TyroCity: Political Theory Notes

What is welfare state?

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

Welfare state is also known as positive state or social service state. It rejects the concepts of individual where the business of the state is to protect but not to promote. So, it discards the policy of a totalitarian state. The welfare of the people, being the major aim of the state, can be accomplished only when the fundamental liberties of the people are provided by the state.

But some refuse the necessities and utility of the welfare state and consider the concept as the instruments of exploitation and oppression. Whereas some consider it as the noblest expression of human purpose and an essential institution by which all type of progress can be achieved. It guarantees the essential liberties to the people and respects them with sincere intent.

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.

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.

Classical Political Science

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

From ancient Greek period into late 19th or early part of 2oth century traditionalism in scholarship was maintained.

After early 20th century as said by David Easton changes in values, norms and perspectives in the discipline. A reform in methodology and approach.

Machiavelli (Renaissance political thinker), Hobbes, Locke, etc developed new thinking but were classified under traditional view.

Four bases of Classical PS or four values and approaches.

Historical – historical facts and values, historical decision and method influenced much, comparative study and appraisal of constitutions reliable in historic decision.
Analytical – analysis of political facts and views, comparative and analytical study of political subjects like state, law, sovereignty, rights, justice, etc.
Normative or prescriptive – ideals, what ought to be, guidance, explanation and special study of political ideals, norms and values replaced with timely need
Descriptive or taxonomical – Since 1903 after est. APSA, appraisal of political org., distribution and use of power.

Nature of the welfare state

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

Welfare is not a charity but its right. The citizen of the state should accept it as the right and he/she has to ask for it. Welfare shouldn’t be accepted as facilities obtained by the hope from the state.
It should maintain the welfare environment. Until and unless people can’t accept the concept of welfare state, it should be performing various welfare activities.
It should eradicate the pauper mentality of the people. It should encourage the characteristic of self help and self motive among the people every time.

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.

System of law

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

Kautilya did not view law to be an expression of the free will of the people. Thus sovereignty – the authority to make laws, did not vest with citizens. Laws were derived from four sources – dharma (scared law), vyavhara (evidence), charita (history and custom), and rajasasana (edicts of the King). In case of conflict amongst the various laws, dharma was supreme. The ordering of the other laws was case specific Rajasasana ordered the relationship between the three major social groupings – the citizen, the association, and the state. The constitutional rules at the state level were specified in the rajasasana but the constitutional rules at the level of the association were to be decided by the members of the association. The collective choice and the operational level rules of the association were also decided by the members of the association though the state did promulgate laws to safeguard the individual member from the tyranny of the majority in the association. Arthasastra outlines a system of civil, criminal, and mercantile law. For example the following were codified : a procedure for interrogation, torture, and trial, the rights of the accused, what constitutes permissible evidence, a procedure for autopsy in case of death in suspicious circumstances, what constitutes defamation and procedure for claiming damages, valid and invalid contracts.

Decentralisation

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

“Decentralisation is usually referred tas the transfer of powers from central government tlower levels in a political-administrative and territorial hierarchy . This official power transfer can take twmain forms. Administrative decentralisation, alsknown as deconcentration, refers ta transfer tlower-level central government authorities, or tother local authorities whare upwardly accountable tthe central government (Ribot 2002). In contrast, political, or democratic, decentralisation refers tthe transfer of authority trepresentative and downwardly accountable actors, such as elected local governments” (Larson).

“The term decentralisation is used tcover a broad range of transfers of the “locus of decision making” from central governments tregional, municipal or local governments” (Sayer et al.).
Decentralization reform refers t“transforming the local institutional infrastructure for natural resource management on which local forest management is based” (Ribot).
“Decentralization is “the means tallow for the participation of people and local governments” (Morell).
Decentralization is transferring the power from the federal tregional level or delivering management functions tother authorities. Decentralization in decision making including in forest management: user-defined functions being transferred tothe private sector, and arrangements for the Forest Fund are transferred tthe regions/administrative units of the Federation, which are badly prepared timplement these rights (Malysheva).
“Definitions of the different types of decentralization vary and the same terms are sometimes used in inconsistent ways in the literature on the subject”.

The paper by Gregersen, Contreras-Hermosilla, White and Phillips adopts the following definitions:

“Political decentralization: Groups at different levels of government–central, mesand local–are empowered tmake decisions related twhat affects them.
Administrative decentralization: Different levels of government administer resources and matters that have been delegated tthem, generally through a constitution. In terms of decentralization as a process of change, and according tthe level of transfer of responsibilities, it is useful tdistinguish between deconcentration, delegation and devolution.
Fiscal decentralization. In this case, previously concentrated powers ttax and generate revenues are dispersed tother levels of government, e.g., local governments are given the power traise and retain financial resources tfulfill their responsibilities.
Market decentralization: Government privatizes or deregulates private functions, such as occurred in the case of New Zealand forest sector”. (World Bank 2000 in Gregersen et al.) http://www.worldbank.org/publicsector/decentralization/admindecen.htm
“In Bolivia, decentralization of forest management was strongly linked ttwongoing processes initiated in the mid-1990s. The first sought tinstitutionalize social participation as part of a broader process of institutional reform of municipalities, and the second was aimed at reforming the forest regulations dating from the mid-1970s. Both have been interlinked through promoting a larger involvement of municipal governments in a wide range of forestry-related issues since the second half of the 1990s” (Pacheco).
“Decentralization of forest management in Guatemala has taken the form of “municipalization”, or deconcentration, as a highly centralized forest regulatory system has been delegated tmunicipalities” (Elias and Wittman).
Decentralization is transforming the local institutional infrastructure on which local forest management is based. Three basic elements of decentralization are accountability, discretionary power, and security (Ribot).
“Decentralization in Zimbabwe’s forest sector has been varied depending on the tenurial status of the land on which the woodlands are found. In protected forest zones, collaborative resource management regimes have only recently been introduced. Collaborative resource management is a variant of decentralization in which communities residing at the margin of state forests can access a limited set of products from the forests” (Hlambela and Kozanayi).
“Decentralization means thand over political, financial and administrative authority from central local (district/city) governments, that the government can facilitate and guarantee better public services for the people. Decentralization of the forestry sector should, however, be viewed as a positive development bring public services closer the people through managing forest resources in a sustainable manner for the community’s welfare” (Ministry of Forestry, Indonesia). As mentioned above, there are various types of decentralization such as deconcentrating, devolution and delegation.

Methods of Elections

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

There are two methods of electing representatives. They are:

Direct Methods of Election
Indirect Methods of Election

Direct Methods of Election

It is very simple process. Voters directly participate in election and elect their representatives of legislature, especially of the people’s chamber (House of Commons in UK and Parliament in India, House of Representatives in USA and Nepal).

Direct election makes people conscious of their rights and duties.

A direct contact between the electors and their representatives stimulates interest in public affairs, develop the sense of public spirit and sharpens the political intelligence and political vigilance of the people, though this method sometimes has been opposed by some political thinkers mentioning that all voters are not the best judges, inactive and uneducated voters could be used through political propaganda and cheap election campaign process, etc.

Indirect Methods of Election

When voters do not directly participate in the election of their representatives, only an intermediary body which alone will make the final choice, he method of election is called indirect. This intermediary body of electors is usually known as an electoral college. This method involves double elections.

General mass of voters first elect a small group of electors and then these electors elect the final representatives. This system limits the power of the general voters, but the selected electors’ superior intelligence and political knowledge could choose best one without any party propaganda.

But the indirect method of election in the modern period has neither gained much favor nor has educative value rather is undemocratic and politically inexpedient.

The Scope of State Functions

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

Minimal Functions

1.Providing pure public goods

2.Defense, Law and order

3.Property rights

4.Macroeconomic management

5.Public health

6.Improving equity

7.Protecting the poor

Intermediate Functions

Addressing externalities
Education, environment
Regulating Monopoly
Overcoming imperfect education
Insurance, financial regulation
Social Insurance

Activist Functions

Industrial policy
Wealth redistribution

Criticism on Democracy

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

It sometimes leads to establish the majority view over the minority view.
Party leaders and political office holders in government control the citizens and the members of the party.
It does not encourage individuals to give their opinions.
It is a very expensive form of government because elections have to be conducted periodically to various office.
It is difficult to prevent corruption and malpractices.
It is also known as government by amateurs and lead to domination of masses.

Plato’s Concept of Justice

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

The Greek word for justice is ‘Diakusune’ which has a wider implication than the English word justice and comes very near to the English word morality.
It represents to do the right thing.
Amateurish meddlesomeness (indicating sophists), factious (unnatural or artificial) spirit and political selfishness which characterized the contemporary Athens.
This led Plato to formulate the concept of justice based on self-less devotion to the State on the lines of functional specialization.
The division of society into three classes and the confinement of each class to its own specialized function was calculated as Plato to remove the causes of political struggle and to lead to real unity and harmony in the state.
Plato reviews a number of traditional and other theories of justice representing successive stages in the growth of nations about morality and justice.

1. Conventional Idea or Traditional Theory of Justice

For old Cephalus, justice and morality meant being true in word and deed, paying ones debts in time and to be honest towards God.
His Son Polemarchus slightly modified this definition by saying that justice consists in giving each person his due (needs) and what is proper to him.
According to Polemarchus, Justice is doing goods to friends and evil to enemies.
For old Cephalus, justice and morality meant being true in word and deed, paying ones debts in time and to be honest towards God.
His Son Polemarchus slightly modified this definition by saying that justice consists in giving each person his due (needs) and what is proper to him.
According to Polemarchus, Justice is doing goods to friends and evil to enemies.
Virtue makes a man good. Plato analyzed virtue in the constituent elements of wisdom, courage and common desires.
Justice is ‘architectonic in relation to other’s excellence and is necessary for their perfection.
Justice is thus not purely a personal virtue but has a social side too.
It is a bond of societies and states, holding men together in healthy social relationships by making them good and perfect for social order.

2. Radical Theory of Justice

Thrasymachus, a sophist, gave the radical theory of justice.
He represented the new and critical views about the nature of justice and morality.
He did not believe in traditional view of justice.
According to him, “In all states, there is same principle of justice which is the interest f the government.
The government must be supposed to have power.
The only reasonable conclusion is that everywhere there is one principle of justice, which is the interest of the stronger’.
From Tharsymachus’ points of view, it can be concluded that:
- Justice means just for one man i.e. the ruler must be just for all;
- Justice is the decision of the stronger;
- Those who breaks laws should be severely punished.
Thus justice is obeying powerful authority according to Thrasymachus.
To this view of Thrasymacus, Plato replies that justice is always better than injustice and a decision of powerful ruler cannot be categorized as justice.
So justice is not the interest of the stronger.
The governors are just the shepherds to protect their sheep and exist for the good of the governed.
Justice produces social harmony by developing socially expedient behavior.
Stronger one could be dictator without reason, i.e., injustice.

3. Pragmatist Theory of Justice (Executive Theory/Pragmatic Theory)

Glaucon and Adiemantus, as pragmatist say that
- The state is born of a compact based on mutual fear and not on universal moral principles.
- The state is a conventional and not natural organization so morality is only a second best thing.
- Justice should be created for man’s comforts, a product of convention and custom.
- Justice is an artificial thing, it is external and is executed.
- So justice is a necessity of weaker not the interest of the stronger as radicals say.
But Plato here also denies that justice is conventional and therefore something external.
According to him, justice depends upon neither conventional nor external force, it is the right condition of human soul and is something internal, depending on human virtue.
It exists both in the state-hence his portrayal of the ideal state and in the individual too.
Having reviewed and dismissed other theories of justice, Plato sets himself through person of Socrates, the task of discovering in his famous book ‘The Republic’.
Justice is the harmonious balancing and operation of life among the three classes in the state.
Plato’s justice means “the will to concentrate on ones own sphere of duty and not to interfere sphere of others.
To Plato, justice is an indispensable quality of moral life in the community.
Plato’s polity is a moral organism and his theory of justice is a theory of ethical code.
Man should get offices according to their ability and to their devotion to their duties to the state.
Ability included moral and intellectual thrust.

The whole conception of justice of Plato is based on the following elements:

Recognition of 3 elements in an individual and the division of society into three classes.
Those three classes representing three elements of reason, spirit and appetite. These three elements are guide to action and bond of union in the state.
Well-regulated scheme of education and training to individuals for their true vocation in life.
Organization of the state on the basis of functional specialization. One man one work creates concentration which strengthens individual efficiency and enriches the life of community.
Freedom of philosopher rulers from labor and private worries and entanglements by as system of communism of property and wives.
The rule of unselfish intellect, it banishes ignorance from politics and leads to political unselfishness.
Emancipation of women enabling them to take their proper place in public life due to the communism of wives.
Plato’s justice is a conception of service and devotion to the state of the individual and not his rights and powers.
An individual exists for and in the sate and has not meaning apart from the state. ‘Man versus the state is incompatible with Plato’s concept of justice.
Plato’s concept of justice conceives of universal and not particular or legalistic justice. It rises above the ‘keen narrow, little and particular legal mind’ which limits the moral life of man to mere conformity to the law of the state.
It refers to the whole duty of ma not merely his legal duties.
Plato’s justice lies in the sphere of morality rather than of law. His concept of justice was of Greek (Metaphysical) rather than Roman (Legal).
To Plato, the essence of social ethics and of justice lies in the concept of “my stations and my duties.”

Comments

In the modern context, Plato’s concept of justice sounds very novel for what it omits and what it includes. It is, in no sense, a juristic or legal definition of justice. Self-control and devotion in the interest of the state is the base of Plato’s justice which lacks the individuals’ rights and the maintenance of these rights through law courts. Justice for him is a social virtue, theory of manners, goodness and moral principles having no sanctions behind them. So it envisages a dull uniformity and harmony in social life.

Professor Popper, Prof. Joad and Crossman comment his concept of justice

Plato’s version of ‘one man, one work’ militates against the full development of human personality and deprives the community of a full and rich variety of life.
Plato’s justice is static and passive.
It is too subjective and does not issue in an objective law for the guidance of people.
Plato’s theory is totalitarian, it leads to the complete subordination of individual to the state.
No equal treatment of the citizens before the law.
No mention about impartiality of the courts of justice, etc.
Plato’s emphasis on justice in all his books is itself a contribution.
Plato too realized his excessive idealism later on and in “The Politicus” and “The Laws,” he gave all citizens a share in political powers in the name of justice.
It is true that Plato’s concept of justice postulates an individual who does not stand isolated but is an active and integral part of a social order.