
W. Pye has used and studied the concept of political culture to make contributions in the
field of political development in the new third world states. (Pye, Politics, Personality and
Nation Building, 1962)

Hence, nature of political culture is subjective. This subjectivity can be better understood
by the work of Almond and Powell who have divided individual orientations into three
major components- (1) cognitive orientations (2) affective orientations and (3) evaluative
orientations. Cognitive orientations denotes the knowledge of the person about the
political system, which can be accurate or may not be accurate as well. Affective
orientations is the orientation of individual about the political objects which show his
emotional attachment, there acceptance or rejection, involvement or other such feelings.
(Almond & Powell, Comparative Politics: A Developmental Approach, 1966)

1.2 Components of Political Culture

From the above definitions, we can say that there are certain components of political
culture. These components have the sociological basis. The study of values, emotions,
sentiments and attitudes originally comes under the umbrella of sociology. Why are these
sociological concepts important in political science? They are important because we all
can observe that individuals in a political system have some set of common values and
emotions towards the political system and its processes. In one political system people
widely agree on the terms of democratic values, free and fair elections, Periodical change
of the government in power, removal of authority of a person if he doesn’t passes the
expected goals and behaves in contrast to the political values of the people. While, in
other societies there may be some other agreed upon values and so on. Also, the
sentiments and emotions of the people towards their political system are also derived
from the norms, values and feelings which they have ascribed from their shared history
and other factors which are explained in the next section.

1.3 Determinants of Political Culture

From the previous text it is clear that political culture is very important for studying political
system and it has some components like beliefs, values, emotions and attitude related to
these sentiments. But, how are these components shaped? Why not the political culture
is same everywhere? Political culture of a political system can be either homogeneous or
heterogeneous. Also, political culture changes with the time and not necessarily needs to
be static. Shaping of political culture is a dynamic process. The nature of political culture
is determined by various factors which can be called as its determinants. These factors
include- Geographical, historical and socio-economic as the broad categories. Looking
into these determinants will result finding the answers for the above problems.

Every society and political system is shaped by the history associated with it. In general
historical incidents shape the attitudes of people by producing contentment or
discontentment for a particular political system or political process. For example, colonial
rule in India lead to the discontentment among the people which resulted in revolts as
well as sparked some sense of unity among the people. Example for dynamic nature of
political culture can also be given by looking the historical facts of European states where
political culture shifted from authoritarian culture to liberal democratic. Discontentment
among the people in Soviet Union resulted in the feeling of hatred for the capitalist political
system and the rise of communism. Leading parliamentarian Edmund Burke understood
the importance of historical development in giving shape to political culture and gave his
doctrine of prescriptive constitution. He criticized the logic behind French revolution and
said “Our constitution is a prescriptive constitution. It is a constitution whose sole authority
is that it has existed time out of mind.” (Bonn, p. 146) So, historical development of a
political system determines the shape of political culture.
Geographical factors have their own position in designing political culture. The geography
of the British prevented the country from foreign invasion and influx which could have
created different ethnic groups. Whereas the geographical conditions of India were so
vast and open that invited invasion from various races and reigns. Foreign invasion and
influx results in the ethnic and racial differences which mostly has resulted into the
heterogeneous political culture with associated conflicts and instability. The cases of
demanding union with Somaliland of Somali tribesmen resulted in the strong fight with
Kenya. Cases of demand of separate state by some parts like Assam and Nagas of India
can also be seen in terms of the geographical factor laying down the foundations of a
political culture.

Also, the socio-economic character of a society contributes greatly in making and shaping
of a political culture. Evidences show that an urban industrialized society is by necessity
more complex, specialized and structured and people show more political participation.
Whereas, rural societies are passive and conservative as well as dominated by peasants
who show less concern towards political action. Development in terms of science and
technology results in more and more innovation, communication through increased mode
of transportation, migration and amalgamation leading to more complex and specialized
society and associated political culture.

Moreover, it is also possible that one political culture exerts influence on the other political
culture and results in its change by partial means or wholly. This can be understood by
looking at the societies where more powerful states made the less powerful states there
colonies and influenced their political culture to a great extent. Imperialism is yet another
similar phenomena. The Peace Constitution of Japan in 1946 as a result of American
imperialism, lead to the imposition of liberal and democratic values is the perfect example
of imperialism shaping political culture. (Burks, 1966, p. 267) In the modern era this
influence can be seen in a new scenario which globalization has given to the world where
more capitalist and liberalist states of particularly the west are exerting their influence in
underdeveloped states through neo- colonialism or like.

The concept of cultural secularization is also allied to political culture. Cultural

secularization of political culture majorly contains two elements in it. First, it refers to the
adoption of orientations based on pragmatism and empiricism. Second, it refers to the
movement or change from diffuseness to specificity in the orientation. The beliefs and
values of people change with the time. However, this change should be in the direction
of pragmatism and empiricism. In other words, the change lead towards specificity from
diffuseness, beliefs as well as values should be directed towards mundane nature from
parochial nature. People should increasingly be creating knowledge about the political
system and hence have grasp our meaning of political participation to grow their political
involvement and be clear about the political legitimacy. Hence, political secularization
means that people should become more and more aware about their political system and
actively participate in it. “It is through the secularization of political culture that these rigid,
ascribed and diffuse customs of social interaction come to be over-ridden by a set of
codified, specifically political, and universalistic rules. By the same token, it is in the
secularization process that bargaining and accommodative political actions become a
common feature of the society, and that the development of special structures such as
interest groups and parties become meaningful.” (Almond & Powell, Comparative Politics:
A Developmental Approach, 1966, p. 60)

1.4 Political Culture and Political Stability:

The study of various political systems all over the world shows how political culture is a
factor which plays an important role in determining political stability or change. This is due
to the fact that orientations of the people towards their political system are the determining
factors for it to be stable or not. Hence, if people are satisfied with the existing political
system, it will be stable. However, if people are not satisfied and they don’t positive
orientations towards it, the system is surely going to change.

It is clearer by taking the example of stable political system of Britain and relatively
unstable French political system. “The rivalry between the two sub-cultures of the political
right committed to principles of order and hierarchy and of the political left committed to
principles of change and equality, means that the values of autonomous leadership and
popular control of the government are not blended within individuals.” (Kavanagh, 1972,
p. 17) It explains that the people having faith in the authoritative government can’t be
superimposed by the parliamentary democracy.
Having said above, it means that the change in the political culture, of whatever kind,
should be slow and continuous and not a sudden one as it will breakdown the system.
This is why, developing countries like India have had the case of what can be called as
bi-culturalism of the combination of traditional prevailing political culture and the modern
political culture with liberal and democratic values.

1.5 Political Culture; Morphology of Political Systems:

Scholars like Almond and Finer have used the political cultural approach in order to do
morphological study of the political systems. This approach is different from the legal-
institutional approach because while the legal-institutional approach focuses on the study
of political institutions in terms of the their legal structure, the political cultural approach
is wider in the sense that student using it takes into account as Almond says, ”the parts
played by family ties, mobs, electorates, causal and persistent groupings, and all foci of
power and influence in the political process if his analysis is to be directly relevant to
political system as they are.” (Davies & Lewis, 1971, p. 112) This states that political
cultural approach takes non-political factors also into the study along with the political
factors.

Almond categorizes the political cultures into different types based on the people’s
orientations and roles towards and in them respectively. He talks about the cognitive,
effective and evaluative orientations of the people in the political system. (Almond &
Verba, The Civic Culture, 1963, p. 17) Hence he divides the political cultures into the
types as under:

(a) Parochial Political Culture: The traditional and simple societies are characterized
by this type of political culture. The other characteristics of this system are very
low specialization and here people play the combined roles of in the form of
economic, political and religious roles at the same time. Hence, they perform
undifferentiated roles in the sense that a priest may be an administrator as well an
economist at the same time. They are largely have no knowledge of the central
authority yet some of the persons may at some point become aware of the authority
at the centre but they have no crystallized feelings towards the evaluation of the
political system and hence are least political participating people.
 (b) Subject Political Culture: It is the political culture such as in colonies where people
are getting aware about the authority and have either accepted it or are hostile
towards it. It means that people either have accepted the authority and rules blind
folded or they are opposing it. However, Almond talks about the case of blindfolded
accepting the authority of colonial powers as he is of the view that in the subject
political culture people have the knowledge about the political system but their
political participation is considerably negligible.
(c) Participant Political Culture: This is the type of political culture which exists in highly
developed societies where there is a large scale specialization and differentiation
of roles. However, political cultures are more homogeneous politically and people
are homogeneously oriented to the political actions. These people not only have
the sound knowledge about their political system but also, they participated
actively in it.

Then, Almond talks about the mixed types of political cultures as in the real world the pure
form of political culture is seldom possible. He characterises the mixed political cultures
into the following types:

(i) Parochial- Subject Political Culture

(ii) Parochial-Participant Political Culture
(iii) Subject-Participant Political Culture
(iv) Civic Culture

However, it doesn’t mean that a particular political culture remains same as it is and never
undergoes any change. Political culture is a dynamically forming phenomena which
undergoes change with time and according to the events. It is evident from the fact that
the orientations of the people can’t remain the same forever, whereas, they change with
the passage of time.

Based upon his characterisation of the political culture into various types, Almond has
then given various types of the political systems in the world which he puts under the
umbrella of the political cultures present in those political systems. (Almond, Comparative
Political Systems, 1956) These are as under:
 (1) Anglo-American Political Culture
(2) Continental European Culture
(3) Pre-Industrial or Partially Industrial Political Systems
(4) Totalitarian Political Systems

Having talked about the morphology of the political systems given by Almond, following
is a brief insight into morphological analysis of political systems by the Finer. He talks
about political culture on the basis of role of military as below:

(a) Mature Political Culture: Here, the state counts minimum on the need of armed
forces for establishing order.
(b) Developed Political Culture: Here, public is organized highly but it sometimes gets
polarized. Hence, sometimes the use of military pressure and force is done to
silence the people.
(c) Low Political Culture: These are very weakly organized population with lot of
internal differences. Hence, public opinion is either very weak or self-divided and
can’t offer a genuine resistance to the authoritarian system.
(d) Lowest Political Culture (Finer, 1962)

It is very clear that the political cultural approach is one of the important approach in the
comparative politics which is used by many scholars in the modern times to study the
political systems. However, like every other approach, it is not free of criticism by many
others. It has been mainly criticized for being biased as they are inclined towards the
western political systems and their values. Also, it is criticized for being conservative as
it justifies stability by declaring the liberal democratic system of the west state as the ideal
political system having the capacity to gradually adjust with the time.

In spite of the criticism given above, the utility and importance of the approach can’t be
undermined. Political cultural approach is indeed a very useful approach for studying and
comparing various political systems in the world. The following section of the project will
also be analysing the Political culture of Indian political system.
2. Historical Foundations and Dynamics of Indian Political Culture:

As, it is clear that the political culture of a system has its foundations based largely on its
history, it becomes necessary to look towards the historical development of that political
system and how it got modifications or complete revolution in structure and function.
Political culture is dynamic which means it changes or gets modified and takes it
hybridized shape with the advent of new time.

Indian political culture, as in the modern times, is also the as a result of its long history
which can be divided into several parts according to various phases of time. Each phase
added new elements of political culture, deleted some previous elements (to a great or
less extent) as well as carried out some elements up to the modern times. For having a
basic understanding about the foundations and dynamics of Indian political culture as in
the present era, this chapter will throw light on the historical development of political
culture in India in various phases of- (i) Indus Valley Civilization (ii) Vedic Phase (iii)
evolution of Indian society from 600 BCE – 1200 CE (iv) medieval Period of rise of Muslim
Rule and other regional powers (v) British rule and various national and reformative
movements.

2.1 Indus Valley Civilization:

Indus valley civilization is believed to be one of the oldest civilizations in the world. Yet,
the world has come to know it very recently. “In time this civilization follows those of Egypt
and Sumer and apparently precedes that of China. With Carbon-14 its time-span has
been assigned to 2175-1750 B .C.” (Fitzsimons, 1970, p. 10)“The Indus Valley, was first
recognized less than fifty years ago. Archaeo-logical investigation from 1921 to 1932 and
since the independence and partition of the Indian sub- continent has revealed something
of the origin and of the extraordinary extent of this civilization. This complex urban way of
life, how- ever, is a voiceless civilization: its excavated cities disclose a hitherto unknown
half-millenium of Indian history and add a new civilization to the tale of human
achievement; but its numerous written remains are brief inscriptions that have not yet
been deciphered.” (Fitzsimons, 1970, p. 9) The Indus Valley Civilization
There are not enough evidences of archaeology which can suggest the type of political
culture as well as political system available at the time of Indus valley civilization.
However, through various archaeological evidences, it is believed that at its large,
population of Indus valley civilization may have reached four to five million people.
Planned structured cities like Harappa, Mohenjo-Daro, Dholavira and Kalibangan have
been found with many other major or minor settlements which show urban planning,
planned drainage system, standardized and baked- brick houses, multi-stories houses
and also some non- residential houses and buildings. All this structured environment
shows that the Indus valley was an urbanized civilization. Moreover, archeological
evidences also show that there was trade with outside civilizations like Mesopotamia. One
such evidence for trading is the discovery of imprinted seals found in Harappa in
Mesopotamian regions. (Fitzsimons, 1970, p. 11)

Very little is known about the political culture of the society and centre of authority in Indus
valley civilization as there are no clear evidences about the institutions who may have
functioned as centres of authority. Yet, regularity in planning, well organized and
standardized means of house building and trade suggest that there was some form of
authority but it is not clear what it could be exactly. It appears that there was not a single
centred authority and the authority was decentralised in structure. One speculated theory
suggests that there were no rulers and people enjoyed more or less equal status as there
are not much differences found in the houses and the health conditions as there were
small amount of elite burials which were recognized using mortuary analysis by the
archaeologists. However, it can’t be said that there was no hierarchy system present in
the Indus valley civilization. Difference in the sizes of some houses and other structures
suggests that there may be different social classes occupied in different levels. Also, the
matter of religion and social organization remains another area of speculation. There are
no clear evidences of temples, kings or priests. Some kind of religious may be present
there which can be associated with the different imprints in the seals found in archaeology
but understanding them has remained a mystery up till now.

Indus valley civilization is believed to be peaceful without any engagement in warfare

which can’t be taken as certain. The argument suggesting the peaceful environment in
Indus valley civilization is that very less weapons were found and that too in few sites. It
has been in debate for were those weapons for the purpose of using in wars for protection
from wild animals. However there are two most accepted theories explaining the demise
of this civilization. One considers that Aryans who were nomadic people invaded the
civilization. While, the other recent believes that the demise of Indus valley civilization
was not due to the invasion of Aryans but climate change may have caused this like
changing of course of the Indus river or the decline in the waters of Sarasvati river.
However no exact causes of the demise of this civilization are known, same is the case
in concern of its origin.

2.2 Vedic Phase: Vedic phase is the period of the composition of Vedas (Rig Veda, Yajur
Veda, Sama Veda and Atharva Veda) which are an important and oldest composed
religious scriptures in Hinduism. This phase is mostly divided into early Rig Vedic and
post Rig Vedic periods by the scholars. There is a lot of debate about the nature of political
system and political culture in Vedic period as well. More competing theories can be found
regarding early Rig Vedic period than the Post Rig Vedic period. Also, researchers don’t
have a common say about nomadic Aryans regarding their origin. There are two major
groups in which one claims Aryans to be migrated from Europe or Central Asian regions
while the other group consists mainly of some Indian scholars who claim that Aryans
never migrated from outside to India and were natives. Arguments in support of migration
theory suggest that there are some linguistic connections found in the language of Aryans
(Sanskrit) and the regions in Europe and Central Asia. However, the scholars who claim
that Aryans were natives are of the view that Aryans were not confined to Europe and
Central Asia but same kind of people or race extended from Central Asia to Northern
India.

Early Rig Vedic period may have started around 2500 B.C. as Rigveda is dated around
2500 B.C. to 1500 B.C. (Winternitz, Moriz, Sarma, & Srinivasa, 1981). Late attempts of
explaining the history of India in Vedic period is done and understanding the working of
society in that period is done by many scholars like D.D. Kosambi, S.A. Dange, D.P
Chattopadhyaya. Most interesting view of the early Vedic Period is given by S.A. Dange
as he firmly claims about communist life style of the early Aryans during early Vedic
period. (Dange, 1979) However Dange has not mentioned any rigid time period and just
talks about the primitive communism in Vedic age. He is of the view that in early Vedic
period there was no king, state, peacekeeping body and there was no punishment. He
talks about the Aryans who were engaged in battles in Central Asia, expanded towards
India and seized it to settle there. According to him the primitive communism may have
ended during the early Vedic institutionalisation and the period of civilization as well as
slavery started with institutionalization in later Vedic period which includes Epics and early
composed Smritis. He explains the course of change in Vedic civilization by introduction
of Yajna after the fire was invented. Fire led to the another mode of production by
changing the nomadic character of Aryans to settlements, result in gradual development
of civilization by changing the lifestyle of living in naked state to clothes, changing the
nature of defense and ways of shelter. Yajna came into existence which was perhaps
greatest by the creator (Bhrama) to the man as interpreted by traditions. According to
traditions it uplifted man to another Yuga as described by Mr. Dange. Dange describes
the meaning of the yajna as the mode of production which is new and resulted due to the
discovery of fire. However, with the emergency of State as well as private property, Yajna
remained and survived as a ritual and as a way to worship. (Kundu, 1985)

Though, the society showed the tracts of patriarchy there is believed to be no rigid
division of society in Aryans in early Rig Vedic Period and women had a lot of rights like
education, selecting mates of their choice, widow remarriage and more. Later Vedic
period is the period of advent of structured and hierarchical society in which originally
there were threefold divisions in society based on the occupation of the people (Bhramins,
Khsatriyas, vaishyas). The mention of the Sudras can be found in last or tenth Mandal of
the Rig Veda which is the latest. Hence, Bhramins were the teachers and preachers,
Khsatriyas were the warriors, vaishyas were the merchants and workers and the shudras
were the people serving all other sections of society. (Dange, 1979) The theory claiming
the migration or invasion of Aryans from central Asia argues that shudras and the
outcastes may be the people who were not Aryans and were invaded and made slaves
by Aryans but there is no concrete evidences to support the theory.
The centre of authority developed mainly in the form of monarchy where there was a king
known as rajan who had the duty to protect the people and was assisted by his councillors
in his conduct. At first, there were tribes and the leader of the tribes but later on with the
discovery of iron, there was the rise of kingdoms known as janpads. These are Janpads
during the Iron Age like Kuru Janpad, Panchala Janpad, Kosla Janpad and Videha
Janpad. Fourth Veda, the Atharva Veda has the mention about ‘syama ayas’ (black metal/
iron). With the Late Vedic Period the strong centers of Vedic cultures emerged in further
east which with the passage of time become consolidated into large kingdoms known as
Mahajanpadas. Also, the great epics of Ramayana and Mahabharata are believed to be
originated in this period. The existing tests are probably of the post Vedic period. (Reddy,
2003)

The Vedic phase hence is very important to look at if we want to understand the
development of Indian political culture in its present form. The reason is that Vedic period
includes the most important step of composition of Vedic scriptures and development of
society, way of life and later on rituals in the Hinduism which have continued up to the
present age with lesser or greater modifications.

2.3 Evolution of Political Culture from 600 BCE to 1200 CE:

The period of 600 BCE to 200 BCE is sometimes also known as the period of second
urbanization. (Samuel, 2010)As, after Indus valley civilization, once again urbanized cities
began to flourish. Various settlements began to arise in the plains of Gages, more
prominently in the central plains of Ganges. Most important region was the Magadha,
where Mauryan Empire flourished. Vedic culture had its influence here as well but this
was different from the civilizations of Kuru (Panchala) region. Also, the area is known to
be the earliest known rice cultivator in South Asia. Moreover, Buddhism as well as Jainism
also emerged in this region which are also known as Shramanic movements. The
estimated time period of flourishment of Shramanic movements is believed to be in
between 800BCE to 200 BCE. (Samuel, 2010)

Earliest of the Upnishdas are believed to be composed somewhere between 800 BCE to
400 BCE. (Mascaro, 1965) Upnishdas are very important as they lay down the theoretical
foundations of Hinduism. They are also known as Vedanta, which means they contain
Vedas’ conclusion or are also considered sometimes as the end of Vedas. The earlier
Upnishdas tried to challenge the increased inclination towards the rituals. They focused
on worshiping ‘Self’ as the divine (knowing divine self and worshiping it only). (Flood &
Gavin, 1966)

Another and most serious attack to increasing intensity of orthodox rituals in the later
Vedic Period was by the rising movements of ‘Sharmana’. These movements owe their
origin after 600 BCE. (Flood & Gavin, 1966)Mahavira was the proponent of Jianism and
Gautam Buddha was the founder of Budhsism. Many concepts of birth and death, mithya
samsara, Middle Way, Ascetic life and liberation etc. were roused by these movements.
(Laumakis, 2008) Though, these movements also differed in some philosophical aspects.
Also, they strongly attacked the orthodoxy in the matter of caste system and other rituals.
They focused on the peaceful life and equality of all humans. Hence, they also led to
some reforms in the society making political culture less rigid and less inclined towards
the orthodox rituals.

The subcontinent was covered by various settlements, small kingodms or cities in the
later Vedic age. Their mention can also be found in some Vedic literatures of early Jainism
and Buddhism dating back to 500 BCE. The major kingdoms were sixteen in number and
are known as ‘Mahajanpadas’. Anga, Kashi, Kosala, Vajji, Chedi, Malla, Avanti, Assaka,
Gandhara, Kuru, Matsya, Kamboja and Panchala are the kindoms known as
Mahajanpadas. Most of these Kingdoms were Monarchies and Kings were defined by
hereditary while in some kingdoms Kings were chosen by the council and hence were
republics. (Reddy, 2003) Other smaller kingdoms which are mentioned in early literature
are believed to be present all around the subcontinent left.

The Kingdom of Magadha, among all other Mahajanpadas, was the site of Sharamanic
movements. Also, it witnessed the origin of India’s great empires of Mauryas and Guptas.
These were the empires which saw great advancement in field of science, ancient
mathematics, philosophy and astronomy. (Majumdar, 1977) Maurya Empire is the age of
Chandragupta Maurya, Ashoka and Kautilya (Chanakya). In the Maurya Empire,
Arthashastra was composed by Kautilya which is a great treatise on the statecraft and
how should a king manage its empire. It even talks about how should be foreign policy be
formed which can be reinterpreted and is useful in context of modern nation states also.
Kautilya, through his philosophy also tried to reform the society and make caste system
not the one which is birth based but according to the capability and occupation. Buddhism
also expanded at large in Mauryan Empire. However the class structure remained more
or less the same.

The period of 200 BCE onwards witnessed the hybridization of culture in North Western
Kingdoms. These cultures included Indo-Greek Kingdom, Indo-Scythian Kingdom, Indo-
Parthian Kingdom and Indo-Sassanid Kingdom. Indo-Greek kingdom came into being
when the region was invaded by Indo-Greek Menander I after 155 BCE. (Strabo & Jones,
1924) The descendent of Sakas who migrated from Sibera to India after going through
Pakistan and Arachosia and took the place of Indo Greeks are known as Indo-Scythians.
(Majumdar, 1977, p. 234) Later, these were taken over by the Gupta Empire. Indo-
Parthians are believed to be belonging to Iranian Tribes’ group living in the east of Parthia
(Parthian Pair of Earrings). They ruled in the present day regions of Pakistan, Afghanistan
as well as western India. Also, empire of Persia known as Sasanid ruled in some parts of
present day Pakistan and expanded in the time period of more or less same as Gupta
Empire. This hybridization of culture lead to the learning by each of the society some
aspects of each other’s culture as well as technology and knowledge. The other reason
of the hybridization of culture is the trade travels to India. Some examples can be given
in the form of spice trade (Kerala), transmission of Buddhism through Silk Road, route of
Roman-India etc. All of these led to the amalgamation of various elements of the culture.
Yet, most of the elements of later Vedic period continued with a slight new shape.

Then comes the age of Gupta Empire expanding in time period of around 320 CE to 650
CE. This is the period when large part of the Indian subcontinent was reunited. In the
history of India, this is also known to be the Golden Age as there were many
achievements in the field art, Science, philosophy, literature, technology, mathematics as
well as religion. (Britannica, 2010) These developments have crystalized the general
Hindu culture. It is the period when development of zero occurred in numerical system in
India (Ore, 1988, p. 19). Many creative paintings, art and architecture flourished. Many
scholars were born in this empire like Aryabhata, Varahamihira, Kalidas, Vatsyayana, and
Vishnu Sharma who have made great advancements and achievements in academic
fields. Elements of both the Vedic culture along with the Buddhism as an attack against
orthodox Bhramanicism were found in the culture. (Jha, 1977)

Another major cultural development can be seen in the period also known as late classical
age which saw the end of Guptas and Empire of Harsha. Hence, its time period can be
said to have been started from 700 CE and it ended in 1300 CE which was the beginning
of Delhi Sultanante (Michaels & Axel, 2004, p. 41) . However it can’t be said to have been
ended altogether as some of its elements continued up till 17th century which
encountered the demise of Vijayanagara Empire. This period is important as it changed
sacrifices tradition and also Budhhism and Jainism traditions began to be replaced by
Vaishnavism, Shaivism and Shaktism. Buddhism in north saw rapid decline with the
invasions of White Hun and Muhammad bin Qasim. Chacha Nama has given record of
many stupas being converted to mosques, e.g., Nerun. A new school, in the name of
Mimamsa philosophy was started by Kumarila Bhatta in 700 CE. It sort to defend Vedic
rituals against the attacks by Buddhists. Some scholars accredit the contributions of
Bhatta leading to the decline of Budhhism. The development of Adveta Vedanta was done
by Adi Shankra which consolidate major characters of current Hinduism. He criticized
both the schools of Mimansa and Buddhism and was the proponent of his own Advaita
philosophy. Many gods replaced the Buddhaism and the image and symbols were given
the importance. However Buddhism didn’t completely decline even for many centuries
after the eighth century. (Michaels & Axel, 2004)

2.4 Political Culture during Muslim Rule:

Though trade between Indian sub-continent and Arab existed through ancient times but
scholars claim that it was at the end of 7th century A.D that the West Indian cost saw the
first settlement of Arab Muslims. After the conquests of Muhammad bin Qasim and
Mahum of Ghazni many Muslim dynasties came to India one after the other such as, The
Slave Dynasty, The Khilji Dynasty, The Tughlaq Dynasty, The Saiyyid, The Lodhi dynasty
and Mughal dynasty in the North India whereas The Nizam Shahi Dynasty of
Ahmadnagar, The Adil Shahi Shahi Dynasty of Bijapur, The Qutab Shahi Shahi Dynasty
of Golkanda, Bahamani Kingdom of Deccan, The Imad Shahi Dynasty of Berar and The
Barid Shahi Dynasty of Bidar in South India. Impact of Muslim dynasties in various fields
of religion, culture, economy, arts and science makes it important for looking into them in
order to draw inferences regarding the formation of Indian political culture. (Frye, 1991)

Religion of individuals is associated with various beliefs, faith and values, many or all of
which are shaped by what religion he has faith on. Obviously, coming of Muslim dynasties
resulted in the amalgamation, hybridization or what can be said that making Indian sub-
continent’s society with two religions competing and living together. There are some
controversies regarding the impact of Muslim dynasties on religious field, yet both the
negative and positive impacts can be drawn. Charles Eliot, in his book named Hinduism
and Buddhism has talked about the influence of Islam on Shankaracharya and Ramanuj
(Eliot, 1921). Tara Chand, who is a prominent scholar, has also accepted this thesis and
he believes that Islam gifted unity of God to India (Chand, 2002). This is not accepted by
A.L. Srivastava who questions the reliability of the theses drawn by Charles Eliot by
questioning if Shankaracharya had borrowed the concept of unit of God from Islam, he
could have also denied the idol and image worship which is a fundamental concept in
Islam. Also, according to him this is possible that two different people can develop their
thoughts on same line while being independent of each other. Some scholars claim that
upper class Hindus who were reformers were of the view that both Hinduism and Islam
were the two paths but their destination was the same (Srivastava A. L., 1961). Hence,
they treated Muslims with generosity and gave them liberty for converting people to the
Islamic religion. They condemned the orthodox rituals in the both and preached devotion
and peace. However, the missionary Muslims who wanted forceful and maximum
conversions were not welcomed by the Hindu leaders and this further led to the rigidity
and orthodoxy in Hindu religion introduced by them in order to control more conversions.
Strict rule began to emerge in various walks of life like marriage, worship, family and all
other general fields. One the other hand some of the democratic Islamic principles were
adopted by Hindus also. Sufism and its principles of equality and unity of God had positive
influence on the Hindus. Also, during the reign of Akbar, some Hindu scholars felt that
treatment Shudras and untouchables should be improved and it was in the interest of
Hindus.
Muslim rulers also left a deep impact on the social structure. Due to more and more
conversions to Islam, Hindu leaders made the rules more rigid by recasting Smritis in
order to prevent further conversions and also, to bring back the persons already
converted. Social relationships in the Hindu society were re-adjusted. In doing so various
ill practiced emerged such as infanticide which meant killing the girl child at the time of
birth. It was due to the fact drawn from information in history many Muslim rulers
compelled Hindus who were rich or chiefs to hand their daughters to them in marriage.
Due the same reason, Purdah system emerged and women lost their liberty. This was
also due to the cultural influence from the Muslim community. Another social evil that
emerged was that of child marriage, in which Hindu girls began to be married at the child
age in order to prevent her marrying or being taken away by Muslims. This became a
ritual that the marriage of girl after the age of twelve years was a sinful act. Women
position became secondary as they were dependent on the males in all of their lives and
were confined to the household not even allowed to outside events or functions (Mehta &
Lal, 1986).

Slavery was prominent in the Indian society before the advent of Muslim dynasties but it
also increased in number. Keeping slaves became a matter of pride, fashion or status in
the Muslim society. Specially, rulers kept many slaves and it is believed that strength of
slaves during rule of Firoz Shah Tughlaq raised to 2 lakh in number. Indian rulers and
feudal lords also began to practice slavery though it was present to some extent already
as well. Even the dowry system of offering women became prevalent among royal families
of Rajput. Slavery began to be practiced at all levels. The life style of wearing Salwar,
Achakan and other dresses as well as food also emerged from the influence from the
Muslim dynasties. These were introduced by high class Muslims and Hindus copied them.
Some of the classes such as priestly classes of Hindu masses remained immune from
the impact in dressing, diet and social practices. However, some changes in other classes
in life style can definitely be seen.

Supremacy in the political sphere was that of Muslim rulers but in economic terms the
condition of Hindus didn’t deteriorated a lot. Muslim rulers owned large jagirs but riled on
the cultivation by Hindu peasants. Only the change in the land system was that land came
under the formal. Control of Muslim Jagirdars. Trade and commerce was also dominated
by Hindus. Muslim rulers crushed some of the commercial classes but still there were
classes like Baniya who continued to have their importance in trade and commerce. Barni
also agrees on the economic upper hand of the Hindus in that period. Hence, though
political and administrative control was under the Muslims but economic life was
controlled by Hindus. Other important impact on economy was that India’s oversees trade
began to flourish once again which was declined after the end of chola dynasty.

Initially the Islam didn’t made its impact on the culture of Hindus as they were not
interested and never gave paid attention to the Persian or Arabic studies. However with
the passage of time Hindus began to study Persian literature. It is believed that it was in
during the rule of Sikandar Lodhi that Hindus first took the Arabic and Persian studies.
While this literary communication progressed during the reign of Tughlaqs. Most
important development was seen in the form of synthesis of the Hindu and Muslim
literature in the reign of Akbar which further expanded in the rule of Shah Jahan. Hindus
were not only influenced by the Persian literature but also Arabic and Muslim impact was
seen. This mixing of cultures resulted in the Urdu as a new language which showed the
characters of languages like Persian, Turkish, Arabic and Sanskrit originated language
such as Hindi. Urdu began to be widely used in the North West India. (Srivastava A. L.,
1964)

According to the prominent scholar Tara Chand, many fields of fine arts showed the image
of Hindus while some fields showed domination of Muslims. It can be said that fine arts
were deeply influenced by the impact of Islam. Coming together of the two cultures
resulted in the evolution of new types of elements in architecture and music. A.L.
Srivastva has also talked about the profound influence of Islam in the field of fine arts in
which Hindus adopted many aspects of architecture and others by which they were
fascinated. Glimpses of architectural influence of Mughals can be seen in the architecture
of Rajputs. Art of painting was also blended beautifully. Also, in the field of music, the
synthesis of Persian and Indian music can be seen with the growth of Qwalis, instruments
like Sitar, Tabla etc. (Srivastava A. L., 1964)
3. Political Culture during Colonial Period:

Indian traditional culture was greatly affected by the British Empire as a result of
introduction of western culture, techniques and education. The medieval glory of India
ended with the Seventeenth Century and it was replaced by the Eighteenth Century led
to the political chaos with the problems like misery, corruption and many more. After
Vasco da Gamma who entered India in 1498, many European powers started to come in
India one after the other. After the conflicts between Portuguese, French and English
powers to remain in India, it was the English which ultimately become successful and
soon started to do a role of a political actor while it started as a trading actor.

Due to the internal weakness and fragmentation of Indian regions ruled by different rulers,
British soon grew more and more powerful and began to control almost whole the
subcontinent. That’s why the western impact of scientific technology and Industrial
civilization changed everything in India. No doubt, there were no immediate benefits to
the Indian society and they were exploited drastically by the British so that the life of
people became miserable but some of the long term benefits revolutionized India and
resulted in the formation of India as it is in present era.

British Empire prompted religious as well as reformative movements. There grew a lot of
Christian missionary movements. The grown complexity in the Vedic religion along with
the influences of Islam had already given rise to Bhakti Movement and now the
emergence of British encouraged reform movements in modern times. It was Raja Ram
Mohan Roy who first founded Bharamo Samaj as a reformative movement in 1828. It
sought to bring rationalized elements by blending the Hinduism by rationally found good
elements in Christianity. Raja Ram Mohan sought for reforms in many spheres of religion,
society. He also supported modern education and sought to revive the good elements of
the Vedic past. Following Raja Ram Mohan Roy, came Keshab Chandra who was the
founder of Prarthana Samaj. Besides it, Swami Dayanand Saraswati founded Arya
Samaj, and was of the view to revive the original Vedas without the orthodox elements of
evils of caste system, Sati Pratha, Parda system and others in the mid nineteenth century.
He advised not get influenced by any new religions like Islam and more importantly
Christianity and that the essence of life lies in Vedas. Vivekananda was another similar
social reformer whose influence even reached the west. His slogans and teachings also
arose feeling of nationalism among the people. Other reformers with more or less same
ideology were like Ranade, Vidyasagar and Aurobindo Ghosh. Hence, the advent of
British led to the emergence of many movements of social and religious reforms.

Changes in the political system: Previously, rule of law, if there was any was derived from
and associated with the religion but by the advent of British Rule of Law emerged in
separation to the religion. In other words, politics and religion were separated. It can be
said that political instability in India was ended by the uniform and centralized rules
policies began to emerge under the British government. Also, with the growth of
bureaucracy there was continuous decline of Panchayati system of self-governing in
villages. New system introduced by the British was known as equality before law. The
result was that the British courts began to treat and give same punishments to Brahmins
and lower caster or untouchables. Though, this led to the resentment by Hindus for some
time but with the passage time they accepted it. Individuals of all the religions began to
be treated equally before the law.

Various Government Acts, such as, Act of 1919, Act of 1935 lead to the formation of State
in in inclination to the liberal democratic thoughts. Hence, liberty of thought, expression,
human rights, equality and religion began to emerge. Even, Indians could criticize the
activities of the British.

Indian Civil Service was reorganized and built of carefully. At first, these posts were filled
by British people but with the passage of time Indians began to take part in the
administration as well. Also, many specialized services grew such as Public Works
Department, Indian Forest Service, Indian Police Service, and Indian Medical Service. It
further centralized the administration and was yet another step towards unified India.

The British impact was largely beneficial in the social sphere. It resulted in the prohibition
of various social evils such as evil of Sati Pratha, child marriage, allowing widow
remarriage, reduction in the practices of infanticide, untouchability and polygamy. Also,
Indians realized the benefits of equality among the individuals regardless of their castes
or sex and made Indian scholars to incorporate these ideas in the making of constitution
after independence.

The main reason of the British for staying in India for about two centuries was to profit
economically. Obviously, they exploited India economically and completely changed its
economic structure of domestic productions and the export which was flourishing in the
trade of cotton, silk, sugar and salt etc. Basic domestic system of economic structure was
changed to meet the needs of new industrial system in Britain. Hence, this drastically
affected the agriculture based economic structure and changed the life style of India.
Indian economy suffered a lot due to British economic policy. According to Dada Bahi
Naroji British took all the cheap raw materials from India and sell the manufactured goods
(manufactured in industries) at high cost. Hence, the wealth of India drained to Britain.
These economic policies of British led to the existence of industries in India as well as
urbanization started.

Also, development in modern communication and transport system was another major
impact of the British rule. For the first time, construction of railway line was done during
the period of Lord Dalhousie. This track was built between Bombay and Thane. Later,
another railway line was built between Madras and Acrot both of which resulted in bringing
together the people of India and building a sense of unity among them. Another unifying
activities were building the roads which connected various parts of India (such as, Grand
Trunk Road) and development of Postal system. All these activities led to the growth and
development of modern transport and communication system in India which was a
positive impact of British in India.

The introduction of western education was yet another major factor which had its
remarkable impact on Indian culture. Now, India came in contact with the vast new
western literature, science and technology. Also, new values of equality, liberty and rights
etc. gradually blended with the Indian values. Hence, it also led to the development of the
modern Indian political culture.
It was in the period of British India that the rediscovery of the past of Indian culture and
civilizations was started (e.g. Indus valley civilization). British helped in the discovery of
Indian glorious past remarkably. However, it should be noted that not all the findings were
right as many Indian scholars differ with the British scholars on various issues. It is
believed that British presented the certain facts falsely in order to have political advantage
in India. It can’t be denied that the important efforts such as development of new
archaeology department by Lord Curzon helped in rediscovering the history of Indian sub-
continent.

Perhaps the most important impact of British on Indian which later shaped its political
culture was the growth of the feeling of Nationalism. People in Indian sub-continent began
to unify and have a common demand of equality, liberty and demand of rights. The feeling
of nationalism further grew during the time of Mahatma Gandhi and other major leaders
when whole nation came forward for making Indian national movement a mass
movement. Mass revolts for independence ultimately were the result of the feeling of
nationalism. However, Muslim-Hindu divide and the policy of British to weaken India
resulted in the Independence of two separate nations (India and Pakistan). Also, glimpses
of this divide and rule policy can be seen even in the modern India.

Along with the above said impacts, the British also led its impact on art and Architecture
as well as culture. Indian way of living was influenced by the western system. Many British
architectural buildings and structures can be seen in India. British impacted the Indian
diet, music, dressing style, language and much more. In a nutshell, it can be said Indian
living style became a blend of Indian and westernized cultures.

Also, Psychological attitude of individuals determines the political culture of a society.

There was a shift in psychological attitude of the people as well. Secondary impact of all
other changes during the British was the change in the attitude of people which shifted
from hospitable, tolerant, and conservative to self-reliant, rebellious and less
conservative. Also, rational, scientific and research elements of the attitude of people
grew. Impact of the new psychological attitude of the people of India can be seen in its
political culture and system of the present time.
There were lot of positive and negative impacts on British rule in India. However, some
scholars focus more on the negative impacts claiming that Indian society was westernized
and it could grew more efficiently in its originality. It changed the Indian political and
economic system of India to a capitalist one with its demerits as emphasized by
communists like Karl Marx. However, it can’t be denied that liberal capitalist system has
flourished almost in every nation state since then and we also know that communism
failed in Soviet Union.

4. Political Culture in India since Independence:

It is clear from the above discussion that the political culture of a state is not a
spontaneously born phenomena. Rather, it is a continuous and dynamic process of
changing and evolving political culture. It has also been discussed that political culture of
a society is a subset of the general culture of that society. That is why we can’t do a
specific study of only political factors of a culture without looking at the other elements of
the culture of that society. Almond and Verba have categorized the various pure type of
political cultures on the basis of the political participation and political attitudes of the
people. The attitudes or orientations of people determining the political culture of a society
according to Almond are- (i) cognitive, (ii) affective and (iii) evaluative. These orientations
in turn give shape to the political system. However, studying the orientations of the people
originally is a very complex and hard work. Orientations result in a particular actions of
the people based on those orientations. If we come to know about the orientations of the
people at a particular time about a political event, we can predict the expected action by
them. However, the orientations of the all the individuals is not exactly the same and also
these orientations keep changing with time. If we look at the political process happening
in a society, how political system is working in that society and political actions of its
people, we can infer about the political orientations and attitudes of people in that political
system. Hence, in order to understand political culture of a society, we need to study the
type of political system, working of the political system, political processes, and political
participation of the people etc. in a society. However, the most important element to study
about the political culture of a society is the political participation of people. All other
elements are directly or indirectly derived from the political participation.
For maintaining continuity and increasing understand ability of the political culture after
independence, this phase has been divided into further two sub-phases: (a) Pre-
liberalisation phase and (b) Post-liberalisation phase. These are discussed below.

4.1 Pre-Liberalisation Phase:

The most important feature of the political culture of India after independence has been
emerging of the nation-state as the dominant actor in the public realm. The nation-state
grew as an important actor in the India in the last decades. However, it has shared the
hegemonic stage with some other political forces. After a long time in India, the centre
stage is occupied by the nation state without any real competition from other actors of
political or public realm. If we look into the fields ranging from literature and arts to all
other spheres of life, these all come under the jurisdiction of the state.

Generations of Indian people who were exposed to the colonial culture and lived under
the influence of Western knowledge systems always dreamt of the day when they will get
independent and powerful state of India, which will transform the society. However, arrival
of golden day has not resulted in much applause. Indians differ and are split regarding
their opinions. First category of the people is of those individuals who subconsciously had
accepted colonial rule prevailing at that time. They can’t believe that India has emerged
as a powerful state. They continue to believe that India is still a recently freed state with
large scale stress and turmoil and under the risk of survival from within as well as due to
the external threats. They are of the view that India needs to go through a long way to
become a powerful nation state by increasing its arms strength and expanding its
industrial base. Second category of people after become aware of the new Indian power
still are not satisfied because they see that the power has actually been swept
continuously in hands of states from the people and there is arising a strong central
bureaucratic system. They are of view that internally brought out reforms will someday
solve this problem. They feel that India can come out of the evil conditions brought in by
foreign as well as some local cultural influences by these revolutions or peaceful
democratic reforms. After the solution of these problems is sought out, the state will then
represent the true will and interest of the majority of the people which will be inclined
towards doing well to all.

Also, some Indians who are the carriers of some form of the Gandhism and Marxism or
Socialism along with some other number of people who have no clear ideology are
interpreting the situation of India in terms of burgeoas and the situations of the minorities
of people ranging from the tribal minority to the untouchables and landless laborers. This
group see the success of Indian state as the problem because success of Indian state
has proven to be the carriage of system of colonial society in the modern nation-state and
that system is capital society with western system of running of state. They question the
reasonability of the great visions which the state is trying to realize for being inadequate
now.

India, after independence adapted various rules, regulations and also cultural aspects
from the British colonial power. There are two expectations which grew out of the
adaptation process. These expectations deal with the explanation of the ideal society.
The quest was to find the form of society which will suet to the modern nation state
system. The primary desire was that, with modernization, a more coherent form of Indian
society will rise and the assorted qualities or diversity of the nation would reduce, to make
India more manageable as well as governable. The second was that, after some time, the
bargained type of the state would offer route to a state working according to the all-
inclusive standards of statecraft and ready to induce, assemble, or constrain the general
public to acclimate to the ideology of the state. Hence, these expectations were inclined
towards seeing the resolution of the problems growing out of diverse culture in India in
terms of ethnic, lingual and other type of diversities by making the state a coherent whole
with the new values of democracy, equality and fraternity. Below is the political system
which grew after the independence in India:

India’s political system is much more recent than the American or British political system
with its unique position in the world. It is the lengthiest as well as one of the most amended
constitution of the world. It contains parliamentary features of Britain, federal features of
Canada, United States and Australia. However, constitution mentioned India as the union
of state and not the federation of states.

Parliament is the law making body in India. India has a bi-cameral parliament with the two
houses being Lok Sabha (the lower house) and Rajya Sabha (the upper house). The
lower house is also known as the house of people as the members of Lok Sabha are
directly elected by the people. The chairman of Lok Sabha is known as Speaker. It has
five year term. Rajya Sabha is the upper house of the parliament and is also known as
Council of States. The members of the Rajya Sabha are indirectly elected in which 12
members are nominated by President according to the constitution. Term of office being
six years, re-election are faced by the one third of the members every two years. It can’t
be dissolved. The legislative power is shared by both the houses with lower houses
having the upper hand and enjoying more power than the upper house. India’s head of
state, or president, has specific authority with regard to the function of the legislative
branch. According to the Indian Constitution, the president has the power to convene
Parliament when he sees fit and must give his approval to all parliamentary bills before
they are enacted into law. The president is authorized to summon the Parliament to meet,
to address either house or both houses together, and to require the attendance of all of
its members. The president of the country also may send messages to either houses
regarding a pending bill or any other matter, and the president addresses the first session
of Parliament each year and must give final approval to all provisions in bills that are
passed.

India is a republic state in which President (the head of state) is elected by Electoral
College with the procedure given in the constitution. However, he is only the ceremonial
head. Prime minister is the head of government and has the real executive power. The
post of Vice-President is also there. He is the ex-officio chairman of the Rajya Sabha. The
leader of the majority party of lower house is appointed as prime minister by President.
Also, other ministers are appointed by the president on the recommendation of prime
minister. There can be no debate that the Prime Minister of India is the most powerful
figure of the country’s government. After initially being selected by the president to serve
in this capacity, normally from the party that commands the plurality of seats in
Parliament, the prime minister is responsible for selecting the Council of Ministers, chosen
from other members of Parliament who are then appointed by the president. Individuals
who are not members of Parliament may be appointed to the Council of Ministers if they
later become a Member of Parliament either through election or appointment within six
months of selection. The Council of Ministers is composed of cabinet ministers, ministers
of state, and deputy ministers. Cabinet members are selected to accommodate different
regional groups, castes, and factions within the ruling party or coalition as well as for their
specific administrative skills and experience. Prime ministers may also frequently retain
key ministerial portfolios for themselves.

India has an independent and integrated judicial system. Supreme Court is at the apex of
the judicial system which also controls and coordinates the subordinate courts. It is the
guardian of the constitution having jurisdiction in civil, constitutional and criminal cases.
In the states there are high courts with their judicial authority in civil, criminal and
constitutional cases. Constitution contains many provisions to ensure the independence
of judiciary. The Supreme Court of India consists of twenty-five associate justices and
one chief justice. The president appoints the chief justice. Associate justices are also
appointed by the president, but only after consultation with the chief justice and, if the
president considers it necessary, with other associate justices of the Supreme Court and
high court judges in the states. Unlike justice appointments in the United States, those
appointed to the Supreme Court by the Indian President do not require the confirmation
of the legislature, in this case, the Indian Parliament. Justices cannot be removed from
office until they reach the mandatory retirement age of sixty-five unless each house of
Parliament passes a presidential order charging “proved misconduct or incapacity.” This
vote must be passed by a two-thirds majority of the members in attendance and a majority
of the total parliamentary membership.

Every democratic system is a demonstration of confidence as in each speaks to, however

defectively, a pledge to liberal esteems and a trust in the political judgment of the general
population. However each is reliant on expanded institutional game plans to shield these
qualities from the general population. One speculates that behind the demonstration of
confidence conceal age-old feelings of fear: fear of the ability of guilelessness of the
general population, seen as very equipped for transforming into hordes (take note of the
British elite class' doubt after the French Revolution and amid the time of expansion of
franchise); fear of the unpredictability and the transient, insane inclinations of the masses
(recollect the events of institutional checks against populism formulated by curve populist
Charles de Gaulle in France); fear of the passionate powerlessness of the normal natives
in universal relations, overwhelmed by irreverent, conspiratorial forces (Henry Kissinger's
apprehensions about atomic demobilization and the security group's tension in Rajiv
Gandhi's India); and fear of the general population's blamelessness about and
subvertibility to the tinsel sparkle of worldwide free enterprise (the predominant figure of
speech in India amid the radical period of Indira Gandhi's residency). Many estimates can
be made about the way of this inner conflict? The blend of confidence and doubt? At the
native citizens. It is conceivable, for example, to risk a figure that the present day state,
notwithstanding when it is avowedly liberal-majority rule, draws a line amongst popular
government and freedom and find freedom in impartial, rational and reasonable
impression of reality and in the optimistic progressivist hypothesis of history. The sense
of duty regarding the democracy turns out to be then an announcement of expectation
that the masses will eventually disguise the values of enlightenment on which positive
statecraft can be fabricated and endured in the meanwhile the nation- state seeking after
these values with a touch of paternalism.

At the point when India achieved opportunity in 1947, many of its subjects were unaware
of the democratic system. In any case, the absolutist control of the British Raj for two
centuries demolished the soul of the general population and the far reaching absence of
education constrained them to live in sub-human conditions. No big surprise some
political scholars had commented that majority rule governmentr would neglect to strike
establishes in the Indian soil.

It is the reality that elections in India have uncovered significant eagerness among the
masses. Since 1952, a substantial number of individuals have revealed unmistakable
fascination in voting. Many votes were proclaimed invalid in the first election. Numerous
voters, on account of lack of education, left ballot papers on the floor of the corners, booth
or on top of the polling station. This would suggest that the privilege to vote was allowed
well before the correct time. In any case, it can, in no way, shape or form, be disregarded
that they were definitely inspired by the constituent issues and wanted to participate in
the electoral affairs.

4.2 Post-Liberalisation Phase:

India, both geographically and demographically, is a huge country. It has 29 states and 7
union territories. After getting unified and independent, Indian political system with lot of
influences as discussed above got oriented towards the political system with supremacy
of constitution, democratic, republic and parliamentary system and separate branches of
government like execute branch, legislative branch and independent judiciary. Hence,
there has been a lot of variation from the ancient and medieval values, beliefs and
intentions about how the political system in India should be. Political system, being used
relatively in a broader terms by the scholars, is being used here mainly for referring the
type of government in India. Political parties and elections are also an important part of
the political system of India.

India is a world’s second largest population having more than 1.2 billion. It is the world’s
largest democracy. Constitution of India as framed by the constituent assembly, consists
of features of different constitutions of the world which were included in Indian constitution
to make it sustain its independence in spite of large scale diversity in different fields.
However, India’s political system is much more recent than the American or British
political system with its unique position in the world. It is the lengthiest as well as one of
the most amended constitution of the world. It contains parliamentary features of Britain,
federal features of Canada, United States and Australia. However, constitution mentioned
India as the union of state and not the federation of states.

The state now has more prominent empirical nearness and more historical substance.
The possibility of the state with which Indians worked after Independence had a mythic
quality about it. The established Indian state and the state in India's epic customs had
survived fundamentally in the brains of men, not in memorable reality. The idea of the
ideal Indian country, as it as far as anyone knows existed before outsiders ruined it, has
been seen with hard eye by these historians. Genuine, the perfect Indian state, similar to
whatever other mythic structure, could stimulate energy and steadfastness, yet they were
of an alternate kind.

Today, the nation state of India dwells less and less in the psyches of men; it is principally
what the Indians go up against on the ground. The unclearness, disorder, consider
jumbling, and failure to shut everything down or stamp out theoretical boundaries? Which
so are disapproved by political examiners in India? are now offering path to the sharp
operational definitions that the moderns savour. The scope of large alternatives once
accessible inside the Indian political culture has started to limit and a clear more goal
orientated path is being continuously been looked for.

Also, India is continuously shifting towards the urbanized and industrialized society which
can be shown by comparing the data of 2001 and 2011 population census:

Table 1 Administrative Unit in 2001

Administrative Unit 2001

Divisions 9

Districts 45

Tehsils 259

Community Development Blocks 313

Number of villages 55,393

Number of towns 394

Source: Census of India 2001

Table 2 Administrative Units in 2011

 Administrative Units 2011

Divisions 10

Districts 50

Tehsils 342

Community Development blocks 313

Number of villages 54,903

Number of towns 476

Source: Census of India 2011

The tables show how India is moving more and more towards urbanised nation-state.
Due to the growing urbanisation, the life style of the people has also changed. It has
brought more and more specialisation in the work. Society is becoming more and more
complex.

Along with what has been said above, political consciousness of a person makes him
aware about the rights, duties and actions he can perform in the society. Hence, it
increases his/her political participation. The political awareness in the individuals comes
from the education. Education not only can make a person aware about the political
system but also it can shape his attitude and orientation towards it. Hence, it becomes
important how much people literate and how much they know about their political system.

Proficiency in India is a key for financial progress, and the Indian education rate has
developed to 64.8% (2011 figure) from 12% toward the finish of British run in 1947.
Although this was a more noteworthy than six fold change, the level is beneath the world
normal proficiency rate of 84%, and of all countries, India as of now has the biggest
ignorant population. Despite government projects, India's proficiency rate expanded
slowly.

Table 3 Literacy rate in India 2011

Persons Male Female

Total Literacy rate 64.8% 75.3% 53.7%

Rural Literacy rate 58.7% 70.7% 46.1%

Urban Literacy rate 79.9% 86.3% 72.9%

Table 4 Literacy Rate 2011

Persons (%) Males (%) Females (%)

State with highest Kerala (90.9) Kerala (94.2) Kerala (87.7)

literacy rate

State with lowest Bihar (47.0) Bihar (59.7) Bihar (33.1)

literacy rate

UT with highest Lakshadweep Lakshadweep Lakshadweep

literacy rate (86.7) (92.5) (80.5)

UT with lowest Dadra & Nagar Dadra & Nagar Dadra & Nagar
literacy rate Haveli (57.6) Haveli (71.2) Haveli (40.2)

District with highest Aizwal, Mizoram Mahe, Pondicherry Aizwal, Mizoram

literacy rate (96.5) (97.6) (96.3)
 District with lowest Dantewada Dantewada Shrawasti UP
literacy rate Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh (18.58)
(30.17) (39.75)

Source: Census of India 2011

Table (3) shows the total literacy rate to be 64.8%. It means that still around 30%
population in India is illiterate. It is very likely that this 30% population doesn’t know about
the political system or its processes. Hence, their political participation will be the lowest
if any. Also, the table shows the vast difference in the literacy rate of urban and rural
areas as well as the difference between the literacy rate of male and female population.
It clearly shows that people in urban area will be well aware and more involved in the
political participation. Likewise, more male population is expected to participate politically
than the female population which can be proved various election data. Table (4) shows
the difference in the literacy rate within the sates, union territories and districts in India.

The participation of the people in election is indeed very important in order to make a
democracy successful. Elections are the globally accepted process which have been
accepted to be the processes ensuring people participation in government. However, if
we see in practical terms. From that point of view, our experience has not been particularly
encouraging. It is true a large number of people take part in the elections; but it is equally
true many others stay away from the polling booths for various reasons. In contrary to the
chances of the literate and educated persons to participate more in the political affairs it
can also be seen sometimes that the most “modern” individuals of the population show
little interested in the political affairs also.

Indian political culture can be viewed as a one of a kind case, or it can be viewed as the
exemplification of the way of life of popularity based nations in the world. On account of
the development of worldwide sensitivities and correspondences, one can discuss a
worldwide community based on democracy today. Inside this group, regardless of the
boundaries of individual societies, certain crosscurrents tend to stream and certain sorts
of borrowings do occur. For instance, the purchasing and offering of political pioneers
through the media, under the direction of hotshots of current administration, was first
idealized in the United States. In any case, it has been pushed to its coherent conclusion
in India, where the pathway from studios of film to charismatic political authority has now
been perfectly laid out. Similarly, the utilization of games to endorse national solidarity
and as a measure of national execution may have been first gone for effectively in
Australia, however it has since discovered its most vociferous representatives in South
Asia. It is in this setting I might rehash the current encounters of India as a general issue
of democratic political system in the world. A specific doubt of the general population, one
suspects, has turned into the dull underside of each modern state. The liberal democracy
expresses this in a unique and special frame.

As it were, even in an open society, the modern state anticipates that the citizens will
demonstrate their sense of duty regarding freedom and scientific rationality by tolerating
and acting as per the significance of freedom and objectivity given to them by the state
and by not pushing the nation- state too far in the path of tolerating the different
interpretations of freedom and the available rationality. The experience of India is not
common in that this connection amongst freedom and democracy is up 'til now open.
Because of the constrained reach of media in the nation, there are quite recently an
excessive number of Indians who decline to be appeased by the way that they have rights
of democracy; they need to practice the privilege to ensure or realize their different
dreams of a free society. Democratic system and freedom may even now be halfway
orthogonal in India in any case, since one is managing a little mass society or social
mixture having an immense country hinterland, such orthogonality remains the element
of only a piece of the general public. To the greater part of Indians, freedom appears to
be indivisible from participatory democratic system. While the advanced area in India
trusts that India will at last recreate the West European democratic and liberal experience
and walk the pathway from seventeenth-century renaissance to late twentieth-century
technocratic and private capitalist system, those outside that segment see the future as
open. To them, participatory popular government, instead of dynamite improvement or
headway in mega science, is the significant instrument for guaranteeing their democracy
based future. Actually, a piece of the developing resistance to the thoughts of
development and current science in India gets from the inconsistency that has emerged
amongst them and the democratic process. To the individuals who completely vest the
possibility of freedom in rationality and effective advancement, this inconsistency is a
calamity. To the individuals who see around them the caving in structure of conventional
wisdom, this is an appreciated pluralization and politicization of frameworks of knowledge
and methods of social interference.

The state now has more prominent empirical nearness and more historical substance.
The possibility of the state with which Indians worked after Independence had a mythic
quality about it. The established Indian state and the state in India's epic customs had
survived fundamentally in the brains of men, not in memorable reality. The idea of the
ideal Indian country, as it as far as anyone knows existed before outsiders ruined it, has
been seen with hard eye by these historians. Genuine, the perfect Indian state, similar
to whatever other mythic structure, could stimulate energy and steadfastness, yet they
were of an alternate kind.

Today, the nation state of India dwells less and less in the psyches of men; it is principally
what the Indians go up against on the ground. The unclearness, disorder, consider
jumbling, and failure to shut everything down or stamp out theoretical boundaries? Which
so are disapproved by political examiners in India? Are now offering path to the sharp
operational definitions that the moderns savor. The scope of large alternatives once
accessible inside the Indian political culture has started to limit and a clear more goal
orientated path is being continuously been looked for.

One change is the growing inclination of the Indian elites to recognize and equalize the
general development with the development of state. Indian state doesn't just hegemonise
every single social asset; it continuously and quickly consumes up an expanding extent
of the assets. In the event that one considers all the state's consumptions on itself, it can
be said to have effectively cornered every single regular focus of advancement; it
basically is associated with its own development. Notwithstanding when the state puts
resources into ordinary advancement, say in essential human services in provincial
territories, the lion's offer of contribution goes to the different wings of the state, to
organization and state-utilized proficient administrations, to the foundation of state
possessed pharmaceutical production lines, to "nationalized" restorative training and
general wellbeing research, and to the wellbeing arranging process itself. Also, quite a bit
of India's most dynamite accomplishments as of late have been in defence related
innovations, technologies and labour. These accomplishments are seen by the Indian
elites not as deviations from advancement but rather as characteristic for it. As the
nation's interior issues neglect to legitimize additionally reinforcing of the forceful power
of the state, such avocations are looked for in the apparent antagonistic vibe to India and
her neighbours. The assumption is that the strengthening of the Indian state itself
consequently guarantees the survival of India.

Second change is a growing inclination to recognize the rational and secular processes
of the Indian state with principle of tolerance of cultural diversity and diversity in terms of
ethnicity. The inclination has effectively made for present day Indians, of the integration
of different minority societies into the national standard and the administration of ethnic
clashes by smoothing diversities. Not exclusively are Indians ending up more reliant on
the state to guarantee tolerance in ethnicity, yet basically every ethnic clash or inter
religious quarrel is presently taken to the state for intervention. However, given that a
present day state has a tendency to be careful about all types of ethnicity, all the more if
they appear not to be able to adapt the demands of the state, such intervention has
stopped to be unbiased. Very much of the time, the decision party, the party in opposition,
the police, the administration, and to a degree the judiciary get included in ethnic savagery
as partisans, a peril basic to states the world over. These groups likewise, reluctantly yet
without a doubt, attempt to take political advantage at the standpoint of such contribution.

A third change is that the state has set up close, sacred connections with super science
and super innovation? not just on the grounds that it must rely on upon modern science
and innovation to offer teeth to its apparatus of coercion, additionally on the grounds that
it can utilize the accomplishments in these divisions, particularly when they are fabulous,
to legitimize itself as an archive of logical and scientific information and an invalidation of
local non rationality. The logical personality or personality full of scientific temperament
as a perfect (which has produced a mass of formally supported explanations,
presentations, and affiliations) is fundamental to this connection amongst knowledge,
information and power. The thought first emerged both in the hypothesis of the Burdon of
white man and in the belief systems of the nineteenth-century movements of reform such
as religious and also secular. Syed Ahmed Khan Rammohun Roy,Swami Vivekananda,
Bankimchandra Chattopadhyay are cases of social scholars and reformers who
suspected that the Western logical convention would excite or reactivate the indigenous
societies in the subcontinent and guarantee their survival in the contemporary world. In
the Post liberalization period this rationalism reached at its height and further increasing.
With regards to Europe's "fruitful" utilization of the way of life of logical objectivity, Indian
culture to these masterminds appeared to be buried in custom? Superstitious, dormant.
Presently this civilizational contrast has been incarnated and a similar talk richly invoked
for use against the old India.5 all the while, the standards of the logical personality and
social development have turned out to be two dimensional weapons. They provoke a
constant scan for terrific mechanical and hierarchical-organizational accomplishments as
proof of the cultural prevalence of the new elites, and a look for marvellous cases of the
debauchery or retrogression and regular irrationality of everyday existence as
confirmation of the social inadequacy of previous India. Also, diversity has turned into a
downsized homogeneity, in which the whole society is seen strolling, marginally winded,
the slanted plane of history, with a vast piece of it trailing behind an enlightened, edified
and confident minority.

Two noteworthy political-social and cultural outcomes have come about because of these
progressions. To start with, there is developing restlessness with legislative issues and
the majority rule or democratic process in a few segments of present day India. These
areas have not abandoned popular government, but rather they trust it has gone too far
and enabled the irrational, nonsensical, and underdeveloped components in the general
public. One part of this fretfulness is to continually look for mechanical and administrative
fixes to sidestep politics.

Hence, every regime comes to control with a flourishing expectations, with expectations,
enthusiasm and energy all around. In the principal half of its term, it looks immune, gets
great press, and appreciates the certainty of the scholarly people and the urban working
classes. Amid this period, all reactions of the administration appear to be unsupported,
uncivil, and even paranoiac. After the half way is over, the desires get with the
administration and its downgrading starts. In the second a large portion of, any support
for the regime looks untrustworthy or self-intrigued, and no measure of populism and
media administration makes it look persuading.

Conclusion:

The primary point, I expect, is clear. The Indian political culture has lately depended
increasingly on a blend of metropolitan and Indian high culture of the nation state. The
Indians talked of Ramarajya, actually the kingdom of Lord Rama or an ethical country. It
is dicey, in any case, that they anticipated that it would be realized. In an epic culture, the
possibility of Ramarajya crossed over the holy and the dishonour, the supernatural and
the ordinary, what was and what would never be. Previous dialect of the Brahminic and
the non-Brahminic, the folk and the classic, the literarily recommended and the practices
derived out of customs has been avoided. Indian political culture is moving far from the
pluralism that was previously present. It is a pointer of the intricacy of Indian culture that
even this definition has essential special cases, for example, the northern Indian
traditional music and form of dance, which are related with low status in some Muslim
people group or with the uncertain status of the devadasis in some Hindu people group.
The new culture of the state has come to depend increasingly on the growing urban,
middle class, pan-Indian culture, filling in as a rising mass culture. This mass culture is
not the focal inclination of the assorted cultures which are popular in the diverse areas
of India however an identifiable, very much limited culture like that of an American-style
mixture.

Keeping in mind all that has been said above, it doesn’t mean that the traditional elements
of the culture of Indian society have vanished altogether. In India, there arrived one of the
oldest civilizations of the world. It has been discussed that how many changes were
brought by various regimes which emerged and passed away with the due process of
time. However, they have given a new shape to the values, beliefs and orientations of the
people and not destroyed the values and beliefs which have been carried along up to the
modern India. This vast history is the cause for the large scale diversity and difference
which are sometimes used by the political actors to gain political benefits (e.g. political
parties) by invoking the emotions of the people which have their roots in the history. No
doubt, their lines are thinning continuously with the time but still these are seen as
resisting the growth and development of Indian state of which it is capable. Will
incorporating more and more capitalization, globalization and liberal-democratic values
bring more development and modernization? If yes, how? Is India deviating from its true
nature? Will reviving of the old and traditional values and system result in greater growth
and development of India? These are some questions which need to be answered and I
think their answers will further expand the scope of this project work. However, one thing
here is clear that India is moving more and more towards individualistic, liberal and
urbanized state with increasing economic and technological developments. How it will
effect in future, time is going to unfold the puzzle.

References:

Almond, G. A. (1956). Comparative Political Systems. Journal of Politics, XVIII.

Almond, G. A., & Powell, G. (1966). Comparative Politics: A Developmental Approach. Little Brown
publisher.

Almond, G. A., & Powell, G. B. (1966). Comparative Politics: A Developmental Approach. Little Brown.

Almond, G. A., & Verba, S. (1963). The Civic Culture. Prinston University Press.

Ball, A. R. (1971). Modern Politics and Government. Mcmillan Publisher.

Beer, B. H., & Ulam, A. B. (1962). Patterns of Government. New York: Random House publisher.

Bonn. (n.d.). Works of Edmund Burke (ed.) (Vol. IV).

Britannica, E. (2010). Gupta Dynasty: Empire in 4th Century.

Burks, A. W. (1966). The Government of Japan (2nd ed.). London: Crowell.

Chand, T. (2002). Modern Methods of Teaching Social Sciences. Sarup & Sons Publishers .
Dange, S. A. (1979). India from Communism to Slavery (3rd ed.). New Delhi Publishing House.

Davies, M. R., & Lewis, V. A. (1971). Models of Political Systems. Delhi: Vikas Publishers.

Eliot, C. (1921). Hindusm and Budhhism: An Historical Sketch. Munshiram Manoharlal .

Finer. (1962). The Role of Military in Politics. ISBN 0-86187-967-8.

Fitzsimons, M. A. (1970, November). The Indus Valley Civilization. The History Teacher, IV, 9-22.

Flood, & Gavin, D. (1966). An Introduction to Hinduism. Cambridge University Press.

Frye, R. M. (1991). Pre-Islamic and Early Islamic Cultures in Central Asia : In hostorical Perspective. (R. L.
Canfield, Ed.) Cambridge University Press.

Jha, D. N. (1977). Ancient India : An Introductory Outline (8th ed.). Manohar Publishers and Distributors.

Kavanagh, D. (1972). Political Culture. Macmillan.

Kundu, B. (1985). Was India In Primitive Communism in The Early Vedic Period. Annals of the Bhandarkar
Oriental Research Institute, LXVI, 63-83.

Laumakis, S. (2008). An Introduction to Bddhist philosophy. Cambridge Press University.

Macridis, R. C. (1961). Interest Groups in Comparative Politics. Journal of Politics, XXIII.

Majumdar, R. C. (1977). Ancient India. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.

Mascaro, J. (1965). The Upanishads. Penguin Books.

Mehta, & Lal, J. (1986). Advanced Study in The History of Medieval India (2nd ed., Vol. I). Sterling
Publishers Private Limited.

Michaels, & Axel. (2004). Hinduism: Past and Present. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Ore, O. (1988). Number Theory and Its History. Courier Dover Publications.

Parsons, T., & Shills, E. (1962). Towards a General Theory of Action. Nabu Press.

Parthian Pair of Earrings. (n.d.). New York: Marymount School.

Pye, L. W. (1962). Politics, Personality and Nation Building. Yale University Press.

Pye, L. W. (1966). Aspects of Political Development. Little Brown .

Reddy, K. (2003). Indian History. New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill.

Samuel, G. (2010). The Origins of Yoga and Tantra. Cambridge University Press.

Srivastava, A. L. (1961). History Of India 1000 - 1707. Shiva Lal Agarwala and Co.

Srivastava, A. L. (1964). Medieval Indian Culture. Jaipur: Shiva Lal Agarval and Company.

Strabo, & Jones, H. L. (1924). (Geographica, Ed.) Lodon: William Heinemann.

Winternitz, Moriz, Sarma, & Srinivasa, V. (1981). A History of Indian Literature: Introduction, Veda, Epics,
Puranas and Tantras. Motilal Banarsidass Publisher.