Search Results

MARXISM Introduction Marxism is a social, political, and economic philosophy named after Karl Marx (1818-1883). Marxism has had a great historical influence on the organization of countries as well as numerous theories in sociology. Marxism can be largely divided into three disciplinary fields, an economic and political program, a theory of history, and philosophical anthropology. Nearly 150 years after his death, Karl Marx and his collaborator, Frederick Engels, remain some of the most controversial, yet influential figures in the western world. Marxism as a political agenda has been utilized throughout history, the Russian revolution in 1917, where the ideas of Marx were influenced by the work of Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin under the umbrella of Marxism-Leninism. Post-World War 2 the world was divided into two opposing camps, one representing liberal Capitalism in the United States of America and the other influenced by Marx’s idea of revolution: The Union of Soviet Socialist Republic. HISTORICAL MATERIALISM Marx’s general ideas about society are known as his theory of historical materialism. Materialism is the basis of his sociological thought because for Marx material conditions or economic factors affect the structure and development of society. His theory is that material conditions essentially comprise technological means of production and human society is formed by the forces and relations of production. Marx’s theory of historical materialism is historical. It is historical because Marx has traced the evolution of human societies from one stage to another. It is called Materialistic because Marx has interpreted the evolution of societies in terms of their material or economic bases. Materialism simply means that it is matter or material reality, which is the basis for any change. Materialism means the materialist structure of society. It is how the super structure of society is based on economic infrastructure. Marx’s theory of historical materialism is the materialistic interpretation of the history of societies. All the societies have experienced similar pattern of history and every history is built upon its materialist foundations. Marx has tried to suggest that all society passes through unilinear evolution, every society progresses stage by stage and every society has marched ahead. He has suggested about the history of society, i.e. Primitive Communism → Slavery → Feudalism→ Capitalism →Socialism →Communism History for Marx goes in a dialectical form where there is a Thesis, Synthesis, and Antithesis. The progression is enabled by the struggle between the two classes which gives rise to a new structure of society that is based on the resulting economic order. The class struggle, therefore, is expressed in a dialectical nature. Two classes are opposed to each other through various points in history: The owners of the means of production which is the bourgeoisie and the workers which are the proletariats. The real battle lines are drawn between the “haves” & the “have-nots”, between the bourgeoisie (those who control the world’s economic, natural & human resources), & the proletariat (the majority of the global population who live in substandard conditions) that fills the coffers of the rich. Primitive communism, in the hunting-gathering stages there was no private property hence there were no classes. Ancient history had a class of slave owners who were the oppressing class and slaves who were the oppressed class. During the Feudal period, the Landowners were the oppressing class and serfs were the oppressed class During the Capitalist period, it is the bourgeoisie and proletariats, in the socialist phase the oppressing class would be the state managers and the workers would be oppressed, and eventually, communism would come into being and there will be classes in society. ALIENATION Alienation comes from the Latin work Alienare which means to remove or take away. For Karl Marx, it is a social or political process. He uses the term entfremdung which translates into estrangement which is separation or detachment from things to which they are naturally tied to. Workers in a capitalist order are compelled to sell their labor to the capitalist and lose control over it and their labor becomes simply a means to the end of capitalists They also have no control over the product of their labor. They get estranged from their labor and the product of their labor. Hence, the workers become alienated from their own self and own nature and also alienated from other human beings as well as their work. Alienation for Marx is of four types: 1. Alienation of the worker from their product: The design and development of a production rest not in the hands of a worker but within the decisions of the capitalists. A worker does not have control over what he or she intends to produce or the specifications of his or her product. 2. Alienation of the worker from the act of production: The production of goods and services within a capitalist society is repetitive and mechanical that offers little to no psychological satisfaction to the worker. Labor seems coerced because a worker undertakes this as a means of survival. 3. Alienation of the worker from their species-essence: The species-essence or “Gattungswesen” of an individual comprises all of his or her innate potentials. Under a capitalist mode of production, an individual losses identity and the opportunity for self-development as he or she is forced to sell his or her labor-power as a market commodity. 4. Alienation of the worker from other workers: The reduction of labor to a mere market commodity creates the so-called labor market in which a worker competes against another worker. Labor is traded in a competitive labor market instead of considering it as a constructive socioeconomic activity characterized by collective common effort. State and Revolution in Marxist Tradition Apart from liberal state theory, Marxist state theory is arguably the most well-known. Issue with the academic examination of the Marxist theory of the state is that the theory has never been rigorously examined by Marx. Marx, Engels, and their followers (especially Lenin) were skeptical of the social contract theory as a source of state formation. They've classified society's evolution into four categories: Ancient communist society, Slave society, Feudal society, and Industrial society There was no state in the original communist society since private property did not exist. The private property system served as a possible catalyst for the emergence of the state where the anti-state came to exist as a defense to private property. For Marxist State will wither away with a communist revolution. People will be able to move to a radical transformation of their position through revolution after they have become conscious of their loss, alienation, as a universal inhuman predicament. This revolution will pave the way for the return of liberty and the foundation of communism. Critiques of Marxism Marx inspired multitudes of followers, but many of his predictions have not come to pass. Marx believed that increasing competition would not produce better goods for consumers but would lead to bankruptcies and the rise of monopolies, with control of production in fewer and fewer hands. Bankrupt former capitalists, he thought, would join the proletariat, eventually creating an army of the unemployed. In addition, the market economy which by its nature is unplanned, would experience crippling supply-and-demand problems and cause severe economic depressions. Capitalism has not collapsed, but it has changed since Marx's time. Governments in many capitalist countries, including the U.S., have the power to crack down on monopolies and monopolistic business practices. Governments set minimum wages and regulatory agencies set standards for worker protection. It is not the Utopian ideal. Economic inequality has increased in many capitalist societies. There have been recessions periodically as well as one Great Depression, but they are not thought to be an inherent feature of free markets. Indeed, a society entirely without competition, money, or private property has not materialized in the modern world, and recent history suggests it is unlikely to emerge in the future. Is Marxism the Same Thing As Communism? Marxism is a philosophy, while communism is a system of government based on Marxist principles. Marx envisioned a society in which workers owned the means of production. In real-world communism, governments own the means of production. Conclusion Marxism is the social and economic theory developed by Karl Marx in the 19th century. Marxian economics describes the capitalist system of production as inherently unfair to the workers, who represent most of the population. Marx's social theories connected these flaws of capitalism with a growing class conflict between labor and business owners, ultimately leading to a revolution that would empower the working class and create communal ownership of the means of production. His theories have been tested in the real world. The communist experiment in the Soviet Union ended in 1991. It continues to be tested in China, which is creating a hybrid social and economic system that Marx might not recognize.

LIBERALISM The liberal tradition of Political Science is derived from the Latin word liber which refers to a class of free people. Liberalism represents the freedom of an individual which is consistent with the freedom of the society the individual inhabits. It works on the premise of constitutionalism and consent and the state under liberal tradition works under the principle of Laissez-Faire i.e., leave the man alone. The pillar of liberalism is to protect the citizen from the tyranny of the government. Liberalism as a political alternative emerged after the breakdown of Feudalism in Western Europe. The English civil war in the 17th, French Revolution in 1789, and the American Revolution in 1776. These were based on questioning the divine rights of monarchial powers which derived their legitimacy from an unelected aristocracy. The development of Liberalism as a political tradition was also a result of industrialization happening in 19th century Europe. Industrialization offered economic mobility to a certain section of society that was previously not in a position to assert its rights. Liberalism thus opened doors for a “rising middle class” that was previously out of the decision-making processes. The context of liberal tradition as mention is 18th & 19th century Europe. It was largely influenced by Enlightenment. CORE VALUES 1. Individualism Now individualism does not mean some simplistic faith that individuals live in an atomistic way. No individuals are social beings and that is also precisely why they need rights: individual rights are to be understood in relation to others. The idea that an individual should have the full autonomy to develop their potential to the maximum extent possible is an article of faith of liberal tradition. Immanuel Kant expressed a belief in the dignity and equality of all human beings and how individuals are an end to themselves. Whereas, C.B Macpherson characterizes liberalism as “possessive individualism” due to liberalism overemphasis on individual who is first and foremost concerned with their interest and welfare rather than the welfare of the society. 2. Freedom The idea of freedom is the unifying force of the entire liberal ideology. Human existence is not fulfilled unless nourished by the idea of liberty. Freedom is the means to the ends of individuals. John Stuart Mill terms this as a harm principle where the liberty of one person does not harm the liberty of anyone else such as “self-regarding” and “other-regarding”. Self regarding action allows the individual to enjoy absolute freedom and the other regarding which can restrict the freedom of others or do them damage Freedom of choice is essential for civilized society worthy of the name – that is, a society made of free and responsible individuals. John Rawls endorses the idea that everyone has entitled to the widest possible liberty that is consistent with a like liberty for all. Isaiah Berlin for example distinguishes between two kinds of liberty - Negative Liberty and Positive Liberty. The former is negative in the sense that it denotes an absence of external restrictions or constraints i.e., an individual is to be left alone and must be able to act in a way he or she prefers. Positive Liberty on the other hand represents that one is autonomous or one’s own master. 3. Reason The liberal tradition gains its legitimacy from the idea of reason. Individuals are free or are at liberty because they are capable of thinking rationally and deciding on and pursuing their best interests. Liberals are strongly biased against the values of paternalism which is authority exercised from above and is modeled on the relationship between father and child. The second key of the reason is the idea of progress and advancement. The third pillar for the case of the reason is Knowledge. Finally, Reason dictates the ideas of supporting discussion debate, and arguments, the liberals staunchly believe that conflict can be settled through debate and negotiation, the use of violence is only justified for self-defense, countering oppression, and defending one’s liberty. 4. Justice Justice in a more general sense if giving an individual what they are due i.e., what is entitled to them. The liberal idea of justice on the other hand represents different types of equality. The tenets of equality for liberals are based on the idea that individuals have equal moral worth. The second foundational principle is the idea of equal citizenship i.e., each citizen is entitled to rights and liberties extended to the next citizen. Factors such as class, caste, gender, race, color. Liberalism in this sense is “difference blind”. The idea of liberty enforces the principle of legality in the decision-making and electoral process where every citizen gets a vote and that vote has one value. The third tenant of liberal justice is the idea of equality of justice, there needs to be an equal playing field. The idea is that an individual must have equal opportunities to develop their unique skills and abilities. This leads to the idea of “meritocracy” that is one’s social position is defined by one’s ability and hard work. 5. Toleration Spinoza or Voltaire for example were great thinkers who understood the value – the human value – of tolerance Toleration is built on the fact that individuals may differ in endowments, opinions, gender, caste, religious inclinations sexualities, etc., but they must be free to pursue their for liberal tradition stand. John Locke for example defended an individual right to pursue his or her religion without the interference of the state. J.S Mill in his treatise titled On Liberty defended the right to freedom of speech. “I detest what you say but will defend till death your right to say it” – Voltaire. The Liberal State The values of liberal tradition cannot be realized on their own, they require a mechanism and a political social order to be implemented. Liberals staunchly believe that both law and governance are necessary to prevent individuals from exploiting each other. The liberty of one person must not become a license to abuse another. Freedom must therefore be exercised within the means of law. John Locks and Thomas Hobbes proposes the idea of a social contract where individuals get into a contract with a sovereign state whose purpose is to defend the individual’s life and liberty. In exchange, the individual is expected to follow the laws and obey the government. The social contract is based on two premises that political authority comes in the sense “from below” (authority elected by the people) and that the state acts as an umpire or a neutral referee in society. The liberal state follows the idea of constitutionalism where the government derives its power and legitimacy from an agreed-upon set of laws and principles that are consensually agreed upon by the citizens. This prevents any potential tyranny by the government which also has to work within the constraints of a constitution. The Schools of Liberal Thought Classical Liberalism Classical Liberalism is a political ideology and a branch of liberalism which advocates civil liberties under the rule of law with an emphasis on economic freedom. Three principles of classical liberalism: 1. Individualism: Belief in the supreme importance of individual and individual autonomy. "Individuals are rational creatures that are entitled to the greatest possible freedom." Believe in complete freedom to every individual for the complete possible personality development. 2. Social Contract Theory: (By John Locke) Locke is the first liberal giving the concept of natural rights and is also the representative thinker of this age. He considered human nature to be cooperative and friendly that must be given freedom. He believed that men being rational can live in harmony with others. 3. Laissez Faire and Minimal State Adam Smith gave the concept of "Laissez Faire" in his book Wealth of Nations which means minimum intervention. It means that state will intervene minimally in the market. Markets should be left completely free. Social Darwinism The idea of Social Darwinism is derivative of the theory proposed by Darwin in the origin of species by Darwin of the doctrine of the survival of the fittest. Here the individual will only survive based on his one merit and hard work. Neoliberalism or Neoclassical Liberalism: The idea of neoclassical liberalism was “counter-revolution” which was to halt or reverse the trend towards big government and state intervention. The idea of the market was supreme to the government and must be free from any political control. Neo-Liberalism Set of economic policies that have become widespread since last 25 years. Thinkers like Robert Nozick, Milton Friedman etc. Attempt to bring back the principles of classical liberalism. They denounced the concept of welfare state,and tries to restore back the concept of Laissez Faire not only in economic sphere but also in social and political sphere. They supported the concept of free market economy and for that they proposed the least control of government in economic and social life. It is against any kind of social and legal restrictions on individual's freedom. Modern Liberalism The idea of modern liberalism developed in the 20th century in the later stages of industrialization to address the spread of slums, poverty, ignorance, and disease. The idea of unrestricted freedom of individuals and a free market could not translate into an equally just society. Modern Liberalism was based on certain values which differed from the classical ones: The idea of Individuality- According to J.S Mill liberty did not just mean the absence of constraints but also a positive and constructive force where individuals take control of their destiny and achieve self-realization. He believed in the idea of individuality which is the fulfillment of self achieved through the realization of an individual distinctive or unique identity or qualities that distinguish one person from all others. The second value endorsed by the Modern Liberals is the idea of Positive Freedom advocated by T.H Green . Social Liberalism was sought by the Modern Liberals where the minimal state was to be replaced by a welfare state which takes the responsibility for the social welfare of its citizens discharged through a range of social security, health education, and other services. The final tenant of modern liberalism is the idea of economic management. The modern liberals discarded the idea of Lassiez Faire and instead replaced it with the Keynesian doctrine which is named after John Maynard Keynes who in his The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (Keynes,1936) argued that government could manage their economies by influencing the levels of aggregate demand.

The Concept of Dharma in Hinduism The concept of dharma means "righteousness" is one of the most challenging in Indian philosophical thought. This is a Sanskrit term, which means law and can be understood in various ways. Dharma is one of the values of an individual. As per the ancient Indian thought, it is dharma that sustains the universe and both the king as well as the people must adhere to it. Only the sages had the power to interpret this dharma or the Sacred Law. The word Dharma could be interpreted into two aspects One is religious convictions and Second is a set of duties or a code of conduct. Conduct of virtuous man who know Vedas, Shruti (Veda), traditions/customs, and satisfaction of one's conscience are other sources of dharma mentioned in texts. Sruti (what was heard) and smriti (what was remembered) were regarded as Sanatana-dharma (eternal law) There are multiple sources available to recall the concept of dharma across various religious texts in Hinduism. The early Vedic period dates from around 1500 B.C. when the Aryans invaded India from the north-west and settled in the plains of Punjab. The Rig- Veda, consisting of hymns in praise of the gods, might have been composed around 1200-1000 B.C. This is the period when the concept of Rta (cosmic order) was born. Rta is both the law of righteousness and of cosmic equilibrium and combines in itself the notion of an integrated whole in which gods, men and nature participate. Dharma is a social concept. Dharma functions along with Kama (Desire) and Artha (wealth) all together known as Trivarga (three-fold principles). Later speculative thinkers came to hold in favour of moksha (liberation) or apavarga (a principle beyond the Trivarga) it was the threefold values of artha, kama, and dharma which governed the lives of the majority. Hinduism, it believed that this meaning of life is four-fold: Dharma : Righteousness or one’s duty Artha : Wealth Kaama : Desire Moksha : Liberation It is believed that the purpose of human life upon earth is to follow the law (Dharma) of God and achieve salvation (Moksha) or freedom from his false self or ignorance (ahamkara) by leading a balanced life in which both material comforts and human passions (Kama) have their own place. These four aspects are collectively known as Purusharthas in Hinduism. Different Purusharthas play major role in different phases of a man’s life. One cannot ignore one of these aspects and its objectives, and further progress in life. Dharma is one of the type of Purushartha. The various dharmas are classified into- Sadharana dharmas Varna dharmas (those varying with one's station in life) and Asrama-dharmas (those varying with stages in life). The third type of dharma, that which varies with stages in life. Ashram means “a place of spiritual shelter.” Each stage of life is not only a natural part of the journey from cradle to grave, but a time at which spirituality can be developed. Each of the four ashrams has its specific duties. The main ones are listed below. Brahmachari (Student Life) The brahmachari-ashram, often away from the home (somewhat like a boarding school), was primarily intended for fostering spiritual values. Memorisation and skill development were subsidiary to character formation and self-realisation. Even sons of the royal family were expected to undergo this austere and rigorous training. The first (student life) is typified in the life of preparation and self-discipline. Grihasta (Household Life) The second or householder stage is where the facticity of the pursuit of artha and kama comes into full play. Traditionally some men remained lifelong celibates, either remaining as brahmacharis or immediately becoming sannyasis. Others were required to marry, extending their responsibilities to include wife, children, relatives, and society in general. This ashram is the only one permitting sexual gratification. To make money and to enjoy sensual pleasure according to ethical principles. To perform sacrifice and observe religious rituals. To protect and nourish family members (wife, children, and elders). To teach children spiritual values. To give in charity, and especially to feed holy people, the poor, and animals. Vanaprashta (Retired Life) The third stage, vanaprastha. retreat to the forest. is analogous to what we mean today by retirement, and significantly. in industrialized societies it often takes the form of a shift from the city to the country. After the children have left home and settled, a man may gradually retire from family responsibilities and, with his wife, begin to focus his mind on spiritual matters. Often he goes on pilgrimage. His wife may accompany him, but all sexual relationships are forbidden. Vanaprashta literally means “forest-dweller.” To generally devote more time to spiritual matters. To engage in austerity and penance. To go on pilgrimage. Sannyasa (Renounced Life) This position is traditionally available only to men who exhibit the qualities of a brahmana. The man would leave home and family and was prohibited from seeing his wife again. Considered civilly dead, he was free to wander, living a life dependent on God alone. The sannyasis are conspicuous in their saffron dress. They are often called sadhus (holy people) although today not all are genuine! To fully control the mind and senses, and to fix the mind on the Supreme. To become detached and fearless, fully dependent on God as the only protector. To teach and preach the importance of self-realization and God-consciousness, especially to the householders, who often become distracted from their spiritual duties. The discipline of the four stages is a discipline of growth. of progressive non-attachment. To phrase it like this is to see how the four asramas are connected with the fourth moksha. Moksha This is the highest pursuit of life and leads to liberation from samsara or the cycle of birth and death. The concept of moksha or liberation came from these people. A distinct class of people called sadhus in India, started moving away from the cities and villages and dwelling in the forests, meditating and seeking answers to questions. Buddha and Mahavira founded Buddhism and Jainism respectively by following the paths of these sadhus or rishis in the forests. Both these religions promoted the aspect of liberation by meditation and by giving up everything one owns. Desire became a key word. As I mentioned earlier Kama and Artha were considered as two desires that one should avoid and seek the pursuit of Moksha or Nirvana (the Buddhist and Jain term for liberation). Rta conception and its meaning The idea of pataka in the Rigveda is related with the conception of rta. Rta had a threefold aspect it refers to The nature's course of things or the regular and general order in the cosmos. The correct and ordered way of the devatas (with respect to yajnas). The moral conduct of man. In Rigveda and Atharvaveda, it is said that the law behind existence is ṛta and to tamper with it will prove deadly. The whole of creation is called sat, which has an inbuilt cosmic law, ṛta. If sat (existence) is a fact, then the value which we realize out of it is ṛta (cosmic law). When we realize ṛta, the value of the whole of creation, we are humbled and naturally become more caring towards the universe. The entire universe supports our sustenance and the whole of creation toils for our existence. This awareness infuses immense gratitude in our hearts. Plato's Theory of the Metaphor of the Divided Line It might be useful at this point to compare the four purusharthas with Plato's distinction between eikasis, pistis, dianoia and noesis in his theory of the metaphor of divided line. In the process of discovering true knowledge, according to Plato, the human mind moves through four stages of development. At each stage, there is a parallel between the kind of object presented to the mind and the kind of thought these objects make possible. These objects and their parallel modes of understanding can be diagrammed as followed: Imagining (eikasis) Belief (Pistis) Thinking (Dianoia) Perfect Intelligence (Noesis) The first two deal with the sensible world and the latter two with the intelligible world.Plato is very clear on the point that there is no route to noesis other than through dianoia. Comparison with the purusharthas is suggestive. The bottom two are worldly. There is no route to the fourth other than via the third. But the progression is not a cognitive one. Platonic and the Vedantic viewpoints show considerable similarity of insight in their quest for the transcendent and their conceiving of this as an ethico-metaphysical endeavor. Whereas the shift from dianoia to noesis is a shift within the overarching framework of the intelligible, the transition from dharma to moksha seems more radical and this now has to be elucidated. How Dhamma and Dharma are similar concept? Dharma and Dhamma is same in meaning. Dharma is a Sanskrit word and Dhamma is a pali word . Raja dhamma and Raja dharma denote duties and moral obligation of King. We say Moksha in Hinduism and Nibbana in Buddhism. Dharma and Dhamma both mention the importance of salvation. Thus both advocated the concept to guide their king to rule better in state. How Dhamma and Dharma are different concept? Dharma is the natural order of the universe; natural law, cosmic order. Whereas Dhamma is the teachings of Buddha. Dharma is one's obligation in respect to one's position in society, one's duty. And dhamma is the teachings of the Buddha as one's personal path to enlightenment. Dharma is the basic principles of the cosmos; also: an ancient sage in Hindu mythology worshipped as a god by some lower castes;. and dhamma is the teachings of the Buddha as a practice to be promulgated and taught. Thus, Hindu Dharma is more religious- like God’s command than the Buddhist Dhamma which is more like natural laws understood by human through sense of reason. Origin of Danda The term Dandniti was first adopted by Usanasa and the "Book 'Dandniti' " ascribed to Prajapati is mentioned in Mahabharata. Prajapati is regarded as the creator of Danda. Danda was created by God Shiva after long concentration and even the Science of Politics was made out of Danda. Danda is also known as soul of Dharma. It is derived from the term Dama - "to restrain" means by which a person is restrained from misconduct. One particular reason behind the religious color of Danda is that religion gives Danda the authority or sanction. Danda was the guarantee of universal happiness and righteousness. Concept of Danda In Ancient India law was based on the twin conception, 1) Theology and 2) agreement and as such it is clear that even in matters of punishment and justice, the theology had its sway. The term Danda is derived from the words Dam and Danda, which refer to tame, subdue, to conquer or to restrain and the like. General conception about punishment was that it should help the man or the criminal to reform himself according to the prescribed codes of Dharma. According to Manu, it is only the king who can protect the entire mankind and for this protection, the king uses Danda as a means or as an instrument. Administration of justice pre-supposes the existence of an authority. Every organization, Social or Political, must have some authority without which the human society can't function. Manu holds the same view about Danda. Danda saves Dharma, Artha, and Kāra. Only a King who is honest could wield Dand. According to Manu Danda was vested in the Amatya. If we identify the term Danda with administration we will have to accept that« there was an officer to execute Danda into practice. T That Officer known as Daad- Nayak, or the Minister-in-Charge of the administration Ancient Indian thinkers were of the opinion that Danda should not be used as per the whims and fancies of the rulers, but only when there is presence of any anti-social elements in the society. As per Kautilya, Danda as an instrument for bringing people under control. Danda was simply a part of the four-fold policy of the state, i.e. "Sama, Dāma, Danda and Bhedä", (re- conciliation, gift, punishment and division. Gautam Buddha treats Danda as reforming or correction. Dandaneethi: Ancient political thinkers suggested that for the sanctity of the concept, Danda should be used carefully. Through Dandaneethi, it becomes easier to bring about proper progress and balanced system of social and economic needs. Danda and RajDharma The ruler in ancient Indian polity is called Dand-Dhar. It is considered as an essential attribute of royalty. The King regulates the state by wielding this weapon of Danda. Danda is supreme in Royal Dharma. As per Manu, that man is essentially low, vile and selfish and can be kept on straight path only with difficulty and harshness so the concept of Dharma is important. Vedic conception was that it was a retribution from heaven. Expiation and Danda are spoken of as twin modes of purification. The principle of purification is also advocated by the Puranas Retribution in its practical character was present in the Vedas. In Mahabharat also punishment as retribution is visible in the following words : - " To take revenge on him who takes revenge, to retaliate, when struck and to do harm in return, for harm". The system of ordeal is as old as Rigveda. According to Narad and Yagnavalkya ordeal shall be resorted n default of worldly proofs. King was only empowered to inflict Artha and Vadha Danda (fine and corporal punishment). In the republican constitution the Raja or the President alone had the right to convict the accused but in doing so he was to be guided by the "Pareni Pustaka" or the Book of Precedents. Thus we find that the King honored the law of the land. Advocators of Danda Gautama has opined that the creation of punishment was for checking the miscreant and wrong-doers. Gautam treats Danda as reforming or correcting influence. Kautilya and Sukra suggested the practical means of purifying the criminal soul. Kautilya said crime is contaminating disease. Kamandaka justifies punishment for the purposes of justice. According to YagSavalķya punishment should place the subject in right path. Before awarding punishment the following points were taken into consideration : (1) Motive , (2) Circumstances (3) Capacity of the criminal, and (4) the crime. Types of Danda Various types of Punishment have been devised over a period of time. Vadhdanda or Capital Punishment, Arthadanda or Fines, Vagdanda or Verbal Punishment, and Moral Disapprobation Pali texts inform us that a Brahmin was not given a privileged position in the eyes of law and if a Brahmin was criminal he was sure to be executed. Conclusion The sphere of fire, the sun, was as potent a symbol for the ancient Hindus as it was for the Greeks. What beckons is a light which is blinding in its intensity. It is tapamya (the austerity which sears) which leads us in this direction. In the meantime we are tried in the refiner's fire - the daily round and common task - the realm of dharma. Glossary Dharma - righteousness, virtues, duty Dhamma - Dhamma is like natural laws, cosmic force which maintain the order in the nature, nothing divine in it. Danda - constraint and coercion Rta - It is the eternal path of divine righteousness for all beings, including humans and gods, which must be followed in thought and action to discover and maintain oneself in the truth. Purushartha- It refers to the four principal categories of pursuits in human life namely dharma,artha,kama and moksha Ashrams- Ashrama (also spelled asrama) is a term used to describe any of the four different life stages that a devout Hindu should pass through.

Nationalist Interpretation This school was represented by political activist such as Dada Bhai Naroji, Lala Lajpat Rai, A.C. Mazumdar, R. G Pradhan, S.N. Banerjee, and B.R. Nanda, etc. Nationalist interpretation emerged in response to Colonial interpretation of Indian history and tried to expose the exploitative character of British colonialism. These people challenged the colonial view that British government has brought to the subcontinent modern political system and political unity. They believe British had harmful effects on economic and cultural development of India. Modernity and political unity are in fact fruits of struggle undertaken by the Indians themselves. Nationalist accepted some of the interpretation of Orientalists of golden age of India and its decline. However, Orientalists claim of bringing modernity and unification in India rejected by Nationalists. Further, they found British responsible for India’s decline. Nationalist school of thought was a product of national movement by which they tried to establish the superiority of the past over the present while using the categorization of James Mill. Mill viewed the remote past, as Hindu civilization and projected it as the golden age. Nationalists’ attempt to rediscover their glorious past in ancient Hindu India gave rise to communal historiography Nationalist historians, in contrast to colonial interpretation, tried to view national movement as peoples’ movement. Various leaders of Indian national movement from Dadabhai Naroji to Gandhi accepted India as a nation in the making. Marxists Perspective: Colonial Interpretation Marxists conceptualize the nations as of people which are divided on class lines. Emphasized the differences among those classes and emphasis that nationalism’s claims of commonality are superficial. Their writing engages with the aspirations of the marginalized sections of society. Proletariat in India or colonized societies elsewhere, was a by-product or an unintentional contribution of colonial administration. Colonialism makes the poor classes aware enough to ask about their role and place in the history of their societies. Rajni Palme Dutt and A. R. Desai are the two most prominent historians are advocates of Marxists Perspective. Marxists historians saw colonialism as a way of capturing the raw materials of the colony. Civilizing nation is vague concept given by British, they always want to dominate mode of production in the country. According to Marxists, colonialism is the highest phase of imperialism. Colonies were created to tackle the problem of constant and cheap supply of labor, raw materials and availability of markets for the manufactured goods. Lenin was one of the top proponent of this perspective who intensified the condition of colonialism during 1920s. Lenin said capital was concentrating into the hands of large monopolistic corporations led by a few large financial oligarchies. Capital in fewer hands created massive inequalities in these societies. Therefore, in order to maintain the levels of profit some kind of creativity and expansion was required and that's how European power started colonizing. Ultimately this led towards imperialism. Lenin identifies that imperialism gave birth to a new capitalist class which was based on ‘the export of capital’. Despite the fact that Lenin and other Marxists believed in the idea of colonialism being just a stage of imperialism, where one imperial power occupied another country for its raw materials and market, they too believed that in most of the cases colonial occupation had been helpful in modernizing the occupied societies. Subaltern Interpretation/Perspective Subaltern perspective brought new genre to the analysis of Indian nationalism. It was the Antonio Gramsci who used the word ‘subaltern’ for the “subordinate class in terms of class, gender, race, language and culture.” This school of thought adopted the “history from below” approach for the analysis of Indian nationalism. They believed that elitist historiography always saw mass upsurge either as a law and order problem or in response to the charisma of certain leader. It means elitist historiography ignored the contribution made by people on their own though in many movements like anti-Rowlett upsurge of 1919 or Quit India movement of 1942, people were actively participated without being guided by leaders. The people resistance to “elite domination” represents the core of the politics of “subalternity There was the co-existence of both domains of politics. But failure of the Indian bourgeoisie to speak for the nation, common people led their own struggle. This perspective tried to explain the politics of elite and politics of people where politics of people didn't highlight by elitist of Indian section. Subaltern historiography emphasis the “autonomous domain” of subaltern groups by highlighting the contribution made by them. They have used the “history from below” approach in line with European Marxist. Thus, they attacked on the symbol of repression only. Conclusion Liberalist perspective presents the justification given by British to rule over Indian legitimately on the name of civilization and modernity. Marxists tried to fix their class division concept in Indian colonialism and exposed imperialistic nature of British. On the other side, Orientalists being kind to Indian by accepting the ancient Indian golden age phase however showcased backwardness and stagnant in economy since a very long time. Utilitarian at some point accepted the legitimacy of British empire in India as their modern and civilized concept helped Indian economy to grow and to escape stagnant. They given oriental despotism. Nationalist exposed British by looting Indian wealth, culture and values. At the end Subaltern perspective They attacked on the symbol of repression only and used the “history from below” approach. Glossary Nationalist : It's an ideology based on the premise that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual or group interests. Utilitarianism : Utilitarianism would say that an action is right if it results in the happiness of the greatest number of people in a society or a group. When used in a sociopolitical construct, utilitarian ethics aims for the betterment of society as a whole. Orientalism : Orientalism is the study of near and far eastern societies and cultures, languages and peoples by Western scholars. I t can also refer to the imitation or depiction of aspects of Eastern cultures in the West by writers and artists. Missionaries : a person sent on a religious mission, especially one sent to promote Christianity in a foreign country. Proletariat: The working class, usually the poor.

Introduction The act of comparison is a basic human nature. Comparison helps us understand issues and events in better manner.Within the field of Political science, Comparative Politics is that major sub field makes comparison its essence. It is concerned with the comparative study and analysis of political systems. A comparative method helps us go beyond mere descriptions, towards looking for ways in which political and social process can be explained and based on such explanations general theoretical propositions made. Thus remarks Edward. Freeman that the establishment of comparative method of study has been the greatest intellectual achievement of our time. Kopstein and Lichbach consider Comparative Politics, Political Theory and International Relations as three important poles in Political Science. From the Greek political discourse, Aristotle came up with the first comparative study of different kinds of political regimes. Comparativists describe and explain, whereas the political theorists bring out the deeper philosophical meanings of these findings. Aristotle was one of the earliest philosopher to study Greek City State by applying Comparative method. Aristotle considers six forms of government: Monarchy, Aristocracy, and Polity on one side as 'good' forms of government, and Tyranny, Oligarchy, and Democracy as 'bad' forms. Why we should compare? By comparing different political institutions, their functioning, different political organizations, associations and their influence, confrontations put up by non state actor’s and states response to all of them introduce us to the various ways in which politics take place. Comparative method immediately opens the gate for intensive study of the subject and projects nuanced understanding of the political life that a single case study alone could never provide. . It also helps us to assess whether theoretical models of decisions making are able to claim universal validity Kenneth Newton and Jan W. Van Deth give us three most important reasons why we should study Comparative Politics First, that we cannot understand our own country without knowledge of others. Second, we cannot understand other countries without knowledge of their background, institutions and history Third, we cannot arrive at valid generalizations about government and politics without the comparative method. Methods of Comparison J S Mill has proposed two useful strategies of comparative research. The comparison of societies or smaller groups that are concerned with reasonably similar problems is more likely to lead to satisfactory conclusions than comparisons between societies existing many centuries apart. Aristotle: Classification of Governments: Aristotle considers six forms of government: Monarchy, Aristocracy, and Polity on one side as 'good' forms of government, and Tyranny, Oligarchy, and Democracy as 'bad' forms. Max Weber: Classification of Authority (Traditional Authority, Legal Rational Authority and Charismatic Authority). Gabriel Almond and Birmingham Powell: Political System Approach. Gabriel Almond and Sydney Verba: Work on Civic Culture (The first major cross national survey of attitude to determine the role of political culture in maintaining the stability of democratic regimes). Montesquieu: Remarkable work on law, linking the institutional and modern phase. Finer: Classification of Regimes into Liberal Democratic, Totalitarian and Autocratic types.  Alexis de Tocqueville: Analysis of Democracy in America. Barrington Moore: Work on Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World (1966) Theda Scokpol: Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China were the scholar compares the major revolutions of France, Russia and China: three basically similar events which took place in three very different contexts). Geovani Sartori: Analysis on Parties and Party System. Domains of Comparative Politics The focus of study of scholars of comparative politics has been on the origin and impact of various types of government or regime types or political orders in the world. They explore their characteristics, reason and time of occurrence. Kopstein and Lichbach have identified three important tools of analysis as determinants of comparative politics Interests Identities and Institutions. Among these, ‘interest’ appears to be the most decisive. People tend to support that political regime that maximises their material benefits. They organise themselves in form of interest groups, trade unions, social movements and political parties. Some comparativists maintain that interests of citizens are guided by their ascriptive identities like religion and ethnicity These identities are seminal in shaping their political choices in terms of voting preferences, support for certain policies. The growing complexities of modern societies supplement the new variants to these identities, based on sexual orientation, commitment to environmentalism etc. which is either accommodated or rejected by the political order. The third determinant happens to be the institution. Contemporary political analysis finds the role of institutions decisive in running a political regime Institutions represent the long nurtured rules and formalisation of political process in a society These institutions run the wheels of government machinery and are the bedrock of political life. Therefore, what emerges from the discussion is that these are institutions like elections, parliaments, judiciary, and political parties etc. that make any political regime work. Scholars may apply these different approaches and line of reasoning to understand any particular problem. Evolution of Comparative Politics Comparative Politics has also evolved with time gradually. Most specifically, it has been the post second world war era that it got entrenched as a sub discipline and consolidated itself under leadership of David Easton in American Political science Association (APSA). Jean Blondel has produced a critical account of evolution of Comparative Politics by categorizing it in three phases- from beginning till middle of 18th century and from mid 18th century till 1914 and from then to the present time. In his review of Comparative Politics, Blondel remarks that before 1914, Comparative Politics has successively taken two main forms. First phase extends up to mid 18th century where blueprints for organizing societies were proposed, and second from mid 18th century to 1914. The initial phase employed normative approach, explicit in the work of Thomas Aquinas to Locke and Rousseau. The subsequent period adopted a legalistic and constitutional approach till First World War. Subsequently, democracy got firmly established in many countries therefore setting up successful constitutional rule. Scholarship of that time concentrated on the issue of constitutional rule and procured this discipline a special status. A new phase started from 1914 when comparative politics became separate and special branch of study of politics. New works from various scholars in twentieth century gradually expanded the domains of the subject providing some truly comparative works. Some examples are H. Finer, Theory and Practice of Modern Government (1949), Herbert Simon Administrative Behavior (1947), Maurice Duverger Political Parties (1950), etc. The decade of 1950s was outlined by behaviouralism, 1960s with developmental models, dependency approach, political culture approach, and the most recent ones as new institutionalism, rational choice theory. Klaus von Beyme‘s attempt to understand the entire history of Comparative Politics by dividing it in 3 different phases find resonance with similar attempts by other scholars like Chilcote. Beyme names these three phases as pre-modern, modern and post-modern, which bear some semblance with other typology in form of pre-paradigmatic and paradigmatic phases proposed by Chilcote. Pre-Modern Phase The pre-modern or pre-paradigmatic phase is the traditional phase ridden with many limitations like being descriptive, assumptive, too generalized and impressionistic. Pre-modern comparisons mostly aimed at classification of whole political orders. As such this phase was marked by porosity of boundaries of different disciplines like philosophy, history, jurisprudence etc. There was pressure to find similarities and overall the objective was to establish classification or typologies rather that focused or meticulous study of any particular systems. Modern Phase The phase of modernity had overwhelming stress on scientific comparisons, empiricism, experimentations. Machiavelli unleashed the unconventional, followed by Montesquieu, Tocqueville, J S Mill. Scientific temperament was specially encapsulated by approaches adopted by Darwin, Spencer, Talcot Parson, Max Weber, Karl Popper, and Charles Merriam. The more recent works of David Easton, Almond Powell, Sydney Verba, Crane Brinton, Theda Schokpol etc. have greatly expanded the nature and scope of the discipline and this process is ongoing. The phase of modernity had overwhelming stress on scientific comparisons, empiricism, experimentations. It resulted in establishment of separate disciplines such as Political Science and sociology in social sciences and aided scientific and aimed comparative studies. This endeavor was formalized with the Behavioral movement under David Easton in post Second World War era. Modernization theory and political development approaches was typically ethnocentric and Eurocentric Its severe limitation gave rise to the Dependency theory. Dependency Theory The first approach emerging from the non western countries. Dependency theory tried to analyse the inequality and problems of the developing counties in light of the global pursuits of imperialism and colonialism. It offered the understanding of the globe in terms of center and periphery. This theory stated that it has been the imperial rule and colonial drainage of resources, labor and raw material which responsible for the impoverished conditions of the developing societies In the globe, the core or center is represented by the handful countries of the developed west and the periphery or the margin is signified by the developing societies. The core gets richer by the continuous and perpetual usurping of resources from the poor and vulnerable peripheries. Criticism However, this theory failed to recognize the nuanced variation among the developing societies by clubbing it under one roof. It ignored the influence of vital determinants like history, culture, different colonial experience of these societies Political Culture Approach The Political Culture approach appeared in 1960s, having a larger canvass and greater inclusivity. It emphasized the study of set of belief, orientation and attitudes, those governing the polities. It emphasized the study of set of belief, orientation and attitudes, those governing the polities. Gabriel Almond and Sydney Verba initiated the discourse on political culture and Arendt Lijphart made required modifications to it. New Institutionalism The most recent approach that has created considerable interest in the field is the New Institutionalism that came in late 1970s. It symbolizes the renewed interest in studying the vitality of institutions. Important work in this regard has been done by James G. March and Johan P. Olsen. This approach called upon the researchers to take into account the interaction of the institutions amongst themselves and its effect on the society. It shifted the focus to study how these institutions influence citizens, organisations, associations and other variables in that society. Post modern Phase The Post Modern era stands with clear difference with its predecessor, the phase of modernity. There cannot be any universal concept of good or bad. Many scholars felt helpless, as such theories like post modernism and relativism opened a Pandora box of problems, but never came up with any solutions. Third World Perspective The contribution of post modernism can be seen in terms of providing inner critique and skepticism rather than adding some substantial new theories to the field. In the decade of 1950s and 1960s, the emergence of third world as been seen as the most significant aspect of social science Third world began to acquire a distinct character by the end of sixties, the Eurocentric discourse of social science gradually started to acknowledge it and also introspect its own credentials due to unpredicted crisis like youth uprisings, anti-war movements, China’s Cultural Revolution etc. Analyzing the discourse of comparative politics in 20th century, Manoranjan Mohanty state that this field has undergone three phases of development: The period of institutionalism from the 1920s till the middle of the 1950s, the period of behaviouralism and modernization which saw its climax in the mid sixties. The emergence of third world challenge since the beginning of seventies.

Main perspectives on colonialism: Liberalism, Marxism, Postcolonialism Liberal Perspective: Colonial Interpretation The Battle of Plassey (1757) is the dividing line in the colonial history of modern India as it led to the foundation of formal colonial rule. In order to gain legitimacy, the British Administration promoted kind of history writing which was sympathetic to their mission in India and showed the colonialism as an necessity for Indians to make them modern and civilized. The group of thinkers and historians belonging to this school also projected the Indian National Movement, whether vide the 1857 rebellion or later the rise of Congress and other organizations, as mere cover of elites. This particular school of colonialism is known as colonial school of history. The colonial perspective on Indian history developed through phases. British did understand the importance of culture, society and Indian people to rule effectively upon them. In fact, it is important to note that from early 19th century, reconstruction of Indian history was the main agenda of colonial power. “Every accumulation of knowledge and especially such as is obtained by social communication with people over whom we exercise dominion, founded on the right of conquest, is useful to the state…it attracts and conciliates distant affections; it lessons the weight of the chain by which the natives are held in subjection; and it imprints on the hearts of our countrymen the sense of obligation and benevolence” said by Warren Hasting. Among the early writings on Indian history and culture were the works of Christian missionaries already active in various parts of India by that time. And these missionaries contributed to highlight the backwardness and primitiveness of Indians in order to justify their presence. They believed Indian history was stagnant since ages and made no progress altogether for a very long time. Beside missionaries, several trained Orientalists and philologists writing about Indian past and culture. Most of the sources used by these colonial historiographers were old Sanskrit texts like Vedas and Smritis and their conversations with pundits and Satirizes in different parts of India. The Missionaries and Orientalists did find ancient similarities between Indian and European cultures. Both of these argued that since a very long time where Europeans have moved much ahead, Indians have remained stagnated and there is noting progressive in recent Indian history. They believe the ‘backwardness’ of Indian society and culture was due to the dominant Hindu beliefs. Based on the writings of some missionaries and Orientalists, earlier colonial administration initiated some ‘reforms’ from above and gave the Missionaries free hand to spread their faith and ideology. Missionaries were unable to give insight of Indians history so company administration took accounts of orientalists into consideration like Sir William Jones, Sir Wilson, H.T. Colebrook, and Rajendra Lal and another. Unlike missionaries who relied only on Sanskrit sources, Orientalists used works of foreign travelers in India like Megathenese, Al-Baruni and others as well. Orientalists tried to relook at ancient Indian history and discover it’s so called greatness and found the "golden age" of Indians. According to Orientalist interpretations during this ‘golden age’ the essence of Indian civilization was formed. They identified the essence of the Indian civilization in the form of richness of its language and religious texts. They argued that the ancient Indian civilization had quite a developed form of Law and other political institutions which have been lost due to corruption in the last century. Orientalists tried to link Indian history with the Biblical stories. For example, they saw the story of Noah’s Ark as an almost parallel to the story of Manu. Despite the glorification of the Indian past, Orientalists viewed contemporary India as inferior and backward as compared to its past. The Oriental school in Britain was not, however, immune from its biases. Most of them projected the necessity of the British rule in India as they found Indians lacking in discipline and modernity. The backwardness of contemporary India was a result of centuries of stagnation, they reiterated. Utilitarian were against of any kind of external colonies but for India they justified saying for Indian economy backwardness it was important to do so. The Missionaries and other Orientalists justified colonialism on the basis of cultural backwardness whereas Utilitarian's emphasized the need to support Indian economy so that it becomes a vibrant partner in future for Britain. Utilitarianism represented by James Mill, T.B. Macaulay and others became important source of Indian history. Their approach was quite different from Orientalists as they opposed the view that Indian past was glorious J S Mill was the first to argue that Indians were culturally backward and therefore needed British rule for their modernization and development Orientalist had glorified India’s past, the Utilitarian had condemnation for it The Utilitarian's emphasized the weakness of Indian civilization and society They argued that there was tremendous need for rationality and individualism if the society was to progress. In order to draw a dividing line between ancient India and modern India, one of the proponents of this school, James Mill, divided the history of India into three parts namely, Hindu civilization The Muslim civilization, and The British period. He argued that the pre-British Hindu and Muslim civilizations were not only backward and stagnant but conformed to the image of ‘oriental-despotism Colonial School was trying to show the superiority of European culture and civilization and at the same time attempting to portray the Indian society as inferior. British should be appreciated as they are carrying the ‘the white men’s burden.’ This ethnocentrisms and racism became the source of Colonialists criticism of 1857 rebellion and any subsequent national movement for independence These historians believed that the rise of Indian nationalism was not a result of British colonialism. Instead they believed that what is called ‘India’ in fact consisted of religious castes, communities and interest. Broadly, “the colonial historians tried to show that Indian nationalism was nothing more than an unprincipled, selfish, amoral bid for power by a few Indian elites”. Nationalism was used as a mere ideology by these elite groups to legitimise their narrow ambitions and to mobilize public support. Conclusion Colonialist perspective on colonialism was based on the justification of the colonial rule. It tried everything to prove the worth of external administration of the various societies in Asia and Africa and elsewhere. For colonialist historians, India needed colonial administration in order to realize its potential and its long due modernization. According to Bandyopadhyay, the history writings all colonial powers “escaped serious interrogation outside of the specific contestations of the nationalist struggle” as they had the monopoly over the literature. Glossary Nationalist : It's an ideology based on the premise that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual or group interests. Utilitarianism : Utilitarianism would say that an action is right if it results in the happiness of the greatest number of people in a society or a group. When used in a sociopolitical construct, utilitarian ethics aims for the betterment of society as a whole. Orientalism : Orientalism is the study of near and far eastern societies and cultures, languages and peoples by Western scholars. I t can also refer to the imitation or depiction of aspects of Eastern cultures in the West by writers and artists. Missionaries : a person sent on a religious mission, especially one sent to promote Christianity in a foreign country. Proletariat: The working class, usually the poor.

IR Levels of Analysis International relations, or the relationships and interactions between different nations and ethnicities, is inherently complex, both in practice and as an academic discipline. Levels of Analysis are the building blocks that are faced by all students and academics when they seek to build an analysis. Without separating these, such as with the levels of analysis, it would be a difficult task to make enough sense of things to build, or utilize, a theory that would allow us to pose viable answers to research questions regarding IR. Most of the scholars mention three level of analysis in IR but we will read about four level of analysis. Let's understand them one by one Systematic level The systematic level comprises the global system in its entirety and looks at issues like the distribution of political power, the economic system, global governance (international organizations, laws and norms) and the diffusion of technology Comprehensive overview of interactions between actor. Identification of patterns of interactions in the system that will enable us to offer generalized information/findings about the behavior of states. It also considers how these factors create conditions that impose themselves structurally on the other levels. State level In this level analysis argue that the international system level tells only part of the story of international relations, but looking at the backgrounds of states, type of government, economic performance, geography, history and cultural values and can offer a more complete explanation. A state-level analyst could point to the collapse of the USSR's economy in the 1980s as one of the factors leading to the end of the Cold War. Higher possibility for generalizations through comparing states/actors Analyze decision-making processes Individual level This level of IR looks at the behavior and decisions of people both in governmental and non-governmental roles, examining their beliefs, fears and their personalities. Emphasizes the "great man in history" concept. Now leaders are taking active role in determine international relations Thus we can say impact of individual leader in order to shape nation's interest like Nehru strategies to gain independence in India. Adolf Hitler leadership; another would be when scholars attribute the end of the Cold War to the relationship between President Reagan and Soviet leader Gorbachev. Marxism level Marxism, however, does not rely simply on individual, state or international levels, but sees class as the category that underlies all political relations. The wealthy, capital-holding class exerts power over the working class, and will continue to do so until the working class gains control over the means of production. In the Marxist view, it is class relations that motivate and underlie decisions at the individual, state and international levels. Conclusion Thus, while mentioning students are advised to mention only three level of fourth could be mentioned if Marxism is mentioned into your chapter. These different level helps res researchers, academicians and students to be time specific while reading IR.

Classical Realism & Neo-Realism What is Realism ? Realism, also known as "Political Realism" or "Realpolitik", continues to remain one of the dominant schools of thought within the domain of international relations. Realism emerged as the dominant international perspective only during the 20th Century. More specifically, it emerged in its modern form largely in reaction to idealism. Realists maintained that a science of international politics must study the world, as it was an insistence that resulted in the Realists' self-acclaimed appellation.Realists appears as a natural phenomenon given the inherent craving -for power in human nature.Realism is grounded in an emphasis on power politics and the pursuit of national interest. Realism maintains that universal moral principles cannot be applied to the actions of states. According to Ainsley, “the name of theory can also be reason for its popularity. Realism (or political realism) is a school of thought that explains international relations in terms of power. Power is often define as the ability to get another actors to do what it would not otherwise have done (or not to do what it would have done). Advocators of Realism - Thucydides (c. 430-406), Machiavelli (1532), Morgenthau (1948) – classical realism; Rousseau (c. 1750), Kenneth Waltz (1979), Mearsheimer (2001) – Structural realism; Zakaria (1998). Realism is based on some of the assumptions:- Human nature is selfish. Most important actors are States Causes of state behavior is Rational pursuit of self interest Nature of international system is anarchy. Core Characteristics of Realism In the works of crucial thinkers like Thucydides and Kenneth Waltz, we identify three core elements of realism are described below- 1. STATISM: It is the term given to the idea of the state as the legitimate representative of the collective will of the people. The legitimacy of the State enables the States to exercise authority within its domestic borders. Yet outside the boundaries of the state, realists argue that a condition of anarchy exists. Here, the concept of anarchy emphasize the point that the international realm is distinguished by the lack of a central authority rather than denoting complete chaos and lawlessness. Realists argue that the basic structure of international politics is one of anarchy in that: Each of the independent sovereign states considers itself to be its own highest authority and does not recognize a higher power. First priority of leaders of each of the independent sovereign States is to ensure the survival of their States. All States wishes to maintain their existence. For example, Poland has loosen its existence four times in the past three centuries. 2. SURVIVAL: In International Politics, the most important goal for each state is survival. States struggle for power as to have security that is to survive. So, survival is held to be a precondition for attaining all other goals either to have war or alliance or treaty. Waltz argues that states have security as their principal interest and therefore seek only the requisite amount of power to ensure their own survival. Mearsheimer argues that the ultimate goal of all states is to achieve a hegemonic position in the International system. 3. SELF-HELP: According to realism, Self-Help refers to lack of global government. It means, each state actor is responsible for ensuring its own well-being and survival. In other words, States should not depend on other states or international institution, such as the United Nations, to ensure their own security. To conclude we can say, realism views a State to strengthen its power capabilities by engaging in a military arms build up, etc, if the state feels threatened. But, this strategy may prove to be insufficient for a number of smaller States who feel threatened by a much larger state. Therefore, Realists considered ‘the balance of power’ in order to the liberty of states. The most common definition of ‘the balance of power’ holds that – if the survival of a state or a number of weaker States is threatened by a hegemonic state or a coalition of stronger states, they should join forces, establish a formal alliance. Cold War is the best example of the balance of power mechanism. There is a debate about the types of realism however, Realism can be classified into a variety of distinct categories. The simplest distinction is a form of periodization that differentiates realism into following historical periods: Classical Realism Modern Realism Structural Realism (Neo-realism Neoclassical Realism Classical Realism Realists, although recognizing that human desires range widely and are remarkably variable, emphasize ‘the limitations which the sordid and selfish aspects of human nature place on the conduct of diplomacy. Classical Realism represents a whole worldview of international politics encompassing several generations of theorists ranging from Thucydides, Machiavelli, and E.H. Carr to Hbs J. Morgenthau, the most famous high priest of post-war Realism. The central argument of classical Realism rests on the assumption that international politics is driven by an endless struggle for power,' which has its root in human nature. In this framework,justice, law, and society have either no place or are circumscribed. They argue that to survive, states must increase their power by internal development such as in the economic system, technological, diplomatic and military means Classical Realism recognises that principles are subordinated to policies and that the ultimate test of the state leader lies in accepting and adapting to the changing power political configurations in world politics. Classical realist argue that- it is from the nature of man that the essential features of international politics, such as competition, fear, and war, can be explained. Later classical realists were notably Machiavelli and Morgenthau. Morgenthau’s era witnessed many drives for more power and territory, such as, Nazi Germany and Czechoslovakia in 1939, and The Soviet Union and Hungary in 1956, many more. These drives confirmed that role of human nature as defined by classical realism. MORGENTHAU In 1948 wrote a book, “Politics among Nations”. He gave his theory of International Relations. His six principles of IR can be enumerated as follows:- There is no fixed or constant national interest. Every states keeps on redefining its national interests. Private morality is different from public morality. State cannot be put into pressure on ground of morality and immorality. Every states work on their views and interest. There is no place for morality and immorality in International Relations. Politics is autonomous. It is not connected with social culture, caste, religion etc. IR is based on objective laws in human nature. Human are selfish and therefore, state is also selfish. Power means control on other States. Criticism of Morgenthau Theory Neither Fully Empirical and nor Fully Logical Guilty of Power Monism A Partial Approach Unrealistic View of the World Unscientific Difficult to Evaluate National Power and National Interest Little Importance to Morality Inconsistency in Views Lack of Clarity in Conceptualizing Autonomy MACHIAVELLI “How is a leader supposed to act in a world animated by such dark forces?” Machiavelli answered the questions saying that- “all obligations and treaties with other states must be disregarded if the security of the community is under the threat.” However, he says that imperial expansion is legitimate as it is a means of gaining great security. Neo-Realism (Structuralism Realism) Neo-realism is primarily based on the philosophy of classical realism. It had three sources. If political realism provided the primary source of neo-realism, then structuralism definitely contributed as its more immediate source. It is widely established that the approach of neorealism originated with the publication of Kenneth Waltz's Theory of International Politics in 1979. Structural realism believes that:- International Politics is a struggle for power. Struggle for power is not a result of human nature, unlike the belief of classical realism. Struggle for power is result of security competition, inter-state conflicts, lack of overarching authority above states, and the relative distribution of power in International system. Kenneth Waltz defined the structure of the international system in terms of three elements:- 1. Organizing principle:- he identifies two different organizing principles: Anarchy, seen in international politics and Hierarchy, prevails in domestic order. 2. Differentiation of units:- here, States are unit of international system. He argues that in international system, all sovereign States are functionally similar. Hence, unit-level variation is irrelevant in explaining international outcome. 3. Distribution of capabilities:- according to Waltz, distribution of capabilities among units is important to understand crucial international outcomes such as war and peace, alliance politics, and the balance of power. Structural realist views to rank all the states on the basis of strength in the following areas: ‘size of population and territory, resource endowment, economic capability, military strength, political stability and competence’. We can consider an example, during cold war (1945-89), there were two great powers-the USA and the USSR - that constituted the bipolar international system. According to Mearsheimer, the structure of the international system compels States to maximize their relative power position. Core Characteristics of Neo Realism Neo-realism is not an entirely different approach of realism but it shares some core assumption with classical realism. Gilpin identified three assumptions which are common to all strands of realism: The nature of international affairs is essentially conflictual. The essence of social reality is the group rather than the individual, and particularly the conflict group, whether tribe, city-State, kingdom, empire, or nation-State. The prime human motivation in all political life is power and security. The main assumptions of neo-realism are as following: Instead of unit level analysis the neo-realism focus on the System level analysis Anarchy as a central theme of the international system International order as mechanistic rather than organic Criticism of Neo-Realism Difficulty in ranking states: Structural realist views to rank all the states on the basis of strength in the following areas: ‘size of population and territory, resource endowment, economic capability, military strength, political stability and competence’. Here, the difficulty is that resource strength does not always lead to military victory. Example:- in the 1967 Six Day War between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, the distribution of resources clearly favored the Arab coalition and yet the supposedly weaker side annihilated its enemies’ forces and seized their territory. Improper definition of 'Power as Capabilities': The definition of power as capabilities failed at explaining the relative economic success of Japan over China. Exclusively Focuses upon state Power: For realists, states are the only actors that really ‘count’. MNCs, TNCs, International Organizations, and ideologically driven terrorist networks, such as Al Qaeda, ISIS etc. are ignored. Conclusion The evolution of international relations is a subject that cannot be clearly understood without examining how different sovereign states have been struggling for power and supremacy. The struggle matches the description and meaning of neorealism. It is agreeable that the theory seeks to explain how power is the leading factor in international relations (Waltz 1979). The nature of realism existing today explains how different nations continue to pursue power. CHECK NOTES FOR IR

Medieval Europe & Pre-Westphalian System Before the origin of the modern state system in Europe, the medieval Europe was characterized as a Pre-Westphalian system. In the Pre-Westphalian system, the Church was the supreme authority from which the universal laws of governance and moral framework of organizing a society was derived. The medieval Europe was based on feudal mode of production. Unlike Westphalian system, the medieval social order in feudal Europe was not based either on the strict separation between the domestic (internal) and international (external) sphere on the one hand and the public and the private realm on the other hand. Holy Roman Empire in 1648 There was no institutional separation of politics and economics during this period. In fact, the highly differentiated carriers of political power in medieval politics and geopolitics were based on the vertical relations of subordination and horizontal relations of coordination. In medieval Europe no political authority-pope, emperor, kings, dukes, counts, bishops, city-lords etc enjoyed the modern state’s monopoly of means of violence guaranteeing exclusive control over a bounded territory Unified and exclusive authority claimed by modern sovereign states, the political authority in medieval Europe was dispersed, fragmented and overlapping. But by the end of the 16th century the authority of the Church in medieval Europe was on decline due to the Renaissance and reformation movement The economic practices of the new trading and manufacturing classes on the one hand, and the power of new science and technology on the other side, also effectively undermined the authority of the Church. Thus, the bloody Thirty Years’ War came to an end with the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 And this led to secularization of life and the acceptance of a secular state in Europe. The Thirty Years War The Thirty Years War (1618-648) was a series of wars fought in the Central Europe, mainly in the Holy Roman Empire, with armies plundering the Central European landscape, fighting battles and surviving by ravaging the Civilian population. It was one of the most destructive conflicts in the European History. Thirty Years’ War was initially began as a religious war between Protestant and Catholic states but later it gradually developed into a non-religious and general conflict among great powers of Europe. Thirty years of war could be divided into four parts First Phase: The Bohemian Phase (1618-1625) - Defenestration of Prague. Second Phase: The Danish Phase (1625-1629) - Height of Catholic power. Third Phase: The Swedish Phase (1630-1635) - The new Protestant leader, Gustavus Adolphus became King of Sweden led army that pushed Catholic forces back to Bohemia. Fourth Phase: The French Phase (1635- 1648) - Cardinal Richelieu (1585-1642), the chief minister of King Louis XIII allied with protestant forces to weaken the power of the Hapsburgs and take the province of Alsace from the Holy Roman Empire. Treaty of Westphalia & Its characteristics Treaty of Westphalia aims to have ended the imposition of any supranational authority on sovereign states. The Treaty of Westphalia also refers to two treaties, namely the Treaty of Munster and the Treaty of Osnabruck. The treaties recognized the sovereignty of more than 300 German Princes. The Treaty of Westphalia played also an important role in the establishment of secular state in Europe and thus marks an end of the supremacy of Church in the political domain. The peace of Westphalia at the end of the Thirty Years War in 1648 concluded a series of religious wars among the main European powers It led to the strengthening of a new conception of international law based on the principles that all states have an equal right to self –determination The Treaty of Westphalia dated from 1648, is the collective term for the peace treaties and it recognizes following principles as its core features : the principle of sovereignty the principle of legal equality among states, the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of other states reduction of the role played by religion, recognizing no superior authority over the sovereign states, fundamental right of political self-determination. The principles of territorial sovereignty, independence and nationalism-in their modern sense- however, were not known to the ancient and medieval peoples. Basic Features of Westphalian Model of State System Westphalian model of state system has introduced new system of political order which consists of sovereign states based on territorial sovereignty and absence of a role for external agents in the internal matters. Initiate the concepts of diplomacy, international law and balance of power. The states are supreme in the matters related with both their internal (domestic) and external affairs. The international law and relations among states are the result of the peace treaty of Westphalia which also founded the important norms for the international system. The aim of International law is to identify the norms and rules for peaceful coexistence. Collectively all states have a mutual concerns to minimize the constraints related with states’ freedom. Recognize the independence of each sovereign state and their right to determine and manage their political and other policy goals. The concepts of nationalism, sovereignty and power are essential conditions for state system, without which the state system cannot exist. In international system the individual great powers have much control and power in the matters of dispute settlements, law enforcement and also law-making. All states in the international system irrespective of their geographical location and position must be treated as equal. Emergence of the emergence of the State System Most scholars often dated the birth or origin of the modern state system with its territorial sovereignty first in Europe from the signing of the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 And by which the European princes and monarchs recognized each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Although some contended that States did indeed exist before Westphalia, and they conducted relations among themselves but that was quite different from modern state system as there had been no nation state with sovereignty. The sovereign state system in Europe emerged as a response to specific historical circumstances. By the 16th century, the Church in Europe was beginning to lose control over the state and societal structures since these were moving in a secular direction for a variety of reasons. The Treaty of Westphalia brought an end to the thirty years war in Europe and, by virtue of this Treaty, the rulers of Europe shook themselves off from the authority of the Church and the Roman Empire. Central principle of this Treaty was “the ruler of the territory would determine the religion of that territory” which had major consequences. The principles of, territorial sovereignty, independence and nationalism are the main characteristic features of the modern state system The basic rules and principles to shape and define the international system are also established by the Treaty of Westphalia (1648). Due to the Treaty of Westphalia, sovereignty and territorial integrity of states as equal and independent members of an international system become one of the core principles in the contemporary international relations. Thus, since the Westphalian revolution in international relations, the states may have lost some parts of its territory while defeating in a war but not subsumed into victorious state and allowed to continue as an independent state. The Thirty Years War had resulted out of the Protestant-Catholic conflict. The struggle did not establish any dominant religion, yet it ended the undisputed authority of the Catholic Church. Post Westphalian System In the Post-Westphalian system, contemporary international politics both in theory and practice, progressed or matured significantly and assumed a new dimension with the start of process of decolonization which results in the emergence of new states in Asia, Africa and Latin America. With the end of Balance of Power system that had existed for three centuries, the post-Second World War international order is different; it see the emergence of two non-European nuclear (weapon) superpower, the US and USSR, instead of the earlier five to six major non-nuclear (weapon) European powers. In the Post-Westphalian system, Westphalian wars are on decline and non-Westphalian war on the issues of economic and informational are on rise The world became unipolar after the Cold War, with the US remaining the only superpower, the present international order has become more interdependent due to the spread of globalization, including international trade, information technology revolution, terrorism, and environmental degradation. Now, since the end of Cold War International Relations (IR) as an academic discipline is also addressing the issues with more sincerity which has assumed multi-dimensional character. We can say that, there has been a deterritorialization of the world. Globalization and Challenges to State Sovereignty Globalization has profound implications for decision-making in both the domestic and international contexts. Because of the forces of globalisation, the structures and processes of the world state system have been facing large-scale changes. Though the states, still surviving and exercise their power and authority in certain respects but the core of Westphalian model, that is, the concept of sovereignty, has been deeply undermined in a fast globalizing world. Some liberal scholars argue that due to globalization state’s power is declining and the power of the markets is ascending It is no secret that global social movements have also now come to undermine the sovereignty of states. The state in a globalizing world has to work along with the forces which are not under its control even such as surveillance by global governance agencies, nationalism, global ecological problems, satellite communications, electronic money transfers, multinational companies, migration, information flows, technology transfers and, most importantly, nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction Scholars point out that the concept of absolute sovereignty was developed under conditions of relatively low level of interdependence among states. The inter-dependence of world economy and the growing importance of the supra-state global governance system have also limited the state sovereignty The operation of MNCs and their interference with the domestic policies of their host countries have really undermined the sovereignty of the states. No wonder, MNCs like IBM, GE, Microsoft, Wal-Mart, and others have become more powerful than many sovereign states. The Neo-realist scholars claim that state still continues to be a primary actor in international politics. For Realist, there is no threat to the state or its authority and the state system will continue to be relevant. Realist scholars claimed that states increasingly exercise sovereignty in multilateral context. They argued that globalization has enhanced the state’s ability and changed the states roles. The Realist and Neo-realist scholars argued that rather than sovereignty disappearing, it is being transformed into contemporary global actors, other than nation-states. Conclusion Despite all these criticism, there is no doubt that states still are independent in order to decide their internal and external matters. The perception that sovereignty is something given and cannot change in terms of ‘time’ and ‘space’ is undergoing transformation. The notion of interdependence and divisible sovereignty are central to the understanding of the contemporary world order. The process of globalization, the operation of international law, the international organizations and non-governmental organizations has distinctly impacted on the sovereignty of state and its exclusive territoriality which are consider as two distinctive features of the modern state. Thus, redefine the meaning of Westphalian sovereignty. Now, state sovereign power is no longer sovereign, and some of that sovereignty has been transformed to the extent that though it primarily resides in the state.

Ideas and Institutions in Indian Political Thought DSC-2 Chapter-1 Statecraft in Ancient India The Hindu thinkers tried to understand the state by differentiating it from the non-state. Their method was logical differentiating it from the non-state. Their method was logical as well as historical. That is, in the first place, they tried to investigate in what particulars the state analytically differs from the non-state; and in the second place, they tried to picture to themselves how the pre-statal condition developed into the statal, i. e., how the state grew out of the non-state. The chief solution of both these problems they found in the doctrine of matasya nyaya or the logic of the fish. Let's try to understand what are other stories beside hindu theory regarding state and non state existence. CHECK DSE1 UNDERSTANDING POLITICAL THEORY NOTES European Thinkers According to Hooker (I554-I6oo) in the Ecclesiastical Polity the state of nature is a state of strife. Spinoza (I632-77), also, expressed the opinion in his Tractatus Theologico Politicus, that the state of nature is a state of war and a state of the right of might. John Stuart Mill remarked ' The non-state is thus conceived to be a war of "all against all "' an " anarchy of birds and beasts ", and a regime of vultures and harpies' The Hobbesian "' law of beasts and birds or the Naturprozess of Gumplowicz is the logic (nyaya) of the fish (matsya) in India. Chinese Thinkers Su Hu explains in The Development of Logic in Ancient China, " each man has his own notion of right. Therefore one mina, " each man has his own notion of right. Therefore one man has one notion of right, two men have two notions of right, and ten men have conceptions of right will there be. Consequently each man ap- proves his own notion of right and denounces every other man's. So they denounce one another." Hindu Theory of State Origin - Theory of Origin of the State by Manu Manu’s Theory of Origin of the State ,according to Manu, lord created the king when there was fear due to chaos in the society (state less society). King was created by combining the eternal particles of Indra, Pawan, Yama, Sun, Agni, Varun, Moon and Kuber. He presented a divine theory of political obligation devised to instruct the subjects to obey the king, and goes as far to claim that even if the king is an infant, he should be respected and revered because he is actually a deity in human form. Protection of subject was considered as the primary duty of the king because that was the reason for his creation. He is expected also to protect all castes and order. He mentioned inflicting punishment to wrong doers as an important duty of king considering that the threat of punishment was essential to maintain social order. In return the subject were obliged to pay taxes that is used by king for social welfare as well as to build a treasury for difficult times. A king who fails in his duties shall go to hell after death. Important Features of State by Manu Manu also builds an organic theory of the state, i.e., it has seven limbs with specific functions and only when each do their job well, can the state survive and prosper. His theory is also referred as Saptanga theory as it also includes seven elements with minor differences from Kautilya. The seven elements mentioned in Manusmriti include: Lord (King) Minister Capital (Pura) Rashtra (kingdom) Treasure Army (or force) Ally In the Manusmriti version of Saptanga theory, fort and janapada (of Arthashastra) are replaced by pura and rashtra, i.e., capital and kingdom. Presents an organic theory of state. King is pivotal to the structure. He is the linchpin who maintains the structure and provides all support. Appointment of the ministers is one of the central duties of the king. He used the understanding of Arthashastra to argue that appointing the right minister to the right department is a significant administrative duty and much depends on it for statecraft. On the subject of appointment, he suggest of five criterions: tradition,ability, examination, fulfilment of objectives and test of courage. Manu considered secrecy as essential for state craft and hence believed that the king should consistently test the loyalties of his staff. Unlike Kautilya, Manu held that on policy matters the King should not only hold wider consultations, but stresses that even Brahmans should be included in this deliberation. Clearly, he suggested that administrative role of the king could not be fulfilled without the support of Brahmans. Manu also suggested that the king should devolve the power effectively along with providing each department more autonomy and independence. Unlike Kautilya, he also allowed for greater autonomy to core departments like finance and army. In fact, he suggested thathe king should seek advices on his ministers and listen to them objectively. Manu opined that power had tendency to make people corrupt. So, he suggested for constant surveillance of administrative officer. He firmly asserted that King should behave like a father to the public and as a guardian he was dutybound to improve the lives of his people. At the same time, he was also expected to be most worried about the interests of the needy and the week in society including children, women and the aged. He maintained that the King should reflects the characteristics of different animals as and when need be: he must act as a tortoise, who is an expert in protecting its weakest points whenever it senses any threat; he must bear patience like heron and never act in haste; he should have strength like that of lion; he should be opportunist to maximize his national interest just like wolf snatches its prey; and it should be like hare, ever attentive and always very agile, even if it has to retreat form a situation. Like Kautilya, Manu also advocated accession of territories to increase influence. He held that king should always be ready to use force, when need be, to protect and promote his national interest. It is both natural and justified duty of king. Unlike in Arthashastra, Manusmriti has detailed lists of immunities and privileges designed for Brahmans. They are given special status. In fact, at times, it appears that Manu recognised two simultaneous authorities: king as the temporal authority and the Brahman as the spiritual authority. Both according to him were joint custodians of the sacred laws or the principles of dharma. State Jurisdiction The end of government, according to Manu, was to help people in the accomplishment of moral righteousness, wealth and the pleasure (Dharma, artha, and kaama). So, the King was expected to consistently endeavour to achieve these aims in consultation with his ministers. He was expected to provide protection and security to his people from both internal as well as external enemies. Internal enemies might include thieves, robbers, or those planning political turmoil, but at the same time it also included those government servants who were corrupt or who misused their powers to oppress the people. According to Manusmriti, the state should perform the following function: make all Varna observed their duties (Dharma), observance of general law, maintenance of peace within the state and keep the state free from external control. Besides these the states should make laws for controlling the price of important articles. It is also expected to maintain the social order and if need be to for the Vaishyas to carry on trade, agriculture and animal husbandry, as well as compel the Sudras to serve the dwijas (the higher caste). It is also within the scope of state to interfere to resolve crisis or conflict among different groups. It is further the duty of the state to impart good education to its people and take good care of the teachers and the taught. For accomplishing these duties, the king is also given the power to levy taxes as well as the power to punish those who digress from the path of righteousness. The Law of Fish - Matsaya Nyaya It is the fundamental law of nature that small fish become prey to big fish or the strong devour the weak. It can be equated to the ‘Law of Jungle’. Otherwise we can say,the strong will prevail over the weak. In absence of government or rule of law, the human society will degenerate into state of anarchy in which stronger will destroy or exploit the weak much like how bigger fish eat smaller fish. If in our society, if we take out the government, the rules, the order and in a matter of hours the human society will degenerate into a state of anarchy in which the stronger one will destroy and devour the weaker ones like the fishes. In modern times, we can call it the “Law of the Jungle” So, according to this, the theory of government was based on a belief in the innate depravity of man. It is seen that in the ancient texts of Sanatana Dharma, the theory of governance was formed keeping in mind the evil nature of the man. A good leadership uses the best combination of the “4 Fold Policies” of Kautilya to find a solution to Matsya Nyaya from time to time. Sama (The wise ruler must maintain peace among his subjects) Dana (Means charity) Danda (punishment) Bheda (The wise ruler must use Bheda to promote welfare of the state) Thus, this theory proposes that government, rulers and laws are necessary to prevent this natural law of ‘Matsya Nyaya’ from operating in human society. Kautilya’s Saptang Theory of State: The Mauryan era of ancient India gave the world a significant treatise, the Arthashastra of Kautilya. It offers deep insights into political statecraft. Although not Kautilya's original idea, he connects the Saptanga/Seven Organs theory to thestate's organization. As the name implies, a state is a collection of seven components thateach serve a specific purpose and cannot exist by themselves. Kautilya is known as the Indian Machiavelli because of his ruthless and shrewd tactics and policies reflecting an approach to statecraft including warfare. The state of ‘nature’ is imagined to be one of total anarchy, in which ‘might was right’. People were oppressed by Matyanyaya, the law of the fish, according to which the bigger fish swallows the smaller ones they selected Manu– son of Vivasvat the king. It was settled that the king should receive one-sixth of the grain and one-tenth of merchandise and gold, as his due. It was the revenue which made it possible for the king to ensure the security and prosperity of his subjects. People agreed to pay taxes and he ruled by one person in order that they might be able to enjoy well-being and security. In Kautilya’s Arthashastra, there is no explicit theory of social contract as laid down by the contractualist. Neither does Kautilya use the contract to make the king all powerful. Key Elements of State Kautilya enumerated seven prakritis or essential organs of the state. They are as follow Swami (The Ruler) Amatya (The Minister) Janapada (The Population) Durga (The Fortified Capital) Kosha (The Treasury) Danda (The Army) Mitra (Ally and Friend) Kautilya’s Mandal Theory or Mandal Sidhant The Mandal theory revolves around Mitra. One of the most remarkable ideas of ancient Indian statecraft is the doctrine of mandala. The theory of Mandala is based on the geographical assumption that the immediate neighbor state of a given state is most likely to be an enemy and a state next to the immediate neighbor is likely to be one’s friend. Thus, after a friendly state comes an unfriendly state (friend of the enemy state) and next to that a friendly state (friend of a friendly state) and so on. Thus, this form circles of friends and foes with the central point being the King and his State. According to Kautilya,the states which are one’s neighbours and are also neighbours of one’s enemies are neutral and should always be treated with respect. This circle is dynamic and the King should strive to expand his central position and reduce the power of the other kings in his vicinity. As per the theory it is to build alliances with states which are two degrees away from the center to create a balance of power. Chanakya advocated six-fold policy to interact with the neighbors, which included co-existence, neutrality, alliance, double policy, march, and war. He advised the king to resort to five tactics in order to follow the six-fold policy. The five tactics are conciliation, gift, and bribery, dissension, deceit and pretence, open attack or war. Mandal theory of kautilya deals with the circle around kings which king have to deal with . These circles are basically divided into friends and enemies of king by mandal theory . As per the Shadguna theory, states participate in diplomacy and war using the six methods of foreign policy which are : Sandhi:- The peace treaties should be made with specific conditions to promote welfare and development. According to Chanakya, one can enter into a treaty with one’s enemy and it could be broken when one grows strong. Vigraha:- The policy of hostility is recommended to be followed by the stronger state. The hostilities can be conducted as open, secret, undeclared or clandestine attacks. Diplomatic wars too are justified on all levels. Asana:- The policy of remaining neutral is highly recommended when both states are equal. Yana:- Very careful consideration is to be made before taking the important decision on wars. Since the preparation for war and the long march entailed heavy expenditure and prolonged absence from the capital. Samsraya:- The policy of seeking protection of a stronger authority can be practised by entering into alliances or by signing a treaty. Dvaidhibhava:- This is the policy of seeking peace with one authority in order to pursue hostilities with another. The main thrust of the Mandala theory was to acquire power and wealth for the conqueror. Kautilya analyzed the concept of strength and categorized it into three kinds. Mantra Bal, the power of deliberation. The second kind of strength consists of the possession of prosperous treasury of Prabhu Bal. Utsaliq Bal, denoting the basic strength of sovereignty, including the material power in terms of physical strength. Thus, the Mandala theory of inter- state politics, as expounded by Kautilya, is an exercise in practical politics and is relevant for all times. Kautilya inspired the king to determine his foreign policy only after a careful assessment of the strength and achievements of his allied and hostile states. In general we can define state theory in three categories - 1. Social Contract Theory - The social contract theory, one of the common theories of the origin of state, believes that state is a result of a contract between the king and his subjects or representatives. The king, thus appointed, was expected to save the state and the subjects from external aggression and establish order and security within the state. However, the earliest Vedic works never stated that state was the result of a contract. But, they clarified that king was elected to wage a successful war against the demons. 2. Divine Origin Theory (The oldest theory) Theory of origin of kingship as well as the state was not widely acclaimed in the ancient Indian polity. The king, according to this theory, was a subordinate to law, which was made by the society and not him. The community as a whole was given greater importance than the king. The king was not allowed to act indiscriminately and was expected to act as a father to his subjects, and treat them with affection and kind­ness. The great epic of India, the Ramayana, also clearly laid out that king was of divine origin. It is stated therein that men approached Brahma (the Creator) to provide them a king and accordingly after all the Gods spared a portion of their power, a being in the human form emerged and was made the king. The Mahabharata, another great epic, explains that king is a person endowed with superior talent and calibre descended from heaven to the king on the earth. Puranas also describe the divine origin of the king and the state. The Agni Purana states that the kings were embodiments or forms of Lord Vishnu (the god who sustains the earth). Some kings had titles like Chakravarthi— universal emperor, while some of the Mauryan emperors conferred titles like Devanam Priya, beloved of Gods, upon them. However, certain ancient scriptures like Manusamhita explain that the origin of state is from the divine. One such excerpt from Manusamhita is that ‘the Lord created the king for the protection of his whole creation … even an infant king must not be despised (from an idea) that he is only a mortal, because he is a great deity in human form’. 3. Organic Theory This theory believes that state is like an organism and that each organ has a specific function to perform. The theory believes that the healthy functioning of the whole organism depends upon the healthy conditions of each part of the body or organism and its efficient functioning. The seven parts of the body, that is, state are the king or the sovereign, the minister, the territory and population, the fortified city or the capital, the treasury, the army, the friends and the allies. Among all the seven elements or parts, it is the king who is most important. The Matsya Purana states that the king was the root and the subjects were the trees. Similarly, Sukra Neetisaara, compares the state with that of human body. According to Sukracharya, the king is the head, the ministers the eyes, the treasurer the mouth, the army the heart, the fort the hands, and the territory the feet. Mahabharata also supports this theory and that every element or the limbs are important for the proper functioning of the state. “A King should not hesitate to break any friendship or alliances that are later found to be disadvantageous.”

Unit 1 Studying International Relations a. How do you understand International Relations: Levels of Analysis b. History of IR: Emergence of the International State System c. Pre-Westphalia and Westphalia d. Post-Westphalia International Relations People have tried to make sense of world politics for centuries, and especially so since the separate academic discipline of International Politics was formed in 1919 when the Department of International Politics was set up at the University of Wales, Aberystwyth. Interestingly, the individual who set up that department, a Welsh industrialist called David Davies, saw its purpose as being to help prevent war Various theories emerged to explain word politics. These are: realism on the power relations between states, liberalism on a much wider set of interactions between states and non-state actors. The first three of these theoretical perspectives, realism, liberalism, and Marxism, have tended to be the main theories that have been used to understand world politics, with constructivism and poststructuralism becoming increasingly influential since the mid-1990s and postcolonialism gaining some influence in the 2000s. The emergence of a global system of states Formation of international Political System: 1500-1900 Emergence of the State System in Europe Feudalism: System in which individuals received land and other benefits for swearing loyalty to high ranking leader. State formed in failure of failed efforts of leaders to establish imperial order over all of Europe. Religious conflict amongst countries a thirty years war Peace of Westphalia(1648): Treaty that divided Europe into sovereign states independent of higher authorities. Concert of Europe(1814): Congress amongst European five powers to maintain order a failed on many grounds to resolve disputes European Pursuit of Foreign Empire Mercantilism: Military power is the central goal of the state attained through wealth a imperial and colonial expansion. Transatlantic slave trade or ‘Rum Triangle’ American Revolution supported by France against the British overspending of the France revolution and over throw of monarchy Napoleon expands Congress of Vienna 1815: Africa is divided into demarcated territories between European powers. Meiji Restoration: selective adaptation of western science, education, industrial technology to boost economy and military to resist Western encroachment. WWI and WWII: 1900-1945 World War 1 Causes: Changes in capabilities if war did come, rather fight in the near term before loss of economic or technologic capabilities Concert of Europe alliances made other countries suspicious made other countries suspicious Triple Alliance: Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy Triple Entente: France, Britain, Russian Germany Kaiser William II abdicates Austria-Hungary surrenders and Germany requests armistice Treaty of Versailles: An attempt was made at Paris Peace conference in 1919 to establish just world order. But the treaty was drafted by victors and Germany was told to sign it. Germany raised many objections. But France had taken its revenge, Germany was deprived of all its overseas colonies. The treaty of Versailles had imposed humiliating conditions on the Central powers and sowed the seeds of the Second World War. Woodrow Wilson: Woodrow Wilson set forth his plan for a "JUST PEACE." Wilson believed that fundamental flaws in international relations created an unhealthy climate that led inexorably to the World War. National self-determination dismantling of empires i.e. Ottomans, Austria-Hungary, Russia. His FOURTEEN POINTS outlined his vision for a safer world. Wilson called for an end to secret diplomacy, a reduction of armaments, and freedom of the seas. He claimed that reductions to trade barriers, fair adjustment of colonies, and respect for national self-determination would reduce economic and nationalist sentiments that lead to war. Finally, Wilson proposed an international organization comprising representatives of all the world's nations that would serve as a forum against allowing any conflict to escalate. Unfortunately, Wilson could not impose his world view on the victorious Allied Powers. When they met in Paris to hammer out the terms of the peace, the European leaders had other ideas. League of Nations States provided with legal/institutional framework to avoid war. an organization for international cooperation established on January 10, 1920, at the initiative of the victorious Allied powers at the end of World War I. The terrible losses of World War I produced, as years went by and peace seemed no nearer, an ever-growing public demand that some method be found to prevent the renewal of the suffering and destruction which were now seen to be an inescapable part of modern war. The League of Nations (1920 – 1946) was the first intergovernmental organization established “to promote international cooperation and to achieve international peace and security”. It is often referred to as the “predecessor” of the United Nations. Some responsibilities were assigned to the League by other international instruments, such as the peace treaties signed in Paris. The Interwar Period: Failed Global Reconstruction- Weimar Republic The Weimar Republic was Germany’s government from 1919 to 1933, the period after World War I until the rise of Nazi Germany.It is sometimes referred to as Weimar Germany. The Weimar Republic began to take shape at the end of World War I. Years of war, economic deprivation and starvation brought about the German Revolution and the abdication of Kaiser Wilhelm II. The Weimar Republic began as a bold experiment in constitutional and representative government. Its creators sought to create a modern liberal democracy in a nation that had known only militarism and authoritarian monarchy. The Weimar Republic is of great significance to historians and history students alike. It demonstrates how democracy can fail when it is too ambitious and when internal forces work against it. France still distrustful maintains strict reparation payments when Germany fails to pay France incites the Ruhr Crisis work stoppages wages paid by printing of money hyperinflation. Dawes Plan came in 1924 US mediation for France to withdraw from Ruhr valley, and international bank to lend Germany money. In 1925, European leaders held extended negotiations in Locarno, Switzerland that produced better results than Genoa meeting. These Locarno conferences led to a series of treaties that ended disagreements about the location of German, Belgian, and French borders. These three nations decided to accept existing boundaries. The Locarno agreements left many international problems unsettled. World War 2 Causes Rise of dictatorship in Italy and Germany. Germany, Italy and Japan were the Axis Powers which had pursued the expansionist policy during the inter-war period. Failure of Disarmament, the task of preparing a plan for reduction of armaments was entrusted to the League of Nation. The Problem of National Minorities ,the US President Wilson had advocated the concept of self-determination but his principle could not be implemented on various occasions. England and France ignored the acts of aggression by Germany and Italy and succumbed to their pressure. Weakness of league of nations, the Axis powers committed acts of aggression due to the fact that England and France followed the policy of appeasement towards the axis powers. UK and Poland sign a peace treaty after Germany invades more Czechoslovakian land. Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact is signed invade and partition Poland. UK and France declare war on Germany. Germany occupies Western Europe, unleashes surprise attack against USSR. USSR, France, UK, and USA now too push back German troops and Hitler commits suicide. Pacific Theatre of WWII: Pearl Harbor, Hiroshima, Nagasaki. Global Struggle of the Cold War: 1945- 1989 United Nation established to maintain postwar peace. Europe loses capacity and legitimacy for maintaining rule over colonies. German divided into four occupation zones between US, UK, USSR, France. Origins & End Of the Cold War The crisis in Europe grew into a global confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union known as the "Cold War." Aggressive expansionism US compelled to establish containment (employs diplomacy economic assistance and military power to counter the effort of a supposedly adversary state) The Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan were the steps to save the European Continent from further Communist influence. The Soviet Union also initiated the Molotov Plan and established the Council of Mutual Economic Assistance. These moves and counter-moves constituted the beginning of the Cold War. The Marshall Plan was an extension of the principle underlying the Truman Doctrine. In order to check Russian supremacy and influence, Britain, France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Luxemburg, etc. signed the Treaty of Brussels in March 1948. The North Atlantic Treaty was signed on 4 April 1949 by the United States, Canada, Belgium, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal and the United Kingdom. The NATO was a defensive organization. USA hostile towards USSR even before WWII see armed intervention of USA in 1918 and 1920 against Bolshevik. USSR wanted to maintain a sphere of influence rather than employ aggressive expansionism. USA wanted to contain USSR to maintain a world friendly to private capitalism to preserve US economic prosperity Misunderstandings about security dilemmas both superpowers feared their power being compromised by the other. Alternatively, the Cold war was inevitable because of the logic of bipolarity (International system driven by the competition of two equally powerful states. Like the NATO, the SEATO (1954) was born out of Communist fear. Its object was to put a stop to the further spread of Communist influence in South-East Asia. he Baghdad Pact was an attempt by the Western Powers to form an anti-Soviet bloc in the Middle East. This Pact was signed in 1955 between Turkey and Iraq. Later on, Britain, Pakistan and Iran joined it. On 4 May 1955, the Soviet Union, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Albania and East Germany signed the Warsaw Pact. The United States proclaimed the Eisenhower Doctrine on 5 March 1957 by which the Truman Doctrine was extended to the Middle East. Growing prominence of nuclear weaponry Mutually Assured destruction of both superpowers if war is declared ,this concept is known as Balance of power, Instead of direct conflict, both superpowers engaged in proxy wars. The Cold War was at its height at the time of the Cuban crisis in 1962. Korean war, In the first major conflict since the end of World War 2, a crisis occurred in the Korean peninsula when Communist North Korea invaded democratic South Korea. Vietnam War, The US intervened in the Vietnam crisis in 1965 by sending troops to aid South Vietnam in its fight against communist North Vietnam. North Vietnam was supported by the USSR and China. Disintegration of USSR USSR had bureaucratic and authoritarian system. Gorbachev instills perestroika and glasnost allows the formation of opposition parties and criticism of the soviet government Democratic elections spread to countries within the Soviet union. Hungary, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia break free of the Soviet union and in 1991 ,USSR collapses. USSR economic bankruptcy exposed. Dominance of Russia; neglect of the interests of other republics. High expenditure on defense, low on infrastructure and technology. Major Events occurred due to USSR fall Fall of berlin wall Many protested against their own govt and crises emerged in socialist bloc. Boris Yeltsin who won popular election in Russian Republic, protested against the coup and central control of USSR. Republics like Russia, Ukraine, Belarus emerged powerful. They declared that the soviet union was disbanded. Thus lead to power shift in international system. Frenchman Fukuyama in his book “The End of History and the Last Man” referred to the collapse of the Soviet Union as the ‘end of history’. Francis Fukuyama argues that “with the ascendancy of Western liberal democracy—which occurred after the Cold War (1945–1991) and the dissolution of the Soviet Union (1991)—humanity has reached “not just" the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: That is, the end-point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government”. View From South Most of the Asian & African countries were being decolonized. The process accelerated after WWII as European powers suffer from decimated economies and legitimacy. Spread of nationalism(intense political identify shared amongst a certain group of people. These newly independent country made their way by joining NAM. The Non-Aligned Movement and Pressure for a New International Economic Order. ‘Third World’ states wished to be non-aligned from both USA and USSR. NAM: movement founded in 1955 by countries some are now emerging economies, other have fallen into humanitarian crisis. Contemporary International Order: 1989-Present From the Unipolar Era to the Return of Great Power Politics. Globalization and its Discontents and the Prevalence of International Terrorism. Contemporary world has alternative centers of power.

UNIT-2 Approaches to Political Theory: Normative, Historical and Empirical The discussion of political science remains incomplete unless the political theory is properly discussed. Normative Theory Normative approach in political science is mainly concerned with political theory. The normative approach offers a unique structure to get the complete notion of 'what ought to be' against the idea of the empirical approach called as 'what is.' It is a kind of political theory through which certain formulas are given for transformation of an imperfect social order to a perfect one. Normative theory is a systematic thinking about government, state and other government institution. This theory has been dominated from the ancient time to the eighteen century. It is a practical philosophy that relates to the government. Example- Suppose you are very ill and you go to the doctor with that illness and the doctor prescribe you some medicines. As per the doctor’s prescription you ate medicines for a few days and got better. Normative political theory is like a doctor’s prescription where some way is said about what an ideal state or society should be. And through implementation of that way, a sick state system will be healed. That’s why this political theory also called as prescriptive political theory. Historical Theory Theorists who developed this political approach focused on historical factors like the age, place, and the situation in which it evolved are taken into consideration. This approach is related to history and emphasizes the study of the history of every political reality to analyze any situation. Political thinkers like Machiavelli, Sabine, and Dunning considered that politics and history are closely related, and the study of politics should always have a historical standpoint. History provides details of the past as well as it also links it with present events. History gives the chronological order of every political event and thereby helps in the future estimation of events. History Provides Roots to Political Science: It is important to situate political phenomena within a historical context because it helps one understand when, why and where they were articulated for the first time. Example - It is often said that history tends to repeat itself. Thus, it can be understood as a lesson. Humanity should collectively avoid issues that were a cause of turmoil in the past and can also take recourse to a set of actions that were applied in the past to deal with those issues. Like why it is important to read history? Empirical Theory / Modern Theory Empirical theory has emerged in the 20th century. That is why this theory is called modern. The empirical theory relies primarily on data. This theory is based on observation and examination of the data. The main purpose of empirical political theory is to make political reality dependent on information. This theory wants to explain what is actually happening, to the one who exists. What is supposed to be or should be is not so much a matter of this theory. This theory is developed by nurturing the philosophy of empiricism or positivism. One of the main aims of this theory is to arrive at conclusions through scientific interpretation of information. That is why it is also called scientific theory. Example - Peasants are protesting against government. Why they are protesting? What are the reasons behind these protests? To find out the reasons of women’s protest, you have to do some field works like collecting data, observing ,generalizing ,etc. Conclusion Political Theory is a separate area within the discipline of political science. Political theory is an outline of what the political order is about. It is symbolic representation about the word ‘political’. It is a formal, logical and systematic analysis of the processes and consequences of political activity. There are different approaches which explains the political system which includes modern and traditional approaches. In behavior approach, scientific method is emphasized because behaviors of several actors in political situation is capable of scientific study. Normative approach is linked to philosophical method because norms and values can be determined philosophically.