TyroCity: Political Theory 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.

Deconcentration

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

Deconcentration, is the term referring to:

“The process by which the agents of central government control are relocated and geographically dispersed” (Sayer et al.).
“Administrative decentralization, i.e. a transfer to lower-level central government authorities, or to other local authorities who are upwardly accountable to the central government” (Ribot 2002 in Larson).
“The transfer of administrative responsibility for specified functions to lower levels within the central government bureaucracy, generally on some spatial basis” (Ferguson and Chandrasekharan).
“One of administrative decentralization which redistributes decision-making authority and financial and management responsibility among levels of the central government; there is no real transfer of authority between levels of government. It may involve only a shift of responsibilities from federal forest service officials of the capital city to those stationed in provinces, districts, etc”.

Introduction to Karl Marx

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

Karl Marx was born in Germany, exiled to Paris, met there Engels (a life long friend), both again left Paris and went to Belgium and at last they reached to England and lived there life-long where real democracy was prevailed. They began to live, think, analyze, express their ideas freely and frankly staying in the Museum of London. Marx wrote many treatise (articles), essays and writings, the main are the Communist Manifesto (1848) and Das Capital (1867).

Marx was both social scientist and political philosopher. For Marx, matter is the basis of all things, matter is the ultimate truth which brings ideas and changes everywhere. It is the matter or mode of production which created classes. Man is the root cause of all evolution and devolution so state is not natural but artificial association which was created by the creation of classes.

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’.

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.

Relation between Political science and Sociology

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

Sociology is parent science of all social sciences so sociology is the fundamental social science. Political science is subdivision of sociology—former originated after the origin of organized society and sociology originated even in the era of unorganized society—even in pre-social life.

Political science has widened its scope to a good understanding of both the nature of society and the behavior of the individual which is merely a subject of sociology.

According to Prof. Giddings, “to teach the theory of the state to men who had not learned the first principles of sociology is like teaching astronomy or thermodynamics to men who have not learnt the Newtonian laws of motion.”

Revolution and social upheavals occur in society which affect political system, but to solve such social problems, government actions are to be regulated.

Types of Democracy

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

Direct Democracy- all citizens, without the intermediary of elected or appointed officials, can participate in making public decisions.
Indirect Democracy – DelegaLve/Representative
Lite Democracy – Illusive Democracy
Constitutional Democracy

Kinds of Sovereignty

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

Sovereignty can be classified into different kinds. This classification is based on the location of sovereignty.

Titular Sovereignty: By titular sovereignty we mean sovereignty by the title only. It refers to the sovereign powers of the king or monarch who has ceased to exercise any real authority. In theory he may still posses all the powers but in practice some other person or body of persons enjoys sovereign power. Titular sovereign is only a symbol of authority, a legacy of past. Britain presents a good example of titular sovereign. The king is the titular head and he does not enjoy any real powers. Actual powers are enjoyed by council of ministers and parliament. In India president is a titular sovereign and the cabinet is a real sovereign.

De Facto and De Jure Sovereignty: De facto sovereignty indicates to a sovereign who without legal support or constitutional support enjoys sovereign power. De jure sovereign is recognized by law or the constitution, but not in position to practice its power. In case of revolutions, that is a successful overthrow of Theory of Sovereignty, by the existing regime in a state tree may be de facto and de jure sovereigns. For example when Mussolini came to power in Italy in 1922, de facto sovereignty passed into his hands although Victor Emmanual was the de jure sovereign. The military dictatorship of the present world, established after a coup d’etate also represents de facto sovereignty until it evolves suitable means to legitimize its authority. Usually de facto and de jure sovereign stay together for a very short period and the de facto sovereign tries to become De Jure sovereign. The de facto and de jure sovereigns should ultimately coincide; otherwise there is danger of conflict between them. New laws are made in order to give him definite status to the de facto sovereign to give it legal support.

Legal and Political Sovereignty: Distinction is some times drawn between legal and political sovereignty. The sovereign is supposed to be absolute and omnipotent. It functions according to its own will. Law is simply the will of sovereign. There is none to question its validity. Legal sovereign grants rights to its citizens and there can be no rights against him. It means rights of citizens depend on the will of legal sovereign and any time he can take away. Legal sovereign has characteristic as detailed below.

The legal sovereignty is always definite and determinate. Legal sovereignty may reside either in one person or in a body of persons. It is definitely organized, precise and known to law.

Rights of citizen are gift of legal sovereign; The will of state is expressed by the legal sovereign only; Legal sovereignty is absolute. It cannot be question. But behind the legal sovereignty there is another power, which is unknown to law. It is political sovereignty. In practice absolute and unlimited authority of the legal sovereignty does not exist anywhere. Even a dictator cannot act independently and exclusively. The will of legal sovereignty is actually sharpened by many influences, which are unknown to law. All these influences are the real power behind the legal sovereign; and this is called political sovereignty. As Professor Gilchrist says- “The political sovereign is the sum total of the influences in the state which lie behind the law.” Law does not know the political sovereignty. In modern representative democracies the political sovereignty is very often identified with either the whole mass of he people or with electorate or with public opinion. The legal sovereign cannot act against the will of political sovereign. Dicey says that “body is politically sovereign which the lawyers recognize there is another sovereign to whom the legal sovereign bow- that body is political sovereignty; that which is ultimately obeyed by the citizens of the state.” A lot of confusion arises when we attempt the exact definition of political sovereignty. It is a vague and indeterminate and cannot be located with exactness. It is suggested by some writers that there is no justification for making a distinction between legal and political sovereignty, as that involves the division of sovereignty, which is not possible.

Popular Sovereignty: When the sovereignty resides in the people of he state it is called as popular sovereignty. This theory was expounded by Rousseau, when later became the slogan of French Revolution. The doctrine of popular sovereignty regards people as the supreme authority. It is people who decide right or wrong. People are not bound by any natural or divine law. Government exists only as a tool for the good of the people. It should be held directly responsible to the people. It can exercise authority only on the basis of the law of land. Will of the people should not be ignored popular sovereignty is the basis of modern democratic system.

Introduction to Concept of Good Governance in Modern Regime

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

The concept of good governance is modern device for better functioning of democracy. Democracy cannot function properly in absence of good governance. Democracy without good governance is like democracy of Plato who defines democracy as “rule of crowd.” The scheme of good governance helps to make democratic government stable, consolidated and positive.

According to Michel Camdessus (Former Managing Director of IMF), good governance is confined to “surveillance over macro-economic policies, transparency of government accounts, effectiveness of public resource management and the stability and transparency of economic and regulatory environment for private sector activity.”

Theories on Origin of State

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

Theories of Origin of State are as below:

Theory of Divine Origin
Force Theory
Social Contract Theory
Evolutionary Theory/Historical Theory

Theory of Divine Origin
This is the oldest theory concerned in the origin of state. According to this theory, state is established and governed by God himself by agent or vicegerent or vicar of God. The chief exponent of this theory in early times were the Jews and supporters were the early church father.

This theory was used especially in medieval period to establish the supremacy of the church over the state. The divine origin theory took the form of the theory of the divine right of the king. James I, the first stuart King who said that “Kings are he breathing images of God upon the earth,” and Sir Robert Filmer good examples. Bousset in France elaborated this theory supporting the despotism of Luis XIV, who proudly declared, “I am the state having full authority directly given by God.”

People have no right to rebel against the King, if so it is against the God himself.

Some of the basic tenets of this theory are:

1.Monarchy is divinely ordained.
2.Hereditary right is indefeasible that means cannot be taken away.
3.Kings are accountable to God alone
4.Resistance to a lawful king is sin.

According to this doctrine, king began to become despot and tyrant. With the growing political consciousness and rise of democratic ideas, this theory was rejected as unsound in theory and dangerous in practice. It got death blow at the hands of Grotius, Hobbes and Locke. Some moral values can be extracted from this theory.

Force Theory

According to this theory, state is the result of the superior physical force and subjugation of the weaker section by the stronger. Physical strength was able to overcome fellow men and to exercise authority over them. Some superior tribes and clans also did so. Then state came into being through physical coercion and compulsion, according to this theory.

As per this theory, war begets the state and Oppenheim, Jenks and many other supports this view. This theory only emphasizes force and accepts that state is the product of coercion and force only. But force must have been an important factor in the evolution of state but to think it as an only one factor is a mistake. Several other factors, such as, voluntary amalgamation as by force and conquest, as a result of conciliation and agreement, by one another’s cooperation and other peaceful agencies and efforts, etc.

Force is an important element for both internal and external security of the state but it is not only the cause for the origination of the state. Might only cannot go ahead permanently. It should follow its path with a positive weapon of right. Force is a physical power while right is a mental power, both should go together in the origination of the state, of course there was strong arms but only with the support of other elements according t MacIver. In the words of MacIver, “Force along never holds a group together.” So force is one of the component for the state origination but not whole sole cause.

Social Contract Theory

According to this theory, state is the result of a deliberate and voluntary contract of primitive man emerging from a state of nature. Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau are the main supporters of this theory. State of nature was even pre-social. According to Hobbes, it was solitary, nasty and brutish. State came into being by the social contract with the surrender of power to absolute monarchy.

According to Locke, “State of nature was pre-political and everything was regulated by natural law, but to execute that law state was originated from the social contract and people chose the constitutional government and limited monarchy.

According to Rousseau, “State of nature was peaceful, carefree life, happiness, but after the advent of economic need, social strife began and society became pre-social.

The state was originated through social contract with the agreement to govern the state under “general will” on the basis of popular sovereignty.

Thus contract was both social contract and governmental or political contract. The objectives of the contract were to secure the life and property of the people. Contract was with one another and with all.

All contractualists justify the conceptions that governmental authority if it is to be legitimate must rest ultimately on the consent of the government.

This theory emphasizes upon the fact that state is man-made by the contract especially to provide protection to the people, it is an artificial creation not natural. And government authority is restrained upon by man’s natural freedom.

This theory has been criticized on three bases:

1. Historical: It seems only historical fiction not historical truth. There is no trace in any history about such contract.

2. Legal: Contract has no legal binding force. State of nature cannot create legal bindingness of contract.

3. Philosophical: Voluntary relations of individual and state seems unreasonable.

Membership in the state could not be voluntary, if so state becomes like a company. Man is a part of nature and the state is the highest expression of nature.

State is a natural growth and not a manufacture. According to T.H. Green, “the real flaw in this theory of social contract is that it implies the possibilities of rights and obligation independently of society, the basis of rights is social recognition not agreement.”

Some truths could be drawn from this theory is that contract is based on consent of the governed, sovereignty has no right to act arbitrarily which is the basis for modern democracy, the importance of the individual and political authority lies in people.

Evolutionary Theory/Historical Theory

According to this theory, the state is a historical growth and result of a gradual evolution. It is a continuous development, cannot be referred to any single moment of time, circumstance and any event, etc.

According to Burgess, “It is a gradual realization of the universal principles of human nature. There is no single case, place and any trace of deliberate creation of men in the origination of the state, but political consciousness has played its role from early period to modernity in the origination of state.”

State was originated on the basis of various causes and varying condition. They are:

Kinship
Religion
Political Consciousness

Kinship:
Kinship is fact knit together different clans and tribes and gives them unity and cohesion since the early period.

Kin-relationship is one of the factor to develop common consciousness, common interest, and common purpose which ultimately helped to establish intensive social relationship. According to MacIver, “Kinship creates society and society at length creates the states.” In the process of development of kinship patriarchal and matriarchal both societies were experienced and such societies contributed in the origin of the state theory through their authority, military and political and religious privileges and powers, legality and sense of morality, tendency to leadership and subordination and custom which translated into law later.

MacIver says that “custom is at work turning example into precedents and precedents into institutions.

Patriarchal society was followed by feudalism in later period, the idea of this society remained for long period and even after the development of complete society.

Religion
Religion played an important role in creation of social consciousness and social solidarity in the emergence of state.

Sense of common worship and cult of deceased ancestral worship and other kinds of religious ceremony of different tribes developed as sense of social unity and cohesion in the process of origin of the state.

Kinship and religion were so closely intertwined that the patriarch who later became the tribal chief was also the high priest, the guardian of religion, interpreter of customs and often the magic man and even medical man.

He was naturally looked upon with reverence in the society.
He ruled over vast mass with the powerful weapon that is religion.

Political Consciousness

Men in a vast mass of society felt need of the state for the protection of themselves. After their wandering habits and hunting nature, men entered into the pastoral and agricultural life and faced several changes as increase in population, vast religious groups, tribal development, contacts with neighboring people, a sense of harmony, accumulation of wealth in individual and group capacity and advance of economic life, etc.

With those development some sort of organization were formed and they ensured internal order and protection of life and property of the people … it is thus beginning of the origin of the state.

Gradually organizations received mass support and came into intensive form and became an authoritative body to maintain social relationship and defense of private property and private life.

Different forms of authoritative body appeared in different times under the leadership of tribal chief, nobles, religious chief, leaders and kings etc. Thus, such authority helped ultimately to form the state institutions.

State emerged with the emergence of law and government, in the process of kinship, religion and political consciousness and state developed as nation state in the process of political evolution.

Political science and ethics (based on conduct and morality)

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

Political science is the science of political order and ethics is the science of moral order—one is incomplete without other. Plato considers politics as subdivision of ethics, the state to him should train men in a life of virtue.

According to Aristotle, political questions should be solved by man’s highest moral judgment based on ethics.

Politics divorced from ethics rests on a foundation of shifting sand, it leads to commercialization and vulgarization of values and virtues.

According to Ivor Brown, “ethical theory is incomplete without political theory because man is an associated creature and cannot live in isolation.

Political theory is idle without ethical theory because its study and result depends fundamentally on the scheme of moral values, our conception of right and wrong.

Mahatma Gandhi’s version of spiritualization of politics, his application of moral principles are truth, love and non-violence and achievement of God.

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.