For aggregating content, So I can write better blogs.

Hi, Whoever is reading my blog. I am sorry that I could not send daily updates since it is very difficult to keep up with reading an writing all by myself. So that is why , along with my friends we created a small online group on an app called Cubeit [App store.]. We came upon this app a week back and it allows us to share content, perform functions like like comment and more than everything else it needs our email address and not phone number.

We are currently four and looking for people who are willing to share content. One more best thing about this application is that it automatically downloads the articles like pocket. So we can read if offline, like when we are travelling.

Please comment your email address if you are genuinely interested. Thank you, Hoping to address the problem of good political science content through this platform.

Anti defection Law - Explains the Indian politicians.

Remember during the election, everyone is talking about how our democratic system is turning into a presidential sort of race, centred around a "Leader". It's not just rhetoric but the actual scenario in India. Why, Anti Defection Law.

Behind all the legal terms [Click here], the basic aim of it is to stop the horse trading that is happening in Indian political scenario leading to weak government [Read 80's, 90's]. So Rajiv Gandhi passed this amendment to constitution when he had more than 400 members of Lok Sabha.

The raises the questions, Do we truly have a parliamentary, representative democracy. But lets not push the blame to Rajiv Gandhi for this change, because practically there never has been change.

Indian leaders such as Nehru, however accommodative people say he was, was immensely popular to the extent that there was clear association with him and the party and this was continued by the party. The only chance we had at an truly democratic  structure was gone with Shastri and the brief rule by Janata government.

Good news:

1. Even though law wanted to keep the speaker decision out of the purview of the court, SC deemed it unconstitutional.
2. Recently when 4 JD[U] leaders did not vote according to party whip, they were defected.But this defection was overturned by Patna High court stating and forming a precedent by pointing out the difference between "Dissent" and "Defection".

Note:

1. Before recommending a change in anti defection policies, think about the repercussion it might have on practically everything from domestic to foreign policy.

Political Science and International relations - Non Aligned Movement.

"Where freedom is menaced or justice threatened or where aggression takes place, we cannot and shall not be neutral" - Nehru


Introduction:

The quote above pretty much sums up the policy and the people behind the NAM. It was this injustice that they saw in the world prompted leaders such as Nehru, Tito and Nasser.It was this that made them fight imperialism, colonialism and Apartheid. It was this that made them to collective come together in Yugoslavia and form NAM.

Here the collective part was important as no recently decolonised nation was powerful enough to fight its battle alone in the World stage. They either had to join a bloc or fend for themselves. This situation was amended by the formation of NAM which called for new economic order, World peace, Nuclear disarmament , Non proliferation.

While stating all these good Ideas, one must understand that NAM served an extension in many ways for nations to further their own political interest and perhaps this was the single most biggest reason that it failed. This can be seen in case of

1. Support of countries such as Vietnam for Russian invasion of Afghanistan.
2. NAM nations invading each other - [Iran-Iraq war], Iraq invasion of Kuwait.
3. It's inability in stopping China going Nuclear.

This national self interest, perhaps the biggest obstacle in international relations, is also the problem for NAM. Even while it is still relevant in a Multi polar, G7 dominated 21st century by exposing theories such as South South cooperation, the trouble rises when NAM member countries move to the developed "North".

China's deal with USA during climate change proves to show that national self interest trumps all.

Political science and international relations -Paper 1- Western thinkers - Locke.

Introduction:

Locke was deeply effected by the glorious revolution during which Britain changed from a Monarchy to a partial parliamentary democracy. So it follows that Locke's theory should in some way support the overthrowing the current king in favour of something else, in Locke's case it was natural rights of men.

Locke , Hobbes and State of Nature:

Much comparison was done on Locke and Hobbes, as both of them had discussed state of nature and natural law. But the difference is that for Locke, the state of nature is a peaceful place with people guided by the natural law. The requirement was for an independent judge who can interpret these laws and punish whoever transgresses them. Without whom people's self interest would come in way of punishing themselves.

Perhaps rightly so, many had said that Locke's theory is Hobbes just in a palatable language.

But perhaps the biggest difference is that Locke's natural theory is said to be derived from divine right and hence immutable. Hobbe's were never derived from god, but was rather concentrated on human reasoning and morality.

While Hobbes argued for an absolute sovereign, Locke wanted a legislature and executive with legislature drawing the laws based on natural law and executive upholding them. Here the legislative is the supreme authority.

Locke and the debate on Capitalism:

While Hobbes, Aristotle propounded the importance of property for the well being of humans, Locke went a step further and talked about the the method and limits of property accumulation.

As humans own their mind and body, anything made out of applying those to what nature provided becomes a man's property. But this was limited by labor [As there is only so much a human can do], spoilage [One is not to spoil] and sufficiency [Not greedy and be just sufficient].

He also accepted the transfer of property as part of natural right and hence with the money being the medium, it enabled some people to accumulate wealth. This was used by many Marxist critic to label Locke as a capitalist theorists with sole emphasis of natural law was to further one's greed.

Even though this seems right, Locke was more concentrated on divine origin of natural rights and less on capitalist theories. His lack of view on the heavily regulated mercantile economy, him arguing for forgiving atheist riots [The human beliefs, edicts and oaths does not bide them as they don't believe in god] proves this point.

Source:

IGNOU - Western Political Thinkers.

Political science and international relations -Paper 1- Western thinkers - Niccolo Machiavelli.

Basic introduction:

Machiavellian politics is in many ways synonymous with being corrupt and ruthless around the world. This can be understood basing on the Italian political conditions during his life. This Italy was broken, corrupt and thus Machiavelli looked at Greek-Roman empires to come up with art of governance.

Here his emphasis was on art of governance and not the form of state. State in his view, like Aristotle, was natural and is necessary for the human well being. However while Aristotle's state placed emphasis on moral behaviour of its citizens, Machiavellian state concentrated on the King and his need for preservation and expansion.

This led him to give overarching powers to the king to the extent that state became synonymous with the king. But he made restrictions on the power of Monarch in acquiring the property and wives of his subjects and even supported the idea of republic so far as it places importance on preservation and expansion of state.

Legacy Machiavelli:

1. He is considered the father of modern political nation which is sovereign in its internal and eternal affairs. 
2. His view of human behaviour is one material self interest which in many ways is similar to what Hobbes has followed.
3. He was one of the first to support secularism i.e. to divide religion from state.

Political science and international relations -Paper 1- Western thinkers - Hobbes.

Importance of Hobbes:

The importance of Hobbes theories lies in his attempt to draw human laws based on laws of physical world, inspired directly by his contemporaries Kaplan and Galileo. This lead him to develop an absolutist theory of sovereignty, one which was accepted by the Parliamentarians nor by the royalists, both of whom saw a difference with Hobbes. This led to philosophers such as Taylor and Warrender derive Hobbes theory based on Natural law, instead of positivist that he is, with divine obligation into absolute sovereignty.

Going into the Theory:

Hobbes considered humans before the formation of civil society who is guided by vital and voluntary motions. These vital motions such as blood pumping are needed for our preservation and any voluntary motion having effect on these vital motions are characterised into desire and aversion.

In this state of nature guided only by our motions, Hobbes declares that life would be short, nasty and Brutish where every man would strive for his self preservation and constantly fight to preserve what he already achieved.

To survive this he drew upon the laws of Nature, which according to him are eternal, which form the basis for human peace and preservation of all. Critics has argued that if these were eternal what were they doing during the brutal state of nature and also why would men follow them because there is always a fear that other person wont. This is equated to present day Prisoner’s dilemma.

Now he brings in sovereign by forming a covenant among men who transfer him power to look after their defence and peace. But the sovereign is outside the covenant and is supreme in so far as he is the final authority on the natural law. The only limitation of the sovereign is he should act for the self preservation of men. In many ways his theory was of enlightened despotism.

The important point here is that he did not derive this authority from God but from Men forming a covenant.

Hobbes on Liberty:

Hobbesinian liberty is close to present day liberty in that the man is a liberty to do anything which is not otherwise allowed by the natural law or the civil law laid down by the sovereign.

Single point:

1. He was the father of us all - Karl Mar.
2. Wrote Leviathan- “State of Nature”.
3. Father of Modern political nation, one in which political authority is impersonal.

Political science and international relations -Paper 1- Western thinkers - Aristotle

*Plato first came to the conclusion that state is in bad shape and then formed his argument around this general conclusion whereas Aristotle went through various available particular data before coming to a conclusion as to whether a state is good or bad.

Introduction and his times:

Aristotle is considered one of the greatest philosophers of all time. Such can be attributed to his evolution of a scientific sense in to the political theory, which was until then dominated by philosophical view of Plato. Such scientific view was possible because of his experience in science through biology, medicine. Also being present in Greek, he was able to observe many different faces of politics around him, without which there could be no analysis possible.

Worked under various kings and learnt different features of the polity, economics and thus became a scholar in various fields of life. Also he was a prolific writer.

But while promoting the scientific side of Aristotle, which runs contrary to the Plato’s philosophical approach, it is equally important that Aristotle did have philosophical view of society and his politics was always based on Ethics.

Such ethics are possible because of the notion that state is a natural thing , whose emergence has at its root the interests of all people and such only ethical conduct by all, both general and Particular, can state succeed. Also state is prior to individual as Aristotle believed that no man can exist without the institution of state,Just as there would not be different parts of body if there was no life in the body that gives it that meaning.

For him this ethical view is one which can be obtained through practice and such the evolution of ethics in human society is closely linked to reason and practice through human interaction. Here it diverges from Plato, in that for him virtue/ethics is more of attaining the knowledge that which is constantly evolving or learnt through practice. An ideal form of ethics (form theory) exists and knowledge can help us achieve it.

While Aristotle accepts the presence of such Ideal form, he accepts the importance of matter (Which was just a shadow for Plato) in so far as it is the formed because of various elements constituting it, with form just activating it, guides it to its final form which is ethical. (This can be viewed in his emphasis on practice for achieving ethical end. Because the various intermediate traits which are considered matter are equally important for Aristotle, who guides him to the ethical end).

Aristotle and State:

*Presence of other associations rather than just the state.
*State is prior to individual and hence natural.
*State is self sufficing while family and village is not.
*state is not unity but unity in diversity (It is one of Unity for Plato, with state being the sole association)

Plato state stops being a state , when it fails at providing love and discipline for the guardian class.

For him state has a very close relationship with ethical being of humans. He considers state as natural in so far as it is the only possible way through which humans can develop into higher beings which are rational and ethical while serving their natural wants and also the development of family (he sees state as extension of family and thus when Plato talks about communism of family for guardian , his conception of state seems artificial to him).

As far as the concept of state is considered, his inductive method concluded state as something which arose to fulfill the material interests of men. In their sense, state is much more than just polity but is everything constituting education and blah and thus their focus on status as a mandatory element is only logical, as no Individual can exist in unison without some sort of associations.

Aristotle considered Plato’s state to be artificially created by Plato. This he based on the belief of evolution and growth of state from different stages of society and thus in a teleological study such as his, which believes that nature always works for some purpose, he probably believes that best possible state will be achieved through time and evolution, contrary to the radical and speculative character of Plato.

Both believe in ideas such as natural inequality (Man-Women, Son-Father, Slave-Free man), state being the only way for man to achieve his development and that the rational man would triumph over passionate man.

Justice:

*Justice if virtue in action (For both Aristotle and Plato). Truth is virtue but being truthful is Justice.
Justice is differentiated in that Aristotle’s was more of a right’s based when compared to duties based on Plato. Also his emphasis on rule of law, as can be understood by his more realistic theory, when compared to Plato’s theory of doing one’s duties.
He states about the importance of Distributive Justice (Rewards according to Work) and corrective justice (To transfer lack of justice from one person to another).  Plato’s theory lacks corrective justice and believes in man’s soul and his duties.
Basically, Plato’s justice is virtue in action which is taken for granted but for Aristotle it is not granted and hence the legal interpretation of justice.
His theory of class based society is wrong in the sense that it devoid certain class political power and state might act against the entrenched rulers. Plato probably knows this better than anyone and hence the various conditions.
Predicted end of slavery and considered it natural if humans were to live a fulfilling life.

Also he was against communism and common family, as he has seen family as a basic entity in providing virtues of cooperation, trust. Also his view of society is one based on Unity in Diversity contrary to Unity of Plato. While promoting private property he only supported the use of private property for common use.

Critique:

•His theory on slavery is more of a justification than an uninterested view of the available facts.

•Aristotle and his illiberal views on slavery (Considers natural) and women.

But his theory on family being the base of state and the importance of public-private divide is very much used.

Direct points:

1- Teleological: Man lives in society for development and state can provide him with that

Political Science and International realations - Western Thinkers - Plato

Born an Aristocrat which has its privileges in the Athenian society of Greece, Plato wanted to enter political life in his early days. But much has changed after his education under Socrates, who has imbibed in him a pursuit of truth  achieved through debate and dialogue.

Other factors such as the continuous war with Sparta (Peloponnesian War) which the Athens lost and the subsequent puppet governments that had emerged in Athens have further distanced himself from public life. The final blow came when his teacher, Socrates was sentenced to death for atheism.

This led for him to search for safety which prompted him to travel across Europe and Africa in which time he had tried to be the educator of many princes. While he finally arrived, he has contributed much to the literary work through various books, some of which such as Laws drew upon the contemporary political institutions and their working.

Plato’s philosophical though can be clearly understood in the context of his theory of forms, Ideas whereby he identifies that the World we live in is but a shadow of reality and whatever we see around us and their description is opinion. Knowledge of the real World, although cannot be seen right away can be taught.

The essential characteristics of Plato's theory of Forms would, thus, include: 

(a) There is a difference between 'Form' or 'Idea'; 'Knowledge' and 'Appearance'; 'Actual', or 'Opinion' as there is difference between the invisible world and the physically visible world. 

(b) The form is the ultimate object of appearance. 

(c) The actual world can attain the ideal world. 

(d) Knowledge can replace opinion and is attainable. 

(e) The visible world is the shadow of the real world. 

(f) What appears to be is not the Form, but is a form of the Form.”

Also the deductive method of philosophy that he uses forms certain notions about the society before hand and when seen through these pre conceived notions, the world seems imperfect and hence the need for an Ideal Society.

Theory of Justice – Specialization, hierarchy, Natural, Separation of conflict i.e. harmony through communism.

Theory of Justice:

 He placed overarching importance on justice which is thought to be holding the society together .While his theory of justice is based on performing one’s duties for the good of the society (It is at the same time a public virtue) and not mere adherence towards laws.Plato has towards the end in his “Laws” has realized the importance of a law based society along with Ideal rulers, something which he conceived as useless if the ruler is virtuous.

Education:

Theory of Social righteousness and not of social success.

Communism:

Formed on the basis that those controlling political activities should not have any economic interests while those controlling economic should have no political interests. Such resulted in the communism of property which included communism of families. This was critical for the effective functioning of the system.

But to compare Plato Communism with Marx communism is wrong because

1.          One is for the whole society and other for classes.
2.          One is an economic solution to political problem while other is a political solution to economic problem.
3.          Finally, Plato’s communism is based on material temptation while for Marx it is the growth of social evils because of accumulation of property.
4.       One is for the whole society while the other is for guardians alone.
5.       The Circumstances differ i.e BC Greek and 19th century Europe.
6.       Applicable for Athens, Greek city state while the other is an global ideology.
7.       Plato is more philosophical in approach while Marx is scientific in approach.

Plato’s republic:

Book deals with the whole gamut of Human life such as Metaphysics, Moral Philosophy, Education, human nature, Philosophy of history, Ideal state.

Man has three traits (Appetite, Spirit and reason) and so three groups of citizens (Producers, Auxiliaries and Rulers) and thus he is termed fascist and radical.

Plato and State:

 State should help citizens to help people achieve a full life.

·         State must perform for the good of all and in it lays true justice.

To say Plato did not put any checks on absolute power of ruler is not correct because of the communism and the rigorous education system. Also by attaining the highest possible virtue which the rulers have by seeing the true form of the politics it is understandable that he thought rulers to be good, at least initially. This position is changed in his “laws”.

Critique of Plato:

Anti Change – Because the moment state reaches its ideal form, there needs be no change. The path is naturalistic in the sense as to going back to tribal affairs and the rule of few wise over the many ignorant. 

Direct Points:

1. Democracy is irrational because it views unequal people as equal and in the process compromises on the effectiveness of the government.s
2. He was a philosopher for he saw beyond the mere appearances.
3. He decided that politics is a corrupted affair unless given the right direction.
4. Deductive Methodology: He decided that the state is corrupt first and then went about to form his philosophy rather than reaching a conclusion after studying, Examining and observing the available data.
5. Teleological – Everything exists for itself and constantly moves towards its desired objective.
6. Analogical – Whereby two objects are said to be same in some aspects based on their similarity in other aspects.
7. “Knowledge is Virtue”, “Public is ill, we must cure our masters” – Socrates.
8. Through basic human traits, man could learn virtue which would make him capable of attaining his end.