An Introduction to Political Theory PDF

https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF An Introduction to Political Theory FIFTH EDITION O.P. Gauba Formerly, Reader in Political Science Campus of Open Learning University of Delhi MACMILLAN https://telegram.me/Upsc...

https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF An Introduction to Political Theory FIFTH EDITION O.P. Gauba Formerly, Reader in Political Science Campus of Open Learning University of Delhi MACMILLAN https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF © O.P. Gauba, 1981, 1985, 1995, 2003, 2009 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without permission. Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. First edition, 1981 Second edition, 1985 Third revised edition, 1995 Reprinted, 1999-2001 (three times) Fourth edition, 2003 Reprinted, 2003, 2004 (twice), 2005 (twice), 2006, 2007 Fifth edition, 2009 Reprinted, 2009 (twice), 2010 MACMILLAN PUBLISHERS INDIA LTD Delhi Bangalore Chennai Kolkata Mumbai Ahmedabad Bhopal Chandigarh Coimbatore Cuttack Guwahati Hubli Hyderabad Jaipur Lucknow Madurai Nagpur Patna Pune Thiruvananthapuram Visakhapatnam Companies and representatives throughout the world ISBN 10: 0230-63888-0 ISBN 13: 978-0230-63888-4 Published by Rajiv Beri for Macmillan Publishers India Ltd 2/10, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi 110 002 Typeset by Text-o-Graphics Bl/56, Arawali Appartments, Sector 34, Noida 201 301 (UP) Printed at Magic International Pvt Ltd 26 E, Sector 31 (Industrial), Site IV, Greater Noida (UP) This book is meant for educational and learning purposes. The author(s) of the book has/have taken al! reasonable care to ensure that the contents of the book do not violate any existing copyright or other intellectual property rights of any person in any manner whatsoever. In the event the author(s) has/have been unable to track any source and if any copyright has been inadvertently infringed, please notify the publisher in writing for corrective action. https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Preface to the Fifth Edition The present edition of An Introduction to Political Theory is different from its previous edition in many ways. The entire text has been re-edited. New material has been incorporated at many places to improve the quality of its presentation, and to make it more logical, lucid, effective and up-to-date. Some of the new topics introduced in this edition include new sections on feminism, status of civil society, feminist perspective on the state, pluralist perspective on the state, communitarian perspective on justice, democracy as a way of life and concept of deliberative democracy. The new points, ideas and concepts included in this edition are reflected in the new, enlarged index of this edition. The illustrative material used in this edition has also been suitably revised, modified and supplemented. All flow charts, comparative charts and diagrams included in this edition bear suitable headings. A list of these charts has been given after the 'Contents'. Placement of many boxes containing definitions, charts and diagrams has been changed to make it more logical and reader-friendly. Bibliography has been rearranged, enlarged and updated. It is hoped that this edition of the book will prove more useful, reader-friendly and popular. Suggestions for further improvement will be welcome. New O.P. Gauba Delhi https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Preface to the Fourth Edition The present edition of An Introduction to Political Theory is almost newly written. The material on conventional topics has been considerably shortened without diluting its substance in order to accommodate new material dealing with the recent developments in the field of political theory. While the lucidity of its style has been maintained, its language has been simplified. Its contents have been rearranged with suitable connecting material to ensure proper placement of the new material. Further, I have tried to make it more reader-friendly by introducing new explanatory diagrams, flow charts, comparative charts and on-the-spot definitions of the new terms in boxes. The major topics which have been newly accommodated or elaborated include: nature and significance of political theory; the end of ideology debate; neo- liberalism, neo-Marxism, anarchism, Gandhism; communitarian perspective on politics; use of philosophy in the study of political science; state and civil society, nationalism and internationalism, current crisis of the nation-state, contemporary trends in advanced industrial countries and the third world; concept of popular sovereignty; contemporary challenges to sovereignty including legacy of imperialism, role of power blocs, process of globalization; communitarian, post- colonial and Gandhian perspectives on the state; concept of power including class perspective, elite theory, gender perspective, group perspective and constructive view of power; concept of citizenship including the nature, components and theories of citizenship, feminist and subaltern critiques of citizenship; concept of human rights including the genesis, scope and theories of human rights, civil liberties and democratic rights; relation between liberty and equality, equality and justice; social-democratic perspective on the right to property; diverse perspectives on justice including liberal, libertarian, Marxist, democratic- socialist, anarchist, feminist and subaltern perspectives; concept of the common https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF viii Preface to the Fourth Edition good including liberal, communitarian. Marxist and Gandhian perspectives: theory of participatory democracy including forms of political participation, concept of people's democracy; process of social change including Marxist theory of revolutionary change and liberal theory of incremental change; concept of development including alternative paths of development, sustainable development, environmentalism, and the concept of political development. In short, this new edition covers a fairly wide range of the problems of political theory and examines them in multifarious perspectives including liberal, neo-liberal, Marxist, neo-Marxist, post-colonial, elitist, communitarian, socialist, social-democratic, anarchist, Gandhian, pluralist, environmentalist, feminist and subaltern perspectives. Suggestions for further improvement will be most welcome. O.R Gauba https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Preface to the First Edition Political theory is an ever-growing subject. Some classical issues of political philosophy, which were sought to be excluded from the sphere of the so-called modern political theory, are now being reconsidered in a new perspective. The empirical theory, which has considerably enriched our knowledge of the theoretical foundations of politics is now being used as an aid to a better understanding of classical issues, including those concerned with value-judgement. The traditional texts on political theory have served our needs for several decades. But today they have become largely outmoded because they were restricted to a discussion of conventional topics, in a conventional manner, hardly indicating the scope of alternative interpretations and their comparative evaluation. These books were mostly descriptive, hardly analytical. For instance, these texts do not indicate why the 'social contract' theory embodies a typical, liberal interpretation of the origin and nature of the state, as distinguished from the idealist and Marxist theories. They hardly provide an analysis of politics as a process with the liberal and Marxist viewpoints as alternative models of interpretation. They usually lack modern empirical insights, e.g. they seldom touch upon elitist, pluralist and Marxist theories in their discussion of democracy. At best, they include a chapter on Marxism cut off from the mainstream, overlooking the immense possibilities of Marxist interpretation of several issues, e.g. nature of politics, origin, nature and functions of the state, theories of rights, freedom, property and democracy. With the modernization of the courses of study, these problems are required to be understood in a comparative perspective, particularly against the background of liberal and Marxist interpretations, with occasional references to the idealist theory. The present book is a modest attempt to meet this requirement, especially https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF X Preface to the Erst Edition of Indian students. It seeks to combine various prevalent approaches to the study of political theory—classical and modern, descriptive and analytical, empirical and normative. An attempt has been made to avoid a doctrinaire approach. Any stand taken on a particular issue, maintaining consistency throughout the book, is sought to be substantiated by suitable arguments and data. In any case, I make no claim to prescribe readymade solutions for all the problems of the present-day world. In my opinion, an author's job is adequately done if he is able to bring out the complexities of the problems and indicate the main approaches, so that he inspires his readers to think for themselves rather than to look for ready-made solutions which will hardly work! Any suggestions for improvement will be most welcome. O.P. Gauba https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Contents Preface to the Fifth Edition v Preface to the Fourth Edition vii Preface to the First Edition ix Flow Charts, Comparative Charts and Diagrams xv 1. Nature and Significance of Political Theory 1 Nature of Political Theory; Significance of Political Theory; Debate on the Decline of Political Theory 2. Concept of Ideology 14 Ideology as a Set of Ideas—Ideology, Politics and Political theory; Ideology as the Science of Ideas; Ideology and Totalitarianism; End of Ideology Debate; Liberalism—Neo-Liberalism; Marxism—Neo- Marxism; Socialism; Fascism; Anarchism; Gandhism; Feminism 3. Nature of Politics 80 Politics as a Process; Different Views of Politics—The Liberal View; The Marsist View; The Communitarian View 4. Approaches to the Study of Politics 94 Introduction; Traditional Approaches; Contemporary Approaches— Behavioural Approach; Post-Behavioural Revolution; Models of Political Analysis—Systems Analysis; Structural-Functional Analysis; Communications Theory; Desicion-Making Analysis; Marxian Analysis 5. Interdisciplinary Perspective on Political Science 121 The Interdisciplinary Approach; Usefulness of Other Social Sciences— The Use of History; The Use of Economics; The Use of Sociology; The Use of Psychology; The Use of Philosophy https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF xii Content s 6. Concept of the State 132 Significance of the State; The State and Other Associations— State and Society; State and Civil Society, State and Government; State and Nation; Rise and Growth of the Modern Nation-State; Nationalism and Internationalism; Current Crisis of the Nation-State; Contemporary Trends in Advanced Industrial Countries and the Third World; Status of Civil Society 7. Concept of Sovereignty 162 Meaning of Sovereignty; Characteristics of Sovereignty; Aspects of Sovereignty; Concept of Popular Sovereignty 8. Pluralist Theory of Sovereignty 177 Genesis of the Pluralistic Theory; The Principles of Pluralism; Exponents of the Pluralist Theory 9. Contemporary Challenges to Sovereignty 192 Legacy of Imperialism; Role of the Power Blocs; Process of Globalization 10. Diverse Perspectives on the State 202 Organic Theory of the State; Liberal-Individualist Perspective—Theory of the Social Contract, Theory of Laissez-Faire Individualism; Welfare State Perspective; Class Perspective; Communitarian Perspective; Post-Colonial Perspective; Gandhian Perspective; Feminist Perspective; Pluralist Perspective 11. Grounds and Limits of Political Obligation 261 Theories of Unlimited Obligation; Theories of Limited Obligation; Theories Against Political Obligation; Gandhian Perspective 12. Concept of Law 270 Nature of Law—Natural Law School, Analytical Jurisprudence, Historical Jurisprudence; Sociological Jurisprudence; Sources of Law; Sphere of Law—Law and Morality, Law and Liberty; Rule of Law 13. Concept of Power 282 Nature and Significance of Power; Power, Authority and Legitimacy— Weber's Analysis; Different Forms of Power—Political Power, Economic Power, Ideological Power; The Structure of Power; Class Perspective— Power and Hegemony (Gramsci's Analysis); Elite Theory (Pareto, Mosca, Michel, C. Wright Mills); Gender Perspective (Feminist Theory); Group Perspective (Pluralist Theory); Constructive View of Power (Hannah Arendt) https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Content xiii s 14. Concept of Citizenship 305 Nature of Citizenship; Components of Citizenship: Civil, Political and Social Rights; Theories of Citizenship—Liberal Theory, Libertarian Theory, Communitarian Theory, Marxist Theory, Pluralist Theory; Critiques of Citizenship—Feminist Critique, Subaltern Critique 15. Concept of Human Rights 319 Nature of Human Rights; Concept of Rights; Conventional Theories of Rights; Social-Democratic Perspective; Marxist Perspective; Genesis of Human Rights; Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Scope of Human Rights; Theories of Human Rights 16. Concept of Liberty 348 Nature of Liberty; Scope of Liberty; Dimensions of Liberty—Civil, Political, Economic; Liberal-Individualist View of Liberty—Negative and Positive Liberty; Marxist Concept of Freedom 17. Concept of Equality 372 Idea of Equality; Rational Grounds of Discrimination; Debate on Reverse Discrimination; Dimensions of Equality—Legal, Political, Socio-Economic; Liberty and Equality; Equality and Justice 18. Right to Property 394 Nature and Scope of Property; Liberal Perspective; Social-Democratic Perspective; Marxist Perspective 19. Concept of Justice 413 Idea of Justice; Relation between Liberty, Equality and Justice; Dimensions of Justice—Legal, Political, Socio-Economic; Distinction between Procedural Justice and Substantive Justice 20. Diverse Perspectives on Justice 427 Liberal Perspective—Rawls's Theory of Justice; Libertarian Perspective—Nozick's Theory of Justice; Marxist Perspective; Democratic-Socialist Perspective; Anarchist Perspective; Feminist Perspective; Subaltern Perspective; Communitarian Perspective 21. Concept of the Common Good 455 Nature of the Common Good; Liberal Perspective; Communitarian Perspective; Marxian Perspective; Gandhian Perspective 22. Concept of Democracy 472 Classical Notion of Democracy; Concept of Liberal Democracy; Problems of Representation—Theories of Representation; Electoral Systems—Plurality System, Majoritarian System, Proportional Representation; Methods of Minority Representation—Concurrent https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF xiv Contents Majority, Consociational Democracy; Conditions for Successful Working of Democracy; Democracy as a Way of Life 23. Contemporary Theory of Democracy 494 Elitist Theory; Pluralist Theory; Theory of Participatory Democracy— Forms of Political Participation; Marxist Theory of Democracy; Dictatorship of the Proletariat; Concept of People's Democracy; Marxist Theory versus Elitist Theory of Democracy; Radical Theory of Democracy; Concept of Deliberative Democracy 24. Process of Social Change 521 Nature of Social Change; Marxist Theory of Revolutionary Change— Dialectical Materialism, Historical Materialism, Theory of Revolution; Liberal Theory of Incremental Change 25. Concept of Development 536 Meaning of Development; Notion of the Third World; From Underdevelopment to Development—Liberal View, Marxist View; Alternative Paths of Development—Market Society Model, Welfare State Model, Socialist Model, Gandhian Model; Concept of Sustainable Development; Development and Environmentalism; Concept of Political Development; Nation-Building and State-Building Further Reading 557 Index 563 https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Flow Charts, Comparative Charts and Diagrams 1. Dimensions of Ideology 18 2.. Marxian View of the Stages of Historical Development 35 3. Comparative Study of Marxian and Gandhian Views 69 4. Issues Relating to Sex and Gender 72 5. Different View of Politics 93 6. Distinction between Empirical and Normative Approaches 98 7. Distinction between Behavioural and Post-behavioural Approaches 108 8. Easton's Model of Political System 109 9. Model of Structural-Functional Analysis 113 10 Marxian Analysis of Historical Stages 119.11 Structures of Domination in Bourgeois State 120.12 Comparative Study of the State and Civil Society 160.13 Genesis of the General Will 175.14 Weber's Analysis of Authority 284.15Gramsci's Analysis of Bourgeois Society 292.16 Comparative Perspective on Power 300.17 Hannah Arendt's Analysis of Power 302.18 Macpherson's Analysis of Power 303.19 Nature of Citizenship 305.20 Comparative Perspective on Citizenship 315. https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF xvi HowQiarts, Comparative Charts and Diagrams 21. Relation between Democratic Rights, Civil Liberties and Human Rights 343 22. Comparative Perspective on Human Rights 347 23. Interface between Authority, Liberty and License 350 24. Distinction between Elite and Subaltern Perspectives 450 25. Comparative Perspective on Justice, Common Good and Public Interest 457 26. Comparative Perspective on the Common Good 471 27. Forms of Political Participation 500 28. Comparative Study of Marxist and Elitist Theories of Democracy 512 29. Nature of Deliberative Democracy 520 30. An Outline of Historical Materialism 529 31. Alternative Paths of Development 548 32. Characteristics of Political Development: Comparative Study 555 https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 1 Nature and Significance of Political Theory A S HUMAN BEINGS we live in society. Society includes many institutions like family, school, religious organization, polity, etc. Every institution serves some specific purpose. It involves some organization and use of authority. Authority denotes a relationship of command and obedience where the command is generally regarded to be reasonable. Mild protests, if any, would not upset the authority. NATURE OF POLITICAL THEORY WHAT IS POLITICAL? When an organization is designed to regulate the whole community, it takes the character of polity. Polity, therefore, denotes an organization where rules are made and decisions are taken for the whole community, and authority is exercised over each member of the community. The term 'political' refers to something that is 'public', as distinguished from private or something applicable to a limited number of persons. Sheldon S. Wolin, in his Politics and Vision (1960) has beautifully summed up the characteristics of the 'political' as follows: Of all the authoritative institutions in society, the political arrangement has been singled out as uniquely concerned with what is 'common' to the whole community. Certain functions, such as national defense, internal order, the dispensing of justice, and economic regulation, have been declared the primary responsibility of political institutions, largely on the grounds that the interests and ends served by these functions were beneficial to all of the members of the community. https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 2 An Introduction to Political Theory Thus polity or the state enjoys a unique position among social institutions. It is so important that Aristotle (an ancient Greek philosopher) described man by nature a 'political animal'. Living in a state was so natural for a person that he who lived outside the state or who did not need a state was either a beast or an angel! The terms 'polity', 'politics' and 'political' are derived from the Greek word 'polis' which denoted ancient Greek city-state. The Greek city-states were relatively small communities which were separated from each other by geographical barriers, like forests, mountains and seas. Each city-state had evolved a compact social life and culture where all institutions and activities were knit together. These institutions and activities which were aimed at securing 'good life' for the community were regarded to be the part of 'polities'. However, in the present- day society the scope of politics is not regarded to be so comprehensive. Today we draw a distinction between public and private spheres of human life, and confine the usage of the term 'politics' to the institutions and activities falling in the public sphere. Thus the decisions of cabinet and parliament, election campaigns and other activities of political parties, people's movements seeking change in law and public policy, etc. belong to politics but the object of our faith and worship, the content of our education, art and culture, etc. do not properly belong to the sphere of politics until some regulation thereof is required to maintain public order and safety! SCOPE OF POLITICAL THEORY After identifying the nature and scope of the 'political', we are now ready to understand the nature of political theory. The term 'theory' stands for a systematic knowledge. Thus 'political theory' denotes a systematic knowledge of political phenomena. What type of knowledge do we require about the political phenomena in the realm of political theory? Broadly speaking, political theory is concerned with three types of statements: (1) Empirical statement, which is based on observation, through sense-experience alone; (2) Logical statement, which is based on reasoning (e.g. 'two plus two is four'); and (3) Evaluative statement, which is based on value-judgment (e.g. 'men are born free and equal'). Political science relies only on empirical and logical statements. It is argued that correct observation and correct reasoning by different persons would lead to the similar conclusion; hence empirical and logical statements are capable of verification. On the other hand, it is alleged that evaluative statements are based on individual or group preferences which differ from individual to individual or group to group; there is no reliable method of determining what is right or wrong, good or bad; one cannot scientifically discover the purpose of the universe or human life. Exponents of 'Logical Positivism' argue that evaluative statements have no empirical content or logical structure; they are expressions of https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Nature and Significance of Political Theory 3 subjective reflection or emotional preference. Likewise, champions of scientific method for the study of politics insist on a 'value-free' or 'value-neutral' approach. In any case, political theory cannot be confined to the so-called scientific knowledge. It is equally concerned with determining values which come within the scope of philosophy. We cannot accept the view that values are based on individual or group preferences. On the contrary, values do have a sound logical structure unless we mistake them for biased statements. Upholders of different values can be invited to have a dialogue, to have an opportunity to understand each other's point of view, to convince each other and probably to agree on certain universal principles to judge the validity of values. Determination of values is the basis of a sound public policy or decision. If we abdicate this responsibility, it may fall in irresponsible hands, with disastrous consequences. Hence political theory must comprehend both political science and political philosophy. Logical Positivism A school of thought founded by German sociologist Max Weber (1864-1920) and the members of Vienna Circle (Moritz Schlick, Ludwig Wittgenstein, AJ. Ayer, etc.) in the early decades of the twentieth century. It holds that reliable and valid knowledge in any field of inquiry can be obtained only by empirical method (i.e. observation based on sense-experience). The questions concerning values are beyond the scope of scientific knowledge; hence it is not possible to obtain reliable knowledge about them. Dwelling on the nature of political theory, George Catlin (Political Quarterly, March 1957) significantly observed: "the theory (of politics) itself is divided into political science and political philosophy. " Pleading for combining the study of political science with sociology, Catlin asserted: "it is the supreme virtue of the fusion of sociology and political science that it could enable us to be sharp-eyed for the phenomena of control in its many forms, over all the processes of the whole social field." (ibid.) Then defining the scope of political philosophy, Catlin explained: "Our concern here... is with the kingdom of ends or final values... So soon as a man begins to ask, 'What is for the national good?' or 'What is the good society?', he is asking questions in philosophy." (ibid.) In short, Catlin proceeds to identify the nature of political theory by pointing to its two important components: political science and political philosophy. As he has suggested, political science deals with the facts of political life (i.e. what is the real situation and which laws govern our actual behaviour) while political philosophy is concerned with values (i.e. what is good for us). Andrew Hacker (Political Theory: Philosophy, Ideology, Science; 1961) also dwells on these two major components of political theory but he introduces some new factors to elaborate the issue. Hacker writes: "Every political scientist plays a double role. He is part scientist and part philosopher... no theorist can https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 4 An Introduction to Political Theory make a lasting contribution to human knowledge unless he works in the realms of both science and philosophy. The scientific parts of a theory can only achieve coherence and significance if the writer has a preconceived idea or the goals of political life." Commenting on the role of political science Hacker observes: "The theorist whose pursuit is political science is interested in describing and explaining the realities of political behaviour. He attempts to draw up generalized propositions about the actual relations between states and citizens and about the role of power in society." (ibid.) About the role of political philosophy he comments: "The theorist whose interest is in writing political philosophy, on the other hand, is concerned with prescribing the goals which citizens, states and societies ought to pursue. His aim is to generalize about right conduct in the political life and about the legitimate uses of power." (ibid.) Adequate knowledge of political science is essential for sound political philosophy. As Hacker points out, "the philosophical parts of a theory must be informed by a profound understanding of the facts of political life. The best political philosophers have always been well aware of the existing realities; they have given intense and systematic study to the needs and capabilities of man and society." (ibid.) NATURE OF POLITICAL SCIENCE In consonance with the requirements of scientific method political science proceeds by the following steps: (a) Observation, which relies on sense-experience alone and rules out supernatural or metaphysical causation (because it is beyond our sense-experience); (b) Generalization which is based on observation of regularities leading to establishing the relation and correlation between different factors or variables. This may either be obtained by the inductive method (proceeding from 'particular to general', i.e. arriving at a general rule after observing similarities in particular cases), or by the deductive method (proceeding from 'general to particular', i.e. postulating a general rule and then confirming it by observation of particular cases). Generalization must be expressed in the form of a general rule, preferably in quantitative terms, which should be capable of verification by experimentation; (c) Explanation which consists in giving reasons for the general rule, for without such reasoning any observation of correlation might be a mere coincidence; explanation alone will make particular events, situations or tendencies meaningful; and finally; (d) Prediction and Prescription so that in the light of known facts and general rules, their possible outcome could be known and measures for achieving such objectives as higher efficiency, stability, satisfaction, etc., could be suggested. Behavioural approach to the study of politics insists on studying the actual behaviour of human beings in a political situation rather than describing salient features of political institutions and their legal position. In the behavioural approach formal political institutions are dissolved into 'systems' and 'processes' so as to https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Nature and Significance of Political Theory 5 focus attention on the actual behaviour of political actors, which alone is capable of scientific study. However, post-behavioural approach insists on making the achievements of political science subservient to human values and ends. Hence it heralds revival of concern with 'values' without compromising scientific method for the study of' facts'. In short, post-behaviouralism calls for application of political science for overcoming the prevailing crises in various spheres of human life. NATURE OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY It is sometimes alleged that political science deals with the 'real' while political philosophy deals with the 'ideal'. According to this viewpoint, political science inquires into what men and women actually do in a political situation while political philosophy tries to determine what they ought to do in keeping with the ultimate good or purpose of human life. But this view does not define the scope of political philosophy adequately. Political philosophy may properly be recognized by its 'critical' function. As D.D. Raphael (Problems of Political Philosophy; 1976) significantly observed: "It is true that some of the classical political philosophers have set out ideal forms of society, but... this has not been their central concern. Even in Plato, the purpose of depicting an ideal society is to criticize existing society and to promote understanding of general social concepts such as justice." According to Raphael, the fundamental purpose of traditional philosophy has been the critical evaluation of beliefs: "Philosophy differs from science in that science seeks explanation while philosophy seeks justification", (ibid.) The term 'justification' implies the attempt to give rational grounds either for accepting or rejecting the beliefs which we normally take for granted without thinking of any grounds thereof. Another closely related function of political philosophy is the clarification of concepts. As Raphael has pointed out, many of these concepts, such as the concept of society, authority, social class, justice, liberty and democracy, are not only highly general but also vague. Clarification of such concepts involves three related purposes: analysis, synthesis and improvement of concepts. Analysis of a concept involves specifying its elements, often by way of definition, such as defining sovereignty as supreme legal authority. Synthesis of concepts implies showing the logical relationships between two concepts, such as showing that the concept of a right involves that of an obligation. Improvement of a concept implies recommending a definition or use that will assist clarity or coherence, such as recommending that the concept of sovereignty should be applied only to the legal authority of a state, and not to its coercive power. CONCLUSION It may be conceded that political philosophy deals with the needs, objectives and goals of human life which cannot be scientifically ascertained. But these can https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 6 An Introduction to Political Theory always be discussed by the right-thinking people, argued on the basis of available data and reasoning, and some acceptable point may be reached at the current level of our social consciousness. Most of the arguments can be picked up for further scrutiny from the long tradition of political thought, new arguments can be introduced thereto and conclusions drawn from the expanding horizons of our knowledge. Hence, the search for values and a critical review of our position is an ongoing process which justify the continuing pursuit of political philosophy. In fact political philosophy itself arose from a critical reflection of political activity which existed long before the advent of political philosophy. It exemplified the Socratic function of 'speaking truth to power'. Hacker particularly cautions us to distinguish political theory from 'ideology'. A theory—whether it takes the character of science or philosophy—must be dispassionate and disinterested. When a theorist has no personal interest in any political arrangement, "his vision of reality and his image of the good life will not be clouded, nor will his theory be special pleading... The intention of ideology is to justify a particular system of power in society. The ideologue is an interested party: his interest may be to defend things as they are or to criticize the status quo in the hope that a new distribution of power will come into being." (Political Theory: Philosophy, Ideology, Science). When theory is clouded by ideology, it is bound to be distorted. Political philosophy aims at a disinterested search for the principles of the good state and the good society. When clouded by ideology, it is reduced to a rationalization for current or future political and social arrangements. For instance, upholders of capitalism regard private property as most conducive to justice and social progress while upholders of socialism regard social ownership of means of production as the most suitable method of achieving these ends. Similarly, upholders of nationalism place national pride and national interest above any other goal while supporters of internationalism tend to disregard national boundaries to determine the index of human progress. In a nutshell, all ideologies are biased towards partisan ends. Any such bias obstructs our search for truth. Political science demands a disinterested search for knowledge of political and social reality. When clouded by ideology, it is reduced to partial or selective depiction, resulting in a distorted description or explanation of political and social reality. Scholarly detachment is, therefore, the keynote of political theory in real sense of the term. Ideology A set of ideas and arguments used to defend an. existing or a proposed distribution of power in society. These ideas are accepted to be true by their upholders without inquiring into their validity. The ruling class may propagate its ideology to strengthen its own position while its opponents may use their ideology to mobilize the people to replace the existing order by a new one to achieve some great objectives. https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Nature and Significance of Political Theory 7 Political science and political philosophy play complementary roles in the realm of political theory. Significance of political theory may, therefore, be sought in both of these areas. CONTROL OF SOCIAL LIFE Scientific analysis of political life enables us to understand and solve the problems of our social life. Just as the knowledge of geology helps us in understanding the causes of earthquake and gives us insights for preventing the havoc caused by it, so political science enables us to understand the causes of conflict and violence in society and gives us insights for preventing their outburst. Just as the knowledge of physics enables us to generate electricity from our thermal and water resources, so the knowledge of political science enables us to secure development of society from our human resources. Just as the knowledge of medical science enables us to control and cure various diseases of human body, so political science guides us to find remedies of political instability and various types of social crises. SOCIAL CRITICISM AND RECONSTRUCTION Political philosophy is primarily concerned with right and wrong, good and evil in social life. When we find something wrong in our society and polity, we look for logical grounds for criticizing it and speculate about the creation of a good society. A galaxy of political philosophers, like Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Hegel, Marx, Mill and Macpherson have pointed to the prevailing ills in society and they have given their own schemes of social reconstruction. We cannot accept any of these proposals as the final truth. But they give us ample insights into the possible ills of social life and their remedies. We can draw our own scheme of social reconstruction on the basis of these insights. For example, Plato brilliantly exposed the modus operandi of selfish and cunning politicians in a democracy. Machiavelli vividly described the character of selfish and greedy people. Marx analysed the sources of conflict between the owners and non-owners of property, and Macpherson pointed to the intricacies of power structure in contemporary society which obstructs the way to creative freedom of individual. We can draw valuable insights from their thought for finding remedies to the existing ills in the present-day society. CLARIFICATION OF CONCEPTS Political philosophy helps us a lot in the clarification of concepts used in the analysis of social and political life. In fact the clarification of concepts in each area of study—whether science or philosophy—is essential for the development of knowledge. This task is particularly difficult in the field of political theory. https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 8 An Introduction to Political Theory As Sheldon S. Wolin has pointed out: "there is the widespread tendency to utilize the same words and notions in describing non-political phenomena that we do in talking about political matters. In contrast to the restricted technical usages of mathematics and the natural sciences, phrases like 'the authority of the father', 'the authority of the church', or 'the authority of Parliament' are evidence of the parallel usages prevailing in social and political discussions." (Politics and Vision; 1960) So when we use the terms of common parlance in political discourse, it is very important to determine their technical meaning. Moreover, the terms like authority, social class, liberty, equality, justice, democracy, etc. may be applied by different schools of thought to indicate different ideas. Political philosophy tries to determine their precise meaning which should be acceptable to the upholders of different ideologies. Agreement on the meaning of the terms of political discourse does not necessarily mean that they come to accept each other's viewpoint. But it certainly paves the way for their dialogue. For example, if a liberal and a socialist accept the same meaning of 'freedom' or 'equality', they are likely to appreciate each other's viewpoint. As long as precise meanings of the terms of political discourse are not determined, some people may apply them so cleverly as to conceal a weak point of their argument. Some selfish leaders and demagogues may use these terms to mislead people by creating an emotional appeal and evading reason, and autocrats may apply them to legitimize their oppressive regimes, as Mussolini (1883-1945) did in Italy. Again, a precise and widely accepted definition of a term enables each thinker to build his argument on sound footing. As every innovative mechanic need not invent a wheel to assemble a new machine, so every new thinker need not devise new terminology to present his point of view. ENCOURAGEMENT TO MUTUAL RESPECT AND TOLERATION The tradition of political theory encourages a dignified debate between upholders of different points of view. Most political philosophers from ancient times till the present-day have been dwelling on some common problems and giving us new insights. As Andrew Hacker has significantly observed: "Political theory is a never-ending conversation among theorists. And while the greatest of the debates are never resolved, the criticisms which the writers make of each other are always most vivid and illuminating.... Politics is, after all, the most democratic of sciences. The final judgements concerning political reality and the good life are the responsibility of all who undertake the study of theory." (Political Theory: Philosophy, Ideology, Science) When we follow the tradition of political philosophers, it inspires us to understand each other's viewpoint. It gives us an opportunity to identify the strengths and https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Nature and Significance of Political Theory 9 weaknesses of our thought, to convince others and be convinced by others when truth is discovered. In short, political theory generates mutual respect and toleration among us and prompts us to resolve our differences peacefully. CONCLUSION Broadly speaking, political theory consists of political science and political philosophy. These two branches of political theory taken together perform three functions which are recognized as the functions of political theory: (a) Description; (b) Criticism; and (c) Reconstruction. Political science mainly relies on empirical method, that is the knowledge based on our practical experience which is supposed to be most reliable, Hence it specializes in 'description'. Political philosophy being concerned with value-judgment specializes in 'criticism' and 'reconstruction'. Advocates of positivism, neo-positivism (logical positivism) and behaviouralism wish to confine political theory to the sphere of political science. They argue that evaluative statements are based on individual or group preferences which differ from individual to individual, and group to group. There is no reliable method of determining what is right or wrong, good or bad; one cannot scientifically discover the purpose of the universe or human life. Hence the questions of value-judgment should be dropped from the purview of political theory altogether. However, since the advent of post-behaviouralism (1969) and consequent upon the revival of political philosophy in the 1970s and 1980s there has been a renewed emphasis on values in the realm of political theory. It is now argued that value-judgment serves as an essential guide to social policy. Indifference to value- judgment will leave society in the dark. The emerging concerns with environmentalism, feminism human rights and social justice for the subaltern groups, etc. call for exploring the new horizons of value-judgment. If political theory tends to relinquish this important function, it may be grabbed by some less competent agency. As David Held (Political Theory Today; 1991; Editor's Introduction) has pointed out: "Taken as a whole, the tasks of political theory are unquestionably demanding. In the absence of their systematic pursuit, there is always the danger that politics will be left to the ignorant and self-interested, or to those simply with a 'will to power'." Thus all the functions of political theory have now become very important and urgent in the present-day world where most of our problems are assuming global dimensions and they are being recognized as the problems of humanity as such. Political theory implies an intellectual effort to attain a systematic knowledge about the goals and methods of politics. In this sense it has a long tradition spreading over two-and-a-half milleniums. However, in mid twentieth century https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 10 AnIntmdmi °" to Polity Theofy the exponents of new political science began to question the continued relevance of the traditional political theory. David Easton, an American political scientist, in his Political System: An Inquiry into the State of Political Science (1953) asserted that the traditional political theory was based on mere speculation. It was devoid of acute observation of the political reality. In order to lay scientific foundations of the study of politics, it was necessary to rescue it from the study of classics and the history of political ideas. Easton argued that the traditional political theory was the product of the turmoil that characterized the past ages. It particularly flourished in Greece in pre-Plato days, Italy in the fifteenth century, England in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries or France in the eighteenth century which were the days of widespread social and political upheaval. It had no relevance in contemporary society. Easton also pointed out that there has been no outstanding political philosopher after Marx (1818-83) and J.S. Mill (1806-73). Why live parasitically on a century-old ideas? Easton argued that while economists and sociologists had produced a systematic study of human behaviour in their respective spheres of investigation, political scientists had lagged behind. They failed to acquire suitable research tools to account for the rise of fascism or communism and their continuance! Again, during the Second World War (1939-45) economists, sociologists and psychologists had played an active role in the decision-making process, but political scientists were ignored. Easton, therefore, appealed for building up a behavioural political science, closer to other social sciences, to take its due place in the decision-making process. He suggested that while traditional political theory was primarily concerned with evolving suitable values for society, modern political science need not make efforts in this direction. He believed that values represent individual or group preferences relative to the social conditions in which these are developed. Contemporary society would evolve its own value system from its own experience and insight. Political scientists should only focus on building causal theory to explain political behaviour. Causal Theory The theory that explains the relation between cause and effect. In other words, it inquires into the cause of what happens; and anticipates what will happen if certain cause is present. However, Easton changed his view after one-and-a-half decades. In his presidential address to the American Political Science Association in 1969 he launched his 'post-behavioural' revolution. In fact Easton was trying to convert political science from a 'pure science' to 'applied science'. He insisted that https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Nature and Significance of Political Theory 11 scientific investigation should enable the contemporary society to tide over the prevailing crisis. This also involved a renewed concern with values which were sought to be excluded in the earlier behavioural approach. The debate on the decline of political theory which appeared in 1950s was also joined by some other prominent writers. Thus Alfred Cobban in his paper on 'The Decline of Political Theory' published in Political Science Quarterly (1953) argued that political theory had lost its significance in capitalist as well as communist systems. Capitalist systems were inspired by the idea of 'libertarian democracy' whereas there was no political theorist of democracy. It was also characterized by an overwhelming role of bureaucracy and the creation of a huge military machine. Political theory had practically to play no role in sustaining this system. On the other hand, communist systems were characterized by a new form of party organization and the rule of a small oligarchy. Political theory had taken a back seat under these systems. Cobban pointed out that Hegel and Marx were interested in a small part of the universe. Hegel was primarily concerned with 'territorial state' and Marx with 'proletariat class'. They wanted to discover what was predestined within their respective frames of reference. Contemporary politics was operating on such a large scale that it could not be analysed in the light of any partial or narrow theory. Besides, logical positivists who sought to concentrate on facts to the exclusion of values were also responsible for the decline of political theory. However, Cobban came to the conclusion that all was not yet lost. Political science has to answer questions which the methodology of social sciences may not be able to answer. It must evolve criteria of judgment which will revive the relevance of political science. Then Seymour Martin Lipset in his Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics (1960) argued that the values of the contemporary society had already been decided. In the United States the age-old search for 'good society' had come to an end because they had already achieved it. The prevailing form of democracy in that country was "the closest approximation to the good society itself in operation." Thus Lipset, too, questioned the continued relevance of political theory in those days. Indeed the exponents of behavioural approach sought to strengthen scientific basis of the study of politics and to delink it from political philosophy. But the champions of political philosophy never approved their stand. Leo Strauss in his famous paper 'What is Political Philosophy?' published in Journal of Politics (1957) and in 'An Epilogue' to Essays on the Scientific Study of Politics (edited by Herbert J. Storing; 1962) argued that the new science of politics was in fact a symptom of the alleged decline of political theory. By adopting positivist approach it had ignored the challenge of normative issues. Empirical theory of politics asserts equal importance of all social values. It denies that certain things are https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 12 An Introduction to Political Theory intrinsically high while others are intrinsically low. Thus it obliterates the distinction between men and brutes as if it destroys the identity of clean water by mixing it with dirty water. Positivism The view that relies on scientific method as the only source of true knowledge. It rejects superstition, religion and metaphysics as pre-srientific forms of thought. It holds that all knowledge is ultimately based on sense-experience. Hence empirical method must be adopted for any genuine inquiry in the field of social sciences as well as physical sciences. Commenting on this debate Dante Germino in his Beyond Ideology: The Revival of Political Theory (1967) argued that in most of the nineteenth century and early twentieth century there were two major causes of the decline of political theory: (a) the rise of positivism which led to the craze for science; and (b) the prevalence of political ideologies culminating in Marxism. But now it was again in ascendancy, particularly in the political thought of Michael Oakeshott, Hannah Arendt, Bertrand de Jouvenal, Leo Strauss and Eric Voegelin. This list was expanded by Germino in a subsequent paper (1975) so as to include John Rawls, C.B. Macpherson, Christian Bay, Robert Nozick, Herbert Marcuse, Jurgen Habermas, Alasdaire Maclntyre and Michael Walzer. The works of these writers had revived the grand tradition of political philosophy. Germino suggested that in order to understand the new role of political theory it was imperative to identify it with political philosophy. Political philosophy is a critical study of the principles of right order in human social existence, involving inquiry into right and wrong. It is neither reductionist behavioural science where everything is reduced to sense-experience, nor opinionated ideology which accepts some principles to be true without inquiring into their validity. It comprehends both the knowledge of facts and the insight with which that knowledge is comprehended. According to Germino, political philosophy deals with perennial problems confronting man in his social existence. Detachment is not ethical neutrality. A political philosopher cannot remain indifferent to the political struggle of his times as a behaviouralist would claim. In short, behavioural political science concentrates on facts and remains neutral to values. Political philosophy cannot grow along with positivism which abstains from a critical examination of any social situation. The gulf between traditionalist and behaviouralist components of political theory is so wide that they cannot be 'reunited'. Any theory separated from the perennial concerns of political philosophy will prove to be irrelevant. Germino laments that the behavioural political theory has often implicitly or uncritically endorsed the policies and practices of the established order instead of https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Nature and Significance of Political Theory 13 performing the Socratic function of 'speaking truth to power.' He warns that full recovery of critical political theory cannot be achieved within the positivist universe of discourse. Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979) has significantly pointed to the risk involved in the demand for scientific study of society and politics. He has argued that when the language of social science attempts to conform to the language of natural science, it tends to lend support to the status quo. In this context scientific terminology is sought to be defined in terms of such operations and behaviour that are capable of observation and measurement. This leaves no scope for a critical vision in the scientific language. For instance, when people's participation is sought to be estimated on the basis of the numbers of voters who turn up at elections, we do not question whether the prevailing electoral system conforms to the spirit of democracy! When we adopt this method of study, social science no longer remains an instrument of social inquiry; it becomes an instrument of social control. In any case, since 1970s the dispute between political science and political philosophy has largely subsided. While David Easton had shown a renewed concern with values in his post-behavioural approach, the exponents of political philosophy did not hesitate in testing their assumptions by empirical method. Karl Popper (1902-94), an eminent exponent of scientific method, proceeded to draw conclusions regarding social values. John Rawls (1921-2002) adopted empirical method for arriving at his principles of justice. Then C.B. Macpherson (1911-87) attacked the empirical theory of democracy propounded by Joseph Schumpeter (1883-1950) and Robert Dahl (1915- ), and advanced his own radical theory of democracy. Herbert Marcuse and Jurgen Habermas (1929- ) have shown a strong.empirical insight in their critical analysis of the contemporary capitalism. It is now held that political science, like other social and natural sciences, enables us to strengthen our means but we will have to resort to political philosophy to determine our ends. Means and ends are interdependent; hence political science and political philosophy play complementary roles in our social life. https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 2 Concept of Ideology I N THE REALM of political theory the term 'ideology' is applied in two contexts: (a) a set of ideas which are accepted to be true by a particular group, party or nation without further examination; and (b) the science of ideas which examines as to how different ideas are formed, how truth is distorted, and how we can overcome distortions to discover true knowledge. In this context, ideology means a set of those ideas which are accepted to be true by a particular group without further examination. These ideas are invoked in order to justify or denounce a particular way of social, economic or political organization. In this sense, ideology is a matter of faith; it has no scientific basis. Adherents of an ideology think that its validity need not be subjected to verification. Different groups may adhere to different ideologies; hence differences among them are inevitable. Ideology, therefore, gives rise to love-hate relationship, which is not conducive to scientific temper. Examples of some ideologies are: liberalism, capitalism, socialism, Marxism, communism, anarchism, fascism, imperialism, nationalism, internationalism, etc. IDEOLOGY, POLITICS AND POLITICAL THEORY A group will invoke its ideology to determine the best form of government, the basis of right to rule and the procedure of selection of rulers. Broadly speaking, it answers the following questions: Who should rule? How rulers should be selected? According to what principles should a government operate? And, what institutions should be maintained or replaced for the realization of those principles? When an ideology is used to defend an existing system or to advocate a limited or a radical change in that system, it becomes a part of politics. A political ideology may lend legitimacy to the ruling class or it may involve an urge for revolution. It https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Concept of Ideology 15 therefore signifies the manipulative power of a dominant class or of a social movement. An ideology is action-oriented. It presents a cause before its adherents and induces them to fight for that cause, and to make sacrifices for its realization. For example, nationalism may inspire people to sacrifice their wealth or life for defending the freedom of their nation. But communalism may induce hatred among people towards members of another community and prompt them to destroy life and property of innocent persons. One stream of fundamentalism, based on obscurantism, has given rise to worldwide terrorism. Obscurantism A poticy or tendency involving deliberate effort at making things obscure so as to prevent people from knowing the truth. In the sphere of politics, conflicting ideologies may be invoked to defend conflicting norms or ideals. Of these, some ideals may be designed to serve some vested interests, and some ideals may seek to challenge irrational beliefs and conventions, and thus pave the way for progress. For example, ideology of imperialism may be invoked to facilitate the exploitation of colonial territories and their people, while environmentalism may be invoked to save humanity from the curse of atmospheric pollution and depletion of valuable natural resources. Coming to political theory, it may be observed that in many cases political theories and political ideologies are described by the same terminology. For instance, the terms 'liberalism', 'socialism', 'communism', etc. are applied to describe certain political ideologies as well as political theories. Do they indicate identical things? Some writers think it is so. At times a political theory seems to justify and prescribe a course of action as if it were a political ideology. The genesis of a political theory may be sought to be explained in the light of stresses and strains emanating from actual politics. Sometimes, clash of some political theories may be, explained in the light of a clash in a political situation. That is why G.H. Sabine, in his Preface to the first edition of his A History of Political Theory (1937) wrote: This history of political theory is written in the light of the hypothesis that theories of politics are themselves a part of politics... Reflection upon the ends of political action, upon the means of achieving them, upon the possibilities and necessities of political situations, and upon the obligations that political purposes impose is an intrinsic element of the whole political process. However, Sabine's view on this issue cannot be accepted as the final word. We must draw a distinction between the origin and the validity of a theory. While https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 16 An Introduction to Political Theory it may be conceded that political theories arise from different political situations, yet the study of political theory also includes a critical evaluation of these theories. This critical evaluation involves segregation of truth embodied in these theories from those elements which are the product of political considerations. For example, we denounce Aristotle's defence of slavery and subjugation of women because they were designed to promote the interests of 'freemen' in ancient Greek society. But his explanation of the instability of constitutions stating that the 'power and virtue cannot coexist' must be accepted as valid as it embodies an eternal truth. Similarly, Machiavelli's advice to the Prince to set aside all moral considerations cannot be accepted, but his insights regarding human behaviour can be profitably used in the sphere of diplomacy and statecraft. It is the critical function of political theory that distinguishes it from the set of ideas which are the product of politics. Politics involves the pursuit of partisan ends. Political ideology is closely related to politics because it involves a passionate search for a better society according to the prescribed model. But political theory involves a disinterested search for a better society. Its goals are under constant investigation and critical examination. Andrew Hacker, in his Political Theory: Philosophy, Ideology, Science (1961) has observed that whether we look at the philosophical side of political theory or its scientific side, it is always dispassionate and disinterested. In other words, the theorist has no fascination for a particular political arrangement. His image of a good life is not affected by any prejudice. He does not favour or oppose any particular arrangement without examining its rightness. On the contrary, an ideology is designed to defend the existing system, or to condemn it in order to prove the superiority of a different system. If theory is loaded by an ideology, it is bound to be distorted. Political philosophy or political theory calls for a disinterested search for best form of state and society. Ideology seeks to justify an existing or a future political and social arrangement. Political science calls for impartial observation of political and social reality. Ideology focuses on selected parts of political and social reality, and gives its distorted description as well as explanation. On the contrary, absolute impartiality is the keynote of genuine political theory. In the realm of political theory, each political theory should be critically examined. Its strong and weak points must be discerned. It should be compared with other relevant theories and evaluated in that light. It is therefore imperative to understand ideology as the science of ideas also. The term 'ideology' was originally devised to describe the science of ideas. In this sense, it seeks to determine how ideas are formed, how they are distorted, and how true ideas could be segregated from false ideas. It was Destutt de Tracy (1754^1836), a French scholar, who first used the word 'ideology' during https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Concept of Ideology 17 1801-15 in his writings on the Enlightenment. He defined it as a study of the process of forming ideas—a science of ideas. Tracy observed that ideas are stimulated by the physical environment; hence empirical learning (gained through sense-experience) is the only source of knowledge. Supernatural or spiritual phenomena have no role to play in the formation of real ideas. Science is founded on these ideas. People could use science for the improvement of social and political conditions. Although Tracy was the first to use the term 'ideology' in this sense, he was not the first to study the process of formation of ideas. Francis Bacon (1561- 1626), an English philosopher, before him, insisted that knowledge should come from careful and accurate observation and experience. He held that the knowledge deduced from less scientific methods of inquiry was distorted by false impressions or 'idols'. In short, Bacon and Tracy focused on the validity of knowledge obtained by scientific method, and cautioned us against distorted forms of knowledge. I— All colours will agree in the dark. Francis Bacon (J 625) In contemporary literature, the term 'ideology' is applied to the set of ideas which are adopted by a group in order to motivate it for the achievement of predetermined goals. Science of ideas is described by different terms, like 'sociology of knowledge' (the term introduced by Karl Mannheim), or 'critical theory' (the term popularized by the Frankfurt School). Science of ideas is used to identify the causes of distortion in the prevailing ideologies. A systematic attempt in this direction began with Marx. Later Lukacs and Mannheim also made significant contributions to this effort. Sociology of Knowledge A systematic attempt to inquire as to how our knowledge is determined, conditioned or distorted by our social background. The term was introduced by Karl Mannheim in Ideology and Utopia (1929) although earlier sociologists also made a significant beginning in this direction. ________________________________________________________________ Critical Theory A stream of philosophical thought which maintains that human society has not yet evolved a rational form of existence, which is still to be achieved. Hence it cannot be analysed by the paradigm of natural sciences. All social institutions and behaviour should, therefore, be analysed from the perspective of their deviation from a rational form. This theory was popularized by the Frankfurt School (which was originally set up in 1923). Critical theory is 'interested' in human emancipation, and not in the achievement of a Ideologynarrow goal. Hence it cannot be equated with an ideology. https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 18 An Introduction to Political Theory Dimensions of Ideology Ideology 1 1 Set of Ideas (on 1 Science of ideas (on how ideas best form of society are and government) formed and distorted) I I 1A 1 matter of faith A matter of critical examination Characterized by Closed 1i Mind 1 Characterized by Open Mind 1 1 Interested Search 1 Disinterested Search for Better Society for Better Society I t 1 1 Instrument of Politics Instrument of Political Theory L 1 Allows Individuali to Question Demands Subordination to Authority Authority VIEWS OF MARX Karl Marx (1818-83) in German Ideology (1845-46) and A Contribution to the Critique oj'Political Economy (1859) dwelled on the nature of ideology. According to him, ideology is a manifestation of 'false consciousness'. In the Critique of Political Economy (Preface), Marx observed: In the social production which men carry on they enter into definite relations that are indispensable and independent of their will; these relations of production correspond to a definite stage of development of their material powers of production. The sum total of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society—the real foundation, on which rise legal and political superstructures and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of production in material life determines the general character of the social, political and spiritual process of life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but, on the contrary, their social existence determines their consciousness. According to Marx, in the process of social development material needs of people advance, but their social consciousness lags behind. This distorted consciousness or false consciousness is reflected in their ideology. Dominant class at any stage of social development makes use of ideology to maintain its authority. For example, makers of the French Revolution (1789) raised the slogan of'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity' to enlist support of the masses. But they settled for liberty which served their interest, i.e. the interest of the new entrepreneurial class of those days. They did not proceed to win freedom for common man, but stopped after winning freedom for a new dominant class to ensure inviolability of property. https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Concept of 19 Ideology Marx and Engels (1820-95) held that ideology is an instrument for protecting the interests of the dominant class. Thus bourgeoisie (the capitalist class) needs ideology to maintain itself in power. On the contrary, when proletariat (the working class) comes to power after the socialist revolution, it has no vested interests in maintaining itself in power. It strives to create such conditions where the state will 'wither away'. It does not want to continue as the dominant class but works for the creation of a classless society. However, V.I. Lenin (1870-1924) in his What is to be Done? (1902) held that ideology is not necessarily a distortion of truth to conceal the prevailing contradictions, but it has become a neutral concept which refers to the political consciousness of different classes, including the proletarian class. He argued that the class struggle will continue for a very long time during the socialist phase. So proletariat also need an ideology—the ideology of scientific socialism for their guidance, lest they are overpowered by the bourgeois ideology. VIEWS OF LUKACS Georg Lukacs (1885-1971), a Hungarian Marxist, in History and Class Consciousness (1923) proposed a theory of the dependence of thought on social life, which primarily consisted of class relations of material production. He held that consciousness was always class consciousness. The proletariat, by virtue of its increasing estrangement within the socio-economic sphere, occupied a unique historical position from which it could achieve universal consciousness. On the nature of ideology Lukacs maintained that it refers both to bourgeois and proletarian consciousness, without implying a necessary negative connotation. Marxism itself is the ideological expression of the proletariat. Lukacs held that bourgeois ideology is false, not because ideology itself is 'false consciousness', but because bourgeois class situation is structurally limited. In other words, bourgeoisie (the capitalist class) cannot stand on its own. It must exploit proletariat (the working class) to maintain itself. Bourgeois ideology is deplorable because it dominates and contaminates the psychological consciousness of proletariat. However, Lukacs has warned that ideological struggle should not become a substitute for class struggle. VIEWS OF MANNHEIM Karl Mannheim (1893-1947), a German sociologist, in his famous work Ideology and Utopia (1929) rejects Marx's theory of ideology on three grounds: (a) 'style of thought' of any group is only indirectly related to its interests; there is no direct correlation between its consciousness and its economic interests; (b) all thought is shaped by its social background; hence Marxism itself is the ideology of a class; and (c) apart from classes, other social groups, like different generations, also have a significant influence upon consciousness. Mannheim introduced the term 'sociology of knowledge' to focus on social determination of knowledge. He sought to generalize Marxist framework as a https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 20 An Introduction to Political Theory tool of analysis. He held that the false consciousness may be manifested in two forms: ideology and Utopia. Ideology represents the tendency of conservation. It relies on false consciousness to muster support for the maintenance of status quo. On the other hand, Utopia represents the impetus to change. It relies on false consciousness by projecting unrealizable principles to muster support for the forces of change. A ruling class makes use of ideology; the opposition may project a Utopia. Mannheim declared that Marxist vision of a classless society was nothing short of Utopia. Hence it also makes false consciousness its tool. Utopia Vision of a perfect society where everyone is happy. In social sciences, this term is applied to designate a set of fascinating but unrealizable principles. The relative character of all knowledge as postulated by Mannheim makes the knowledge of objective truth extremely difficult. Is there no hope, then, to discover truth? Well, there is a silver lining. Mannheim hinges on the possibility of a 'free- floating stratum' of intellectuals between the contending classes to achieve disinterested knowledge. He hopes that some enlightened individuals within the conflicting groups will realize that their perception of truth is partial; it could be complemented by understanding their opponent's view. Such individuals from both sides will come together with an open mind; they will enter into a dialogue and incessantly strive to arrive at the objective truth. Thus they will open the way to achieve synthetic common knowledge of the prevailing historical situation and a realistic assessment of actual possibilities. In other words, they will be able to grasp a realistic vision between ideology and Utopia. Mannheim identifies these intellectuals as social scientists. He recommends that these social scientists, who have proved their ability to grasp the objective truth, should be given authority to rule. Critics argue that Mannheim has created a confusion between the origin and validity of knowledge. His extreme relativism contemplates the existence of ideas without upholders. Moreover, giving power to social scientists is fraught with danger of absolutism. Let these social scientists function as critics of power-holders instead of wielding power themselves. They would better serve as organizers of agitations and demonstrations, journalist, and writers, and as 'conscience-keepers' of society. When ideology is conceived as an instrument of motivating people for the achievement of predetermined goals, it comes close to totalitarianism. Some writers, therefore, assert that ideology in this sense is found only in totalitarian systems; it has no place in an open society. https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Concept of Ideology 21 Totalitarianism A system of governance in which the state seeks to regulate and control all aspects of life of its citizens—whether public or private. In other words, it seeks to direct all political, economic, social-cultural and intellectual activities of people towards fulfilling certain aims which are determined by the state itself. No citizen has the right or opportunity to oppose or criticize the state, or to propose any new aim. ________________________________________________________________ Open Society A social and political system where there is a free flow of information regarding public affairs and matters of public importance. Public policy in such a system represents a reconciliation of diverse interests. Power-hoLders under this system do not claim that they have found the truth. Hence it encourages freedom of expression among citizens; it shows readiness to adopt new ideas; and permits the citizens to criticize the government. Famous Austrian philosopher Karl Popper (1902-94) in The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945) argued that ideology is the characteristic of totalitarianism; it has nothing to do in an open society. He maintained that science and freedom flourish together in a society which is open in the sense that it is willing to accept new ideas. In contrast, a totalitarian society claims that it has already found the absolute truth, and strives to implement it ruthlessly. Ideology is the tool which enables the state to mobilize its manpower and other resources for a goal which is declared to embody the absolute truth. It does not allow anyone to oppose or criticize the public policy which is exclusively determined by the ruling group. In Popper's view, Western liberal-democratic societies are open societies; hence they do not need an ideology for working smoothly. Citizens of these societies are absolutely free to criticize the existing institutions and structures of power. Then Hannah Arendt (1906-75), a German Jew philosopher, in The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951) defined totalitarianism as a system of total domination, characterized by ideology and terror. It was made possible in recent Europe by three factors: (a) the specific political and social position of the Jews which had given anti-semitism (the tendency of hatred toward Jews) a new force; (b) imperialism which generated racist movements and worldwide expansion of power; and (c) dissolution of European society into uprooted masses, so lonely and disoriented that they could be mobilized behind ideologies. Thus Popper and Arendt focused on the role of ideology as a tool of totalitarianism. It is interesting to recall that Marx had evolved the concept of ideology in late nineteenth century in order to expose capitalism. Concept of totalitarianism was evolved in early twentieth century to describe the dictatorial way of working of communist regime of the Soviet Union till the end of Stalin- era (1953) and fascist regime of Italy (under Mussolini) and Germany (under https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 22 An Introduction to Political Theory Hitler) till the end of Second World War (1945). Both communist and fascist regimes made ample use of their respective ideologies for the mobilization of their citizens toward the achievement of their respective goals. Popper largely focused on the communist regime, and Arendt on the fascist regime to bring out the close correlation between ideology and totalitarianism. CONCLUSION Ideology has been variously condemned as the reflection of false consciousness or as an instrument of totalitarianism. But it is not fair to look at all ideologies in this light. In actual practice, different ideologies as sets of ideas will continue to exist as the vehicles of value-systems evolved by different groups. They will be used for motivating people to achieve the goals cherished by their upholders. They may also be used by some groups to convince others regarding their rightful claims. Ideologies do not belong exclusively to dominant classes; oppressed classes also have their own ideologies. They cannot be set aside as 'false consciousness'. Ideologies could serve as meeting ground for like-minded people, instead of confining themselves to their tribe, caste, religion, region, etc. They may reflect changing social consciousness on crucial issues. Some ideologies have given rise to strong social movements for the emancipation of various oppressed sections. Some ideologies manifest a deep concern with the future of humanity. An ideology is identified by commitment to a cause. It rules out personal interest, bias or submission to a particular person, group or dynasty. It signifies a set of coherent ideas—perception of real and ideal from one's own position. It may also be used to make others realize that position. That is how, in the sphere of world politics, developing nations strive to impress upon advanced nations to adopt humanist attitudes and policies. The current status of ideology in the world was reviewed in mid-1950s and in 1960s. In Western liberal-democratic countries, it was declared that the age of ideology had come to an end. These countries looked at ideology as a tool of totalitarianism which had no place in open societies. 'End of ideology' also implied that at the advanced stage of industrial development, a country's social-economic organization is determined by the level of its development, and not by its political ideology. In other words, capitalist and communist countries were bound to evolve similar characteristics at the advanced stage of their industrial development, irrespective of their ideological differences. Early indications of this view may be found in the proceedings of a conference on 'The Future of Freedom' held in Milan, Italy, in 1955. Edward Shils' report on this conference was published in Encounter (1955) under the title 'The End of https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Concept of 23 Ideology Ideology'. The conference urged its participants to forget their minor differences and discover common grounds to face the danger of Communism. Daniel Bell observed in the course of his speech: Today ideologies are exhausted... In the Western World... there is today a rough consensus among intellectuals on political issues: the acceptance of a Welfare State; the desirability of decentralized power; a system of mixed economy and of political pluralism. In that sense too the ideological age has ended. This view was confirmed and further elaborated by several Western writers. Ralph Dahrendorf in Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society (1957) argued that the Western societies had entered a new phase of development. They were no longer capitalist societies; they had become 'post-capitalist societies'. The coincidence of economic conflict and political conflict, which was the foundation of Marx's theory, had ceased to exist in the post-capitalist societies. In a capitalist society, the lines of industrial and political conflict were superimposed. The opponents within the industrial sphere—capitalists and workers—met again as bourgeoisie and proletariat, in the political arena. In contrast, industry and society have been dissociated in the post-capitalist society. The social relations of the industrial sphere, including industrial conflict, no longer dominate the whole society but remain confined in their patterns and problems to the sphere of industry. In postTcapitalist society, industry and industrial conflicts are institutionally isolated. In other words, they remain confined within the borders of their proper realm, and do not influence politics and other spheres of social life. Thus in Dahrendorf's view, the framework of Marxian ideology was no longer suitable for the analysis of the Western societies. Daniel Bell, in his noted work The End of Ideology (1960) asserted that post- industrial societies are prone to similar development irrespective of their ideological differences. They have lesser proportion of workers in industry than in services. In other words, at the advanced stage of industrial development in any country the services sector expands at a faster rate than the manufacturing sector. Besides, it is also characterized by the increasing dominance of technical elites. The change in this direction is not affected by its political ideology. Then Seymour M. Lipset, in Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics (1960) significantly observed: Democracy is not only or even primarily a means through which different groups can attain their ends or seek the good society; it is the good society itself in operation. Lipset observed that in the Western democracies the differences between the left and the right are no longer profound; the only issues before politics are concerned with marginal increase in wages, marginal rise in prices, and extension of old-age https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF ~24 An Introduction to Political Theory pensions, etc. He maintained that the fundamental political problems of the indi revolution have been solved: the workers have achieved industrial and poi citizenship; the conservatives have accepted the welfare state; and the demo< left has recognized that an increase in overall state power carries with it i dangers to freedom than solutions for economic problems. The triump democracy in the West has made the intellectuals realize that they no longer i ideologies or Utopias to motivate them to political action. W. W. Rostow, in The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-communist Manift (1960) built a unidimensional model of economic growth which was applica to all countries irrespective of their political ideologies. He suggested that societies pass through five stages of growth: traditional society, preconditic for take-off, take-off, road to maturity and the age of high mass consumptic He believed that the process of development going on at that time in Asia, Lat America, Africa and the Middle East was analogous to the stages of preconditioi for take-off and take-off which prevailed in the Western societies in late eighteen! and nineteenth centuries. Rostow asserted that the adoption of different politics ideologies played no role in determining the course of economic development ii different countries. J.K. Galbraith, in The New Industrial State (1967) identified certain characteristics of advanced industrial societies which correspond to the end of ideology thesis. Galbraith observed that all industrialized societies are destined to similar development. This involves greater centralization, bureaucratization, professionalization and technocratization. These characteristics were visible in the Russian as well as American systems although they had adopted as divergent ideologies as communism and capitalism respectively. It means that a country's techno-economic structure is shaped by the level of its industrialization, and not by its distinctive political ideology. Galbraith claimed that a new ruling class consisting of the bureaucratic and technocratic elite had emerged in all advanced industrial societies. This class belonged neither to the working class nor to the capitalists. In liberal societies, the members of this class occupied high positions in an open meritocratic system. Because of high rate of social mobility, they are not attached to particular capitalists. Power in society is vested in bureaucracy and technocracy, and not in capitalists. Galbraith comes to the conclusion that in the contemporary world, emancipation of humanity should be sought in anti-bureaucratism rather than in anti-capitalism. The end of ideology thesis had a message for the new nations of Asia, Africa and Latin America. It implied that they should focus on their industrial development, and should not run after the mirage of communism as a remedy of their ills. With the collapse of communist systems in East European countries in 1989 (which was followed by a similar collapse in the then Soviet Union in 1991), this view got a new impetus in the form of the 'End of History' thesis. Francis Fukuyama, in his paper entitled 'The End of History', published in The National Interest https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF Concept of 25 Ideology (1989), argued that the failure of socialism (i.e. communism in the present context) neant an unabashed victory of economic and political liberalism. It marked the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government. Fukuyama maintained hat the liberal democracy contains no basic contradictions and that it is capable af fulfilling deepest aspirations of mankind. Its victory has heralded an end to the long historical struggle which had obstructed its expansion in the past. This hesis was given wide publicity in the Western press and academic circles as it vas suited to their mode of thought. However, Richard Titmuss, C. Wright Mills, C.B. Macpherson and Alasdair Maclntyre serverly criticized the end of ideology thesis. Titmuss observed that the champions of the end of ideology thesis overlook the problems of monopolistic concentration of economic power, social disorganization and cultural deprivation within the capitalist system. C. Wright Mills dubbed the upholders of end of ideology thesis the advocates of status quo. In his view, it is an ideology of political complacency which appears to be the only way now available for many social scientists to acquiesce in or to justify the established social structure. So far as human and political ideas are concerned, the end of ideology thesis stands for a denial of their relevance. C.B. Macpherson asserted that the champions of lie end of ideology thesis make a futile attempt to solve the problem of equitable listribution within the market society. Alasdair Maclntyre (Against the Self-images of the Age; 1971) significantly observed that the 'end of ideology' theorists "failed to entertain one crucial alternative possibility: namely that the end-of- ideology, far from marking the end-of-ideology, was itself a key expression of the ideology of the time and place where it arose." In short, the end of ideology debate, and its latest version are designed to project the supremacy of liberal-democratic system in theory as well as practice. In the contemporary climate of increasing urge for liberalization, privatization and globalization, this idea seems to be riding high. However, it needs a close scrutiny. Collapse of socialism in a large part of the world could be the outcome of human faults in its implementation. Moreover, Western democratic world is by no means an epitome of justice and morality. Human emancipation is a complex venture. There are no readymade answers to all human problems. In devising their solution, relevant ideas from different ideologies may be drawn and examined. Of these, liberalism, Marxism, socialism, fascism, anarchism, Gandhism and feminism are particularly important. V. LIBERALISM BASIC TENETS OF LIBERALISM Liberalism is a principle of politics which insists on 'liberty' of individual as the first and foremost goal of public policy. Liberty, in this sense, implies 'liberation' https://telegram.me/UpscPdfDrive  https://telegram.me/UPSC_PDF 26 An Introduction to Political Theory from restraints—particularly, from the restraints imposed by an authoritarian state. This principle was evolved in the West in late seventeenth century in order to liquidate feudal privileges of the land-owning class and to create favourable conditions for the new entrepreneurial class to enable them to contribute to social progress. Authoritarian State A s