MPS 004 Solved Assignment 2020 English
MPS 004 Comparative Politics: Issue and trends
Solved Assignment in English Medium
31 March 2020 / 30 September 2020
तुलनात्मक राजनीति : मुद्दे एवं प्रवृत्तियाँ
For Written Notes and Solved
Assignment Contact us – 8851761957
(What’s app only)
YouTube channel – PS Study Center
Website – Psstudycenter.com
MPS 004 Free Solved Assignment 2020
Q. 3 What is a state? Analyse the difference between Marxist and social contract theory of the origin of states.
Solved Assignment, Notes Contact us – 8851761957 (What’s app only)
The state, being the basic concept Science, has its own significance. Numerous definitions of the state have appeared since the days of the ancient Greeks. There are, in fact, as many meanings state as there are theorists who venture to define it. That the state is an association with population, definite and sovereigntyis a meaning which all liberalsgive to the state. That it is an instrument in the economically dominant class which exploits the have-nots, an executive committee, as Marx had said capitalistic system,of the bourgeoisie to oppress the proletariat. The anarchists, the social democrat, the Gandhi Ans have their own different perspectives state. Thus, different meanings have been given to state by different political philosophies. also are different theories with regard to the origin of the state; so also are different theories with regard to its nature and functions. To understand the concept of state in its totality is to know it from all perspectives.
MEANING OF CONCEPT OF STATE
Etymology of the concept ‘State’
The fact of the existence of the state is older than its name. The state as a word `Stato’ appeared in ltaly in the early part of the sixteenth century. in the writing of Machiavelii (1469-1527). The meaning of the state in the sense ofbody-politics became common in England and France in the later part of the sixteenth century. The word staatnkunst became the German equivalent of ragione de state during the seventeenth century and a little later the word staatscrecht got the meaning of jus publiceem.Thus came the use of the word State.
The word ‘State’ has its origin in the Latin word ‘Statue’ which means ‘standing’ or ‘position’ of a person or a body of persons. The Latin ‘status’, Ernest Barker tells us, gave three English words: (i) ‘estate’, in the sense of a ‘standing’ or ‘position’ in regard to some form of property (ii) ‘Estate’, using the word in the primary sense of a grade or rank in the system of the social standing or position belonging to such grade or rank and ‘State’, stateliness vested in one person or some body of persons … primarily a peculiar standing, of a kind which was political and of a degree in that md hich was superior or supreme. The word ‘State’ came to be understood, during the 16 -17 centuries and even down to the last days of the 18 century, some what identical with the terms ‘sovereign’, ‘king’. No wonder if Louis XIV said, ‘I am the State’. And to this context, Barker adds, “Was he (Louis XIV) not in his own view, as in that of his subjects, the person who enjoyed the ‘State’ and position of being the supreme political authority, and was he not therefore ‘the state.
The use of the word in ancient Greece or the word in ancient Rome or the word ‘commonwealth’, ‘Commonweal’ during the medieval age in the West do not clearly and definitely contain in themselves the idea of stateliness, sovereign political position of a person or a body of persons. This is why these words ‘res ‘commonweal’ meant much more than the pressure of the rulers. These meant, in fact, the whole body of people living on a territory, the rulers forming only one part, though prominent indeed. It was only in the writings of Machiavelli and the theorists after him that the word ‘state’ came in vogue, defining not only the position of the ruler in regard to his subjects, but also the degree of the position the ruler eventually came to obtain. During the later part of the 18 century and the larger part of the 19 century, emphasis came to be laid, owing largely due to. the efforts of the jurists in England and France internal supremacy and external independence of the sovereign authority. As democracy, in the form of franchise, came to be associated with liberal-capitalist system, the concept of the State was itself liberalised to include the great body of people residing in it. Barker pointed out, “The is now whole community; the whole legal association; the whole of the organisation. This is democracy, or a result of democracy; we must henceforth think of the state as ourselves; and we must henceforth give the name of ‘government’ to the authority before called ‘state’.
Solved Assignment, Notes Contact us – 8851761957 (What’s app only)
The marxist theory
MPS 004 Solved Assignment 2020 in hindi –
The best exposition of the of the origin of the state is given by Frederick English in his book Origin of the Family, Private Property and says: ‘The State is, therefore, by no means a power forced in society from without, just as little is it the reality of ‘the ethical idea’, ‘the image and reality’ of reason’, as maintains. Rather, it is a product of society at a certain stage of social development: it is the admission that this society has become entangled in an insoluble contradiction with itself, that is into irreconcilable antagonisms, classes with conflicting economic interests, might not continue themselves and society in sterile struggle, a power seemingly standing above society became necessary for the purpose of moderating the conflict, if keeping it within the bounds of ‘older’ and this power, arisen out of society, but placing itself above it and increasingly alienating itself from it, is the state.’
Engels tells us that the state is not a natural organisation. It has, he says, not existed from all eternity and there have been societies that did without it. The state became a necessity at a certain stage of social development that was a consequence of the cleavage of society into two contending classes. Accordingly, the state is the product of antagonistic classes and it is of the economically dominant class, for its welfare and against the interests of those means of production. The thesis is that with the emergenceand growth private ownership , of the means of production, antagonistic classes arose, and the state emerged for the possessing class and against the non-possessing class. Engels, therefore, concludes: ‘The state is, as a rule, the state of the most powerful, economically dominant class which, through the medium of the state, becomes also the politically dominant class and thus acquires new means of holding down and exploiting the oppressed class. Thus the state of antiquity was above all, the state of the slave-owners for the purposes of holding down the slaves, as the feudal state was the organ of the nobility for holding down the peasants, serfs and lordsmen, and the modem representative state is the instrument of exploitation of wage labour by capital’.
The major aspects of the theory of the origin of the state can be, briefly, summed up as under:
1) The state appears because the antagonistic classes appear; these classes appear because the private ownership of means of production appears.
2) The state is the class society and came at a definite stage of social development.
3) The state, as a class institution, is of the economically dominant class, of the slave-owners, or of the feudal lords and at present is of the capitalists.
4) The state means public power, the legal right to use force.
5) The state power works through its apparatus: bureaucracy, police, courts, jails and the like.
6) For the public power work effectively and the state obtains the right to tax
people, raise loans, and possess property.
The Social contract Theory
A clear-cut and elaborate expression of the social contract theory of the origin f the state is associated with Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, both from England of the 17 century and th Rousseau, from France of the 18 century. The theory holds that the state is the result of man’s deliberate intentions expressed through a in a pre-civil and pre-political period, called the state of nature. The theory, therefore, assumes that there existed a time when there was no and that people lived in the state of nature, meaning thereby a situation when people lived without law, without authority and without government. Hobbes,Locke and Rousseau classified the human society living in two eras: the era of the state of nature, and the era of political They all say that the contract for having the state was concluded by the people in the state of nature. It was after the conclusion of the contract that people left the state of nature and entered into political society. Contract, therefore, is the dividing line. What the three philosophers, the contractualists,convey to us is that in the state of nature, men lived without authority and that in that state of nature, they felt the need of the state, state’s necessity and, therefore, the contract among them and state’s appearance after the contract. It is after the appearance of the state that the distinction between the ruler and the ruled could be made; and the emphasis on state authority or powers of the state came to be laid. There is no agreement among the contractualists on various issues. For example, what was the state of nature, how was the condition of man, why the contract was made, what was the nature of contract, what type of state appeared after the contract -are questions on which the contractualists differed drastically.On what they were to agree is that there was a kind of law in the state of nature, called the natural law; men did possess natural rights. But with regard to the outcome of the contract, Hobbes propounded an omnipotent state, absolute sovereignty; Locke advocated a limited state, political sovereignty; Rousseau talked about a democratic state based on his theory of general will, popular sovereignly,
MPS 004 Solved Assignment 2020 in English
Q. 4 What is Nationalism? What are the different approaches to the study of nationalism?
Nationalism has been called the religion of and centuries.As a way of thinking about the world, it emphasises the importance of nations explaining historical developments and analysing contemporary politics and also claims that ‘national character’ is a pervasive factor differentiating human beings. Nationalism assumesthat all human beings should have one and only one nationality which should be their primary factor of identity and loyalty. This means that people should see themselves as members of a nationality and be prepared to make any sacrifices required to defend and advance the interest of a nation. As a doctrine of universal applicability, nationalism claims that all people should give their highest loyalty to their own nation. claims to represent the will people to be able to decide upon their own destiny, their will to be respected as a to develop their culture and personality.
WHAT IS NATIONALISM
Nationalism is a compound of many factors some of which have their roots in human nature and many of which have a long history. Yet it is a modern phenomenon. To discover it is a difficult undertaking and to define it in succinct phrases is even more difficult. In one sense it is the extension of a group to which one belongs. this sense, it is a form of collective egoism. In negative sense it is a manifestation of that fear of the ‘stranger’ with its roots deep in human nature. In modern sense it of that love of the familiar land and people which is often regarded as the core of patriotism. According to Hayes, nationalism has been used in many different ways and it is commonly used ‘to denote a condition of mind among members of a nationality, perhaps already possessed of a national state, a condition of mind in which loyalty to the ideal or to the fact of one’s national state is superior to all other loyalties and of which pride in one’s nationality and belief in its intrinsic excellence and its’mission’ are ‘integral parts’.
APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF NATIONALISM
During the last 300 years, nationalism has gone through different phases. Rising as a cultural and humanitarian concept, it has been used and misused by different ideologies Liberalism,
Imperialism,Marxism, Fascism etc. It was a potent weapon in the hands of ex-colonial countries in their struggle for national Nationalism has been approached fiom a wide variety of perspectives ranging from liberal-rational to fascist-irrational.The main approaches are as follows:
* Marxist approach to Nationalism
* Integral-Fascist Approach to Nationalism
* Anti-imperialist approach to Nationalism
Liberal Humanitarian Approach to Nationalism
It was the earliest kind of formal nationalism and is found in the writings of Bolinbroke,Rousseau, Herder, Fichte, etc. According to Herder, mankind is divided by nature and by reason into separate nationalities and it is through cultivation of the particular genius of the nationality that both the individual and humanity as a whole make progress towards perfection.Each national organism has its own peculiar individuality, a gift of nature and it is the duty of the individuals who are a part of this organism to cultivate that particular genius. Nationalities are distinguished from one another by historical traditions, by the possession of their own language, literature, system of education, customs and in a well developed nationality by the possession of ‘national soul’. Herder emphasised the cultural part of nationalism, his exposition of what basically must distinguish one nationality from another include factors such as geography, climate, historical traditions, language, literature, education and manners. Similarly, concept of ‘people’ meant a people who share a common language and historical tradition, would have the means and inclination to assert the principle of popularsovereignty and to ensure the operation of political democracy.
Contrary to the vision of thinkers like Mazzini that the war of liberation would result in the achievement of unity and independencefor the nationalities, the victories in the liberal wars brought about the very evils which they were supposed to destroy. Rather they the forerunnersand pioneersof warsmore destructiveand extensivethan before. National unification and democracy intensified international antagonisms and the broad mass of peoples active participants in them. After the industrial revolution had spread to a number of European countries and the American continent. The unified nations now had the cohesion and emotional impetus necessary for policies of conquest-whethercolonial or otherwise. International disputes now became controversies between nations where the interests of the peoples themselves determiningpart. The triumph of nationalismand democracy strengthened the sovereignty of the state and a stepping stone for national expansion beyond its frontiers. This led to a in the theoretical justification of nationalism liberal, humanitarian to ‘scientific’ and biological one. Nationalism was discovered by some writers to have a biological basis and imperialism was discovered to be but a workingout of the evolutionary principle of the struggle for existence and the survival of the fittest. With this change, a scientific justification could be given to imperialist expansion.
Solved Assignment, Notes Contact us – 8851761957 (What’s app only)
The idea of nationalism and the nation-state had a different connotation in Marxism. Marx declared that the societies were divided not on nationalities but on class basis. The purpose of the state is the protection of vested interests of the dominant class and as such the state does not represent the nationality but the class interest. Writing about his own times, Marx emphasised that although the capitalist-liberal state talks of national interest, industrialisation has created a working class which has a universal interest irrespective of nationality, as a of which the concept of nationality is almost dead in industrialised countries. Extreme nationalism is an ideological means which helps in ‘the class domination. It is a fiction created by the bourgeois class and is being used by it just as it used religion, ethics, democracy, science, art or literature. He said that the working class has no nation; it has universal class interest. The salvation of the working class laid in the development of productive forces on a world scale which was not possible in the narrow sphere of nation state. Hence, theoretically, Marx and Engels gave the idea of abolition of nationalities which, according to them, was the creation of middle class ideology.
Integral (Fascist) Approach
In the 19th century, nationalism contributed to the liberation and emancipation movements. At that time it was a progressive doctrine inseparably connected with the democratic universalistic values inherited the French Revolution. However, in the century,this liberal nationalism was replaced by what is known as integral nationalism. This form of nationalism appeared in the writings of Maurice Barres, Charles Maurras, Aurthur de Gonineau, H.S. Chamberlain etc. In the version of integral nationalism found practical embodiment which was imitated and extended on a most ruthless fashion by Hitler and Nazi Germany. It was Maurass who first used this term and defined integral nationalism as ‘the exclusive pursuit of national policies, the absolute maintenance of national integrity and the steady increase in national power’. As a doctrine, this form of nationalism stressed that the individual for the state, serves the state and glorifies the state. It gave an organic concept of state, rejected political democracy and favoured aggressive internationalism as a positive good.
Anti Colonial Approach
In the 20th century, the period between the two world wars, the Russian revolution and the rise of Fascism were important landmarks in the spread of nationalist ideas Europe to the non European lands of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Collectively, they set in motion the process of national liberation movements, as a result of which many countries got independence from
the imperialist powers of Europe. Such revolutionary changes played a vital role in developing a-new form of nationalism. New nations like china, Pakistan, Egypt, Vietnam grew on the world scene which gave a new meaning to the concept of nationalism. The circumstances which gave birth to these nations were quite different from those of the West. These were the countries which were subjugated by imperialist countries like England, France, Spain, Holland etc. and their economies had been exploited. Imperialist countries considered them their private property whom they sold and pilfered. They destroyed their independence and preserved puppet governments which were too weak to do any harm to imperialism.
MPS 004 Solved Assignment 2020 free pdf
Q. 5 Evaluate the impact of Globalization on nature and functioning of states.
lobalization is the word used to describe the growing interdependence of the world’s economies, cultures, and populations, brought about by cross-border trade in goods and services, technology, and flows of investment, people, and information. Countries have built economic partnerships to facilitate these movements over many centuries. But the term gained popularity after the Cold War in the early 1990s, as these cooperative arrangements shaped modern everyday life. This guide uses the term more narrowly to refer to international trade and some of the investment flows among advanced economies, mostly focusing on the United States.
The wide-ranging effects of globalization are complex and politically charged. As with major technological advances, globalization benefits society as a whole, while harming certain groups. Understanding the relative costs and benefits can pave the way for alleviating problems while sustaining the wider payoffs.
Impact of Globalization on nature and functioning of states
IMPACT OF GLOBALISATION ON INTERNAL FUNCTIONING OF STATES
Democratic Decision Making
Questions are also being raised about the impact of globalisationon the internal functioning of nation-states. A central question raised by liberal political theory, closely related to popular sovereignty, is about the impact of globalisation on democratic decision-making. Traditionally liberal theory assumed that there is a symmetrical and congruent relationship between the rulers and the ruled. The former made decisions for the latter based upon notions of majority rule and accountability,and the latter accorded them legitimacy.Nation-states were seen as self-contained units and changes in other states or the international system, except in case of war or an , invasion, were not taken into consideration. The emergence of neo-liberalism has led to the retreat of the state creating more space for civil society and competitive markets, which are not limited to or enclosed within nation states. Moreover, active intervention by agenciessuch as the , World Bank and the IMF leading to Structural Adjustment Programmes and Development Projects,and trade sanctions, aid, military imports etc., to a much greater extent than before has grave implications for democratic decision-making.
A second issue is the coexistence of globalisation and assertions based on ethnic identities, of language, tribe or religion, which is today questioning the concept of a homogenous nation-state based upon a common national sentiment, whether constructed out of long struggles against feudalism and the Church in the West, or colonial rule the developing world. Earlier scholars examining ethnic identities and their relationship with the nation-state believed that ethnic ties were primordial, that is, given from the beginning and fixed,and with modemisation and increasing allocation of roles on the basis of universalistic criteria, they were expected to disappear. Nation states would be able to solve the problem of ethnic minorities over a period of time; and assimilation was not merely social theory, but also a policy goal to be assiduously followed by states.
IMPACT ON STATE SOVEREIGNTY
Two major changes in economic international processes, which have impacted on state sovereignty, have been internationalisationof production and financial transactions organised by Multinational Corporations (MNCs). MNCs in their production and financial transactions plan their activities with the world and not national economies in mind. Even when they have a national base, their interests are global, their activities in their home country being less important. Financial organisations such as MN Banks, which are global in scale and new information technology, have made this possible, and stocks and shares are now ‘mobile’ and move across frontiers easily. So the financial economy is not under the control of the state any longer. Technological advances in communication and transport are eroding the boundaries between national markets, which in the past were the bastion of independent national policies. As a result internal policymaking, investment, employment and revenue within a state is often affected by the activities of MNCs and changes in the world economy.
Solved Assignment, Notes Contact us – 8851761957 (What’s app only)
Challenge from new international organisations
Between the state and the system there have arisen a large number of international. organisations and regimes- new associations – which now manage whole areas of transnational activity (trade, oceans, space) and collective policy problems. In 1909 there were 37 inter-governmental organisations and 176 by 1984 the number has risen to 280 and 4,615 respectively. Consequently, we witnessing new forms of decisionmaking involving a number of states, and a whole array of international pressure groups.
A number of international agencies such as the International Postal Union or Telecom Unions are largely non-political organisatdons.But there are a large number of international organisations such as the World Bank, IMF, UNESCO, UN, which are highly politicised and controversial and over the years their power to in the internal affairs of states has increased.
Challenge from International law
Changes in international law have introduced new forms of regulations, rights and duties which act as constraints on states. These are not backed by any coercive power but despite that are important enough for states to obey them. Traditionally a rule that upheld state sovereignty was the immunity of individuals and state agencies from being tried in a court in any other country.
Ignou free solved assignment
Q. 7 (a) Patterns of anti – colonial struggles.
(b) Gandhian perspective on the Morden state.
Ans. (a) Patterns of anti – colonial struggles
It was the sense of being deprived and exploited that disillusioned the subject peoples. After the establishment of the colonial rule the modernist elite took the lead in opposing the colonial rule. They sought to unite the people on one platform and demanded of the rulers the right to be heard and be equally treated. Their tone was initially moderate, but later extremist wings grew up out of frustration. For three decades beginning from the end of the nineteenth century, for instance, revolutionary nationalist movement (that the British called ‘terrorist’) was powerful in India.During and after World War violent strategies were widely followed in the anti-colonial movements in Asia and Africa.
There remained collaborators of the ruling regimes across the conservative and the modernist camps as there were both the segments of the native societies. Needless to mention that the collaborators were the beneficiaries and the opponents were the disillusioned people at a given time. Nevertheless anti- colonial movements kept in growing, though not necessarily in similar ways.
India as the Model
The Indian National Congress that sought to unite the Indians on a loyal but critical platform drew into its fold the elite from sections of the Indian society and even some compassionate European subjects of the British Its leadership was essentially upper middle class professional, but it included and was backed by several landlords and adversary of the Raj. At the end of the nineteenth century emerged an extremist wing a section of which resorting to revolutionary violence. After World War I Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi turned the Indian Congress into a mass part and, through a non – violent resistance, challenged the might of the British Empire. Not with standing the departure of several groups from its fold the strength of the Indian National Congress steadily so much so that the British had to hand over power to this organisation.A very special combination mass politics and ‘constitutionalism’ was the characteristic of this struggle.
The Sacred Versus the Secular
In the 1880s a religion-based, prdphetic, anti-colonial struggle broke out in Sudan -the Mahdist (deliverer). In certain other parts of the Muslim world a revival of the puritanic Wahabi movement took place. The combined effect of these movements was the rise of a Pan – Islamism Its anti-West tenor combined with the Muslim resentment on the humiliation of the Sultan of Turkey, the of the Islamic world, to produce the Khilafat agitation that had a great impact in India and Afghanistan. In the Muslim world, however, pan-Islamism had an adversary in In several Arab countries there was resentment against the Turkish Empire. During World War this resentment was encouraged and made use of by the British who found Turkey in the opposite camp led by Germany. The result was the creation of a number of ‘mandated territories’ for, the Arabs under the Anglo-French aegis after World War I. The discovery of oil in West Asia contributed a great deal towards this arrangement.
Towards the end of the nineteenth century organised black African workers on strike in several mining centres. Students and, interestingly,Christian church leaders took lead in organising a pan-African movement. The first Pan-African Congress met in London in 1919.
Ans. (b) Gandhian perspective on the Morden state.
The Gandhian (after the name of M.K. Gandhi: 1869-1948, the Father of Nation) perspective of state provides a unique blend of what it is and what it should be. Gandhiji the state as he found it in the West and favoured a polity popularly called Ramrajya, the state he had wanted it to be.
Like all anarchists, Gandhiji nurtured distrust for all types of power, including the political power. Power, Gandhiji held, is by its very nature coercive and compulsive: it imposes, obstructs and spies; its existence means the absence of free will, of inner self and all that is eternal in the individual. In Gandhiji’s own words: ‘The state represents violence in and organised form. The individual has a soul but the state is a soulless machine; it can never wean from violence to which it owes its very existence.
But Gandhiji was not at all an anarchist. He was anarchist to the extent that he declared the state as an embodiment of force. He is, in a way, very close to the classical individualists or the New Right libertarians of our times. He advocated not a monolithic state, but a state with minimum functions, minimal state. He is of the opinion that until the society becomes self-regulative and self-evolving and until the individual becomes perfect, the state would, so long, be necessary, He fully subscribes to what Theorem had advocated: that government is the best which governs the least.
To some extent, Gandhiji was nearer Marx in so far as he propounded a type of society which is stateless in character. Like any Marxist Gandhiji opposed the in stitution of the state as an instrument of oppression and exploitation; all all evils in private property; like all Marxists, he condemned the partisan state. But, at the time, Gandhiji visualised in his Ramrajya a society without coercion and without force.
By conviction, Gandhiji was a spiritualistand to that extent, there is much what is non-materialist in Gandhiji. According to him,real swarajya is not merely the attainment of political freedom but much more than that. According to him, swarajya begins from the individual; is the rule of the it is a matter of and The real power lies with the individual; more the power advances up, more does it become ‘decentralised. In Gandhiji Ramrajya, the whole system, individual to the central polity, works itself, without any imposition and without any compulsion. His Ramrajya is a state without coercion, and to that extent stateless; it is a state without the use of violence, and to that extent, free and emancipative.
Solved Assignment, Notes Contact us – 8851761957 (What’s app only)
MA Political Science 1st year MPS 004 Solved Assignment 2020
Q. 10 (a) Political economy approach in Comparative Politics
(b) Role of civil society in democracy
Ans. (a) Political economy approach in Comparative Politics
WHAT IS POLITICAL ECONOMY
Webster’s third New International Dictionary has defined political economy as a social science which deals with the of and political process. Economists stress the economic ramifications of political economy. Mandel traced’ its origin to “the development of a society based on petty commodity production.” Mam’s major work, Capital, is subtitled “A Critique of Political Economy” and emphasizes commodities, money, surplus value, and accumulation of capital. focused on “all material production by individualsas determined by society”. He criticised Adam Smith and Proudhon for basing their conclusions based on the freedom of the individual and free competition, which were illusory. However, in contemporary political science, no great tradition of political economy had developed. Actually, radical economists and sociologists have done more to revive the current interest in political economy and to make it more relevant to political analysis. Most of these writers have promoted a Marxist understanding of political economy.
Comparative Political Economy
The examination of the theory, method and concept suggests a dichotomy between bourgeois and Marxist political economy. Attention to capitalist accumulation permits the consideration of both political and economic issues. The study of capitalist accumulation with emphasis on precapitalist and capitalist modes of production can integrate the inquiry that has so far led the economists to investigate questions about the material base of society and political scientists to study the issues of the political and ideological super-structure.
Some might say that economists should be concerned with theories of imperialism and political scientists should deal with the theories of state and class. However, all these concerns should be integrated by the political economist. The solution is the reconstitution of economies and political science into economy.
Political economy fundamentally addresses the broad historical sweep of capitalism, especially over the past hundred years. In the Das Marx gave us the foundations for such study. Paul Sweezy in The of and Ernest Mandel in Marxist Economic theory interpreted findings, emphasizing the economic implications. However, a synthesis by Stanley W. Moore in Democracy focused on the political ramifications.
Mandel’s Late Capitalism attempts to integrate theory and history in the tradition of Marx, dialectically moving from abstract to concrete and vice versa, from the parts to the whole and back again to parts, contradiction to totality and back to contradiction. Samir in Accumulationon a World Scale combined theory with history on a holistic level. He insisted that all modes and formations of the contemporary world reflect an accumulation on world scale.
Capitalist and non-capitalist world markets are not separate because there was one world market in which the former socialist countries participated marginally. Moreover, capitalism is a world system, not a mixture of national capitalisms. Other attempts to provide a holistic overview of political economy include Parry Anderson’s Passages from and of the Absolute State. They studied the political economies of European feudalism and capitalism. Wallerstein,in The Modern World elaborated Andre Gunder Frank’s theory of capitalist development and underdevelopment and emphasized market relations.
Four thinkers-Mandel, Anderson, and Wallerstein-among others have rekindled an interest in the history of political economy. It orients us toward old and new issues neglected by most contemporary economists and political scientists. All four borrowed from Marxist tradition of political economy and enriched it by their valuable contributions. Mandel explained that the entire capitalist system is a hierarchical structure of different levels of productivity and the outcome of the uneven and combined development of states, religions, branches of industryand firms, unleashed by the search for super- profits. In this system, unity coexists with lack of homogeneity, Development with underdevelopment and super profit with poverty, Given these variations, features of lower stages combine with those of upper stages to produce a formation of contradictory character and allow a qualitative leap in the social backward people. Brenner criticises this approach he thinks it has neglected relations of production and class struggle. He doubts whether a national solution will prevail over the problems of world wide accumulation.
MPS 004 Solved Assignment MA political science
Ans. (b) Role of civil society in democracy
DEMOCRACY AND SOCIETY
Democracy society are twins’: they integrally each other. A healthy liberal democracy needs the support of a public “that is organised for democracy, socialised to its norms and values, and committed not just to its myriad narrow interests but to larger, common civic end”. To quote Larry Diamond,”such a civil public is only possible with a vibrant ‘civil society’.” (1999).
One has to trace back in this context to Alexis de Tocqueville whose classic writings on American politics laid the foundation of democracy-civil society nexus thesis. Tocqueville thought, America’s democracy was sustained by the richness and diversity of its voluntary associations. In his view, associations assisted in the development of democratid values such as trust, tolerance and compromise. New generations of prominent among whom is Robert Putnam, have, since the revived the concept of civil society as the bedrock of democracy. Putnam’s work on the political development of the Italian regions the prosperous North vis-a-vis the impoverished South -sought to explain superior institutional performance in the former in terms of flourishing ‘social capital’ which stands for “features of social organisation such as trust, norms and networks”. The propensity of individuals to join private, voluntary associations, according to Putnam, contributes to the effectiveness of democracy because of its ‘internal’ and ‘external’ consequences. Internally, associations”install habits of cooperation, solidarity, and public spiritedness”. Externally, a dense network of secondary associations “contributes to effective social collaboration”.The Putnam thesis is simply this: where there is no social capital, could not flourish (1993).
For the most comprehensive theoretical assessment of the virtues of civil society in the context of democratic transition and consolidation, one has to refer to Larry Diamond’s recent work on developing Democracy (1999). Civil society, in Diamond view, serves the “development, deepening consolidation As Diamond explains the process, civil society provides the basis for the limitation of state power, supplements the role of parties in stimulating political participation, increases the political and skill of democratic citizens, educates the masses in democracy, structures multiple channels, beyond the political party, for articulating, aggregating, and representing interests, empowers the powerless to advance their interests, generates a wide range of cross -cutting interests, mitigates thereby the polarities of political conflict, recruits and trains new political leaders, develops techniques for conflict mediation and resolution, gives citizens respect for the state and positive engagement with it, and facilitates the spread of ideas essential for economic reform .
Diamond has. however, laid down certain conditions that be fulfilled for civil society to perform the democracy functions. a stable democracy has a good prospect if civil society does not contain interest groups or groups with anti- democratic goals and methods”. Second, another of a strong civil society is what Diamond has called the “level of As he argues, “where interests are organised in a structured, stable manner, bargaining and the growth of cooperative networks are facilitated”. Third, the other important requirement is the “internally democratic character”of organisations as defined by “decision-making, leadership selection, accountability and transparency”.