TyroCity: Political Theory and Thoughts Notes

Saptanga Theory

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

There is not any fixed date found when Kautilya was there on the earth, but a Brahmin named Chanakya, who destroyed Nanda Vansha (dynasty) in the history of India is known as Kautilya.

The main treatise of Kautilya is Arthasastra where he depicts about the state, its nature and a theory of ‘Saptanga’ for the establishment of the strong state. The state is a natural and inevitable institution according to him.
The state is a whole consisting of the following seven interdependent pasts as called ‘Saptanga’ theory.

1. The swami or sovereign: The king as a head of the state is a swami or sovereign.

A good ruler should be equipped with various qualities through meditation, sound education, political training, etc.
A good ruler should always care people and the state.

2. Amatya: Amatya means composition of council of ministers and bureaucracy.

The king should take advice from all ministers, should consult in all matters but the king could take own decision, this is an Machiavelli approach.

3. Janapada: The people and territory, should be suitable and balanced between jana and pada.

4.Forts: Construction of various kinds of forts for the protection of state and king as well.

Especially, the capital should be well fortified and easily defendable against external and internal attacks.
Fort should be self sufficient enough in periods of crisis both internal and external crises.

5. Establishment of strong treasury: Discretion of king in expenditure.

6. Strong army for the state’s defense: Arrangement of punishment through army as well as other forces should exist in the state.

Fear of punishment should be comprehensive to save the state’s sovereignty externally and internally.

7. The ally: Friendship with many countries as far as possible.

Kautilya is sometimes criticized as Eastern Machiavelli who was too power monger.

Comments on Marx

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Sorel, Sidney and Macaver were the commentators on Marx.
Economy is not only the main cause of class struggle, there are other sources of conflicts in society besides economic problems.
Marx’s conception is the ‘over-concentration’ upon economic conflict. Economic mode of production is the ultimate cause of class struggle is difficult to accept.
Human history is not only the history of class struggle, it is difficult to determine the stages of history which corresponds to thesis, antithesis and synthesis. There are other wars in history, such as wars between nations or intra-nations for powers for ethnicity, territory for religions like crusades, etc.
The doctrine of class struggle leads to survival of only one class, i.e., proletariat class in this approach, there is no compromise in tone and democratic version.
Marxian concept of classes is static and rigid.
Dialecticism is the process of development in society, according to Karl Marx, but it would be stopped after the creation of classless and stateless society in his version, which seems most unsuitable for the process of development.
It is dictatorship of revolutionary people not of the whole people, his approach of equality never belongs.
Marx’s prophet of creation of classless and stateless society seems utopia.
Marx theory to some extent is scientific but he has been distorted and twisted time to time.
In his late age, Marx said that ‘I know the only thing that at least I am not Marxist’.

Relationship of political science with history

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Intimately connected: without political events, history is only a literature and without history, political science is only a theory. History is past politics and politics is present history.

According to Seeley, “history without political science has no fruits, political science without history has no root.

History provides raw materials to political science Study of political science is possible in the foundation of history.

History is the laboratory of political science. They are interlinked, they are interdependent and interrelated.

Difference between history and political science

In their method of treatment, history is narrative with chronological orders, but political science particularize the political events, depicts (describes) and analyze.
In scope, history is comprehensive dealing economy, religions, military, social and all aspects but political science deals with state, government authority and political relations.
History deals with concrete fact whereas political science deals with ideal and abstract fact.

Conclusion

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Arthasastra is a very comprehensive treatise on the governance in a monarchical Vedic state. Kautilya had a rational approach to governance and statecraft. He conceptualized the state and the office of the kingship to be human artifacts. Also his model of the human being was very realistic. However he expected super human qualities from a ‘human’ King. Chandragupta, Bindusar and Ashoka matched this ideal but their successors could not. Clearly the system of checks and balances amongst the king, the associations and the citizens worked well as long as the King wanted it to work. The ideal society of the Arthasastra did last for a couple of centuries. However the successful Muslims invasion in the 8th century indicated a serious (military) deficiency in the ‘Hindu’ society. The vision of Kautilya was a creation of a strong and prosperous Vedic order so the foreigner invasions (like that of Alexander) could be repulsed. The success of the Muslim invasion suggested that either the governance by the ‘Hindu’ Kings was not according to the tenets of the Arthasastra or the Arthasastra philosophy itself had become antiquated. Probably both were true. Kings had certainly deviated from the Vedic ideal of a ‘dharmic king’ – the ‘servant’ of the people and the protector of the dharmic order. Varna system had degenerated into a caste system. The rational and dharmic order of the Arthasastra had been reduced to only a shadow of its past glory. Muslim invasion probably found an easy target in a moribund order.

Perquisites of Democracy

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Elections on their own do not make a country democratic
Control over government decisions about policy constitutionally vested in elected representatives.
Elected representatives chosen in frequent and fair elections.
Elected representatives exercise their constitutional powers.
All adults have the right to vote in elections.
All adults have the right to run for public office.
Citizens have the right to express themselves on political matters, defined broadly, without the risk of state punishment.
Citizens have the right to seek out alternative sources of information, such as the news media, and such sources are protected by law.
Citizens have the right to form independent associations and organizations, including independent political parties and interest groups.
Government is autonomous and able to act independently from outside constraints (such as those imposed by alliances and blocs).
Citizens concerns are adequately responded and heard by the government.

The law of Negation of Negation

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Thesis – Antithesis – Synthesis
Direct beginning of class struggle (Nothing would be lost except the chain of your hand).
Victory of proletariat class.
Dictatorship of proletariat class.

The Law of transformation of quantity into quality

Establishment of communism
Creation of classless and stateless society, then no need of state and law, there will be equal law for all without discrimination between classes. So class struggle is a necessity and main route for achieving communism.

Cicero’s Concept of Law of Nature

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

To Cicero, there are two kinds of laws in the state. They are:

Law of nature
The legal enactments of law of the state

Attributes of Law of Nature

Natural law is a single law governing the whole universe.
It is indivisible and ancient.
It is right reason, eternal, immutable (no changeable) and it is the source of state itself.
It is self-imposed and spread among all itself.
Natural law is the law of moral as well as the law of God.
Natural law is not changeable.
There is consistency in natural law, no gap, no deadlock remains forever.
Equal treatment before the eyes of God and common justice, i.e., natural law.
His concept of law of nature is based on the doctrine of the natural equality of man.
Men are not equal in learning, wealth and physical vigor but equal in the possession of reason in their nature as human beings.
Inequality is man mad and not natural.

Three ideas stand out in the political theory of Cicero

1.The authority of the state proceeds from the people.
2.It should be exercised in accordance with law.
3.The exercise of the state authority is justified only on moral grounds.

Cicero gives emphasis on world unity, universal law, moral law and law of God which remained as a dominant factor over the whole medieval period.

Devolution

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Devolution, refers to:

“The transfer of ‘natural resource management to local individuals and institutions located within and outside of government’ though some people use ‘devolution’ only in reference to direct community transfers” (Larson)
“The transfer of rights and assets from the centre to local governments or communities. All of these processes occur within the context of national laws that set the limits within which any decentralised or devolved forest management occurs”.
“The transfer of governance responsibility for specified functions to sub-national levels, either publicly or privately owned, that are largely outside the direct control of the central government” (Ferguson and Chandrasekharan).
“One form of administrative decentralization which transfers specific decision making powers from one level of government to another (which could be from lower level to higher level of government, in the case of federations, or government transfers decision-making powers to entities of the civil society. Regional or provincial governments, for example, become semi autonomous and administer forest resources according to their own priorities and within clear geographical boundaries under their control. Most political decentralization is associated with devolution”.

John Locke

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Born in England, at period of glorious revolution. It was a bloodless revolution, slowly transfer of the King’s power to the parliament , to solve the political problems of then England and supporting this revolution Locke wrote book ‘Two treatise on Civil Government.’ There is description of constitutional limited government means limited and liberal democracy.

State of nature was of pre-political condition rather than pre-social. Men were descent, orderly, social, capable of ruling themselves.

Feeling of brotherhood and justice and natural law. Peace, goodwill, mutual assistance and preservation. But people felt lack of three political needs.

To execute the natural law
To interpret the natural law

3. To punish the breaker of law

So they came into the social contract to fulfill their needs through limited government. Contract was of each with all, so it was trust or fiduciary.

They contracted to have majority rule based on the consent of the people. Contract was irrevocable.
Contract was for limited government. Locke regards state and government as two distinct entities and government is an agent of society which is created to promote the general good and social welfare.
He provides for an effective government imposing some restraints upon its power so that it may not be abused.
His sovereignty is divided, not indivisible (divided into executive, legislature, judiciary, and federation). He resorts to the theory of separation of powers.
His sovereignty is limited not absolute. Government can be dissolved through periodic elections which are provided for to enforce the responsibility of the executive to the people.
His state was tolerant (not to interfere people’s idea and consents).
Government should manage to secure to each individual – his life, liberty, and property.
Government should be established to provide a standard interpretation of the law of nature.
Government, to provide an impartial authority which shall settle all the disputes arising among persons in accordance with laws.
Thus Locke preferred the liberal democratic form to secure the principle of consent through constitutional monarch. Governments’ form may vary from time to time, the state remains the same forever.

Aristotle General Background

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) was born at Stagira, a Greek city state in 384 B.C. in a family of Royal Physician.
He was a man of comfortable means and believed in the necessity of private property and family.
Aristotle entered Plato’s Academia at the age of 17 and studied for 20 years. His philosophy was shaped during that 20 years time.
Aristotle established a school named Lyceum in 335 B.C. It became the intellectual center of Hellas, the Greek people.
He wrote a book named ‘The Politics’.
He is bridge between orient and occident.
He explored 150 countries and studied the Constitution of 150 countries.
He was realist in thought and action in contrast to his teacher Plato who was idealist in thought and action.
His method of study was inductive method. As per the inductive method, specific observation leads to general conclusion.

Introduction to John Stuart Mill

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

About John Stuart Mill

Born in England.
Studied different great man’s life.
Inspired by utilitarian theory of Jeremy Bentham
Many article at times but main is ‘On Liberty’ in 1959. He has dealt about democracy, woman’s freedom, need of bicameral legislature and maximum exercise of liberty by the reasonable people.
‘On Liberty’ is a worldwide and famous book.

Contemporary Theories of the State

Political Theory Notes — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Marxism
For Marxist theorists, the role of modern states is determined or related to their position in capitalist societies. Many contemporary Marxists offer a liberal interpretation of Marx’s comment in The Communist Manifesto that the state is but the executive committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.

Ralph Miliband argued that the ruling class uses the state as its instrument to dominate society by virtue of the interpersonal ties between state officials and economic elites. For Miliband, the state is dominated by an elite that comes from the same background as the capitalist class.

State officials therefore share the same interests as owners of capital and are linked to them through a wide array of interpersonal and political ties.

By contrast, other Marxist theorists argue that the question of who controls the state is irrelevant. Heavily influenced by Gramsci, Nicos Poulantzas, a Greek neo-Marxist theorist argued that capitalist states do not always act on behalf of the ruling class, and when they do, it is not necessarily the case because state officials consciously strive to do so, but because the ‘structural’ position of the state is configured in such a way to ensure that the long-term interests of capital are always dominant.

Poulantzas’ main contribution to the Marxist literature on the state was the concept of ‘relative autonomy’ of the state. While Poulantzas’ work on ‘state autonomy’ has served to sharpen and specify a great deal of Marxist literature on the state, his own framework came under criticism for its ’structural functionalism.’

Pluralism

While neo-Marxist theories of the state were relatively influential in continental Europe in the 1960s and 1970s, pluralism, a contending approach, gained greater adherence in the United States. Within the pluralist tradition, Robert Dahl sees the state as either a neutral arena for contending interests or its agencies as simply another set of interest groups.

With power competitively arranged in society, state policy is a product of recurrent bargaining. Although pluralism recognizes the existence of inequality, it asserts that all groups have an opportunity to pressure the state. The pluralist approach suggests that the state’s actions are the result of pressures applied for both polyarchy and organized interests.

Institutionalism

Both the Marxist and pluralist approaches view the state as reacting to the activities of groups within society, such as classes or interest groups. In this sense, they have both come under criticism for their ‘society-centered’ understanding of the state by scholars who emphasize the autonomy of the state with respect to social forces.

In particular, the “new institutionalism,” an approach to politics that holds that behavior is fundamentally molded by the institutions in which it is embedded, asserts that the state is not an ‘instrument’ or an ‘arena’ and does not ‘function’ in the interests of a single class. Scholars working within this approach stress the importance of interposing civil society between the economy and the state to explain variation in state forms.

“New institutionalist” writings on the state, such as the works of Theda Skocpol, suggest that state actors are to an important degree autonomous. In other words, state personnel have interests of their own, which they can and do pursue independently (at times in conflict with) actors in society. Since the state controls the means of coercion, and given the dependence of many groups in civil society on the state for achieving any goals they may espouse, state personnel can to some extent impose their own preferences on civil society.

‘New institutionalist’ writers, claiming allegiance to Weber, often utilize the distinction between ‘strong states’ and ‘weak states,’ claiming that the degree of ‘relative autonomy’ of the state from pressures in society determines the power of the state—a position that has found favor in the field of international political economy.