Politics

When we refer to the term ‘Politics’, what usually comes to mind is the
government and its policies, political leaders, political parties, perhaps elections
and all the activities associated with the same. Further the kind of activity that the
term conjures is one that involves intrigue, some kind of strategizing by concerned
parties which may be groups or individuals, to either further their interest or
prevent others from fulfilling their own interest. That divergent interests are an
integral aspect of politics is therefore apparent. However it is not essential that
divergent interests be always conflictual. While most instances of political activity
that we observe in everyday life seem conflictual, which is why one often hears
the phrase that ‘politics is a dirty game’, the activity per se does not explain the
rationale/ non rationale behind its performance (more on that later).Given that
politics involves divergent / conflictual interests the logical course of action would
be to try and resolve these interests. This brings us to a preliminary definition of
politics as put forth by Andrew Heywood, who sees “politics as the activity
through which people make, preserve and amend the general rules under which
they live” 1The latter also includes an attempt to reconcile divergent interests
Let us unpack this definition to understand it better. Interests can broadly be
classified into two categories i.e. material and non material. Non material interests
include values, beliefs, ideas etc of individuals and groups while material interests
would include economic resources, natural or otherwise. That these interests are
divergent can be explained by two reasons. The first is social diversity, on account
of which people may hold different ideas and beliefs and values. For example they
may have different goals in life, may believe in different value systems etc. The
second is scarcity of resources. As demand exceeds supply of available material
resources there is need to ration these out. For example given that there is one
apple which is to be distributed among 10 people. The person who cuts the apple
has to take a whole host of decisions i.e. should each get a same sized piece or
should the poorer person get more? If the poorer person is to get more, then how
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

much more should he or she get in comparison to others? Criteria of distribution,

manner of distribution and distributing agency all must be decided. Such decisions
would involve a lot of difference of opinion. There is thus a need to reconcile
divergent interests. The various ways of doing so could be by consensus,
compromise etc. Let us take recourse to another definition by Adrian Leftwich
who says that, “....Politics comprises all the activities of co-operation and conflict,
within and between societies, whereby the human species goes about organizing
the use, production and distribution of human, natural and other resources in the
course of the production and reproduction of its biological and social life”. 2
Having established the divergent nature of interests, one must also pay attention to
the fact that it may not always be possible to reconcile divergent / conflicting
interests. For instance Marxist theorists would argue that economic inequalities in
society cannot be resolved through democratic, peaceful means but only through a
revolution. Conflict they argue is not natural to society but a result of the rise of
exploiting and exploited economic classes. Through revolution, class inequalities
would end; as a result conflict would end and there would be abolition of politics.
Another school of thought referred to as the communitarians focuses its attention
on activities of communities within societies. They would argue that community
behavior varies from one community to another in terms of ideologies, belief
systems, notions of rights, justice, equality etc. and therefore recognition should be
accorded to communities within the State. However as these diverse viewpoints
are incommensurable i.e. cannot be compared on a common scale, differences
amongst communities cannot be reconciled and should therefore be accorded
equal importance and accepted as such. Therefore politics attempts to reconcile
divergent interests.
Finally, “politics is a collective activity straddling the spheres of the formal and
3
the informal as well as the public and private”. Here one needs to make a
distinction between the traditional and modern definition of politics. Traditionally
the study of politics was confined to a study of public institutions, in particular the

2 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

State, its Constitution, the various institutions such as the legislature, executive,
bureaucracy, political parties etc. However a modern understanding of politics
extends the term to include not only a study of formal /public institutions but also
the private and the informal, which would include for instance business
organizations, universities and even families. That politics is a collective activity
implies that its focal point is issues that concern people as a collectivity.
Interpersonal disputes cannot be the subject matter of politics, unless the
implications extend to groups in common. It has been said that politics involves a
universal solution, not a private one. 4
Drawing forth from the modern understanding of politics it has been argued that,”
politics cannot be regarded narrowly as a sphere apart from economy or culture”. 5
Any attempt to do so is to remove certain issues from the scope of politics which
have been called “strategies of depoliticisation”. 6 For example issues concerning
domestic violence, poverty etc. Marxism was one of the first political traditions
which attempted to link the political and the economic. The relation between the
two can be understood in the form of a triangle, in which the economic factor or
what Marxism calls the ‘mode of production’ forms the base and the political
aspect i.e. the State, politics , culture and ideology etc constitute the
superstructure. The superstructure is determined by the economic base. Politics
cannot be studied independent of the unequal economic class structure in society.
Feminist theorists have taken this argument further by bringing the family within
the sphere of the political. They argue that gender inequality and male domination
whether in the family or within civil society cannot be treated as separate from the
sphere of the State’s activities but must be dealt with publicly. For them the
‘personal is political’. They hope to end gender inequality in all spheres of human
activity and all levels of social organization.
This brings us to the interdisciplinary nature of politics, which draws variables
from various other disciplines. Therefore we now have the study of political
economy, political sociology, political psychology and so on. Moreover as the

3 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

study of politics is now no longer confined to the study of the ‘nation state’,
politics has extended into the sphere of trans-national issues leading to the rise of
international politics and international relations.
Finally, coming back to the initial definition of politics that we started with, to
ensure that rules are observed and implemented an impartial authoritative
institution is required which is based on the consent of the people. This institution
is the State. Thus David Easton describes politics as the “science of authoritative
distribution of values in society”.7
To sum up, politics encompasses all spheres of human activity. Human activity
should not be defined narrowly to only include relations between individuals and
groups but it would also extend to our natural environment. Thus there could be a
politics of the environment well exemplified by the ‘Narmada Bachao Andolan’,
which questions the State’s development strategy. While politics aims at
reconciling divergent interests, it may not always succeed in doing so. As conflicts
persist, politics as an activity also persists. To the extent that decisions are made
and obeyed, politics involves power, represented by the institution of the State.

Why Study Politics

The question, ‘why study politics’ can be interpreted in two ways. As stated in the
earlier portion, one way would involve studying politics as an activity, mapping
changes empirically (based on experience) or factually. This could also be in the
form of numerical data for example political surveys conducted with regard to
electoral data. The study of politics as an exercise to collect political data would
however not provide an answer to the question, ’why study politics’. It is the
theoretical underpinnings of political events or data, contextualizing the latter in
time and space, moving forth from ‘what is’ to ‘what ought to be’, that provides
the relevance of studying politics. Politics provides a perspective for
understanding and explaining and perhaps resolving social issues.

4 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

Let us take the example of a communal riot. A riot represents conflict between
communities. The reasons for its occurrence could be many. On the face of it the
conflict is ideological with different / contrary views being expressed by diverse
communities, religious, ethnic or otherwise. However beyond the immediate
answer, other reasons for the outbreak of the riot could be economic or social,
such as caste differences. The latter is typical of inter-caste clashes, which in turn
could have an economic explanation as caste and class hierarchies are often seen
to coalesce. Finally the riot could be a result of political parties or leaders
instigating one community against another in a bid to draw political mileage. Thus
another variable to explain the riot could be electoral politics. Piecing together
these variables to provide an explanation for the event, identifying causes and
looking for ways of resolving them, as also placing the issue in a broader
theoretical context to be able to define aspects of communal behavior would
together constitute the subject matter and the relevance of politics.
The study of politics proceeds through the formation of theoretical frameworks. A
theory can be defined as systematic reflection. Let us simplify this definition.
Reflection or thought is not usually a part of our routine behavior. Many actions
that we perform are on account of habit and we don’t usually question them. Let
us take an example of the red light at crossroads that all vehicles and pedestrians
stop at. Why do we stop at a red light? The first explanation that comes to mind is
that it exemplifies part of the rules and regulations framed by the transport
department. The next question could be why do we follow these rules? Who
framed them? Were these framed by the officials or were people involved too? Do
they apply equally to all or do some get away even by violating them? Do these
rules curb ‘the freedom of movement’ of individuals? If they do, what are the
limits of State intervention vis-à-vis the individual sphere of freedom? Having
initiated the discussion from a simple act of habit, reflecting about the act can lead
us into the process of political inquiry concerning issues that are typically political
i.e. the nature of democracy, rights, political obligation and so on.

5 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

Weaving together all these thoughts in a systematic manner is what initiates the
process of theorizing. However all kinds of systematic reflection are not theory. A
theory has certain special characteristics. A theory is committed to advancing
reasons for its claims. Reflection leads to questioning of dogmas. Therefore any
theoretical argument must be empirically (based on experience) or rationally
(based on reason or logic) verifiable or rather, falsifiable. Further, a theory is very
careful about the use of words and attempts to distinguish between terms that seem
to imply similar meanings. For instance both India and America are democracies.
However India has a parliamentary democratic system while America has a
presidential system. Thus the term democracy first needs to be qualified. Further
the democratic values and meanings in the Indian context would be very different
from those in America on account of the varying socio-economic and cultural
milieu. Therefore theoretical frameworks for the two would need to be worked out
separately, but without discounting comparisons which would further advance
democratic theory
When we apply a theory to political issues we are engaging in political theory. A
Political theory could be normative or empirical. However, often a distinction is
made between political science and political philosophy. Political science is
empirical and uses the scientific method, which involves observation,
experimentation and measurement. The scientific method is objective and value-
neutral and is the only way to arrive at reliable knowledge. The scientific method
became very popular in the discipline of politics in the 1950s and 1960s as
exemplified by the Behavioral school of thought. The focus was on studying
quantifiable political behavior, for instance voting patterns. Political philosophy
on the other hand has been concerned with asking normative and ethical questions
such as , what is justice?, should all individuals be treated equally? How can
individual and collective rights be reconciled? It has been argued that political
philosophy is concerned with two main tasks. “One is the critical evaluation of
political beliefs.” 8 The second is to “clarify and refine the concepts employed in

6 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

political discourse.” 9 Answering the above questions would invariably lead us to

adopting a particular viewpoint. Therefore political philosophy is value laden and
subjective.
Contemporary political theory does away with the distinction between political
science and political philosophy. Both are treated as indispensable to the discipline
of politics. Politics itself has varied meanings which points to the broad scope that
the subject has. Let us look at some of the perspectives put forth by Andrew
Heywood10 As stated earlier, politics was traditionally seen as the art of
government. The word ‘politics’ in fact derives from the Greek city state ‘Polis’.
That which concerned the Polis was politics and as the Polis was the state, politics
too came to be associated with the sphere of the state.
A second understanding of politics is in the form of ‘public affairs’. Politics moves
beyond the narrow sphere of the government and comes to encompass the public
sphere of life which includes trade unions, political parties, interest groups etc.
Beginning from Aristotle’s book Politics, in which he says that ‘man by nature is a
political animal’, there has been a long tradition of thinkers such as Rousseau
(general will) and J.S.Mill who have advocated active participation of individuals
in public life to promote, ‘personal, moral and intellectual development of the
individual’11 Thus the strict separation between State and civil society is done
away with to be replaced by the binary relationship of the political and personal, a
distinction which was in turn, finally done away by the Feminist thinkers.
A third understanding of politics is to see it as the pursuit of power. There are two
aspects to such a view. The first aspect is in terms of control over use, production
and distribution of scarce resources. In the second aspect politics is said to involve
relations of domination and subordination. Such a view of politics is advocated by
the Marxists and Feminists. Marx in the Communist Manifesto (1848) referred to
political power as, ‘merely the organized power of one class for oppressing
another’. The dominant class was that which owned the means of production
(bourgeoisie) and the subordinate class, the ‘proletariat’ sold their labour power in

7 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

return for wages. The instrument of domination is the State and the State
apparatus, which are controlled by the dominant class. Feminist thinkers also view
politics as a power relationship. Here the variables in the relation are men and
women, involving domination of the former by the former over the latter. This
domination exists at all levels of social organization i.e. State, civil society and the
private sphere including domestic, family and personal life. 12 Therefore all these
spheres are seen to be intensely political. This third view of politics is extremely
radical as it sees politics as pervading every corner and aspect of human existence.
The study of politics helps us to better understand the world we live in. Wherever
one encounters a collectivity there is need for rule making so that actions can be
coordinated. Politics begins with such an organization and constantly attempts to
better it so that collective and individual aspirations may be fulfilled. As human
beings are thinking beings, mechanical knowledge by itself cannot provide the
foundation for society and its needs. Individuals and groups have diverse ideas,
viewpoints and values. They cannot be straitjacketed into any one system, an ideal
type. This is what makes the subject of politics dynamic and exciting.

Diverse Traditions of politics

Traditions in politics can be categorized in many ways. We shall look at two main
traditions i.e. historical and ideological. Historically the initiation of political
thought can be traced to the Greek age. The political philosopher Plato presented
the notion of an ‘Ideal State’ in his book Republic. The ideal State represented a
fusion of ethics and politics. The Ideal State was the moral organization and
justice, the ethical code by which the individual lived. Politics for the Greeks was
a participatory activity involving a rotational system of decision making between
the ruled and the rulers such that each citizen got a chance to participate in the
affairs of the State. However it was also unequal as slaves, women and barbarians
were kept apart from the sphere of politics. Greek thought also exemplifies the
first attempt to link politics to the scientific method. Aristotle classified

8 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

constitutions and advocated a theory of cyclical change. Not only was change
inevitable but change from one kind of constitution to another was determined and
could be predicted. Politics for the Greeks was all encompassing such that the
individual was but a part of the moral organism i.e. the State. While the latter
could exist without the former, the individual could not survive without the State.
It has been said that, “we inherit our ideas from the Greeks, but our practices from
the Romans..… The political vocabulary of the Greeks – policy, police, politics
itself and the civic vocabulary of the Romans – civility, citizen, civilization”.13The
Romans were known in European civilization for their system of laws. Politics
was mediated through the language of law. The latter also provided the context for
theorizing about citizen rights and powers of the rulers. The values of virtue and
freedom were inherited by the Romans from the Greeks. Finally the most
important contribution of the Romans to politics was their spirit of patriotism i.e.
putting the State before the concerns of the individual. As has been said, while
Greek politics was based on reason that of the Romans was based on love, love of
the country.
Politics in the medieval period (fourth to fifteenth century A.D.) had the definite
imprint of religion as this was the period of the rise of Christianity. It has been
said that the Greeks and the Romans had followed a civic religion in which there
was no distinction between the membership of the Church and the State as the
same set of institutions performed both functions. Medieval politics is marked by a
separation of temporal and ecclesiastical authority leading to the theory of the two
swords and the rise of conflicting jurisdictions. However as the Church became
corrupt (morally and financially), papal supremacy was carried away in the wave
of the Renaissance and the Reformation. The decline of the Church saw the rise of
absolutist monarchies. The monarchies performed a balancing act between the last
vestiges of the influence of the Church and the unreliability of the feudal lords, on
whom the monarchs were dependent for financial and military support. Absolutist
monarchies finally gave way to the rise of the modern state.

9 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

The modern State emerged out of two conflicting movements. 14 On the one hand
centralizing tendencies established the concept of the sovereign state. On the other
hand, the rise of new commercial and industrial classes, led to their staking claim
to civil rights and political power. The attempt of the monarchs to precariously
hold on to their sovereign power in the face of these centrifugal pulls, perhaps best
exemplified in Machiavelli’s The Prince, came to be known as the ‘new politics’
This new politics was marked by ‘realism’ and is said to have “turned the whole
idea of politics upside down”15 Service to the State was no longer the defining
feature of politics, rather the State was seen as an institution to keep peace, so that
individuals could carry on with their own plans of life. Politics thus began to
negotiate between the sphere of the State and the sphere of the individual. This in
turn gave rise to the other tradition of politics that we shall discuss i.e. political
ideologies.
Ideology refers to a particular perspective on political reality, a perspective that
can explain all the concepts and ideas that are included within the ‘political’ such
as the State, political obligation, rights, liberty, justice etc. But ideologies do not
always have consistent arguments. There is thus a possibility of debate and
discussion within the same ideological tradition. This is best exemplified by
Liberalism. The main thrust of classical liberal thought was on the individual and
individual freedom. The individual was seen as a rational being, capable of
autonomous action. State intervention was therefore to be limited to maintenance
of peace, law and order, while the market was to regulate the sphere of the
economy. Liberalism clearly demarcated and separated the sphere of the State and
civil society. Most importantly, exponents of classical liberalism, in particular
Hobbes, laid stress on the rational equality of all individuals. Classical liberalism
gave way to what has been called ‘social individualism’. In the mid 19th century,
writers such as T.H Green, L.T.Hobhouse and J.S.Mill argued for situating the
individual in the social context. Society is the repository of morality and rights.
The State according to these thinkers must perform a positive, welfarist role in

10 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

alleviating the condition of the deprived sections of society. Social liberalism was
also more democratic; for example James Mill advocated universal adult
franchise. The rise of neo-classical liberalism in the mid 20th century marked a
reversion to the classical liberal ideals. As seen in the writings of F.A.Hayek and
Robert Nozick, the stress was once again on the liberty of the individual and a
minimal State. John Rawls, who is also seen as a contemporary liberal thinker, did
put forth a notion of justice that was addressed to the marginalized sections of
society, though even for him equal liberty must be the first organizing principle of
society.
Socialism as an ideology is in direct contrast to most of the fundamental tenets of
liberalism. Society is the focal point of politics for the Socialist and not the
individual. Politics is not confined to the activities of the State but is linked to the
way that society functions. The most celebrated socialist philosophy has been
Marxism. The two founding ideas of Marxist thought are Dialectical and
Historical Materialism. A historical study of society must proceed through a study
of the changing nature of the material mode of production, a change that takes
place dialectically. Historically, society passes through a number of economic
stages i.e. primitive communism, slave society, feudalism and capitalism. Each
stage, except the first, is marked by the rise of antagonistic classes based on
unequal control over the means of production. Economic exploitation is reflected
politically in the institution of the State which is controlled by the owning class.
Exploitation of the working class can end only through a violent revolution such
that the unequal State and economic structure is destroyed. The change from a
capitalist economic system must pass through a transitory stage i.e. of
‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ and finally Communism, which is a classless and
stateless society. However Marxism as a practical idea has not been very
successful as seen in the demise of the erstwhile Communist regime of the Soviet
Union and the east European countries. Marxist thought however has been

11 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

reinterpreted by a school of thought called the ‘new left’ which we shall explore in
the section on recent trends.
The third ideology that we shall explore has broadly been referred to as
Conservatism. Conservatism arose in the latter part of the 18th century, one of its
foremost spokespersons being Edmund Burke. Conservatism stood for certain
general principles.
For example the principle that the maintenance of social order and stability is of
prime importance; that individuals are by nature egoistic and selfish beings16 and
that experience is to be preferred over reason. The last does not imply that the
conservatives were non rational, rather they believed that reason linked to
grandiose or revolutionary change ought to be avoided and gradual change based
on experience is to be preferred. Conservatives also oppose equality as any such
move could restrict liberty. Traditionally they support a government based on the
nobility of birth.17 Twentieth century conservatism however changed by
incorporating elements of classical liberalism along with those of traditional
conservatism. This new tradition called the ‘New Right’ encompasses two
apparently conflicting views i.e. economic liberalism and social conservatism. In
the economic sphere, advocates of the New Right supported the notion of a
minimal State and a free market economy. They are very critical of the idea of the
welfare State. However in the social sphere the New Right supports “a strong State
in relation to public order, social morality and defence”.18 The opposition to
equality persists. For instance, some neo-conservatives argue that welfare
programmes encourage people not to work and that attempts to promote racial and
sexual equality in the professions through affirmative actions are wrong.19 Neo-
conservatism moves quite close to classical liberalism. Therefore the boundaries
of ideologies are fluid. One must note that political ideologies are not exhausted
by the above three. If interested, the reader can look up other ideologies such as
nationalism, feminism, fascism and so on.

12 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

Tools of Political Analysis

According to Andrew Heywood, “Concepts, models and theories are the tools of
political analysis” 20. A concept is defined as, “a general idea about something
usually expressed in a single word or a short phrase. Concepts are the tools with
which we think, criticize, argue, explain and analyse”. 21For instance the concept
of a table is different from a given physical table that we see. The concept of the
table is an idea of the table that might provide general characteristics of the table
and explain its utility. Concepts are therefore ideas and not things. In politics we
deal with concepts such as rights, power, democracy etc. We must note that
concepts do not have any one definition and are contestable.
Having defined theory earlier it might suffice to say that a theory is a systematic
analysis of concepts. Just as in the case of concepts, theories vary on the basis of
perspectives and ideologies. For example while Liberal thinkers support political
and social equality, Marxist thinkers pitch for economic equality.
Models are defined as theoretical representations of empirical data.22 To
understand what a model is, let us take the example of the ‘Systems’ model as
developed by David Easton, which is also referred to as the input-output model.
Easton sees politics as a systematic activity constituted by inputs in the form of
demands and supports and outputs in the form of governmental decisions.
Demands come from the people, such as the demand for employment
opportunities, social welfare measures etc. Supports from the people take the form
of paying taxes, participating in the electoral process etc. Given these inputs,
government decisions and actions in the form of policies and programmes and
legislation constitute outputs. These outputs impact ‘feedback’ from the people
which then influences future demands and supports. While model building in
politics helps to impose a coherent structure on what is otherwise a complex
political reality, it has some shortcomings. One such shortcoming is that the model
leaves out many variables that may impact the political system. In other words it
does not exhaust the political reality. For instance the category of demands and

13 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

supports does not define the economic, religious, cultural, social attributes of the
system. Further every political system is situated in a historical context. The
manner of development of the system remains unexplored. Secondly the model
presupposes certain values such as the concern to preserve ‘equilibrium’ between
inputs and outputs so that political stability may be maintained. However such a
system would be status-quoist, not allowing for any change.
While both, models and theories are tools of political analysis, models are in the
manner of hypotheses, yet to be tested, while theories present reliable knowledge.
Theories are constituted by a series of models such as a model of the state, a
model of political participation and so on.
Yet another tool of political analysis is that of survey research. A Survey is a tool
of empirical analysis that involves the collection of data from respondents and the
tabulation and analysis of the data collected. One form of survey that most of us
are familiar with is that conducted for election analysis. The school of thought
associated with this is called ‘psephology’, which has been defined as, ‘scientific
analysis of political elections and polls’. 23

Recent Trends
Recent trends in political thinking have been closely intertwined with the plethora
of historical events that the 20th century has been witness to. The rise of
totalitarianism in the form of the Fascist and the Nazi regimes in Italy and
Germany respectively, the end of colonial rule and the experience of the non-
western tradition as also the rise of the post-communist regimes have all
contributed to shaping the trajectory of political theory in the 20th century. The
more or less universal acceptance of the liberal democratic capitalist state as the
best form of politico-economic organization and political values has led to
scholars predicting the end of ‘isms’ and also the ‘end of history’. Such a view is
however unacceptable for two reasons. Firstly, interpretations of what a liberal-
capitalist State is, vary both contextually and theoretically. Secondly the very

14 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

foundations of liberal thought, resting as it did on modernity, have been called into
question by the rise of what has been called the ‘post-modern condition’. 24
Post modernism has made its impact across disciplines including the sciences,
literature and art. Leaving aside the many ways in which post-modernism has been
understood for our purpose, it would suffice to say that post-modernism sees the
universal as an essentially contested category. Let us take the example of
Feminism. Feminism as an ideology may take off from the common identity of
women, but the category of ‘women’ itself is contestable. For instance the
experience of black women would be different when compared to that of white
women. Further the commonality of ‘maternity, social or biological’25 would also
be problematic as all women may be, or may not be, may choose or may not
choose, to be mothers. As experiences vary, a common referent or universal is not
possible. This has in turn given rise to a number of new schools of thought within
Feminism such as Black Feminism, Radical Feminism and others.
Secondly post-modernism also questions the ‘dominant’ understanding of
concepts, events and ideas, which does not take into account the voice of the
marginalized sections of society, referred to as the ‘subaltern’ category. This is
perhaps most evident in the rewriting of India’s freedom movement from the
perspective of the ‘subaltern’, a category which includes women, peasants,
minorities and others. Post-modernism replaces the universal in favour of the
particular.
Two other recent trends that we shall explore are Green political perspectives, and
Multiculturalism. Green political theory as the name itself suggests is concerned
with human beings and their relation to the natural world. The theory highlight
issues of air, water, and soil pollution, destruction and excessive consumption of
natural resources, the decline of bio-diversity and climate change. For the greens,
political ideas and action must be rooted in this ‘socio-ecological problematic’26
They advocate a break with prevalent and dominant development paradigms
which are destructive of nature and want to bring about changes that put an end to

15 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

the existing unequal distributions of power and rights. They are thus committed to
social justice and equality, participatory democracy and women’s emancipation
and they are opposed to militarism. However in the face of an ever expanding
trend of globalization and free market economies, the green agenda of
foregrounding the local and the alternative faces an uphill task.
Yet another recent trend that draws inspiration from post-modernism is
Multiculturalism. Multiculturalism argues for adequate expression, representation
and recognition of the multiple cultures that might exist within a given State.27
Multiculturalism celebrates difference and would argue that difference should not
be the basis of discrimination. One culture cannot be preferred over another as
cultural values and practices are incomparable. Most of the western liberal
democratic States are dominated by one cultural tradition in the public arena. This
often becomes a source of unequal treatment of people following another tradition.
For example Sunday as the day of rest allows devout Christians to practice their
religion but such a practice ignores the demands of other religious communities,
which might prefer some other day of rest. Hence Multiculturalism demands
cultural equality. Multiculturalism as a school of thought gained currency in the
latter half of the twentieth century as immigrant populations such as the Asian
community in Britain and the French in Canada demanded equal cultural rights.
One of the critiques often advanced against Multiculturalism is that it ignores
intra-community differences which may very often oppress individual identity and
available life choices.
To sum up, the scope of politics has advanced tremendously in the past few
decades. This change is multidimensional. It includes emergence of new schools
of thought that engage and criticize viewpoints within the dominant traditions such
as Multiculturalism. It also includes new areas of theorizing as seen in the linkage
drawn between environment and politics by Green political theory. Finally
political practice has expanded on account of the new social movements that
emerged in the 1960s and 1970s. These movements broadly categorized as the

16 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

‘New Left’ unleashed a number of other movements such as the civil rights
movement, the anti war movement and the Feminist and Black movements. The
very pervasiveness of political activity provides enough justification for engaging
in a study of the discipline.

End notes
1) Heywood, Andrew (2002), Politics, Palgrave.
2) Leftwich, Adrian (1984),’Politics: People, Resources and Power, from Adrian
Leftwich (ed.) What is Politics? The activity and its study, Basil Blackwell, pp 65
3) Ibid.; pp 63
4) Held, David (1991), Political Theory Today, Polity Press. Read Introduction
5) Ibid.; pp 5
6) Ibid.; pp 5
7) Heywood, Andrew (2002), Politics, Palgrave
8) Heywood, Andrew (1994), ‘Introduction’, in Andrew Heywood, Political Ideas
and Concepts, Macmillan, London. pp12
9) Ibid.; pp14
10) Heywood, Andrew (1994), ‘Politics, Government and the State’, in Andrew
Heywood, Political Ideas and Concepts, Macmillan, London. pp12
11) Ibid.; pp20
12) Ibid.; pp25
13) Minogue, Kenneth (2005), Politics- A Very Short Introduction, Oxford
University Press, New Delhi.
14) Ibid.; pp 34
15) Ibid.; pp 37
16) Such a view was first enunciated by Thomas Hobbes who has been identified
as one of the traditional Liberal thinkers.
17) Levine, Herbert.M. (1987), Political Issues Debated: an Introduction to
Politics, Prentice hall, New Jersey, Second Edition.

17 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

18) Heywood, Andrew (1994), ‘Introduction’, in Andrew Heywood, Political

Ideas and Concepts, Macmillan, London. pp11
19) Levine, Herbert.M. (1987) Political Issues Debated: an Introduction to
Politics, Prentice hall, New Jersey, Second Edition
20) Heywood, Andrew (2002), Politics, Palgrave.
21) Ibid.; pp 18
22) Ibid.; pp 19
23) Hutchinson Encyclopedia (2006) Helicon Publishing Limited.
24) Lyotard, Jean Francois (1997),’Introduction to the Post-Modern Condition: A
Report on Knowledge’ from Stephen Eric Bronner, Twentieth Century Political
Theory: A Reader, Routledge, New York and London.
25) Butler, Judith (1997),’Contingent Foundations’, from Stephen Eric Bronner,
Twentieth Century Political Theory: A Reader, Routledge, New York and London.
26) Meadowcroft, James (2001), ‘Green political perspectives at the dawn of the
twenty-first century’, from Michael Freeden (ed.), Reassessing Political
Ideologies- the Durability of Dissent, Routledge, New York and London.
27) Ideologically and politically, multiculturalism and post-modernism are allies
in so far as both wish to foreground those identities, which have been oppressed,
dominated and marginalized. Yet they differ in so far as post-modernism stresses
excessively on the individual and questions the validity of modernistic categories
such as democracy, while multiculturalism focuses on communities as the basis of
social organization and wishes to promote diversity through democratic
institutions.

18 radhikaku@hotmail.com
 Radhika Kumar
Social Enquiry: Politics

Suggested Readings
1) Bottomore,Tom (ed.) Dictionary of Marxist Thought.
2) Callinicos, Alex (1984) ‘Marxism and politics’ Chapter 7 in Adrian
Leftwich, (ed) What is Politics? The activity and its study, Basil
Blackwell.
3) Hacker, Andrew (1961), Political Theory: Philosophy, Ideology and
Science, Macmillan, New York. Read Chapter 1 Pg 1-19
4) Held, David (1991), Political Theory Today, Polity Press. Read
Introduction
5) Heywood, Andrew (2002), Politics, Palgrave. Read Chapter one.
6) Heywood, Andrew (1994), Political Ideas and Concepts, Macmillan,
London. Read Chapter one.
7) Leftwich, Adrian (1984), What is Politics? The activity and its study,
Basil Blackwell. Read chapter 4
8) Levine, Herbert.M. (1987), Political Issues Debated: an Introduction to
Politics, Prentice hall, New Jersey, Second Edition.
9) Miliband, Ralph (1997), Marxism and Politics
10) Miller, David ‘Political Theory and Political Science’ in The Blackwell
Encyclopedia of Political Thought.
11) Miller, David (2003), Political Philosophy: A Very Short Introduction.
12) Minogue, Kenneth (2005), Politics- A Very Short Introduction, Oxford
University Press, New Delhi.
13) Vincent, Andrew, Modern Political Ideologies. Read Chapter on
Liberalism.

19 radhikaku@hotmail.com