Easy2Siksha.com
GNDU Question Paper-2024
B.A 1
st
Semester
POLITICAL SCIENCE
(Principles of Political Science)
Time Allowed: Three Hours Max. Marks: 100
Note: Attempt Five questions in all, selecting at least One question from each section. The
Fifth question may be attempted from any section. All questions carry equal marks.
SECTION-A
1. Discuss the meaning and nature of Political Science as per traditional view.
2. Examine the relationship of Political Science with History.
SECTION-B
3. Define State and discuss its essential elements.
4 Critically discuss the social contract theory for the origin of the State.
SECTION-C
5. Discuss the nature of the State as per Gandhian view.
6. Critically discuss the nature of development State.
Easy2Siksha.com
SECTION-D
7 Discuss the meaning and attributes of Sovereignty.
8. Critically examine the determinants of Political Participation.
GNDU Answer Paper-2024
B.A 1
st
Semester
POLITICAL SCIENCE
(Principles of Political Science)
Time Allowed: Three Hours Max. Marks: 100
Note: Attempt Five questions in all, selecting at least One question from each section. The
Fifth question may be attempted from any section. All questions carry equal marks.
SECTION-A
1. Discuss the meaning and nature of Political Science as per traditional view.
Ans: Imagine a time centuries ago, in a small village or a growing city, where people
gathered to decide how to live together, how to share resources, how to resolve disputes,
and who should lead. This human need to organize life in a community is where the story of
Political Science begins. Political Science, in its simplest sense, is the study of power,
governance, and human society—how people govern themselves and are governed. But to
truly understand it, we must step into the lens of traditional thinkers who first tried to make
sense of this fascinating field.
1. The Meaning of Political Science (Traditional View)
Traditionally, Political Science was considered the “science of the state”. Early scholars and
philosophers were curious about how societies were organized and how rulers and
governments functioned. According to the classical view:
Easy2Siksha.com
• Aristotle, often called the “Father of Political Science,” defined politics as the study
of the state and the art of good governance. He famously said that man is a
“political animal,” meaning humans naturally live in communities and seek to
organize their lives collectively.
• Political Science, in this view, is normative as much as it is descriptive. It does not
only describe how governments work but also evaluates what makes a government
or a political system good or bad. This means traditional Political Science is about
morals, ethics, and justice in governance, not just rules and laws.
To put it in a relatable story: imagine a village where villagers must decide who leads, how
taxes are collected, and how disputes are resolved. Traditional Political Science would ask:
“Who should lead?” “What is a fair law?” “How can we ensure justice for everyone?” Its
focus is on ideal arrangements and ethical governance.
2. The Nature of Political Science (Traditional Perspective)
The nature of Political Science, according to traditional scholars, has several key
characteristics:
a) Science of State
Traditional Political Science focuses primarily on the state as the central unit of study. The
state is seen as the organized political community with a government that holds sovereign
authority over a territory. In simpler terms, the state is like the captain of a ship that steers
society toward order and stability.
• The state is the heart of political life. Without it, there is no formal political authority
or legal system.
• Political Science studies its origins, functions, and purposes.
b) Normative Nature
Classical thinkers like Plato and Aristotle emphasized that Political Science is not just about
facts but also about values. It’s about asking “what ought to be” rather than just “what is.”
• For example, Aristotle discussed the ideal state where rulers are just and citizens live
harmoniously.
• Plato wrote about a state led by philosopher-kings—leaders guided by wisdom and
morality.
This shows that traditional Political Science is deeply value-oriented. It’s about guiding
society toward the common good.
c) Ethical and Philosophical Orientation
Traditional Political Science is closely linked with ethics and philosophy. Scholars believed
that studying politics is inseparable from thinking about human virtues and moral
responsibilities.
Easy2Siksha.com
• A government is not judged only by how efficiently it governs but also by how just
and fair it is.
• This is why ethics, morality, and justice were always central to traditional Political
Science.
d) Practical and Advisory Role
In its early conception, Political Science was not purely theoretical; it had a practical
purpose. It advised rulers on how to govern effectively and justly.
• Machiavelli, although slightly later than Aristotle, emphasized practical politics,
advising rulers on maintaining power and stability. Even though he had a different
tone, the core idea of guiding governance was consistent.
• Political Science was like a manual for statesmen, teaching the art of ruling and
administration.
e) Focus on Government and Law
Traditional Political Science was mostly concerned with:
1. The State: Its origin, purpose, and functions.
2. Government: Types of government (monarchy, aristocracy, democracy), their
advantages, and disadvantages.
3. Law and Order: The importance of laws in regulating society and maintaining justice.
4. Political Obligations: Duties of citizens and rulers in maintaining a fair society.
It was less concerned with politics as a broad social phenomenon, which is why traditional
scholars often studied political theory more than political behavior.
f) Classification of Political Systems
Another interesting aspect of traditional Political Science was the effort to classify
governments:
• Aristotle divided governments into:
o Monarchy: Rule by one.
o Aristocracy: Rule by the best.
o Polity: Rule by the many.
And he also identified corrupt forms like tyranny, oligarchy, and mob rule.
This classification shows that traditional Political Science was structured, systematic, and
analytical.
3. Why Traditional Political Science Was Important
To understand why this view mattered, imagine the early societies without any structured
governance. Chaos, disputes, and injustice could prevail easily. Traditional Political Science
provided:
Easy2Siksha.com
1. Guidance for Rulers: It helped kings, emperors, and leaders think about how to
govern wisely and fairly.
2. Framework for Society: It offered ideas about rights, duties, and justice, helping
societies organize themselves.
3. Foundation for Modern Political Science: Today’s Political Science, with its emphasis
on comparative politics, international relations, and political behavior, grew from
these classical ideas.
4. Visualizing the Traditional View
Here’s a simple diagram to help you picture it:
Political Science (Traditional View)
|
--------------------------------------
| | |
Study of State Ethics & Morality Government & Law
| | |
Origin & Nature Justice & Virtue Ruler & Citizen Roles
| | |
Types of Government Ideal Governance Stability & Order
This diagram summarizes how traditional Political Science focuses on the state, ethical
governance, and the role of rulers and citizens in creating an ideal society.
5. Humanizing Political Science
Think of Political Science as the ancient art of storytelling—but the story is about how
humans live together, share power, and organize life. Instead of dragons and knights, the
heroes are rulers and citizens, the villains are tyranny, corruption, and injustice, and the
goal is a peaceful, just, and prosperous society.
• For a student, this is exciting because it’s like reading a guidebook written centuries
ago, yet still relevant today.
• For an examiner, it’s enjoyable because it shows both knowledge and
understanding of human society.
6. Conclusion
In summary, the traditional view of Political Science sees it as:
• The science of the state: studying its origin, nature, and functions.
• Normative and ethical: concerned with justice, morality, and ideal governance.
• Practical and advisory: guiding rulers in the art of governance.
• Structured and analytical: classifying types of governments and their characteristics.
Traditional Political Science is a story of human beings trying to live together in an
organized way, guided by reason, ethics, and the pursuit of the common good. Its teachings
may be centuries old, but the principles—justice, fairness, and good governance—remain
timeless.
Easy2Siksha.com
2. Examine the relationship of Political Science with History.
Ans: The Relationship of Political Science with History
A Fresh Beginning
Imagine two old friends sitting together in a library. One is History, surrounded by dusty
scrolls and chronicles of kings, wars, revolutions, and empires. The other is Political Science,
holding books of theories, constitutions, and models of governance. At first glance, they
seem different—one tells stories of the past, the other analyzes systems of power. But as
they talk, you realize they are inseparable. Political Science cannot breathe without the
oxygen of History, and History often finds meaning only when Political Science interprets it.
This is the essence of their relationship: History provides the raw material, while Political
Science provides the tools to analyze it.
Political Science: The Study of Power and Governance
Political Science is concerned with the theory and practice of politics—how governments
are formed, how power is distributed, how laws are made, and how citizens interact with
the state. It asks questions like:
• What is the best form of government?
• How do revolutions change societies?
• Why do democracies succeed in some places and fail in others?
But to answer these questions, Political Science cannot work in a vacuum. It needs the
context of History.
History: The Record of Human Experience
History is the story of human civilization—its struggles, triumphs, mistakes, and progress. It
tells us how societies evolved, how empires rose and fell, and how ideas like liberty,
equality, and justice were born.
But History, too, is not just a collection of dates and events. Without Political Science, it risks
becoming a mere chronicle. Political Science helps us interpret historical events, see
patterns, and draw lessons.
How Political Science and History Interact
1. History as the Foundation of Political Science
• Political Science draws heavily on historical examples.
• Aristotle, often called the father of Political Science, studied 158 Greek constitutions
to classify governments.
• Machiavelli’s The Prince was based on his study of Roman and Italian history.
Easy2Siksha.com
• Montesquieu’s theory of separation of powers was inspired by the historical
evolution of the British constitution.
Thus, without History, Political Science would lack evidence and grounding.
2. Political Science Gives Meaning to History
• History records events like the French Revolution, the American Civil War, or the
Indian Independence Movement.
• But Political Science explains their significance:
o The French Revolution wasn’t just a bloody uprising; it was the birth of
modern democracy and the idea of popular sovereignty.
o The American Civil War wasn’t just a conflict; it was a turning point in the
struggle between federal and state power.
o Indian Independence wasn’t just the end of colonial rule; it was the triumph
of non-violent political struggle.
Political Science helps us see the political meaning behind historical events.
3. History Provides Lessons for Political Science
• By studying the fall of the Roman Empire, political scientists learn about the dangers
of overexpansion and corruption.
• By studying the rise of Nazi Germany, they understand how economic crises and
propaganda can destroy democracies.
• By studying India’s freedom struggle, they see how leadership, ideology, and mass
participation shape political change.
History is like a laboratory where Political Science tests its theories.
4. Political Science Shapes the Writing of History
• Historians often use political concepts to frame their narratives.
• For example, when writing about the Mughal Empire, historians analyze its
administrative system, revenue policies, and centralization of power—all concepts
from Political Science.
• When studying the Cold War, historians use terms like “balance of power,”
“deterrence,” and “bipolarity”—again, political science concepts.
Thus, Political Science influences how History is written and understood.
Differences Between Political Science and History
While they are closely related, they are not identical.
Aspect
Political Science
History
Focus
Theories, systems, and principles of
governance
Events, processes, and changes over
time
Easy2Siksha.com
Method
Analytical, comparative, normative
Descriptive, chronological, narrative
Aim
To understand and improve political
life
To record and explain past human
experience
Scope
Present and future as well as past
Primarily past events
So, while History tells us what happened, Political Science asks why it happened and what
it means for today and tomorrow.
Famous Thinkers on the Relationship
• Lord Bryce: “History without Political Science has no fruit; Political Science without
History has no root.”
• Seeley: “History without Political Science is incomplete, and Political Science without
History is blind.”
• Freeman: “History is past politics, and politics is present history.”
These quotes beautifully capture their interdependence.
Story-Like Illustration
Think of the Indian Constitution.
• History’s Role: It tells us about British colonial rule, the 1857 revolt, the nationalist
movement, the Cabinet Mission, and the Constituent Assembly debates.
• Political Science’s Role: It explains why India chose parliamentary democracy,
federalism, fundamental rights, and secularism.
Without History, we wouldn’t know the struggles that shaped the Constitution. Without
Political Science, we wouldn’t understand its structure and functioning.
Criticisms and Limitations
Some argue that Political Science should be independent of History, focusing on present
realities rather than past events. Others say History should not be reduced to politics alone,
since it also includes culture, economy, and society.
Yet, despite these criticisms, the two disciplines remain deeply connected.
Conclusion
The relationship between Political Science and History is like that of two sides of the same
coin. History provides the narrative of human experience, while Political Science provides
the analysis of power and governance. Together, they give us a complete picture of political
life—its origins, its evolution, and its future.
To study Political Science without History is like trying to understand a tree without knowing
its roots. To study History without Political Science is like admiring a tree without
understanding how it grows.
Easy2Siksha.com
So, when we examine the relationship between the two, we see not rivalry but
partnership—a partnership that helps us understand not only the past but also the present,
and guides us toward building a better political future.
SECTION-B
3. Define State and discuss its essential elements.
Ans: Imagine a small village in ancient times. People live there, each with their own chores
and responsibilities. Some farm the land, some build houses, some craft tools, and some
teach children. Life is generally peaceful, but there’s a problem—sometimes disputes arise.
Perhaps two families argue over the use of water from a shared well. Or a traveler steals a
goat from someone. In these situations, the villagers need someone or something to
maintain order, ensure justice, and protect everyone’s rights. This is where the idea of the
State begins to emerge.
In simple terms, a State is like the village’s invisible “guardian.” It is not a person, not a
building, but an organized system that governs, regulates, and protects the lives of people
living within a specific territory. You can think of it as a body that gives society structure,
rules, and authority. Just as the human body has a brain that makes decisions, a heart that
sustains life, and a skeleton that provides support, the State has elements that ensure it
functions effectively.
Defining the State
Over time, scholars, philosophers, and thinkers have tried to define the State. Let’s look at
some simple ways to understand it:
1. Max Weber’s Definition: Weber, a famous sociologist, said the State is an
organization that claims the monopoly of legitimate use of physical force within a
territory. In simpler words, only the State has the right to enforce laws, punish
wrongdoers, and maintain order. No one else can legitimately use violence or
coercion in its territory.
2. Aristotle’s Perspective: Aristotle, the Greek philosopher, viewed the State as a
community of citizens aimed at achieving the highest good. For him, the State
exists not just to protect life but to help people live a good and meaningful life.
3. Modern View: Today, a State is commonly defined as a political and legal
organization that has sovereignty over a certain territory and its population,
enforces laws, and maintains public order and welfare.
From these definitions, we can see that the State is much more than just rulers or
government—it is an institution that organizes society, enforces rules, and ensures the
welfare of its citizens.
Easy2Siksha.com
Essential Elements of the State
Now, let’s break down the State into its essential elements. Think of these elements as the
building blocks of a house. Without any one of them, the house—or the State—cannot
stand properly. There are four key elements: Population, Territory, Government, and
Sovereignty.
1. Population
The first and most obvious element of the State is its people. A State cannot exist without
people because the State is formed to organize human life. People are the heart of the
State—they work, pay taxes, follow laws, and contribute to the society.
• Diversity of Population: Populations are often diverse in terms of culture, religion,
language, and ethnicity. This diversity shapes the nature of the State. A successful
State manages to unite its population despite differences.
• Responsibility and Rights: People are not just passive members; they have rights to
protection, education, and freedom, and responsibilities like obeying laws and
paying taxes.
Imagine a State without people—it’s like a school with no students. It exists on paper but
has no real purpose.
2. Territory
Next comes the territory. This is the physical space where the State exercises its authority. It
includes land, water, airspace, and sometimes even seas. A State cannot function without a
defined territory because this is where it enforces laws and protects its citizens.
• Borders and Boundaries: Territory must have clear boundaries, either natural (like
rivers and mountains) or man-made (like fences and walls). These borders
distinguish one State from another.
• Resources: Territory also provides resources such as land for farming, forests for
timber, and minerals for industry. Managing these resources is crucial for the State’s
survival and development.
Think of territory as the stage where the play of governance unfolds. Without a stage, the
actors have nowhere to perform.
3. Government
The government is the most visible part of the State. It’s the brain and hands that organize
the people, make laws, and enforce them. Government is the agency through which the
State operates.
Easy2Siksha.com
• Structure: Governments can take various forms—democracies, monarchies,
dictatorships, or republics. But no matter the form, every government has the
responsibility to maintain order, provide security, and promote welfare.
• Functions: The government makes laws, enforces them through police and judicial
systems, collects taxes, and manages public services like education, healthcare, and
transportation.
Without a government, the State would be like a body without a brain—no coordination, no
decision-making, and no direction.
4. Sovereignty
Finally, the fourth element is sovereignty. This is what gives the State its independence and
authority. Sovereignty means the State has supreme power within its territory and is free
from external control.
• Internal Sovereignty: The State can make and enforce laws without interference
from any other authority inside its territory.
• External Sovereignty: The State can engage with other States, make treaties, and
conduct foreign policy without being dominated by another country.
Sovereignty is what separates a fully functional State from just a region or community.
Without sovereignty, the State cannot exercise its authority fully, and its existence becomes
unstable.
Connecting the Elements
Now, let’s connect these elements into a story. Imagine a kingdom:
• The people are the lifeblood, the citizens who live, work, and interact every day.
• The territory is the land they live on, with rivers, mountains, and farms that sustain
life.
• The government is the king, ministers, and officials who organize the community,
settle disputes, and provide security.
• Sovereignty is the power of the king to make decisions without anyone from outside
interfering in the affairs of the kingdom.
Remove any one of these, and the kingdom—or State—collapses. No people? No State. No
territory? No base of power. No government? Chaos. No sovereignty? Vulnerability to
external control.
Easy2Siksha.com
Additional Features of the State
Besides these essential elements, there are other characteristics that make the State
unique:
1. Permanent Organization: Unlike temporary committees or clubs, a State is a
permanent entity designed to last for generations.
2. Enforces Laws: The State has the authority to make and enforce laws to ensure
order and justice.
3. Provides Welfare: A modern State is not only about power but also about ensuring
the welfare of its citizens through education, health, and economic support.
4. Regulates International Relations: A sovereign State interacts with other States
through diplomacy, treaties, and trade.
Conclusion
In essence, the State is like a carefully orchestrated play. The people are the actors, the
territory is the stage, the government is the director, and sovereignty is the ultimate
authority that keeps the play running smoothly. Together, these elements create a system
that maintains order, protects citizens, and allows society to flourish.
Understanding the State this way makes it more than just a political or legal concept—it
becomes a living, breathing entity that organizes human life, balances freedom and order,
and ensures that society functions harmoniously. Without the State, life would be chaotic,
and human progress would be severely hindered.
By keeping these elements in mind, one can appreciate why the State is fundamental to
civilization. It is not just a ruler or a government building—it is the framework within which
people live, work, and grow together as a community.
4 Critically discuss the social contract theory for the origin of the State.
Ans: Critically Discussing the Social Contract Theory of the Origin of the State
A Fresh Beginning
Imagine a time long before governments, parliaments, or courts existed. People lived in
caves, forests, and open fields. There were no police to protect them, no judges to settle
disputes, and no written laws to guide behavior. Life was uncertain—sometimes peaceful,
sometimes violent.
Easy2Siksha.com
Now imagine those people gathering one day and saying: “Enough of this uncertainty! Let us
agree to live together under some rules. We will give up some of our freedom in exchange
for security and order.”
That imagined agreement is what philosophers later called the “social contract.” It is not a
real historical event but a powerful idea: that the State was born out of an agreement
among individuals to escape the dangers of the “state of nature.”
Meaning of Social Contract Theory
The Social Contract Theory is one of the most famous explanations of how the State
originated. It suggests:
• Human beings once lived in a state of nature without organized authority.
• To escape insecurity, they entered into a contract—an agreement among
themselves.
• This contract created a civil society and gave rise to the State.
The theory was developed in the 16th–18th centuries by thinkers like Thomas Hobbes, John
Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Each gave a different version of the contract, reflecting
their own view of human nature and politics.
Versions of the Social Contract
1. Hobbes’ Version: The Leviathan
• State of Nature: Hobbes described it as a condition of constant fear and insecurity.
People were selfish, power-hungry, and violent. His famous line: “Life in the state of
nature was solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”
• The Contract: To escape this chaos, individuals surrendered all their rights to a single
authority—the Sovereign.
• The State: The result was an absolute monarchy, a powerful “Leviathan” that could
impose peace and order.
• Criticism: Hobbes’ view is too pessimistic. It justifies dictatorship and ignores human
capacity for cooperation.
2. Locke’s Version: The Liberal Contract
• State of Nature: Locke saw it more positively. People were free, equal, and guided
by natural law. But disputes over property created conflicts.
• The Contract: People agreed to form a government to protect their natural rights—
life, liberty, and property.
• The State: The government was a trustee, limited by law. If it failed, people had the
right to revolt.
• Criticism: Locke’s theory is more balanced, but it assumes people are rational and
overlooks deep inequalities in society.
3. Rousseau’s Version: The General Will
Easy2Siksha.com
• State of Nature: Rousseau believed humans were innocent and free, living simple
lives. Civilization and private property corrupted them.
• The Contract: People agreed to form a community based on the “general will”—the
collective interest of all.
• The State: Sovereignty belonged to the people. Laws expressed the general will, and
obedience to law was freedom itself.
• Criticism: Rousseau’s idea inspired democracy, but the “general will” can be vague
and may justify majority tyranny.
Common Features of the Theory
Despite differences, all versions share some common points:
1. The State is not of divine origin but a human creation.
2. It is based on agreement, not force.
3. The State exists to serve the people, not the other way around.
4. Political authority is legitimate only if it rests on consent.
Critical Discussion
Strengths of the Social Contract Theory
1. Human-Centered: It shifted the explanation of the State from divine will to human
choice. This was revolutionary in its time.
2. Foundation of Rights: Locke’s version laid the groundwork for modern ideas of
human rights, constitutionalism, and limited government.
3. Democratic Spirit: Rousseau’s emphasis on the general will inspired modern
democracy and popular sovereignty.
4. Moral Justification: It provided a moral basis for political authority—rulers must
govern with the consent of the governed.
Weaknesses of the Social Contract Theory
1. Historical Fiction: There is no evidence that such a contract ever happened. It is a
philosophical myth, not a historical fact.
2. Simplistic View of Human Nature: Hobbes was too pessimistic, Rousseau too
optimistic, and Locke too rational. Real human behavior is more complex.
3. Ambiguity: The idea of “general will” is vague and can be misused by authoritarian
leaders claiming to represent the people.
4. Ignores Social Realities: The theory assumes individuals were free and equal before
the contract, but in reality, societies were shaped by power, class, and inequality.
5. Modern Criticism: Thinkers like Marx argued that the State did not arise from a
contract but from class struggles and economic forces.
Relevance Today
Even though the social contract never literally happened, the idea still matters:
Easy2Siksha.com
• Constitutions are like modern social contracts, setting rules between citizens and the
State.
• Democracy is based on the principle of consent of the governed.
• Human Rights debates often refer back to Locke’s natural rights.
• Public Policy discussions still echo Rousseau’s idea of balancing individual freedom
with the common good.
Story-Like Illustration
Think of a classroom without a teacher. Students talk, fight, and no one listens. Finally, they
agree: “Let’s choose a class monitor. We’ll follow some rules so everyone can study in
peace.” That agreement is their social contract.
• If they give the monitor absolute power (Hobbes), order is maintained but freedom
is lost.
• If they give the monitor limited power and can replace him if he fails (Locke), balance
is achieved.
• If they all decide rules together as a group (Rousseau), it becomes a democracy.
This simple classroom story mirrors the grand theories of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau.
Conclusion
The Social Contract Theory is one of the most influential ideas in political thought. It may
not describe the actual historical origin of the State, but it captures the essence of why
people accept authority: to escape chaos, protect rights, and live together in peace.
Critically, it has strengths—emphasizing consent, rights, and democracy—but also
weaknesses—being hypothetical, simplistic, and sometimes vague. Yet, its legacy is
undeniable. From the American Declaration of Independence to the French Revolution and
modern constitutions, the spirit of the social contract continues to shape our political world.
In short, the Social Contract Theory is less about what really happened in the past and more
about what should guide us in the present: that the State exists for the people, and its
legitimacy rests on their consent.
SECTION-C
5. Discuss the nature of the State as per Gandhian view.
Ans: Imagine you are sitting in a quiet village in India during the early 20th century. You see
Mahatma Gandhi walking slowly along a dusty path, surrounded by villagers. He stops for a
moment and begins to talk about life, morality, and society. Suddenly, he starts speaking
about something very important—the State. But Gandhi doesn’t speak in abstract political
Easy2Siksha.com
jargon. Instead, he explains the State in terms of human values, ethics, and the real life of
ordinary people.
For Gandhi, the State is not just an institution of power, or a government that commands
obedience, collects taxes, or enforces laws. To him, the State is a reflection of the society it
governs. Its nature, its purpose, and its authority are closely tied to moral principles. In fact,
Gandhi was deeply concerned that a State without morality would inevitably become a
machine of coercion and violence.
1. The State and Violence
Gandhi starts from a fundamental observation: most modern States maintain themselves
through coercion and force. Laws are enforced through police, armies, courts, and
punishment. This use of violence, Gandhi argues, is the root of the State's authority.
However, he sees this as a deeply flawed principle. A State that depends on violence to keep
people in line has already failed ethically. It imposes order not by convincing citizens of what
is right, but by threatening them with punishment. Gandhi calls this a negative and
unnatural form of power.
To illustrate, imagine a school where students behave only because the teacher threatens
punishment. The students may appear orderly, but they are not learning discipline or
responsibility. Similarly, a State based on coercion might appear stable, but it is morally
weak. Gandhi believed that a true State should not rely on violence—it should inspire
people to do what is right voluntarily.
2. The State and Moral Authority
For Gandhi, the ideal State is rooted in moral authority, not physical force. He repeatedly
emphasizes that political authority must emerge from the ethical consciousness of
individuals. A State is legitimate only when it serves the moral and spiritual welfare of its
citizens.
This brings us to Gandhi’s concept of “Rama Rajya”, which is often misunderstood as a
religious term. Rama Rajya literally means the rule of Rama, the ideal king in Hindu
mythology. But Gandhi interprets it differently. For him, Rama Rajya symbolizes a society
where justice, fairness, truth, and non-violence prevail. In such a State, the ruler is not a
tyrant with power over others but a servant of the people, dedicated to the common good.
Gandhi believes that true political power is ethical power. Authority is justified only when it
reflects the moral will of the people. If the State loses this ethical dimension, it degenerates
into domination and oppression.
3. The Role of Non-Violence (Ahimsa)
At the heart of Gandhi’s vision of the State is Ahimsa, or non-violence. For him, the State
should never harm its citizens, even in the pursuit of law and order. This is radically different
from traditional views of political authority. Classical political thinkers like Hobbes or
Easy2Siksha.com
Machiavelli often justify the State as necessary to control humans, who are seen as naturally
selfish or violent. Gandhi, however, sees humans as capable of moral improvement, and the
State as a facilitator, not a controller.
Non-violence, for Gandhi, is not merely a personal ethic—it is a political principle. A State
that adopts non-violence as its guiding principle encourages people to resolve conflicts
through dialogue and understanding rather than force. This transforms society from a
battleground into a community of mutual respect and shared responsibility.
4. Decentralization of Power
Gandhi’s vision of the State also emphasizes decentralization and self-rule. Unlike a
centralized State that governs from the top down, Gandhi imagines a State where villages
and communities are self-sufficient and self-governing. Each village is a miniature republic,
responsible for its own administration, justice, and welfare.
He calls this system “Gram Swaraj” (village self-rule). In Gram Swaraj, the State does not
exist as an overpowering entity. Instead, it becomes a network of cooperative
communities, each guided by ethical principles. This decentralization prevents the abuse of
power and ensures that governance remains close to the people.
To understand this, picture a small village managing its water supply, schools, and dispute
resolution through local councils. The State provides support but does not dictate or
impose. The citizens, guided by ethical responsibility, maintain order and justice themselves.
This, Gandhi argues, is the truest form of political life.
5. Economics and the State
Gandhi also links the nature of the State to economic principles. He is critical of modern
industrial capitalism, which centralizes wealth and power, creating a State that enforces
inequality. Gandhi believes the State should promote economic self-sufficiency and
equality, reducing dependence on coercion.
In his ideal State, the economy is human-centered, not profit-centered. Industries and
resources should serve human needs, not dominate people’s lives. This aligns with his vision
of trusteeship, where those with wealth act as stewards for the welfare of the larger
community. By aligning the economy with morality, Gandhi strengthens the ethical
foundation of the State.
6. The State as a Moral Teacher
Perhaps the most unique aspect of Gandhi’s vision is that the State is not only an
administrator but also a teacher of morality. Its role is to educate citizens in ethics,
responsibility, and self-discipline. Laws are not only rules to be obeyed but instruments to
guide human behavior toward truth and justice.
Easy2Siksha.com
This idea contrasts sharply with modern legalistic States, where law is often divorced from
morality. Gandhi insists that for a State to be legitimate, it must harmonize law, morality,
and community welfare.
7. Critiques and Challenges
Of course, Gandhi’s vision is idealistic, and critics argue that it may be impractical in large,
complex societies. Can millions of people govern themselves morally without a centralized
authority? Gandhi acknowledges this challenge but argues that the quality of political life
should not be sacrificed for convenience or efficiency. True governance, he believes,
cannot be separated from ethical living.
8. Conclusion: A Human-Centered State
In simple terms, Gandhi’s view of the State can be summarized as follows:
1. The State should never rely on violence; moral authority is the true source of power.
2. The State exists to serve human welfare, not to dominate or exploit.
3. Non-violence and truth are the guiding principles of governance.
4. Power should be decentralized, empowering local communities.
5. The economy and wealth should be organized to promote equality and social
welfare.
6. The State acts as a moral teacher, guiding citizens toward justice, self-discipline, and
responsibility.
If we visualize it, Gandhi’s State is more like a nurturing gardener than a strict warden. It
does not force the flowers to bloom; it provides soil, water, and sunlight, guiding them to
grow naturally. Similarly, a Gandhian State cultivates ethical citizens who govern themselves
through understanding, morality, and cooperation.
In the end, Gandhi’s vision is radically humane. It challenges us to rethink politics not as a
struggle for power but as a pursuit of truth, justice, and moral progress. While it may seem
idealistic in today’s context, it offers a timeless reminder: a State is truly strong when it is
ethical, decentralized, non-violent, and committed to the well-being of its people.
6. Critically discuss the nature of development State.
Ans: Critically Discussing the Nature of the Developmental State
A Fresh Beginning
Picture a newly independent country in the mid-20th century. The colonial rulers have left,
the economy is fragile, industries are scarce, and poverty is widespread. The people look to
the new government not just for law and order, but for jobs, schools, hospitals, and roads.
In this moment, the State is no longer just a night-watchman guarding property—it becomes
the chief architect of development.
Easy2Siksha.com
This is the essence of the Developmental State: a State that takes on the responsibility of
guiding economic growth, reducing poverty, and modernizing society. But what exactly is its
nature, and how should we critically understand it?
Meaning of Developmental State
The term “developmental state” refers to a model of governance where the State plays an
active, interventionist role in promoting economic development. Unlike the laissez-faire
model (where markets are left alone) or the purely coercive model (where the State only
controls), the developmental state is activist—it plans, directs, and often leads the process
of modernization.
Key Features of a Developmental State
1. Strong State Capacity
• The developmental state is not weak or passive. It has strong institutions, efficient
bureaucracy, and the ability to implement policies.
• Example: Japan after World War II, where the Ministry of International Trade and
Industry (MITI) guided industrial growth.
2. Economic Planning
• Developmental states rely on planned development—five-year plans, industrial
policies, and targeted investments.
• India’s Planning Commission in the Nehruvian era is a classic example.
3. Alliance Between State and Business
• The State often works closely with private industry, guiding it toward national goals.
• In South Korea, the government supported chaebols (large conglomerates) to
become global players.
4. Focus on Social Development
• Beyond economic growth, developmental states aim to improve education,
healthcare, and infrastructure.
• The idea is that development is not just about GDP but about human well-being.
5. Legitimacy Through Development
• Unlike monarchies that claim divine right or dictatorships that rely on fear,
developmental states gain legitimacy by delivering progress.
• Citizens tolerate state control if it brings jobs, roads, and prosperity.
The Nature of the Developmental State
Now let’s critically examine its nature—what makes it unique, and what challenges it faces.
Easy2Siksha.com
1. Activist and Interventionist
The developmental state is proactive. It does not wait for markets to solve problems; it
intervenes. For example, in post-independence India, the State built steel plants, dams, and
universities because private capital was too weak.
Criticism: Too much intervention can lead to inefficiency, corruption, and bureaucratic red
tape.
2. Centralized but People-Oriented
Developmental states often centralize power to push through reforms quickly. But they
justify this centralization by claiming it is for the people’s welfare.
Criticism: Centralization can sometimes silence dissent, ignore local needs, and create
authoritarian tendencies.
3. Balancing Growth and Equity
The developmental state tries to balance rapid industrial growth with social justice. Land
reforms, subsidies, and welfare schemes are part of this effort.
Criticism: In practice, many developmental states favored industrial elites while neglecting
farmers and workers, leading to inequality.
4. Dependent on Global Context
The developmental state does not exist in isolation. Its policies are shaped by global
forces—colonial legacies, Cold War politics, globalization.
• Example: East Asian developmental states thrived partly because the U.S. supported
them during the Cold War.
• Example: Post-colonial states like India borrowed heavily from both Soviet-style
planning and Western aid.
Criticism: This dependence makes the developmental state vulnerable to global shocks,
debt crises, and foreign influence.
5. Legitimacy Through Performance
The developmental state’s survival depends on delivering results. If it fails to reduce poverty
or create jobs, its legitimacy collapses.
Criticism: This creates pressure for short-term gains, sometimes at the cost of long-term
sustainability (e.g., environmental damage).
Perspectives on the Developmental State
Easy2Siksha.com
Liberal Perspective
Liberals argue that the developmental state is necessary in early stages but should
eventually give way to free markets. They praise its role in building infrastructure but warn
against overreach.
Marxist Perspective
Marxists see the developmental state as serving capitalist interests. They argue it often
protects elites while claiming to serve the masses. For example, land reforms in many
countries remained incomplete because elites resisted.
Gandhian Perspective (in India)
Gandhians criticized the centralized, bureaucratic nature of the developmental state. They
preferred decentralized, village-based development (Swaraj).
Examples of Developmental States
• East Asia: Japan, South Korea, Taiwan—successful cases where strong states guided
rapid industrialization.
• India: Post-independence Nehruvian model—mixed results, with achievements in
education and industry but failures in poverty eradication.
• Africa: Many post-colonial states tried the developmental model but struggled due
to corruption, weak institutions, and external dependence.
Critical Evaluation
Strengths
1. Nation-Building: Helped newly independent countries consolidate unity and identity.
2. Infrastructure Growth: Built roads, dams, schools, and industries.
3. Social Progress: Expanded education and healthcare.
4. Economic Transformation: Shifted economies from agriculture to industry.
Weaknesses
1. Authoritarian Tendencies: Centralization sometimes led to suppression of
democracy.
2. Inequality: Benefits often concentrated in urban elites.
3. Corruption and Inefficiency: Bureaucratic control sometimes bred rent-seeking.
4. Environmental Costs: Focus on industrial growth often ignored sustainability.
5. Global Dependence: Reliance on foreign aid and loans created debt traps.
Story-Like Illustration
Think of the developmental state as a strict but ambitious school principal.
Easy2Siksha.com
• He insists on discipline (centralized authority).
• He builds new classrooms, hires teachers, and sets high goals (infrastructure and
planning).
• He tells students, “Work hard now, and you’ll succeed later” (sacrifices for long-term
growth).
But if he becomes too authoritarian, ignores weaker students, or spends too much on fancy
buildings while neglecting basic needs, the school suffers. Similarly, the developmental state
can succeed brilliantly or fail miserably depending on how it balances power, equity, and
accountability.
Conclusion
The nature of the developmental state is complex: it is activist, centralized, and
performance-driven. It emerged as a response to the challenges of post-colonial societies
and global competition. Its greatest strength lies in its ability to mobilize resources for rapid
growth and social transformation. Its greatest weakness lies in the risks of authoritarianism,
inequality, and dependence.
Critically, the developmental state is not a one-size-fits-all model. In some places, like East
Asia, it worked wonders. In others, it faltered. But its legacy remains important: it reminds
us that the State is not just a policeman or tax collector—it can also be a builder, a planner,
and a guide for society’s progress.
In today’s world of globalization and neoliberalism, the developmental state may look
different, but the core question remains the same: how much should the State do to
ensure development, and how much should it leave to the market?
SECTION-D
7 Discuss the meaning and attributes of Sovereignty.
Ans: Imagine you are living in a small village, where everyone follows certain rules. The
village has a chief who decides what is right and wrong, resolves disputes, and ensures
everyone is safe. No one in the village can question the chief’s final decisions. Now, think
bigger: replace the village with a country, and the chief with the government. This idea of
ultimate authority in a state—where no other outside or inside power can override its
decisions—is what we call Sovereignty.
Sovereignty is not just a fancy word from political textbooks; it’s the heartbeat of a nation. It
defines who truly holds the power to govern, make laws, and ensure order. Without
sovereignty, a state is like a ship without a captain, drifting in the sea of international
relations, vulnerable to storms and external control.
The Meaning of Sovereignty
Easy2Siksha.com
In simple words, sovereignty means supreme and absolute authority within a territory. It is
the power to make decisions and enforce them without being subjected to any other
authority. Think of it as the “final say” in all matters of governance.
The concept of sovereignty has evolved over centuries. In ancient times, kings and emperors
were considered sovereign, ruling their lands as they wished. Their power was often
justified by divine authority—“the king rules because God wills it.” But in the modern sense,
sovereignty is legal and political, not religious. It rests on the idea that a state has the
supreme authority over its territory, people, and resources, independent of any external
power.
The famous French jurist Jean Bodin, in the 16th century, was among the first to explain
sovereignty in a clear way. He said that sovereignty is the absolute and perpetual power of
a state to make laws and decisions without the consent of any higher authority. Later,
political thinkers like Thomas Hobbes and J.J. Rousseau expanded this idea, emphasizing
that sovereignty is the foundation of law, order, and political organization.
In everyday life, sovereignty means that a government can:
1. Make and enforce laws.
2. Control its borders.
3. Regulate the economy.
4. Conduct diplomacy and make treaties.
5. Maintain an army and ensure internal security.
In essence, sovereignty is what separates a state from a mere community or organization. A
community may have rules and leaders, but it is not sovereign because it can be influenced
or controlled by higher authorities.
Attributes of Sovereignty
Now, let’s look at the main characteristics or attributes of sovereignty, which make it
distinct and powerful:
1. Supremacy (Absolute Authority)
Sovereignty is supreme, meaning it is the highest authority in the state. All other
institutions—courts, police, local governments—derive their power from the sovereign
authority. No individual or body within the state can legally override the sovereign. For
example, in a country, the parliament or legislature can make laws, but those laws must
align with the constitutional framework. The ultimate authority rests with the sovereign
power of the state.
2. Permanence (Continuity of Authority)
Sovereignty is perpetual. Even if governments change due to elections or revolutions, the
state’s sovereignty remains intact. Imagine a game of musical chairs: the players may
change, but the rules of the game remain. Similarly, a state’s sovereignty continues despite
Easy2Siksha.com
changes in leadership, political parties, or rulers. This ensures stability and continuity in
governance.
3. Independence (Autonomy from External Control)
A sovereign state is independent and self-reliant. No external power has the legal right to
interfere in its internal affairs. For instance, international organizations may advise or
suggest, but they cannot compel a sovereign state to act against its will. Independence in
sovereignty also applies in decision-making regarding laws, taxation, defense, and foreign
policy.
4. Unity and Indivisibility
Sovereignty is unified and cannot be divided. A state cannot share its ultimate authority
with another country. However, in practice, sovereignty can be limited voluntarily, as seen
in international treaties or organizations like the United Nations or the European Union.
Even then, the state retains its fundamental sovereign rights—it chooses to share authority
for mutual benefits.
5. Authority to Legislate
One of the core attributes of sovereignty is the power to make laws for its citizens. Without
this legislative power, a state cannot function effectively. Laws are not just rules; they are a
reflection of the state’s authority, values, and priorities. Sovereignty ensures that these laws
are binding on everyone within the territory, from ordinary citizens to government officials.
6. Supreme Decision-Making Power
Sovereignty implies the ultimate decision-making power, both in internal and external
matters. Internal decisions include governance, law enforcement, and economic policies,
while external decisions involve diplomacy, alliances, and war. For example, a sovereign
state can decide whether to join an international treaty or remain independent.
7. Legal and Political Recognition
Sovereignty is meaningful only when recognized legally and politically. Recognition by other
states, international organizations, and its own citizens gives a state legitimacy. Without
recognition, a state may exist in name but cannot exercise full sovereignty. This is why
international recognition is crucial for newly formed countries.
8. Power to Protect and Defend
A sovereign state has the power to protect its territory, citizens, and resources. It
maintains armed forces, police, and administrative machinery to ensure law, order, and
security. Sovereignty ensures that a state can defend itself against internal revolts and
external threats without relying on another country.
Easy2Siksha.com
Types of Sovereignty
Sovereignty can be categorized into two main types:
1. Internal Sovereignty – Refers to the supreme authority within the state. It involves
law-making, governance, and maintaining order. For example, the Indian
government enforces laws, collects taxes, and ensures peace in its territory.
2. External Sovereignty – Refers to independence from external control. It allows the
state to interact with other nations freely, conduct diplomacy, and enter
international agreements. India, as an independent nation, makes its foreign policy
without interference from any other country.
Why Sovereignty Matters
Sovereignty is the soul of the state. Without it, there would be chaos and confusion. Here’s
why it matters:
• Maintains Order: Sovereignty ensures that laws are enforced and disputes are
resolved fairly.
• Protects Citizens: It safeguards citizens from external invasions and internal
disorder.
• Supports Democracy: In democratic nations, sovereignty empowers people through
elected representatives, allowing them to govern themselves indirectly.
• Enables International Presence: A sovereign state can enter alliances, treaties, and
trade agreements with other countries.
Imagine sovereignty as the roots of a tree. Just as strong roots allow a tree to grow and
survive storms, strong sovereignty allows a state to function, develop, and maintain its
identity amidst global challenges.
Conclusion
In the simplest story form, sovereignty is like the “captain of the ship” that guides a nation
through calm and stormy waters alike. It ensures the ship has a direction, protects it from
external threats, and gives the crew a sense of order and purpose. Without sovereignty, a
state loses its identity and becomes vulnerable to chaos and external domination.
To summarize:
• Sovereignty means supreme, absolute, and independent authority of the state.
• It has key attributes such as supremacy, permanence, independence, unity,
legislative authority, and decision-making power.
• It exists in two forms: internal (authority within the state) and external
(independence from external interference).
Easy2Siksha.com
• Sovereignty is essential for law, order, citizen protection, democratic governance,
and international recognition.
Thus, sovereignty is not just a political term; it is the lifeline of the state, shaping its power,
authority, and existence. Every law, every policy, and every international agreement finds its
foundation in the sovereignty of a nation.
8. Critically examine the determinants of Political Participation.
Ans: Critically Examining the Determinants of Political Participation
A Fresh Beginning
Imagine a busy election day in a country. At one polling booth, a young college student
excitedly casts her first vote. At another, an elderly farmer walks miles to participate,
believing it is his duty. Meanwhile, a wealthy businessman donates heavily to a political
campaign instead of voting himself. And in the same society, a poor laborer stays home,
convinced his vote won’t change anything.
Why do these people behave so differently? The answer lies in the determinants of political
participation—the social, economic, psychological, and institutional factors that shape how
and why individuals engage in politics.
Meaning of Political Participation
Political participation refers to the various ways in which citizens take part in political life. It
includes:
• Conventional forms: voting, joining parties, campaigning, contesting elections.
• Unconventional forms: protests, demonstrations, petitions, strikes.
• Passive forms: discussing politics, following news, showing support on social media.
Participation is the lifeblood of democracy, but it is uneven—some groups participate more
actively than others. Let’s critically examine the determinants.
1. Socio-Economic Factors
Education
• Education is one of the strongest predictors of participation.
• Educated citizens are more aware of rights, better informed about issues, and more
confident in engaging with politics.
• Example: Higher voter turnout is often seen in urban, educated populations.
Criticism: Education alone does not guarantee participation. In some contexts, even
educated elites may be apathetic if they distrust the system.
Easy2Siksha.com
Income and Occupation
• Higher income provides resources—time, money, networks—to participate.
• Professionals and white-collar workers often engage more than manual laborers.
• Wealthy individuals may influence politics through donations or lobbying.
Criticism: This creates inequality—politics may become dominated by the rich, while the
poor remain underrepresented.
Social Class
• Middle classes are often more politically active, demanding reforms and
accountability.
• Lower classes may participate less due to alienation or lack of resources.
Criticism: In times of crisis, marginalized groups can become highly mobilized, as seen in
peasant or workers’ movements.
2. Psychological Factors
Political Efficacy
• Political efficacy is the belief that one’s actions can influence politics.
• Internal efficacy: confidence in one’s own ability to understand politics.
• External efficacy: belief that the system will respond to citizens.
• People with high efficacy are more likely to vote, protest, or join parties.
Criticism: In corrupt or authoritarian systems, even high efficacy may not translate into
participation if people feel the system is unresponsive.
Political Knowledge and Awareness
• Awareness of issues, policies, and candidates motivates participation.
• Media, education, and social networks play a role in spreading knowledge.
Criticism: In the age of misinformation, knowledge can be distorted, leading to misguided
participation.
Political Interest
• Some individuals are naturally more interested in politics, following debates and
campaigns closely.
• Interest often grows with age and experience.
Criticism: Interest can also decline if politics is seen as repetitive, corrupt, or irrelevant.
3. Demographic Factors
Easy2Siksha.com
Age
• Older citizens tend to vote more regularly, valuing stability.
• Younger citizens often prefer unconventional participation—protests, online
activism.
Criticism: Youth apathy in voting is a concern, but their energy in movements shows
participation takes new forms.
Gender
• Historically, men participated more in formal politics.
• Women’s participation has increased with education, empowerment, and quotas.
• Still, cultural norms and discrimination often limit women’s political roles.
Criticism: Numbers alone don’t ensure equality—women may still face tokenism or
marginalization within political institutions.
Ethnicity, Religion, and Identity
• Minority groups may mobilize politically to demand rights.
• Identity politics can increase participation but may also deepen divisions.
Criticism: Excessive identity-based mobilization can fragment societies and weaken common
democratic goals.
4. Institutional and Political Factors
Nature of Political System
• In democracies, participation is encouraged through elections, parties, and
freedoms.
• In authoritarian regimes, participation may be restricted or manipulated.
Criticism: Even in democracies, flawed institutions (corruption, weak parties) can discourage
participation.
Electoral System
• Proportional representation often encourages higher participation than first-past-
the-post systems.
• Compulsory voting (as in Australia) ensures turnout but may reduce genuine
engagement.
Role of Political Parties
• Strong, inclusive parties mobilize citizens effectively.
• Weak or elitist parties discourage participation.
Easy2Siksha.com
Media and Communication
• Free press and social media spread awareness and mobilize people.
• Example: Social media played a huge role in the Arab Spring.
Criticism: Media bias, fake news, and echo chambers can distort participation.
5. Cultural and Social Factors
Political Culture
• In societies with a participatory political culture, citizens are more active.
• In parochial or subject cultures, people remain passive.
Family and Socialization
• Family traditions, peer groups, and schools shape political attitudes.
• Example: Children of politically active parents are more likely to participate.
Criticism: Socialization can also reinforce apathy if families are disengaged.
Critical Examination
While all these determinants matter, their influence is not uniform.
• In developed democracies, education and efficacy are key.
• In developing countries, poverty, inequality, and distrust in institutions play a larger
role.
• Globalization and technology have added new dimensions—online activism, digital
campaigns, and transnational movements.
Key Criticism: Political participation is often unequal. The wealthy, educated, and urban
dominate, while the poor, uneducated, and rural are marginalized. This creates a
“participation gap” that undermines democracy.
Story-Like Illustration
Think of political participation as a cricket match.
• The players are those who actively vote, campaign, or protest.
• The spectators are those who watch but don’t join.
• The umpires are institutions like the Election Commission ensuring fair play.
• But not everyone gets the same chance to play—some have better equipment
(education, income), while others are left on the sidelines.
The determinants of participation decide who gets to bat, who remains in the stands, and
who never even enters the stadium.
Easy2Siksha.com
Conclusion
Political participation is shaped by a complex web of factors—education, income, age,
gender, political culture, institutions, and personal beliefs. Each determinant can encourage
or discourage engagement. Critically, while participation is the heartbeat of democracy, it is
often unequal, reflecting broader social and economic inequalities.
The challenge for modern societies is to reduce these gaps—by empowering the
marginalized, strengthening institutions, and fostering a culture of inclusion. Only then can
political participation truly reflect the will of all the people, not just the privileged few.
“This paper has been carefully prepared for educational purposes. If you notice any mistakes or
have suggestions, feel free to share your feedback.”
