SECTION A

1. Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: 10×5=50

1.(a) Explain the Philosophical approach to the study of Political theory.

The philosophical approach to political theory is fundamentally concerned with the normative and ethical dimensions of political life. It seeks to understand not just how political systems function, but how they ought to function.

At its core, this approach revolves around abstract reasoning and conceptual analysis. Philosophers of politics engage with foundational concepts such as liberty, equality, authority, rights, and justice. Philosophical political theorists use reason to explore questions such as:

       * What is a just society?

      *  Why should individuals obey the state?

      *  What is the moral basis of law and authority?

Historically, the philosophical approach has been shaped by towering figures like Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Kant. Each of these thinkers offered distinct visions of the political good. Plato envisioned a society governed by philosopher-kings, where justice was achieved through a harmonious ordering of classes. Aristotle emphasized the role of virtue and civic participation in achieving the good life.  

One of the strengths of the philosophical approach is its ability to challenge the status quo and imagine alternative futures. It encourages critical reflection on existing institutions and practices, asking whether they align with our highest ideals. This makes it particularly relevant in times of political crisis or transformation, when societies must reevaluate their foundational principles. However, the approach is not without criticism. Some argue that it is too abstract, disconnected from the messy realities of political life. Others contend that it can be overly idealistic, proposing visions of society that are difficult to implement.

Despite these critiques, the philosophical approach remains indispensable. It provides the moral compass by which political actions and institutions are judged. It reminds us that politics is not just about power and strategy, but about justice, dignity, and the common good. In a world increasingly driven by data and pragmatism, the philosophical method offers a space for reflection, imagination, and ethical clarity. It challenges us to ask not only what is possible, but what is right.

1. (b) Write a note on the relation between equality and liberty from the multi-cultural perspective.

In multicultural societies, the ideals of equality and liberty are deeply intertwined—but not always easily reconciled. While liberty emphasizes individual freedom, equality demands fairness and inclusion across diverse cultural groups. The challenge lies in ensuring that both values are upheld without allowing one to undermine the other.

Will Kymlicka’s Perspective

Will Kymlicka, a leading theorist of multicultural citizenship, argues that liberalism must evolve to accommodate cultural diversity. He critiques traditional liberalism for being “color-blind,” assuming that equal rights for all individuals are sufficient to ensure justice. However, Kymlicka contends that this approach ignores the structural disadvantages faced by minority cultures, whose members often lack access to the cultural resources that shape meaningful life choices.

• He introduces the idea of group-differentiated rights, such as self-government rights for national minorities or polyethnic rights for immigrant groups.
• For Kymlicka, liberty is meaningful only when individuals have access to their own cultural frameworks, which requires recognizing and protecting cultural differences.
• Thus, equality demands more than identical treatment—it requires context-sensitive policies that empower minority groups to flourish without being assimilated into dominant cultures.

Bhikhu Parekh’s Perspective

Bhikhu Parekh offers a complementary yet critical lens. He emphasizes that human beings are culturally embedded, and that liberalism often fails to recognize the moral significance of cultural diversity.

• Parekh argues that equality must be redefined in multicultural contexts—not as uniformity, but as equal respect for different ways of life.
• He warns against the liberal tendency to treat cultural differences as private matters, advocating instead for public recognition and dialogue between cultures.
• For Parekh, liberty must include the freedom to live according to one’s cultural values, but this liberty must be balanced with the need to uphold common civic norms that ensure mutual respect and social cohesion.

The Delicate Balance

Both thinkers highlight that in multicultural societies:

• Liberty without equality can lead to cultural domination.
• Equality without liberty can suppress individuality and cultural expression.

The solution lies in rethinking liberal principles to accommodate pluralism, where both individual rights and group identities are respected. This means crafting policies that:

• Protect minority cultures from assimilation.
• Ensure fair access to resources and representation.
• Promote intercultural dialogue and mutual understanding.

In essence, Kymlicka and Parekh remind us that true equality and liberty in multicultural societies require more than abstract ideals—they demand a commitment to justice that is both inclusive and contextually aware.

1.(c) Explain the Macpherson''s view on power.

C.B. Macpherson’s view on power is rooted in his critique of liberal democracy and capitalist society. He challenges the traditional notion of power as mere control or domination, instead proposing a more nuanced understanding that distinguishes between different types of power and their effects on human development. His view on power is centered around the concept of possessive individualism.

• • Possessive Individualism: He argued that liberal societies are built on the idea that individuals own themselves and their capacities. This leads to competition, commodification of labor, and inequality.
  • Relational Power: Power is not a fixed trait but emerges through relationships—between citizens and institutions, employers and workers, or governments and governed.
  • Developmental Power: True power should help individuals flourish. He believed democracy should empower people to realize their full human potential, not just protect property rights.
  • Extractive Power: This refers to the ability of elites or institutions to extract resources, labor, or value from others—often without reciprocal benefit. In capitalist systems, extractive power manifests in:

      *  Employers profiting disproportionately from workers’ labor

      *  Corporations exploiting natural resources or communities

      * Governments using taxation or regulation to benefit dominant classes

He sees extractive power as a distortion of democratic ideals, where power serves accumulation rather than emancipation.  

• • Critique of Capitalism: Capitalist markets concentrate extractive and possessive power, undermining democratic participation and reinforcing structural inequality.
  • Democratic Redistribution: He advocated for participatory democracy that redistributes both political and economic power—challenging extractive systems and enabling collective decision-making.
  • Ethical Use of Power: Power should be exercised to uplift others, not exploit them. Extractive power, by contrast, is ethically corrosive and socially destabilizing.

1.(d) Mention the difference between Italian and German brands of fascism.

The political upheaval in Europe following World War I gave rise to two aggressive and authoritarian ideologies—Fascism and Nazism. While movements inspired by these doctrines emerged across the continent, only Italy and Germany saw them evolve into ruling governments. Though both shared totalitarian traits, Fascism and Nazism diverged significantly in their core ideological foundations.

Arendt, in the Origins of Totalitarianism clearly articulates the difference between the Italian and German cases as far as the issue of totalitarianism is concerned. The basic difference between Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy is the fact that the former was totalitarian while the latter remained as a dictatorship that intended to be totalitarian. While Mussolini’s regime was famous for its pragmatic and opportunistic moves, the totalitarian methods of the Nazi state were systematic, unhesitant and aimed to be permanent.

Arendt contrasts the differences between Nazi totalitarianism and Italian dictatorship in terms of their relationships with their armies: In contrast to the Nazis and Bolsheviks, who destroyed the spirit of the army by subordinating it to the political commissars or totalitarian elite formations, the Fascists wanted a Fascist state and a Fascist army, but still an army and a state.

With respect to the Church, Italian fascism opted for compromise with the Church and Mussolini, an atheist himself, recognized the importance of the Church to secure his regime while the relationships between Nazi Party and the Church were less than smooth. Although the Christian Church accepted the Nazi rule without questioning, it is argued that not only the destruction of the Church but also the abolition of the Christian religion in any meaningful sense of the term was among the long-term aims of the Nazis.

Hannah Arendt sharply distinguished Nazi Germany from Italian Fascism in terms of the intensity, scope, and purpose of violence and terror. Arendt saw Nazi terror as rooted in a racial ideology that aimed to eliminate entire populations, especially Jews, through industrialized genocide. While Mussolini’s regime was brutal—especially toward political opponents—it did not pursue mass extermination or racial annihilation as a core policy.

These ideological, structural and historical differences between Italian Fascism and German National Socialism are hard to ignore for the social scientist.

1.(e) Explain briefly the elite theory of democracy.

The elite theory of democracy asserts that in any society, especially larger and complex ones, political power is concentrated in the hands of a small, cohesive elite group who effectively control decision-making. This elite includes not just politicians but influential members from corporations, the military, media, and policy-making institutions.  

The main theorists of elite theory are Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca, C.W.Mills and Robert Michels. These three scholars, often referred to as the founders of the Italian school of elitism, formulated the classic elite theory in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

• Vilfredo Pareto emphasized the intellectual and psychological superiority of elites, distinguishing between governing and non-governing elites and introducing the concept of the "circulation of elites," where one elite group is replaced by another over time.
• Gaetano Mosca focused on the sociological aspects, describing elites as the organized minority with intellectual, moral, and material superiority over the unorganized majority (the masses). He saw elites as necessary for maintaining political order.
• Robert Michels developed the "iron law of oligarchy," arguing that all large-scale organizations, including democracies, inevitably become dominated by a small elite due to organizational necessities and leadership dynamics.
• C. Wright Mills' elite theory explains that a small interconnected group holds dominant power in society by occupying key leadership positions across three major institutions: the government, the corporate sector, and the military. 

Together, they argued that political power is always concentrated in the hands of a minority elite, and this arrangement is inevitable in any society.

Criticisms

• Undermines Democratic Ideals by dismissing the potential of genuine democratic participation.
• Overstates the unity and coherence of elites.
• Neglects Pluralism dismissing the view that power is distributed among multiple interest groups, not concentrated in a single elite.
• Ignores Social Mobility ignoring how individuals from non-elite backgrounds can rise through merit or activism.
• Lacks robust empirical evidence across different democratic contexts.

Despite criticisms, elite theory serves as a reminder that vigilance, transparency, and active civic engagement are essential to ensure that democracy remains responsive to all—not just the powerful few.

2. 

2.(a) What is the Marxist and liberal approach towards the state? On what grounds the theoretical differences between them are premised? Explain. (20)

A state is a political organization with the power to make and enforce laws within a defined territory. Different ideologies—like liberalism and Marxism—interpret the state''s role in very different ways.

Liberal View of the State

• Nature: Seen as a neutral arbiter that protects individual rights and freedoms.
• Purpose: To uphold the rule of law, ensure justice, and maintain order while limiting interference in private life.
• Role: Supports capitalism and a free-market economy, with minimal state intervention.
• Nature: Believes individuals are rational and capable of self-governance.
• Political Structure: Emphasizes constitutionalism, democracy, and pluralism.
• Future of the State: The state is considered a permanent institution necessary for societal stability.

John Locke (1632–1704), widely regarded as the father of liberalism, argued that individuals possess natural rights to life, liberty, and property, and that the state arises from a social contract to protect these rights. He maintained that government legitimacy depends on the consent of the governed, and that people have the right to overthrow a tyrannical ruler who violates the contract.

Over time, liberal theory has evolved into classical liberalism (favouring minimal state intervention), welfare liberalism (supporting state action to ensure equality of opportunity), and neoliberalism (emphasizing free markets and individual responsibility). 

Marxist View of the State

• Nature: Viewed as an instrument of class oppression, serving the interests of the ruling bourgeoisie.
• Purpose: To maintain capitalist dominance and suppress the working class (proletariat).
• Role: Critiques capitalism as exploitative; advocates for socialism and eventual communism.
• Nature: Individuals are shaped by their class position and economic conditions.
• Political Structure: Calls for revolutionary change to dismantle capitalist structures and build a classless society.
• Future of the State: Believes the state will wither away after the establishment of communism.

The Marxist view of the state was primarily shaped by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, with later contributions from Vladimir Lenin, Ralph Miliband, Nicos Poulantzas, Antonio Gramsci, and Louis Althusser, each refining or expanding the theory. Marxists see the state as the "executive committee of the capitalist class", using both coercion (police, military, legal system) and ideology (education, media) to keep the subordinate classes in check.

Neo Marxists such as instrumentalists (Ralph Miliband) emphasize direct control by capitalists, whereas structuralists (Antonio Gramsci) emphasize the state’s structural role in maintaining the capitalist system, even at the expense of individual capitalists’ immediate interests.

These philosophical foundations differentiate the Liberal and Marxist views of the state.

2.(b) Karl Popper presents a defence of the open society against its enemies. Elaborate. (15)

Karl Popper’s seminal work The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945) is a powerful philosophical and political defense of liberal democracy and individual freedom against authoritarian ideologies.  Popper defines an open society as one in which:

• Individuals are free to think, speak, and criticize without fear.
• Institutions are transparent and subject to reform.
• Decisions are made through democratic processes.
• Rational debate and tolerance are central to public life.

Popper critiques three major thinkers—Plato, Hegel, and Marx—for promoting historicism, the belief that history unfolds according to predetermined laws. He argues that:

• Plato idealized a rigid, hierarchical society governed by philosopher-kings, which Popper saw as inherently authoritarian.
• Hegel glorified the state and saw history as a rational process culminating in the Prussian state, which Popper viewed as a justification for nationalism and absolutism.
• Marx envisioned a classless society through revolutionary means, but Popper warned that this could lead to totalitarianism if dissent was suppressed in pursuit of utopia.

Popper’s defense of the open society rests on several key philosophical principles:

• Critical Rationalism: All ideas must be open to scrutiny and falsification. No authority is beyond question.
• Fallibilism: Humans are inherently fallible, so political systems must allow for correction and reform.
• Incremental Change: Social progress should be gradual and piecemeal, not revolutionary or utopian.
• Democratic Institutions: These provide mechanisms for peaceful change and protect against tyranny.

Popper’s ideas remain influential in debates about democracy, authoritarianism, and the role of reason in politics. His work is a reminder that:

• Freedom and openness require constant vigilance.
• Intellectual dogma can be as dangerous as political oppression.
• Democracy thrives on dissent, debate, and diversity of thought.

Popper's defence of the open society is hence a rejection of totalitarian ideologies and historicism in favor of liberal democracy, individual freedom, critical rationalism, and social reform through democratic processes, safeguarding the society against its enemies who seek to impose dogmatic, absolute truths and suppress freedom.

2.(c) Explain how Rawls used the liberal and egalitarian perspective to develop his concept of distributive justice. (15)

John Rawls developed his concept of distributive justice combining liberal ideals of individual liberty with egalitarian principles of equality, forming what he called "justice as fairness." His theory aims to reconcile these often-competing values within a well-ordered society.

Liberal Perspective

• Rooted in political liberalism, Rawls upholds equal basic rights and liberties for all individuals. These include political freedoms compatible with everyone having fair access.
• He rejects utilitarianism's focus on aggregate welfare, arguing instead that justice must protect individual rights regardless of majority preferences.
• Inspired by Kantian philosophy, Rawls emphasizes rational individuals making autonomous choices under a veil of ignorance — where no one knows their own social or economic status — ensuring impartiality in choosing justice principles.

Egalitarian Perspective

• Rawls introduces two key principles of justice:
1. Equal Basic Liberties: Everyone has the same fundamental rights.
2. Difference Principle: Social and economic inequalities are permissible only if they benefit the least advantaged members of society.
• Equality is further specified by the principle of fair equality of opportunity, ensuring that positions and offices are open to all under conditions of fair competition.
• The difference principle imposes a constraint on inequality—allowing disparities only if they improve the situation of those worst off, promoting distributive fairness.

Integration in Distributive Justice

• Rawls models society as a system of cooperation where individuals benefit from social cooperation, but conflicts arise in distributing those benefits fairly.
• The hypothetical Original Position with the veil of ignorance allows rational agents to select principles balancing freedom and equality without bias.
• His approach ensures that justice is not about absolute equality but about fair arrangements that protect liberty while mandating social structures to aid the least advantaged.

In essence, Rawls' concept of distributive justice is a sophisticated blend of liberal respect for individual freedom and egalitarian concern for social equality, aiming to fairly distribute benefits and burdens in society through democratic institutions and fair opportunities for all.

3. 

3.(a) Provide a comparative analysis of behavioural and institutional approach to the study of political theory. (20)

The behavioral and institutional approaches represent two distinct paradigms for studying political theory, each with unique focuses and methodologies.

The institutional approach looks at formal political structures like legislatures, executives, courts, and constitutions. It emphasizes the rules, procedures, and organizational frameworks that create stability and govern political interactions. It is largely descriptive and normative, focusing on how institutions shape political behavior and governance. It tends to analyze politics through legal and organizational lenses, often ignoring informal political dynamics.

In contrast, the behavioral approach centers on the individuals and groups within political systems. It studies political behavior empirically, using surveys, observations, and statistical methods to analyze attitudes, voting patterns, decision-making, and social interactions in politics. Behavioralism seeks regularities in behavior, adopts a scientific, value-neutral stance, and aims to explain and predict political phenomena rather than prescribe norms.

While the institutional approach laid the groundwork for understanding political structures, the behavioural approach brought a much-needed empirical and analytical lens to political inquiry. Today, scholars often integrate both approaches to gain a more holistic understanding of political phenomena.

3.(b) "State does the greatest harm to mankind by destroying individuality, which lies at the root of all progress." – Mahatma Gandhi. Elucidate. (15)

Mahatma Gandhi's statement that "The state does the greatest harm to mankind by destroying individuality, which lies at the root of all progress" emphasizes the critical importance of individuality as the foundation for human progress and the dangers posed by excessive state power.

The Essence of Individuality

• Individuality as the engine of progress: Gandhi believed that true progress — whether moral, spiritual, scientific, or social — stems from the unique thoughts, actions, and innovations of individuals. Every great idea, movement, or invention begins with someone daring to think differently.
• Moral autonomy: For Gandhi, individuality wasn’t just about personal expression; it was about moral responsibility. He championed swaraj (self-rule), not just politically but spiritually — the idea that each person must govern themselves ethically and consciously.

The Role of the State

• State as a homogenizing force: Gandhi warned that when the state becomes too powerful, it tends to impose uniformity — through laws, bureaucracy, and centralized control — which can stifle dissent, creativity, and diversity of thought.
• Loss of personal agency: In a system where the state dictates every aspect of life, individuals may lose the ability to make independent choices, leading to passive obedience rather than active engagement with society.

Historical and Philosophical Context

• Gandhi’s anarchist leanings: Though not a violent revolutionary, Gandhi was deeply skeptical of institutional power. He admired thinkers like Leo Tolstoy and Henry David Thoreau, who emphasized civil disobedience and the primacy of conscience over law.
• Colonial backdrop: This quote also reflects Gandhi’s experience under British colonial rule, where the state apparatus was used to suppress Indian voices and enforce foreign dominance.

Contemporary Relevance

• Modern democracies: Even in democratic societies, Gandhi’s warning remains relevant. Surveillance, censorship, and overregulation can erode personal freedoms and discourage innovation.
• Education and conformity: Systems that prioritize rote learning and obedience over critical thinking risk producing citizens who follow rather than lead.

Gandhi's caution against state overreach serves as a profound reminder that true progress hinges on preserving and nurturing individuality, which enables innovation, moral courage, and social harmony. When the state overrides this, it undermines the essential human qualities that drive meaningful advancement.

3.(c) Explain how the slogan ''the personal is political'' addresses the issue of women''s oppression and discrimination. (15)

The slogan "the personal is political" addresses women's oppression and discrimination by highlighting that personal experiences of women—such as issues related to family life, childcare, relationships, and domestic responsibilities—are not merely private or individual problems but are deeply connected to larger political and social structures of power, specifically patriarchy. This feminist slogan, popularized in the late 1960s and 1970s, especially by Carol Hanisch in her 1970 essay, argues that the personal circumstances women face are shaped by systemic inequality and power imbalances in society.

Radical feminist use of "the personal is political" illuminated how discrimination and oppression of women are deeply embedded in both the private and public realms, calling for revolutionary changes to dismantle patriarchal systems that oppress women in all areas of life.

• Patriarchy begins at home: Radical feminists argue that the family — often idealized as a private, apolitical space — is actually a primary site of women’s oppression. They expose how traditional gender roles, domestic labor, and male dominance within households mirror and reinforce broader systems of power.
• Sexual politics: Radical feminism brings attention to how sexual relationships, beauty standards, and reproductive control are shaped by patriarchal norms. These aren't just personal choices — they’re political battlegrounds where power is negotiated and often unequally distributed.
• Consciousness-raising: Radical feminists pioneered consciousness-raising groups, where women shared personal experiences to uncover shared patterns of abuse, inequality, and silencing. These groups embodied the slogan — turning private pain into collective awareness and political action.
• Critique of liberal feminism: While liberal feminism often focuses on legal equality and public rights, radical feminism insists that true liberation requires dismantling the patriarchal structures that govern personal life — including marriage, motherhood, and sexuality.

Radical feminism takes “the personal is political” to its most transformative conclusion: to change society, we must revolutionize the private sphere. It demands not just policy reform, but a rethinking of love, sex, family, and identity itself.

Radical feminist thinkers include Shulamith Firestone, Kate Millet, Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon — each of whom challenged patriarchal structures and emphasized the political nature of personal life.

4. 

4.(a) The foundational base of western democracy has been shaped by Locke''s ideas of constitutionalism, freedom and property. Elucidate.(20)

John Locke’s political philosophy laid the intellectual groundwork for Western democracy by championing constitutional government, individual liberty, and property rights as natural entitlements.

Constitutionalism

Locke advanced the concept of constitutionalism by arguing that legitimate government arises from a social contract, whereby authority is derived from the consent of the governed. He rejected absolutism, instead positing that rulers are accountable and their power must be limited by laws and institutional checks and balances. Locke’s insistence on rule of law and the separation of powers became core principles in constitutional democracies, such as those reflected in the United States and French constitutions.

Freedom

Locke viewed freedom not as unrestrained license but as living under laws made with popular consent. He linked liberty to the protection of individual rights—life, liberty, and property—under a restrained government. His advocacy for religious tolerance widened the meaning of individual liberty in plural societies. By asserting the right to resist or even overthrow unjust governments, Locke offered a justification for revolutionary action that became pivotal in democratic theory and practice.

Property

Property was central in Locke's theory, encompassing not just material possessions but all that individuals morally claim as their own—life, liberty, and estate. Locke posited that property rights arise naturally when individuals mix their labor with resources, making property not a privilege granted by the state, but a pre-political right. He argued that the protection of property (broadly defined) is a primary function of government, and that arbitrary seizure of property is illegitimate. These views directly influenced the development of capitalist economies within democratic states.

Influence on Western Democracy

Locke’s synthesis of constitutional limitation, individual freedoms, and property rights provided the scaffolding for modern liberal democracy. The American and French revolutions, for instance, drew significantly from his principles, embedding rights, limited government, and safeguards against arbitrary power into their institutional frameworks. Locke’s enduring legacy is evident in the centrality of consent, checks and balances, and protection of rights in Western political tradition.

John Locke’s vision of a rights-based, accountable government rooted in constitutionalism, liberty, and property remains the bedrock of Western democracy. His philosophy not only challenged absolutism but also empowered individuals as sovereign agents in the political order—an enduring legacy that continues to define democratic governance today.

4.(b) Hannah Arendt analysed a few categories of vita activa. Explain.(15)

Hannah Arendt, in her seminal work The Human Condition (1958), categorized the concept of vita activa—the active life—into three fundamental human activities: labor, work, and action. Each represents a distinct way in which humans engage with the world.

Labor – The Cycle of Necessity

• Definition: Labor refers to activities necessary for biological survival, such as eating, sleeping, and reproduction.
• Characteristics:
• Repetitive and cyclical in nature.
• Tied to the natural processes of life and the human body.
• Produces no lasting artifacts or legacy.
• Realm: Associated with the private sphere (e.g., household), where survival needs are met.
• Status: Considered the lowest form of activity in Arendt’s hierarchy because it does not transcend necessity.

Work – The World of Durability

• Definition: Work involves the creation of artificial, durable objects—tools, buildings, artworks—that constitute the human-made world.
• Characteristics:
• Linear and goal-oriented.
• Produces permanent structures that outlast the individual.
• Reflects human capacity for planning, fabrication, and design.
• Realm: Belongs to the public world, shaping civilization and culture.
• Status: Higher than labor because it contributes to a stable, shared human world.

Action – The Realm of Freedom and Plurality

• Definition: Action is the activity of initiating new processes through speech and deeds in the presence of others.
• Characteristics:
• Unpredictable and irreversible.
• Requires plurality—the presence of others who are different yet equal.
• Reveals individual identity and fosters political freedom.
• Realm: Takes place in the public-political sphere, where individuals appear before others.
• Status: The highest form of vita activa, as it enables human freedom, responsibility, and legacy through storytelling and remembrance.

            Arendt contrasts vita activa with vita contemplativa (the contemplative life), historically favored by philosophers like Plato.

• She warns that modern society overemphasizes labor and consumption, neglecting the higher values of work and action.
• Her framework critiques the depoliticization of modern life and calls for a revival of public engagement and political responsibility.

Arendt’s analysis of vita activa thus offers a profound lens to understand human existence—not merely as survival or productivity, but as a space for freedom, creativity, and political life.

4.(c) Do you think that legitimacy acquired by consent or manufactured by indoctrination is an essential element in maintenance of political rule? Justify your answer with relevant examples. (15)

Legitimacy in political rule is fundamentally tied to the acceptance of authority, which can be acquired either through consent or manufactured by indoctrination. Both approaches serve to maintain political stability, but they differ significantly in their ethical foundations and long-term viability.

Legitimacy by Consent

Legitimacy acquired through consent is rooted in the voluntary agreement of the governed, often through democratic processes such as elections, participation, and adherence to laws that reflect the will of the people. This form of legitimacy is seen as more sustainable and morally justified because it is based on free, informed, and genuine agreement.

• Examples: Modern democracies like India, the UK, or the United States derive legitimacy from elections, constitutional principles, and the rule of law, which ensure that authority is exercised with the explicit consent of the governed.
• Advantages: It fosters political stability, respect for individual rights, and voluntary compliance, reinforcing social trust and legitimacy.
• Limitations: It relies heavily on active participation and informed consent; otherwise, it risks being undermined.

Legitimacy by Indoctrination

In contrast, legitimacy by manufactured indoctrination relies on propaganda, ideological control, or other manipulative means to secure obedience, often in authoritarian regimes. It depends less on voluntary support and more on coercion, fear, or illusion, which can produce short-term compliance but tends to be fragile and illegitimate in the moral sense.

• Examples: Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union historically used propaganda and ideological indoctrination to manufacture consent among their populations.
• Advantages: It can quickly consolidate power and suppress dissent.
• Limitations: This legitimacy is often superficial, can generate resistance, and is inherently unstable because it relies on coercion rather than genuine support.

While both types of legitimacy can maintain political rule temporarily, legitimacy based on consent is essential for sustainable governance, as it aligns with democratic principles, moral justification, and the voluntary participation of the governed. Conversely, legitimacy manufactured through indoctrination is inherently fragile and ethically problematic, risking resistance and unrest once coercive mechanisms weaken or are exposed.

Long-term stability and moral legitimacy are best secured when political authority is rooted in the genuine consent of the people, whereas manufactured consent mostly serves as a tool for short-term control.

SECTION B

5. Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: 10×5=50

5.(a) Write a note on the Dalit perspective of Indian National Movement.

The Dalit perspective on the Indian National Movement highlights both participation in the struggle against colonialism and a parallel fight against caste oppression, emphasizing that freedom from British rule alone did not guarantee social equality.

• Dual Struggle: While the mainstream nationalist movement focused on political independence from British rule, Dalits were simultaneously fighting for social justice, dignity, and equality within Indian society. For them, liberation meant not only political freedom but also emancipation from caste-based discrimination.
• Early Reformers: Leaders like Jyotirao Phule pioneered Dalit assertion by founding the Satyashodhak Samaj (Society of Seekers of Truth) in 1873, which challenged Brahmanical dominance and promoted education for Dalits and women.
• Ambedkar’s Role: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar became the most prominent Dalit voice during the national movement. He argued that political independence without social equality would leave Dalits marginalized. His demand for separate electorates under the Communal Award (1932) reflected Dalit aspirations for political representation, though it was later modified under the Poona Pact with Gandhi.
• Critique of Congress & Gandhi: Many Dalits felt that the Congress-led movement did not adequately address caste oppression. Gandhi’s emphasis on “Harijan upliftment” was seen as paternalistic by Ambedkar, who insisted on structural reforms rather than charity.
• Dalit Organizations: Several Dalit movements and associations emerged during this period, such as the Depressed Classes Federation (founded by Ambedkar in 1930), which sought to secure Dalit rights within the broader nationalist framework.
• Sociological Dimension: For Dalits, the national movement was not just about ending foreign rule but also about dismantling the exploitative caste hierarchy. Their participation was often motivated by the hope of achieving egalitarianism and social justice alongside political freedom.

               Dalits viewed independence as incomplete without social emancipation. Leaders like Phule and Ambedkar reframed nationalism to include justice, equality, and representation. The Dalit viewpoint influenced post-independence constitutional provisions for equality, reservations, and protections, enriching the national movement with demands for inclusive democracy. Scholars like Gail Omvedt noted Dalit movements as more consistently democratic than elite-led Congress efforts.

5.(b) Explain briefly the role of Peasant Movements after 1857 and before independence.

Peasant movements from 1857 to 1947 protested exploitative British land revenue systems like Permanent Settlement and Ryotwari, high rents, forced cash crops, and moneylender abuses, marking a shift from pre-1857 restorative uprisings to organized anti-colonial resistance.

Major Movements

• Indigo Revolt (1859-60, Bengal): Farmers rejected coerced indigo cultivation by planters, gaining support through Dinabandhu Mitra's Nil Darpan and leading to government inquiry.
• Pabna Revolt (1870s, Bengal): Peasants formed leagues against zamindar evictions and illegal cesses, prompting tenancy reforms.
• Deccan Riots (1875, Maharashtra): Attacks on moneylenders' records addressed debt bondage, influencing the Deccan Agriculturists' Relief Act.​
• Champaran (1917), Kheda (1918), Bardoli (1928): Gandhi-led satyagrahas ended tinkathia system, suspended taxes during famines, and resisted revenue hikes, integrating peasants into nationalism.
• Tebhaga (1946, Bengal): Sharecroppers demanded two-thirds crop share, highlighting tenant rights.

Impact

• Raised agrarian consciousness: Peasants became aware of their rights and collective strength.
• Linked with nationalism: Many movements merged with the Indian National Congress and Gandhian campaigns.
• Policy impact: Some revolts forced colonial authorities to introduce reforms (e.g., Deccan Relief Act).
• Foundation for post-independence struggles: These movements shaped later agrarian reforms and peasant organizations.

These movements weakened colonial authority by uniting rural masses, inspiring leaders like Gandhi and Patel, and paving the way for post-independence land reforms like zamindari abolition. Despite limitations like regional focus and occasional violence, they broadened the independence struggle beyond elites.

5.(c) Land reforms programmes led to some constitutional amendments. Comment.

Land reform programmes in India directly influenced constitutional amendments, especially to protect zamindari abolition and redistribution laws from judicial challenges. The most significant were the First Amendment (1951) and later amendments that strengthened the state’s power over property rights.

• 1^st Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951
• Inserted Article 31B and the Ninth Schedule to protect land reform laws (like zamindari abolition acts) from being struck down by courts.
• Validated agrarian reform measures that were challenged as violating the right to property and equality.
• Marked the beginning of constitutional protection for redistributive justice.
• 4^th Amendment Act, 1955
• Strengthened the government’s power to acquire property for public purposes.
• Allowed the state to determine compensation for land acquisition, limiting judicial interference.
• 17^th Amendment Act, 1964
• Expanded the Ninth Schedule by including more land reform laws.
• Clarified the definition of “estate” to cover various tenures and rights, ensuring reforms could not be invalidated.
• 42^nd Amendment Act, 1976
• Further widened the scope of the Ninth Schedule.
• Reinforced the socialist orientation of the Constitution by prioritizing distributive justice over individual property rights.

Significance of These Amendments

• Protected agrarian reforms: Prevented courts from striking down redistributive measures as unconstitutional.
• Shift in property rights: Reduced the sanctity of the fundamental right to property, eventually leading to its removal as a fundamental right in 1978 (44th Amendment).
• Social justice orientation: Reflected the constitutional commitment to dismantling feudal structures and ensuring equitable land distribution.
• Balance of power: Showed how Parliament asserted its authority to pursue socio-economic reforms despite judicial resistance.

Land reforms were central to India’s socio-economic transformation, but they faced strong legal challenges from landlords. Constitutional amendments—especially the First, Fourth, and Seventeenth—were crucial in safeguarding these reforms. They illustrate how the Constitution evolved to prioritize social justice over property rights, embedding the vision of a more egalitarian agrarian order.

5.(d) Delineate the key factors that have shaped the evolving political landscape in Jammu and Kashmir post 2019.

The political landscape of Jammu and Kashmir post-2019 has been shaped by the abrogation of Article 370, reorganization into Union Territories, central governance, security recalibrations, delimitation exercises, and evolving party strategies. These factors have redefined both federal relations and local political dynamics.

• Abrogation of Article 370 & 35A (August 2019):
• Ended J&K’s special constitutional status.
• Integrated the region fully into the Indian Union, altering its federal relationship with New Delhi.
• Reorganization into Union Territories:
• Jammu & Kashmir became a Union Territory with a legislative assembly, while Ladakh was separated as a Union Territory without one.
• This restructuring brought governance directly under the central government.
• Security & Stability Measures:
• Enhanced deployment of security forces and stricter law-and-order mechanisms.
• Aimed at curbing militancy and separatist movements, though it also reshaped civil liberties and political mobilization.
• Delimitation Commission (2020–22):
• Redrew assembly constituencies, increasing seats in Jammu relative to Kashmir.
• This shift has significant implications for electoral balance and party strategies.
• Political Party Realignments:
• Traditional parties like the National Conference (NC) and People’s Democratic Party (PDP) faced challenges in mobilizing support under the new framework.
• Emergence of new parties and leaders (e.g., Ghulam Nabi Azad’s Democratic Progressive Azad Party) reflects attempts to adapt to the altered political terrain.
• Central Development Initiatives:
• Focus on infrastructure, investment, and governance reforms to integrate J&K economically with the rest of India.
• These initiatives are also politically significant, as they aim to shift discourse from autonomy to development.
• Electoral Prospects:
• Assembly elections are anticipated, with the new delimitation shaping voter dynamics.
• The BJP seeks to consolidate gains in Jammu, while regional parties aim to retain influence in Kashmir.

Post-2019, Jammu and Kashmir’s politics has transitioned from autonomy-centered debates to integration, security, and development-oriented narratives. The abrogation of Article 370 remains the watershed moment, but the evolving balance between central authority and local aspirations continues to define the region’s political trajectory.

5.(e) How far has the National Human Rights Commission been successful in achieving its objectives? Comment.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India, established in 1993, has achieved partial success in promoting and protecting human rights through extensive case handling, monetary relief recommendations, and policy interventions, but faces limitations from non-binding powers and implementation gaps.

Achievements

NHRC has processed over 2.3 million cases by 2024, including thousands of suo motu actions, recommending ₹254 crore in relief across 8,731 cases and conducting spot inquiries into violations like custodial deaths and farmer suicides. It influenced reforms such as enhanced compensation for bonded labor, guidelines for child rights, and rehabilitation for over 100,000 orphans, while appointing special rapporteurs and monitors for vulnerable groups. International engagement and awareness campaigns further bolstered its role in addressing issues like women's harassment and disaster displacement.

Limitations

Recommendations lack enforceability, leading to frequent government delays or non-compliance, compounded by resource constraints, bureaucratic hurdles, and limited jurisdiction over armed forces. Critics note uneven impact on systemic issues like custodial torture despite high case volumes.

Overall Assessment

NHRC serves as a vital watchdog, driving awareness and incremental reforms, yet fuller success requires statutory enhancements for binding powers and better enforcement mechanisms.

6. 

6.(a) Parliamentary committees are indispensable to the legislative process. It provides for the opportunity for cross-pollination between the two chambers of the Parliament. Discuss. (20)

Parliamentary Committees are rightly considered the backbone of the legislative process in India. They ensure detailed scrutiny of bills, policies, and finances, while also fostering cooperation and dialogue between the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.

Significance

• Detailed Scrutiny:
• Parliament as a whole often lacks the time for in-depth debate. Committees examine bills, budgets, and policies in detail, ensuring technical and expert input.
• Public Accounts Committee (PAC): Scrutinizes government expenditure, ensuring financial accountability.
• Checks and Balances:
• They act as watchdogs over executive actions, holding ministries accountable through reports and recommendations.
• Estimates Committee: Examines how funds are allocated and used, suggesting efficiency improvements.
• Consensus Building:
• Committees provide a less partisan environment compared to the floor of the House, encouraging constructive dialogue.
• Joint Committees on Specific Issues: Provide a platform for both Houses to jointly investigate matters of national importance (e.g., JPC on stock market scams, telecom).
• Expertise Utilization:
• Members can consult specialists, stakeholders, and civil society, enriching the legislative process with diverse perspectives.
• Standing Committees: Review bills before they are debated in the House, often reshaping legislation.

Cross-Pollination Between the Two Chambers

• Joint Membership:
• Many committees (e.g., Public Accounts Committee, Estimates Committee, Department-related Standing Committees) include members from both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.
• Shared Deliberations:
• This joint participation allows for exchange of ideas, reducing chamber-specific biases and fostering a unified parliamentary outlook.
• Bridging Political Divides:
• Committees often function beyond party lines, enabling MPs from both Houses to collaborate on national issues.
• Institutional Continuity:

• Since committees work throughout the year, they ensure continuity of legislative oversight even when Parliament is not in session.

Parliamentary committees embody the principle of deliberative democracy. They not only strengthen legislative oversight but also create a forum where members of both Houses can cross-pollinate ideas, share expertise, and build consensus. While their recommendations are not binding, their influence on shaping legislation and policy is undeniable.

6.(b) Examine the constitutional provisions and nature of advisory jurisdiction of Supreme Court of India. Evaluate your answer with relevant examples. (15)

Article 143 of the Constitution of India provides the basis for the advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

• Article 143(1): The President of India may refer to the Supreme Court any question of law or fact of public importance. The Court may then give its opinion, though it is not binding.
• Article 143(2): Specifically empowers the President to seek the Court’s opinion on disputes arising out of pre-constitutional treaties, agreements, or covenants.

Nature of Advisory Jurisdiction

• Discretionary Opinion: The Supreme Court is not bound to give its opinion; it may decline if it feels the matter is not appropriate.
• Non-binding Character: The opinion given is advisory, not enforceable. The President or government may accept or ignore it.
• Public Importance: The jurisdiction is meant for questions of law or fact that have wide constitutional or national significance.
• Unique Role: Unlike its appellate or original jurisdiction, advisory jurisdiction positions the Court as a constitutional consultant to the executive.

Examples

• Re Berubari Union Case (1960):
• The President sought advice on the implementation of the Indo-Pakistan Agreement regarding the transfer of Berubari Union.
• The Court opined that a constitutional amendment was necessary to cede territory.
• Keshav Singh Case (1965):
• Concerned the powers of the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly vis-à-vis contempt of court.
• The Court clarified the balance between legislative privilege and judicial authority.
• Special Reference No. 1 of 1993 (Ayodhya Dispute):
• The President asked whether a temple existed at the disputed site before the mosque was built.
• The Court declined to answer, showing its discretion in advisory jurisdiction.
• Special Reference No. 1 of 2002 (Gujarat Assembly Dissolution):

• The President sought advice on whether elections could be delayed beyond six months after dissolution.
• The Court advised that elections must be held within six months, reinforcing democratic principles.

Evaluation

• Strengths:
• Provides constitutional clarity on complex issues.
• Acts as a check on executive discretion.
• Enhances the Court’s role as guardian of the Constitution.
• Limitations:

• Opinions are not binding, reducing their practical impact.
• Risk of politicization if references are made for partisan purposes.
• Court’s refusal in some cases shows the limits of its advisory role.

The advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 143 is a unique constitutional device that allows the executive to seek judicial wisdom on matters of national importance. While its opinions are not binding, they carry immense persuasive value and have shaped constitutional practice in India. The Berubari and Gujarat Assembly references illustrate its constructive role, while the Ayodhya reference shows the Court’s prudence in avoiding political entanglement.

6.(c) The recent developments in Indian Politics have not eroded the true spirit of federalism in India. Critically examine this statement with the help of appropriate examples. (15)

India’s federalism is described as “quasi-federal” with a strong Centre but significant powers for states.

• Articles 245–263 define legislative, administrative, and financial relations.
• Mechanisms like the Inter-State Council, Finance Commission, and GST Council institutionalize cooperation.

Developments Supporting Federalism

• GST Council (2017 onwards): A unique body where Centre and states jointly decide indirect tax policies. Despite disputes (e.g., compensation crisis during COVID-19), it reflects cooperative federalism.
• Coalition Politics: Regional parties continue to play a decisive role in national politics, ensuring state interests are represented at the Centre.
• Judicial Safeguards: The Supreme Court has upheld federal principles in cases like SR Bommai (1994), limiting misuse of Article 356.
• Decentralized Schemes: NITI Aayog promotes state-specific development strategies, encouraging competitive federalism.

Challenges to Federalism

• Abrogation of Article 370 (2019): The reorganization of Jammu & Kashmir into Union Territories raised concerns about unilateral central action reducing state autonomy.
• Farm Laws (2020): Central legislation on agriculture, a subject in the State List, triggered massive protests and highlighted tensions in Centre–State jurisdiction.
• Governor’s Role: Increasing friction between state governments and Governors (e.g., in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, West Bengal) shows central influence in state affairs.
• Financial Dependence: States rely heavily on central transfers; disputes over Finance Commission recommendations and GST compensation reflect fiscal imbalance.

Critical Examination

• Federalism has not been eroded: Institutions like the GST Council, Finance Commission, and judiciary continue to safeguard cooperative federalism. States retain significant autonomy in health, education, and local governance.
• But strains are visible: Central interventions in state matters, financial dominance, and unilateral decisions (e.g., J&K) challenge the balance.
• Evolving nature: Indian federalism adapts to political realities—sometimes leaning towards centralization, but also empowering states through coalition politics and competitive development.

The spirit of federalism in India remains intact but contested. Recent developments show both cooperative mechanisms (GST Council, NITI Aayog) and centralizing tendencies (farm laws, Article 370). Federalism in India is dynamic, not static—it survives through negotiation, judicial oversight, and political bargaining, ensuring that despite tensions, the balance between unity and diversity continues.

7. 

7.(a) Enunciate the impediments to women''s participation in local governance in the process of political decentralisation. (20)
7.(b) Caste remains a vital axis for political mobilisation in India. How would the caste census address the aspirations of people? Discuss. (15)
7.(c) There is a debate on the procedure for appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners to the Election Commission of India. Analyse its various aspects. (15)

8. 

8.(a) The decision to conduct Population Census-2027 has reopened the debate on delimitation in India. Discuss its various aspects. (20)
8.(b) With reference to Nehruvian perspective of planning and economic development, examine how the early phase of economic planning in India has laid the foundation of modern India''s economic growth. (15)
8.(c) Illustrate with examples how political parties in India have played a crucial role in drawing the historically disadvantaged groups into the mainstream political system. (15)