Why and how is power shared in democracies?

 

INTRODUCTION 
The division of power among various groups and at various levels and parts of the government is necessary for the proper functioning of the democracy. It creates checks and balances in the political system of a country and removes dissatisfaction among various groups of society and parts of the government. However in different parts of the world problems have been created due to unequal representation of different groups in power sharing.

Belgium :
(i)    It is a small country in Europe smaller in area then Haryana in India.
(ii)    Bordering countries are Netherlands France and Germany
(iii)    It has the population of little over one crore about half of the population of Haryana
(iv)    The ethnic composition is complex.

 

(v)    The minority French Speaking community was relatively rich and powerful.
(vi)    This was resented by Dutch speaking coummunity who got the benifit of economic development and education much later.
(vii)    The tension continued during 1950’s and 1960’s and became acute in Bruseels.
(viii)    Dutch speaking people constituted a majority in the country but minority in capital.

Illustration 1 :

(i)    Which language speaking people resided in the areas marked with 1 and 4.
(ii)    Name the place marked with 2.
Solution
(i)    Dutch speaking, French speaking
(ii)    Brussels

Majoritarianism in srilanka :
    Srilanka :

(i)    An island nation a few kilometres away from Indian state of Tamilnadu coast in South Asia region.
(ii)    Population is 2 crore about same as Haryana state of India.
(iii)    It has diverse population.

(iv)    Srilanka became independent in 1948.
(v)    SINHALAS secured dominance over the government by the virtue of their majority.
(vi)    The Government adopted majoritarian measures to establish Sinhala supremacy.
(vii)    In 1956 by an Act Sinhala was declared the only official language, disregarding Tamils.
(viii)    The government policies were preferential and favoured sinhala applicants for university positions and government jobs.
(ix)    A new constitution stipulated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism.
(x)    All these events caused a feeling of alienation and great resentment in Tamils.
(xi)    Causes of resentment were –
    (a)    Tamil felt that non of the political parties led by Buddhist sinhala leader were sensitive to their langugage and culture.
    (b)    Constitution and the government policies denied them equal political rights.
    (c)    Discriminated against them in getting jobs and other opportunities and ignored their interest.
(xii)    Srilankan Tamils launched parties and struggles for
    (a)    Recognition of Tamil as an official language.
    (b)    Regional autonomy
    (c)    Equality of opportunity in education and jobs.
(xiii)    Demands of Tamils for more autonomy to provinces populated by Tamils was repeatedly denied by the majority led government.
(xiv)    By 1980’s several political organization came into existence demanding independent Tamil Eelam (state) in North and Eastern parts of Sri Lanka.
(xv)    This lead to civil war killing thousands of people of both communities.
(xvi)    People were forced to leave Srilanka as refugees and many more lost their livelihood leading to a terrible setback in social, cultural and economic life.

Illustration 2 :
    (i)    How did Srilankan Tamils start their struggle.
    (ii)    Why did Sinhala community seek to secure government dominance over Srilankan Government.
Solution
    (i)    By launching the political parties for 
        (a) Recognising tamil as an official language              (b) Regional autonomy
        (c) Equality of opportunity in education and Jobs.

Try yourself :
5.    What made Srilankan Tamils feel alinated?
6.    Give an account of ethenic composition of Sri Lanka.
7.    Why was the Act of 1956 passed in Srilanka?
Accommodation in belgium :
    The Belgian leaders took a different Path by recognising the existence of regional differences and cultural diversities :
(i)    Amendment of the constitution four times between 1970 and 1993 to enable everyone to live together in the same country.
(ii)   The arrangement they worked out is different from any other country and is very innovative.
        Elements of the Belgian model :
(i)    Number of Dutch and French speaking ministers shall equal in central government.
(ii)   Many powers of the central government has been given to the state government of the two regions of the country. The state governments are not subordinate to central government
(iii)   Brussels has a separate government in which both communities have equal representation.
        The French speaking people accepted equal representation in Brussels because the Dutch speaking community has accepted equal representation in the Central Government.
(iv)   The ‘Community Government’ is elected by the people belonging to one language community–Dutch, French and German speaking no matter wherethey live.
    This Government has power regarding cultural educational and language related issues.
    Nature of Belgian model :
(i)    It is very complicated, even for the people living in Belgium.
(ii)    These arrangements have worked well so far and has halped in avoiding civic strife between two major communities and a possible divison of the country on linguistic basis.
(iii)    After formation of European unions Brussels was chosen as its headquarters.

 

Why and how is power shared in democracies?

 

INTRODUCTION 
The division of power among various groups and at various levels and parts of the government is necessary for the proper functioning of the democracy. It creates checks and balances in the political system of a country and removes dissatisfaction among various groups of society and parts of the government. However in different parts of the world problems have been created due to unequal representation of different groups in power sharing.

Belgium :
(i)    It is a small country in Europe smaller in area then Haryana in India.
(ii)    Bordering countries are Netherlands France and Germany
(iii)    It has the population of little over one crore about half of the population of Haryana
(iv)    The ethnic composition is complex.

 

(v)    The minority French Speaking community was relatively rich and powerful.
(vi)    This was resented by Dutch speaking coummunity who got the benifit of economic development and education much later.
(vii)    The tension continued during 1950’s and 1960’s and became acute in Bruseels.
(viii)    Dutch speaking people constituted a majority in the country but minority in capital.

Illustration 1 :

(i)    Which language speaking people resided in the areas marked with 1 and 4.
(ii)    Name the place marked with 2.
Solution
(i)    Dutch speaking, French speaking
(ii)    Brussels

Majoritarianism in srilanka :
    Srilanka :

(i)    An island nation a few kilometres away from Indian state of Tamilnadu coast in South Asia region.
(ii)    Population is 2 crore about same as Haryana state of India.
(iii)    It has diverse population.

(iv)    Srilanka became independent in 1948.
(v)    SINHALAS secured dominance over the government by the virtue of their majority.
(vi)    The Government adopted majoritarian measures to establish Sinhala supremacy.
(vii)    In 1956 by an Act Sinhala was declared the only official language, disregarding Tamils.
(viii)    The government policies were preferential and favoured sinhala applicants for university positions and government jobs.
(ix)    A new constitution stipulated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism.
(x)    All these events caused a feeling of alienation and great resentment in Tamils.
(xi)    Causes of resentment were –
    (a)    Tamil felt that non of the political parties led by Buddhist sinhala leader were sensitive to their langugage and culture.
    (b)    Constitution and the government policies denied them equal political rights.
    (c)    Discriminated against them in getting jobs and other opportunities and ignored their interest.
(xii)    Srilankan Tamils launched parties and struggles for
    (a)    Recognition of Tamil as an official language.
    (b)    Regional autonomy
    (c)    Equality of opportunity in education and jobs.
(xiii)    Demands of Tamils for more autonomy to provinces populated by Tamils was repeatedly denied by the majority led government.
(xiv)    By 1980’s several political organization came into existence demanding independent Tamil Eelam (state) in North and Eastern parts of Sri Lanka.
(xv)    This lead to civil war killing thousands of people of both communities.
(xvi)    People were forced to leave Srilanka as refugees and many more lost their livelihood leading to a terrible setback in social, cultural and economic life.

Illustration 2 :
    (i)    How did Srilankan Tamils start their struggle.
    (ii)    Why did Sinhala community seek to secure government dominance over Srilankan Government.
Solution
    (i)    By launching the political parties for 
        (a) Recognising tamil as an official language              (b) Regional autonomy
        (c) Equality of opportunity in education and Jobs.

Try yourself :
5.    What made Srilankan Tamils feel alinated?
6.    Give an account of ethenic composition of Sri Lanka.
7.    Why was the Act of 1956 passed in Srilanka?
Accommodation in belgium :
    The Belgian leaders took a different Path by recognising the existence of regional differences and cultural diversities :
(i)    Amendment of the constitution four times between 1970 and 1993 to enable everyone to live together in the same country.
(ii)   The arrangement they worked out is different from any other country and is very innovative.
        Elements of the Belgian model :
(i)    Number of Dutch and French speaking ministers shall equal in central government.
(ii)   Many powers of the central government has been given to the state government of the two regions of the country. The state governments are not subordinate to central government
(iii)   Brussels has a separate government in which both communities have equal representation.
        The French speaking people accepted equal representation in Brussels because the Dutch speaking community has accepted equal representation in the Central Government.
(iv)   The ‘Community Government’ is elected by the people belonging to one language community–Dutch, French and German speaking no matter wherethey live.
    This Government has power regarding cultural educational and language related issues.
    Nature of Belgian model :
(i)    It is very complicated, even for the people living in Belgium.
(ii)    These arrangements have worked well so far and has halped in avoiding civic strife between two major communities and a possible divison of the country on linguistic basis.
(iii)    After formation of European unions Brussels was chosen as its headquarters.

 

Why and how is power shared in democracies?

 

INTRODUCTION 
The division of power among various groups and at various levels and parts of the government is necessary for the proper functioning of the democracy. It creates checks and balances in the political system of a country and removes dissatisfaction among various groups of society and parts of the government. However in different parts of the world problems have been created due to unequal representation of different groups in power sharing.

Belgium :
(i)    It is a small country in Europe smaller in area then Haryana in India.
(ii)    Bordering countries are Netherlands France and Germany
(iii)    It has the population of little over one crore about half of the population of Haryana
(iv)    The ethnic composition is complex.

 

(v)    The minority French Speaking community was relatively rich and powerful.
(vi)    This was resented by Dutch speaking coummunity who got the benifit of economic development and education much later.
(vii)    The tension continued during 1950’s and 1960’s and became acute in Bruseels.
(viii)    Dutch speaking people constituted a majority in the country but minority in capital.

Illustration 1 :

(i)    Which language speaking people resided in the areas marked with 1 and 4.
(ii)    Name the place marked with 2.
Solution
(i)    Dutch speaking, French speaking
(ii)    Brussels

Majoritarianism in srilanka :
    Srilanka :

(i)    An island nation a few kilometres away from Indian state of Tamilnadu coast in South Asia region.
(ii)    Population is 2 crore about same as Haryana state of India.
(iii)    It has diverse population.

(iv)    Srilanka became independent in 1948.
(v)    SINHALAS secured dominance over the government by the virtue of their majority.
(vi)    The Government adopted majoritarian measures to establish Sinhala supremacy.
(vii)    In 1956 by an Act Sinhala was declared the only official language, disregarding Tamils.
(viii)    The government policies were preferential and favoured sinhala applicants for university positions and government jobs.
(ix)    A new constitution stipulated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism.
(x)    All these events caused a feeling of alienation and great resentment in Tamils.
(xi)    Causes of resentment were –
    (a)    Tamil felt that non of the political parties led by Buddhist sinhala leader were sensitive to their langugage and culture.
    (b)    Constitution and the government policies denied them equal political rights.
    (c)    Discriminated against them in getting jobs and other opportunities and ignored their interest.
(xii)    Srilankan Tamils launched parties and struggles for
    (a)    Recognition of Tamil as an official language.
    (b)    Regional autonomy
    (c)    Equality of opportunity in education and jobs.
(xiii)    Demands of Tamils for more autonomy to provinces populated by Tamils was repeatedly denied by the majority led government.
(xiv)    By 1980’s several political organization came into existence demanding independent Tamil Eelam (state) in North and Eastern parts of Sri Lanka.
(xv)    This lead to civil war killing thousands of people of both communities.
(xvi)    People were forced to leave Srilanka as refugees and many more lost their livelihood leading to a terrible setback in social, cultural and economic life.

Illustration 2 :
    (i)    How did Srilankan Tamils start their struggle.
    (ii)    Why did Sinhala community seek to secure government dominance over Srilankan Government.
Solution
    (i)    By launching the political parties for 
        (a) Recognising tamil as an official language              (b) Regional autonomy
        (c) Equality of opportunity in education and Jobs.

Try yourself :
5.    What made Srilankan Tamils feel alinated?
6.    Give an account of ethenic composition of Sri Lanka.
7.    Why was the Act of 1956 passed in Srilanka?
Accommodation in belgium :
    The Belgian leaders took a different Path by recognising the existence of regional differences and cultural diversities :
(i)    Amendment of the constitution four times between 1970 and 1993 to enable everyone to live together in the same country.
(ii)   The arrangement they worked out is different from any other country and is very innovative.
        Elements of the Belgian model :
(i)    Number of Dutch and French speaking ministers shall equal in central government.
(ii)   Many powers of the central government has been given to the state government of the two regions of the country. The state governments are not subordinate to central government
(iii)   Brussels has a separate government in which both communities have equal representation.
        The French speaking people accepted equal representation in Brussels because the Dutch speaking community has accepted equal representation in the Central Government.
(iv)   The ‘Community Government’ is elected by the people belonging to one language community–Dutch, French and German speaking no matter wherethey live.
    This Government has power regarding cultural educational and language related issues.
    Nature of Belgian model :
(i)    It is very complicated, even for the people living in Belgium.
(ii)    These arrangements have worked well so far and has halped in avoiding civic strife between two major communities and a possible divison of the country on linguistic basis.
(iii)    After formation of European unions Brussels was chosen as its headquarters.

 

Why and how is power shared in democracies?

 

INTRODUCTION 
The division of power among various groups and at various levels and parts of the government is necessary for the proper functioning of the democracy. It creates checks and balances in the political system of a country and removes dissatisfaction among various groups of society and parts of the government. However in different parts of the world problems have been created due to unequal representation of different groups in power sharing.

Belgium :
(i)    It is a small country in Europe smaller in area then Haryana in India.
(ii)    Bordering countries are Netherlands France and Germany
(iii)    It has the population of little over one crore about half of the population of Haryana
(iv)    The ethnic composition is complex.

 

(v)    The minority French Speaking community was relatively rich and powerful.
(vi)    This was resented by Dutch speaking coummunity who got the benifit of economic development and education much later.
(vii)    The tension continued during 1950’s and 1960’s and became acute in Bruseels.
(viii)    Dutch speaking people constituted a majority in the country but minority in capital.

Illustration 1 :

(i)    Which language speaking people resided in the areas marked with 1 and 4.
(ii)    Name the place marked with 2.
Solution
(i)    Dutch speaking, French speaking
(ii)    Brussels

Majoritarianism in srilanka :
    Srilanka :

(i)    An island nation a few kilometres away from Indian state of Tamilnadu coast in South Asia region.
(ii)    Population is 2 crore about same as Haryana state of India.
(iii)    It has diverse population.

(iv)    Srilanka became independent in 1948.
(v)    SINHALAS secured dominance over the government by the virtue of their majority.
(vi)    The Government adopted majoritarian measures to establish Sinhala supremacy.
(vii)    In 1956 by an Act Sinhala was declared the only official language, disregarding Tamils.
(viii)    The government policies were preferential and favoured sinhala applicants for university positions and government jobs.
(ix)    A new constitution stipulated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism.
(x)    All these events caused a feeling of alienation and great resentment in Tamils.
(xi)    Causes of resentment were –
    (a)    Tamil felt that non of the political parties led by Buddhist sinhala leader were sensitive to their langugage and culture.
    (b)    Constitution and the government policies denied them equal political rights.
    (c)    Discriminated against them in getting jobs and other opportunities and ignored their interest.
(xii)    Srilankan Tamils launched parties and struggles for
    (a)    Recognition of Tamil as an official language.
    (b)    Regional autonomy
    (c)    Equality of opportunity in education and jobs.
(xiii)    Demands of Tamils for more autonomy to provinces populated by Tamils was repeatedly denied by the majority led government.
(xiv)    By 1980’s several political organization came into existence demanding independent Tamil Eelam (state) in North and Eastern parts of Sri Lanka.
(xv)    This lead to civil war killing thousands of people of both communities.
(xvi)    People were forced to leave Srilanka as refugees and many more lost their livelihood leading to a terrible setback in social, cultural and economic life.

Illustration 2 :
    (i)    How did Srilankan Tamils start their struggle.
    (ii)    Why did Sinhala community seek to secure government dominance over Srilankan Government.
Solution
    (i)    By launching the political parties for 
        (a) Recognising tamil as an official language              (b) Regional autonomy
        (c) Equality of opportunity in education and Jobs.

Try yourself :
5.    What made Srilankan Tamils feel alinated?
6.    Give an account of ethenic composition of Sri Lanka.
7.    Why was the Act of 1956 passed in Srilanka?
Accommodation in belgium :
    The Belgian leaders took a different Path by recognising the existence of regional differences and cultural diversities :
(i)    Amendment of the constitution four times between 1970 and 1993 to enable everyone to live together in the same country.
(ii)   The arrangement they worked out is different from any other country and is very innovative.
        Elements of the Belgian model :
(i)    Number of Dutch and French speaking ministers shall equal in central government.
(ii)   Many powers of the central government has been given to the state government of the two regions of the country. The state governments are not subordinate to central government
(iii)   Brussels has a separate government in which both communities have equal representation.
        The French speaking people accepted equal representation in Brussels because the Dutch speaking community has accepted equal representation in the Central Government.
(iv)   The ‘Community Government’ is elected by the people belonging to one language community–Dutch, French and German speaking no matter wherethey live.
    This Government has power regarding cultural educational and language related issues.
    Nature of Belgian model :
(i)    It is very complicated, even for the people living in Belgium.
(ii)    These arrangements have worked well so far and has halped in avoiding civic strife between two major communities and a possible divison of the country on linguistic basis.
(iii)    After formation of European unions Brussels was chosen as its headquarters.

 

Why and how is power shared in democracies?

 

INTRODUCTION 
The division of power among various groups and at various levels and parts of the government is necessary for the proper functioning of the democracy. It creates checks and balances in the political system of a country and removes dissatisfaction among various groups of society and parts of the government. However in different parts of the world problems have been created due to unequal representation of different groups in power sharing.

Belgium :
(i)    It is a small country in Europe smaller in area then Haryana in India.
(ii)    Bordering countries are Netherlands France and Germany
(iii)    It has the population of little over one crore about half of the population of Haryana
(iv)    The ethnic composition is complex.

 

(v)    The minority French Speaking community was relatively rich and powerful.
(vi)    This was resented by Dutch speaking coummunity who got the benifit of economic development and education much later.
(vii)    The tension continued during 1950’s and 1960’s and became acute in Bruseels.
(viii)    Dutch speaking people constituted a majority in the country but minority in capital.

Illustration 1 :

(i)    Which language speaking people resided in the areas marked with 1 and 4.
(ii)    Name the place marked with 2.
Solution
(i)    Dutch speaking, French speaking
(ii)    Brussels

Majoritarianism in srilanka :
    Srilanka :

(i)    An island nation a few kilometres away from Indian state of Tamilnadu coast in South Asia region.
(ii)    Population is 2 crore about same as Haryana state of India.
(iii)    It has diverse population.

(iv)    Srilanka became independent in 1948.
(v)    SINHALAS secured dominance over the government by the virtue of their majority.
(vi)    The Government adopted majoritarian measures to establish Sinhala supremacy.
(vii)    In 1956 by an Act Sinhala was declared the only official language, disregarding Tamils.
(viii)    The government policies were preferential and favoured sinhala applicants for university positions and government jobs.
(ix)    A new constitution stipulated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism.
(x)    All these events caused a feeling of alienation and great resentment in Tamils.
(xi)    Causes of resentment were –
    (a)    Tamil felt that non of the political parties led by Buddhist sinhala leader were sensitive to their langugage and culture.
    (b)    Constitution and the government policies denied them equal political rights.
    (c)    Discriminated against them in getting jobs and other opportunities and ignored their interest.
(xii)    Srilankan Tamils launched parties and struggles for
    (a)    Recognition of Tamil as an official language.
    (b)    Regional autonomy
    (c)    Equality of opportunity in education and jobs.
(xiii)    Demands of Tamils for more autonomy to provinces populated by Tamils was repeatedly denied by the majority led government.
(xiv)    By 1980’s several political organization came into existence demanding independent Tamil Eelam (state) in North and Eastern parts of Sri Lanka.
(xv)    This lead to civil war killing thousands of people of both communities.
(xvi)    People were forced to leave Srilanka as refugees and many more lost their livelihood leading to a terrible setback in social, cultural and economic life.

Illustration 2 :
    (i)    How did Srilankan Tamils start their struggle.
    (ii)    Why did Sinhala community seek to secure government dominance over Srilankan Government.
Solution
    (i)    By launching the political parties for 
        (a) Recognising tamil as an official language              (b) Regional autonomy
        (c) Equality of opportunity in education and Jobs.

Try yourself :
5.    What made Srilankan Tamils feel alinated?
6.    Give an account of ethenic composition of Sri Lanka.
7.    Why was the Act of 1956 passed in Srilanka?
Accommodation in belgium :
    The Belgian leaders took a different Path by recognising the existence of regional differences and cultural diversities :
(i)    Amendment of the constitution four times between 1970 and 1993 to enable everyone to live together in the same country.
(ii)   The arrangement they worked out is different from any other country and is very innovative.
        Elements of the Belgian model :
(i)    Number of Dutch and French speaking ministers shall equal in central government.
(ii)   Many powers of the central government has been given to the state government of the two regions of the country. The state governments are not subordinate to central government
(iii)   Brussels has a separate government in which both communities have equal representation.
        The French speaking people accepted equal representation in Brussels because the Dutch speaking community has accepted equal representation in the Central Government.
(iv)   The ‘Community Government’ is elected by the people belonging to one language community–Dutch, French and German speaking no matter wherethey live.
    This Government has power regarding cultural educational and language related issues.
    Nature of Belgian model :
(i)    It is very complicated, even for the people living in Belgium.
(ii)    These arrangements have worked well so far and has halped in avoiding civic strife between two major communities and a possible divison of the country on linguistic basis.
(iii)    After formation of European unions Brussels was chosen as its headquarters.

 

Why and how is power shared in democracies?

 

INTRODUCTION 
The division of power among various groups and at various levels and parts of the government is necessary for the proper functioning of the democracy. It creates checks and balances in the political system of a country and removes dissatisfaction among various groups of society and parts of the government. However in different parts of the world problems have been created due to unequal representation of different groups in power sharing.

Belgium :
(i)    It is a small country in Europe smaller in area then Haryana in India.
(ii)    Bordering countries are Netherlands France and Germany
(iii)    It has the population of little over one crore about half of the population of Haryana
(iv)    The ethnic composition is complex.

 

(v)    The minority French Speaking community was relatively rich and powerful.
(vi)    This was resented by Dutch speaking coummunity who got the benifit of economic development and education much later.
(vii)    The tension continued during 1950’s and 1960’s and became acute in Bruseels.
(viii)    Dutch speaking people constituted a majority in the country but minority in capital.

Illustration 1 :

(i)    Which language speaking people resided in the areas marked with 1 and 4.
(ii)    Name the place marked with 2.
Solution
(i)    Dutch speaking, French speaking
(ii)    Brussels

Majoritarianism in srilanka :
    Srilanka :

(i)    An island nation a few kilometres away from Indian state of Tamilnadu coast in South Asia region.
(ii)    Population is 2 crore about same as Haryana state of India.
(iii)    It has diverse population.

(iv)    Srilanka became independent in 1948.
(v)    SINHALAS secured dominance over the government by the virtue of their majority.
(vi)    The Government adopted majoritarian measures to establish Sinhala supremacy.
(vii)    In 1956 by an Act Sinhala was declared the only official language, disregarding Tamils.
(viii)    The government policies were preferential and favoured sinhala applicants for university positions and government jobs.
(ix)    A new constitution stipulated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism.
(x)    All these events caused a feeling of alienation and great resentment in Tamils.
(xi)    Causes of resentment were –
    (a)    Tamil felt that non of the political parties led by Buddhist sinhala leader were sensitive to their langugage and culture.
    (b)    Constitution and the government policies denied them equal political rights.
    (c)    Discriminated against them in getting jobs and other opportunities and ignored their interest.
(xii)    Srilankan Tamils launched parties and struggles for
    (a)    Recognition of Tamil as an official language.
    (b)    Regional autonomy
    (c)    Equality of opportunity in education and jobs.
(xiii)    Demands of Tamils for more autonomy to provinces populated by Tamils was repeatedly denied by the majority led government.
(xiv)    By 1980’s several political organization came into existence demanding independent Tamil Eelam (state) in North and Eastern parts of Sri Lanka.
(xv)    This lead to civil war killing thousands of people of both communities.
(xvi)    People were forced to leave Srilanka as refugees and many more lost their livelihood leading to a terrible setback in social, cultural and economic life.

Illustration 2 :
    (i)    How did Srilankan Tamils start their struggle.
    (ii)    Why did Sinhala community seek to secure government dominance over Srilankan Government.
Solution
    (i)    By launching the political parties for 
        (a) Recognising tamil as an official language              (b) Regional autonomy
        (c) Equality of opportunity in education and Jobs.

Try yourself :
5.    What made Srilankan Tamils feel alinated?
6.    Give an account of ethenic composition of Sri Lanka.
7.    Why was the Act of 1956 passed in Srilanka?
Accommodation in belgium :
    The Belgian leaders took a different Path by recognising the existence of regional differences and cultural diversities :
(i)    Amendment of the constitution four times between 1970 and 1993 to enable everyone to live together in the same country.
(ii)   The arrangement they worked out is different from any other country and is very innovative.
        Elements of the Belgian model :
(i)    Number of Dutch and French speaking ministers shall equal in central government.
(ii)   Many powers of the central government has been given to the state government of the two regions of the country. The state governments are not subordinate to central government
(iii)   Brussels has a separate government in which both communities have equal representation.
        The French speaking people accepted equal representation in Brussels because the Dutch speaking community has accepted equal representation in the Central Government.
(iv)   The ‘Community Government’ is elected by the people belonging to one language community–Dutch, French and German speaking no matter wherethey live.
    This Government has power regarding cultural educational and language related issues.
    Nature of Belgian model :
(i)    It is very complicated, even for the people living in Belgium.
(ii)    These arrangements have worked well so far and has halped in avoiding civic strife between two major communities and a possible divison of the country on linguistic basis.
(iii)    After formation of European unions Brussels was chosen as its headquarters.

 

Why and how is power shared in democracies?

 

INTRODUCTION 
The division of power among various groups and at various levels and parts of the government is necessary for the proper functioning of the democracy. It creates checks and balances in the political system of a country and removes dissatisfaction among various groups of society and parts of the government. However in different parts of the world problems have been created due to unequal representation of different groups in power sharing.

Belgium :
(i)    It is a small country in Europe smaller in area then Haryana in India.
(ii)    Bordering countries are Netherlands France and Germany
(iii)    It has the population of little over one crore about half of the population of Haryana
(iv)    The ethnic composition is complex.

 

(v)    The minority French Speaking community was relatively rich and powerful.
(vi)    This was resented by Dutch speaking coummunity who got the benifit of economic development and education much later.
(vii)    The tension continued during 1950’s and 1960’s and became acute in Bruseels.
(viii)    Dutch speaking people constituted a majority in the country but minority in capital.

Illustration 1 :

(i)    Which language speaking people resided in the areas marked with 1 and 4.
(ii)    Name the place marked with 2.
Solution
(i)    Dutch speaking, French speaking
(ii)    Brussels

Majoritarianism in srilanka :
    Srilanka :

(i)    An island nation a few kilometres away from Indian state of Tamilnadu coast in South Asia region.
(ii)    Population is 2 crore about same as Haryana state of India.
(iii)    It has diverse population.

(iv)    Srilanka became independent in 1948.
(v)    SINHALAS secured dominance over the government by the virtue of their majority.
(vi)    The Government adopted majoritarian measures to establish Sinhala supremacy.
(vii)    In 1956 by an Act Sinhala was declared the only official language, disregarding Tamils.
(viii)    The government policies were preferential and favoured sinhala applicants for university positions and government jobs.
(ix)    A new constitution stipulated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism.
(x)    All these events caused a feeling of alienation and great resentment in Tamils.
(xi)    Causes of resentment were –
    (a)    Tamil felt that non of the political parties led by Buddhist sinhala leader were sensitive to their langugage and culture.
    (b)    Constitution and the government policies denied them equal political rights.
    (c)    Discriminated against them in getting jobs and other opportunities and ignored their interest.
(xii)    Srilankan Tamils launched parties and struggles for
    (a)    Recognition of Tamil as an official language.
    (b)    Regional autonomy
    (c)    Equality of opportunity in education and jobs.
(xiii)    Demands of Tamils for more autonomy to provinces populated by Tamils was repeatedly denied by the majority led government.
(xiv)    By 1980’s several political organization came into existence demanding independent Tamil Eelam (state) in North and Eastern parts of Sri Lanka.
(xv)    This lead to civil war killing thousands of people of both communities.
(xvi)    People were forced to leave Srilanka as refugees and many more lost their livelihood leading to a terrible setback in social, cultural and economic life.

Illustration 2 :
    (i)    How did Srilankan Tamils start their struggle.
    (ii)    Why did Sinhala community seek to secure government dominance over Srilankan Government.
Solution
    (i)    By launching the political parties for 
        (a) Recognising tamil as an official language              (b) Regional autonomy
        (c) Equality of opportunity in education and Jobs.

Try yourself :
5.    What made Srilankan Tamils feel alinated?
6.    Give an account of ethenic composition of Sri Lanka.
7.    Why was the Act of 1956 passed in Srilanka?
Accommodation in belgium :
    The Belgian leaders took a different Path by recognising the existence of regional differences and cultural diversities :
(i)    Amendment of the constitution four times between 1970 and 1993 to enable everyone to live together in the same country.
(ii)   The arrangement they worked out is different from any other country and is very innovative.
        Elements of the Belgian model :
(i)    Number of Dutch and French speaking ministers shall equal in central government.
(ii)   Many powers of the central government has been given to the state government of the two regions of the country. The state governments are not subordinate to central government
(iii)   Brussels has a separate government in which both communities have equal representation.
        The French speaking people accepted equal representation in Brussels because the Dutch speaking community has accepted equal representation in the Central Government.
(iv)   The ‘Community Government’ is elected by the people belonging to one language community–Dutch, French and German speaking no matter wherethey live.
    This Government has power regarding cultural educational and language related issues.
    Nature of Belgian model :
(i)    It is very complicated, even for the people living in Belgium.
(ii)    These arrangements have worked well so far and has halped in avoiding civic strife between two major communities and a possible divison of the country on linguistic basis.
(iii)    After formation of European unions Brussels was chosen as its headquarters.

 

Are divisions inherent to the working of democracy?

INTRODUCTION 
In most of the countries of the world we find different social norms in different parts of the countries. Democracy is such a form of government which have the capabilities to assimilate the differences which are found among the different cultural groups. In this topic we study how democracy responds to social diffrences, divisons and  inequalities. It also deals with various forms of social differences and how the democratic politics affects and is affected by these social diversities. It is an attempt to understand the working of democracy admist various social differences.

Important Terms
   Homogenous society : A society with similar kinds of people.
   Migrant : Anybody who shifts from one region or country to another region within a country or to a another country, usually for work or other economic       opportunities.
   Civil Rights Movement : It was a non-violent movement initiated by Martin Luther King Jr. 
    to fight against racial discrimination practised in the US against African-Americans who were Blacks.
    frican-American : An African-American is a person in the United States whose ancestors, 
    fathers and forefathers, were born in Sub-Sahara Africa.
    Black power : The Black Power movement came into existence in 1966 and lasted till 1975. 
    It was a militant and racist movement advocating even violence to end racism in the US.
    Overlapping differences : When some social differencdes overlap other differences.
    Cross-cutting differences : When some social differences cross-cut one another.

democracy and diversity    
Tommy Smith and John Carlos US Athletes were Afro - Americans had won gold and Bronze medals respectively.
They received their medals wearing Black socks and no shoes to represent Black poverty. With this gesture, they tried to draw international attention to racial discrimination in the United States. The black-gloved and raised clenched fists were meant to symbolise Black Power.
The silver medallist, white Australian athlete, Peter Norman, wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.
The International Olympic Association held Carlos and Smith guilty of violating the Olympic spirit by making a political statement. Their medals were taken back. Back home, they were subjected to a lot of criticism. 
Norman too suffered for his action and was not included in the Australian team for the next Olympic. But their action succeeded in gaining international attention for the Civil Rights Movement in the US.

difference, similarities, divisions
The athletes in the example above were responding to social divisions and social divisions
The examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka show both regional and social divisions. In the case of Belgium we noted that people who live in different regions speak different languages. In Sri Lanka, we noted linguistic as well as religious differences. Thus social diversity can take different forms in different societies.

Illustration 1
    Who were Tommie Smith and John Carlos?
Solution
    The were African-Americans, who won gold and Bronze medals in Mexico olympics drew attention of world community towards racial discrimination.

Illustration 2
    Who was Martin Luther king Junior?
Solution
    He led civil rights movement in USA against racial discrimination against African American.

Illustration 3
    Who were African-Americans?
Solution
    Blacks Americans the descendants of African who were brought into America as slaves between the 17th to 19th century.

Illustration 4
    What was Black power?
Solution
    It was movement between 1966 to 1975 which advocated even voilence if necessary to end racism in U.S.

Illustration 5
    What was the reaction of Peter Norman  towards the other two winning athlete?
Solution
    Peter Norman an Australian wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the prize ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.

Are divisions inherent to the working of democracy?

INTRODUCTION 
In most of the countries of the world we find different social norms in different parts of the countries. Democracy is such a form of government which have the capabilities to assimilate the differences which are found among the different cultural groups. In this topic we study how democracy responds to social diffrences, divisons and  inequalities. It also deals with various forms of social differences and how the democratic politics affects and is affected by these social diversities. It is an attempt to understand the working of democracy admist various social differences.

Important Terms
   Homogenous society : A society with similar kinds of people.
   Migrant : Anybody who shifts from one region or country to another region within a country or to a another country, usually for work or other economic       opportunities.
   Civil Rights Movement : It was a non-violent movement initiated by Martin Luther King Jr. 
    to fight against racial discrimination practised in the US against African-Americans who were Blacks.
    frican-American : An African-American is a person in the United States whose ancestors, 
    fathers and forefathers, were born in Sub-Sahara Africa.
    Black power : The Black Power movement came into existence in 1966 and lasted till 1975. 
    It was a militant and racist movement advocating even violence to end racism in the US.
    Overlapping differences : When some social differencdes overlap other differences.
    Cross-cutting differences : When some social differences cross-cut one another.

democracy and diversity    
Tommy Smith and John Carlos US Athletes were Afro - Americans had won gold and Bronze medals respectively.
They received their medals wearing Black socks and no shoes to represent Black poverty. With this gesture, they tried to draw international attention to racial discrimination in the United States. The black-gloved and raised clenched fists were meant to symbolise Black Power.
The silver medallist, white Australian athlete, Peter Norman, wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.
The International Olympic Association held Carlos and Smith guilty of violating the Olympic spirit by making a political statement. Their medals were taken back. Back home, they were subjected to a lot of criticism. 
Norman too suffered for his action and was not included in the Australian team for the next Olympic. But their action succeeded in gaining international attention for the Civil Rights Movement in the US.

difference, similarities, divisions
The athletes in the example above were responding to social divisions and social divisions
The examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka show both regional and social divisions. In the case of Belgium we noted that people who live in different regions speak different languages. In Sri Lanka, we noted linguistic as well as religious differences. Thus social diversity can take different forms in different societies.

Illustration 1
    Who were Tommie Smith and John Carlos?
Solution
    The were African-Americans, who won gold and Bronze medals in Mexico olympics drew attention of world community towards racial discrimination.

Illustration 2
    Who was Martin Luther king Junior?
Solution
    He led civil rights movement in USA against racial discrimination against African American.

Illustration 3
    Who were African-Americans?
Solution
    Blacks Americans the descendants of African who were brought into America as slaves between the 17th to 19th century.

Illustration 4
    What was Black power?
Solution
    It was movement between 1966 to 1975 which advocated even voilence if necessary to end racism in U.S.

Illustration 5
    What was the reaction of Peter Norman  towards the other two winning athlete?
Solution
    Peter Norman an Australian wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the prize ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.

Are divisions inherent to the working of democracy?

INTRODUCTION 
In most of the countries of the world we find different social norms in different parts of the countries. Democracy is such a form of government which have the capabilities to assimilate the differences which are found among the different cultural groups. In this topic we study how democracy responds to social diffrences, divisons and  inequalities. It also deals with various forms of social differences and how the democratic politics affects and is affected by these social diversities. It is an attempt to understand the working of democracy admist various social differences.

Important Terms
   Homogenous society : A society with similar kinds of people.
   Migrant : Anybody who shifts from one region or country to another region within a country or to a another country, usually for work or other economic       opportunities.
   Civil Rights Movement : It was a non-violent movement initiated by Martin Luther King Jr. 
    to fight against racial discrimination practised in the US against African-Americans who were Blacks.
    frican-American : An African-American is a person in the United States whose ancestors, 
    fathers and forefathers, were born in Sub-Sahara Africa.
    Black power : The Black Power movement came into existence in 1966 and lasted till 1975. 
    It was a militant and racist movement advocating even violence to end racism in the US.
    Overlapping differences : When some social differencdes overlap other differences.
    Cross-cutting differences : When some social differences cross-cut one another.

democracy and diversity    
Tommy Smith and John Carlos US Athletes were Afro - Americans had won gold and Bronze medals respectively.
They received their medals wearing Black socks and no shoes to represent Black poverty. With this gesture, they tried to draw international attention to racial discrimination in the United States. The black-gloved and raised clenched fists were meant to symbolise Black Power.
The silver medallist, white Australian athlete, Peter Norman, wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.
The International Olympic Association held Carlos and Smith guilty of violating the Olympic spirit by making a political statement. Their medals were taken back. Back home, they were subjected to a lot of criticism. 
Norman too suffered for his action and was not included in the Australian team for the next Olympic. But their action succeeded in gaining international attention for the Civil Rights Movement in the US.

difference, similarities, divisions
The athletes in the example above were responding to social divisions and social divisions
The examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka show both regional and social divisions. In the case of Belgium we noted that people who live in different regions speak different languages. In Sri Lanka, we noted linguistic as well as religious differences. Thus social diversity can take different forms in different societies.

Illustration 1
    Who were Tommie Smith and John Carlos?
Solution
    The were African-Americans, who won gold and Bronze medals in Mexico olympics drew attention of world community towards racial discrimination.

Illustration 2
    Who was Martin Luther king Junior?
Solution
    He led civil rights movement in USA against racial discrimination against African American.

Illustration 3
    Who were African-Americans?
Solution
    Blacks Americans the descendants of African who were brought into America as slaves between the 17th to 19th century.

Illustration 4
    What was Black power?
Solution
    It was movement between 1966 to 1975 which advocated even voilence if necessary to end racism in U.S.

Illustration 5
    What was the reaction of Peter Norman  towards the other two winning athlete?
Solution
    Peter Norman an Australian wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the prize ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.

Are divisions inherent to the working of democracy?

INTRODUCTION 
In most of the countries of the world we find different social norms in different parts of the countries. Democracy is such a form of government which have the capabilities to assimilate the differences which are found among the different cultural groups. In this topic we study how democracy responds to social diffrences, divisons and  inequalities. It also deals with various forms of social differences and how the democratic politics affects and is affected by these social diversities. It is an attempt to understand the working of democracy admist various social differences.

Important Terms
   Homogenous society : A society with similar kinds of people.
   Migrant : Anybody who shifts from one region or country to another region within a country or to a another country, usually for work or other economic       opportunities.
   Civil Rights Movement : It was a non-violent movement initiated by Martin Luther King Jr. 
    to fight against racial discrimination practised in the US against African-Americans who were Blacks.
    frican-American : An African-American is a person in the United States whose ancestors, 
    fathers and forefathers, were born in Sub-Sahara Africa.
    Black power : The Black Power movement came into existence in 1966 and lasted till 1975. 
    It was a militant and racist movement advocating even violence to end racism in the US.
    Overlapping differences : When some social differencdes overlap other differences.
    Cross-cutting differences : When some social differences cross-cut one another.

democracy and diversity    
Tommy Smith and John Carlos US Athletes were Afro - Americans had won gold and Bronze medals respectively.
They received their medals wearing Black socks and no shoes to represent Black poverty. With this gesture, they tried to draw international attention to racial discrimination in the United States. The black-gloved and raised clenched fists were meant to symbolise Black Power.
The silver medallist, white Australian athlete, Peter Norman, wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.
The International Olympic Association held Carlos and Smith guilty of violating the Olympic spirit by making a political statement. Their medals were taken back. Back home, they were subjected to a lot of criticism. 
Norman too suffered for his action and was not included in the Australian team for the next Olympic. But their action succeeded in gaining international attention for the Civil Rights Movement in the US.

difference, similarities, divisions
The athletes in the example above were responding to social divisions and social divisions
The examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka show both regional and social divisions. In the case of Belgium we noted that people who live in different regions speak different languages. In Sri Lanka, we noted linguistic as well as religious differences. Thus social diversity can take different forms in different societies.

Illustration 1
    Who were Tommie Smith and John Carlos?
Solution
    The were African-Americans, who won gold and Bronze medals in Mexico olympics drew attention of world community towards racial discrimination.

Illustration 2
    Who was Martin Luther king Junior?
Solution
    He led civil rights movement in USA against racial discrimination against African American.

Illustration 3
    Who were African-Americans?
Solution
    Blacks Americans the descendants of African who were brought into America as slaves between the 17th to 19th century.

Illustration 4
    What was Black power?
Solution
    It was movement between 1966 to 1975 which advocated even voilence if necessary to end racism in U.S.

Illustration 5
    What was the reaction of Peter Norman  towards the other two winning athlete?
Solution
    Peter Norman an Australian wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the prize ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.

Are divisions inherent to the working of democracy?

INTRODUCTION 
In most of the countries of the world we find different social norms in different parts of the countries. Democracy is such a form of government which have the capabilities to assimilate the differences which are found among the different cultural groups. In this topic we study how democracy responds to social diffrences, divisons and  inequalities. It also deals with various forms of social differences and how the democratic politics affects and is affected by these social diversities. It is an attempt to understand the working of democracy admist various social differences.

Important Terms
   Homogenous society : A society with similar kinds of people.
   Migrant : Anybody who shifts from one region or country to another region within a country or to a another country, usually for work or other economic       opportunities.
   Civil Rights Movement : It was a non-violent movement initiated by Martin Luther King Jr. 
    to fight against racial discrimination practised in the US against African-Americans who were Blacks.
    frican-American : An African-American is a person in the United States whose ancestors, 
    fathers and forefathers, were born in Sub-Sahara Africa.
    Black power : The Black Power movement came into existence in 1966 and lasted till 1975. 
    It was a militant and racist movement advocating even violence to end racism in the US.
    Overlapping differences : When some social differencdes overlap other differences.
    Cross-cutting differences : When some social differences cross-cut one another.

democracy and diversity    
Tommy Smith and John Carlos US Athletes were Afro - Americans had won gold and Bronze medals respectively.
They received their medals wearing Black socks and no shoes to represent Black poverty. With this gesture, they tried to draw international attention to racial discrimination in the United States. The black-gloved and raised clenched fists were meant to symbolise Black Power.
The silver medallist, white Australian athlete, Peter Norman, wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.
The International Olympic Association held Carlos and Smith guilty of violating the Olympic spirit by making a political statement. Their medals were taken back. Back home, they were subjected to a lot of criticism. 
Norman too suffered for his action and was not included in the Australian team for the next Olympic. But their action succeeded in gaining international attention for the Civil Rights Movement in the US.

difference, similarities, divisions
The athletes in the example above were responding to social divisions and social divisions
The examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka show both regional and social divisions. In the case of Belgium we noted that people who live in different regions speak different languages. In Sri Lanka, we noted linguistic as well as religious differences. Thus social diversity can take different forms in different societies.

Illustration 1
    Who were Tommie Smith and John Carlos?
Solution
    The were African-Americans, who won gold and Bronze medals in Mexico olympics drew attention of world community towards racial discrimination.

Illustration 2
    Who was Martin Luther king Junior?
Solution
    He led civil rights movement in USA against racial discrimination against African American.

Illustration 3
    Who were African-Americans?
Solution
    Blacks Americans the descendants of African who were brought into America as slaves between the 17th to 19th century.

Illustration 4
    What was Black power?
Solution
    It was movement between 1966 to 1975 which advocated even voilence if necessary to end racism in U.S.

Illustration 5
    What was the reaction of Peter Norman  towards the other two winning athlete?
Solution
    Peter Norman an Australian wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the prize ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.

Are divisions inherent to the working of democracy?

INTRODUCTION 
In most of the countries of the world we find different social norms in different parts of the countries. Democracy is such a form of government which have the capabilities to assimilate the differences which are found among the different cultural groups. In this topic we study how democracy responds to social diffrences, divisons and  inequalities. It also deals with various forms of social differences and how the democratic politics affects and is affected by these social diversities. It is an attempt to understand the working of democracy admist various social differences.

Important Terms
   Homogenous society : A society with similar kinds of people.
   Migrant : Anybody who shifts from one region or country to another region within a country or to a another country, usually for work or other economic       opportunities.
   Civil Rights Movement : It was a non-violent movement initiated by Martin Luther King Jr. 
    to fight against racial discrimination practised in the US against African-Americans who were Blacks.
    frican-American : An African-American is a person in the United States whose ancestors, 
    fathers and forefathers, were born in Sub-Sahara Africa.
    Black power : The Black Power movement came into existence in 1966 and lasted till 1975. 
    It was a militant and racist movement advocating even violence to end racism in the US.
    Overlapping differences : When some social differencdes overlap other differences.
    Cross-cutting differences : When some social differences cross-cut one another.

democracy and diversity    
Tommy Smith and John Carlos US Athletes were Afro - Americans had won gold and Bronze medals respectively.
They received their medals wearing Black socks and no shoes to represent Black poverty. With this gesture, they tried to draw international attention to racial discrimination in the United States. The black-gloved and raised clenched fists were meant to symbolise Black Power.
The silver medallist, white Australian athlete, Peter Norman, wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.
The International Olympic Association held Carlos and Smith guilty of violating the Olympic spirit by making a political statement. Their medals were taken back. Back home, they were subjected to a lot of criticism. 
Norman too suffered for his action and was not included in the Australian team for the next Olympic. But their action succeeded in gaining international attention for the Civil Rights Movement in the US.

difference, similarities, divisions
The athletes in the example above were responding to social divisions and social divisions
The examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka show both regional and social divisions. In the case of Belgium we noted that people who live in different regions speak different languages. In Sri Lanka, we noted linguistic as well as religious differences. Thus social diversity can take different forms in different societies.

Illustration 1
    Who were Tommie Smith and John Carlos?
Solution
    The were African-Americans, who won gold and Bronze medals in Mexico olympics drew attention of world community towards racial discrimination.

Illustration 2
    Who was Martin Luther king Junior?
Solution
    He led civil rights movement in USA against racial discrimination against African American.

Illustration 3
    Who were African-Americans?
Solution
    Blacks Americans the descendants of African who were brought into America as slaves between the 17th to 19th century.

Illustration 4
    What was Black power?
Solution
    It was movement between 1966 to 1975 which advocated even voilence if necessary to end racism in U.S.

Illustration 5
    What was the reaction of Peter Norman  towards the other two winning athlete?
Solution
    Peter Norman an Australian wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the prize ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.

Are divisions inherent to the working of democracy?

INTRODUCTION 
In most of the countries of the world we find different social norms in different parts of the countries. Democracy is such a form of government which have the capabilities to assimilate the differences which are found among the different cultural groups. In this topic we study how democracy responds to social diffrences, divisons and  inequalities. It also deals with various forms of social differences and how the democratic politics affects and is affected by these social diversities. It is an attempt to understand the working of democracy admist various social differences.

Important Terms
   Homogenous society : A society with similar kinds of people.
   Migrant : Anybody who shifts from one region or country to another region within a country or to a another country, usually for work or other economic       opportunities.
   Civil Rights Movement : It was a non-violent movement initiated by Martin Luther King Jr. 
    to fight against racial discrimination practised in the US against African-Americans who were Blacks.
    frican-American : An African-American is a person in the United States whose ancestors, 
    fathers and forefathers, were born in Sub-Sahara Africa.
    Black power : The Black Power movement came into existence in 1966 and lasted till 1975. 
    It was a militant and racist movement advocating even violence to end racism in the US.
    Overlapping differences : When some social differencdes overlap other differences.
    Cross-cutting differences : When some social differences cross-cut one another.

democracy and diversity    
Tommy Smith and John Carlos US Athletes were Afro - Americans had won gold and Bronze medals respectively.
They received their medals wearing Black socks and no shoes to represent Black poverty. With this gesture, they tried to draw international attention to racial discrimination in the United States. The black-gloved and raised clenched fists were meant to symbolise Black Power.
The silver medallist, white Australian athlete, Peter Norman, wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.
The International Olympic Association held Carlos and Smith guilty of violating the Olympic spirit by making a political statement. Their medals were taken back. Back home, they were subjected to a lot of criticism. 
Norman too suffered for his action and was not included in the Australian team for the next Olympic. But their action succeeded in gaining international attention for the Civil Rights Movement in the US.

difference, similarities, divisions
The athletes in the example above were responding to social divisions and social divisions
The examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka show both regional and social divisions. In the case of Belgium we noted that people who live in different regions speak different languages. In Sri Lanka, we noted linguistic as well as religious differences. Thus social diversity can take different forms in different societies.

Illustration 1
    Who were Tommie Smith and John Carlos?
Solution
    The were African-Americans, who won gold and Bronze medals in Mexico olympics drew attention of world community towards racial discrimination.

Illustration 2
    Who was Martin Luther king Junior?
Solution
    He led civil rights movement in USA against racial discrimination against African American.

Illustration 3
    Who were African-Americans?
Solution
    Blacks Americans the descendants of African who were brought into America as slaves between the 17th to 19th century.

Illustration 4
    What was Black power?
Solution
    It was movement between 1966 to 1975 which advocated even voilence if necessary to end racism in U.S.

Illustration 5
    What was the reaction of Peter Norman  towards the other two winning athlete?
Solution
    Peter Norman an Australian wore a human rights badge on his shirt during the prize ceremony to show his support to the two Americans.

Note: Ch-5 is to be done as project work only and will not be evaluated in theory

INTRODUCTION : 
Power sharing is an essential feature of democracy. The power is shared by different groups and organisation in various ways. In a country there are various organisations which have 
different interest and different view points. These organisation create pressure over the government for promoting the interest of their own community. They act as interest groups or pressure groups. In the subsequent chapter we will be discussing the pressure groups or interest groups and various movements for attaining any one objectives or few objectives.

popular struggles in nepal and bolivia :    
Nepal

Do you remember the story of the triumph of democracy in Poland? We studied it last year in the first chapter of class IX. The story reminded us about the role played by the people in the making of democracy. Let us read two recent stories of that kind and see how power is exercised in democracy.
Nepal witnessed an extraordinary popular movement in April 2006. The movement was aimed at restoring democracy.
Nepal, was one of the ‘third wave’ countries that it had won democracy in 1990. Although the king formally remained the head ot the state, the real power was exercised by popularly elected representatives. King Birendra, who has accepted this transition from absolute monarch) to constitutional monarchy, was killed in a mysterious massacre of the royal family in 2001.
King Gyanendra, the new king of Nepal, was not prepared.to accept democratic rule. He took advantage of the weakness and unpopularity of the democratically elected government. In February 2005, the king dismissed the then Prime Minister and dissolved the popularly elected Parliament. The movement of April 2006 was aimed at regaining popular control over the government from the king.
All the major political parties in the parliament formed a Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and called for a four day strike in Kathmandu, the country’s capital. 
This protest soon turned into an indefinite strike in which Maoist insurgents and various other organisations joined hands. People defied curfew and took to the streets. 
The security forces found themselves unable to take on more than a lakh people who gathered almost every day to demand restoration of democracy. The number of protesters reached between three to five lakhs on 21 April and they served an ultimatum to the king.
The leaders of the movement rejected the halfhearted concessions made by the king. 

Demands of The Napelese leader    
    1.     Restoration of parliament, 
    2.     Power to an all-party government and  
    3.     A new constituent assembly.
            On 24 April 2004, the last day of the ultimatum, the king was forced to concede all the three demands.
    1.    The SPA chose Girija Prasad Koirala as the new Prime Minister of the interim government. 
    2.    The restored parliament met and passed laws taking away most of the powers of the king.
    3.     The SPA and the Maoists came to an understanding about how the new Constituent Assembly was going to be elected. 
    4.    This struggle came to be known as Nepal’s second movement for democracy, the struggle of 
            the Nepali people is a source of inspiration to democrats all over the world.

Bolivia
The story of Poland and that of Nepal apply to the struggle for establishing or restoring democracy. But the role of popular struggles does not come to an end with the establishment of democracy. People’s successful struggle against privatisation of water in Bolivia reminds us that popular struggles are integral to the working of democracy.

Cause of Water War
1.   Bolivia is a poor country in Latin America. The World Bank pressurised the government to give up its control of municipal water supply .
2.   The government sold these rights for the city of Cochabamba to a multi-national company (MNC). The company immediately increased the price of water by four times. Many people received monthly water bill of Rs 1000 in a country where average income is around Rs 5000 a month. This led to a spontaneous popular protest.
Bolivias Water War
1.  In January 2000, a new alliance of labour, human rights and community leaders organised a successful four-day general strike in the city. The government agreed to negotiate and the strike was called off. Yet nothing happened. The police resorted to brutal repression when the agitation was started again in February.
2. Another strike followed in April and the government imposed martial law. But the power of the people forced the officials of the MNC to flee the city and made the government concede to all the demands of the protesters.
3.  The contract with the MNC was cancelled and water supply was restored to the municipality at old rates. This came to be known as Bolivia’s water war.

Illustration 1
    What was the root cause of Bolivian problem?
Solution
    Water privatisation

Illustration 2
    Who were the members of FEDECOR orgenisation?
Solution
    Local professionals including engineers and environmentalists.

Illustration 3
    In which city of Bolivia the water problem arose?
Solution
   Cochambaba

pressure groups and movements:
Pressure Groups
1. Pressure groups are organisations that attempt to influence government policies. But unlike political parties, pressure groups do not aim to directly control or share political power.
2. These organisations are formed when people with common occupation, interest, aspirations or opinions come together in order to achieve a common objective.

Movement
A movement is a form of collective action launched by people having common interest or concern.
1.    It also attempts to influence politics rather than directly take part in electoral competition. 
2.    Movements have a loose organisation. Their decision making is more informal and flexible. 
3.    They depend much more on spontaneous mass participation than an interest group.
Eg. of movements are :Narmada Bachao Andolan, Movement for Right to Information, 
Anti-liquor Movement, Women’s Movement, Environmental Movement. 

Note: Ch-5 is to be done as project work only and will not be evaluated in theory

INTRODUCTION : 
Power sharing is an essential feature of democracy. The power is shared by different groups and organisation in various ways. In a country there are various organisations which have 
different interest and different view points. These organisation create pressure over the government for promoting the interest of their own community. They act as interest groups or pressure groups. In the subsequent chapter we will be discussing the pressure groups or interest groups and various movements for attaining any one objectives or few objectives.

popular struggles in nepal and bolivia :    
Nepal

Do you remember the story of the triumph of democracy in Poland? We studied it last year in the first chapter of class IX. The story reminded us about the role played by the people in the making of democracy. Let us read two recent stories of that kind and see how power is exercised in democracy.
Nepal witnessed an extraordinary popular movement in April 2006. The movement was aimed at restoring democracy.
Nepal, was one of the ‘third wave’ countries that it had won democracy in 1990. Although the king formally remained the head ot the state, the real power was exercised by popularly elected representatives. King Birendra, who has accepted this transition from absolute monarch) to constitutional monarchy, was killed in a mysterious massacre of the royal family in 2001.
King Gyanendra, the new king of Nepal, was not prepared.to accept democratic rule. He took advantage of the weakness and unpopularity of the democratically elected government. In February 2005, the king dismissed the then Prime Minister and dissolved the popularly elected Parliament. The movement of April 2006 was aimed at regaining popular control over the government from the king.
All the major political parties in the parliament formed a Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and called for a four day strike in Kathmandu, the country’s capital. 
This protest soon turned into an indefinite strike in which Maoist insurgents and various other organisations joined hands. People defied curfew and took to the streets. 
The security forces found themselves unable to take on more than a lakh people who gathered almost every day to demand restoration of democracy. The number of protesters reached between three to five lakhs on 21 April and they served an ultimatum to the king.
The leaders of the movement rejected the halfhearted concessions made by the king. 

Demands of The Napelese leader    
    1.     Restoration of parliament, 
    2.     Power to an all-party government and  
    3.     A new constituent assembly.
            On 24 April 2004, the last day of the ultimatum, the king was forced to concede all the three demands.
    1.    The SPA chose Girija Prasad Koirala as the new Prime Minister of the interim government. 
    2.    The restored parliament met and passed laws taking away most of the powers of the king.
    3.     The SPA and the Maoists came to an understanding about how the new Constituent Assembly was going to be elected. 
    4.    This struggle came to be known as Nepal’s second movement for democracy, the struggle of 
            the Nepali people is a source of inspiration to democrats all over the world.

Bolivia
The story of Poland and that of Nepal apply to the struggle for establishing or restoring democracy. But the role of popular struggles does not come to an end with the establishment of democracy. People’s successful struggle against privatisation of water in Bolivia reminds us that popular struggles are integral to the working of democracy.

Cause of Water War
1.   Bolivia is a poor country in Latin America. The World Bank pressurised the government to give up its control of municipal water supply .
2.   The government sold these rights for the city of Cochabamba to a multi-national company (MNC). The company immediately increased the price of water by four times. Many people received monthly water bill of Rs 1000 in a country where average income is around Rs 5000 a month. This led to a spontaneous popular protest.
Bolivias Water War
1.  In January 2000, a new alliance of labour, human rights and community leaders organised a successful four-day general strike in the city. The government agreed to negotiate and the strike was called off. Yet nothing happened. The police resorted to brutal repression when the agitation was started again in February.
2. Another strike followed in April and the government imposed martial law. But the power of the people forced the officials of the MNC to flee the city and made the government concede to all the demands of the protesters.
3.  The contract with the MNC was cancelled and water supply was restored to the municipality at old rates. This came to be known as Bolivia’s water war.

Illustration 1
    What was the root cause of Bolivian problem?
Solution
    Water privatisation

Illustration 2
    Who were the members of FEDECOR orgenisation?
Solution
    Local professionals including engineers and environmentalists.

Illustration 3
    In which city of Bolivia the water problem arose?
Solution
   Cochambaba

pressure groups and movements:
Pressure Groups
1. Pressure groups are organisations that attempt to influence government policies. But unlike political parties, pressure groups do not aim to directly control or share political power.
2. These organisations are formed when people with common occupation, interest, aspirations or opinions come together in order to achieve a common objective.

Movement
A movement is a form of collective action launched by people having common interest or concern.
1.    It also attempts to influence politics rather than directly take part in electoral competition. 
2.    Movements have a loose organisation. Their decision making is more informal and flexible. 
3.    They depend much more on spontaneous mass participation than an interest group.
Eg. of movements are :Narmada Bachao Andolan, Movement for Right to Information, 
Anti-liquor Movement, Women’s Movement, Environmental Movement. 

Note: Ch-5 is to be done as project work only and will not be evaluated in theory

INTRODUCTION : 
Power sharing is an essential feature of democracy. The power is shared by different groups and organisation in various ways. In a country there are various organisations which have 
different interest and different view points. These organisation create pressure over the government for promoting the interest of their own community. They act as interest groups or pressure groups. In the subsequent chapter we will be discussing the pressure groups or interest groups and various movements for attaining any one objectives or few objectives.

popular struggles in nepal and bolivia :    
Nepal

Do you remember the story of the triumph of democracy in Poland? We studied it last year in the first chapter of class IX. The story reminded us about the role played by the people in the making of democracy. Let us read two recent stories of that kind and see how power is exercised in democracy.
Nepal witnessed an extraordinary popular movement in April 2006. The movement was aimed at restoring democracy.
Nepal, was one of the ‘third wave’ countries that it had won democracy in 1990. Although the king formally remained the head ot the state, the real power was exercised by popularly elected representatives. King Birendra, who has accepted this transition from absolute monarch) to constitutional monarchy, was killed in a mysterious massacre of the royal family in 2001.
King Gyanendra, the new king of Nepal, was not prepared.to accept democratic rule. He took advantage of the weakness and unpopularity of the democratically elected government. In February 2005, the king dismissed the then Prime Minister and dissolved the popularly elected Parliament. The movement of April 2006 was aimed at regaining popular control over the government from the king.
All the major political parties in the parliament formed a Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and called for a four day strike in Kathmandu, the country’s capital. 
This protest soon turned into an indefinite strike in which Maoist insurgents and various other organisations joined hands. People defied curfew and took to the streets. 
The security forces found themselves unable to take on more than a lakh people who gathered almost every day to demand restoration of democracy. The number of protesters reached between three to five lakhs on 21 April and they served an ultimatum to the king.
The leaders of the movement rejected the halfhearted concessions made by the king. 

Demands of The Napelese leader    
    1.     Restoration of parliament, 
    2.     Power to an all-party government and  
    3.     A new constituent assembly.
            On 24 April 2004, the last day of the ultimatum, the king was forced to concede all the three demands.
    1.    The SPA chose Girija Prasad Koirala as the new Prime Minister of the interim government. 
    2.    The restored parliament met and passed laws taking away most of the powers of the king.
    3.     The SPA and the Maoists came to an understanding about how the new Constituent Assembly was going to be elected. 
    4.    This struggle came to be known as Nepal’s second movement for democracy, the struggle of 
            the Nepali people is a source of inspiration to democrats all over the world.

Bolivia
The story of Poland and that of Nepal apply to the struggle for establishing or restoring democracy. But the role of popular struggles does not come to an end with the establishment of democracy. People’s successful struggle against privatisation of water in Bolivia reminds us that popular struggles are integral to the working of democracy.

Cause of Water War
1.   Bolivia is a poor country in Latin America. The World Bank pressurised the government to give up its control of municipal water supply .
2.   The government sold these rights for the city of Cochabamba to a multi-national company (MNC). The company immediately increased the price of water by four times. Many people received monthly water bill of Rs 1000 in a country where average income is around Rs 5000 a month. This led to a spontaneous popular protest.
Bolivias Water War
1.  In January 2000, a new alliance of labour, human rights and community leaders organised a successful four-day general strike in the city. The government agreed to negotiate and the strike was called off. Yet nothing happened. The police resorted to brutal repression when the agitation was started again in February.
2. Another strike followed in April and the government imposed martial law. But the power of the people forced the officials of the MNC to flee the city and made the government concede to all the demands of the protesters.
3.  The contract with the MNC was cancelled and water supply was restored to the municipality at old rates. This came to be known as Bolivia’s water war.

Illustration 1
    What was the root cause of Bolivian problem?
Solution
    Water privatisation

Illustration 2
    Who were the members of FEDECOR orgenisation?
Solution
    Local professionals including engineers and environmentalists.

Illustration 3
    In which city of Bolivia the water problem arose?
Solution
   Cochambaba

pressure groups and movements:
Pressure Groups
1. Pressure groups are organisations that attempt to influence government policies. But unlike political parties, pressure groups do not aim to directly control or share political power.
2. These organisations are formed when people with common occupation, interest, aspirations or opinions come together in order to achieve a common objective.

Movement
A movement is a form of collective action launched by people having common interest or concern.
1.    It also attempts to influence politics rather than directly take part in electoral competition. 
2.    Movements have a loose organisation. Their decision making is more informal and flexible. 
3.    They depend much more on spontaneous mass participation than an interest group.
Eg. of movements are :Narmada Bachao Andolan, Movement for Right to Information, 
Anti-liquor Movement, Women’s Movement, Environmental Movement. 

Note: Ch-5 is to be done as project work only and will not be evaluated in theory

INTRODUCTION : 
Power sharing is an essential feature of democracy. The power is shared by different groups and organisation in various ways. In a country there are various organisations which have 
different interest and different view points. These organisation create pressure over the government for promoting the interest of their own community. They act as interest groups or pressure groups. In the subsequent chapter we will be discussing the pressure groups or interest groups and various movements for attaining any one objectives or few objectives.

popular struggles in nepal and bolivia :    
Nepal

Do you remember the story of the triumph of democracy in Poland? We studied it last year in the first chapter of class IX. The story reminded us about the role played by the people in the making of democracy. Let us read two recent stories of that kind and see how power is exercised in democracy.
Nepal witnessed an extraordinary popular movement in April 2006. The movement was aimed at restoring democracy.
Nepal, was one of the ‘third wave’ countries that it had won democracy in 1990. Although the king formally remained the head ot the state, the real power was exercised by popularly elected representatives. King Birendra, who has accepted this transition from absolute monarch) to constitutional monarchy, was killed in a mysterious massacre of the royal family in 2001.
King Gyanendra, the new king of Nepal, was not prepared.to accept democratic rule. He took advantage of the weakness and unpopularity of the democratically elected government. In February 2005, the king dismissed the then Prime Minister and dissolved the popularly elected Parliament. The movement of April 2006 was aimed at regaining popular control over the government from the king.
All the major political parties in the parliament formed a Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and called for a four day strike in Kathmandu, the country’s capital. 
This protest soon turned into an indefinite strike in which Maoist insurgents and various other organisations joined hands. People defied curfew and took to the streets. 
The security forces found themselves unable to take on more than a lakh people who gathered almost every day to demand restoration of democracy. The number of protesters reached between three to five lakhs on 21 April and they served an ultimatum to the king.
The leaders of the movement rejected the halfhearted concessions made by the king. 

Demands of The Napelese leader    
    1.     Restoration of parliament, 
    2.     Power to an all-party government and  
    3.     A new constituent assembly.
            On 24 April 2004, the last day of the ultimatum, the king was forced to concede all the three demands.
    1.    The SPA chose Girija Prasad Koirala as the new Prime Minister of the interim government. 
    2.    The restored parliament met and passed laws taking away most of the powers of the king.
    3.     The SPA and the Maoists came to an understanding about how the new Constituent Assembly was going to be elected. 
    4.    This struggle came to be known as Nepal’s second movement for democracy, the struggle of 
            the Nepali people is a source of inspiration to democrats all over the world.

Bolivia
The story of Poland and that of Nepal apply to the struggle for establishing or restoring democracy. But the role of popular struggles does not come to an end with the establishment of democracy. People’s successful struggle against privatisation of water in Bolivia reminds us that popular struggles are integral to the working of democracy.

Cause of Water War
1.   Bolivia is a poor country in Latin America. The World Bank pressurised the government to give up its control of municipal water supply .
2.   The government sold these rights for the city of Cochabamba to a multi-national company (MNC). The company immediately increased the price of water by four times. Many people received monthly water bill of Rs 1000 in a country where average income is around Rs 5000 a month. This led to a spontaneous popular protest.
Bolivias Water War
1.  In January 2000, a new alliance of labour, human rights and community leaders organised a successful four-day general strike in the city. The government agreed to negotiate and the strike was called off. Yet nothing happened. The police resorted to brutal repression when the agitation was started again in February.
2. Another strike followed in April and the government imposed martial law. But the power of the people forced the officials of the MNC to flee the city and made the government concede to all the demands of the protesters.
3.  The contract with the MNC was cancelled and water supply was restored to the municipality at old rates. This came to be known as Bolivia’s water war.

Illustration 1
    What was the root cause of Bolivian problem?
Solution
    Water privatisation

Illustration 2
    Who were the members of FEDECOR orgenisation?
Solution
    Local professionals including engineers and environmentalists.

Illustration 3
    In which city of Bolivia the water problem arose?
Solution
   Cochambaba

pressure groups and movements:
Pressure Groups
1. Pressure groups are organisations that attempt to influence government policies. But unlike political parties, pressure groups do not aim to directly control or share political power.
2. These organisations are formed when people with common occupation, interest, aspirations or opinions come together in order to achieve a common objective.

Movement
A movement is a form of collective action launched by people having common interest or concern.
1.    It also attempts to influence politics rather than directly take part in electoral competition. 
2.    Movements have a loose organisation. Their decision making is more informal and flexible. 
3.    They depend much more on spontaneous mass participation than an interest group.
Eg. of movements are :Narmada Bachao Andolan, Movement for Right to Information, 
Anti-liquor Movement, Women’s Movement, Environmental Movement. 

Note: Ch-5 is to be done as project work only and will not be evaluated in theory

INTRODUCTION : 
Power sharing is an essential feature of democracy. The power is shared by different groups and organisation in various ways. In a country there are various organisations which have 
different interest and different view points. These organisation create pressure over the government for promoting the interest of their own community. They act as interest groups or pressure groups. In the subsequent chapter we will be discussing the pressure groups or interest groups and various movements for attaining any one objectives or few objectives.

popular struggles in nepal and bolivia :    
Nepal

Do you remember the story of the triumph of democracy in Poland? We studied it last year in the first chapter of class IX. The story reminded us about the role played by the people in the making of democracy. Let us read two recent stories of that kind and see how power is exercised in democracy.
Nepal witnessed an extraordinary popular movement in April 2006. The movement was aimed at restoring democracy.
Nepal, was one of the ‘third wave’ countries that it had won democracy in 1990. Although the king formally remained the head ot the state, the real power was exercised by popularly elected representatives. King Birendra, who has accepted this transition from absolute monarch) to constitutional monarchy, was killed in a mysterious massacre of the royal family in 2001.
King Gyanendra, the new king of Nepal, was not prepared.to accept democratic rule. He took advantage of the weakness and unpopularity of the democratically elected government. In February 2005, the king dismissed the then Prime Minister and dissolved the popularly elected Parliament. The movement of April 2006 was aimed at regaining popular control over the government from the king.
All the major political parties in the parliament formed a Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and called for a four day strike in Kathmandu, the country’s capital. 
This protest soon turned into an indefinite strike in which Maoist insurgents and various other organisations joined hands. People defied curfew and took to the streets. 
The security forces found themselves unable to take on more than a lakh people who gathered almost every day to demand restoration of democracy. The number of protesters reached between three to five lakhs on 21 April and they served an ultimatum to the king.
The leaders of the movement rejected the halfhearted concessions made by the king. 

Demands of The Napelese leader    
    1.     Restoration of parliament, 
    2.     Power to an all-party government and  
    3.     A new constituent assembly.
            On 24 April 2004, the last day of the ultimatum, the king was forced to concede all the three demands.
    1.    The SPA chose Girija Prasad Koirala as the new Prime Minister of the interim government. 
    2.    The restored parliament met and passed laws taking away most of the powers of the king.
    3.     The SPA and the Maoists came to an understanding about how the new Constituent Assembly was going to be elected. 
    4.    This struggle came to be known as Nepal’s second movement for democracy, the struggle of 
            the Nepali people is a source of inspiration to democrats all over the world.

Bolivia
The story of Poland and that of Nepal apply to the struggle for establishing or restoring democracy. But the role of popular struggles does not come to an end with the establishment of democracy. People’s successful struggle against privatisation of water in Bolivia reminds us that popular struggles are integral to the working of democracy.

Cause of Water War
1.   Bolivia is a poor country in Latin America. The World Bank pressurised the government to give up its control of municipal water supply .
2.   The government sold these rights for the city of Cochabamba to a multi-national company (MNC). The company immediately increased the price of water by four times. Many people received monthly water bill of Rs 1000 in a country where average income is around Rs 5000 a month. This led to a spontaneous popular protest.
Bolivias Water War
1.  In January 2000, a new alliance of labour, human rights and community leaders organised a successful four-day general strike in the city. The government agreed to negotiate and the strike was called off. Yet nothing happened. The police resorted to brutal repression when the agitation was started again in February.
2. Another strike followed in April and the government imposed martial law. But the power of the people forced the officials of the MNC to flee the city and made the government concede to all the demands of the protesters.
3.  The contract with the MNC was cancelled and water supply was restored to the municipality at old rates. This came to be known as Bolivia’s water war.

Illustration 1
    What was the root cause of Bolivian problem?
Solution
    Water privatisation

Illustration 2
    Who were the members of FEDECOR orgenisation?
Solution
    Local professionals including engineers and environmentalists.

Illustration 3
    In which city of Bolivia the water problem arose?
Solution
   Cochambaba

pressure groups and movements:
Pressure Groups
1. Pressure groups are organisations that attempt to influence government policies. But unlike political parties, pressure groups do not aim to directly control or share political power.
2. These organisations are formed when people with common occupation, interest, aspirations or opinions come together in order to achieve a common objective.

Movement
A movement is a form of collective action launched by people having common interest or concern.
1.    It also attempts to influence politics rather than directly take part in electoral competition. 
2.    Movements have a loose organisation. Their decision making is more informal and flexible. 
3.    They depend much more on spontaneous mass participation than an interest group.
Eg. of movements are :Narmada Bachao Andolan, Movement for Right to Information, 
Anti-liquor Movement, Women’s Movement, Environmental Movement. 

Note: Ch-5 is to be done as project work only and will not be evaluated in theory

INTRODUCTION : 
Power sharing is an essential feature of democracy. The power is shared by different groups and organisation in various ways. In a country there are various organisations which have 
different interest and different view points. These organisation create pressure over the government for promoting the interest of their own community. They act as interest groups or pressure groups. In the subsequent chapter we will be discussing the pressure groups or interest groups and various movements for attaining any one objectives or few objectives.

popular struggles in nepal and bolivia :    
Nepal

Do you remember the story of the triumph of democracy in Poland? We studied it last year in the first chapter of class IX. The story reminded us about the role played by the people in the making of democracy. Let us read two recent stories of that kind and see how power is exercised in democracy.
Nepal witnessed an extraordinary popular movement in April 2006. The movement was aimed at restoring democracy.
Nepal, was one of the ‘third wave’ countries that it had won democracy in 1990. Although the king formally remained the head ot the state, the real power was exercised by popularly elected representatives. King Birendra, who has accepted this transition from absolute monarch) to constitutional monarchy, was killed in a mysterious massacre of the royal family in 2001.
King Gyanendra, the new king of Nepal, was not prepared.to accept democratic rule. He took advantage of the weakness and unpopularity of the democratically elected government. In February 2005, the king dismissed the then Prime Minister and dissolved the popularly elected Parliament. The movement of April 2006 was aimed at regaining popular control over the government from the king.
All the major political parties in the parliament formed a Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and called for a four day strike in Kathmandu, the country’s capital. 
This protest soon turned into an indefinite strike in which Maoist insurgents and various other organisations joined hands. People defied curfew and took to the streets. 
The security forces found themselves unable to take on more than a lakh people who gathered almost every day to demand restoration of democracy. The number of protesters reached between three to five lakhs on 21 April and they served an ultimatum to the king.
The leaders of the movement rejected the halfhearted concessions made by the king. 

Demands of The Napelese leader    
    1.     Restoration of parliament, 
    2.     Power to an all-party government and  
    3.     A new constituent assembly.
            On 24 April 2004, the last day of the ultimatum, the king was forced to concede all the three demands.
    1.    The SPA chose Girija Prasad Koirala as the new Prime Minister of the interim government. 
    2.    The restored parliament met and passed laws taking away most of the powers of the king.
    3.     The SPA and the Maoists came to an understanding about how the new Constituent Assembly was going to be elected. 
    4.    This struggle came to be known as Nepal’s second movement for democracy, the struggle of 
            the Nepali people is a source of inspiration to democrats all over the world.

Bolivia
The story of Poland and that of Nepal apply to the struggle for establishing or restoring democracy. But the role of popular struggles does not come to an end with the establishment of democracy. People’s successful struggle against privatisation of water in Bolivia reminds us that popular struggles are integral to the working of democracy.

Cause of Water War
1.   Bolivia is a poor country in Latin America. The World Bank pressurised the government to give up its control of municipal water supply .
2.   The government sold these rights for the city of Cochabamba to a multi-national company (MNC). The company immediately increased the price of water by four times. Many people received monthly water bill of Rs 1000 in a country where average income is around Rs 5000 a month. This led to a spontaneous popular protest.
Bolivias Water War
1.  In January 2000, a new alliance of labour, human rights and community leaders organised a successful four-day general strike in the city. The government agreed to negotiate and the strike was called off. Yet nothing happened. The police resorted to brutal repression when the agitation was started again in February.
2. Another strike followed in April and the government imposed martial law. But the power of the people forced the officials of the MNC to flee the city and made the government concede to all the demands of the protesters.
3.  The contract with the MNC was cancelled and water supply was restored to the municipality at old rates. This came to be known as Bolivia’s water war.

Illustration 1
    What was the root cause of Bolivian problem?
Solution
    Water privatisation

Illustration 2
    Who were the members of FEDECOR orgenisation?
Solution
    Local professionals including engineers and environmentalists.

Illustration 3
    In which city of Bolivia the water problem arose?
Solution
   Cochambaba

pressure groups and movements:
Pressure Groups
1. Pressure groups are organisations that attempt to influence government policies. But unlike political parties, pressure groups do not aim to directly control or share political power.
2. These organisations are formed when people with common occupation, interest, aspirations or opinions come together in order to achieve a common objective.

Movement
A movement is a form of collective action launched by people having common interest or concern.
1.    It also attempts to influence politics rather than directly take part in electoral competition. 
2.    Movements have a loose organisation. Their decision making is more informal and flexible. 
3.    They depend much more on spontaneous mass participation than an interest group.
Eg. of movements are :Narmada Bachao Andolan, Movement for Right to Information, 
Anti-liquor Movement, Women’s Movement, Environmental Movement. 

Note: Ch-5 is to be done as project work only and will not be evaluated in theory

INTRODUCTION : 
Power sharing is an essential feature of democracy. The power is shared by different groups and organisation in various ways. In a country there are various organisations which have 
different interest and different view points. These organisation create pressure over the government for promoting the interest of their own community. They act as interest groups or pressure groups. In the subsequent chapter we will be discussing the pressure groups or interest groups and various movements for attaining any one objectives or few objectives.

popular struggles in nepal and bolivia :    
Nepal

Do you remember the story of the triumph of democracy in Poland? We studied it last year in the first chapter of class IX. The story reminded us about the role played by the people in the making of democracy. Let us read two recent stories of that kind and see how power is exercised in democracy.
Nepal witnessed an extraordinary popular movement in April 2006. The movement was aimed at restoring democracy.
Nepal, was one of the ‘third wave’ countries that it had won democracy in 1990. Although the king formally remained the head ot the state, the real power was exercised by popularly elected representatives. King Birendra, who has accepted this transition from absolute monarch) to constitutional monarchy, was killed in a mysterious massacre of the royal family in 2001.
King Gyanendra, the new king of Nepal, was not prepared.to accept democratic rule. He took advantage of the weakness and unpopularity of the democratically elected government. In February 2005, the king dismissed the then Prime Minister and dissolved the popularly elected Parliament. The movement of April 2006 was aimed at regaining popular control over the government from the king.
All the major political parties in the parliament formed a Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and called for a four day strike in Kathmandu, the country’s capital. 
This protest soon turned into an indefinite strike in which Maoist insurgents and various other organisations joined hands. People defied curfew and took to the streets. 
The security forces found themselves unable to take on more than a lakh people who gathered almost every day to demand restoration of democracy. The number of protesters reached between three to five lakhs on 21 April and they served an ultimatum to the king.
The leaders of the movement rejected the halfhearted concessions made by the king. 

Demands of The Napelese leader    
    1.     Restoration of parliament, 
    2.     Power to an all-party government and  
    3.     A new constituent assembly.
            On 24 April 2004, the last day of the ultimatum, the king was forced to concede all the three demands.
    1.    The SPA chose Girija Prasad Koirala as the new Prime Minister of the interim government. 
    2.    The restored parliament met and passed laws taking away most of the powers of the king.
    3.     The SPA and the Maoists came to an understanding about how the new Constituent Assembly was going to be elected. 
    4.    This struggle came to be known as Nepal’s second movement for democracy, the struggle of 
            the Nepali people is a source of inspiration to democrats all over the world.

Bolivia
The story of Poland and that of Nepal apply to the struggle for establishing or restoring democracy. But the role of popular struggles does not come to an end with the establishment of democracy. People’s successful struggle against privatisation of water in Bolivia reminds us that popular struggles are integral to the working of democracy.

Cause of Water War
1.   Bolivia is a poor country in Latin America. The World Bank pressurised the government to give up its control of municipal water supply .
2.   The government sold these rights for the city of Cochabamba to a multi-national company (MNC). The company immediately increased the price of water by four times. Many people received monthly water bill of Rs 1000 in a country where average income is around Rs 5000 a month. This led to a spontaneous popular protest.
Bolivias Water War
1.  In January 2000, a new alliance of labour, human rights and community leaders organised a successful four-day general strike in the city. The government agreed to negotiate and the strike was called off. Yet nothing happened. The police resorted to brutal repression when the agitation was started again in February.
2. Another strike followed in April and the government imposed martial law. But the power of the people forced the officials of the MNC to flee the city and made the government concede to all the demands of the protesters.
3.  The contract with the MNC was cancelled and water supply was restored to the municipality at old rates. This came to be known as Bolivia’s water war.

Illustration 1
    What was the root cause of Bolivian problem?
Solution
    Water privatisation

Illustration 2
    Who were the members of FEDECOR orgenisation?
Solution
    Local professionals including engineers and environmentalists.

Illustration 3
    In which city of Bolivia the water problem arose?
Solution
   Cochambaba

pressure groups and movements:
Pressure Groups
1. Pressure groups are organisations that attempt to influence government policies. But unlike political parties, pressure groups do not aim to directly control or share political power.
2. These organisations are formed when people with common occupation, interest, aspirations or opinions come together in order to achieve a common objective.

Movement
A movement is a form of collective action launched by people having common interest or concern.
1.    It also attempts to influence politics rather than directly take part in electoral competition. 
2.    Movements have a loose organisation. Their decision making is more informal and flexible. 
3.    They depend much more on spontaneous mass participation than an interest group.
Eg. of movements are :Narmada Bachao Andolan, Movement for Right to Information, 
Anti-liquor Movement, Women’s Movement, Environmental Movement. 

What role do political parties play in competition and contestation?

INTRODUCTION : 
In all the democracies of the world we find political parties which shape up the public opinion and are in competion to gain political power. The political parties are considered as vehicals of federal sharing of political power and as negotiators of social divisions in the arena of democratic politics. The topic highlights the national and regional political parties their role in the politics and their importance. The problems related to the political parties and how the political parties can be made free from these problems. This topic begins with few basic questions like why do we need political parties? How many parties are good for a democracy? It also explain different systems which we have in different part of the world i.e. one party system, Bi-party system and multiparty system.

Important terms:
 ·     Political party: Agroup of people with similar policies and programmes, who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.
 ·     Partisan: A person who is strongly committed to a party that runs the government.
 ·     Ruling party: A political party that runs government.
 ·     One - party system: In some countries only one party is allowed to control and run the government. These ae called one party system.
 ·     Two pary system: In some countries power usually changes between two major parties.
·      Multi - party system: If several parties compete for power, more than two parties have a reasonable chance of winning and coming to power either            on their own or through an alliance with other.
·      Alliance/front: When several parties join hands for the purpose of contesting elections or winning power.
 ·    Regional party: A party that secures at least 6% of the total votes in an election to the legislative assembly of a state and wins at least 2 seats is              recognised as a regional party/state party.
·    National party: Those parties which are country -wde parties are called national parties.
·   Defection: Moving of a person from one party to another party for some personal benefit.
·  Affidavit: An affidavit is a signed document submitted to an officer, where a person makes a sworn statement regarding his / her personal information.

WhY do we need political parties?    
Political parties are easily one of the most visible institutions in a democracy. For most of the ordinary citizens, democracy is equal to political parties.

Meaning
A political party is a group of people who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government. They agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good.
Since there can be different views on what is good for all, parties try to persuade people why their policies are better than others. They seek to implement these policies by winning popular support through elections.
Thus, parties reflect fundamental political divisions in a society. Parties are about a part of the society and thus involve partisanship. Thus a party is known by which part it stands for, which policies it supports and whose interests it upholds.
A political party has three components:
 ·    the leaders
 ·    the active members
 ·    the followers

Functions
1. Parties contest elections. In most democracies, elections are fought mainly among the candidates put up by political parties. Parties select their              candidates in different ways. In some countries, such as the USA & India, members and supporters of a party choose its candidates.
2.  Parties put forward different policies and programmes and the voters choose from them. 
 Each of us may have different opinions and views on what policies are suitable for the society. But no     government can handle such a large variety of views. In a democracy, a large number of similar opinions have to be grouped together to provide a direction in which policies can be formulated by the governments. This is what the parties do.
A party reduces a vast multitude of opinions into a few basic positions which it supports. 
A government is expected to base its policies on the line taken by the RULING PARTY.
3.    Parties play a decisive role in making laws for a country. Formally, laws are debated and passed in the legislature. But since most of the members belong to a party, they go by the direction of the party leadership, irrespective of their personal opinions.
4.    Parties form and run governments. The big policy decisions are taken by political executive that comes from the political parties. Parties recruit leaders, trains them and then make them ministers to run the government in the way they want
5.    Those parties that lose in the elections play the role of opposition to the parties in power, by voicing different views and criticising government for its failures or wrong policies. Opposition parties also mobilise opposition to the government.
6.    Parties shape public opinion. They raise and highlight issues. Many of the pressure groups are the extensions of political parties among different sections of society. Parties sometimes also launch movements for the resolution of problems faced by people.
7.    Parties provide people access to government machinery and welfare schemes implemented by governments. For an ordinary citizen it is easy to approach a local party leader than a government officer. That is why they feel close to parties even when they do not fully trust them. Parties have to be responsive to people’s needs and demands. Otherwise people can reject those parties in the next elections.

Necessity of Political Parties
    We need political parties because they perform all these functions. Why modern democracies cannot exist without political parties?
    We can understand the necessity of political parties by imagining a situation without parties.
    Every candidate in the elections will be independent. So no one will be able to make any promises to the people about any major policy changes.
   The government may be formed, but its utility will remain ever uncertain. Elected representative will be accountable to their constituency for what they      do in the locality. But no one will be responsible for how the country run.

We can also think about it by looking at the non-party based elections to the panchayat in many states. Although, the parties do not contest formally, it is generally noticed that the village gets split into more than one faction, each of which puts up a ‘panel’ of its candidates. This is exactly what the party does. That is the reason we find political parties in almost all countries of the world, whether these countries are big or small, old or new, developed or developing.
The rise of political parties is directly linked to the emergence of representative democracies.
As societies became large and complex, they also need some agency to gather different views on various issues and to present these to the government.
They needed some way to bring various representatives together so that a responsible government could be formed. They needed a mechanism to support or restrain the government, make policies, justify or oppose them. Political parties fulfill these needs that every representative government has.

Illustration 1
Why people tend to be very critical of political parties?
Solution
They tend to blame political parties for all that is wrong with our democracy and our political life.

Illustration 2
How political parties are formed?
Solution
Political parties are formed when a group of people agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good and come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.

What role do political parties play in competition and contestation?

INTRODUCTION : 
In all the democracies of the world we find political parties which shape up the public opinion and are in competion to gain political power. The political parties are considered as vehicals of federal sharing of political power and as negotiators of social divisions in the arena of democratic politics. The topic highlights the national and regional political parties their role in the politics and their importance. The problems related to the political parties and how the political parties can be made free from these problems. This topic begins with few basic questions like why do we need political parties? How many parties are good for a democracy? It also explain different systems which we have in different part of the world i.e. one party system, Bi-party system and multiparty system.

Important terms:
 ·     Political party: Agroup of people with similar policies and programmes, who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.
 ·     Partisan: A person who is strongly committed to a party that runs the government.
 ·     Ruling party: A political party that runs government.
 ·     One - party system: In some countries only one party is allowed to control and run the government. These ae called one party system.
 ·     Two pary system: In some countries power usually changes between two major parties.
·      Multi - party system: If several parties compete for power, more than two parties have a reasonable chance of winning and coming to power either            on their own or through an alliance with other.
·      Alliance/front: When several parties join hands for the purpose of contesting elections or winning power.
 ·    Regional party: A party that secures at least 6% of the total votes in an election to the legislative assembly of a state and wins at least 2 seats is              recognised as a regional party/state party.
·    National party: Those parties which are country -wde parties are called national parties.
·   Defection: Moving of a person from one party to another party for some personal benefit.
·  Affidavit: An affidavit is a signed document submitted to an officer, where a person makes a sworn statement regarding his / her personal information.

WhY do we need political parties?    
Political parties are easily one of the most visible institutions in a democracy. For most of the ordinary citizens, democracy is equal to political parties.

Meaning
A political party is a group of people who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government. They agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good.
Since there can be different views on what is good for all, parties try to persuade people why their policies are better than others. They seek to implement these policies by winning popular support through elections.
Thus, parties reflect fundamental political divisions in a society. Parties are about a part of the society and thus involve partisanship. Thus a party is known by which part it stands for, which policies it supports and whose interests it upholds.
A political party has three components:
 ·    the leaders
 ·    the active members
 ·    the followers

Functions
1. Parties contest elections. In most democracies, elections are fought mainly among the candidates put up by political parties. Parties select their              candidates in different ways. In some countries, such as the USA & India, members and supporters of a party choose its candidates.
2.  Parties put forward different policies and programmes and the voters choose from them. 
 Each of us may have different opinions and views on what policies are suitable for the society. But no     government can handle such a large variety of views. In a democracy, a large number of similar opinions have to be grouped together to provide a direction in which policies can be formulated by the governments. This is what the parties do.
A party reduces a vast multitude of opinions into a few basic positions which it supports. 
A government is expected to base its policies on the line taken by the RULING PARTY.
3.    Parties play a decisive role in making laws for a country. Formally, laws are debated and passed in the legislature. But since most of the members belong to a party, they go by the direction of the party leadership, irrespective of their personal opinions.
4.    Parties form and run governments. The big policy decisions are taken by political executive that comes from the political parties. Parties recruit leaders, trains them and then make them ministers to run the government in the way they want
5.    Those parties that lose in the elections play the role of opposition to the parties in power, by voicing different views and criticising government for its failures or wrong policies. Opposition parties also mobilise opposition to the government.
6.    Parties shape public opinion. They raise and highlight issues. Many of the pressure groups are the extensions of political parties among different sections of society. Parties sometimes also launch movements for the resolution of problems faced by people.
7.    Parties provide people access to government machinery and welfare schemes implemented by governments. For an ordinary citizen it is easy to approach a local party leader than a government officer. That is why they feel close to parties even when they do not fully trust them. Parties have to be responsive to people’s needs and demands. Otherwise people can reject those parties in the next elections.

Necessity of Political Parties
    We need political parties because they perform all these functions. Why modern democracies cannot exist without political parties?
    We can understand the necessity of political parties by imagining a situation without parties.
    Every candidate in the elections will be independent. So no one will be able to make any promises to the people about any major policy changes.
   The government may be formed, but its utility will remain ever uncertain. Elected representative will be accountable to their constituency for what they      do in the locality. But no one will be responsible for how the country run.

We can also think about it by looking at the non-party based elections to the panchayat in many states. Although, the parties do not contest formally, it is generally noticed that the village gets split into more than one faction, each of which puts up a ‘panel’ of its candidates. This is exactly what the party does. That is the reason we find political parties in almost all countries of the world, whether these countries are big or small, old or new, developed or developing.
The rise of political parties is directly linked to the emergence of representative democracies.
As societies became large and complex, they also need some agency to gather different views on various issues and to present these to the government.
They needed some way to bring various representatives together so that a responsible government could be formed. They needed a mechanism to support or restrain the government, make policies, justify or oppose them. Political parties fulfill these needs that every representative government has.

Illustration 1
Why people tend to be very critical of political parties?
Solution
They tend to blame political parties for all that is wrong with our democracy and our political life.

Illustration 2
How political parties are formed?
Solution
Political parties are formed when a group of people agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good and come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.

What role do political parties play in competition and contestation?

INTRODUCTION : 
In all the democracies of the world we find political parties which shape up the public opinion and are in competion to gain political power. The political parties are considered as vehicals of federal sharing of political power and as negotiators of social divisions in the arena of democratic politics. The topic highlights the national and regional political parties their role in the politics and their importance. The problems related to the political parties and how the political parties can be made free from these problems. This topic begins with few basic questions like why do we need political parties? How many parties are good for a democracy? It also explain different systems which we have in different part of the world i.e. one party system, Bi-party system and multiparty system.

Important terms:
 ·     Political party: Agroup of people with similar policies and programmes, who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.
 ·     Partisan: A person who is strongly committed to a party that runs the government.
 ·     Ruling party: A political party that runs government.
 ·     One - party system: In some countries only one party is allowed to control and run the government. These ae called one party system.
 ·     Two pary system: In some countries power usually changes between two major parties.
·      Multi - party system: If several parties compete for power, more than two parties have a reasonable chance of winning and coming to power either            on their own or through an alliance with other.
·      Alliance/front: When several parties join hands for the purpose of contesting elections or winning power.
 ·    Regional party: A party that secures at least 6% of the total votes in an election to the legislative assembly of a state and wins at least 2 seats is              recognised as a regional party/state party.
·    National party: Those parties which are country -wde parties are called national parties.
·   Defection: Moving of a person from one party to another party for some personal benefit.
·  Affidavit: An affidavit is a signed document submitted to an officer, where a person makes a sworn statement regarding his / her personal information.

WhY do we need political parties?    
Political parties are easily one of the most visible institutions in a democracy. For most of the ordinary citizens, democracy is equal to political parties.

Meaning
A political party is a group of people who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government. They agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good.
Since there can be different views on what is good for all, parties try to persuade people why their policies are better than others. They seek to implement these policies by winning popular support through elections.
Thus, parties reflect fundamental political divisions in a society. Parties are about a part of the society and thus involve partisanship. Thus a party is known by which part it stands for, which policies it supports and whose interests it upholds.
A political party has three components:
 ·    the leaders
 ·    the active members
 ·    the followers

Functions
1. Parties contest elections. In most democracies, elections are fought mainly among the candidates put up by political parties. Parties select their              candidates in different ways. In some countries, such as the USA & India, members and supporters of a party choose its candidates.
2.  Parties put forward different policies and programmes and the voters choose from them. 
 Each of us may have different opinions and views on what policies are suitable for the society. But no     government can handle such a large variety of views. In a democracy, a large number of similar opinions have to be grouped together to provide a direction in which policies can be formulated by the governments. This is what the parties do.
A party reduces a vast multitude of opinions into a few basic positions which it supports. 
A government is expected to base its policies on the line taken by the RULING PARTY.
3.    Parties play a decisive role in making laws for a country. Formally, laws are debated and passed in the legislature. But since most of the members belong to a party, they go by the direction of the party leadership, irrespective of their personal opinions.
4.    Parties form and run governments. The big policy decisions are taken by political executive that comes from the political parties. Parties recruit leaders, trains them and then make them ministers to run the government in the way they want
5.    Those parties that lose in the elections play the role of opposition to the parties in power, by voicing different views and criticising government for its failures or wrong policies. Opposition parties also mobilise opposition to the government.
6.    Parties shape public opinion. They raise and highlight issues. Many of the pressure groups are the extensions of political parties among different sections of society. Parties sometimes also launch movements for the resolution of problems faced by people.
7.    Parties provide people access to government machinery and welfare schemes implemented by governments. For an ordinary citizen it is easy to approach a local party leader than a government officer. That is why they feel close to parties even when they do not fully trust them. Parties have to be responsive to people’s needs and demands. Otherwise people can reject those parties in the next elections.

Necessity of Political Parties
    We need political parties because they perform all these functions. Why modern democracies cannot exist without political parties?
    We can understand the necessity of political parties by imagining a situation without parties.
    Every candidate in the elections will be independent. So no one will be able to make any promises to the people about any major policy changes.
   The government may be formed, but its utility will remain ever uncertain. Elected representative will be accountable to their constituency for what they      do in the locality. But no one will be responsible for how the country run.

We can also think about it by looking at the non-party based elections to the panchayat in many states. Although, the parties do not contest formally, it is generally noticed that the village gets split into more than one faction, each of which puts up a ‘panel’ of its candidates. This is exactly what the party does. That is the reason we find political parties in almost all countries of the world, whether these countries are big or small, old or new, developed or developing.
The rise of political parties is directly linked to the emergence of representative democracies.
As societies became large and complex, they also need some agency to gather different views on various issues and to present these to the government.
They needed some way to bring various representatives together so that a responsible government could be formed. They needed a mechanism to support or restrain the government, make policies, justify or oppose them. Political parties fulfill these needs that every representative government has.

Illustration 1
Why people tend to be very critical of political parties?
Solution
They tend to blame political parties for all that is wrong with our democracy and our political life.

Illustration 2
How political parties are formed?
Solution
Political parties are formed when a group of people agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good and come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.

What role do political parties play in competition and contestation?

INTRODUCTION : 
In all the democracies of the world we find political parties which shape up the public opinion and are in competion to gain political power. The political parties are considered as vehicals of federal sharing of political power and as negotiators of social divisions in the arena of democratic politics. The topic highlights the national and regional political parties their role in the politics and their importance. The problems related to the political parties and how the political parties can be made free from these problems. This topic begins with few basic questions like why do we need political parties? How many parties are good for a democracy? It also explain different systems which we have in different part of the world i.e. one party system, Bi-party system and multiparty system.

Important terms:
 ·     Political party: Agroup of people with similar policies and programmes, who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.
 ·     Partisan: A person who is strongly committed to a party that runs the government.
 ·     Ruling party: A political party that runs government.
 ·     One - party system: In some countries only one party is allowed to control and run the government. These ae called one party system.
 ·     Two pary system: In some countries power usually changes between two major parties.
·      Multi - party system: If several parties compete for power, more than two parties have a reasonable chance of winning and coming to power either            on their own or through an alliance with other.
·      Alliance/front: When several parties join hands for the purpose of contesting elections or winning power.
 ·    Regional party: A party that secures at least 6% of the total votes in an election to the legislative assembly of a state and wins at least 2 seats is              recognised as a regional party/state party.
·    National party: Those parties which are country -wde parties are called national parties.
·   Defection: Moving of a person from one party to another party for some personal benefit.
·  Affidavit: An affidavit is a signed document submitted to an officer, where a person makes a sworn statement regarding his / her personal information.

WhY do we need political parties?    
Political parties are easily one of the most visible institutions in a democracy. For most of the ordinary citizens, democracy is equal to political parties.

Meaning
A political party is a group of people who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government. They agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good.
Since there can be different views on what is good for all, parties try to persuade people why their policies are better than others. They seek to implement these policies by winning popular support through elections.
Thus, parties reflect fundamental political divisions in a society. Parties are about a part of the society and thus involve partisanship. Thus a party is known by which part it stands for, which policies it supports and whose interests it upholds.
A political party has three components:
 ·    the leaders
 ·    the active members
 ·    the followers

Functions
1. Parties contest elections. In most democracies, elections are fought mainly among the candidates put up by political parties. Parties select their              candidates in different ways. In some countries, such as the USA & India, members and supporters of a party choose its candidates.
2.  Parties put forward different policies and programmes and the voters choose from them. 
 Each of us may have different opinions and views on what policies are suitable for the society. But no     government can handle such a large variety of views. In a democracy, a large number of similar opinions have to be grouped together to provide a direction in which policies can be formulated by the governments. This is what the parties do.
A party reduces a vast multitude of opinions into a few basic positions which it supports. 
A government is expected to base its policies on the line taken by the RULING PARTY.
3.    Parties play a decisive role in making laws for a country. Formally, laws are debated and passed in the legislature. But since most of the members belong to a party, they go by the direction of the party leadership, irrespective of their personal opinions.
4.    Parties form and run governments. The big policy decisions are taken by political executive that comes from the political parties. Parties recruit leaders, trains them and then make them ministers to run the government in the way they want
5.    Those parties that lose in the elections play the role of opposition to the parties in power, by voicing different views and criticising government for its failures or wrong policies. Opposition parties also mobilise opposition to the government.
6.    Parties shape public opinion. They raise and highlight issues. Many of the pressure groups are the extensions of political parties among different sections of society. Parties sometimes also launch movements for the resolution of problems faced by people.
7.    Parties provide people access to government machinery and welfare schemes implemented by governments. For an ordinary citizen it is easy to approach a local party leader than a government officer. That is why they feel close to parties even when they do not fully trust them. Parties have to be responsive to people’s needs and demands. Otherwise people can reject those parties in the next elections.

Necessity of Political Parties
    We need political parties because they perform all these functions. Why modern democracies cannot exist without political parties?
    We can understand the necessity of political parties by imagining a situation without parties.
    Every candidate in the elections will be independent. So no one will be able to make any promises to the people about any major policy changes.
   The government may be formed, but its utility will remain ever uncertain. Elected representative will be accountable to their constituency for what they      do in the locality. But no one will be responsible for how the country run.

We can also think about it by looking at the non-party based elections to the panchayat in many states. Although, the parties do not contest formally, it is generally noticed that the village gets split into more than one faction, each of which puts up a ‘panel’ of its candidates. This is exactly what the party does. That is the reason we find political parties in almost all countries of the world, whether these countries are big or small, old or new, developed or developing.
The rise of political parties is directly linked to the emergence of representative democracies.
As societies became large and complex, they also need some agency to gather different views on various issues and to present these to the government.
They needed some way to bring various representatives together so that a responsible government could be formed. They needed a mechanism to support or restrain the government, make policies, justify or oppose them. Political parties fulfill these needs that every representative government has.

Illustration 1
Why people tend to be very critical of political parties?
Solution
They tend to blame political parties for all that is wrong with our democracy and our political life.

Illustration 2
How political parties are formed?
Solution
Political parties are formed when a group of people agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good and come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.

What role do political parties play in competition and contestation?

INTRODUCTION : 
In all the democracies of the world we find political parties which shape up the public opinion and are in competion to gain political power. The political parties are considered as vehicals of federal sharing of political power and as negotiators of social divisions in the arena of democratic politics. The topic highlights the national and regional political parties their role in the politics and their importance. The problems related to the political parties and how the political parties can be made free from these problems. This topic begins with few basic questions like why do we need political parties? How many parties are good for a democracy? It also explain different systems which we have in different part of the world i.e. one party system, Bi-party system and multiparty system.

Important terms:
 ·     Political party: Agroup of people with similar policies and programmes, who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.
 ·     Partisan: A person who is strongly committed to a party that runs the government.
 ·     Ruling party: A political party that runs government.
 ·     One - party system: In some countries only one party is allowed to control and run the government. These ae called one party system.
 ·     Two pary system: In some countries power usually changes between two major parties.
·      Multi - party system: If several parties compete for power, more than two parties have a reasonable chance of winning and coming to power either            on their own or through an alliance with other.
·      Alliance/front: When several parties join hands for the purpose of contesting elections or winning power.
 ·    Regional party: A party that secures at least 6% of the total votes in an election to the legislative assembly of a state and wins at least 2 seats is              recognised as a regional party/state party.
·    National party: Those parties which are country -wde parties are called national parties.
·   Defection: Moving of a person from one party to another party for some personal benefit.
·  Affidavit: An affidavit is a signed document submitted to an officer, where a person makes a sworn statement regarding his / her personal information.

WhY do we need political parties?    
Political parties are easily one of the most visible institutions in a democracy. For most of the ordinary citizens, democracy is equal to political parties.

Meaning
A political party is a group of people who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government. They agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good.
Since there can be different views on what is good for all, parties try to persuade people why their policies are better than others. They seek to implement these policies by winning popular support through elections.
Thus, parties reflect fundamental political divisions in a society. Parties are about a part of the society and thus involve partisanship. Thus a party is known by which part it stands for, which policies it supports and whose interests it upholds.
A political party has three components:
 ·    the leaders
 ·    the active members
 ·    the followers

Functions
1. Parties contest elections. In most democracies, elections are fought mainly among the candidates put up by political parties. Parties select their              candidates in different ways. In some countries, such as the USA & India, members and supporters of a party choose its candidates.
2.  Parties put forward different policies and programmes and the voters choose from them. 
 Each of us may have different opinions and views on what policies are suitable for the society. But no     government can handle such a large variety of views. In a democracy, a large number of similar opinions have to be grouped together to provide a direction in which policies can be formulated by the governments. This is what the parties do.
A party reduces a vast multitude of opinions into a few basic positions which it supports. 
A government is expected to base its policies on the line taken by the RULING PARTY.
3.    Parties play a decisive role in making laws for a country. Formally, laws are debated and passed in the legislature. But since most of the members belong to a party, they go by the direction of the party leadership, irrespective of their personal opinions.
4.    Parties form and run governments. The big policy decisions are taken by political executive that comes from the political parties. Parties recruit leaders, trains them and then make them ministers to run the government in the way they want
5.    Those parties that lose in the elections play the role of opposition to the parties in power, by voicing different views and criticising government for its failures or wrong policies. Opposition parties also mobilise opposition to the government.
6.    Parties shape public opinion. They raise and highlight issues. Many of the pressure groups are the extensions of political parties among different sections of society. Parties sometimes also launch movements for the resolution of problems faced by people.
7.    Parties provide people access to government machinery and welfare schemes implemented by governments. For an ordinary citizen it is easy to approach a local party leader than a government officer. That is why they feel close to parties even when they do not fully trust them. Parties have to be responsive to people’s needs and demands. Otherwise people can reject those parties in the next elections.

Necessity of Political Parties
    We need political parties because they perform all these functions. Why modern democracies cannot exist without political parties?
    We can understand the necessity of political parties by imagining a situation without parties.
    Every candidate in the elections will be independent. So no one will be able to make any promises to the people about any major policy changes.
   The government may be formed, but its utility will remain ever uncertain. Elected representative will be accountable to their constituency for what they      do in the locality. But no one will be responsible for how the country run.

We can also think about it by looking at the non-party based elections to the panchayat in many states. Although, the parties do not contest formally, it is generally noticed that the village gets split into more than one faction, each of which puts up a ‘panel’ of its candidates. This is exactly what the party does. That is the reason we find political parties in almost all countries of the world, whether these countries are big or small, old or new, developed or developing.
The rise of political parties is directly linked to the emergence of representative democracies.
As societies became large and complex, they also need some agency to gather different views on various issues and to present these to the government.
They needed some way to bring various representatives together so that a responsible government could be formed. They needed a mechanism to support or restrain the government, make policies, justify or oppose them. Political parties fulfill these needs that every representative government has.

Illustration 1
Why people tend to be very critical of political parties?
Solution
They tend to blame political parties for all that is wrong with our democracy and our political life.

Illustration 2
How political parties are formed?
Solution
Political parties are formed when a group of people agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good and come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.

What role do political parties play in competition and contestation?

INTRODUCTION : 
In all the democracies of the world we find political parties which shape up the public opinion and are in competion to gain political power. The political parties are considered as vehicals of federal sharing of political power and as negotiators of social divisions in the arena of democratic politics. The topic highlights the national and regional political parties their role in the politics and their importance. The problems related to the political parties and how the political parties can be made free from these problems. This topic begins with few basic questions like why do we need political parties? How many parties are good for a democracy? It also explain different systems which we have in different part of the world i.e. one party system, Bi-party system and multiparty system.

Important terms:
 ·     Political party: Agroup of people with similar policies and programmes, who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.
 ·     Partisan: A person who is strongly committed to a party that runs the government.
 ·     Ruling party: A political party that runs government.
 ·     One - party system: In some countries only one party is allowed to control and run the government. These ae called one party system.
 ·     Two pary system: In some countries power usually changes between two major parties.
·      Multi - party system: If several parties compete for power, more than two parties have a reasonable chance of winning and coming to power either            on their own or through an alliance with other.
·      Alliance/front: When several parties join hands for the purpose of contesting elections or winning power.
 ·    Regional party: A party that secures at least 6% of the total votes in an election to the legislative assembly of a state and wins at least 2 seats is              recognised as a regional party/state party.
·    National party: Those parties which are country -wde parties are called national parties.
·   Defection: Moving of a person from one party to another party for some personal benefit.
·  Affidavit: An affidavit is a signed document submitted to an officer, where a person makes a sworn statement regarding his / her personal information.

WhY do we need political parties?    
Political parties are easily one of the most visible institutions in a democracy. For most of the ordinary citizens, democracy is equal to political parties.

Meaning
A political party is a group of people who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government. They agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good.
Since there can be different views on what is good for all, parties try to persuade people why their policies are better than others. They seek to implement these policies by winning popular support through elections.
Thus, parties reflect fundamental political divisions in a society. Parties are about a part of the society and thus involve partisanship. Thus a party is known by which part it stands for, which policies it supports and whose interests it upholds.
A political party has three components:
 ·    the leaders
 ·    the active members
 ·    the followers

Functions
1. Parties contest elections. In most democracies, elections are fought mainly among the candidates put up by political parties. Parties select their              candidates in different ways. In some countries, such as the USA & India, members and supporters of a party choose its candidates.
2.  Parties put forward different policies and programmes and the voters choose from them. 
 Each of us may have different opinions and views on what policies are suitable for the society. But no     government can handle such a large variety of views. In a democracy, a large number of similar opinions have to be grouped together to provide a direction in which policies can be formulated by the governments. This is what the parties do.
A party reduces a vast multitude of opinions into a few basic positions which it supports. 
A government is expected to base its policies on the line taken by the RULING PARTY.
3.    Parties play a decisive role in making laws for a country. Formally, laws are debated and passed in the legislature. But since most of the members belong to a party, they go by the direction of the party leadership, irrespective of their personal opinions.
4.    Parties form and run governments. The big policy decisions are taken by political executive that comes from the political parties. Parties recruit leaders, trains them and then make them ministers to run the government in the way they want
5.    Those parties that lose in the elections play the role of opposition to the parties in power, by voicing different views and criticising government for its failures or wrong policies. Opposition parties also mobilise opposition to the government.
6.    Parties shape public opinion. They raise and highlight issues. Many of the pressure groups are the extensions of political parties among different sections of society. Parties sometimes also launch movements for the resolution of problems faced by people.
7.    Parties provide people access to government machinery and welfare schemes implemented by governments. For an ordinary citizen it is easy to approach a local party leader than a government officer. That is why they feel close to parties even when they do not fully trust them. Parties have to be responsive to people’s needs and demands. Otherwise people can reject those parties in the next elections.

Necessity of Political Parties
    We need political parties because they perform all these functions. Why modern democracies cannot exist without political parties?
    We can understand the necessity of political parties by imagining a situation without parties.
    Every candidate in the elections will be independent. So no one will be able to make any promises to the people about any major policy changes.
   The government may be formed, but its utility will remain ever uncertain. Elected representative will be accountable to their constituency for what they      do in the locality. But no one will be responsible for how the country run.

We can also think about it by looking at the non-party based elections to the panchayat in many states. Although, the parties do not contest formally, it is generally noticed that the village gets split into more than one faction, each of which puts up a ‘panel’ of its candidates. This is exactly what the party does. That is the reason we find political parties in almost all countries of the world, whether these countries are big or small, old or new, developed or developing.
The rise of political parties is directly linked to the emergence of representative democracies.
As societies became large and complex, they also need some agency to gather different views on various issues and to present these to the government.
They needed some way to bring various representatives together so that a responsible government could be formed. They needed a mechanism to support or restrain the government, make policies, justify or oppose them. Political parties fulfill these needs that every representative government has.

Illustration 1
Why people tend to be very critical of political parties?
Solution
They tend to blame political parties for all that is wrong with our democracy and our political life.

Illustration 2
How political parties are formed?
Solution
Political parties are formed when a group of people agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good and come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.

What role do political parties play in competition and contestation?

INTRODUCTION : 
In all the democracies of the world we find political parties which shape up the public opinion and are in competion to gain political power. The political parties are considered as vehicals of federal sharing of political power and as negotiators of social divisions in the arena of democratic politics. The topic highlights the national and regional political parties their role in the politics and their importance. The problems related to the political parties and how the political parties can be made free from these problems. This topic begins with few basic questions like why do we need political parties? How many parties are good for a democracy? It also explain different systems which we have in different part of the world i.e. one party system, Bi-party system and multiparty system.

Important terms:
 ·     Political party: Agroup of people with similar policies and programmes, who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.
 ·     Partisan: A person who is strongly committed to a party that runs the government.
 ·     Ruling party: A political party that runs government.
 ·     One - party system: In some countries only one party is allowed to control and run the government. These ae called one party system.
 ·     Two pary system: In some countries power usually changes between two major parties.
·      Multi - party system: If several parties compete for power, more than two parties have a reasonable chance of winning and coming to power either            on their own or through an alliance with other.
·      Alliance/front: When several parties join hands for the purpose of contesting elections or winning power.
 ·    Regional party: A party that secures at least 6% of the total votes in an election to the legislative assembly of a state and wins at least 2 seats is              recognised as a regional party/state party.
·    National party: Those parties which are country -wde parties are called national parties.
·   Defection: Moving of a person from one party to another party for some personal benefit.
·  Affidavit: An affidavit is a signed document submitted to an officer, where a person makes a sworn statement regarding his / her personal information.

WhY do we need political parties?    
Political parties are easily one of the most visible institutions in a democracy. For most of the ordinary citizens, democracy is equal to political parties.

Meaning
A political party is a group of people who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government. They agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good.
Since there can be different views on what is good for all, parties try to persuade people why their policies are better than others. They seek to implement these policies by winning popular support through elections.
Thus, parties reflect fundamental political divisions in a society. Parties are about a part of the society and thus involve partisanship. Thus a party is known by which part it stands for, which policies it supports and whose interests it upholds.
A political party has three components:
 ·    the leaders
 ·    the active members
 ·    the followers

Functions
1. Parties contest elections. In most democracies, elections are fought mainly among the candidates put up by political parties. Parties select their              candidates in different ways. In some countries, such as the USA & India, members and supporters of a party choose its candidates.
2.  Parties put forward different policies and programmes and the voters choose from them. 
 Each of us may have different opinions and views on what policies are suitable for the society. But no     government can handle such a large variety of views. In a democracy, a large number of similar opinions have to be grouped together to provide a direction in which policies can be formulated by the governments. This is what the parties do.
A party reduces a vast multitude of opinions into a few basic positions which it supports. 
A government is expected to base its policies on the line taken by the RULING PARTY.
3.    Parties play a decisive role in making laws for a country. Formally, laws are debated and passed in the legislature. But since most of the members belong to a party, they go by the direction of the party leadership, irrespective of their personal opinions.
4.    Parties form and run governments. The big policy decisions are taken by political executive that comes from the political parties. Parties recruit leaders, trains them and then make them ministers to run the government in the way they want
5.    Those parties that lose in the elections play the role of opposition to the parties in power, by voicing different views and criticising government for its failures or wrong policies. Opposition parties also mobilise opposition to the government.
6.    Parties shape public opinion. They raise and highlight issues. Many of the pressure groups are the extensions of political parties among different sections of society. Parties sometimes also launch movements for the resolution of problems faced by people.
7.    Parties provide people access to government machinery and welfare schemes implemented by governments. For an ordinary citizen it is easy to approach a local party leader than a government officer. That is why they feel close to parties even when they do not fully trust them. Parties have to be responsive to people’s needs and demands. Otherwise people can reject those parties in the next elections.

Necessity of Political Parties
    We need political parties because they perform all these functions. Why modern democracies cannot exist without political parties?
    We can understand the necessity of political parties by imagining a situation without parties.
    Every candidate in the elections will be independent. So no one will be able to make any promises to the people about any major policy changes.
   The government may be formed, but its utility will remain ever uncertain. Elected representative will be accountable to their constituency for what they      do in the locality. But no one will be responsible for how the country run.

We can also think about it by looking at the non-party based elections to the panchayat in many states. Although, the parties do not contest formally, it is generally noticed that the village gets split into more than one faction, each of which puts up a ‘panel’ of its candidates. This is exactly what the party does. That is the reason we find political parties in almost all countries of the world, whether these countries are big or small, old or new, developed or developing.
The rise of political parties is directly linked to the emergence of representative democracies.
As societies became large and complex, they also need some agency to gather different views on various issues and to present these to the government.
They needed some way to bring various representatives together so that a responsible government could be formed. They needed a mechanism to support or restrain the government, make policies, justify or oppose them. Political parties fulfill these needs that every representative government has.

Illustration 1
Why people tend to be very critical of political parties?
Solution
They tend to blame political parties for all that is wrong with our democracy and our political life.

Illustration 2
How political parties are formed?
Solution
Political parties are formed when a group of people agree on some policies and programmes for the society with a view to promote the collective good and come together to contest elections and hold power in the government.

How has federal division of power in India helped national unity?

Why power sharing is desirable :
(i)    Power sharing is good because it helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. Since social conflict often leads to violence and political instablitiy, power sharing is a good way to ensure the stability of political order. This is called prudentral power sharing.
(ii)    Imposing the will of majority community over others may look like an attractive option in the short run, but in the long run it undermines the unity of the nation.
(iii)    Tyranny of the majority is not just oppressive for the minority; it often brings ruin to the majority as well.
(iv)    Power sharing is the very spirit of democracy. A democratic rule involves sharing power with those affected by its exercise, and who have to live with its effects. This is called moral power sharing.
(v)    People have a right to be consulted on how they are to be governed.
(vi)    A legitimate government is one where citizens, through participation, acquire a stake in the system.
(vii)    Prudential reasons: It stress that power sharing will bring out better outcomes.
(viii)    Moral reason: emphasises the very act of power sharing as valuable.

Illustration 4
    (i)    What happens if powersharing in a country, is not proper?
    (ii)    How imposing will of majority undermines national unity
    (iii)    Why power sharing is called the ‘Spirit of Democracy’?
Solution
(i)    It leads to social conflicts, Voilence and Political instability.
(ii)    In long run minority community starts opposing the present system which leads to social clashes and disputes which hampers national unity.
(iii)    Because power sharing ensures the proper representation of all the social groups and communities providing a better partiapation of the people.

Try yourself :
11.    What can be the best example of prudential reason of power sharing?
12.    Decentralisation of power in India is an examples of which kind of reason of Power Sharing?
13.    “Giving Power of Panchayats is also a way to reduce corruption and increase administrative efficiency” Which reason of power sharing has been shown in the above statement.

forms of power sharing :
(i)    One basic principle of democracy is that people are the source of all political power. In a democracy, people rule themselves through institutions of self-governance. 
(ii)    In a good democratic government, due respect is given to diverse groups and views that exist in a society. Everyone has a voice in the shaping of public policies.
(iii)    Therefore, it follows that in a democracy political power should be distributed among as many citizens as possible.

    This is called horizontal distribution of power because it allows different organs of government placed at the same level to exercise different powers.
    Even though ministers and government officials exercise power, they are responsible to the Parliament or State Assemblies.
    Similarly, although judges are appointed by the executive, they can check the functioning of executive or laws made by the legislatures.
    This arrangement is called a system of checks and balances.
    Shared among governments at different levels :
    Federal Government ® State Government ® Local Self Government
    A general government for the entire country called federal government and governments at the provincial or regional level. We call them State Governments.
    This is called federal division of power. 
    The same principle can be extended to levels of government lower than the State government, such as the municipality and panchayat called local self government.
    Shared among different social groups
    Such as the religious and linguistic groups. ‘Community government’ in Belgium is a good example of this arrangement.
    For example : The system of ‘reserved constituencies’ in assemblies and the parliament of our country. Meant to give space in the government and administration to diverse social groups who otherwise would feel alienated from the governement.
    Power sharing by political parties, pressure groups and movements :
    The citizens must have freedom to choose among various contenders for power. Such competition ensure that power does not remain in one hand.
    Sometimes this kind of sharing can be direct, when two or more parties form an alliance to contest elections. If their alliance is elected, they form a coalition government and thus share power.
    In a democracy, we find interest groups such as those of traders, businessmen, industrialists, formers and industrial workers. They also will have a share in government power, either through participation in governmental committees or bringing influence on the decision making process.

How has federal division of power in India helped national unity?

Why power sharing is desirable :
(i)    Power sharing is good because it helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. Since social conflict often leads to violence and political instablitiy, power sharing is a good way to ensure the stability of political order. This is called prudentral power sharing.
(ii)    Imposing the will of majority community over others may look like an attractive option in the short run, but in the long run it undermines the unity of the nation.
(iii)    Tyranny of the majority is not just oppressive for the minority; it often brings ruin to the majority as well.
(iv)    Power sharing is the very spirit of democracy. A democratic rule involves sharing power with those affected by its exercise, and who have to live with its effects. This is called moral power sharing.
(v)    People have a right to be consulted on how they are to be governed.
(vi)    A legitimate government is one where citizens, through participation, acquire a stake in the system.
(vii)    Prudential reasons: It stress that power sharing will bring out better outcomes.
(viii)    Moral reason: emphasises the very act of power sharing as valuable.

Illustration 4
    (i)    What happens if powersharing in a country, is not proper?
    (ii)    How imposing will of majority undermines national unity
    (iii)    Why power sharing is called the ‘Spirit of Democracy’?
Solution
(i)    It leads to social conflicts, Voilence and Political instability.
(ii)    In long run minority community starts opposing the present system which leads to social clashes and disputes which hampers national unity.
(iii)    Because power sharing ensures the proper representation of all the social groups and communities providing a better partiapation of the people.

Try yourself :
11.    What can be the best example of prudential reason of power sharing?
12.    Decentralisation of power in India is an examples of which kind of reason of Power Sharing?
13.    “Giving Power of Panchayats is also a way to reduce corruption and increase administrative efficiency” Which reason of power sharing has been shown in the above statement.

forms of power sharing :
(i)    One basic principle of democracy is that people are the source of all political power. In a democracy, people rule themselves through institutions of self-governance. 
(ii)    In a good democratic government, due respect is given to diverse groups and views that exist in a society. Everyone has a voice in the shaping of public policies.
(iii)    Therefore, it follows that in a democracy political power should be distributed among as many citizens as possible.

    This is called horizontal distribution of power because it allows different organs of government placed at the same level to exercise different powers.
    Even though ministers and government officials exercise power, they are responsible to the Parliament or State Assemblies.
    Similarly, although judges are appointed by the executive, they can check the functioning of executive or laws made by the legislatures.
    This arrangement is called a system of checks and balances.
    Shared among governments at different levels :
    Federal Government ® State Government ® Local Self Government
    A general government for the entire country called federal government and governments at the provincial or regional level. We call them State Governments.
    This is called federal division of power. 
    The same principle can be extended to levels of government lower than the State government, such as the municipality and panchayat called local self government.
    Shared among different social groups
    Such as the religious and linguistic groups. ‘Community government’ in Belgium is a good example of this arrangement.
    For example : The system of ‘reserved constituencies’ in assemblies and the parliament of our country. Meant to give space in the government and administration to diverse social groups who otherwise would feel alienated from the governement.
    Power sharing by political parties, pressure groups and movements :
    The citizens must have freedom to choose among various contenders for power. Such competition ensure that power does not remain in one hand.
    Sometimes this kind of sharing can be direct, when two or more parties form an alliance to contest elections. If their alliance is elected, they form a coalition government and thus share power.
    In a democracy, we find interest groups such as those of traders, businessmen, industrialists, formers and industrial workers. They also will have a share in government power, either through participation in governmental committees or bringing influence on the decision making process.

How has federal division of power in India helped national unity?

Why power sharing is desirable :
(i)    Power sharing is good because it helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. Since social conflict often leads to violence and political instablitiy, power sharing is a good way to ensure the stability of political order. This is called prudentral power sharing.
(ii)    Imposing the will of majority community over others may look like an attractive option in the short run, but in the long run it undermines the unity of the nation.
(iii)    Tyranny of the majority is not just oppressive for the minority; it often brings ruin to the majority as well.
(iv)    Power sharing is the very spirit of democracy. A democratic rule involves sharing power with those affected by its exercise, and who have to live with its effects. This is called moral power sharing.
(v)    People have a right to be consulted on how they are to be governed.
(vi)    A legitimate government is one where citizens, through participation, acquire a stake in the system.
(vii)    Prudential reasons: It stress that power sharing will bring out better outcomes.
(viii)    Moral reason: emphasises the very act of power sharing as valuable.

Illustration 4
    (i)    What happens if powersharing in a country, is not proper?
    (ii)    How imposing will of majority undermines national unity
    (iii)    Why power sharing is called the ‘Spirit of Democracy’?
Solution
(i)    It leads to social conflicts, Voilence and Political instability.
(ii)    In long run minority community starts opposing the present system which leads to social clashes and disputes which hampers national unity.
(iii)    Because power sharing ensures the proper representation of all the social groups and communities providing a better partiapation of the people.

Try yourself :
11.    What can be the best example of prudential reason of power sharing?
12.    Decentralisation of power in India is an examples of which kind of reason of Power Sharing?
13.    “Giving Power of Panchayats is also a way to reduce corruption and increase administrative efficiency” Which reason of power sharing has been shown in the above statement.

forms of power sharing :
(i)    One basic principle of democracy is that people are the source of all political power. In a democracy, people rule themselves through institutions of self-governance. 
(ii)    In a good democratic government, due respect is given to diverse groups and views that exist in a society. Everyone has a voice in the shaping of public policies.
(iii)    Therefore, it follows that in a democracy political power should be distributed among as many citizens as possible.

    This is called horizontal distribution of power because it allows different organs of government placed at the same level to exercise different powers.
    Even though ministers and government officials exercise power, they are responsible to the Parliament or State Assemblies.
    Similarly, although judges are appointed by the executive, they can check the functioning of executive or laws made by the legislatures.
    This arrangement is called a system of checks and balances.
    Shared among governments at different levels :
    Federal Government ® State Government ® Local Self Government
    A general government for the entire country called federal government and governments at the provincial or regional level. We call them State Governments.
    This is called federal division of power. 
    The same principle can be extended to levels of government lower than the State government, such as the municipality and panchayat called local self government.
    Shared among different social groups
    Such as the religious and linguistic groups. ‘Community government’ in Belgium is a good example of this arrangement.
    For example : The system of ‘reserved constituencies’ in assemblies and the parliament of our country. Meant to give space in the government and administration to diverse social groups who otherwise would feel alienated from the governement.
    Power sharing by political parties, pressure groups and movements :
    The citizens must have freedom to choose among various contenders for power. Such competition ensure that power does not remain in one hand.
    Sometimes this kind of sharing can be direct, when two or more parties form an alliance to contest elections. If their alliance is elected, they form a coalition government and thus share power.
    In a democracy, we find interest groups such as those of traders, businessmen, industrialists, formers and industrial workers. They also will have a share in government power, either through participation in governmental committees or bringing influence on the decision making process.

How has federal division of power in India helped national unity?

Why power sharing is desirable :
(i)    Power sharing is good because it helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. Since social conflict often leads to violence and political instablitiy, power sharing is a good way to ensure the stability of political order. This is called prudentral power sharing.
(ii)    Imposing the will of majority community over others may look like an attractive option in the short run, but in the long run it undermines the unity of the nation.
(iii)    Tyranny of the majority is not just oppressive for the minority; it often brings ruin to the majority as well.
(iv)    Power sharing is the very spirit of democracy. A democratic rule involves sharing power with those affected by its exercise, and who have to live with its effects. This is called moral power sharing.
(v)    People have a right to be consulted on how they are to be governed.
(vi)    A legitimate government is one where citizens, through participation, acquire a stake in the system.
(vii)    Prudential reasons: It stress that power sharing will bring out better outcomes.
(viii)    Moral reason: emphasises the very act of power sharing as valuable.

Illustration 4
    (i)    What happens if powersharing in a country, is not proper?
    (ii)    How imposing will of majority undermines national unity
    (iii)    Why power sharing is called the ‘Spirit of Democracy’?
Solution
(i)    It leads to social conflicts, Voilence and Political instability.
(ii)    In long run minority community starts opposing the present system which leads to social clashes and disputes which hampers national unity.
(iii)    Because power sharing ensures the proper representation of all the social groups and communities providing a better partiapation of the people.

Try yourself :
11.    What can be the best example of prudential reason of power sharing?
12.    Decentralisation of power in India is an examples of which kind of reason of Power Sharing?
13.    “Giving Power of Panchayats is also a way to reduce corruption and increase administrative efficiency” Which reason of power sharing has been shown in the above statement.

forms of power sharing :
(i)    One basic principle of democracy is that people are the source of all political power. In a democracy, people rule themselves through institutions of self-governance. 
(ii)    In a good democratic government, due respect is given to diverse groups and views that exist in a society. Everyone has a voice in the shaping of public policies.
(iii)    Therefore, it follows that in a democracy political power should be distributed among as many citizens as possible.

    This is called horizontal distribution of power because it allows different organs of government placed at the same level to exercise different powers.
    Even though ministers and government officials exercise power, they are responsible to the Parliament or State Assemblies.
    Similarly, although judges are appointed by the executive, they can check the functioning of executive or laws made by the legislatures.
    This arrangement is called a system of checks and balances.
    Shared among governments at different levels :
    Federal Government ® State Government ® Local Self Government
    A general government for the entire country called federal government and governments at the provincial or regional level. We call them State Governments.
    This is called federal division of power. 
    The same principle can be extended to levels of government lower than the State government, such as the municipality and panchayat called local self government.
    Shared among different social groups
    Such as the religious and linguistic groups. ‘Community government’ in Belgium is a good example of this arrangement.
    For example : The system of ‘reserved constituencies’ in assemblies and the parliament of our country. Meant to give space in the government and administration to diverse social groups who otherwise would feel alienated from the governement.
    Power sharing by political parties, pressure groups and movements :
    The citizens must have freedom to choose among various contenders for power. Such competition ensure that power does not remain in one hand.
    Sometimes this kind of sharing can be direct, when two or more parties form an alliance to contest elections. If their alliance is elected, they form a coalition government and thus share power.
    In a democracy, we find interest groups such as those of traders, businessmen, industrialists, formers and industrial workers. They also will have a share in government power, either through participation in governmental committees or bringing influence on the decision making process.

How has federal division of power in India helped national unity?

Why power sharing is desirable :
(i)    Power sharing is good because it helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. Since social conflict often leads to violence and political instablitiy, power sharing is a good way to ensure the stability of political order. This is called prudentral power sharing.
(ii)    Imposing the will of majority community over others may look like an attractive option in the short run, but in the long run it undermines the unity of the nation.
(iii)    Tyranny of the majority is not just oppressive for the minority; it often brings ruin to the majority as well.
(iv)    Power sharing is the very spirit of democracy. A democratic rule involves sharing power with those affected by its exercise, and who have to live with its effects. This is called moral power sharing.
(v)    People have a right to be consulted on how they are to be governed.
(vi)    A legitimate government is one where citizens, through participation, acquire a stake in the system.
(vii)    Prudential reasons: It stress that power sharing will bring out better outcomes.
(viii)    Moral reason: emphasises the very act of power sharing as valuable.

Illustration 4
    (i)    What happens if powersharing in a country, is not proper?
    (ii)    How imposing will of majority undermines national unity
    (iii)    Why power sharing is called the ‘Spirit of Democracy’?
Solution
(i)    It leads to social conflicts, Voilence and Political instability.
(ii)    In long run minority community starts opposing the present system which leads to social clashes and disputes which hampers national unity.
(iii)    Because power sharing ensures the proper representation of all the social groups and communities providing a better partiapation of the people.

Try yourself :
11.    What can be the best example of prudential reason of power sharing?
12.    Decentralisation of power in India is an examples of which kind of reason of Power Sharing?
13.    “Giving Power of Panchayats is also a way to reduce corruption and increase administrative efficiency” Which reason of power sharing has been shown in the above statement.

forms of power sharing :
(i)    One basic principle of democracy is that people are the source of all political power. In a democracy, people rule themselves through institutions of self-governance. 
(ii)    In a good democratic government, due respect is given to diverse groups and views that exist in a society. Everyone has a voice in the shaping of public policies.
(iii)    Therefore, it follows that in a democracy political power should be distributed among as many citizens as possible.

    This is called horizontal distribution of power because it allows different organs of government placed at the same level to exercise different powers.
    Even though ministers and government officials exercise power, they are responsible to the Parliament or State Assemblies.
    Similarly, although judges are appointed by the executive, they can check the functioning of executive or laws made by the legislatures.
    This arrangement is called a system of checks and balances.
    Shared among governments at different levels :
    Federal Government ® State Government ® Local Self Government
    A general government for the entire country called federal government and governments at the provincial or regional level. We call them State Governments.
    This is called federal division of power. 
    The same principle can be extended to levels of government lower than the State government, such as the municipality and panchayat called local self government.
    Shared among different social groups
    Such as the religious and linguistic groups. ‘Community government’ in Belgium is a good example of this arrangement.
    For example : The system of ‘reserved constituencies’ in assemblies and the parliament of our country. Meant to give space in the government and administration to diverse social groups who otherwise would feel alienated from the governement.
    Power sharing by political parties, pressure groups and movements :
    The citizens must have freedom to choose among various contenders for power. Such competition ensure that power does not remain in one hand.
    Sometimes this kind of sharing can be direct, when two or more parties form an alliance to contest elections. If their alliance is elected, they form a coalition government and thus share power.
    In a democracy, we find interest groups such as those of traders, businessmen, industrialists, formers and industrial workers. They also will have a share in government power, either through participation in governmental committees or bringing influence on the decision making process.

How has federal division of power in India helped national unity?

Why power sharing is desirable :
(i)    Power sharing is good because it helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. Since social conflict often leads to violence and political instablitiy, power sharing is a good way to ensure the stability of political order. This is called prudentral power sharing.
(ii)    Imposing the will of majority community over others may look like an attractive option in the short run, but in the long run it undermines the unity of the nation.
(iii)    Tyranny of the majority is not just oppressive for the minority; it often brings ruin to the majority as well.
(iv)    Power sharing is the very spirit of democracy. A democratic rule involves sharing power with those affected by its exercise, and who have to live with its effects. This is called moral power sharing.
(v)    People have a right to be consulted on how they are to be governed.
(vi)    A legitimate government is one where citizens, through participation, acquire a stake in the system.
(vii)    Prudential reasons: It stress that power sharing will bring out better outcomes.
(viii)    Moral reason: emphasises the very act of power sharing as valuable.

Illustration 4
    (i)    What happens if powersharing in a country, is not proper?
    (ii)    How imposing will of majority undermines national unity
    (iii)    Why power sharing is called the ‘Spirit of Democracy’?
Solution
(i)    It leads to social conflicts, Voilence and Political instability.
(ii)    In long run minority community starts opposing the present system which leads to social clashes and disputes which hampers national unity.
(iii)    Because power sharing ensures the proper representation of all the social groups and communities providing a better partiapation of the people.

Try yourself :
11.    What can be the best example of prudential reason of power sharing?
12.    Decentralisation of power in India is an examples of which kind of reason of Power Sharing?
13.    “Giving Power of Panchayats is also a way to reduce corruption and increase administrative efficiency” Which reason of power sharing has been shown in the above statement.

forms of power sharing :
(i)    One basic principle of democracy is that people are the source of all political power. In a democracy, people rule themselves through institutions of self-governance. 
(ii)    In a good democratic government, due respect is given to diverse groups and views that exist in a society. Everyone has a voice in the shaping of public policies.
(iii)    Therefore, it follows that in a democracy political power should be distributed among as many citizens as possible.

    This is called horizontal distribution of power because it allows different organs of government placed at the same level to exercise different powers.
    Even though ministers and government officials exercise power, they are responsible to the Parliament or State Assemblies.
    Similarly, although judges are appointed by the executive, they can check the functioning of executive or laws made by the legislatures.
    This arrangement is called a system of checks and balances.
    Shared among governments at different levels :
    Federal Government ® State Government ® Local Self Government
    A general government for the entire country called federal government and governments at the provincial or regional level. We call them State Governments.
    This is called federal division of power. 
    The same principle can be extended to levels of government lower than the State government, such as the municipality and panchayat called local self government.
    Shared among different social groups
    Such as the religious and linguistic groups. ‘Community government’ in Belgium is a good example of this arrangement.
    For example : The system of ‘reserved constituencies’ in assemblies and the parliament of our country. Meant to give space in the government and administration to diverse social groups who otherwise would feel alienated from the governement.
    Power sharing by political parties, pressure groups and movements :
    The citizens must have freedom to choose among various contenders for power. Such competition ensure that power does not remain in one hand.
    Sometimes this kind of sharing can be direct, when two or more parties form an alliance to contest elections. If their alliance is elected, they form a coalition government and thus share power.
    In a democracy, we find interest groups such as those of traders, businessmen, industrialists, formers and industrial workers. They also will have a share in government power, either through participation in governmental committees or bringing influence on the decision making process.

How has federal division of power in India helped national unity?

Why power sharing is desirable :
(i)    Power sharing is good because it helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. Since social conflict often leads to violence and political instablitiy, power sharing is a good way to ensure the stability of political order. This is called prudentral power sharing.
(ii)    Imposing the will of majority community over others may look like an attractive option in the short run, but in the long run it undermines the unity of the nation.
(iii)    Tyranny of the majority is not just oppressive for the minority; it often brings ruin to the majority as well.
(iv)    Power sharing is the very spirit of democracy. A democratic rule involves sharing power with those affected by its exercise, and who have to live with its effects. This is called moral power sharing.
(v)    People have a right to be consulted on how they are to be governed.
(vi)    A legitimate government is one where citizens, through participation, acquire a stake in the system.
(vii)    Prudential reasons: It stress that power sharing will bring out better outcomes.
(viii)    Moral reason: emphasises the very act of power sharing as valuable.

Illustration 4
    (i)    What happens if powersharing in a country, is not proper?
    (ii)    How imposing will of majority undermines national unity
    (iii)    Why power sharing is called the ‘Spirit of Democracy’?
Solution
(i)    It leads to social conflicts, Voilence and Political instability.
(ii)    In long run minority community starts opposing the present system which leads to social clashes and disputes which hampers national unity.
(iii)    Because power sharing ensures the proper representation of all the social groups and communities providing a better partiapation of the people.

Try yourself :
11.    What can be the best example of prudential reason of power sharing?
12.    Decentralisation of power in India is an examples of which kind of reason of Power Sharing?
13.    “Giving Power of Panchayats is also a way to reduce corruption and increase administrative efficiency” Which reason of power sharing has been shown in the above statement.

forms of power sharing :
(i)    One basic principle of democracy is that people are the source of all political power. In a democracy, people rule themselves through institutions of self-governance. 
(ii)    In a good democratic government, due respect is given to diverse groups and views that exist in a society. Everyone has a voice in the shaping of public policies.
(iii)    Therefore, it follows that in a democracy political power should be distributed among as many citizens as possible.

    This is called horizontal distribution of power because it allows different organs of government placed at the same level to exercise different powers.
    Even though ministers and government officials exercise power, they are responsible to the Parliament or State Assemblies.
    Similarly, although judges are appointed by the executive, they can check the functioning of executive or laws made by the legislatures.
    This arrangement is called a system of checks and balances.
    Shared among governments at different levels :
    Federal Government ® State Government ® Local Self Government
    A general government for the entire country called federal government and governments at the provincial or regional level. We call them State Governments.
    This is called federal division of power. 
    The same principle can be extended to levels of government lower than the State government, such as the municipality and panchayat called local self government.
    Shared among different social groups
    Such as the religious and linguistic groups. ‘Community government’ in Belgium is a good example of this arrangement.
    For example : The system of ‘reserved constituencies’ in assemblies and the parliament of our country. Meant to give space in the government and administration to diverse social groups who otherwise would feel alienated from the governement.
    Power sharing by political parties, pressure groups and movements :
    The citizens must have freedom to choose among various contenders for power. Such competition ensure that power does not remain in one hand.
    Sometimes this kind of sharing can be direct, when two or more parties form an alliance to contest elections. If their alliance is elected, they form a coalition government and thus share power.
    In a democracy, we find interest groups such as those of traders, businessmen, industrialists, formers and industrial workers. They also will have a share in government power, either through participation in governmental committees or bringing influence on the decision making process.

To what extent has decentralisation achieved this objective?

INTRODUCTION 
    There are different forms of power sharing like horizontal power sharing, vertical power sharing, social power sharing, coalition, etc. In large countries like India for success of democracy power sharing becomes essential. In vertical power sharing we include the power sharing among union government, state government and local self government this is generally referred to federalism.It is also a convinient method to run the administration of the country successfully. This chapter deals with various aspects of federalism and some important concepts related to it.

what is federlism?    
    Belgium    
    One of the key changes made in the Constitution of Belgium was to reduce the power of the Central Government and to give these powers to the regional governments. 
    Regional governments existed in Belgium even earlier. They had their roles and powers. But all these powers were given to these governments and could be withdrawn by the Central Government.
    The change that took place in 1993 was that the regional governments were given constitutional powers that were no longer dependent on the central government. Thus, Belgium shifted from a unitary to a federal form of government, 
    Sri Lanka
    Continues to be, for all practical purposes, a unitary system where the national government has all the powers. Tamil leaders want Sri Lanka to become a federal system.     
    Federalism
    Federalism is a system of government in which the power is divided between a central authority and various constituent units of the country.

Usually, a federation has two levels of government :–  
    (1)    The government for the entire country that is usually responsible for a few subjects of common national interest.
    (2)    The others are governments at the level of provinces or states that look after much of the 
day-to-day administering of their state.
    Both these levels of governments enjoy their power independent of the other.    
    Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Features of Federalism
    (1)    There are two or more levels (or tiers) of government. 
    (2)    ‘Different tiers of government govern the same citizens, but each tier has its own jurisdiction in specific matters of legislation, taxation and administration.
    (3)    The jurisdictions of the respective levels or tiers of government are specified in the constitution. So the existence and authority of each tier of government is constitutionally guaranteed.
    (4)    The fundamental provisions of the constitution cannot be unilaterally changed by one level of government. Such changes require the consent of both the levels of government. (i.e. central and state) 
    (5)    Courts have the power to interpret the constitution and the powers of different levels of government. The highest court acts as an umpire if disputes arise between different levels of government in the exercise of their respective powers.
    (6)    Sources of revenue for each level of government are clearly specified to ensure its financial autonomy.
    (7)    The federal system thus has dual objectives: 
        (a) To safeguard and promote unity of the country,
        (b) While at the same time accommodate regional diversity. 

    Two aspects are crucial for the institutions and practice of federalism: 
    (1)    Governments at different levels should agree to some rules of power sharing.
    (2)    They should also trust that each would abide by its part of the agreement.An ideal federal system has both aspects : mutual trust and agreement to live together.

The exact balance of power between the central and the state government varies from one federation to another.

This balance depends mainly on the historical context in which the federation was formed.
    There are two kinds of routes through which federations have been formed.     
    First Route
    The first route involves independent States coming together on their own to form a bigger unit, so that by pooling sovereignity and retaining identity they can increase their security. This type of ‘coming together’ federations include USA, Switzerland and Australia. 
    In this first category of federations, all the constituent States usually have equal power and are strong 
    vis-a-vis the federal government.
    Second Route
    The second route is where a large country decides to divide its power between the constituent States and the national government. 
    India, Spain and Belgium are examples of this kind of ‘holding together’ federations. 
    In this second category, the central government tends to be more powerful vis-a-vis the States. 
    Very often different constituent units of the federation have unequal powers.Some units are granted special powers.

 

To what extent has decentralisation achieved this objective?

INTRODUCTION 
    There are different forms of power sharing like horizontal power sharing, vertical power sharing, social power sharing, coalition, etc. In large countries like India for success of democracy power sharing becomes essential. In vertical power sharing we include the power sharing among union government, state government and local self government this is generally referred to federalism.It is also a convinient method to run the administration of the country successfully. This chapter deals with various aspects of federalism and some important concepts related to it.

what is federlism?    
    Belgium    
    One of the key changes made in the Constitution of Belgium was to reduce the power of the Central Government and to give these powers to the regional governments. 
    Regional governments existed in Belgium even earlier. They had their roles and powers. But all these powers were given to these governments and could be withdrawn by the Central Government.
    The change that took place in 1993 was that the regional governments were given constitutional powers that were no longer dependent on the central government. Thus, Belgium shifted from a unitary to a federal form of government, 
    Sri Lanka
    Continues to be, for all practical purposes, a unitary system where the national government has all the powers. Tamil leaders want Sri Lanka to become a federal system.     
    Federalism
    Federalism is a system of government in which the power is divided between a central authority and various constituent units of the country.

Usually, a federation has two levels of government :–  
    (1)    The government for the entire country that is usually responsible for a few subjects of common national interest.
    (2)    The others are governments at the level of provinces or states that look after much of the 
day-to-day administering of their state.
    Both these levels of governments enjoy their power independent of the other.    
    Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Features of Federalism
    (1)    There are two or more levels (or tiers) of government. 
    (2)    ‘Different tiers of government govern the same citizens, but each tier has its own jurisdiction in specific matters of legislation, taxation and administration.
    (3)    The jurisdictions of the respective levels or tiers of government are specified in the constitution. So the existence and authority of each tier of government is constitutionally guaranteed.
    (4)    The fundamental provisions of the constitution cannot be unilaterally changed by one level of government. Such changes require the consent of both the levels of government. (i.e. central and state) 
    (5)    Courts have the power to interpret the constitution and the powers of different levels of government. The highest court acts as an umpire if disputes arise between different levels of government in the exercise of their respective powers.
    (6)    Sources of revenue for each level of government are clearly specified to ensure its financial autonomy.
    (7)    The federal system thus has dual objectives: 
        (a) To safeguard and promote unity of the country,
        (b) While at the same time accommodate regional diversity. 

    Two aspects are crucial for the institutions and practice of federalism: 
    (1)    Governments at different levels should agree to some rules of power sharing.
    (2)    They should also trust that each would abide by its part of the agreement.An ideal federal system has both aspects : mutual trust and agreement to live together.

The exact balance of power between the central and the state government varies from one federation to another.

This balance depends mainly on the historical context in which the federation was formed.
    There are two kinds of routes through which federations have been formed.     
    First Route
    The first route involves independent States coming together on their own to form a bigger unit, so that by pooling sovereignity and retaining identity they can increase their security. This type of ‘coming together’ federations include USA, Switzerland and Australia. 
    In this first category of federations, all the constituent States usually have equal power and are strong 
    vis-a-vis the federal government.
    Second Route
    The second route is where a large country decides to divide its power between the constituent States and the national government. 
    India, Spain and Belgium are examples of this kind of ‘holding together’ federations. 
    In this second category, the central government tends to be more powerful vis-a-vis the States. 
    Very often different constituent units of the federation have unequal powers.Some units are granted special powers.

 

To what extent has decentralisation achieved this objective?

INTRODUCTION 
    There are different forms of power sharing like horizontal power sharing, vertical power sharing, social power sharing, coalition, etc. In large countries like India for success of democracy power sharing becomes essential. In vertical power sharing we include the power sharing among union government, state government and local self government this is generally referred to federalism.It is also a convinient method to run the administration of the country successfully. This chapter deals with various aspects of federalism and some important concepts related to it.

what is federlism?    
    Belgium    
    One of the key changes made in the Constitution of Belgium was to reduce the power of the Central Government and to give these powers to the regional governments. 
    Regional governments existed in Belgium even earlier. They had their roles and powers. But all these powers were given to these governments and could be withdrawn by the Central Government.
    The change that took place in 1993 was that the regional governments were given constitutional powers that were no longer dependent on the central government. Thus, Belgium shifted from a unitary to a federal form of government, 
    Sri Lanka
    Continues to be, for all practical purposes, a unitary system where the national government has all the powers. Tamil leaders want Sri Lanka to become a federal system.     
    Federalism
    Federalism is a system of government in which the power is divided between a central authority and various constituent units of the country.

Usually, a federation has two levels of government :–  
    (1)    The government for the entire country that is usually responsible for a few subjects of common national interest.
    (2)    The others are governments at the level of provinces or states that look after much of the 
day-to-day administering of their state.
    Both these levels of governments enjoy their power independent of the other.    
    Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Features of Federalism
    (1)    There are two or more levels (or tiers) of government. 
    (2)    ‘Different tiers of government govern the same citizens, but each tier has its own jurisdiction in specific matters of legislation, taxation and administration.
    (3)    The jurisdictions of the respective levels or tiers of government are specified in the constitution. So the existence and authority of each tier of government is constitutionally guaranteed.
    (4)    The fundamental provisions of the constitution cannot be unilaterally changed by one level of government. Such changes require the consent of both the levels of government. (i.e. central and state) 
    (5)    Courts have the power to interpret the constitution and the powers of different levels of government. The highest court acts as an umpire if disputes arise between different levels of government in the exercise of their respective powers.
    (6)    Sources of revenue for each level of government are clearly specified to ensure its financial autonomy.
    (7)    The federal system thus has dual objectives: 
        (a) To safeguard and promote unity of the country,
        (b) While at the same time accommodate regional diversity. 

    Two aspects are crucial for the institutions and practice of federalism: 
    (1)    Governments at different levels should agree to some rules of power sharing.
    (2)    They should also trust that each would abide by its part of the agreement.An ideal federal system has both aspects : mutual trust and agreement to live together.

The exact balance of power between the central and the state government varies from one federation to another.

This balance depends mainly on the historical context in which the federation was formed.
    There are two kinds of routes through which federations have been formed.     
    First Route
    The first route involves independent States coming together on their own to form a bigger unit, so that by pooling sovereignity and retaining identity they can increase their security. This type of ‘coming together’ federations include USA, Switzerland and Australia. 
    In this first category of federations, all the constituent States usually have equal power and are strong 
    vis-a-vis the federal government.
    Second Route
    The second route is where a large country decides to divide its power between the constituent States and the national government. 
    India, Spain and Belgium are examples of this kind of ‘holding together’ federations. 
    In this second category, the central government tends to be more powerful vis-a-vis the States. 
    Very often different constituent units of the federation have unequal powers.Some units are granted special powers.

 

To what extent has decentralisation achieved this objective?

INTRODUCTION 
    There are different forms of power sharing like horizontal power sharing, vertical power sharing, social power sharing, coalition, etc. In large countries like India for success of democracy power sharing becomes essential. In vertical power sharing we include the power sharing among union government, state government and local self government this is generally referred to federalism.It is also a convinient method to run the administration of the country successfully. This chapter deals with various aspects of federalism and some important concepts related to it.

what is federlism?    
    Belgium    
    One of the key changes made in the Constitution of Belgium was to reduce the power of the Central Government and to give these powers to the regional governments. 
    Regional governments existed in Belgium even earlier. They had their roles and powers. But all these powers were given to these governments and could be withdrawn by the Central Government.
    The change that took place in 1993 was that the regional governments were given constitutional powers that were no longer dependent on the central government. Thus, Belgium shifted from a unitary to a federal form of government, 
    Sri Lanka
    Continues to be, for all practical purposes, a unitary system where the national government has all the powers. Tamil leaders want Sri Lanka to become a federal system.     
    Federalism
    Federalism is a system of government in which the power is divided between a central authority and various constituent units of the country.

Usually, a federation has two levels of government :–  
    (1)    The government for the entire country that is usually responsible for a few subjects of common national interest.
    (2)    The others are governments at the level of provinces or states that look after much of the 
day-to-day administering of their state.
    Both these levels of governments enjoy their power independent of the other.    
    Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Features of Federalism
    (1)    There are two or more levels (or tiers) of government. 
    (2)    ‘Different tiers of government govern the same citizens, but each tier has its own jurisdiction in specific matters of legislation, taxation and administration.
    (3)    The jurisdictions of the respective levels or tiers of government are specified in the constitution. So the existence and authority of each tier of government is constitutionally guaranteed.
    (4)    The fundamental provisions of the constitution cannot be unilaterally changed by one level of government. Such changes require the consent of both the levels of government. (i.e. central and state) 
    (5)    Courts have the power to interpret the constitution and the powers of different levels of government. The highest court acts as an umpire if disputes arise between different levels of government in the exercise of their respective powers.
    (6)    Sources of revenue for each level of government are clearly specified to ensure its financial autonomy.
    (7)    The federal system thus has dual objectives: 
        (a) To safeguard and promote unity of the country,
        (b) While at the same time accommodate regional diversity. 

    Two aspects are crucial for the institutions and practice of federalism: 
    (1)    Governments at different levels should agree to some rules of power sharing.
    (2)    They should also trust that each would abide by its part of the agreement.An ideal federal system has both aspects : mutual trust and agreement to live together.

The exact balance of power between the central and the state government varies from one federation to another.

This balance depends mainly on the historical context in which the federation was formed.
    There are two kinds of routes through which federations have been formed.     
    First Route
    The first route involves independent States coming together on their own to form a bigger unit, so that by pooling sovereignity and retaining identity they can increase their security. This type of ‘coming together’ federations include USA, Switzerland and Australia. 
    In this first category of federations, all the constituent States usually have equal power and are strong 
    vis-a-vis the federal government.
    Second Route
    The second route is where a large country decides to divide its power between the constituent States and the national government. 
    India, Spain and Belgium are examples of this kind of ‘holding together’ federations. 
    In this second category, the central government tends to be more powerful vis-a-vis the States. 
    Very often different constituent units of the federation have unequal powers.Some units are granted special powers.

 

To what extent has decentralisation achieved this objective?

INTRODUCTION 
    There are different forms of power sharing like horizontal power sharing, vertical power sharing, social power sharing, coalition, etc. In large countries like India for success of democracy power sharing becomes essential. In vertical power sharing we include the power sharing among union government, state government and local self government this is generally referred to federalism.It is also a convinient method to run the administration of the country successfully. This chapter deals with various aspects of federalism and some important concepts related to it.

what is federlism?    
    Belgium    
    One of the key changes made in the Constitution of Belgium was to reduce the power of the Central Government and to give these powers to the regional governments. 
    Regional governments existed in Belgium even earlier. They had their roles and powers. But all these powers were given to these governments and could be withdrawn by the Central Government.
    The change that took place in 1993 was that the regional governments were given constitutional powers that were no longer dependent on the central government. Thus, Belgium shifted from a unitary to a federal form of government, 
    Sri Lanka
    Continues to be, for all practical purposes, a unitary system where the national government has all the powers. Tamil leaders want Sri Lanka to become a federal system.     
    Federalism
    Federalism is a system of government in which the power is divided between a central authority and various constituent units of the country.

Usually, a federation has two levels of government :–  
    (1)    The government for the entire country that is usually responsible for a few subjects of common national interest.
    (2)    The others are governments at the level of provinces or states that look after much of the 
day-to-day administering of their state.
    Both these levels of governments enjoy their power independent of the other.    
    Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Features of Federalism
    (1)    There are two or more levels (or tiers) of government. 
    (2)    ‘Different tiers of government govern the same citizens, but each tier has its own jurisdiction in specific matters of legislation, taxation and administration.
    (3)    The jurisdictions of the respective levels or tiers of government are specified in the constitution. So the existence and authority of each tier of government is constitutionally guaranteed.
    (4)    The fundamental provisions of the constitution cannot be unilaterally changed by one level of government. Such changes require the consent of both the levels of government. (i.e. central and state) 
    (5)    Courts have the power to interpret the constitution and the powers of different levels of government. The highest court acts as an umpire if disputes arise between different levels of government in the exercise of their respective powers.
    (6)    Sources of revenue for each level of government are clearly specified to ensure its financial autonomy.
    (7)    The federal system thus has dual objectives: 
        (a) To safeguard and promote unity of the country,
        (b) While at the same time accommodate regional diversity. 

    Two aspects are crucial for the institutions and practice of federalism: 
    (1)    Governments at different levels should agree to some rules of power sharing.
    (2)    They should also trust that each would abide by its part of the agreement.An ideal federal system has both aspects : mutual trust and agreement to live together.

The exact balance of power between the central and the state government varies from one federation to another.

This balance depends mainly on the historical context in which the federation was formed.
    There are two kinds of routes through which federations have been formed.     
    First Route
    The first route involves independent States coming together on their own to form a bigger unit, so that by pooling sovereignity and retaining identity they can increase their security. This type of ‘coming together’ federations include USA, Switzerland and Australia. 
    In this first category of federations, all the constituent States usually have equal power and are strong 
    vis-a-vis the federal government.
    Second Route
    The second route is where a large country decides to divide its power between the constituent States and the national government. 
    India, Spain and Belgium are examples of this kind of ‘holding together’ federations. 
    In this second category, the central government tends to be more powerful vis-a-vis the States. 
    Very often different constituent units of the federation have unequal powers.Some units are granted special powers.

 

To what extent has decentralisation achieved this objective?

INTRODUCTION 
    There are different forms of power sharing like horizontal power sharing, vertical power sharing, social power sharing, coalition, etc. In large countries like India for success of democracy power sharing becomes essential. In vertical power sharing we include the power sharing among union government, state government and local self government this is generally referred to federalism.It is also a convinient method to run the administration of the country successfully. This chapter deals with various aspects of federalism and some important concepts related to it.

what is federlism?    
    Belgium    
    One of the key changes made in the Constitution of Belgium was to reduce the power of the Central Government and to give these powers to the regional governments. 
    Regional governments existed in Belgium even earlier. They had their roles and powers. But all these powers were given to these governments and could be withdrawn by the Central Government.
    The change that took place in 1993 was that the regional governments were given constitutional powers that were no longer dependent on the central government. Thus, Belgium shifted from a unitary to a federal form of government, 
    Sri Lanka
    Continues to be, for all practical purposes, a unitary system where the national government has all the powers. Tamil leaders want Sri Lanka to become a federal system.     
    Federalism
    Federalism is a system of government in which the power is divided between a central authority and various constituent units of the country.

Usually, a federation has two levels of government :–  
    (1)    The government for the entire country that is usually responsible for a few subjects of common national interest.
    (2)    The others are governments at the level of provinces or states that look after much of the 
day-to-day administering of their state.
    Both these levels of governments enjoy their power independent of the other.    
    Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Features of Federalism
    (1)    There are two or more levels (or tiers) of government. 
    (2)    ‘Different tiers of government govern the same citizens, but each tier has its own jurisdiction in specific matters of legislation, taxation and administration.
    (3)    The jurisdictions of the respective levels or tiers of government are specified in the constitution. So the existence and authority of each tier of government is constitutionally guaranteed.
    (4)    The fundamental provisions of the constitution cannot be unilaterally changed by one level of government. Such changes require the consent of both the levels of government. (i.e. central and state) 
    (5)    Courts have the power to interpret the constitution and the powers of different levels of government. The highest court acts as an umpire if disputes arise between different levels of government in the exercise of their respective powers.
    (6)    Sources of revenue for each level of government are clearly specified to ensure its financial autonomy.
    (7)    The federal system thus has dual objectives: 
        (a) To safeguard and promote unity of the country,
        (b) While at the same time accommodate regional diversity. 

    Two aspects are crucial for the institutions and practice of federalism: 
    (1)    Governments at different levels should agree to some rules of power sharing.
    (2)    They should also trust that each would abide by its part of the agreement.An ideal federal system has both aspects : mutual trust and agreement to live together.

The exact balance of power between the central and the state government varies from one federation to another.

This balance depends mainly on the historical context in which the federation was formed.
    There are two kinds of routes through which federations have been formed.     
    First Route
    The first route involves independent States coming together on their own to form a bigger unit, so that by pooling sovereignity and retaining identity they can increase their security. This type of ‘coming together’ federations include USA, Switzerland and Australia. 
    In this first category of federations, all the constituent States usually have equal power and are strong 
    vis-a-vis the federal government.
    Second Route
    The second route is where a large country decides to divide its power between the constituent States and the national government. 
    India, Spain and Belgium are examples of this kind of ‘holding together’ federations. 
    In this second category, the central government tends to be more powerful vis-a-vis the States. 
    Very often different constituent units of the federation have unequal powers.Some units are granted special powers.

 

To what extent has decentralisation achieved this objective?

INTRODUCTION 
    There are different forms of power sharing like horizontal power sharing, vertical power sharing, social power sharing, coalition, etc. In large countries like India for success of democracy power sharing becomes essential. In vertical power sharing we include the power sharing among union government, state government and local self government this is generally referred to federalism.It is also a convinient method to run the administration of the country successfully. This chapter deals with various aspects of federalism and some important concepts related to it.

what is federlism?    
    Belgium    
    One of the key changes made in the Constitution of Belgium was to reduce the power of the Central Government and to give these powers to the regional governments. 
    Regional governments existed in Belgium even earlier. They had their roles and powers. But all these powers were given to these governments and could be withdrawn by the Central Government.
    The change that took place in 1993 was that the regional governments were given constitutional powers that were no longer dependent on the central government. Thus, Belgium shifted from a unitary to a federal form of government, 
    Sri Lanka
    Continues to be, for all practical purposes, a unitary system where the national government has all the powers. Tamil leaders want Sri Lanka to become a federal system.     
    Federalism
    Federalism is a system of government in which the power is divided between a central authority and various constituent units of the country.

Usually, a federation has two levels of government :–  
    (1)    The government for the entire country that is usually responsible for a few subjects of common national interest.
    (2)    The others are governments at the level of provinces or states that look after much of the 
day-to-day administering of their state.
    Both these levels of governments enjoy their power independent of the other.    
    Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Unitary System 
    (Under the unitary system either there is only one level of government or the sub-units are subordinate to the central government.)
    The central government can pass on orders to the provincial or the local government 
    But in a federal system, the central government cannot order the state government to do something.
    State government has powers of its own for which it is not answerable to the central government. 
    Both these governments are separately answerable to the people of their respective states.

Features of Federalism
    (1)    There are two or more levels (or tiers) of government. 
    (2)    ‘Different tiers of government govern the same citizens, but each tier has its own jurisdiction in specific matters of legislation, taxation and administration.
    (3)    The jurisdictions of the respective levels or tiers of government are specified in the constitution. So the existence and authority of each tier of government is constitutionally guaranteed.
    (4)    The fundamental provisions of the constitution cannot be unilaterally changed by one level of government. Such changes require the consent of both the levels of government. (i.e. central and state) 
    (5)    Courts have the power to interpret the constitution and the powers of different levels of government. The highest court acts as an umpire if disputes arise between different levels of government in the exercise of their respective powers.
    (6)    Sources of revenue for each level of government are clearly specified to ensure its financial autonomy.
    (7)    The federal system thus has dual objectives: 
        (a) To safeguard and promote unity of the country,
        (b) While at the same time accommodate regional diversity. 

    Two aspects are crucial for the institutions and practice of federalism: 
    (1)    Governments at different levels should agree to some rules of power sharing.
    (2)    They should also trust that each would abide by its part of the agreement.An ideal federal system has both aspects : mutual trust and agreement to live together.

The exact balance of power between the central and the state government varies from one federation to another.

This balance depends mainly on the historical context in which the federation was formed.
    There are two kinds of routes through which federations have been formed.     
    First Route
    The first route involves independent States coming together on their own to form a bigger unit, so that by pooling sovereignity and retaining identity they can increase their security. This type of ‘coming together’ federations include USA, Switzerland and Australia. 
    In this first category of federations, all the constituent States usually have equal power and are strong 
    vis-a-vis the federal government.
    Second Route
    The second route is where a large country decides to divide its power between the constituent States and the national government. 
    India, Spain and Belgium are examples of this kind of ‘holding together’ federations. 
    In this second category, the central government tends to be more powerful vis-a-vis the States. 
    Very often different constituent units of the federation have unequal powers.Some units are granted special powers.

 

How does democracy accommodate different social groups?

What makes india a federal country?
Written Constitution
India had emerged as an independent nation after a painful and bloody partition. Soon after Independence, several princely states became a part of the country. 
The Constitution declared India as a Union of States. Although it did not use the word federation, the Indian Union is based on the principles of federalism.
Division of Powers
The Constitution originally provided for a two-tier system of government, the Union Government or what we call the Union of India and the State governments. 
Later, a third tier of federalism was added in the form of Panchayats and Municipalities. As in any federation, these different tiers enjoy separate jurisdiction.
The Constitution clearly provided a three-fold distribution of legislative powers between the Union Government and the State Governments.

Residuary Subjects
The Subjects that do not fall in any of the three lists, or subjects like computer software that came up after the constitution was made,  According to our constitution, the Union Government has the power to legislate on these subjects and they are called residuary subjects.
 Holding togather federation
Most federations that are formed by ‘holding together’ do not give equal power to its constituent units. Thus, all States in the Indian Union do not have identical powers. 
(i) Some States enjoy a special status. Jammu and Kashmir has its own Constitution. Many provisions of the Indian Constitution are not applicable to this State without the approval of the State Assembly. (Art 375)
(ii) Indians who are not permanent residents of this State cannot buy land or house here.Similar special provisions exist for some other States of India as well like Jharkhand etc. 

There are some units of the Indian Union which enjoy very little power, these are areas which are too small to become an independent State but which could not be merged with any of the existing States.
These areas, like Chandigarh, or Lakshadweep or the capital city of Delhi, are called Union Territories. 
These territories do not have the powers of a State. The Central Government has special powers in running these areas.
Coming togather federation
When different states come togather to form a federation enjoying equal powers like center. For example, USA, Australia, Switzerland etc.
This sharing of power between the Union Government and the State governments is basic to the structure of the Constitution.
It is not easy to make changes to this power sharing arrangement. 
The Parliament cannot on its own change this arrangement. Any change to it has to be first passed by both the Houses of Parliament with at least two-thirds majority. 
Then it has to be ratified by the legislatures of at least half of the total States.
Independent Judiciary 
The judiciary plays an important role in overseeing the implementation of constitutional provisions and procedures. 
In case of any dispute about the division of powers, the High Courts and the Supreme Court make a decision. 
The Union and State governments have the power to raise resources by levying taxes in order to carry on the government and the responsibilities assigned to each of them.

 

How does democracy accommodate different social groups?

What makes india a federal country?
Written Constitution
India had emerged as an independent nation after a painful and bloody partition. Soon after Independence, several princely states became a part of the country. 
The Constitution declared India as a Union of States. Although it did not use the word federation, the Indian Union is based on the principles of federalism.
Division of Powers
The Constitution originally provided for a two-tier system of government, the Union Government or what we call the Union of India and the State governments. 
Later, a third tier of federalism was added in the form of Panchayats and Municipalities. As in any federation, these different tiers enjoy separate jurisdiction.
The Constitution clearly provided a three-fold distribution of legislative powers between the Union Government and the State Governments.

Residuary Subjects
The Subjects that do not fall in any of the three lists, or subjects like computer software that came up after the constitution was made,  According to our constitution, the Union Government has the power to legislate on these subjects and they are called residuary subjects.
 Holding togather federation
Most federations that are formed by ‘holding together’ do not give equal power to its constituent units. Thus, all States in the Indian Union do not have identical powers. 
(i) Some States enjoy a special status. Jammu and Kashmir has its own Constitution. Many provisions of the Indian Constitution are not applicable to this State without the approval of the State Assembly. (Art 375)
(ii) Indians who are not permanent residents of this State cannot buy land or house here.Similar special provisions exist for some other States of India as well like Jharkhand etc. 

There are some units of the Indian Union which enjoy very little power, these are areas which are too small to become an independent State but which could not be merged with any of the existing States.
These areas, like Chandigarh, or Lakshadweep or the capital city of Delhi, are called Union Territories. 
These territories do not have the powers of a State. The Central Government has special powers in running these areas.
Coming togather federation
When different states come togather to form a federation enjoying equal powers like center. For example, USA, Australia, Switzerland etc.
This sharing of power between the Union Government and the State governments is basic to the structure of the Constitution.
It is not easy to make changes to this power sharing arrangement. 
The Parliament cannot on its own change this arrangement. Any change to it has to be first passed by both the Houses of Parliament with at least two-thirds majority. 
Then it has to be ratified by the legislatures of at least half of the total States.
Independent Judiciary 
The judiciary plays an important role in overseeing the implementation of constitutional provisions and procedures. 
In case of any dispute about the division of powers, the High Courts and the Supreme Court make a decision. 
The Union and State governments have the power to raise resources by levying taxes in order to carry on the government and the responsibilities assigned to each of them.

 

How does democracy accommodate different social groups?

What makes india a federal country?
Written Constitution
India had emerged as an independent nation after a painful and bloody partition. Soon after Independence, several princely states became a part of the country. 
The Constitution declared India as a Union of States. Although it did not use the word federation, the Indian Union is based on the principles of federalism.
Division of Powers
The Constitution originally provided for a two-tier system of government, the Union Government or what we call the Union of India and the State governments. 
Later, a third tier of federalism was added in the form of Panchayats and Municipalities. As in any federation, these different tiers enjoy separate jurisdiction.
The Constitution clearly provided a three-fold distribution of legislative powers between the Union Government and the State Governments.

Residuary Subjects
The Subjects that do not fall in any of the three lists, or subjects like computer software that came up after the constitution was made,  According to our constitution, the Union Government has the power to legislate on these subjects and they are called residuary subjects.
 Holding togather federation
Most federations that are formed by ‘holding together’ do not give equal power to its constituent units. Thus, all States in the Indian Union do not have identical powers. 
(i) Some States enjoy a special status. Jammu and Kashmir has its own Constitution. Many provisions of the Indian Constitution are not applicable to this State without the approval of the State Assembly. (Art 375)
(ii) Indians who are not permanent residents of this State cannot buy land or house here.Similar special provisions exist for some other States of India as well like Jharkhand etc. 

There are some units of the Indian Union which enjoy very little power, these are areas which are too small to become an independent State but which could not be merged with any of the existing States.
These areas, like Chandigarh, or Lakshadweep or the capital city of Delhi, are called Union Territories. 
These territories do not have the powers of a State. The Central Government has special powers in running these areas.
Coming togather federation
When different states come togather to form a federation enjoying equal powers like center. For example, USA, Australia, Switzerland etc.
This sharing of power between the Union Government and the State governments is basic to the structure of the Constitution.
It is not easy to make changes to this power sharing arrangement. 
The Parliament cannot on its own change this arrangement. Any change to it has to be first passed by both the Houses of Parliament with at least two-thirds majority. 
Then it has to be ratified by the legislatures of at least half of the total States.
Independent Judiciary 
The judiciary plays an important role in overseeing the implementation of constitutional provisions and procedures. 
In case of any dispute about the division of powers, the High Courts and the Supreme Court make a decision. 
The Union and State governments have the power to raise resources by levying taxes in order to carry on the government and the responsibilities assigned to each of them.

 

How does democracy accommodate different social groups?

What makes india a federal country?
Written Constitution
India had emerged as an independent nation after a painful and bloody partition. Soon after Independence, several princely states became a part of the country. 
The Constitution declared India as a Union of States. Although it did not use the word federation, the Indian Union is based on the principles of federalism.
Division of Powers
The Constitution originally provided for a two-tier system of government, the Union Government or what we call the Union of India and the State governments. 
Later, a third tier of federalism was added in the form of Panchayats and Municipalities. As in any federation, these different tiers enjoy separate jurisdiction.
The Constitution clearly provided a three-fold distribution of legislative powers between the Union Government and the State Governments.

Residuary Subjects
The Subjects that do not fall in any of the three lists, or subjects like computer software that came up after the constitution was made,  According to our constitution, the Union Government has the power to legislate on these subjects and they are called residuary subjects.
 Holding togather federation
Most federations that are formed by ‘holding together’ do not give equal power to its constituent units. Thus, all States in the Indian Union do not have identical powers. 
(i) Some States enjoy a special status. Jammu and Kashmir has its own Constitution. Many provisions of the Indian Constitution are not applicable to this State without the approval of the State Assembly. (Art 375)
(ii) Indians who are not permanent residents of this State cannot buy land or house here.Similar special provisions exist for some other States of India as well like Jharkhand etc. 

There are some units of the Indian Union which enjoy very little power, these are areas which are too small to become an independent State but which could not be merged with any of the existing States.
These areas, like Chandigarh, or Lakshadweep or the capital city of Delhi, are called Union Territories. 
These territories do not have the powers of a State. The Central Government has special powers in running these areas.
Coming togather federation
When different states come togather to form a federation enjoying equal powers like center. For example, USA, Australia, Switzerland etc.
This sharing of power between the Union Government and the State governments is basic to the structure of the Constitution.
It is not easy to make changes to this power sharing arrangement. 
The Parliament cannot on its own change this arrangement. Any change to it has to be first passed by both the Houses of Parliament with at least two-thirds majority. 
Then it has to be ratified by the legislatures of at least half of the total States.
Independent Judiciary 
The judiciary plays an important role in overseeing the implementation of constitutional provisions and procedures. 
In case of any dispute about the division of powers, the High Courts and the Supreme Court make a decision. 
The Union and State governments have the power to raise resources by levying taxes in order to carry on the government and the responsibilities assigned to each of them.

 

How does democracy accommodate different social groups?

What makes india a federal country?
Written Constitution
India had emerged as an independent nation after a painful and bloody partition. Soon after Independence, several princely states became a part of the country. 
The Constitution declared India as a Union of States. Although it did not use the word federation, the Indian Union is based on the principles of federalism.
Division of Powers
The Constitution originally provided for a two-tier system of government, the Union Government or what we call the Union of India and the State governments. 
Later, a third tier of federalism was added in the form of Panchayats and Municipalities. As in any federation, these different tiers enjoy separate jurisdiction.
The Constitution clearly provided a three-fold distribution of legislative powers between the Union Government and the State Governments.

Residuary Subjects
The Subjects that do not fall in any of the three lists, or subjects like computer software that came up after the constitution was made,  According to our constitution, the Union Government has the power to legislate on these subjects and they are called residuary subjects.
 Holding togather federation
Most federations that are formed by ‘holding together’ do not give equal power to its constituent units. Thus, all States in the Indian Union do not have identical powers. 
(i) Some States enjoy a special status. Jammu and Kashmir has its own Constitution. Many provisions of the Indian Constitution are not applicable to this State without the approval of the State Assembly. (Art 375)
(ii) Indians who are not permanent residents of this State cannot buy land or house here.Similar special provisions exist for some other States of India as well like Jharkhand etc. 

There are some units of the Indian Union which enjoy very little power, these are areas which are too small to become an independent State but which could not be merged with any of the existing States.
These areas, like Chandigarh, or Lakshadweep or the capital city of Delhi, are called Union Territories. 
These territories do not have the powers of a State. The Central Government has special powers in running these areas.
Coming togather federation
When different states come togather to form a federation enjoying equal powers like center. For example, USA, Australia, Switzerland etc.
This sharing of power between the Union Government and the State governments is basic to the structure of the Constitution.
It is not easy to make changes to this power sharing arrangement. 
The Parliament cannot on its own change this arrangement. Any change to it has to be first passed by both the Houses of Parliament with at least two-thirds majority. 
Then it has to be ratified by the legislatures of at least half of the total States.
Independent Judiciary 
The judiciary plays an important role in overseeing the implementation of constitutional provisions and procedures. 
In case of any dispute about the division of powers, the High Courts and the Supreme Court make a decision. 
The Union and State governments have the power to raise resources by levying taxes in order to carry on the government and the responsibilities assigned to each of them.

 

How does democracy accommodate different social groups?

What makes india a federal country?
Written Constitution
India had emerged as an independent nation after a painful and bloody partition. Soon after Independence, several princely states became a part of the country. 
The Constitution declared India as a Union of States. Although it did not use the word federation, the Indian Union is based on the principles of federalism.
Division of Powers
The Constitution originally provided for a two-tier system of government, the Union Government or what we call the Union of India and the State governments. 
Later, a third tier of federalism was added in the form of Panchayats and Municipalities. As in any federation, these different tiers enjoy separate jurisdiction.
The Constitution clearly provided a three-fold distribution of legislative powers between the Union Government and the State Governments.

Residuary Subjects
The Subjects that do not fall in any of the three lists, or subjects like computer software that came up after the constitution was made,  According to our constitution, the Union Government has the power to legislate on these subjects and they are called residuary subjects.
 Holding togather federation
Most federations that are formed by ‘holding together’ do not give equal power to its constituent units. Thus, all States in the Indian Union do not have identical powers. 
(i) Some States enjoy a special status. Jammu and Kashmir has its own Constitution. Many provisions of the Indian Constitution are not applicable to this State without the approval of the State Assembly. (Art 375)
(ii) Indians who are not permanent residents of this State cannot buy land or house here.Similar special provisions exist for some other States of India as well like Jharkhand etc. 

There are some units of the Indian Union which enjoy very little power, these are areas which are too small to become an independent State but which could not be merged with any of the existing States.
These areas, like Chandigarh, or Lakshadweep or the capital city of Delhi, are called Union Territories. 
These territories do not have the powers of a State. The Central Government has special powers in running these areas.
Coming togather federation
When different states come togather to form a federation enjoying equal powers like center. For example, USA, Australia, Switzerland etc.
This sharing of power between the Union Government and the State governments is basic to the structure of the Constitution.
It is not easy to make changes to this power sharing arrangement. 
The Parliament cannot on its own change this arrangement. Any change to it has to be first passed by both the Houses of Parliament with at least two-thirds majority. 
Then it has to be ratified by the legislatures of at least half of the total States.
Independent Judiciary 
The judiciary plays an important role in overseeing the implementation of constitutional provisions and procedures. 
In case of any dispute about the division of powers, the High Courts and the Supreme Court make a decision. 
The Union and State governments have the power to raise resources by levying taxes in order to carry on the government and the responsibilities assigned to each of them.

 

How does democracy accommodate different social groups?

What makes india a federal country?
Written Constitution
India had emerged as an independent nation after a painful and bloody partition. Soon after Independence, several princely states became a part of the country. 
The Constitution declared India as a Union of States. Although it did not use the word federation, the Indian Union is based on the principles of federalism.
Division of Powers
The Constitution originally provided for a two-tier system of government, the Union Government or what we call the Union of India and the State governments. 
Later, a third tier of federalism was added in the form of Panchayats and Municipalities. As in any federation, these different tiers enjoy separate jurisdiction.
The Constitution clearly provided a three-fold distribution of legislative powers between the Union Government and the State Governments.

Residuary Subjects
The Subjects that do not fall in any of the three lists, or subjects like computer software that came up after the constitution was made,  According to our constitution, the Union Government has the power to legislate on these subjects and they are called residuary subjects.
 Holding togather federation
Most federations that are formed by ‘holding together’ do not give equal power to its constituent units. Thus, all States in the Indian Union do not have identical powers. 
(i) Some States enjoy a special status. Jammu and Kashmir has its own Constitution. Many provisions of the Indian Constitution are not applicable to this State without the approval of the State Assembly. (Art 375)
(ii) Indians who are not permanent residents of this State cannot buy land or house here.Similar special provisions exist for some other States of India as well like Jharkhand etc. 

There are some units of the Indian Union which enjoy very little power, these are areas which are too small to become an independent State but which could not be merged with any of the existing States.
These areas, like Chandigarh, or Lakshadweep or the capital city of Delhi, are called Union Territories. 
These territories do not have the powers of a State. The Central Government has special powers in running these areas.
Coming togather federation
When different states come togather to form a federation enjoying equal powers like center. For example, USA, Australia, Switzerland etc.
This sharing of power between the Union Government and the State governments is basic to the structure of the Constitution.
It is not easy to make changes to this power sharing arrangement. 
The Parliament cannot on its own change this arrangement. Any change to it has to be first passed by both the Houses of Parliament with at least two-thirds majority. 
Then it has to be ratified by the legislatures of at least half of the total States.
Independent Judiciary 
The judiciary plays an important role in overseeing the implementation of constitutional provisions and procedures. 
In case of any dispute about the division of powers, the High Courts and the Supreme Court make a decision. 
The Union and State governments have the power to raise resources by levying taxes in order to carry on the government and the responsibilities assigned to each of them.

 

What has been the effect of caste on politics and of politics on caste?

politics of social divisions
    Democracy involves competition among various political parties. Their competition tends to divide any society. If they start competing in terms of some existing social divisions, it can make social divisions into political divisions and lead to conflict, violence or even disintegration of a country. 

range of outcomes
This region of the United Kingdom has been for many years the site of a violent and bitter ethno-political conflict Its population is divided into two major sects of Christianity : 53 per cent are Protestants, while 44 per cent are Roman Catholics. The Catholics were represented by Nationalist parties who demanded that Northern Ireland be unified with the Republic of Ireland, a predominantly Catholic country. 

The Protestants were represented by Unionists who wanted to remain with the UK, which is predominantly protestant. Hundreds of civilians, militants and security forces were killed in the fight between Unionists and Nationalists and between the security forces of the UK and the Nationalists. It was only in 1998, that the UK government and the Nationalists reached a peace treaty after which the latter suspended, their armed struggle.
Political competition along religious and ethnic lines led to the disintegration of Yugoslavia into six independent countries.
Some people too conclude that politics and social divisions must not be allowed to mix. If social divisions do exist in a country, they must never be expressed in politics.
Social divisions of one kind or another exist in most countries of the world. Wherever they exist, these divisions are reflected in politics. In a democracy it is only natural that political parties would talk about these divisions, make different promises to different communities, look after due representation of various communities and make policies to redress the grievances of the disadvantaged communities. Social divisions affect voting in most countries. People from one community tend to prefer some party more than others. In many countries there are parties that focus only on one community. Yet all this does not lead to disintegration of the country.

Three determinants
1.    First of all the outcome depends on how people perceive their identities. If people see their identities in singular and exclusive terms, it becomes very difficult to accommodated.
        It is much easier if the people see that their identities are multiple and are complementary with the national identity. A majority of Belgians now feel that they are as much Belgian as they are Dutch or German-speaking. This helps them to stay together.
2.    Second, it depends on how political leaders raise the demands of any community. It is easier to accommodate demands that are within the constitutional framework and are not at the cost of another community.
3.    Third, it depends on the how the government reacts to demands of different groups. As we saw in the examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka, if the rulers are willing to share power and accommodate the reasonable demands of minority community, social divisions become less threatening for         the country. But if they try to suppress such a demand in the name of national unity, the end result is often quite the opposite. Such attempts at forced integration often sow the seeds of disintegration.
       Thus the assertion of social diversities in a country need not be seen as a source of danger.
       In a democracy, political expression of social divisions is very normal and can be healthy. 

(i).    This allows various disadvantaged and marginal social groups to express their grievances and get the government to attend to these. 
(ii).    Expression of various kinds of social divisions in politics often results in their cancelling one another out and thus reducing their intensity. This leads to strengthening of a democracy.
         People who feel marginalised, deprived and discriminated have to fight against the injustices. Such a fight often takes the democratic path, voicing their demands in a peaceful and constitutional manner and seeking a fair position through elections.
        Sometimes social differences can take the form of unacceptable level of social inequality and injustice. The struggle against such inequalities sometimes takes the path of violence and defiance of state power. However history shows that democracy is the best way to fight for recognition              and also to accommodate diversity.

Illustration 10
    What will happen if political parties start competing in terms of some existing social divisons?
Solution
    If this happens then it can make social divison into political divisons and lead to conflict voilence or even disintegrationof a country.

Illustration 11
    What happened in India which led to formation of Pakistan?
Solution
    Congress and Muslim league started competing in terms of existing social divisons in Hindus and Muslims which led to disintegation of country into India and Pakistan.


 

What has been the effect of caste on politics and of politics on caste?

politics of social divisions
    Democracy involves competition among various political parties. Their competition tends to divide any society. If they start competing in terms of some existing social divisions, it can make social divisions into political divisions and lead to conflict, violence or even disintegration of a country. 

range of outcomes
This region of the United Kingdom has been for many years the site of a violent and bitter ethno-political conflict Its population is divided into two major sects of Christianity : 53 per cent are Protestants, while 44 per cent are Roman Catholics. The Catholics were represented by Nationalist parties who demanded that Northern Ireland be unified with the Republic of Ireland, a predominantly Catholic country. 

The Protestants were represented by Unionists who wanted to remain with the UK, which is predominantly protestant. Hundreds of civilians, militants and security forces were killed in the fight between Unionists and Nationalists and between the security forces of the UK and the Nationalists. It was only in 1998, that the UK government and the Nationalists reached a peace treaty after which the latter suspended, their armed struggle.
Political competition along religious and ethnic lines led to the disintegration of Yugoslavia into six independent countries.
Some people too conclude that politics and social divisions must not be allowed to mix. If social divisions do exist in a country, they must never be expressed in politics.
Social divisions of one kind or another exist in most countries of the world. Wherever they exist, these divisions are reflected in politics. In a democracy it is only natural that political parties would talk about these divisions, make different promises to different communities, look after due representation of various communities and make policies to redress the grievances of the disadvantaged communities. Social divisions affect voting in most countries. People from one community tend to prefer some party more than others. In many countries there are parties that focus only on one community. Yet all this does not lead to disintegration of the country.

Three determinants
1.    First of all the outcome depends on how people perceive their identities. If people see their identities in singular and exclusive terms, it becomes very difficult to accommodated.
        It is much easier if the people see that their identities are multiple and are complementary with the national identity. A majority of Belgians now feel that they are as much Belgian as they are Dutch or German-speaking. This helps them to stay together.
2.    Second, it depends on how political leaders raise the demands of any community. It is easier to accommodate demands that are within the constitutional framework and are not at the cost of another community.
3.    Third, it depends on the how the government reacts to demands of different groups. As we saw in the examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka, if the rulers are willing to share power and accommodate the reasonable demands of minority community, social divisions become less threatening for         the country. But if they try to suppress such a demand in the name of national unity, the end result is often quite the opposite. Such attempts at forced integration often sow the seeds of disintegration.
       Thus the assertion of social diversities in a country need not be seen as a source of danger.
       In a democracy, political expression of social divisions is very normal and can be healthy. 

(i).    This allows various disadvantaged and marginal social groups to express their grievances and get the government to attend to these. 
(ii).    Expression of various kinds of social divisions in politics often results in their cancelling one another out and thus reducing their intensity. This leads to strengthening of a democracy.
         People who feel marginalised, deprived and discriminated have to fight against the injustices. Such a fight often takes the democratic path, voicing their demands in a peaceful and constitutional manner and seeking a fair position through elections.
        Sometimes social differences can take the form of unacceptable level of social inequality and injustice. The struggle against such inequalities sometimes takes the path of violence and defiance of state power. However history shows that democracy is the best way to fight for recognition              and also to accommodate diversity.

Illustration 10
    What will happen if political parties start competing in terms of some existing social divisons?
Solution
    If this happens then it can make social divison into political divisons and lead to conflict voilence or even disintegrationof a country.

Illustration 11
    What happened in India which led to formation of Pakistan?
Solution
    Congress and Muslim league started competing in terms of existing social divisons in Hindus and Muslims which led to disintegation of country into India and Pakistan.


 

What has been the effect of caste on politics and of politics on caste?

politics of social divisions
    Democracy involves competition among various political parties. Their competition tends to divide any society. If they start competing in terms of some existing social divisions, it can make social divisions into political divisions and lead to conflict, violence or even disintegration of a country. 

range of outcomes
This region of the United Kingdom has been for many years the site of a violent and bitter ethno-political conflict Its population is divided into two major sects of Christianity : 53 per cent are Protestants, while 44 per cent are Roman Catholics. The Catholics were represented by Nationalist parties who demanded that Northern Ireland be unified with the Republic of Ireland, a predominantly Catholic country. 

The Protestants were represented by Unionists who wanted to remain with the UK, which is predominantly protestant. Hundreds of civilians, militants and security forces were killed in the fight between Unionists and Nationalists and between the security forces of the UK and the Nationalists. It was only in 1998, that the UK government and the Nationalists reached a peace treaty after which the latter suspended, their armed struggle.
Political competition along religious and ethnic lines led to the disintegration of Yugoslavia into six independent countries.
Some people too conclude that politics and social divisions must not be allowed to mix. If social divisions do exist in a country, they must never be expressed in politics.
Social divisions of one kind or another exist in most countries of the world. Wherever they exist, these divisions are reflected in politics. In a democracy it is only natural that political parties would talk about these divisions, make different promises to different communities, look after due representation of various communities and make policies to redress the grievances of the disadvantaged communities. Social divisions affect voting in most countries. People from one community tend to prefer some party more than others. In many countries there are parties that focus only on one community. Yet all this does not lead to disintegration of the country.

Three determinants
1.    First of all the outcome depends on how people perceive their identities. If people see their identities in singular and exclusive terms, it becomes very difficult to accommodated.
        It is much easier if the people see that their identities are multiple and are complementary with the national identity. A majority of Belgians now feel that they are as much Belgian as they are Dutch or German-speaking. This helps them to stay together.
2.    Second, it depends on how political leaders raise the demands of any community. It is easier to accommodate demands that are within the constitutional framework and are not at the cost of another community.
3.    Third, it depends on the how the government reacts to demands of different groups. As we saw in the examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka, if the rulers are willing to share power and accommodate the reasonable demands of minority community, social divisions become less threatening for         the country. But if they try to suppress such a demand in the name of national unity, the end result is often quite the opposite. Such attempts at forced integration often sow the seeds of disintegration.
       Thus the assertion of social diversities in a country need not be seen as a source of danger.
       In a democracy, political expression of social divisions is very normal and can be healthy. 

(i).    This allows various disadvantaged and marginal social groups to express their grievances and get the government to attend to these. 
(ii).    Expression of various kinds of social divisions in politics often results in their cancelling one another out and thus reducing their intensity. This leads to strengthening of a democracy.
         People who feel marginalised, deprived and discriminated have to fight against the injustices. Such a fight often takes the democratic path, voicing their demands in a peaceful and constitutional manner and seeking a fair position through elections.
        Sometimes social differences can take the form of unacceptable level of social inequality and injustice. The struggle against such inequalities sometimes takes the path of violence and defiance of state power. However history shows that democracy is the best way to fight for recognition              and also to accommodate diversity.

Illustration 10
    What will happen if political parties start competing in terms of some existing social divisons?
Solution
    If this happens then it can make social divison into political divisons and lead to conflict voilence or even disintegrationof a country.

Illustration 11
    What happened in India which led to formation of Pakistan?
Solution
    Congress and Muslim league started competing in terms of existing social divisons in Hindus and Muslims which led to disintegation of country into India and Pakistan.


 

What has been the effect of caste on politics and of politics on caste?

politics of social divisions
    Democracy involves competition among various political parties. Their competition tends to divide any society. If they start competing in terms of some existing social divisions, it can make social divisions into political divisions and lead to conflict, violence or even disintegration of a country. 

range of outcomes
This region of the United Kingdom has been for many years the site of a violent and bitter ethno-political conflict Its population is divided into two major sects of Christianity : 53 per cent are Protestants, while 44 per cent are Roman Catholics. The Catholics were represented by Nationalist parties who demanded that Northern Ireland be unified with the Republic of Ireland, a predominantly Catholic country. 

The Protestants were represented by Unionists who wanted to remain with the UK, which is predominantly protestant. Hundreds of civilians, militants and security forces were killed in the fight between Unionists and Nationalists and between the security forces of the UK and the Nationalists. It was only in 1998, that the UK government and the Nationalists reached a peace treaty after which the latter suspended, their armed struggle.
Political competition along religious and ethnic lines led to the disintegration of Yugoslavia into six independent countries.
Some people too conclude that politics and social divisions must not be allowed to mix. If social divisions do exist in a country, they must never be expressed in politics.
Social divisions of one kind or another exist in most countries of the world. Wherever they exist, these divisions are reflected in politics. In a democracy it is only natural that political parties would talk about these divisions, make different promises to different communities, look after due representation of various communities and make policies to redress the grievances of the disadvantaged communities. Social divisions affect voting in most countries. People from one community tend to prefer some party more than others. In many countries there are parties that focus only on one community. Yet all this does not lead to disintegration of the country.

Three determinants
1.    First of all the outcome depends on how people perceive their identities. If people see their identities in singular and exclusive terms, it becomes very difficult to accommodated.
        It is much easier if the people see that their identities are multiple and are complementary with the national identity. A majority of Belgians now feel that they are as much Belgian as they are Dutch or German-speaking. This helps them to stay together.
2.    Second, it depends on how political leaders raise the demands of any community. It is easier to accommodate demands that are within the constitutional framework and are not at the cost of another community.
3.    Third, it depends on the how the government reacts to demands of different groups. As we saw in the examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka, if the rulers are willing to share power and accommodate the reasonable demands of minority community, social divisions become less threatening for         the country. But if they try to suppress such a demand in the name of national unity, the end result is often quite the opposite. Such attempts at forced integration often sow the seeds of disintegration.
       Thus the assertion of social diversities in a country need not be seen as a source of danger.
       In a democracy, political expression of social divisions is very normal and can be healthy. 

(i).    This allows various disadvantaged and marginal social groups to express their grievances and get the government to attend to these. 
(ii).    Expression of various kinds of social divisions in politics often results in their cancelling one another out and thus reducing their intensity. This leads to strengthening of a democracy.
         People who feel marginalised, deprived and discriminated have to fight against the injustices. Such a fight often takes the democratic path, voicing their demands in a peaceful and constitutional manner and seeking a fair position through elections.
        Sometimes social differences can take the form of unacceptable level of social inequality and injustice. The struggle against such inequalities sometimes takes the path of violence and defiance of state power. However history shows that democracy is the best way to fight for recognition              and also to accommodate diversity.

Illustration 10
    What will happen if political parties start competing in terms of some existing social divisons?
Solution
    If this happens then it can make social divison into political divisons and lead to conflict voilence or even disintegrationof a country.

Illustration 11
    What happened in India which led to formation of Pakistan?
Solution
    Congress and Muslim league started competing in terms of existing social divisons in Hindus and Muslims which led to disintegation of country into India and Pakistan.


 

What has been the effect of caste on politics and of politics on caste?

politics of social divisions
    Democracy involves competition among various political parties. Their competition tends to divide any society. If they start competing in terms of some existing social divisions, it can make social divisions into political divisions and lead to conflict, violence or even disintegration of a country. 

range of outcomes
This region of the United Kingdom has been for many years the site of a violent and bitter ethno-political conflict Its population is divided into two major sects of Christianity : 53 per cent are Protestants, while 44 per cent are Roman Catholics. The Catholics were represented by Nationalist parties who demanded that Northern Ireland be unified with the Republic of Ireland, a predominantly Catholic country. 

The Protestants were represented by Unionists who wanted to remain with the UK, which is predominantly protestant. Hundreds of civilians, militants and security forces were killed in the fight between Unionists and Nationalists and between the security forces of the UK and the Nationalists. It was only in 1998, that the UK government and the Nationalists reached a peace treaty after which the latter suspended, their armed struggle.
Political competition along religious and ethnic lines led to the disintegration of Yugoslavia into six independent countries.
Some people too conclude that politics and social divisions must not be allowed to mix. If social divisions do exist in a country, they must never be expressed in politics.
Social divisions of one kind or another exist in most countries of the world. Wherever they exist, these divisions are reflected in politics. In a democracy it is only natural that political parties would talk about these divisions, make different promises to different communities, look after due representation of various communities and make policies to redress the grievances of the disadvantaged communities. Social divisions affect voting in most countries. People from one community tend to prefer some party more than others. In many countries there are parties that focus only on one community. Yet all this does not lead to disintegration of the country.

Three determinants
1.    First of all the outcome depends on how people perceive their identities. If people see their identities in singular and exclusive terms, it becomes very difficult to accommodated.
        It is much easier if the people see that their identities are multiple and are complementary with the national identity. A majority of Belgians now feel that they are as much Belgian as they are Dutch or German-speaking. This helps them to stay together.
2.    Second, it depends on how political leaders raise the demands of any community. It is easier to accommodate demands that are within the constitutional framework and are not at the cost of another community.
3.    Third, it depends on the how the government reacts to demands of different groups. As we saw in the examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka, if the rulers are willing to share power and accommodate the reasonable demands of minority community, social divisions become less threatening for         the country. But if they try to suppress such a demand in the name of national unity, the end result is often quite the opposite. Such attempts at forced integration often sow the seeds of disintegration.
       Thus the assertion of social diversities in a country need not be seen as a source of danger.
       In a democracy, political expression of social divisions is very normal and can be healthy. 

(i).    This allows various disadvantaged and marginal social groups to express their grievances and get the government to attend to these. 
(ii).    Expression of various kinds of social divisions in politics often results in their cancelling one another out and thus reducing their intensity. This leads to strengthening of a democracy.
         People who feel marginalised, deprived and discriminated have to fight against the injustices. Such a fight often takes the democratic path, voicing their demands in a peaceful and constitutional manner and seeking a fair position through elections.
        Sometimes social differences can take the form of unacceptable level of social inequality and injustice. The struggle against such inequalities sometimes takes the path of violence and defiance of state power. However history shows that democracy is the best way to fight for recognition              and also to accommodate diversity.

Illustration 10
    What will happen if political parties start competing in terms of some existing social divisons?
Solution
    If this happens then it can make social divison into political divisons and lead to conflict voilence or even disintegrationof a country.

Illustration 11
    What happened in India which led to formation of Pakistan?
Solution
    Congress and Muslim league started competing in terms of existing social divisons in Hindus and Muslims which led to disintegation of country into India and Pakistan.


 

What has been the effect of caste on politics and of politics on caste?

politics of social divisions
    Democracy involves competition among various political parties. Their competition tends to divide any society. If they start competing in terms of some existing social divisions, it can make social divisions into political divisions and lead to conflict, violence or even disintegration of a country. 

range of outcomes
This region of the United Kingdom has been for many years the site of a violent and bitter ethno-political conflict Its population is divided into two major sects of Christianity : 53 per cent are Protestants, while 44 per cent are Roman Catholics. The Catholics were represented by Nationalist parties who demanded that Northern Ireland be unified with the Republic of Ireland, a predominantly Catholic country. 

The Protestants were represented by Unionists who wanted to remain with the UK, which is predominantly protestant. Hundreds of civilians, militants and security forces were killed in the fight between Unionists and Nationalists and between the security forces of the UK and the Nationalists. It was only in 1998, that the UK government and the Nationalists reached a peace treaty after which the latter suspended, their armed struggle.
Political competition along religious and ethnic lines led to the disintegration of Yugoslavia into six independent countries.
Some people too conclude that politics and social divisions must not be allowed to mix. If social divisions do exist in a country, they must never be expressed in politics.
Social divisions of one kind or another exist in most countries of the world. Wherever they exist, these divisions are reflected in politics. In a democracy it is only natural that political parties would talk about these divisions, make different promises to different communities, look after due representation of various communities and make policies to redress the grievances of the disadvantaged communities. Social divisions affect voting in most countries. People from one community tend to prefer some party more than others. In many countries there are parties that focus only on one community. Yet all this does not lead to disintegration of the country.

Three determinants
1.    First of all the outcome depends on how people perceive their identities. If people see their identities in singular and exclusive terms, it becomes very difficult to accommodated.
        It is much easier if the people see that their identities are multiple and are complementary with the national identity. A majority of Belgians now feel that they are as much Belgian as they are Dutch or German-speaking. This helps them to stay together.
2.    Second, it depends on how political leaders raise the demands of any community. It is easier to accommodate demands that are within the constitutional framework and are not at the cost of another community.
3.    Third, it depends on the how the government reacts to demands of different groups. As we saw in the examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka, if the rulers are willing to share power and accommodate the reasonable demands of minority community, social divisions become less threatening for         the country. But if they try to suppress such a demand in the name of national unity, the end result is often quite the opposite. Such attempts at forced integration often sow the seeds of disintegration.
       Thus the assertion of social diversities in a country need not be seen as a source of danger.
       In a democracy, political expression of social divisions is very normal and can be healthy. 

(i).    This allows various disadvantaged and marginal social groups to express their grievances and get the government to attend to these. 
(ii).    Expression of various kinds of social divisions in politics often results in their cancelling one another out and thus reducing their intensity. This leads to strengthening of a democracy.
         People who feel marginalised, deprived and discriminated have to fight against the injustices. Such a fight often takes the democratic path, voicing their demands in a peaceful and constitutional manner and seeking a fair position through elections.
        Sometimes social differences can take the form of unacceptable level of social inequality and injustice. The struggle against such inequalities sometimes takes the path of violence and defiance of state power. However history shows that democracy is the best way to fight for recognition              and also to accommodate diversity.

Illustration 10
    What will happen if political parties start competing in terms of some existing social divisons?
Solution
    If this happens then it can make social divison into political divisons and lead to conflict voilence or even disintegrationof a country.

Illustration 11
    What happened in India which led to formation of Pakistan?
Solution
    Congress and Muslim league started competing in terms of existing social divisons in Hindus and Muslims which led to disintegation of country into India and Pakistan.


 

What has been the effect of caste on politics and of politics on caste?

politics of social divisions
    Democracy involves competition among various political parties. Their competition tends to divide any society. If they start competing in terms of some existing social divisions, it can make social divisions into political divisions and lead to conflict, violence or even disintegration of a country. 

range of outcomes
This region of the United Kingdom has been for many years the site of a violent and bitter ethno-political conflict Its population is divided into two major sects of Christianity : 53 per cent are Protestants, while 44 per cent are Roman Catholics. The Catholics were represented by Nationalist parties who demanded that Northern Ireland be unified with the Republic of Ireland, a predominantly Catholic country. 

The Protestants were represented by Unionists who wanted to remain with the UK, which is predominantly protestant. Hundreds of civilians, militants and security forces were killed in the fight between Unionists and Nationalists and between the security forces of the UK and the Nationalists. It was only in 1998, that the UK government and the Nationalists reached a peace treaty after which the latter suspended, their armed struggle.
Political competition along religious and ethnic lines led to the disintegration of Yugoslavia into six independent countries.
Some people too conclude that politics and social divisions must not be allowed to mix. If social divisions do exist in a country, they must never be expressed in politics.
Social divisions of one kind or another exist in most countries of the world. Wherever they exist, these divisions are reflected in politics. In a democracy it is only natural that political parties would talk about these divisions, make different promises to different communities, look after due representation of various communities and make policies to redress the grievances of the disadvantaged communities. Social divisions affect voting in most countries. People from one community tend to prefer some party more than others. In many countries there are parties that focus only on one community. Yet all this does not lead to disintegration of the country.

Three determinants
1.    First of all the outcome depends on how people perceive their identities. If people see their identities in singular and exclusive terms, it becomes very difficult to accommodated.
        It is much easier if the people see that their identities are multiple and are complementary with the national identity. A majority of Belgians now feel that they are as much Belgian as they are Dutch or German-speaking. This helps them to stay together.
2.    Second, it depends on how political leaders raise the demands of any community. It is easier to accommodate demands that are within the constitutional framework and are not at the cost of another community.
3.    Third, it depends on the how the government reacts to demands of different groups. As we saw in the examples of Belgium and Sri Lanka, if the rulers are willing to share power and accommodate the reasonable demands of minority community, social divisions become less threatening for         the country. But if they try to suppress such a demand in the name of national unity, the end result is often quite the opposite. Such attempts at forced integration often sow the seeds of disintegration.
       Thus the assertion of social diversities in a country need not be seen as a source of danger.
       In a democracy, political expression of social divisions is very normal and can be healthy. 

(i).    This allows various disadvantaged and marginal social groups to express their grievances and get the government to attend to these. 
(ii).    Expression of various kinds of social divisions in politics often results in their cancelling one another out and thus reducing their intensity. This leads to strengthening of a democracy.
         People who feel marginalised, deprived and discriminated have to fight against the injustices. Such a fight often takes the democratic path, voicing their demands in a peaceful and constitutional manner and seeking a fair position through elections.
        Sometimes social differences can take the form of unacceptable level of social inequality and injustice. The struggle against such inequalities sometimes takes the path of violence and defiance of state power. However history shows that democracy is the best way to fight for recognition              and also to accommodate diversity.

Illustration 10
    What will happen if political parties start competing in terms of some existing social divisons?
Solution
    If this happens then it can make social divison into political divisons and lead to conflict voilence or even disintegrationof a country.

Illustration 11
    What happened in India which led to formation of Pakistan?
Solution
    Congress and Muslim league started competing in terms of existing social divisons in Hindus and Muslims which led to disintegation of country into India and Pakistan.


 

How has the gender division shaped politics?

INTRODUCTION 
    Political expression of social differences is possible and sometime quite desirable in a democratic system. Gender, religion and caste are three kind of social differences that can take form of the social diffrences divisions and inequalities. In each case we look at the nature of this division in India and how it gets expressed in politics. We will also discuss that what is the role of these divisons in a democracy.

Gender and Politics
Public / Private division
Boys and girls are brought up to believe that the main responsibility of women is housework and bringing up children. This is reflected in a SEXUAL DIVISION OF LABOUR in most families:  women do all work inside the home such as cooking, cleaning, washing clothes, tailoring, looking after children, etc., and men do all the work outside the home.
The result of this division of labour is that although women constitute half of the humanity, their role in public life, especially politics, is minimal in most societies.
There were agitations in different countries for the extension of voting rights to women. These agitations demanded enhancing the political and legal status of women and improving their educational and career opportunities. More radical women’s movements aimed at equality in personal and family life as well. These movements are called FEMINIST movements.
1.  Political expression of gender division and political mobilisation on this question helped to improve women’s role in public life. 
2. We now find women working as scientists, doctors, engineers, lawyers, managers and college and university teachers which were earlier not considered suitable for women. 
3.  In some parts of the world, for example in Scandinavian countries such as Sweden, Norway and Finland, the participation of women in public life is very high.

Ours is still a male- dominated, PATRIARCHAL society. Women race disadvantage, discrimination and oppression in various ways.
1.The literacy rate among women is only 54 per cent compared with 76 per cent among men. Similarly, a smaller proportion of girl students go for higher studies. 
2.On an average an Indian woman works one hour more than an average man every day. Yet much of her work is not paid and therefore often not valued.
 3.The Equal Wages Act provides that equal wages should be paid to equal work. However in almost all areas of work, from sports and cinema, to factories and fields, women are paid less than men, even when both do exactly the same work.
4.In many parts of India parents prefer to have sons and find ways to have the girl child aborted before she is born. 
5.There are reports of various kinds of harassment, exploitation and violence against women. Urban areas have become particularly unsafe for women.

Women’s Political Representation
Many feminists and women’s movements conclude that unless women control power, their problems will not get adequate attention. One way to ensure this is to have more women as elected representatives.
1.In India, the proportion of women in legislature has been very low. For example, the percentage of elected women members in Lok Sabha has never reached even 10 per cent of its total strength. Their share in the state assemblies is less than 5 per cent. 
2.In the government, cabinets are largely all-male even when a woman becomes the Chief Minister or the Prime Minister.
3.One-third of seats in local government bodies - in panchayats and municipalities — are now reserved for women. Now there are more than 10 lakh elected women representatives in rural and urban local bodies.
Women’s organisations and activists have been demanding a similar reservation of at least one-third of seats in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies for women. 

Illustration 1
    Which form of social divison is rarely recognised in the study of politics?
Solution
    Gender divison is a form of hierarchical social divison seen everywhere but is rarely recognised in the study of politics.
Illustration 2
    What are the base of gender divison?
Solution
    The gender divison is based on social expectations and stereotypes, it is not based on biology. 


    

How has the gender division shaped politics?

INTRODUCTION 
    Political expression of social differences is possible and sometime quite desirable in a democratic system. Gender, religion and caste are three kind of social differences that can take form of the social diffrences divisions and inequalities. In each case we look at the nature of this division in India and how it gets expressed in politics. We will also discuss that what is the role of these divisons in a democracy.

Gender and Politics
Public / Private division
Boys and girls are brought up to believe that the main responsibility of women is housework and bringing up children. This is reflected in a SEXUAL DIVISION OF LABOUR in most families:  women do all work inside the home such as cooking, cleaning, washing clothes, tailoring, looking after children, etc., and men do all the work outside the home.
The result of this division of labour is that although women constitute half of the humanity, their role in public life, especially politics, is minimal in most societies.
There were agitations in different countries for the extension of voting rights to women. These agitations demanded enhancing the political and legal status of women and improving their educational and career opportunities. More radical women’s movements aimed at equality in personal and family life as well. These movements are called FEMINIST movements.
1.  Political expression of gender division and political mobilisation on this question helped to improve women’s role in public life. 
2. We now find women working as scientists, doctors, engineers, lawyers, managers and college and university teachers which were earlier not considered suitable for women. 
3.  In some parts of the world, for example in Scandinavian countries such as Sweden, Norway and Finland, the participation of women in public life is very high.

Ours is still a male- dominated, PATRIARCHAL society. Women race disadvantage, discrimination and oppression in various ways.
1.The literacy rate among women is only 54 per cent compared with 76 per cent among men. Similarly, a smaller proportion of girl students go for higher studies. 
2.On an average an Indian woman works one hour more than an average man every day. Yet much of her work is not paid and therefore often not valued.
 3.The Equal Wages Act provides that equal wages should be paid to equal work. However in almost all areas of work, from sports and cinema, to factories and fields, women are paid less than men, even when both do exactly the same work.
4.In many parts of India parents prefer to have sons and find ways to have the girl child aborted before she is born. 
5.There are reports of various kinds of harassment, exploitation and violence against women. Urban areas have become particularly unsafe for women.

Women’s Political Representation
Many feminists and women’s movements conclude that unless women control power, their problems will not get adequate attention. One way to ensure this is to have more women as elected representatives.
1.In India, the proportion of women in legislature has been very low. For example, the percentage of elected women members in Lok Sabha has never reached even 10 per cent of its total strength. Their share in the state assemblies is less than 5 per cent. 
2.In the government, cabinets are largely all-male even when a woman becomes the Chief Minister or the Prime Minister.
3.One-third of seats in local government bodies - in panchayats and municipalities — are now reserved for women. Now there are more than 10 lakh elected women representatives in rural and urban local bodies.
Women’s organisations and activists have been demanding a similar reservation of at least one-third of seats in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies for women. 

Illustration 1
    Which form of social divison is rarely recognised in the study of politics?
Solution
    Gender divison is a form of hierarchical social divison seen everywhere but is rarely recognised in the study of politics.
Illustration 2
    What are the base of gender divison?
Solution
    The gender divison is based on social expectations and stereotypes, it is not based on biology. 


    

How has the gender division shaped politics?

INTRODUCTION 
    Political expression of social differences is possible and sometime quite desirable in a democratic system. Gender, religion and caste are three kind of social differences that can take form of the social diffrences divisions and inequalities. In each case we look at the nature of this division in India and how it gets expressed in politics. We will also discuss that what is the role of these divisons in a democracy.

Gender and Politics
Public / Private division
Boys and girls are brought up to believe that the main responsibility of women is housework and bringing up children. This is reflected in a SEXUAL DIVISION OF LABOUR in most families:  women do all work inside the home such as cooking, cleaning, washing clothes, tailoring, looking after children, etc., and men do all the work outside the home.
The result of this division of labour is that although women constitute half of the humanity, their role in public life, especially politics, is minimal in most societies.
There were agitations in different countries for the extension of voting rights to women. These agitations demanded enhancing the political and legal status of women and improving their educational and career opportunities. More radical women’s movements aimed at equality in personal and family life as well. These movements are called FEMINIST movements.
1.  Political expression of gender division and political mobilisation on this question helped to improve women’s role in public life. 
2. We now find women working as scientists, doctors, engineers, lawyers, managers and college and university teachers which were earlier not considered suitable for women. 
3.  In some parts of the world, for example in Scandinavian countries such as Sweden, Norway and Finland, the participation of women in public life is very high.

Ours is still a male- dominated, PATRIARCHAL society. Women race disadvantage, discrimination and oppression in various ways.
1.The literacy rate among women is only 54 per cent compared with 76 per cent among men. Similarly, a smaller proportion of girl students go for higher studies. 
2.On an average an Indian woman works one hour more than an average man every day. Yet much of her work is not paid and therefore often not valued.
 3.The Equal Wages Act provides that equal wages should be paid to equal work. However in almost all areas of work, from sports and cinema, to factories and fields, women are paid less than men, even when both do exactly the same work.
4.In many parts of India parents prefer to have sons and find ways to have the girl child aborted before she is born. 
5.There are reports of various kinds of harassment, exploitation and violence against women. Urban areas have become particularly unsafe for women.

Women’s Political Representation
Many feminists and women’s movements conclude that unless women control power, their problems will not get adequate attention. One way to ensure this is to have more women as elected representatives.
1.In India, the proportion of women in legislature has been very low. For example, the percentage of elected women members in Lok Sabha has never reached even 10 per cent of its total strength. Their share in the state assemblies is less than 5 per cent. 
2.In the government, cabinets are largely all-male even when a woman becomes the Chief Minister or the Prime Minister.
3.One-third of seats in local government bodies - in panchayats and municipalities — are now reserved for women. Now there are more than 10 lakh elected women representatives in rural and urban local bodies.
Women’s organisations and activists have been demanding a similar reservation of at least one-third of seats in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies for women. 

Illustration 1
    Which form of social divison is rarely recognised in the study of politics?
Solution
    Gender divison is a form of hierarchical social divison seen everywhere but is rarely recognised in the study of politics.
Illustration 2
    What are the base of gender divison?
Solution
    The gender divison is based on social expectations and stereotypes, it is not based on biology. 


    

How has the gender division shaped politics?

INTRODUCTION 
    Political expression of social differences is possible and sometime quite desirable in a democratic system. Gender, religion and caste are three kind of social differences that can take form of the social diffrences divisions and inequalities. In each case we look at the nature of this division in India and how it gets expressed in politics. We will also discuss that what is the role of these divisons in a democracy.

Gender and Politics
Public / Private division
Boys and girls are brought up to believe that the main responsibility of women is housework and bringing up children. This is reflected in a SEXUAL DIVISION OF LABOUR in most families:  women do all work inside the home such as cooking, cleaning, washing clothes, tailoring, looking after children, etc., and men do all the work outside the home.
The result of this division of labour is that although women constitute half of the humanity, their role in public life, especially politics, is minimal in most societies.
There were agitations in different countries for the extension of voting rights to women. These agitations demanded enhancing the political and legal status of women and improving their educational and career opportunities. More radical women’s movements aimed at equality in personal and family life as well. These movements are called FEMINIST movements.
1.  Political expression of gender division and political mobilisation on this question helped to improve women’s role in public life. 
2. We now find women working as scientists, doctors, engineers, lawyers, managers and college and university teachers which were earlier not considered suitable for women. 
3.  In some parts of the world, for example in Scandinavian countries such as Sweden, Norway and Finland, the participation of women in public life is very high.

Ours is still a male- dominated, PATRIARCHAL society. Women race disadvantage, discrimination and oppression in various ways.
1.The literacy rate among women is only 54 per cent compared with 76 per cent among men. Similarly, a smaller proportion of girl students go for higher studies. 
2.On an average an Indian woman works one hour more than an average man every day. Yet much of her work is not paid and therefore often not valued.
 3.The Equal Wages Act provides that equal wages should be paid to equal work. However in almost all areas of work, from sports and cinema, to factories and fields, women are paid less than men, even when both do exactly the same work.
4.In many parts of India parents prefer to have sons and find ways to have the girl child aborted before she is born. 
5.There are reports of various kinds of harassment, exploitation and violence against women. Urban areas have become particularly unsafe for women.

Women’s Political Representation
Many feminists and women’s movements conclude that unless women control power, their problems will not get adequate attention. One way to ensure this is to have more women as elected representatives.
1.In India, the proportion of women in legislature has been very low. For example, the percentage of elected women members in Lok Sabha has never reached even 10 per cent of its total strength. Their share in the state assemblies is less than 5 per cent. 
2.In the government, cabinets are largely all-male even when a woman becomes the Chief Minister or the Prime Minister.
3.One-third of seats in local government bodies - in panchayats and municipalities — are now reserved for women. Now there are more than 10 lakh elected women representatives in rural and urban local bodies.
Women’s organisations and activists have been demanding a similar reservation of at least one-third of seats in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies for women. 

Illustration 1
    Which form of social divison is rarely recognised in the study of politics?
Solution
    Gender divison is a form of hierarchical social divison seen everywhere but is rarely recognised in the study of politics.
Illustration 2
    What are the base of gender divison?
Solution
    The gender divison is based on social expectations and stereotypes, it is not based on biology. 


    

How has the gender division shaped politics?

INTRODUCTION 
    Political expression of social differences is possible and sometime quite desirable in a democratic system. Gender, religion and caste are three kind of social differences that can take form of the social diffrences divisions and inequalities. In each case we look at the nature of this division in India and how it gets expressed in politics. We will also discuss that what is the role of these divisons in a democracy.

Gender and Politics
Public / Private division
Boys and girls are brought up to believe that the main responsibility of women is housework and bringing up children. This is reflected in a SEXUAL DIVISION OF LABOUR in most families:  women do all work inside the home such as cooking, cleaning, washing clothes, tailoring, looking after children, etc., and men do all the work outside the home.
The result of this division of labour is that although women constitute half of the humanity, their role in public life, especially politics, is minimal in most societies.
There were agitations in different countries for the extension of voting rights to women. These agitations demanded enhancing the political and legal status of women and improving their educational and career opportunities. More radical women’s movements aimed at equality in personal and family life as well. These movements are called FEMINIST movements.
1.  Political expression of gender division and political mobilisation on this question helped to improve women’s role in public life. 
2. We now find women working as scientists, doctors, engineers, lawyers, managers and college and university teachers which were earlier not considered suitable for women. 
3.  In some parts of the world, for example in Scandinavian countries such as Sweden, Norway and Finland, the participation of women in public life is very high.

Ours is still a male- dominated, PATRIARCHAL society. Women race disadvantage, discrimination and oppression in various ways.
1.The literacy rate among women is only 54 per cent compared with 76 per cent among men. Similarly, a smaller proportion of girl students go for higher studies. 
2.On an average an Indian woman works one hour more than an average man every day. Yet much of her work is not paid and therefore often not valued.
 3.The Equal Wages Act provides that equal wages should be paid to equal work. However in almost all areas of work, from sports and cinema, to factories and fields, women are paid less than men, even when both do exactly the same work.
4.In many parts of India parents prefer to have sons and find ways to have the girl child aborted before she is born. 
5.There are reports of various kinds of harassment, exploitation and violence against women. Urban areas have become particularly unsafe for women.

Women’s Political Representation
Many feminists and women’s movements conclude that unless women control power, their problems will not get adequate attention. One way to ensure this is to have more women as elected representatives.
1.In India, the proportion of women in legislature has been very low. For example, the percentage of elected women members in Lok Sabha has never reached even 10 per cent of its total strength. Their share in the state assemblies is less than 5 per cent. 
2.In the government, cabinets are largely all-male even when a woman becomes the Chief Minister or the Prime Minister.
3.One-third of seats in local government bodies - in panchayats and municipalities — are now reserved for women. Now there are more than 10 lakh elected women representatives in rural and urban local bodies.
Women’s organisations and activists have been demanding a similar reservation of at least one-third of seats in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies for women. 

Illustration 1
    Which form of social divison is rarely recognised in the study of politics?
Solution
    Gender divison is a form of hierarchical social divison seen everywhere but is rarely recognised in the study of politics.
Illustration 2
    What are the base of gender divison?
Solution
    The gender divison is based on social expectations and stereotypes, it is not based on biology. 


    

How has the gender division shaped politics?

INTRODUCTION 
    Political expression of social differences is possible and sometime quite desirable in a democratic system. Gender, religion and caste are three kind of social differences that can take form of the social diffrences divisions and inequalities. In each case we look at the nature of this division in India and how it gets expressed in politics. We will also discuss that what is the role of these divisons in a democracy.

Gender and Politics
Public / Private division
Boys and girls are brought up to believe that the main responsibility of women is housework and bringing up children. This is reflected in a SEXUAL DIVISION OF LABOUR in most families:  women do all work inside the home such as cooking, cleaning, washing clothes, tailoring, looking after children, etc., and men do all the work outside the home.
The result of this division of labour is that although women constitute half of the humanity, their role in public life, especially politics, is minimal in most societies.
There were agitations in different countries for the extension of voting rights to women. These agitations demanded enhancing the political and legal status of women and improving their educational and career opportunities. More radical women’s movements aimed at equality in personal and family life as well. These movements are called FEMINIST movements.
1.  Political expression of gender division and political mobilisation on this question helped to improve women’s role in public life. 
2. We now find women working as scientists, doctors, engineers, lawyers, managers and college and university teachers which were earlier not considered suitable for women. 
3.  In some parts of the world, for example in Scandinavian countries such as Sweden, Norway and Finland, the participation of women in public life is very high.

Ours is still a male- dominated, PATRIARCHAL society. Women race disadvantage, discrimination and oppression in various ways.
1.The literacy rate among women is only 54 per cent compared with 76 per cent among men. Similarly, a smaller proportion of girl students go for higher studies. 
2.On an average an Indian woman works one hour more than an average man every day. Yet much of her work is not paid and therefore often not valued.
 3.The Equal Wages Act provides that equal wages should be paid to equal work. However in almost all areas of work, from sports and cinema, to factories and fields, women are paid less than men, even when both do exactly the same work.
4.In many parts of India parents prefer to have sons and find ways to have the girl child aborted before she is born. 
5.There are reports of various kinds of harassment, exploitation and violence against women. Urban areas have become particularly unsafe for women.

Women’s Political Representation
Many feminists and women’s movements conclude that unless women control power, their problems will not get adequate attention. One way to ensure this is to have more women as elected representatives.
1.In India, the proportion of women in legislature has been very low. For example, the percentage of elected women members in Lok Sabha has never reached even 10 per cent of its total strength. Their share in the state assemblies is less than 5 per cent. 
2.In the government, cabinets are largely all-male even when a woman becomes the Chief Minister or the Prime Minister.
3.One-third of seats in local government bodies - in panchayats and municipalities — are now reserved for women. Now there are more than 10 lakh elected women representatives in rural and urban local bodies.
Women’s organisations and activists have been demanding a similar reservation of at least one-third of seats in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies for women. 

Illustration 1
    Which form of social divison is rarely recognised in the study of politics?
Solution
    Gender divison is a form of hierarchical social divison seen everywhere but is rarely recognised in the study of politics.
Illustration 2
    What are the base of gender divison?
Solution
    The gender divison is based on social expectations and stereotypes, it is not based on biology. 


    

How has the gender division shaped politics?

INTRODUCTION 
    Political expression of social differences is possible and sometime quite desirable in a democratic system. Gender, religion and caste are three kind of social differences that can take form of the social diffrences divisions and inequalities. In each case we look at the nature of this division in India and how it gets expressed in politics. We will also discuss that what is the role of these divisons in a democracy.

Gender and Politics
Public / Private division
Boys and girls are brought up to believe that the main responsibility of women is housework and bringing up children. This is reflected in a SEXUAL DIVISION OF LABOUR in most families:  women do all work inside the home such as cooking, cleaning, washing clothes, tailoring, looking after children, etc., and men do all the work outside the home.
The result of this division of labour is that although women constitute half of the humanity, their role in public life, especially politics, is minimal in most societies.
There were agitations in different countries for the extension of voting rights to women. These agitations demanded enhancing the political and legal status of women and improving their educational and career opportunities. More radical women’s movements aimed at equality in personal and family life as well. These movements are called FEMINIST movements.
1.  Political expression of gender division and political mobilisation on this question helped to improve women’s role in public life. 
2. We now find women working as scientists, doctors, engineers, lawyers, managers and college and university teachers which were earlier not considered suitable for women. 
3.  In some parts of the world, for example in Scandinavian countries such as Sweden, Norway and Finland, the participation of women in public life is very high.

Ours is still a male- dominated, PATRIARCHAL society. Women race disadvantage, discrimination and oppression in various ways.
1.The literacy rate among women is only 54 per cent compared with 76 per cent among men. Similarly, a smaller proportion of girl students go for higher studies. 
2.On an average an Indian woman works one hour more than an average man every day. Yet much of her work is not paid and therefore often not valued.
 3.The Equal Wages Act provides that equal wages should be paid to equal work. However in almost all areas of work, from sports and cinema, to factories and fields, women are paid less than men, even when both do exactly the same work.
4.In many parts of India parents prefer to have sons and find ways to have the girl child aborted before she is born. 
5.There are reports of various kinds of harassment, exploitation and violence against women. Urban areas have become particularly unsafe for women.

Women’s Political Representation
Many feminists and women’s movements conclude that unless women control power, their problems will not get adequate attention. One way to ensure this is to have more women as elected representatives.
1.In India, the proportion of women in legislature has been very low. For example, the percentage of elected women members in Lok Sabha has never reached even 10 per cent of its total strength. Their share in the state assemblies is less than 5 per cent. 
2.In the government, cabinets are largely all-male even when a woman becomes the Chief Minister or the Prime Minister.
3.One-third of seats in local government bodies - in panchayats and municipalities — are now reserved for women. Now there are more than 10 lakh elected women representatives in rural and urban local bodies.
Women’s organisations and activists have been demanding a similar reservation of at least one-third of seats in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies for women. 

Illustration 1
    Which form of social divison is rarely recognised in the study of politics?
Solution
    Gender divison is a form of hierarchical social divison seen everywhere but is rarely recognised in the study of politics.
Illustration 2
    What are the base of gender divison?
Solution
    The gender divison is based on social expectations and stereotypes, it is not based on biology. 


    

How do communal divisions affect democracy?

Religion, communalism and politics
The division based on religious differences is not as universal as gender. Many countries including India have in their population, followers of different religions. 
Consider the following:
(i) Gandhi ji used to say that religion can never be separated from politics.He meant like Hinduism or I slam  moral values that inform all religions. He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from     religion.
(ii) Most of the victims of communal riots in our country are people from religious minorities. They have demanded that the government take special steps to protect religious minorities.
(iii)  Women’s movement has argued that FAMILY LAWS of all religions discriminate against women. So they have demanded that government should change these laws to make them more equitable.
1.    Ideas, ideals and values drawn from different religions can and perhaps should play a role in politics.
2.    People should be able to express in politics their needs, interests and demands as a member of a religious community. 
3.    Those who hold political power should sometimes be able to regulate the practice of religion so as to prevent discrimination and oppression.
4.    These political acts are not wrong as long as they treat every religion equally.
Communalism
The problem begins when religion is seen ‘ as the basis of the nation.
1. The problem becomes more acute when religion is expressed in politics in exclusive and partisan terms, when one religion and its followers are pitted against another. This happens when beliefs of one religion are presented as superior to those of other religions.
2. When the demands of one religious group are formed in opposition to another and when state power is used to establish domination of one religious group over the rest. 
This manner of using religion in politics is communal politics.
Communal politics is based on the idea that religion is the principal basis of social community. 

1. The followers of a particular religion must belong to one community. Their fundamental interests are the same. Any difference that they may have is irrelevant or trivial for community life.
2.It also follows that people who follow different religions cannot belong to the same social community. If the followers of different religion have some commonalities these are superficial and immaterial. 
3. Their interests are bound to be different and involve a conflict. In its extreme form communalism leads to the belief that people belonging to different religions cannot live as equal citizens within one nation. Either, one of them has to dominate the rest or they have to form different nations.
This belief is fundamentally flawed. People of one religion do not have the same interests and aspirations in every context. Everyone has several other roles, positions and identities. There are many voices inside every community. All these voices have a right to be heard. Therefore any attempt to bring all followers of one religion together in context other than religion is bound to suppress many voices within that community.

Various forms of Communalism
1. The most common expression of communalism is in everyday beliefs. These routinely involve religious prejudices, stereotypes of religious communities and belief in the superiority of one’s religion over other religions. 
2.A communal mind often leads to a quest for political dominance of one’s own religious community. For those belonging to majority community, this takes the form of majoritarian dominance. For those belonging to the minority community, it can take the form of a desire to form a separate political unit.
3.Political mobilisation on religious lines is another frequent form of communalism. This involves the use of sacred symbols, religious leaders, emotional appeal and plain fear in order to bring the followers of one religion together in the political arena. 
4.    Sometimes communalism takes its most fugitive form of communal violence, riots and massacre. India and Pakistan suffered some of the worst communal riots at the time of the Partition.

Secular State
1. There is no official religion for the Indian state. Unlike the status of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, that of Islam in Pakistan and that of Christianity in England, our Constitution does not give a special status to any religion.
2.    The Constitution provides to al! individuals and communities freedom to profess, practice and propagate any religion, or not to follow any.
3.    The Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion. 
4.    At the same time the Constitution allows the state to intervene in the matters of religion in order to ensure equality within religious communities.: For example, it bans untouchability.
Secularism is not just an ideology of some parties or persons. This idea constitutes one of the foundations of our country.
A secular Constitution like ours is necessary but not sufficient to combat communalism. Communal prejudices and propaganda needs to be countered in every day life and religion based mobilisation needs to be countered in the arena of politics.

Illustration 4
    Which kind of diversity is most wide spread in the world which is often expressed in politics.
Solution
    Religious diversity is often expressed in politics.
Illustration 5
    Gandiji used to say that “religion can never be seperated from politics”. What does this means?
Solution
    He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from religion.
Illustration 6
    Which people are most of the victims of communal riots according to human rights group?
Solution
    Most of the victims of communal riots are people from religous minorities.

How do communal divisions affect democracy?

Religion, communalism and politics
The division based on religious differences is not as universal as gender. Many countries including India have in their population, followers of different religions. 
Consider the following:
(i) Gandhi ji used to say that religion can never be separated from politics.He meant like Hinduism or I slam  moral values that inform all religions. He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from     religion.
(ii) Most of the victims of communal riots in our country are people from religious minorities. They have demanded that the government take special steps to protect religious minorities.
(iii)  Women’s movement has argued that FAMILY LAWS of all religions discriminate against women. So they have demanded that government should change these laws to make them more equitable.
1.    Ideas, ideals and values drawn from different religions can and perhaps should play a role in politics.
2.    People should be able to express in politics their needs, interests and demands as a member of a religious community. 
3.    Those who hold political power should sometimes be able to regulate the practice of religion so as to prevent discrimination and oppression.
4.    These political acts are not wrong as long as they treat every religion equally.
Communalism
The problem begins when religion is seen ‘ as the basis of the nation.
1. The problem becomes more acute when religion is expressed in politics in exclusive and partisan terms, when one religion and its followers are pitted against another. This happens when beliefs of one religion are presented as superior to those of other religions.
2. When the demands of one religious group are formed in opposition to another and when state power is used to establish domination of one religious group over the rest. 
This manner of using religion in politics is communal politics.
Communal politics is based on the idea that religion is the principal basis of social community. 

1. The followers of a particular religion must belong to one community. Their fundamental interests are the same. Any difference that they may have is irrelevant or trivial for community life.
2.It also follows that people who follow different religions cannot belong to the same social community. If the followers of different religion have some commonalities these are superficial and immaterial. 
3. Their interests are bound to be different and involve a conflict. In its extreme form communalism leads to the belief that people belonging to different religions cannot live as equal citizens within one nation. Either, one of them has to dominate the rest or they have to form different nations.
This belief is fundamentally flawed. People of one religion do not have the same interests and aspirations in every context. Everyone has several other roles, positions and identities. There are many voices inside every community. All these voices have a right to be heard. Therefore any attempt to bring all followers of one religion together in context other than religion is bound to suppress many voices within that community.

Various forms of Communalism
1. The most common expression of communalism is in everyday beliefs. These routinely involve religious prejudices, stereotypes of religious communities and belief in the superiority of one’s religion over other religions. 
2.A communal mind often leads to a quest for political dominance of one’s own religious community. For those belonging to majority community, this takes the form of majoritarian dominance. For those belonging to the minority community, it can take the form of a desire to form a separate political unit.
3.Political mobilisation on religious lines is another frequent form of communalism. This involves the use of sacred symbols, religious leaders, emotional appeal and plain fear in order to bring the followers of one religion together in the political arena. 
4.    Sometimes communalism takes its most fugitive form of communal violence, riots and massacre. India and Pakistan suffered some of the worst communal riots at the time of the Partition.

Secular State
1. There is no official religion for the Indian state. Unlike the status of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, that of Islam in Pakistan and that of Christianity in England, our Constitution does not give a special status to any religion.
2.    The Constitution provides to al! individuals and communities freedom to profess, practice and propagate any religion, or not to follow any.
3.    The Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion. 
4.    At the same time the Constitution allows the state to intervene in the matters of religion in order to ensure equality within religious communities.: For example, it bans untouchability.
Secularism is not just an ideology of some parties or persons. This idea constitutes one of the foundations of our country.
A secular Constitution like ours is necessary but not sufficient to combat communalism. Communal prejudices and propaganda needs to be countered in every day life and religion based mobilisation needs to be countered in the arena of politics.

Illustration 4
    Which kind of diversity is most wide spread in the world which is often expressed in politics.
Solution
    Religious diversity is often expressed in politics.
Illustration 5
    Gandiji used to say that “religion can never be seperated from politics”. What does this means?
Solution
    He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from religion.
Illustration 6
    Which people are most of the victims of communal riots according to human rights group?
Solution
    Most of the victims of communal riots are people from religous minorities.

How do communal divisions affect democracy?

Religion, communalism and politics
The division based on religious differences is not as universal as gender. Many countries including India have in their population, followers of different religions. 
Consider the following:
(i) Gandhi ji used to say that religion can never be separated from politics.He meant like Hinduism or I slam  moral values that inform all religions. He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from     religion.
(ii) Most of the victims of communal riots in our country are people from religious minorities. They have demanded that the government take special steps to protect religious minorities.
(iii)  Women’s movement has argued that FAMILY LAWS of all religions discriminate against women. So they have demanded that government should change these laws to make them more equitable.
1.    Ideas, ideals and values drawn from different religions can and perhaps should play a role in politics.
2.    People should be able to express in politics their needs, interests and demands as a member of a religious community. 
3.    Those who hold political power should sometimes be able to regulate the practice of religion so as to prevent discrimination and oppression.
4.    These political acts are not wrong as long as they treat every religion equally.
Communalism
The problem begins when religion is seen ‘ as the basis of the nation.
1. The problem becomes more acute when religion is expressed in politics in exclusive and partisan terms, when one religion and its followers are pitted against another. This happens when beliefs of one religion are presented as superior to those of other religions.
2. When the demands of one religious group are formed in opposition to another and when state power is used to establish domination of one religious group over the rest. 
This manner of using religion in politics is communal politics.
Communal politics is based on the idea that religion is the principal basis of social community. 

1. The followers of a particular religion must belong to one community. Their fundamental interests are the same. Any difference that they may have is irrelevant or trivial for community life.
2.It also follows that people who follow different religions cannot belong to the same social community. If the followers of different religion have some commonalities these are superficial and immaterial. 
3. Their interests are bound to be different and involve a conflict. In its extreme form communalism leads to the belief that people belonging to different religions cannot live as equal citizens within one nation. Either, one of them has to dominate the rest or they have to form different nations.
This belief is fundamentally flawed. People of one religion do not have the same interests and aspirations in every context. Everyone has several other roles, positions and identities. There are many voices inside every community. All these voices have a right to be heard. Therefore any attempt to bring all followers of one religion together in context other than religion is bound to suppress many voices within that community.

Various forms of Communalism
1. The most common expression of communalism is in everyday beliefs. These routinely involve religious prejudices, stereotypes of religious communities and belief in the superiority of one’s religion over other religions. 
2.A communal mind often leads to a quest for political dominance of one’s own religious community. For those belonging to majority community, this takes the form of majoritarian dominance. For those belonging to the minority community, it can take the form of a desire to form a separate political unit.
3.Political mobilisation on religious lines is another frequent form of communalism. This involves the use of sacred symbols, religious leaders, emotional appeal and plain fear in order to bring the followers of one religion together in the political arena. 
4.    Sometimes communalism takes its most fugitive form of communal violence, riots and massacre. India and Pakistan suffered some of the worst communal riots at the time of the Partition.

Secular State
1. There is no official religion for the Indian state. Unlike the status of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, that of Islam in Pakistan and that of Christianity in England, our Constitution does not give a special status to any religion.
2.    The Constitution provides to al! individuals and communities freedom to profess, practice and propagate any religion, or not to follow any.
3.    The Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion. 
4.    At the same time the Constitution allows the state to intervene in the matters of religion in order to ensure equality within religious communities.: For example, it bans untouchability.
Secularism is not just an ideology of some parties or persons. This idea constitutes one of the foundations of our country.
A secular Constitution like ours is necessary but not sufficient to combat communalism. Communal prejudices and propaganda needs to be countered in every day life and religion based mobilisation needs to be countered in the arena of politics.

Illustration 4
    Which kind of diversity is most wide spread in the world which is often expressed in politics.
Solution
    Religious diversity is often expressed in politics.
Illustration 5
    Gandiji used to say that “religion can never be seperated from politics”. What does this means?
Solution
    He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from religion.
Illustration 6
    Which people are most of the victims of communal riots according to human rights group?
Solution
    Most of the victims of communal riots are people from religous minorities.

How do communal divisions affect democracy?

Religion, communalism and politics
The division based on religious differences is not as universal as gender. Many countries including India have in their population, followers of different religions. 
Consider the following:
(i) Gandhi ji used to say that religion can never be separated from politics.He meant like Hinduism or I slam  moral values that inform all religions. He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from     religion.
(ii) Most of the victims of communal riots in our country are people from religious minorities. They have demanded that the government take special steps to protect religious minorities.
(iii)  Women’s movement has argued that FAMILY LAWS of all religions discriminate against women. So they have demanded that government should change these laws to make them more equitable.
1.    Ideas, ideals and values drawn from different religions can and perhaps should play a role in politics.
2.    People should be able to express in politics their needs, interests and demands as a member of a religious community. 
3.    Those who hold political power should sometimes be able to regulate the practice of religion so as to prevent discrimination and oppression.
4.    These political acts are not wrong as long as they treat every religion equally.
Communalism
The problem begins when religion is seen ‘ as the basis of the nation.
1. The problem becomes more acute when religion is expressed in politics in exclusive and partisan terms, when one religion and its followers are pitted against another. This happens when beliefs of one religion are presented as superior to those of other religions.
2. When the demands of one religious group are formed in opposition to another and when state power is used to establish domination of one religious group over the rest. 
This manner of using religion in politics is communal politics.
Communal politics is based on the idea that religion is the principal basis of social community. 

1. The followers of a particular religion must belong to one community. Their fundamental interests are the same. Any difference that they may have is irrelevant or trivial for community life.
2.It also follows that people who follow different religions cannot belong to the same social community. If the followers of different religion have some commonalities these are superficial and immaterial. 
3. Their interests are bound to be different and involve a conflict. In its extreme form communalism leads to the belief that people belonging to different religions cannot live as equal citizens within one nation. Either, one of them has to dominate the rest or they have to form different nations.
This belief is fundamentally flawed. People of one religion do not have the same interests and aspirations in every context. Everyone has several other roles, positions and identities. There are many voices inside every community. All these voices have a right to be heard. Therefore any attempt to bring all followers of one religion together in context other than religion is bound to suppress many voices within that community.

Various forms of Communalism
1. The most common expression of communalism is in everyday beliefs. These routinely involve religious prejudices, stereotypes of religious communities and belief in the superiority of one’s religion over other religions. 
2.A communal mind often leads to a quest for political dominance of one’s own religious community. For those belonging to majority community, this takes the form of majoritarian dominance. For those belonging to the minority community, it can take the form of a desire to form a separate political unit.
3.Political mobilisation on religious lines is another frequent form of communalism. This involves the use of sacred symbols, religious leaders, emotional appeal and plain fear in order to bring the followers of one religion together in the political arena. 
4.    Sometimes communalism takes its most fugitive form of communal violence, riots and massacre. India and Pakistan suffered some of the worst communal riots at the time of the Partition.

Secular State
1. There is no official religion for the Indian state. Unlike the status of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, that of Islam in Pakistan and that of Christianity in England, our Constitution does not give a special status to any religion.
2.    The Constitution provides to al! individuals and communities freedom to profess, practice and propagate any religion, or not to follow any.
3.    The Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion. 
4.    At the same time the Constitution allows the state to intervene in the matters of religion in order to ensure equality within religious communities.: For example, it bans untouchability.
Secularism is not just an ideology of some parties or persons. This idea constitutes one of the foundations of our country.
A secular Constitution like ours is necessary but not sufficient to combat communalism. Communal prejudices and propaganda needs to be countered in every day life and religion based mobilisation needs to be countered in the arena of politics.

Illustration 4
    Which kind of diversity is most wide spread in the world which is often expressed in politics.
Solution
    Religious diversity is often expressed in politics.
Illustration 5
    Gandiji used to say that “religion can never be seperated from politics”. What does this means?
Solution
    He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from religion.
Illustration 6
    Which people are most of the victims of communal riots according to human rights group?
Solution
    Most of the victims of communal riots are people from religous minorities.

How do communal divisions affect democracy?

Religion, communalism and politics
The division based on religious differences is not as universal as gender. Many countries including India have in their population, followers of different religions. 
Consider the following:
(i) Gandhi ji used to say that religion can never be separated from politics.He meant like Hinduism or I slam  moral values that inform all religions. He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from     religion.
(ii) Most of the victims of communal riots in our country are people from religious minorities. They have demanded that the government take special steps to protect religious minorities.
(iii)  Women’s movement has argued that FAMILY LAWS of all religions discriminate against women. So they have demanded that government should change these laws to make them more equitable.
1.    Ideas, ideals and values drawn from different religions can and perhaps should play a role in politics.
2.    People should be able to express in politics their needs, interests and demands as a member of a religious community. 
3.    Those who hold political power should sometimes be able to regulate the practice of religion so as to prevent discrimination and oppression.
4.    These political acts are not wrong as long as they treat every religion equally.
Communalism
The problem begins when religion is seen ‘ as the basis of the nation.
1. The problem becomes more acute when religion is expressed in politics in exclusive and partisan terms, when one religion and its followers are pitted against another. This happens when beliefs of one religion are presented as superior to those of other religions.
2. When the demands of one religious group are formed in opposition to another and when state power is used to establish domination of one religious group over the rest. 
This manner of using religion in politics is communal politics.
Communal politics is based on the idea that religion is the principal basis of social community. 

1. The followers of a particular religion must belong to one community. Their fundamental interests are the same. Any difference that they may have is irrelevant or trivial for community life.
2.It also follows that people who follow different religions cannot belong to the same social community. If the followers of different religion have some commonalities these are superficial and immaterial. 
3. Their interests are bound to be different and involve a conflict. In its extreme form communalism leads to the belief that people belonging to different religions cannot live as equal citizens within one nation. Either, one of them has to dominate the rest or they have to form different nations.
This belief is fundamentally flawed. People of one religion do not have the same interests and aspirations in every context. Everyone has several other roles, positions and identities. There are many voices inside every community. All these voices have a right to be heard. Therefore any attempt to bring all followers of one religion together in context other than religion is bound to suppress many voices within that community.

Various forms of Communalism
1. The most common expression of communalism is in everyday beliefs. These routinely involve religious prejudices, stereotypes of religious communities and belief in the superiority of one’s religion over other religions. 
2.A communal mind often leads to a quest for political dominance of one’s own religious community. For those belonging to majority community, this takes the form of majoritarian dominance. For those belonging to the minority community, it can take the form of a desire to form a separate political unit.
3.Political mobilisation on religious lines is another frequent form of communalism. This involves the use of sacred symbols, religious leaders, emotional appeal and plain fear in order to bring the followers of one religion together in the political arena. 
4.    Sometimes communalism takes its most fugitive form of communal violence, riots and massacre. India and Pakistan suffered some of the worst communal riots at the time of the Partition.

Secular State
1. There is no official religion for the Indian state. Unlike the status of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, that of Islam in Pakistan and that of Christianity in England, our Constitution does not give a special status to any religion.
2.    The Constitution provides to al! individuals and communities freedom to profess, practice and propagate any religion, or not to follow any.
3.    The Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion. 
4.    At the same time the Constitution allows the state to intervene in the matters of religion in order to ensure equality within religious communities.: For example, it bans untouchability.
Secularism is not just an ideology of some parties or persons. This idea constitutes one of the foundations of our country.
A secular Constitution like ours is necessary but not sufficient to combat communalism. Communal prejudices and propaganda needs to be countered in every day life and religion based mobilisation needs to be countered in the arena of politics.

Illustration 4
    Which kind of diversity is most wide spread in the world which is often expressed in politics.
Solution
    Religious diversity is often expressed in politics.
Illustration 5
    Gandiji used to say that “religion can never be seperated from politics”. What does this means?
Solution
    He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from religion.
Illustration 6
    Which people are most of the victims of communal riots according to human rights group?
Solution
    Most of the victims of communal riots are people from religous minorities.

How do communal divisions affect democracy?

Religion, communalism and politics
The division based on religious differences is not as universal as gender. Many countries including India have in their population, followers of different religions. 
Consider the following:
(i) Gandhi ji used to say that religion can never be separated from politics.He meant like Hinduism or I slam  moral values that inform all religions. He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from     religion.
(ii) Most of the victims of communal riots in our country are people from religious minorities. They have demanded that the government take special steps to protect religious minorities.
(iii)  Women’s movement has argued that FAMILY LAWS of all religions discriminate against women. So they have demanded that government should change these laws to make them more equitable.
1.    Ideas, ideals and values drawn from different religions can and perhaps should play a role in politics.
2.    People should be able to express in politics their needs, interests and demands as a member of a religious community. 
3.    Those who hold political power should sometimes be able to regulate the practice of religion so as to prevent discrimination and oppression.
4.    These political acts are not wrong as long as they treat every religion equally.
Communalism
The problem begins when religion is seen ‘ as the basis of the nation.
1. The problem becomes more acute when religion is expressed in politics in exclusive and partisan terms, when one religion and its followers are pitted against another. This happens when beliefs of one religion are presented as superior to those of other religions.
2. When the demands of one religious group are formed in opposition to another and when state power is used to establish domination of one religious group over the rest. 
This manner of using religion in politics is communal politics.
Communal politics is based on the idea that religion is the principal basis of social community. 

1. The followers of a particular religion must belong to one community. Their fundamental interests are the same. Any difference that they may have is irrelevant or trivial for community life.
2.It also follows that people who follow different religions cannot belong to the same social community. If the followers of different religion have some commonalities these are superficial and immaterial. 
3. Their interests are bound to be different and involve a conflict. In its extreme form communalism leads to the belief that people belonging to different religions cannot live as equal citizens within one nation. Either, one of them has to dominate the rest or they have to form different nations.
This belief is fundamentally flawed. People of one religion do not have the same interests and aspirations in every context. Everyone has several other roles, positions and identities. There are many voices inside every community. All these voices have a right to be heard. Therefore any attempt to bring all followers of one religion together in context other than religion is bound to suppress many voices within that community.

Various forms of Communalism
1. The most common expression of communalism is in everyday beliefs. These routinely involve religious prejudices, stereotypes of religious communities and belief in the superiority of one’s religion over other religions. 
2.A communal mind often leads to a quest for political dominance of one’s own religious community. For those belonging to majority community, this takes the form of majoritarian dominance. For those belonging to the minority community, it can take the form of a desire to form a separate political unit.
3.Political mobilisation on religious lines is another frequent form of communalism. This involves the use of sacred symbols, religious leaders, emotional appeal and plain fear in order to bring the followers of one religion together in the political arena. 
4.    Sometimes communalism takes its most fugitive form of communal violence, riots and massacre. India and Pakistan suffered some of the worst communal riots at the time of the Partition.

Secular State
1. There is no official religion for the Indian state. Unlike the status of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, that of Islam in Pakistan and that of Christianity in England, our Constitution does not give a special status to any religion.
2.    The Constitution provides to al! individuals and communities freedom to profess, practice and propagate any religion, or not to follow any.
3.    The Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion. 
4.    At the same time the Constitution allows the state to intervene in the matters of religion in order to ensure equality within religious communities.: For example, it bans untouchability.
Secularism is not just an ideology of some parties or persons. This idea constitutes one of the foundations of our country.
A secular Constitution like ours is necessary but not sufficient to combat communalism. Communal prejudices and propaganda needs to be countered in every day life and religion based mobilisation needs to be countered in the arena of politics.

Illustration 4
    Which kind of diversity is most wide spread in the world which is often expressed in politics.
Solution
    Religious diversity is often expressed in politics.
Illustration 5
    Gandiji used to say that “religion can never be seperated from politics”. What does this means?
Solution
    He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from religion.
Illustration 6
    Which people are most of the victims of communal riots according to human rights group?
Solution
    Most of the victims of communal riots are people from religous minorities.

How do communal divisions affect democracy?

Religion, communalism and politics
The division based on religious differences is not as universal as gender. Many countries including India have in their population, followers of different religions. 
Consider the following:
(i) Gandhi ji used to say that religion can never be separated from politics.He meant like Hinduism or I slam  moral values that inform all religions. He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from     religion.
(ii) Most of the victims of communal riots in our country are people from religious minorities. They have demanded that the government take special steps to protect religious minorities.
(iii)  Women’s movement has argued that FAMILY LAWS of all religions discriminate against women. So they have demanded that government should change these laws to make them more equitable.
1.    Ideas, ideals and values drawn from different religions can and perhaps should play a role in politics.
2.    People should be able to express in politics their needs, interests and demands as a member of a religious community. 
3.    Those who hold political power should sometimes be able to regulate the practice of religion so as to prevent discrimination and oppression.
4.    These political acts are not wrong as long as they treat every religion equally.
Communalism
The problem begins when religion is seen ‘ as the basis of the nation.
1. The problem becomes more acute when religion is expressed in politics in exclusive and partisan terms, when one religion and its followers are pitted against another. This happens when beliefs of one religion are presented as superior to those of other religions.
2. When the demands of one religious group are formed in opposition to another and when state power is used to establish domination of one religious group over the rest. 
This manner of using religion in politics is communal politics.
Communal politics is based on the idea that religion is the principal basis of social community. 

1. The followers of a particular religion must belong to one community. Their fundamental interests are the same. Any difference that they may have is irrelevant or trivial for community life.
2.It also follows that people who follow different religions cannot belong to the same social community. If the followers of different religion have some commonalities these are superficial and immaterial. 
3. Their interests are bound to be different and involve a conflict. In its extreme form communalism leads to the belief that people belonging to different religions cannot live as equal citizens within one nation. Either, one of them has to dominate the rest or they have to form different nations.
This belief is fundamentally flawed. People of one religion do not have the same interests and aspirations in every context. Everyone has several other roles, positions and identities. There are many voices inside every community. All these voices have a right to be heard. Therefore any attempt to bring all followers of one religion together in context other than religion is bound to suppress many voices within that community.

Various forms of Communalism
1. The most common expression of communalism is in everyday beliefs. These routinely involve religious prejudices, stereotypes of religious communities and belief in the superiority of one’s religion over other religions. 
2.A communal mind often leads to a quest for political dominance of one’s own religious community. For those belonging to majority community, this takes the form of majoritarian dominance. For those belonging to the minority community, it can take the form of a desire to form a separate political unit.
3.Political mobilisation on religious lines is another frequent form of communalism. This involves the use of sacred symbols, religious leaders, emotional appeal and plain fear in order to bring the followers of one religion together in the political arena. 
4.    Sometimes communalism takes its most fugitive form of communal violence, riots and massacre. India and Pakistan suffered some of the worst communal riots at the time of the Partition.

Secular State
1. There is no official religion for the Indian state. Unlike the status of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, that of Islam in Pakistan and that of Christianity in England, our Constitution does not give a special status to any religion.
2.    The Constitution provides to al! individuals and communities freedom to profess, practice and propagate any religion, or not to follow any.
3.    The Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion. 
4.    At the same time the Constitution allows the state to intervene in the matters of religion in order to ensure equality within religious communities.: For example, it bans untouchability.
Secularism is not just an ideology of some parties or persons. This idea constitutes one of the foundations of our country.
A secular Constitution like ours is necessary but not sufficient to combat communalism. Communal prejudices and propaganda needs to be countered in every day life and religion based mobilisation needs to be countered in the arena of politics.

Illustration 4
    Which kind of diversity is most wide spread in the world which is often expressed in politics.
Solution
    Religious diversity is often expressed in politics.
Illustration 5
    Gandiji used to say that “religion can never be seperated from politics”. What does this means?
Solution
    He believed that politics must be guided by ethics drawn from religion.
Illustration 6
    Which people are most of the victims of communal riots according to human rights group?
Solution
    Most of the victims of communal riots are people from religous minorities.

Which are the major national and regional parties in India?

National Political Parties :
There are some countrywide parties, which are called ‘national parties’. These parties have their units in various states. But by and large all these units follow the same policies, programmes and strategy that is decided at the national level.
Every party in the country has to register with the Election Commission. While the Commission treats all parties equally, it offers some special facilities to large and established parties. These parties are given a unique symbol – only the official candidates of that party can use that election symbol.
Parties that get this privilege and some other special facilities are ‘recognised’ by the Election Commission for this purpose. That is why these parties are called, ‘recognised political parties’. The Election Commission has laid down detailed criteria of the proportion of votes and seats that a party must get in order to be a recognised party.
A party that secures at least 6 per cent of the total votes in an election to the Legislative Assembly of a State and wins at least two seats is recognised as a State party. 
A party that secures at least six per cent of total votes in Lok Sabha elections or Assembly elections in four States and wins at least four seats in the Lok Sabha is recognised as a national party.
According to this classification, there were six national recognised parties in the country in 2006.

Indian National Congress (INC)
Popularly known as the Congress Party. One of the oldest parties of the world. Founded in 1885 and has experienced many splits. Played a dominant role in Indian politics at the national and state level for several decades after India’s Independence. Under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru, the party sought to build a modern secular democratic republic in India. Ruling partner at the centre till 1977 and then from 1980 to 1989. After 1989, its support declined, but it continues to be present throughout the country, cutting across social divisions. A centrist party (neither rightist nor leftist) in its ideological  orientation, the party supports secularism and welfare of weaker sections and minorities. Supports new economic reforms but with a human face. Emerged as the largest party with 145 members in the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004. Currently leads the ruling United Progressive Alliance coalition government at the Centre.

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
Founded in 1980 by reviving the erstwhile Bharatiya Jana Sangh. Wants to build a strong and modern India by drawing inspiration from India’s ancient culture and values. Cultural nationalism (or ‘Hindutva’) is an important element in its conception of Indian nationhood and politics. Wants full territorial and political integration of Jammu and Kashmir with India, a uniform civil code for all people living in the country irrespective of religion, and ban on religious conversions. Its support base increased substantially in the 1990s. Earlier limited to north and west and to urban areas, the party expanded its support in the south, east, the north-east and to rural areas. Came to power in 1998 as the leader of the National Democratic Alliance including several state and regional parties. Lost elections in 2004 and is the principal opposition party in the Lok Sabha.

Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)
Formed in 1984 under the leadership of Kanshi Ram. Seeks to represent and secure power for the bahujan samaj which includes the dalits, adivasis, OBCs and religious minorities. Draws inspiration from the ideas and teachings of Sahu Maharaj, Mahatma Phule, Periyar Ramaswami Naicker and Babasaheb Ambedkar. Stands for the cause of securing the interests and welfare of the dalits and oppressed people. It has its main base in the state of Uttar Pradesh and substantial presence in neighbouring states like Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Delhi and Punjab. Formed government in Uttar Pradesh several times by taking the support of different parties at different times. In the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004, it polled about 5 per cent votes and secured 19 seats in the Lok Sabha.

Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M)
Founded in 1964. Believes in Marxism-Leninism. Supports socialism, secularism and democracy and opposes imperialism and communalism. Accepts democratic elections as a useful and helpful means for securing the objective of socio-economic justice in India, Enjoys strong support in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, especially among the poor, factory workers, farmers, agricultural labourers and the intelligentsia. Critical of the new economic policies that allow free flow of foreign capital and goods into the country. Has been in power in West Bengal without a break for 30 years. In 2004 elections, it won about 6 per cent of votes and 43 seats in the Lok Sabha. Currently supports the UPA government from outside, without joining the government.

Communist Party of India (CPI)
Formed in 1925. Believes in Marxism-Leninism, secularism and democracy. Opposed to the forces of secessionism and communalism. Accepts parliamentary democracy as a means of promoting the interests of the working class, farmers and the poor. Became weak after the split in the party in 1964 that led to the formation of the CPI(M). Significant presence in the states of Kerala, West Bengal, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. Its support base had gradually declined over the years. It secured about 
1.4 per cent votes and 10 seats in the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. Advocates the coming together of all left parties to build a strong left front. Currently supports UPA government from outside.

Nationalist Congress Party (NCP)
Formed in 1999 following a split in the Congress party. Espouses democracy, Gandhian secularism, equity, social justice and federalism. Wants that high offices in government be confined to natural born citizens of the country. A major party in Maharashtra and has a significant presence in Meghalaya, Manipur and Assam. A coalition partner in the state of Maharashtra in alliance with the Congress. Since 2004, a member of the United Progressive Alliance.

Illustration 4
    Which two kinds of politicla parties are found in democracies that follow a federal system?
Solution
    National parties and state parties

Illustration 5
    Who registers the political parties of India?
Solution
    Election Commision

Illustration 6
    Which parties get special facilities from election commission?
Solution
    Large and established parties

Illustration 7
    Who can use the election symbol given to a party by election commission?
Solution
    Only the official candidates of the party.

State Parties :
‘State parties’. are commonly referred to as regional parties. Yet these parties need not be regional in their ideology or outlook. Some of these parties are all India parties that happen to have succeeded only in some states.
Parties like the Samajwadi Party, Samata Party and Rashtriya Janata Dal have national level political organisation with units in several state and Some of these parties like Biju Janata Dal, Sikkim Democratic Front and Mizo National Front are conscious about their State identity.
Over the last three decades, the number and strength of these parties has expanded. No one national party is able to secure on its own a majority in Lok Sabha. As a result, the national parties are compelled to form alliances with State parties.
Since 1996, nearly every one of the State parties has got an opportunity to be a part of one or the other national level coalition government. This has contributed to the strengthening of federalism and democracy in our country.

Challenges to political parties :
Since parties are the most visible face of democracy, it is natural that people blame parties for whatever is wrong with the working of democracy. All over the world, people express strong dissatisfaction with the failure of political parties to perform their functions well. This is the case in our country too. Popular dissatisfaction and criticism has focussed on four problem areas in the working of political parties. 
Political parties need to face and overcome these challenges in order to remain effective instruments of democracy.

Lack of Internal Democracy with in Parties
All over the world there is a tendency in political parties towards the concentration of power in one or few leaders at the top.
Parties do not keep membership registers, do not hold organisational meetings, and do not conduct internal elections regularly. Ordinary members of the party do not get sufficient information on what happens inside the party.
They do not have the means or the connections needed to influence the decisions.
As a result the leaders assume greater power to make decisions in the name of the party.
More than loyalty to party principles and policies, personal loyalty to the leader becomes more important.
Dynastic Succession 
Since most political parties do not practice open and transparent procedures for their functioning, there are very few ways for an ordinary worker to rise to the top in a party.
Those who happen to be the leaders are in a position of unfair advantage to favour people close to them or even their family members.
In many parties, the top positions are always controlled by members of one family.
This is unfair to other members of that party.

Money and Muscle Power
The third challenge is about the growing role of money and muscle power in parties, especially during elections. Since parties are focussed only on winnning elections, they tend to use short-cuts to win elections. They tend to nominate those candidates who have or can raise lots of money.
Rich people and companies who give funds to the parties tend to have influence on the policies and decisions of the party.
Parties support criminals who can win elections. Democrats all over the world are worried about the increasing role of rich people and big companies in democratic politics.
    
No Meaningful Choice
The fourth challenge is that very often parties do not seem to offer a meaningful choice to the voters.
In order to offer meaningful choice, parties must be significantly different In recent years there has been a decline in the ideological differences among parties in most parts of the world.
For example, 
The difference between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party in Britain is very little. They agree on more fundamental aspects but differ only in details on how policies are to be framed and implemented.
In our country too, the differences among all the major parties on the economic policies have reduced. 
Sometimes people cannot even elect very different leaders either, because the same set of leaders keep shifting from one party to another.

 

Which are the major national and regional parties in India?

National Political Parties :
There are some countrywide parties, which are called ‘national parties’. These parties have their units in various states. But by and large all these units follow the same policies, programmes and strategy that is decided at the national level.
Every party in the country has to register with the Election Commission. While the Commission treats all parties equally, it offers some special facilities to large and established parties. These parties are given a unique symbol – only the official candidates of that party can use that election symbol.
Parties that get this privilege and some other special facilities are ‘recognised’ by the Election Commission for this purpose. That is why these parties are called, ‘recognised political parties’. The Election Commission has laid down detailed criteria of the proportion of votes and seats that a party must get in order to be a recognised party.
A party that secures at least 6 per cent of the total votes in an election to the Legislative Assembly of a State and wins at least two seats is recognised as a State party. 
A party that secures at least six per cent of total votes in Lok Sabha elections or Assembly elections in four States and wins at least four seats in the Lok Sabha is recognised as a national party.
According to this classification, there were six national recognised parties in the country in 2006.

Indian National Congress (INC)
Popularly known as the Congress Party. One of the oldest parties of the world. Founded in 1885 and has experienced many splits. Played a dominant role in Indian politics at the national and state level for several decades after India’s Independence. Under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru, the party sought to build a modern secular democratic republic in India. Ruling partner at the centre till 1977 and then from 1980 to 1989. After 1989, its support declined, but it continues to be present throughout the country, cutting across social divisions. A centrist party (neither rightist nor leftist) in its ideological  orientation, the party supports secularism and welfare of weaker sections and minorities. Supports new economic reforms but with a human face. Emerged as the largest party with 145 members in the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004. Currently leads the ruling United Progressive Alliance coalition government at the Centre.

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
Founded in 1980 by reviving the erstwhile Bharatiya Jana Sangh. Wants to build a strong and modern India by drawing inspiration from India’s ancient culture and values. Cultural nationalism (or ‘Hindutva’) is an important element in its conception of Indian nationhood and politics. Wants full territorial and political integration of Jammu and Kashmir with India, a uniform civil code for all people living in the country irrespective of religion, and ban on religious conversions. Its support base increased substantially in the 1990s. Earlier limited to north and west and to urban areas, the party expanded its support in the south, east, the north-east and to rural areas. Came to power in 1998 as the leader of the National Democratic Alliance including several state and regional parties. Lost elections in 2004 and is the principal opposition party in the Lok Sabha.

Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)
Formed in 1984 under the leadership of Kanshi Ram. Seeks to represent and secure power for the bahujan samaj which includes the dalits, adivasis, OBCs and religious minorities. Draws inspiration from the ideas and teachings of Sahu Maharaj, Mahatma Phule, Periyar Ramaswami Naicker and Babasaheb Ambedkar. Stands for the cause of securing the interests and welfare of the dalits and oppressed people. It has its main base in the state of Uttar Pradesh and substantial presence in neighbouring states like Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Delhi and Punjab. Formed government in Uttar Pradesh several times by taking the support of different parties at different times. In the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004, it polled about 5 per cent votes and secured 19 seats in the Lok Sabha.

Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M)
Founded in 1964. Believes in Marxism-Leninism. Supports socialism, secularism and democracy and opposes imperialism and communalism. Accepts democratic elections as a useful and helpful means for securing the objective of socio-economic justice in India, Enjoys strong support in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, especially among the poor, factory workers, farmers, agricultural labourers and the intelligentsia. Critical of the new economic policies that allow free flow of foreign capital and goods into the country. Has been in power in West Bengal without a break for 30 years. In 2004 elections, it won about 6 per cent of votes and 43 seats in the Lok Sabha. Currently supports the UPA government from outside, without joining the government.

Communist Party of India (CPI)
Formed in 1925. Believes in Marxism-Leninism, secularism and democracy. Opposed to the forces of secessionism and communalism. Accepts parliamentary democracy as a means of promoting the interests of the working class, farmers and the poor. Became weak after the split in the party in 1964 that led to the formation of the CPI(M). Significant presence in the states of Kerala, West Bengal, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. Its support base had gradually declined over the years. It secured about 
1.4 per cent votes and 10 seats in the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. Advocates the coming together of all left parties to build a strong left front. Currently supports UPA government from outside.

Nationalist Congress Party (NCP)
Formed in 1999 following a split in the Congress party. Espouses democracy, Gandhian secularism, equity, social justice and federalism. Wants that high offices in government be confined to natural born citizens of the country. A major party in Maharashtra and has a significant presence in Meghalaya, Manipur and Assam. A coalition partner in the state of Maharashtra in alliance with the Congress. Since 2004, a member of the United Progressive Alliance.

Illustration 4
    Which two kinds of politicla parties are found in democracies that follow a federal system?
Solution
    National parties and state parties

Illustration 5
    Who registers the political parties of India?
Solution
    Election Commision

Illustration 6
    Which parties get special facilities from election commission?
Solution
    Large and established parties

Illustration 7
    Who can use the election symbol given to a party by election commission?
Solution
    Only the official candidates of the party.

State Parties :
‘State parties’. are commonly referred to as regional parties. Yet these parties need not be regional in their ideology or outlook. Some of these parties are all India parties that happen to have succeeded only in some states.
Parties like the Samajwadi Party, Samata Party and Rashtriya Janata Dal have national level political organisation with units in several state and Some of these parties like Biju Janata Dal, Sikkim Democratic Front and Mizo National Front are conscious about their State identity.
Over the last three decades, the number and strength of these parties has expanded. No one national party is able to secure on its own a majority in Lok Sabha. As a result, the national parties are compelled to form alliances with State parties.
Since 1996, nearly every one of the State parties has got an opportunity to be a part of one or the other national level coalition government. This has contributed to the strengthening of federalism and democracy in our country.

Challenges to political parties :
Since parties are the most visible face of democracy, it is natural that people blame parties for whatever is wrong with the working of democracy. All over the world, people express strong dissatisfaction with the failure of political parties to perform their functions well. This is the case in our country too. Popular dissatisfaction and criticism has focussed on four problem areas in the working of political parties. 
Political parties need to face and overcome these challenges in order to remain effective instruments of democracy.

Lack of Internal Democracy with in Parties
All over the world there is a tendency in political parties towards the concentration of power in one or few leaders at the top.
Parties do not keep membership registers, do not hold organisational meetings, and do not conduct internal elections regularly. Ordinary members of the party do not get sufficient information on what happens inside the party.
They do not have the means or the connections needed to influence the decisions.
As a result the leaders assume greater power to make decisions in the name of the party.
More than loyalty to party principles and policies, personal loyalty to the leader becomes more important.
Dynastic Succession 
Since most political parties do not practice open and transparent procedures for their functioning, there are very few ways for an ordinary worker to rise to the top in a party.
Those who happen to be the leaders are in a position of unfair advantage to favour people close to them or even their family members.
In many parties, the top positions are always controlled by members of one family.
This is unfair to other members of that party.

Money and Muscle Power
The third challenge is about the growing role of money and muscle power in parties, especially during elections. Since parties are focussed only on winnning elections, they tend to use short-cuts to win elections. They tend to nominate those candidates who have or can raise lots of money.
Rich people and companies who give funds to the parties tend to have influence on the policies and decisions of the party.
Parties support criminals who can win elections. Democrats all over the world are worried about the increasing role of rich people and big companies in democratic politics.
    
No Meaningful Choice
The fourth challenge is that very often parties do not seem to offer a meaningful choice to the voters.
In order to offer meaningful choice, parties must be significantly different In recent years there has been a decline in the ideological differences among parties in most parts of the world.
For example, 
The difference between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party in Britain is very little. They agree on more fundamental aspects but differ only in details on how policies are to be framed and implemented.
In our country too, the differences among all the major parties on the economic policies have reduced. 
Sometimes people cannot even elect very different leaders either, because the same set of leaders keep shifting from one party to another.

 

Which are the major national and regional parties in India?

National Political Parties :
There are some countrywide parties, which are called ‘national parties’. These parties have their units in various states. But by and large all these units follow the same policies, programmes and strategy that is decided at the national level.
Every party in the country has to register with the Election Commission. While the Commission treats all parties equally, it offers some special facilities to large and established parties. These parties are given a unique symbol – only the official candidates of that party can use that election symbol.
Parties that get this privilege and some other special facilities are ‘recognised’ by the Election Commission for this purpose. That is why these parties are called, ‘recognised political parties’. The Election Commission has laid down detailed criteria of the proportion of votes and seats that a party must get in order to be a recognised party.
A party that secures at least 6 per cent of the total votes in an election to the Legislative Assembly of a State and wins at least two seats is recognised as a State party. 
A party that secures at least six per cent of total votes in Lok Sabha elections or Assembly elections in four States and wins at least four seats in the Lok Sabha is recognised as a national party.
According to this classification, there were six national recognised parties in the country in 2006.

Indian National Congress (INC)
Popularly known as the Congress Party. One of the oldest parties of the world. Founded in 1885 and has experienced many splits. Played a dominant role in Indian politics at the national and state level for several decades after India’s Independence. Under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru, the party sought to build a modern secular democratic republic in India. Ruling partner at the centre till 1977 and then from 1980 to 1989. After 1989, its support declined, but it continues to be present throughout the country, cutting across social divisions. A centrist party (neither rightist nor leftist) in its ideological  orientation, the party supports secularism and welfare of weaker sections and minorities. Supports new economic reforms but with a human face. Emerged as the largest party with 145 members in the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004. Currently leads the ruling United Progressive Alliance coalition government at the Centre.

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
Founded in 1980 by reviving the erstwhile Bharatiya Jana Sangh. Wants to build a strong and modern India by drawing inspiration from India’s ancient culture and values. Cultural nationalism (or ‘Hindutva’) is an important element in its conception of Indian nationhood and politics. Wants full territorial and political integration of Jammu and Kashmir with India, a uniform civil code for all people living in the country irrespective of religion, and ban on religious conversions. Its support base increased substantially in the 1990s. Earlier limited to north and west and to urban areas, the party expanded its support in the south, east, the north-east and to rural areas. Came to power in 1998 as the leader of the National Democratic Alliance including several state and regional parties. Lost elections in 2004 and is the principal opposition party in the Lok Sabha.

Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)
Formed in 1984 under the leadership of Kanshi Ram. Seeks to represent and secure power for the bahujan samaj which includes the dalits, adivasis, OBCs and religious minorities. Draws inspiration from the ideas and teachings of Sahu Maharaj, Mahatma Phule, Periyar Ramaswami Naicker and Babasaheb Ambedkar. Stands for the cause of securing the interests and welfare of the dalits and oppressed people. It has its main base in the state of Uttar Pradesh and substantial presence in neighbouring states like Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Delhi and Punjab. Formed government in Uttar Pradesh several times by taking the support of different parties at different times. In the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004, it polled about 5 per cent votes and secured 19 seats in the Lok Sabha.

Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M)
Founded in 1964. Believes in Marxism-Leninism. Supports socialism, secularism and democracy and opposes imperialism and communalism. Accepts democratic elections as a useful and helpful means for securing the objective of socio-economic justice in India, Enjoys strong support in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, especially among the poor, factory workers, farmers, agricultural labourers and the intelligentsia. Critical of the new economic policies that allow free flow of foreign capital and goods into the country. Has been in power in West Bengal without a break for 30 years. In 2004 elections, it won about 6 per cent of votes and 43 seats in the Lok Sabha. Currently supports the UPA government from outside, without joining the government.

Communist Party of India (CPI)
Formed in 1925. Believes in Marxism-Leninism, secularism and democracy. Opposed to the forces of secessionism and communalism. Accepts parliamentary democracy as a means of promoting the interests of the working class, farmers and the poor. Became weak after the split in the party in 1964 that led to the formation of the CPI(M). Significant presence in the states of Kerala, West Bengal, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. Its support base had gradually declined over the years. It secured about 
1.4 per cent votes and 10 seats in the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. Advocates the coming together of all left parties to build a strong left front. Currently supports UPA government from outside.

Nationalist Congress Party (NCP)
Formed in 1999 following a split in the Congress party. Espouses democracy, Gandhian secularism, equity, social justice and federalism. Wants that high offices in government be confined to natural born citizens of the country. A major party in Maharashtra and has a significant presence in Meghalaya, Manipur and Assam. A coalition partner in the state of Maharashtra in alliance with the Congress. Since 2004, a member of the United Progressive Alliance.

Illustration 4
    Which two kinds of politicla parties are found in democracies that follow a federal system?
Solution
    National parties and state parties

Illustration 5
    Who registers the political parties of India?
Solution
    Election Commision

Illustration 6
    Which parties get special facilities from election commission?
Solution
    Large and established parties

Illustration 7
    Who can use the election symbol given to a party by election commission?
Solution
    Only the official candidates of the party.

State Parties :
‘State parties’. are commonly referred to as regional parties. Yet these parties need not be regional in their ideology or outlook. Some of these parties are all India parties that happen to have succeeded only in some states.
Parties like the Samajwadi Party, Samata Party and Rashtriya Janata Dal have national level political organisation with units in several state and Some of these parties like Biju Janata Dal, Sikkim Democratic Front and Mizo National Front are conscious about their State identity.
Over the last three decades, the number and strength of these parties has expanded. No one national party is able to secure on its own a majority in Lok Sabha. As a result, the national parties are compelled to form alliances with State parties.
Since 1996, nearly every one of the State parties has got an opportunity to be a part of one or the other national level coalition government. This has contributed to the strengthening of federalism and democracy in our country.

Challenges to political parties :
Since parties are the most visible face of democracy, it is natural that people blame parties for whatever is wrong with the working of democracy. All over the world, people express strong dissatisfaction with the failure of political parties to perform their functions well. This is the case in our country too. Popular dissatisfaction and criticism has focussed on four problem areas in the working of political parties. 
Political parties need to face and overcome these challenges in order to remain effective instruments of democracy.

Lack of Internal Democracy with in Parties
All over the world there is a tendency in political parties towards the concentration of power in one or few leaders at the top.
Parties do not keep membership registers, do not hold organisational meetings, and do not conduct internal elections regularly. Ordinary members of the party do not get sufficient information on what happens inside the party.
They do not have the means or the connections needed to influence the decisions.
As a result the leaders assume greater power to make decisions in the name of the party.
More than loyalty to party principles and policies, personal loyalty to the leader becomes more important.
Dynastic Succession 
Since most political parties do not practice open and transparent procedures for their functioning, there are very few ways for an ordinary worker to rise to the top in a party.
Those who happen to be the leaders are in a position of unfair advantage to favour people close to them or even their family members.
In many parties, the top positions are always controlled by members of one family.
This is unfair to other members of that party.

Money and Muscle Power
The third challenge is about the growing role of money and muscle power in parties, especially during elections. Since parties are focussed only on winnning elections, they tend to use short-cuts to win elections. They tend to nominate those candidates who have or can raise lots of money.
Rich people and companies who give funds to the parties tend to have influence on the policies and decisions of the party.
Parties support criminals who can win elections. Democrats all over the world are worried about the increasing role of rich people and big companies in democratic politics.
    
No Meaningful Choice
The fourth challenge is that very often parties do not seem to offer a meaningful choice to the voters.
In order to offer meaningful choice, parties must be significantly different In recent years there has been a decline in the ideological differences among parties in most parts of the world.
For example, 
The difference between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party in Britain is very little. They agree on more fundamental aspects but differ only in details on how policies are to be framed and implemented.
In our country too, the differences among all the major parties on the economic policies have reduced. 
Sometimes people cannot even elect very different leaders either, because the same set of leaders keep shifting from one party to another.

 

Which are the major national and regional parties in India?

National Political Parties :
There are some countrywide parties, which are called ‘national parties’. These parties have their units in various states. But by and large all these units follow the same policies, programmes and strategy that is decided at the national level.
Every party in the country has to register with the Election Commission. While the Commission treats all parties equally, it offers some special facilities to large and established parties. These parties are given a unique symbol – only the official candidates of that party can use that election symbol.
Parties that get this privilege and some other special facilities are ‘recognised’ by the Election Commission for this purpose. That is why these parties are called, ‘recognised political parties’. The Election Commission has laid down detailed criteria of the proportion of votes and seats that a party must get in order to be a recognised party.
A party that secures at least 6 per cent of the total votes in an election to the Legislative Assembly of a State and wins at least two seats is recognised as a State party. 
A party that secures at least six per cent of total votes in Lok Sabha elections or Assembly elections in four States and wins at least four seats in the Lok Sabha is recognised as a national party.
According to this classification, there were six national recognised parties in the country in 2006.

Indian National Congress (INC)
Popularly known as the Congress Party. One of the oldest parties of the world. Founded in 1885 and has experienced many splits. Played a dominant role in Indian politics at the national and state level for several decades after India’s Independence. Under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru, the party sought to build a modern secular democratic republic in India. Ruling partner at the centre till 1977 and then from 1980 to 1989. After 1989, its support declined, but it continues to be present throughout the country, cutting across social divisions. A centrist party (neither rightist nor leftist) in its ideological  orientation, the party supports secularism and welfare of weaker sections and minorities. Supports new economic reforms but with a human face. Emerged as the largest party with 145 members in the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004. Currently leads the ruling United Progressive Alliance coalition government at the Centre.

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
Founded in 1980 by reviving the erstwhile Bharatiya Jana Sangh. Wants to build a strong and modern India by drawing inspiration from India’s ancient culture and values. Cultural nationalism (or ‘Hindutva’) is an important element in its conception of Indian nationhood and politics. Wants full territorial and political integration of Jammu and Kashmir with India, a uniform civil code for all people living in the country irrespective of religion, and ban on religious conversions. Its support base increased substantially in the 1990s. Earlier limited to north and west and to urban areas, the party expanded its support in the south, east, the north-east and to rural areas. Came to power in 1998 as the leader of the National Democratic Alliance including several state and regional parties. Lost elections in 2004 and is the principal opposition party in the Lok Sabha.

Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)
Formed in 1984 under the leadership of Kanshi Ram. Seeks to represent and secure power for the bahujan samaj which includes the dalits, adivasis, OBCs and religious minorities. Draws inspiration from the ideas and teachings of Sahu Maharaj, Mahatma Phule, Periyar Ramaswami Naicker and Babasaheb Ambedkar. Stands for the cause of securing the interests and welfare of the dalits and oppressed people. It has its main base in the state of Uttar Pradesh and substantial presence in neighbouring states like Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Delhi and Punjab. Formed government in Uttar Pradesh several times by taking the support of different parties at different times. In the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004, it polled about 5 per cent votes and secured 19 seats in the Lok Sabha.

Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M)
Founded in 1964. Believes in Marxism-Leninism. Supports socialism, secularism and democracy and opposes imperialism and communalism. Accepts democratic elections as a useful and helpful means for securing the objective of socio-economic justice in India, Enjoys strong support in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, especially among the poor, factory workers, farmers, agricultural labourers and the intelligentsia. Critical of the new economic policies that allow free flow of foreign capital and goods into the country. Has been in power in West Bengal without a break for 30 years. In 2004 elections, it won about 6 per cent of votes and 43 seats in the Lok Sabha. Currently supports the UPA government from outside, without joining the government.

Communist Party of India (CPI)
Formed in 1925. Believes in Marxism-Leninism, secularism and democracy. Opposed to the forces of secessionism and communalism. Accepts parliamentary democracy as a means of promoting the interests of the working class, farmers and the poor. Became weak after the split in the party in 1964 that led to the formation of the CPI(M). Significant presence in the states of Kerala, West Bengal, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. Its support base had gradually declined over the years. It secured about 
1.4 per cent votes and 10 seats in the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. Advocates the coming together of all left parties to build a strong left front. Currently supports UPA government from outside.

Nationalist Congress Party (NCP)
Formed in 1999 following a split in the Congress party. Espouses democracy, Gandhian secularism, equity, social justice and federalism. Wants that high offices in government be confined to natural born citizens of the country. A major party in Maharashtra and has a significant presence in Meghalaya, Manipur and Assam. A coalition partner in the state of Maharashtra in alliance with the Congress. Since 2004, a member of the United Progressive Alliance.

Illustration 4
    Which two kinds of politicla parties are found in democracies that follow a federal system?
Solution
    National parties and state parties

Illustration 5
    Who registers the political parties of India?
Solution
    Election Commision

Illustration 6
    Which parties get special facilities from election commission?
Solution
    Large and established parties

Illustration 7
    Who can use the election symbol given to a party by election commission?
Solution
    Only the official candidates of the party.

State Parties :
‘State parties’. are commonly referred to as regional parties. Yet these parties need not be regional in their ideology or outlook. Some of these parties are all India parties that happen to have succeeded only in some states.
Parties like the Samajwadi Party, Samata Party and Rashtriya Janata Dal have national level political organisation with units in several state and Some of these parties like Biju Janata Dal, Sikkim Democratic Front and Mizo National Front are conscious about their State identity.
Over the last three decades, the number and strength of these parties has expanded. No one national party is able to secure on its own a majority in Lok Sabha. As a result, the national parties are compelled to form alliances with State parties.
Since 1996, nearly every one of the State parties has got an opportunity to be a part of one or the other national level coalition government. This has contributed to the strengthening of federalism and democracy in our country.

Challenges to political parties :
Since parties are the most visible face of democracy, it is natural that people blame parties for whatever is wrong with the working of democracy. All over the world, people express strong dissatisfaction with the failure of political parties to perform their functions well. This is the case in our country too. Popular dissatisfaction and criticism has focussed on four problem areas in the working of political parties. 
Political parties need to face and overcome these challenges in order to remain effective instruments of democracy.

Lack of Internal Democracy with in Parties
All over the world there is a tendency in political parties towards the concentration of power in one or few leaders at the top.
Parties do not keep membership registers, do not hold organisational meetings, and do not conduct internal elections regularly. Ordinary members of the party do not get sufficient information on what happens inside the party.
They do not have the means or the connections needed to influence the decisions.
As a result the leaders assume greater power to make decisions in the name of the party.
More than loyalty to party principles and policies, personal loyalty to the leader becomes more important.
Dynastic Succession 
Since most political parties do not practice open and transparent procedures for their functioning, there are very few ways for an ordinary worker to rise to the top in a party.
Those who happen to be the leaders are in a position of unfair advantage to favour people close to them or even their family members.
In many parties, the top positions are always controlled by members of one family.
This is unfair to other members of that party.

Money and Muscle Power
The third challenge is about the growing role of money and muscle power in parties, especially during elections. Since parties are focussed only on winnning elections, they tend to use short-cuts to win elections. They tend to nominate those candidates who have or can raise lots of money.
Rich people and companies who give funds to the parties tend to have influence on the policies and decisions of the party.
Parties support criminals who can win elections. Democrats all over the world are worried about the increasing role of rich people and big companies in democratic politics.
    
No Meaningful Choice
The fourth challenge is that very often parties do not seem to offer a meaningful choice to the voters.
In order to offer meaningful choice, parties must be significantly different In recent years there has been a decline in the ideological differences among parties in most parts of the world.
For example, 
The difference between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party in Britain is very little. They agree on more fundamental aspects but differ only in details on how policies are to be framed and implemented.
In our country too, the differences among all the major parties on the economic policies have reduced. 
Sometimes people cannot even elect very different leaders either, because the same set of leaders keep shifting from one party to another.

 

Which are the major national and regional parties in India?

National Political Parties :
There are some countrywide parties, which are called ‘national parties’. These parties have their units in various states. But by and large all these units follow the same policies, programmes and strategy that is decided at the national level.
Every party in the country has to register with the Election Commission. While the Commission treats all parties equally, it offers some special facilities to large and established parties. These parties are given a unique symbol – only the official candidates of that party can use that election symbol.
Parties that get this privilege and some other special facilities are ‘recognised’ by the Election Commission for this purpose. That is why these parties are called, ‘recognised political parties’. The Election Commission has laid down detailed criteria of the proportion of votes and seats that a party must get in order to be a recognised party.
A party that secures at least 6 per cent of the total votes in an election to the Legislative Assembly of a State and wins at least two seats is recognised as a State party. 
A party that secures at least six per cent of total votes in Lok Sabha elections or Assembly elections in four States and wins at least four seats in the Lok Sabha is recognised as a national party.
According to this classification, there were six national recognised parties in the country in 2006.

Indian National Congress (INC)
Popularly known as the Congress Party. One of the oldest parties of the world. Founded in 1885 and has experienced many splits. Played a dominant role in Indian politics at the national and state level for several decades after India’s Independence. Under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru, the party sought to build a modern secular democratic republic in India. Ruling partner at the centre till 1977 and then from 1980 to 1989. After 1989, its support declined, but it continues to be present throughout the country, cutting across social divisions. A centrist party (neither rightist nor leftist) in its ideological  orientation, the party supports secularism and welfare of weaker sections and minorities. Supports new economic reforms but with a human face. Emerged as the largest party with 145 members in the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004. Currently leads the ruling United Progressive Alliance coalition government at the Centre.

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
Founded in 1980 by reviving the erstwhile Bharatiya Jana Sangh. Wants to build a strong and modern India by drawing inspiration from India’s ancient culture and values. Cultural nationalism (or ‘Hindutva’) is an important element in its conception of Indian nationhood and politics. Wants full territorial and political integration of Jammu and Kashmir with India, a uniform civil code for all people living in the country irrespective of religion, and ban on religious conversions. Its support base increased substantially in the 1990s. Earlier limited to north and west and to urban areas, the party expanded its support in the south, east, the north-east and to rural areas. Came to power in 1998 as the leader of the National Democratic Alliance including several state and regional parties. Lost elections in 2004 and is the principal opposition party in the Lok Sabha.

Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)
Formed in 1984 under the leadership of Kanshi Ram. Seeks to represent and secure power for the bahujan samaj which includes the dalits, adivasis, OBCs and religious minorities. Draws inspiration from the ideas and teachings of Sahu Maharaj, Mahatma Phule, Periyar Ramaswami Naicker and Babasaheb Ambedkar. Stands for the cause of securing the interests and welfare of the dalits and oppressed people. It has its main base in the state of Uttar Pradesh and substantial presence in neighbouring states like Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Delhi and Punjab. Formed government in Uttar Pradesh several times by taking the support of different parties at different times. In the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004, it polled about 5 per cent votes and secured 19 seats in the Lok Sabha.

Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M)
Founded in 1964. Believes in Marxism-Leninism. Supports socialism, secularism and democracy and opposes imperialism and communalism. Accepts democratic elections as a useful and helpful means for securing the objective of socio-economic justice in India, Enjoys strong support in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, especially among the poor, factory workers, farmers, agricultural labourers and the intelligentsia. Critical of the new economic policies that allow free flow of foreign capital and goods into the country. Has been in power in West Bengal without a break for 30 years. In 2004 elections, it won about 6 per cent of votes and 43 seats in the Lok Sabha. Currently supports the UPA government from outside, without joining the government.

Communist Party of India (CPI)
Formed in 1925. Believes in Marxism-Leninism, secularism and democracy. Opposed to the forces of secessionism and communalism. Accepts parliamentary democracy as a means of promoting the interests of the working class, farmers and the poor. Became weak after the split in the party in 1964 that led to the formation of the CPI(M). Significant presence in the states of Kerala, West Bengal, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. Its support base had gradually declined over the years. It secured about 
1.4 per cent votes and 10 seats in the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. Advocates the coming together of all left parties to build a strong left front. Currently supports UPA government from outside.

Nationalist Congress Party (NCP)
Formed in 1999 following a split in the Congress party. Espouses democracy, Gandhian secularism, equity, social justice and federalism. Wants that high offices in government be confined to natural born citizens of the country. A major party in Maharashtra and has a significant presence in Meghalaya, Manipur and Assam. A coalition partner in the state of Maharashtra in alliance with the Congress. Since 2004, a member of the United Progressive Alliance.

Illustration 4
    Which two kinds of politicla parties are found in democracies that follow a federal system?
Solution
    National parties and state parties

Illustration 5
    Who registers the political parties of India?
Solution
    Election Commision

Illustration 6
    Which parties get special facilities from election commission?
Solution
    Large and established parties

Illustration 7
    Who can use the election symbol given to a party by election commission?
Solution
    Only the official candidates of the party.

State Parties :
‘State parties’. are commonly referred to as regional parties. Yet these parties need not be regional in their ideology or outlook. Some of these parties are all India parties that happen to have succeeded only in some states.
Parties like the Samajwadi Party, Samata Party and Rashtriya Janata Dal have national level political organisation with units in several state and Some of these parties like Biju Janata Dal, Sikkim Democratic Front and Mizo National Front are conscious about their State identity.
Over the last three decades, the number and strength of these parties has expanded. No one national party is able to secure on its own a majority in Lok Sabha. As a result, the national parties are compelled to form alliances with State parties.
Since 1996, nearly every one of the State parties has got an opportunity to be a part of one or the other national level coalition government. This has contributed to the strengthening of federalism and democracy in our country.

Challenges to political parties :
Since parties are the most visible face of democracy, it is natural that people blame parties for whatever is wrong with the working of democracy. All over the world, people express strong dissatisfaction with the failure of political parties to perform their functions well. This is the case in our country too. Popular dissatisfaction and criticism has focussed on four problem areas in the working of political parties. 
Political parties need to face and overcome these challenges in order to remain effective instruments of democracy.

Lack of Internal Democracy with in Parties
All over the world there is a tendency in political parties towards the concentration of power in one or few leaders at the top.
Parties do not keep membership registers, do not hold organisational meetings, and do not conduct internal elections regularly. Ordinary members of the party do not get sufficient information on what happens inside the party.
They do not have the means or the connections needed to influence the decisions.
As a result the leaders assume greater power to make decisions in the name of the party.
More than loyalty to party principles and policies, personal loyalty to the leader becomes more important.
Dynastic Succession 
Since most political parties do not practice open and transparent procedures for their functioning, there are very few ways for an ordinary worker to rise to the top in a party.
Those who happen to be the leaders are in a position of unfair advantage to favour people close to them or even their family members.
In many parties, the top positions are always controlled by members of one family.
This is unfair to other members of that party.

Money and Muscle Power
The third challenge is about the growing role of money and muscle power in parties, especially during elections. Since parties are focussed only on winnning elections, they tend to use short-cuts to win elections. They tend to nominate those candidates who have or can raise lots of money.
Rich people and companies who give funds to the parties tend to have influence on the policies and decisions of the party.
Parties support criminals who can win elections. Democrats all over the world are worried about the increasing role of rich people and big companies in democratic politics.
    
No Meaningful Choice
The fourth challenge is that very often parties do not seem to offer a meaningful choice to the voters.
In order to offer meaningful choice, parties must be significantly different In recent years there has been a decline in the ideological differences among parties in most parts of the world.
For example, 
The difference between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party in Britain is very little. They agree on more fundamental aspects but differ only in details on how policies are to be framed and implemented.
In our country too, the differences among all the major parties on the economic policies have reduced. 
Sometimes people cannot even elect very different leaders either, because the same set of leaders keep shifting from one party to another.

 

Which are the major national and regional parties in India?

National Political Parties :
There are some countrywide parties, which are called ‘national parties’. These parties have their units in various states. But by and large all these units follow the same policies, programmes and strategy that is decided at the national level.
Every party in the country has to register with the Election Commission. While the Commission treats all parties equally, it offers some special facilities to large and established parties. These parties are given a unique symbol – only the official candidates of that party can use that election symbol.
Parties that get this privilege and some other special facilities are ‘recognised’ by the Election Commission for this purpose. That is why these parties are called, ‘recognised political parties’. The Election Commission has laid down detailed criteria of the proportion of votes and seats that a party must get in order to be a recognised party.
A party that secures at least 6 per cent of the total votes in an election to the Legislative Assembly of a State and wins at least two seats is recognised as a State party. 
A party that secures at least six per cent of total votes in Lok Sabha elections or Assembly elections in four States and wins at least four seats in the Lok Sabha is recognised as a national party.
According to this classification, there were six national recognised parties in the country in 2006.

Indian National Congress (INC)
Popularly known as the Congress Party. One of the oldest parties of the world. Founded in 1885 and has experienced many splits. Played a dominant role in Indian politics at the national and state level for several decades after India’s Independence. Under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru, the party sought to build a modern secular democratic republic in India. Ruling partner at the centre till 1977 and then from 1980 to 1989. After 1989, its support declined, but it continues to be present throughout the country, cutting across social divisions. A centrist party (neither rightist nor leftist) in its ideological  orientation, the party supports secularism and welfare of weaker sections and minorities. Supports new economic reforms but with a human face. Emerged as the largest party with 145 members in the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004. Currently leads the ruling United Progressive Alliance coalition government at the Centre.

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
Founded in 1980 by reviving the erstwhile Bharatiya Jana Sangh. Wants to build a strong and modern India by drawing inspiration from India’s ancient culture and values. Cultural nationalism (or ‘Hindutva’) is an important element in its conception of Indian nationhood and politics. Wants full territorial and political integration of Jammu and Kashmir with India, a uniform civil code for all people living in the country irrespective of religion, and ban on religious conversions. Its support base increased substantially in the 1990s. Earlier limited to north and west and to urban areas, the party expanded its support in the south, east, the north-east and to rural areas. Came to power in 1998 as the leader of the National Democratic Alliance including several state and regional parties. Lost elections in 2004 and is the principal opposition party in the Lok Sabha.

Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)
Formed in 1984 under the leadership of Kanshi Ram. Seeks to represent and secure power for the bahujan samaj which includes the dalits, adivasis, OBCs and religious minorities. Draws inspiration from the ideas and teachings of Sahu Maharaj, Mahatma Phule, Periyar Ramaswami Naicker and Babasaheb Ambedkar. Stands for the cause of securing the interests and welfare of the dalits and oppressed people. It has its main base in the state of Uttar Pradesh and substantial presence in neighbouring states like Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Delhi and Punjab. Formed government in Uttar Pradesh several times by taking the support of different parties at different times. In the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004, it polled about 5 per cent votes and secured 19 seats in the Lok Sabha.

Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M)
Founded in 1964. Believes in Marxism-Leninism. Supports socialism, secularism and democracy and opposes imperialism and communalism. Accepts democratic elections as a useful and helpful means for securing the objective of socio-economic justice in India, Enjoys strong support in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, especially among the poor, factory workers, farmers, agricultural labourers and the intelligentsia. Critical of the new economic policies that allow free flow of foreign capital and goods into the country. Has been in power in West Bengal without a break for 30 years. In 2004 elections, it won about 6 per cent of votes and 43 seats in the Lok Sabha. Currently supports the UPA government from outside, without joining the government.

Communist Party of India (CPI)
Formed in 1925. Believes in Marxism-Leninism, secularism and democracy. Opposed to the forces of secessionism and communalism. Accepts parliamentary democracy as a means of promoting the interests of the working class, farmers and the poor. Became weak after the split in the party in 1964 that led to the formation of the CPI(M). Significant presence in the states of Kerala, West Bengal, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. Its support base had gradually declined over the years. It secured about 
1.4 per cent votes and 10 seats in the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. Advocates the coming together of all left parties to build a strong left front. Currently supports UPA government from outside.

Nationalist Congress Party (NCP)
Formed in 1999 following a split in the Congress party. Espouses democracy, Gandhian secularism, equity, social justice and federalism. Wants that high offices in government be confined to natural born citizens of the country. A major party in Maharashtra and has a significant presence in Meghalaya, Manipur and Assam. A coalition partner in the state of Maharashtra in alliance with the Congress. Since 2004, a member of the United Progressive Alliance.

Illustration 4
    Which two kinds of politicla parties are found in democracies that follow a federal system?
Solution
    National parties and state parties

Illustration 5
    Who registers the political parties of India?
Solution
    Election Commision

Illustration 6
    Which parties get special facilities from election commission?
Solution
    Large and established parties

Illustration 7
    Who can use the election symbol given to a party by election commission?
Solution
    Only the official candidates of the party.

State Parties :
‘State parties’. are commonly referred to as regional parties. Yet these parties need not be regional in their ideology or outlook. Some of these parties are all India parties that happen to have succeeded only in some states.
Parties like the Samajwadi Party, Samata Party and Rashtriya Janata Dal have national level political organisation with units in several state and Some of these parties like Biju Janata Dal, Sikkim Democratic Front and Mizo National Front are conscious about their State identity.
Over the last three decades, the number and strength of these parties has expanded. No one national party is able to secure on its own a majority in Lok Sabha. As a result, the national parties are compelled to form alliances with State parties.
Since 1996, nearly every one of the State parties has got an opportunity to be a part of one or the other national level coalition government. This has contributed to the strengthening of federalism and democracy in our country.

Challenges to political parties :
Since parties are the most visible face of democracy, it is natural that people blame parties for whatever is wrong with the working of democracy. All over the world, people express strong dissatisfaction with the failure of political parties to perform their functions well. This is the case in our country too. Popular dissatisfaction and criticism has focussed on four problem areas in the working of political parties. 
Political parties need to face and overcome these challenges in order to remain effective instruments of democracy.

Lack of Internal Democracy with in Parties
All over the world there is a tendency in political parties towards the concentration of power in one or few leaders at the top.
Parties do not keep membership registers, do not hold organisational meetings, and do not conduct internal elections regularly. Ordinary members of the party do not get sufficient information on what happens inside the party.
They do not have the means or the connections needed to influence the decisions.
As a result the leaders assume greater power to make decisions in the name of the party.
More than loyalty to party principles and policies, personal loyalty to the leader becomes more important.
Dynastic Succession 
Since most political parties do not practice open and transparent procedures for their functioning, there are very few ways for an ordinary worker to rise to the top in a party.
Those who happen to be the leaders are in a position of unfair advantage to favour people close to them or even their family members.
In many parties, the top positions are always controlled by members of one family.
This is unfair to other members of that party.

Money and Muscle Power
The third challenge is about the growing role of money and muscle power in parties, especially during elections. Since parties are focussed only on winnning elections, they tend to use short-cuts to win elections. They tend to nominate those candidates who have or can raise lots of money.
Rich people and companies who give funds to the parties tend to have influence on the policies and decisions of the party.
Parties support criminals who can win elections. Democrats all over the world are worried about the increasing role of rich people and big companies in democratic politics.
    
No Meaningful Choice
The fourth challenge is that very often parties do not seem to offer a meaningful choice to the voters.
In order to offer meaningful choice, parties must be significantly different In recent years there has been a decline in the ideological differences among parties in most parts of the world.
For example, 
The difference between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party in Britain is very little. They agree on more fundamental aspects but differ only in details on how policies are to be framed and implemented.
In our country too, the differences among all the major parties on the economic policies have reduced. 
Sometimes people cannot even elect very different leaders either, because the same set of leaders keep shifting from one party to another.

 

Which are the major national and regional parties in India?

National Political Parties :
There are some countrywide parties, which are called ‘national parties’. These parties have their units in various states. But by and large all these units follow the same policies, programmes and strategy that is decided at the national level.
Every party in the country has to register with the Election Commission. While the Commission treats all parties equally, it offers some special facilities to large and established parties. These parties are given a unique symbol – only the official candidates of that party can use that election symbol.
Parties that get this privilege and some other special facilities are ‘recognised’ by the Election Commission for this purpose. That is why these parties are called, ‘recognised political parties’. The Election Commission has laid down detailed criteria of the proportion of votes and seats that a party must get in order to be a recognised party.
A party that secures at least 6 per cent of the total votes in an election to the Legislative Assembly of a State and wins at least two seats is recognised as a State party. 
A party that secures at least six per cent of total votes in Lok Sabha elections or Assembly elections in four States and wins at least four seats in the Lok Sabha is recognised as a national party.
According to this classification, there were six national recognised parties in the country in 2006.

Indian National Congress (INC)
Popularly known as the Congress Party. One of the oldest parties of the world. Founded in 1885 and has experienced many splits. Played a dominant role in Indian politics at the national and state level for several decades after India’s Independence. Under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru, the party sought to build a modern secular democratic republic in India. Ruling partner at the centre till 1977 and then from 1980 to 1989. After 1989, its support declined, but it continues to be present throughout the country, cutting across social divisions. A centrist party (neither rightist nor leftist) in its ideological  orientation, the party supports secularism and welfare of weaker sections and minorities. Supports new economic reforms but with a human face. Emerged as the largest party with 145 members in the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004. Currently leads the ruling United Progressive Alliance coalition government at the Centre.

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
Founded in 1980 by reviving the erstwhile Bharatiya Jana Sangh. Wants to build a strong and modern India by drawing inspiration from India’s ancient culture and values. Cultural nationalism (or ‘Hindutva’) is an important element in its conception of Indian nationhood and politics. Wants full territorial and political integration of Jammu and Kashmir with India, a uniform civil code for all people living in the country irrespective of religion, and ban on religious conversions. Its support base increased substantially in the 1990s. Earlier limited to north and west and to urban areas, the party expanded its support in the south, east, the north-east and to rural areas. Came to power in 1998 as the leader of the National Democratic Alliance including several state and regional parties. Lost elections in 2004 and is the principal opposition party in the Lok Sabha.

Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)
Formed in 1984 under the leadership of Kanshi Ram. Seeks to represent and secure power for the bahujan samaj which includes the dalits, adivasis, OBCs and religious minorities. Draws inspiration from the ideas and teachings of Sahu Maharaj, Mahatma Phule, Periyar Ramaswami Naicker and Babasaheb Ambedkar. Stands for the cause of securing the interests and welfare of the dalits and oppressed people. It has its main base in the state of Uttar Pradesh and substantial presence in neighbouring states like Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Delhi and Punjab. Formed government in Uttar Pradesh several times by taking the support of different parties at different times. In the Lok Sabha elections held in 2004, it polled about 5 per cent votes and secured 19 seats in the Lok Sabha.

Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M)
Founded in 1964. Believes in Marxism-Leninism. Supports socialism, secularism and democracy and opposes imperialism and communalism. Accepts democratic elections as a useful and helpful means for securing the objective of socio-economic justice in India, Enjoys strong support in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, especially among the poor, factory workers, farmers, agricultural labourers and the intelligentsia. Critical of the new economic policies that allow free flow of foreign capital and goods into the country. Has been in power in West Bengal without a break for 30 years. In 2004 elections, it won about 6 per cent of votes and 43 seats in the Lok Sabha. Currently supports the UPA government from outside, without joining the government.

Communist Party of India (CPI)
Formed in 1925. Believes in Marxism-Leninism, secularism and democracy. Opposed to the forces of secessionism and communalism. Accepts parliamentary democracy as a means of promoting the interests of the working class, farmers and the poor. Became weak after the split in the party in 1964 that led to the formation of the CPI(M). Significant presence in the states of Kerala, West Bengal, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. Its support base had gradually declined over the years. It secured about 
1.4 per cent votes and 10 seats in the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. Advocates the coming together of all left parties to build a strong left front. Currently supports UPA government from outside.

Nationalist Congress Party (NCP)
Formed in 1999 following a split in the Congress party. Espouses democracy, Gandhian secularism, equity, social justice and federalism. Wants that high offices in government be confined to natural born citizens of the country. A major party in Maharashtra and has a significant presence in Meghalaya, Manipur and Assam. A coalition partner in the state of Maharashtra in alliance with the Congress. Since 2004, a member of the United Progressive Alliance.

Illustration 4
    Which two kinds of politicla parties are found in democracies that follow a federal system?
Solution
    National parties and state parties

Illustration 5
    Who registers the political parties of India?
Solution
    Election Commision

Illustration 6
    Which parties get special facilities from election commission?
Solution
    Large and established parties

Illustration 7
    Who can use the election symbol given to a party by election commission?
Solution
    Only the official candidates of the party.

State Parties :
‘State parties’. are commonly referred to as regional parties. Yet these parties need not be regional in their ideology or outlook. Some of these parties are all India parties that happen to have succeeded only in some states.
Parties like the Samajwadi Party, Samata Party and Rashtriya Janata Dal have national level political organisation with units in several state and Some of these parties like Biju Janata Dal, Sikkim Democratic Front and Mizo National Front are conscious about their State identity.
Over the last three decades, the number and strength of these parties has expanded. No one national party is able to secure on its own a majority in Lok Sabha. As a result, the national parties are compelled to form alliances with State parties.
Since 1996, nearly every one of the State parties has got an opportunity to be a part of one or the other national level coalition government. This has contributed to the strengthening of federalism and democracy in our country.

Challenges to political parties :
Since parties are the most visible face of democracy, it is natural that people blame parties for whatever is wrong with the working of democracy. All over the world, people express strong dissatisfaction with the failure of political parties to perform their functions well. This is the case in our country too. Popular dissatisfaction and criticism has focussed on four problem areas in the working of political parties. 
Political parties need to face and overcome these challenges in order to remain effective instruments of democracy.

Lack of Internal Democracy with in Parties
All over the world there is a tendency in political parties towards the concentration of power in one or few leaders at the top.
Parties do not keep membership registers, do not hold organisational meetings, and do not conduct internal elections regularly. Ordinary members of the party do not get sufficient information on what happens inside the party.
They do not have the means or the connections needed to influence the decisions.
As a result the leaders assume greater power to make decisions in the name of the party.
More than loyalty to party principles and policies, personal loyalty to the leader becomes more important.
Dynastic Succession 
Since most political parties do not practice open and transparent procedures for their functioning, there are very few ways for an ordinary worker to rise to the top in a party.
Those who happen to be the leaders are in a position of unfair advantage to favour people close to them or even their family members.
In many parties, the top positions are always controlled by members of one family.
This is unfair to other members of that party.

Money and Muscle Power
The third challenge is about the growing role of money and muscle power in parties, especially during elections. Since parties are focussed only on winnning elections, they tend to use short-cuts to win elections. They tend to nominate those candidates who have or can raise lots of money.
Rich people and companies who give funds to the parties tend to have influence on the policies and decisions of the party.
Parties support criminals who can win elections. Democrats all over the world are worried about the increasing role of rich people and big companies in democratic politics.
    
No Meaningful Choice
The fourth challenge is that very often parties do not seem to offer a meaningful choice to the voters.
In order to offer meaningful choice, parties must be significantly different In recent years there has been a decline in the ideological differences among parties in most parts of the world.
For example, 
The difference between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party in Britain is very little. They agree on more fundamental aspects but differ only in details on how policies are to be framed and implemented.
In our country too, the differences among all the major parties on the economic policies have reduced. 
Sometimes people cannot even elect very different leaders either, because the same set of leaders keep shifting from one party to another.

 

What outcomes can one reasonably expect of democracies?

INTRODUCTION : 
Now it is a proved fact that Democracy is the best form of government so far. Still democracy is facing several kinds of problems but generally it is capable of accommodation and adjustments. The democracy too like any other form of governance have certain good and evil features. In this topic we will study how the democratic government is beneficial for its citizens and what kind of problems country faces because of this kind of set up. In a democracy people blame the government for various failures but at the same time want that it should prevail in the country. Thus democracy is always at the test, as it keeps on facing several challenges. We will study that if democracy prevails how it will affect the citizens of the country.

How do we assess democracy’s outcomes? 
    Democracy is better because it:
    ·    Promotes equality among citizens;
    ·    Enhances the dignity of the individual;
    ·    Improves the quality of decision-making;
    ·    Provides a method to resolve conflicts; and
    ·    Allows room to correct mistakes.

When we talk to people around us, most of them support democracy against other alternatives, such as rule by a monarch or military or religious leaders. But not so many of them would be satisfied with the democracy in practice.

So we face a dilemma: democracy is seen to be good in principle, but felt to be not so good in its practice. This dilemma invites us to think hard about the outcomes of democracy. Do we prefer democracy only for moral reasons, or prudential reasons.

COMMON FEATURES
    ·    formal constitutions
    ·    they hold elections
    ·    they have parties
    ·    they guarantee rights of citizens

DIFFERENT FEATURES
    ·    in terms of their social situations
    ·    their economic achievements
    ·    their cultures
    ·    out interest in and fascination for democracy often pushes us into taking a position that democracy can address all socio-economic and political               problems. If some of our expectations are not met, we start blaming the idea of democracy.

The first step towards thinking carefully about the outcomes of democracy is to recognise that democracy is just a form of government.
 ·    It can only create conditions for achieving something and the citizens have to take advantage of those conditions and achieve those goals.

 

What outcomes can one reasonably expect of democracies?

INTRODUCTION : 
Now it is a proved fact that Democracy is the best form of government so far. Still democracy is facing several kinds of problems but generally it is capable of accommodation and adjustments. The democracy too like any other form of governance have certain good and evil features. In this topic we will study how the democratic government is beneficial for its citizens and what kind of problems country faces because of this kind of set up. In a democracy people blame the government for various failures but at the same time want that it should prevail in the country. Thus democracy is always at the test, as it keeps on facing several challenges. We will study that if democracy prevails how it will affect the citizens of the country.

How do we assess democracy’s outcomes? 
    Democracy is better because it:
    ·    Promotes equality among citizens;
    ·    Enhances the dignity of the individual;
    ·    Improves the quality of decision-making;
    ·    Provides a method to resolve conflicts; and
    ·    Allows room to correct mistakes.

When we talk to people around us, most of them support democracy against other alternatives, such as rule by a monarch or military or religious leaders. But not so many of them would be satisfied with the democracy in practice.

So we face a dilemma: democracy is seen to be good in principle, but felt to be not so good in its practice. This dilemma invites us to think hard about the outcomes of democracy. Do we prefer democracy only for moral reasons, or prudential reasons.

COMMON FEATURES
    ·    formal constitutions
    ·    they hold elections
    ·    they have parties
    ·    they guarantee rights of citizens

DIFFERENT FEATURES
    ·    in terms of their social situations
    ·    their economic achievements
    ·    their cultures
    ·    out interest in and fascination for democracy often pushes us into taking a position that democracy can address all socio-economic and political               problems. If some of our expectations are not met, we start blaming the idea of democracy.

The first step towards thinking carefully about the outcomes of democracy is to recognise that democracy is just a form of government.
 ·    It can only create conditions for achieving something and the citizens have to take advantage of those conditions and achieve those goals.

 

What outcomes can one reasonably expect of democracies?

INTRODUCTION : 
Now it is a proved fact that Democracy is the best form of government so far. Still democracy is facing several kinds of problems but generally it is capable of accommodation and adjustments. The democracy too like any other form of governance have certain good and evil features. In this topic we will study how the democratic government is beneficial for its citizens and what kind of problems country faces because of this kind of set up. In a democracy people blame the government for various failures but at the same time want that it should prevail in the country. Thus democracy is always at the test, as it keeps on facing several challenges. We will study that if democracy prevails how it will affect the citizens of the country.

How do we assess democracy’s outcomes? 
    Democracy is better because it:
    ·    Promotes equality among citizens;
    ·    Enhances the dignity of the individual;
    ·    Improves the quality of decision-making;
    ·    Provides a method to resolve conflicts; and
    ·    Allows room to correct mistakes.

When we talk to people around us, most of them support democracy against other alternatives, such as rule by a monarch or military or religious leaders. But not so many of them would be satisfied with the democracy in practice.

So we face a dilemma: democracy is seen to be good in principle, but felt to be not so good in its practice. This dilemma invites us to think hard about the outcomes of democracy. Do we prefer democracy only for moral reasons, or prudential reasons.

COMMON FEATURES
    ·    formal constitutions
    ·    they hold elections
    ·    they have parties
    ·    they guarantee rights of citizens

DIFFERENT FEATURES
    ·    in terms of their social situations
    ·    their economic achievements
    ·    their cultures
    ·    out interest in and fascination for democracy often pushes us into taking a position that democracy can address all socio-economic and political               problems. If some of our expectations are not met, we start blaming the idea of democracy.

The first step towards thinking carefully about the outcomes of democracy is to recognise that democracy is just a form of government.
 ·    It can only create conditions for achieving something and the citizens have to take advantage of those conditions and achieve those goals.

 

What outcomes can one reasonably expect of democracies?

INTRODUCTION : 
Now it is a proved fact that Democracy is the best form of government so far. Still democracy is facing several kinds of problems but generally it is capable of accommodation and adjustments. The democracy too like any other form of governance have certain good and evil features. In this topic we will study how the democratic government is beneficial for its citizens and what kind of problems country faces because of this kind of set up. In a democracy people blame the government for various failures but at the same time want that it should prevail in the country. Thus democracy is always at the test, as it keeps on facing several challenges. We will study that if democracy prevails how it will affect the citizens of the country.

How do we assess democracy’s outcomes? 
    Democracy is better because it:
    ·    Promotes equality among citizens;
    ·    Enhances the dignity of the individual;
    ·    Improves the quality of decision-making;
    ·    Provides a method to resolve conflicts; and
    ·    Allows room to correct mistakes.

When we talk to people around us, most of them support democracy against other alternatives, such as rule by a monarch or military or religious leaders. But not so many of them would be satisfied with the democracy in practice.

So we face a dilemma: democracy is seen to be good in principle, but felt to be not so good in its practice. This dilemma invites us to think hard about the outcomes of democracy. Do we prefer democracy only for moral reasons, or prudential reasons.

COMMON FEATURES
    ·    formal constitutions
    ·    they hold elections
    ·    they have parties
    ·    they guarantee rights of citizens

DIFFERENT FEATURES
    ·    in terms of their social situations
    ·    their economic achievements
    ·    their cultures
    ·    out interest in and fascination for democracy often pushes us into taking a position that democracy can address all socio-economic and political               problems. If some of our expectations are not met, we start blaming the idea of democracy.

The first step towards thinking carefully about the outcomes of democracy is to recognise that democracy is just a form of government.
 ·    It can only create conditions for achieving something and the citizens have to take advantage of those conditions and achieve those goals.

 

What outcomes can one reasonably expect of democracies?

INTRODUCTION : 
Now it is a proved fact that Democracy is the best form of government so far. Still democracy is facing several kinds of problems but generally it is capable of accommodation and adjustments. The democracy too like any other form of governance have certain good and evil features. In this topic we will study how the democratic government is beneficial for its citizens and what kind of problems country faces because of this kind of set up. In a democracy people blame the government for various failures but at the same time want that it should prevail in the country. Thus democracy is always at the test, as it keeps on facing several challenges. We will study that if democracy prevails how it will affect the citizens of the country.

How do we assess democracy’s outcomes? 
    Democracy is better because it:
    ·    Promotes equality among citizens;
    ·    Enhances the dignity of the individual;
    ·    Improves the quality of decision-making;
    ·    Provides a method to resolve conflicts; and
    ·    Allows room to correct mistakes.

When we talk to people around us, most of them support democracy against other alternatives, such as rule by a monarch or military or religious leaders. But not so many of them would be satisfied with the democracy in practice.

So we face a dilemma: democracy is seen to be good in principle, but felt to be not so good in its practice. This dilemma invites us to think hard about the outcomes of democracy. Do we prefer democracy only for moral reasons, or prudential reasons.

COMMON FEATURES
    ·    formal constitutions
    ·    they hold elections
    ·    they have parties
    ·    they guarantee rights of citizens

DIFFERENT FEATURES
    ·    in terms of their social situations
    ·    their economic achievements
    ·    their cultures
    ·    out interest in and fascination for democracy often pushes us into taking a position that democracy can address all socio-economic and political               problems. If some of our expectations are not met, we start blaming the idea of democracy.

The first step towards thinking carefully about the outcomes of democracy is to recognise that democracy is just a form of government.
 ·    It can only create conditions for achieving something and the citizens have to take advantage of those conditions and achieve those goals.

 

What outcomes can one reasonably expect of democracies?

INTRODUCTION : 
Now it is a proved fact that Democracy is the best form of government so far. Still democracy is facing several kinds of problems but generally it is capable of accommodation and adjustments. The democracy too like any other form of governance have certain good and evil features. In this topic we will study how the democratic government is beneficial for its citizens and what kind of problems country faces because of this kind of set up. In a democracy people blame the government for various failures but at the same time want that it should prevail in the country. Thus democracy is always at the test, as it keeps on facing several challenges. We will study that if democracy prevails how it will affect the citizens of the country.

How do we assess democracy’s outcomes? 
    Democracy is better because it:
    ·    Promotes equality among citizens;
    ·    Enhances the dignity of the individual;
    ·    Improves the quality of decision-making;
    ·    Provides a method to resolve conflicts; and
    ·    Allows room to correct mistakes.

When we talk to people around us, most of them support democracy against other alternatives, such as rule by a monarch or military or religious leaders. But not so many of them would be satisfied with the democracy in practice.

So we face a dilemma: democracy is seen to be good in principle, but felt to be not so good in its practice. This dilemma invites us to think hard about the outcomes of democracy. Do we prefer democracy only for moral reasons, or prudential reasons.

COMMON FEATURES
    ·    formal constitutions
    ·    they hold elections
    ·    they have parties
    ·    they guarantee rights of citizens

DIFFERENT FEATURES
    ·    in terms of their social situations
    ·    their economic achievements
    ·    their cultures
    ·    out interest in and fascination for democracy often pushes us into taking a position that democracy can address all socio-economic and political               problems. If some of our expectations are not met, we start blaming the idea of democracy.

The first step towards thinking carefully about the outcomes of democracy is to recognise that democracy is just a form of government.
 ·    It can only create conditions for achieving something and the citizens have to take advantage of those conditions and achieve those goals.

 

What outcomes can one reasonably expect of democracies?

INTRODUCTION : 
Now it is a proved fact that Democracy is the best form of government so far. Still democracy is facing several kinds of problems but generally it is capable of accommodation and adjustments. The democracy too like any other form of governance have certain good and evil features. In this topic we will study how the democratic government is beneficial for its citizens and what kind of problems country faces because of this kind of set up. In a democracy people blame the government for various failures but at the same time want that it should prevail in the country. Thus democracy is always at the test, as it keeps on facing several challenges. We will study that if democracy prevails how it will affect the citizens of the country.

How do we assess democracy’s outcomes? 
    Democracy is better because it:
    ·    Promotes equality among citizens;
    ·    Enhances the dignity of the individual;
    ·    Improves the quality of decision-making;
    ·    Provides a method to resolve conflicts; and
    ·    Allows room to correct mistakes.

When we talk to people around us, most of them support democracy against other alternatives, such as rule by a monarch or military or religious leaders. But not so many of them would be satisfied with the democracy in practice.

So we face a dilemma: democracy is seen to be good in principle, but felt to be not so good in its practice. This dilemma invites us to think hard about the outcomes of democracy. Do we prefer democracy only for moral reasons, or prudential reasons.

COMMON FEATURES
    ·    formal constitutions
    ·    they hold elections
    ·    they have parties
    ·    they guarantee rights of citizens

DIFFERENT FEATURES
    ·    in terms of their social situations
    ·    their economic achievements
    ·    their cultures
    ·    out interest in and fascination for democracy often pushes us into taking a position that democracy can address all socio-economic and political               problems. If some of our expectations are not met, we start blaming the idea of democracy.

The first step towards thinking carefully about the outcomes of democracy is to recognise that democracy is just a form of government.
 ·    It can only create conditions for achieving something and the citizens have to take advantage of those conditions and achieve those goals.

 

Does democracy in India meet these expectations?

Accountable, responsive and legitimate government :
Accountable
·    In a democracy, we are most concerned with ensuring that people will have the right to choose their rulers and people will have control over the rulers.       Whenever possible and necessary, citizens should be able to participate in decision making, that affects them all.
·    Therefore, the most basic outcome of democracy is that it produces a government that is accountable to the citizens, and responsive to the needs and      expectations of the citizens.

Why do some people think that democracy produces less effective government?
·    It bother about deliberation in assemblies or worry about majority and public opinion.
·    So some delay is bound to take place.

The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it.
·   Imagine a government that may take decisions very fast. But it may take decisions that are not accepted by the people and may therefore face problems.
·  In contrast, the democratic government will take more time to follow procedures before arriving at a decision. But because it has followed procedures, its decisions may be both more acceptable to the people and more effective. “The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it”.

Responsive
Democracy ensures that decision making will be based on norms and procedures. So, a citizen who wants to know if a decision was taken through the correct procedures can find this out.
One of the right is the means to examine the process of decision making. This is known as transparency.
·    This fact is often missing from a non-democratic government.

 How you would measure democracies on the basis of this expected outcome?
·  You would look for the following practices and institutions:
    The actual performance of democracies shows a mixed record on this.
    (i) regular, free and fair elections;
    (ii)    open public debate on major policies and legislations;

    (iii)    citizens’ right to information about the government and its functioning.
·    Democracies have had greater, success in setting up regular and free elections and in setting up conditions for open public debate. But most                   democracies fall short of elections that provide a fair chance to everyone and in subjecting every decision to public debate.
·    Democratic governments do not have a very good record when it comes to sharing information with citizens. All one can say in favour of democratic regimes is that they are much better than any non-democratic regime in these respects.

In substantive terms
·    It may be reasonable to expect from democracy a government that is attentive to the needs and demands to the people and is largely free of corruption. The record of democracies in not impressive on these two counts.
·    Democracy often frustrate the needs to the people and often ignore the demands of a majority of its population. The routine tales of corruption are enough to convince us that democracy is not free of this evil. At the same time, there is nothing to show that non-democracies are less corrupt or more sensitive to the people.

Legitimate
·    There is one respect in which democratic government is certainly better than its alternatives: democratic government is legimate government.
·    It may be slow, less efficient, not always very responsive or clean. But a democratic government is people’s own government. That is why there is           an overwhelming support for the idea of demoracy all over the world.
·    People wish to be ruled by representatives elected by them. They also believe that democracy is suitable for their country. Democracy’s ability to              generate its own support is itself an outcome that cannot be ignored.

Does democracy in India meet these expectations?

Accountable, responsive and legitimate government :
Accountable
·    In a democracy, we are most concerned with ensuring that people will have the right to choose their rulers and people will have control over the rulers.       Whenever possible and necessary, citizens should be able to participate in decision making, that affects them all.
·    Therefore, the most basic outcome of democracy is that it produces a government that is accountable to the citizens, and responsive to the needs and      expectations of the citizens.

Why do some people think that democracy produces less effective government?
·    It bother about deliberation in assemblies or worry about majority and public opinion.
·    So some delay is bound to take place.

The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it.
·   Imagine a government that may take decisions very fast. But it may take decisions that are not accepted by the people and may therefore face problems.
·  In contrast, the democratic government will take more time to follow procedures before arriving at a decision. But because it has followed procedures, its decisions may be both more acceptable to the people and more effective. “The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it”.

Responsive
Democracy ensures that decision making will be based on norms and procedures. So, a citizen who wants to know if a decision was taken through the correct procedures can find this out.
One of the right is the means to examine the process of decision making. This is known as transparency.
·    This fact is often missing from a non-democratic government.

 How you would measure democracies on the basis of this expected outcome?
·  You would look for the following practices and institutions:
    The actual performance of democracies shows a mixed record on this.
    (i) regular, free and fair elections;
    (ii)    open public debate on major policies and legislations;

    (iii)    citizens’ right to information about the government and its functioning.
·    Democracies have had greater, success in setting up regular and free elections and in setting up conditions for open public debate. But most                   democracies fall short of elections that provide a fair chance to everyone and in subjecting every decision to public debate.
·    Democratic governments do not have a very good record when it comes to sharing information with citizens. All one can say in favour of democratic regimes is that they are much better than any non-democratic regime in these respects.

In substantive terms
·    It may be reasonable to expect from democracy a government that is attentive to the needs and demands to the people and is largely free of corruption. The record of democracies in not impressive on these two counts.
·    Democracy often frustrate the needs to the people and often ignore the demands of a majority of its population. The routine tales of corruption are enough to convince us that democracy is not free of this evil. At the same time, there is nothing to show that non-democracies are less corrupt or more sensitive to the people.

Legitimate
·    There is one respect in which democratic government is certainly better than its alternatives: democratic government is legimate government.
·    It may be slow, less efficient, not always very responsive or clean. But a democratic government is people’s own government. That is why there is           an overwhelming support for the idea of demoracy all over the world.
·    People wish to be ruled by representatives elected by them. They also believe that democracy is suitable for their country. Democracy’s ability to              generate its own support is itself an outcome that cannot be ignored.

Does democracy in India meet these expectations?

Accountable, responsive and legitimate government :
Accountable
·    In a democracy, we are most concerned with ensuring that people will have the right to choose their rulers and people will have control over the rulers.       Whenever possible and necessary, citizens should be able to participate in decision making, that affects them all.
·    Therefore, the most basic outcome of democracy is that it produces a government that is accountable to the citizens, and responsive to the needs and      expectations of the citizens.

Why do some people think that democracy produces less effective government?
·    It bother about deliberation in assemblies or worry about majority and public opinion.
·    So some delay is bound to take place.

The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it.
·   Imagine a government that may take decisions very fast. But it may take decisions that are not accepted by the people and may therefore face problems.
·  In contrast, the democratic government will take more time to follow procedures before arriving at a decision. But because it has followed procedures, its decisions may be both more acceptable to the people and more effective. “The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it”.

Responsive
Democracy ensures that decision making will be based on norms and procedures. So, a citizen who wants to know if a decision was taken through the correct procedures can find this out.
One of the right is the means to examine the process of decision making. This is known as transparency.
·    This fact is often missing from a non-democratic government.

 How you would measure democracies on the basis of this expected outcome?
·  You would look for the following practices and institutions:
    The actual performance of democracies shows a mixed record on this.
    (i) regular, free and fair elections;
    (ii)    open public debate on major policies and legislations;

    (iii)    citizens’ right to information about the government and its functioning.
·    Democracies have had greater, success in setting up regular and free elections and in setting up conditions for open public debate. But most                   democracies fall short of elections that provide a fair chance to everyone and in subjecting every decision to public debate.
·    Democratic governments do not have a very good record when it comes to sharing information with citizens. All one can say in favour of democratic regimes is that they are much better than any non-democratic regime in these respects.

In substantive terms
·    It may be reasonable to expect from democracy a government that is attentive to the needs and demands to the people and is largely free of corruption. The record of democracies in not impressive on these two counts.
·    Democracy often frustrate the needs to the people and often ignore the demands of a majority of its population. The routine tales of corruption are enough to convince us that democracy is not free of this evil. At the same time, there is nothing to show that non-democracies are less corrupt or more sensitive to the people.

Legitimate
·    There is one respect in which democratic government is certainly better than its alternatives: democratic government is legimate government.
·    It may be slow, less efficient, not always very responsive or clean. But a democratic government is people’s own government. That is why there is           an overwhelming support for the idea of demoracy all over the world.
·    People wish to be ruled by representatives elected by them. They also believe that democracy is suitable for their country. Democracy’s ability to              generate its own support is itself an outcome that cannot be ignored.

Does democracy in India meet these expectations?

Accountable, responsive and legitimate government :
Accountable
·    In a democracy, we are most concerned with ensuring that people will have the right to choose their rulers and people will have control over the rulers.       Whenever possible and necessary, citizens should be able to participate in decision making, that affects them all.
·    Therefore, the most basic outcome of democracy is that it produces a government that is accountable to the citizens, and responsive to the needs and      expectations of the citizens.

Why do some people think that democracy produces less effective government?
·    It bother about deliberation in assemblies or worry about majority and public opinion.
·    So some delay is bound to take place.

The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it.
·   Imagine a government that may take decisions very fast. But it may take decisions that are not accepted by the people and may therefore face problems.
·  In contrast, the democratic government will take more time to follow procedures before arriving at a decision. But because it has followed procedures, its decisions may be both more acceptable to the people and more effective. “The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it”.

Responsive
Democracy ensures that decision making will be based on norms and procedures. So, a citizen who wants to know if a decision was taken through the correct procedures can find this out.
One of the right is the means to examine the process of decision making. This is known as transparency.
·    This fact is often missing from a non-democratic government.

 How you would measure democracies on the basis of this expected outcome?
·  You would look for the following practices and institutions:
    The actual performance of democracies shows a mixed record on this.
    (i) regular, free and fair elections;
    (ii)    open public debate on major policies and legislations;

    (iii)    citizens’ right to information about the government and its functioning.
·    Democracies have had greater, success in setting up regular and free elections and in setting up conditions for open public debate. But most                   democracies fall short of elections that provide a fair chance to everyone and in subjecting every decision to public debate.
·    Democratic governments do not have a very good record when it comes to sharing information with citizens. All one can say in favour of democratic regimes is that they are much better than any non-democratic regime in these respects.

In substantive terms
·    It may be reasonable to expect from democracy a government that is attentive to the needs and demands to the people and is largely free of corruption. The record of democracies in not impressive on these two counts.
·    Democracy often frustrate the needs to the people and often ignore the demands of a majority of its population. The routine tales of corruption are enough to convince us that democracy is not free of this evil. At the same time, there is nothing to show that non-democracies are less corrupt or more sensitive to the people.

Legitimate
·    There is one respect in which democratic government is certainly better than its alternatives: democratic government is legimate government.
·    It may be slow, less efficient, not always very responsive or clean. But a democratic government is people’s own government. That is why there is           an overwhelming support for the idea of demoracy all over the world.
·    People wish to be ruled by representatives elected by them. They also believe that democracy is suitable for their country. Democracy’s ability to              generate its own support is itself an outcome that cannot be ignored.

Does democracy in India meet these expectations?

Accountable, responsive and legitimate government :
Accountable
·    In a democracy, we are most concerned with ensuring that people will have the right to choose their rulers and people will have control over the rulers.       Whenever possible and necessary, citizens should be able to participate in decision making, that affects them all.
·    Therefore, the most basic outcome of democracy is that it produces a government that is accountable to the citizens, and responsive to the needs and      expectations of the citizens.

Why do some people think that democracy produces less effective government?
·    It bother about deliberation in assemblies or worry about majority and public opinion.
·    So some delay is bound to take place.

The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it.
·   Imagine a government that may take decisions very fast. But it may take decisions that are not accepted by the people and may therefore face problems.
·  In contrast, the democratic government will take more time to follow procedures before arriving at a decision. But because it has followed procedures, its decisions may be both more acceptable to the people and more effective. “The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it”.

Responsive
Democracy ensures that decision making will be based on norms and procedures. So, a citizen who wants to know if a decision was taken through the correct procedures can find this out.
One of the right is the means to examine the process of decision making. This is known as transparency.
·    This fact is often missing from a non-democratic government.

 How you would measure democracies on the basis of this expected outcome?
·  You would look for the following practices and institutions:
    The actual performance of democracies shows a mixed record on this.
    (i) regular, free and fair elections;
    (ii)    open public debate on major policies and legislations;

    (iii)    citizens’ right to information about the government and its functioning.
·    Democracies have had greater, success in setting up regular and free elections and in setting up conditions for open public debate. But most                   democracies fall short of elections that provide a fair chance to everyone and in subjecting every decision to public debate.
·    Democratic governments do not have a very good record when it comes to sharing information with citizens. All one can say in favour of democratic regimes is that they are much better than any non-democratic regime in these respects.

In substantive terms
·    It may be reasonable to expect from democracy a government that is attentive to the needs and demands to the people and is largely free of corruption. The record of democracies in not impressive on these two counts.
·    Democracy often frustrate the needs to the people and often ignore the demands of a majority of its population. The routine tales of corruption are enough to convince us that democracy is not free of this evil. At the same time, there is nothing to show that non-democracies are less corrupt or more sensitive to the people.

Legitimate
·    There is one respect in which democratic government is certainly better than its alternatives: democratic government is legimate government.
·    It may be slow, less efficient, not always very responsive or clean. But a democratic government is people’s own government. That is why there is           an overwhelming support for the idea of demoracy all over the world.
·    People wish to be ruled by representatives elected by them. They also believe that democracy is suitable for their country. Democracy’s ability to              generate its own support is itself an outcome that cannot be ignored.

Does democracy in India meet these expectations?

Accountable, responsive and legitimate government :
Accountable
·    In a democracy, we are most concerned with ensuring that people will have the right to choose their rulers and people will have control over the rulers.       Whenever possible and necessary, citizens should be able to participate in decision making, that affects them all.
·    Therefore, the most basic outcome of democracy is that it produces a government that is accountable to the citizens, and responsive to the needs and      expectations of the citizens.

Why do some people think that democracy produces less effective government?
·    It bother about deliberation in assemblies or worry about majority and public opinion.
·    So some delay is bound to take place.

The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it.
·   Imagine a government that may take decisions very fast. But it may take decisions that are not accepted by the people and may therefore face problems.
·  In contrast, the democratic government will take more time to follow procedures before arriving at a decision. But because it has followed procedures, its decisions may be both more acceptable to the people and more effective. “The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it”.

Responsive
Democracy ensures that decision making will be based on norms and procedures. So, a citizen who wants to know if a decision was taken through the correct procedures can find this out.
One of the right is the means to examine the process of decision making. This is known as transparency.
·    This fact is often missing from a non-democratic government.

 How you would measure democracies on the basis of this expected outcome?
·  You would look for the following practices and institutions:
    The actual performance of democracies shows a mixed record on this.
    (i) regular, free and fair elections;
    (ii)    open public debate on major policies and legislations;

    (iii)    citizens’ right to information about the government and its functioning.
·    Democracies have had greater, success in setting up regular and free elections and in setting up conditions for open public debate. But most                   democracies fall short of elections that provide a fair chance to everyone and in subjecting every decision to public debate.
·    Democratic governments do not have a very good record when it comes to sharing information with citizens. All one can say in favour of democratic regimes is that they are much better than any non-democratic regime in these respects.

In substantive terms
·    It may be reasonable to expect from democracy a government that is attentive to the needs and demands to the people and is largely free of corruption. The record of democracies in not impressive on these two counts.
·    Democracy often frustrate the needs to the people and often ignore the demands of a majority of its population. The routine tales of corruption are enough to convince us that democracy is not free of this evil. At the same time, there is nothing to show that non-democracies are less corrupt or more sensitive to the people.

Legitimate
·    There is one respect in which democratic government is certainly better than its alternatives: democratic government is legimate government.
·    It may be slow, less efficient, not always very responsive or clean. But a democratic government is people’s own government. That is why there is           an overwhelming support for the idea of demoracy all over the world.
·    People wish to be ruled by representatives elected by them. They also believe that democracy is suitable for their country. Democracy’s ability to              generate its own support is itself an outcome that cannot be ignored.

Does democracy in India meet these expectations?

Accountable, responsive and legitimate government :
Accountable
·    In a democracy, we are most concerned with ensuring that people will have the right to choose their rulers and people will have control over the rulers.       Whenever possible and necessary, citizens should be able to participate in decision making, that affects them all.
·    Therefore, the most basic outcome of democracy is that it produces a government that is accountable to the citizens, and responsive to the needs and      expectations of the citizens.

Why do some people think that democracy produces less effective government?
·    It bother about deliberation in assemblies or worry about majority and public opinion.
·    So some delay is bound to take place.

The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it.
·   Imagine a government that may take decisions very fast. But it may take decisions that are not accepted by the people and may therefore face problems.
·  In contrast, the democratic government will take more time to follow procedures before arriving at a decision. But because it has followed procedures, its decisions may be both more acceptable to the people and more effective. “The cost of time that democracy pays is perhaps worth it”.

Responsive
Democracy ensures that decision making will be based on norms and procedures. So, a citizen who wants to know if a decision was taken through the correct procedures can find this out.
One of the right is the means to examine the process of decision making. This is known as transparency.
·    This fact is often missing from a non-democratic government.

 How you would measure democracies on the basis of this expected outcome?
·  You would look for the following practices and institutions:
    The actual performance of democracies shows a mixed record on this.
    (i) regular, free and fair elections;
    (ii)    open public debate on major policies and legislations;

    (iii)    citizens’ right to information about the government and its functioning.
·    Democracies have had greater, success in setting up regular and free elections and in setting up conditions for open public debate. But most                   democracies fall short of elections that provide a fair chance to everyone and in subjecting every decision to public debate.
·    Democratic governments do not have a very good record when it comes to sharing information with citizens. All one can say in favour of democratic regimes is that they are much better than any non-democratic regime in these respects.

In substantive terms
·    It may be reasonable to expect from democracy a government that is attentive to the needs and demands to the people and is largely free of corruption. The record of democracies in not impressive on these two counts.
·    Democracy often frustrate the needs to the people and often ignore the demands of a majority of its population. The routine tales of corruption are enough to convince us that democracy is not free of this evil. At the same time, there is nothing to show that non-democracies are less corrupt or more sensitive to the people.

Legitimate
·    There is one respect in which democratic government is certainly better than its alternatives: democratic government is legimate government.
·    It may be slow, less efficient, not always very responsive or clean. But a democratic government is people’s own government. That is why there is           an overwhelming support for the idea of demoracy all over the world.
·    People wish to be ruled by representatives elected by them. They also believe that democracy is suitable for their country. Democracy’s ability to              generate its own support is itself an outcome that cannot be ignored.

Has democracy led to development, security and dignity for the people?

Economic growth and development :
Evidence shows that in practice many democracies did not fulfil this expectation.
·    If you consider all democracies and all dictatorships for the fifty years between 1950 and 2000, dictatorships have slightly higher rate of economic growth. The inability of democracy to achieve higher economic development worries us. But this alone cannot be reason to reject democracy.
·    In economics, economicdevelopment, depends on several factors
        –  country’s population size,
        –  global situation
        –  cooperation from other countries
        –  economic priorities adopted by the country.
However, the difference in the rates of economic development between less developed countries with dictatorships and democracies is negligible.
·    Overall, we cannot say that democracy is a guarantee of economic development. But we can expect democracy  not to lag behind dictatorships in this respect. When we find such significant different in the rates of economic growth between countries under dictatorship and democracy, it is better to prefer democracy as it has several other positive outcomes.

Illustration 1
    When was democracy introduce in India?
Solution
    In 1950, when constitution was enforced in India.

Illustration 2
    What does political outcomes signifies?
Solution
    Accountable, responsive and legitimate government.

Illustration 3
    What is the basic element of democracy?
Solution
    Universal adult franchise.

Illustration 4
    What do you mean by social outcomes?
Solution
    Social outcomes means the benefits derived by the society due to democracy like dignity and freedom, gender equality and Ban on child labour, etc.

Reduction of inequality and poverty :
·    Perhaps more than  development, it is reasonable to expect democracies to reduce economic disparities.
·    Economic growth in demoracies are accompanied by increased inequalities among the 
      people - democracies lead to a just distribution of goods and opportunities.
·    Democracies are based on political  equality. All individuals have equal weight in electing representatives. Parallel to the process of bringing                    individuals into the political  arena on an equal footing, we find growing economic inequalities.
·    A small number of ultra-rich enjoy a highly disproportionate share of wealth and income. Not only that, their share in the total income of the country          has been increasing.
·    Those at the bottom of the society have very little to depend upon. Their incomes have been declining. Sometimes they find it difficult to meet their          basic needs of life such as food, clothing, house, education and health.

·    In actual life, democracies do not appear to be very successful in reducing economic inequalities. The poor constitute a large proportion of our                  voters  and no party will like to lose their votes. 
      Yet democratically elected governments do not appear to be as keen to address the question of poverty as you would expect them to.
·    The situation is much worse in some other countries. In Bangladesh, more thanhalf of its population live in poverty. People in several poor countries        are now dependent on the rich countries even for food supplies.

Accommodation of Social Diversity :
1. Democracies accommodates various social divisions. For example: Belgium has 
successfully negotiated difference among ethnic populations. Democracies usually develop a procedure to conduct their competition. This reduces the possibility of these tensions becoming explosing or violent.
2. No society can fully and permanently resolve conflicts among different groups. But we can certainly learn to respect these differences and we can also evolve mechanisms to negotiate the differences.
Democracy is best suited to produce this outcomes. Non-democratic regimes often turn a blind eye to or suppress internal social differences.
3.    Abillity to handle social difference, divisions and conflicts is thus a definite plus point of democratic regimes.
       But the example of Sri Lanka reminds us that a democracy must fulfil two conditions in order to achieve this outcome:
(a)  It is necessary to understand that democracy is not simply rule by majority opinion. The majority always needs to work with the minority so that government function to represent the general view. Majority and minority opinion are not permanent.
(b)    It is also necessary that rule by majority does not become rule by majority community in terms of religion or race or linguistic group, etc.
Rule by majority means that in case of every decision or in case of every election, different persons and groups may and can form a majority. Democracy remains democracy only as every citizen has a chance of being in majority at some point of time. If someone is barred from being in majority on the basis of birth, then the demoratic rule ceases to be accommodative for that person or group.

Dignity and freedom of the citizens :
Democracy stands much superior to any other form of government in promoting dignity and freedom of the individual.
·    Every individual wants to receive respect from fellow beings.
·    Often conflicts arise among individials because some feel that they are not treated with due respect. The passion for respect and freedom are the basis of democracy. Democracies throughout the world have recognised this, at least in principle. Democracies which have been built for long on the basis is not a simple matter to recognize that all individuals are equal.

Dignity of women
·  Most societies across the world were historically male dominated societies. Long struggles by women have created some sensitivity today that respect to and equal treatment of women are necessary ingredients of a democratic society.
·    That does not mean that women are actually always treated with respect. But once the principle is recognised, it becomes easier for women to wage a struggle against what is not unaccetpable legally and morally.
    ·    In a non-democratic set up, this unacceptability would not have legal basis because the principle of individual freedom and dignity would not have the legal and moral force there.

 Caste inequalities
·    Democracy in India has strengthened the claims of the disadvantaged and  discriminated castes for equal status and equal opportunity.
     There are instances still of caste-based inequalities and atrocities, but these lack, the moral and legal foundations. Perhaps it is the recognition that          makes ordinary citizens value their democratic rights.

Has democracy led to development, security and dignity for the people?

Economic growth and development :
Evidence shows that in practice many democracies did not fulfil this expectation.
·    If you consider all democracies and all dictatorships for the fifty years between 1950 and 2000, dictatorships have slightly higher rate of economic growth. The inability of democracy to achieve higher economic development worries us. But this alone cannot be reason to reject democracy.
·    In economics, economicdevelopment, depends on several factors
        –  country’s population size,
        –  global situation
        –  cooperation from other countries
        –  economic priorities adopted by the country.
However, the difference in the rates of economic development between less developed countries with dictatorships and democracies is negligible.
·    Overall, we cannot say that democracy is a guarantee of economic development. But we can expect democracy  not to lag behind dictatorships in this respect. When we find such significant different in the rates of economic growth between countries under dictatorship and democracy, it is better to prefer democracy as it has several other positive outcomes.

Illustration 1
    When was democracy introduce in India?
Solution
    In 1950, when constitution was enforced in India.

Illustration 2
    What does political outcomes signifies?
Solution
    Accountable, responsive and legitimate government.

Illustration 3
    What is the basic element of democracy?
Solution
    Universal adult franchise.

Illustration 4
    What do you mean by social outcomes?
Solution
    Social outcomes means the benefits derived by the society due to democracy like dignity and freedom, gender equality and Ban on child labour, etc.

Reduction of inequality and poverty :
·    Perhaps more than  development, it is reasonable to expect democracies to reduce economic disparities.
·    Economic growth in demoracies are accompanied by increased inequalities among the 
      people - democracies lead to a just distribution of goods and opportunities.
·    Democracies are based on political  equality. All individuals have equal weight in electing representatives. Parallel to the process of bringing                    individuals into the political  arena on an equal footing, we find growing economic inequalities.
·    A small number of ultra-rich enjoy a highly disproportionate share of wealth and income. Not only that, their share in the total income of the country          has been increasing.
·    Those at the bottom of the society have very little to depend upon. Their incomes have been declining. Sometimes they find it difficult to meet their          basic needs of life such as food, clothing, house, education and health.

·    In actual life, democracies do not appear to be very successful in reducing economic inequalities. The poor constitute a large proportion of our                  voters  and no party will like to lose their votes. 
      Yet democratically elected governments do not appear to be as keen to address the question of poverty as you would expect them to.
·    The situation is much worse in some other countries. In Bangladesh, more thanhalf of its population live in poverty. People in several poor countries        are now dependent on the rich countries even for food supplies.

Accommodation of Social Diversity :
1. Democracies accommodates various social divisions. For example: Belgium has 
successfully negotiated difference among ethnic populations. Democracies usually develop a procedure to conduct their competition. This reduces the possibility of these tensions becoming explosing or violent.
2. No society can fully and permanently resolve conflicts among different groups. But we can certainly learn to respect these differences and we can also evolve mechanisms to negotiate the differences.
Democracy is best suited to produce this outcomes. Non-democratic regimes often turn a blind eye to or suppress internal social differences.
3.    Abillity to handle social difference, divisions and conflicts is thus a definite plus point of democratic regimes.
       But the example of Sri Lanka reminds us that a democracy must fulfil two conditions in order to achieve this outcome:
(a)  It is necessary to understand that democracy is not simply rule by majority opinion. The majority always needs to work with the minority so that government function to represent the general view. Majority and minority opinion are not permanent.
(b)    It is also necessary that rule by majority does not become rule by majority community in terms of religion or race or linguistic group, etc.
Rule by majority means that in case of every decision or in case of every election, different persons and groups may and can form a majority. Democracy remains democracy only as every citizen has a chance of being in majority at some point of time. If someone is barred from being in majority on the basis of birth, then the demoratic rule ceases to be accommodative for that person or group.

Dignity and freedom of the citizens :
Democracy stands much superior to any other form of government in promoting dignity and freedom of the individual.
·    Every individual wants to receive respect from fellow beings.
·    Often conflicts arise among individials because some feel that they are not treated with due respect. The passion for respect and freedom are the basis of democracy. Democracies throughout the world have recognised this, at least in principle. Democracies which have been built for long on the basis is not a simple matter to recognize that all individuals are equal.

Dignity of women
·  Most societies across the world were historically male dominated societies. Long struggles by women have created some sensitivity today that respect to and equal treatment of women are necessary ingredients of a democratic society.
·    That does not mean that women are actually always treated with respect. But once the principle is recognised, it becomes easier for women to wage a struggle against what is not unaccetpable legally and morally.
    ·    In a non-democratic set up, this unacceptability would not have legal basis because the principle of individual freedom and dignity would not have the legal and moral force there.

 Caste inequalities
·    Democracy in India has strengthened the claims of the disadvantaged and  discriminated castes for equal status and equal opportunity.
     There are instances still of caste-based inequalities and atrocities, but these lack, the moral and legal foundations. Perhaps it is the recognition that          makes ordinary citizens value their democratic rights.

Has democracy led to development, security and dignity for the people?

Economic growth and development :
Evidence shows that in practice many democracies did not fulfil this expectation.
·    If you consider all democracies and all dictatorships for the fifty years between 1950 and 2000, dictatorships have slightly higher rate of economic growth. The inability of democracy to achieve higher economic development worries us. But this alone cannot be reason to reject democracy.
·    In economics, economicdevelopment, depends on several factors
        –  country’s population size,
        –  global situation
        –  cooperation from other countries
        –  economic priorities adopted by the country.
However, the difference in the rates of economic development between less developed countries with dictatorships and democracies is negligible.
·    Overall, we cannot say that democracy is a guarantee of economic development. But we can expect democracy  not to lag behind dictatorships in this respect. When we find such significant different in the rates of economic growth between countries under dictatorship and democracy, it is better to prefer democracy as it has several other positive outcomes.

Illustration 1
    When was democracy introduce in India?
Solution
    In 1950, when constitution was enforced in India.

Illustration 2
    What does political outcomes signifies?
Solution
    Accountable, responsive and legitimate government.

Illustration 3
    What is the basic element of democracy?
Solution
    Universal adult franchise.

Illustration 4
    What do you mean by social outcomes?
Solution
    Social outcomes means the benefits derived by the society due to democracy like dignity and freedom, gender equality and Ban on child labour, etc.

Reduction of inequality and poverty :
·    Perhaps more than  development, it is reasonable to expect democracies to reduce economic disparities.
·    Economic growth in demoracies are accompanied by increased inequalities among the 
      people - democracies lead to a just distribution of goods and opportunities.
·    Democracies are based on political  equality. All individuals have equal weight in electing representatives. Parallel to the process of bringing                    individuals into the political  arena on an equal footing, we find growing economic inequalities.
·    A small number of ultra-rich enjoy a highly disproportionate share of wealth and income. Not only that, their share in the total income of the country          has been increasing.
·    Those at the bottom of the society have very little to depend upon. Their incomes have been declining. Sometimes they find it difficult to meet their          basic needs of life such as food, clothing, house, education and health.

·    In actual life, democracies do not appear to be very successful in reducing economic inequalities. The poor constitute a large proportion of our                  voters  and no party will like to lose their votes. 
      Yet democratically elected governments do not appear to be as keen to address the question of poverty as you would expect them to.
·    The situation is much worse in some other countries. In Bangladesh, more thanhalf of its population live in poverty. People in several poor countries        are now dependent on the rich countries even for food supplies.

Accommodation of Social Diversity :
1. Democracies accommodates various social divisions. For example: Belgium has 
successfully negotiated difference among ethnic populations. Democracies usually develop a procedure to conduct their competition. This reduces the possibility of these tensions becoming explosing or violent.
2. No society can fully and permanently resolve conflicts among different groups. But we can certainly learn to respect these differences and we can also evolve mechanisms to negotiate the differences.
Democracy is best suited to produce this outcomes. Non-democratic regimes often turn a blind eye to or suppress internal social differences.
3.    Abillity to handle social difference, divisions and conflicts is thus a definite plus point of democratic regimes.
       But the example of Sri Lanka reminds us that a democracy must fulfil two conditions in order to achieve this outcome:
(a)  It is necessary to understand that democracy is not simply rule by majority opinion. The majority always needs to work with the minority so that government function to represent the general view. Majority and minority opinion are not permanent.
(b)    It is also necessary that rule by majority does not become rule by majority community in terms of religion or race or linguistic group, etc.
Rule by majority means that in case of every decision or in case of every election, different persons and groups may and can form a majority. Democracy remains democracy only as every citizen has a chance of being in majority at some point of time. If someone is barred from being in majority on the basis of birth, then the demoratic rule ceases to be accommodative for that person or group.

Dignity and freedom of the citizens :
Democracy stands much superior to any other form of government in promoting dignity and freedom of the individual.
·    Every individual wants to receive respect from fellow beings.
·    Often conflicts arise among individials because some feel that they are not treated with due respect. The passion for respect and freedom are the basis of democracy. Democracies throughout the world have recognised this, at least in principle. Democracies which have been built for long on the basis is not a simple matter to recognize that all individuals are equal.

Dignity of women
·  Most societies across the world were historically male dominated societies. Long struggles by women have created some sensitivity today that respect to and equal treatment of women are necessary ingredients of a democratic society.
·    That does not mean that women are actually always treated with respect. But once the principle is recognised, it becomes easier for women to wage a struggle against what is not unaccetpable legally and morally.
    ·    In a non-democratic set up, this unacceptability would not have legal basis because the principle of individual freedom and dignity would not have the legal and moral force there.

 Caste inequalities
·    Democracy in India has strengthened the claims of the disadvantaged and  discriminated castes for equal status and equal opportunity.
     There are instances still of caste-based inequalities and atrocities, but these lack, the moral and legal foundations. Perhaps it is the recognition that          makes ordinary citizens value their democratic rights.

Has democracy led to development, security and dignity for the people?

Economic growth and development :
Evidence shows that in practice many democracies did not fulfil this expectation.
·    If you consider all democracies and all dictatorships for the fifty years between 1950 and 2000, dictatorships have slightly higher rate of economic growth. The inability of democracy to achieve higher economic development worries us. But this alone cannot be reason to reject democracy.
·    In economics, economicdevelopment, depends on several factors
        –  country’s population size,
        –  global situation
        –  cooperation from other countries
        –  economic priorities adopted by the country.
However, the difference in the rates of economic development between less developed countries with dictatorships and democracies is negligible.
·    Overall, we cannot say that democracy is a guarantee of economic development. But we can expect democracy  not to lag behind dictatorships in this respect. When we find such significant different in the rates of economic growth between countries under dictatorship and democracy, it is better to prefer democracy as it has several other positive outcomes.

Illustration 1
    When was democracy introduce in India?
Solution
    In 1950, when constitution was enforced in India.

Illustration 2
    What does political outcomes signifies?
Solution
    Accountable, responsive and legitimate government.

Illustration 3
    What is the basic element of democracy?
Solution
    Universal adult franchise.

Illustration 4
    What do you mean by social outcomes?
Solution
    Social outcomes means the benefits derived by the society due to democracy like dignity and freedom, gender equality and Ban on child labour, etc.

Reduction of inequality and poverty :
·    Perhaps more than  development, it is reasonable to expect democracies to reduce economic disparities.
·    Economic growth in demoracies are accompanied by increased inequalities among the 
      people - democracies lead to a just distribution of goods and opportunities.
·    Democracies are based on political  equality. All individuals have equal weight in electing representatives. Parallel to the process of bringing                    individuals into the political  arena on an equal footing, we find growing economic inequalities.
·    A small number of ultra-rich enjoy a highly disproportionate share of wealth and income. Not only that, their share in the total income of the country          has been increasing.
·    Those at the bottom of the society have very little to depend upon. Their incomes have been declining. Sometimes they find it difficult to meet their          basic needs of life such as food, clothing, house, education and health.

·    In actual life, democracies do not appear to be very successful in reducing economic inequalities. The poor constitute a large proportion of our                  voters  and no party will like to lose their votes. 
      Yet democratically elected governments do not appear to be as keen to address the question of poverty as you would expect them to.
·    The situation is much worse in some other countries. In Bangladesh, more thanhalf of its population live in poverty. People in several poor countries        are now dependent on the rich countries even for food supplies.

Accommodation of Social Diversity :
1. Democracies accommodates various social divisions. For example: Belgium has 
successfully negotiated difference among ethnic populations. Democracies usually develop a procedure to conduct their competition. This reduces the possibility of these tensions becoming explosing or violent.
2. No society can fully and permanently resolve conflicts among different groups. But we can certainly learn to respect these differences and we can also evolve mechanisms to negotiate the differences.
Democracy is best suited to produce this outcomes. Non-democratic regimes often turn a blind eye to or suppress internal social differences.
3.    Abillity to handle social difference, divisions and conflicts is thus a definite plus point of democratic regimes.
       But the example of Sri Lanka reminds us that a democracy must fulfil two conditions in order to achieve this outcome:
(a)  It is necessary to understand that democracy is not simply rule by majority opinion. The majority always needs to work with the minority so that government function to represent the general view. Majority and minority opinion are not permanent.
(b)    It is also necessary that rule by majority does not become rule by majority community in terms of religion or race or linguistic group, etc.
Rule by majority means that in case of every decision or in case of every election, different persons and groups may and can form a majority. Democracy remains democracy only as every citizen has a chance of being in majority at some point of time. If someone is barred from being in majority on the basis of birth, then the demoratic rule ceases to be accommodative for that person or group.

Dignity and freedom of the citizens :
Democracy stands much superior to any other form of government in promoting dignity and freedom of the individual.
·    Every individual wants to receive respect from fellow beings.
·    Often conflicts arise among individials because some feel that they are not treated with due respect. The passion for respect and freedom are the basis of democracy. Democracies throughout the world have recognised this, at least in principle. Democracies which have been built for long on the basis is not a simple matter to recognize that all individuals are equal.

Dignity of women
·  Most societies across the world were historically male dominated societies. Long struggles by women have created some sensitivity today that respect to and equal treatment of women are necessary ingredients of a democratic society.
·    That does not mean that women are actually always treated with respect. But once the principle is recognised, it becomes easier for women to wage a struggle against what is not unaccetpable legally and morally.
    ·    In a non-democratic set up, this unacceptability would not have legal basis because the principle of individual freedom and dignity would not have the legal and moral force there.

 Caste inequalities
·    Democracy in India has strengthened the claims of the disadvantaged and  discriminated castes for equal status and equal opportunity.
     There are instances still of caste-based inequalities and atrocities, but these lack, the moral and legal foundations. Perhaps it is the recognition that          makes ordinary citizens value their democratic rights.

Has democracy led to development, security and dignity for the people?

Economic growth and development :
Evidence shows that in practice many democracies did not fulfil this expectation.
·    If you consider all democracies and all dictatorships for the fifty years between 1950 and 2000, dictatorships have slightly higher rate of economic growth. The inability of democracy to achieve higher economic development worries us. But this alone cannot be reason to reject democracy.
·    In economics, economicdevelopment, depends on several factors
        –  country’s population size,
        –  global situation
        –  cooperation from other countries
        –  economic priorities adopted by the country.
However, the difference in the rates of economic development between less developed countries with dictatorships and democracies is negligible.
·    Overall, we cannot say that democracy is a guarantee of economic development. But we can expect democracy  not to lag behind dictatorships in this respect. When we find such significant different in the rates of economic growth between countries under dictatorship and democracy, it is better to prefer democracy as it has several other positive outcomes.

Illustration 1
    When was democracy introduce in India?
Solution
    In 1950, when constitution was enforced in India.

Illustration 2
    What does political outcomes signifies?
Solution
    Accountable, responsive and legitimate government.

Illustration 3
    What is the basic element of democracy?
Solution
    Universal adult franchise.

Illustration 4
    What do you mean by social outcomes?
Solution
    Social outcomes means the benefits derived by the society due to democracy like dignity and freedom, gender equality and Ban on child labour, etc.

Reduction of inequality and poverty :
·    Perhaps more than  development, it is reasonable to expect democracies to reduce economic disparities.
·    Economic growth in demoracies are accompanied by increased inequalities among the 
      people - democracies lead to a just distribution of goods and opportunities.
·    Democracies are based on political  equality. All individuals have equal weight in electing representatives. Parallel to the process of bringing                    individuals into the political  arena on an equal footing, we find growing economic inequalities.
·    A small number of ultra-rich enjoy a highly disproportionate share of wealth and income. Not only that, their share in the total income of the country          has been increasing.
·    Those at the bottom of the society have very little to depend upon. Their incomes have been declining. Sometimes they find it difficult to meet their          basic needs of life such as food, clothing, house, education and health.

·    In actual life, democracies do not appear to be very successful in reducing economic inequalities. The poor constitute a large proportion of our                  voters  and no party will like to lose their votes. 
      Yet democratically elected governments do not appear to be as keen to address the question of poverty as you would expect them to.
·    The situation is much worse in some other countries. In Bangladesh, more thanhalf of its population live in poverty. People in several poor countries        are now dependent on the rich countries even for food supplies.

Accommodation of Social Diversity :
1. Democracies accommodates various social divisions. For example: Belgium has 
successfully negotiated difference among ethnic populations. Democracies usually develop a procedure to conduct their competition. This reduces the possibility of these tensions becoming explosing or violent.
2. No society can fully and permanently resolve conflicts among different groups. But we can certainly learn to respect these differences and we can also evolve mechanisms to negotiate the differences.
Democracy is best suited to produce this outcomes. Non-democratic regimes often turn a blind eye to or suppress internal social differences.
3.    Abillity to handle social difference, divisions and conflicts is thus a definite plus point of democratic regimes.
       But the example of Sri Lanka reminds us that a democracy must fulfil two conditions in order to achieve this outcome:
(a)  It is necessary to understand that democracy is not simply rule by majority opinion. The majority always needs to work with the minority so that government function to represent the general view. Majority and minority opinion are not permanent.
(b)    It is also necessary that rule by majority does not become rule by majority community in terms of religion or race or linguistic group, etc.
Rule by majority means that in case of every decision or in case of every election, different persons and groups may and can form a majority. Democracy remains democracy only as every citizen has a chance of being in majority at some point of time. If someone is barred from being in majority on the basis of birth, then the demoratic rule ceases to be accommodative for that person or group.

Dignity and freedom of the citizens :
Democracy stands much superior to any other form of government in promoting dignity and freedom of the individual.
·    Every individual wants to receive respect from fellow beings.
·    Often conflicts arise among individials because some feel that they are not treated with due respect. The passion for respect and freedom are the basis of democracy. Democracies throughout the world have recognised this, at least in principle. Democracies which have been built for long on the basis is not a simple matter to recognize that all individuals are equal.

Dignity of women
·  Most societies across the world were historically male dominated societies. Long struggles by women have created some sensitivity today that respect to and equal treatment of women are necessary ingredients of a democratic society.
·    That does not mean that women are actually always treated with respect. But once the principle is recognised, it becomes easier for women to wage a struggle against what is not unaccetpable legally and morally.
    ·    In a non-democratic set up, this unacceptability would not have legal basis because the principle of individual freedom and dignity would not have the legal and moral force there.

 Caste inequalities
·    Democracy in India has strengthened the claims of the disadvantaged and  discriminated castes for equal status and equal opportunity.
     There are instances still of caste-based inequalities and atrocities, but these lack, the moral and legal foundations. Perhaps it is the recognition that          makes ordinary citizens value their democratic rights.

Has democracy led to development, security and dignity for the people?

Economic growth and development :
Evidence shows that in practice many democracies did not fulfil this expectation.
·    If you consider all democracies and all dictatorships for the fifty years between 1950 and 2000, dictatorships have slightly higher rate of economic growth. The inability of democracy to achieve higher economic development worries us. But this alone cannot be reason to reject democracy.
·    In economics, economicdevelopment, depends on several factors
        –  country’s population size,
        –  global situation
        –  cooperation from other countries
        –  economic priorities adopted by the country.
However, the difference in the rates of economic development between less developed countries with dictatorships and democracies is negligible.
·    Overall, we cannot say that democracy is a guarantee of economic development. But we can expect democracy  not to lag behind dictatorships in this respect. When we find such significant different in the rates of economic growth between countries under dictatorship and democracy, it is better to prefer democracy as it has several other positive outcomes.

Illustration 1
    When was democracy introduce in India?
Solution
    In 1950, when constitution was enforced in India.

Illustration 2
    What does political outcomes signifies?
Solution
    Accountable, responsive and legitimate government.

Illustration 3
    What is the basic element of democracy?
Solution
    Universal adult franchise.

Illustration 4
    What do you mean by social outcomes?
Solution
    Social outcomes means the benefits derived by the society due to democracy like dignity and freedom, gender equality and Ban on child labour, etc.

Reduction of inequality and poverty :
·    Perhaps more than  development, it is reasonable to expect democracies to reduce economic disparities.
·    Economic growth in demoracies are accompanied by increased inequalities among the 
      people - democracies lead to a just distribution of goods and opportunities.
·    Democracies are based on political  equality. All individuals have equal weight in electing representatives. Parallel to the process of bringing                    individuals into the political  arena on an equal footing, we find growing economic inequalities.
·    A small number of ultra-rich enjoy a highly disproportionate share of wealth and income. Not only that, their share in the total income of the country          has been increasing.
·    Those at the bottom of the society have very little to depend upon. Their incomes have been declining. Sometimes they find it difficult to meet their          basic needs of life such as food, clothing, house, education and health.

·    In actual life, democracies do not appear to be very successful in reducing economic inequalities. The poor constitute a large proportion of our                  voters  and no party will like to lose their votes. 
      Yet democratically elected governments do not appear to be as keen to address the question of poverty as you would expect them to.
·    The situation is much worse in some other countries. In Bangladesh, more thanhalf of its population live in poverty. People in several poor countries        are now dependent on the rich countries even for food supplies.

Accommodation of Social Diversity :
1. Democracies accommodates various social divisions. For example: Belgium has 
successfully negotiated difference among ethnic populations. Democracies usually develop a procedure to conduct their competition. This reduces the possibility of these tensions becoming explosing or violent.
2. No society can fully and permanently resolve conflicts among different groups. But we can certainly learn to respect these differences and we can also evolve mechanisms to negotiate the differences.
Democracy is best suited to produce this outcomes. Non-democratic regimes often turn a blind eye to or suppress internal social differences.
3.    Abillity to handle social difference, divisions and conflicts is thus a definite plus point of democratic regimes.
       But the example of Sri Lanka reminds us that a democracy must fulfil two conditions in order to achieve this outcome:
(a)  It is necessary to understand that democracy is not simply rule by majority opinion. The majority always needs to work with the minority so that government function to represent the general view. Majority and minority opinion are not permanent.
(b)    It is also necessary that rule by majority does not become rule by majority community in terms of religion or race or linguistic group, etc.
Rule by majority means that in case of every decision or in case of every election, different persons and groups may and can form a majority. Democracy remains democracy only as every citizen has a chance of being in majority at some point of time. If someone is barred from being in majority on the basis of birth, then the demoratic rule ceases to be accommodative for that person or group.

Dignity and freedom of the citizens :
Democracy stands much superior to any other form of government in promoting dignity and freedom of the individual.
·    Every individual wants to receive respect from fellow beings.
·    Often conflicts arise among individials because some feel that they are not treated with due respect. The passion for respect and freedom are the basis of democracy. Democracies throughout the world have recognised this, at least in principle. Democracies which have been built for long on the basis is not a simple matter to recognize that all individuals are equal.

Dignity of women
·  Most societies across the world were historically male dominated societies. Long struggles by women have created some sensitivity today that respect to and equal treatment of women are necessary ingredients of a democratic society.
·    That does not mean that women are actually always treated with respect. But once the principle is recognised, it becomes easier for women to wage a struggle against what is not unaccetpable legally and morally.
    ·    In a non-democratic set up, this unacceptability would not have legal basis because the principle of individual freedom and dignity would not have the legal and moral force there.

 Caste inequalities
·    Democracy in India has strengthened the claims of the disadvantaged and  discriminated castes for equal status and equal opportunity.
     There are instances still of caste-based inequalities and atrocities, but these lack, the moral and legal foundations. Perhaps it is the recognition that          makes ordinary citizens value their democratic rights.

Has democracy led to development, security and dignity for the people?

Economic growth and development :
Evidence shows that in practice many democracies did not fulfil this expectation.
·    If you consider all democracies and all dictatorships for the fifty years between 1950 and 2000, dictatorships have slightly higher rate of economic growth. The inability of democracy to achieve higher economic development worries us. But this alone cannot be reason to reject democracy.
·    In economics, economicdevelopment, depends on several factors
        –  country’s population size,
        –  global situation
        –  cooperation from other countries
        –  economic priorities adopted by the country.
However, the difference in the rates of economic development between less developed countries with dictatorships and democracies is negligible.
·    Overall, we cannot say that democracy is a guarantee of economic development. But we can expect democracy  not to lag behind dictatorships in this respect. When we find such significant different in the rates of economic growth between countries under dictatorship and democracy, it is better to prefer democracy as it has several other positive outcomes.

Illustration 1
    When was democracy introduce in India?
Solution
    In 1950, when constitution was enforced in India.

Illustration 2
    What does political outcomes signifies?
Solution
    Accountable, responsive and legitimate government.

Illustration 3
    What is the basic element of democracy?
Solution
    Universal adult franchise.

Illustration 4
    What do you mean by social outcomes?
Solution
    Social outcomes means the benefits derived by the society due to democracy like dignity and freedom, gender equality and Ban on child labour, etc.

Reduction of inequality and poverty :
·    Perhaps more than  development, it is reasonable to expect democracies to reduce economic disparities.
·    Economic growth in demoracies are accompanied by increased inequalities among the 
      people - democracies lead to a just distribution of goods and opportunities.
·    Democracies are based on political  equality. All individuals have equal weight in electing representatives. Parallel to the process of bringing                    individuals into the political  arena on an equal footing, we find growing economic inequalities.
·    A small number of ultra-rich enjoy a highly disproportionate share of wealth and income. Not only that, their share in the total income of the country          has been increasing.
·    Those at the bottom of the society have very little to depend upon. Their incomes have been declining. Sometimes they find it difficult to meet their          basic needs of life such as food, clothing, house, education and health.

·    In actual life, democracies do not appear to be very successful in reducing economic inequalities. The poor constitute a large proportion of our                  voters  and no party will like to lose their votes. 
      Yet democratically elected governments do not appear to be as keen to address the question of poverty as you would expect them to.
·    The situation is much worse in some other countries. In Bangladesh, more thanhalf of its population live in poverty. People in several poor countries        are now dependent on the rich countries even for food supplies.

Accommodation of Social Diversity :
1. Democracies accommodates various social divisions. For example: Belgium has 
successfully negotiated difference among ethnic populations. Democracies usually develop a procedure to conduct their competition. This reduces the possibility of these tensions becoming explosing or violent.
2. No society can fully and permanently resolve conflicts among different groups. But we can certainly learn to respect these differences and we can also evolve mechanisms to negotiate the differences.
Democracy is best suited to produce this outcomes. Non-democratic regimes often turn a blind eye to or suppress internal social differences.
3.    Abillity to handle social difference, divisions and conflicts is thus a definite plus point of democratic regimes.
       But the example of Sri Lanka reminds us that a democracy must fulfil two conditions in order to achieve this outcome:
(a)  It is necessary to understand that democracy is not simply rule by majority opinion. The majority always needs to work with the minority so that government function to represent the general view. Majority and minority opinion are not permanent.
(b)    It is also necessary that rule by majority does not become rule by majority community in terms of religion or race or linguistic group, etc.
Rule by majority means that in case of every decision or in case of every election, different persons and groups may and can form a majority. Democracy remains democracy only as every citizen has a chance of being in majority at some point of time. If someone is barred from being in majority on the basis of birth, then the demoratic rule ceases to be accommodative for that person or group.

Dignity and freedom of the citizens :
Democracy stands much superior to any other form of government in promoting dignity and freedom of the individual.
·    Every individual wants to receive respect from fellow beings.
·    Often conflicts arise among individials because some feel that they are not treated with due respect. The passion for respect and freedom are the basis of democracy. Democracies throughout the world have recognised this, at least in principle. Democracies which have been built for long on the basis is not a simple matter to recognize that all individuals are equal.

Dignity of women
·  Most societies across the world were historically male dominated societies. Long struggles by women have created some sensitivity today that respect to and equal treatment of women are necessary ingredients of a democratic society.
·    That does not mean that women are actually always treated with respect. But once the principle is recognised, it becomes easier for women to wage a struggle against what is not unaccetpable legally and morally.
    ·    In a non-democratic set up, this unacceptability would not have legal basis because the principle of individual freedom and dignity would not have the legal and moral force there.

 Caste inequalities
·    Democracy in India has strengthened the claims of the disadvantaged and  discriminated castes for equal status and equal opportunity.
     There are instances still of caste-based inequalities and atrocities, but these lack, the moral and legal foundations. Perhaps it is the recognition that          makes ordinary citizens value their democratic rights.

What sustains democracy in India?

Thinking about challenges : 
Serious challenges democracy faces all over the world. A challenge is a difficulty that carries within it an opportunity for progress. Once we overcome a challenge we go up to a higher level than before. Different countries face different kinds of challenges. 
1. In non-democratic government countries face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting democratic government. This involve keeping military away from controlling government and establishing a sovereign and functional state. 
2. Most of the established democracies face the challenge of expansion. This involve giving greater power to local governments, extension of federal principle to all units of the federation, inclusion of women and minority groups, etc. 
3. Deepening of Democracy : This involves strengthening of the institution and practices of democracy. This challenge takes different meanings and paths in different parts of the world. It usually means strengthening those institutions that help people' participation and control. 

Thinking about political reforms : 
All the suggestions or proposals about overcoming various challenges to democracy are called  'democracy reform' or 'political reform'. All the countries do not have the same challenges, so it cannot follow the same recipe of political reforms. 
Some crucial question need to be thought at the State and local level. So, we think of some broad guidelines that can be kept in mind while devising ways and means for political reforms in India:

1. It is very tempting to think of legal ways of reforming politics. But this temptation need to be resisted. Law has an important role to play in political reform. Carefully devised changes in law can help to discourage wrong political practices and encourage good ones. But legal constitutional changes by themselves cannot overcome challenges to democracy. Democratic reforms should be carried out mainly by political activists, parties, movement and politically conscious citizens. 
 2. Any legal change must carefully look at what results it will have on politic. Sometimes the results may be counter productive. Generally, laws that seek to ban something are not very successful in politics. Laws that give political actors incentives to do good thing have more chances of working. The best laws are those which empower people to carry out democratic reforms. 
3. The main focus of political reforms should be on ways to strengthen democratic practice. The most important concern should be to increase and improve the quality of political participation by ordinary citizen. 
4. Any proposal for political reforms should think not only about what is a good solution but also about who will implement it and how.

Redefining Democracy :
    1.    Democracy is a form of government in which the rulers are elected by the people. 
    2.    The rulers elected by the people must take all the major decisions. 
    3.    Election must offer a choice and fair opportunity to the people to change the current ruler. 
    4.    This choice and opportunity should be available to all the people on an equal basis. 
    5.    The exercise of this choice must lead to a government limited by basic rules of constitution and citizens right 

Illustration 10     
What type of challenge is faced by a non - democratic country for democratic set - up?
Solution: 
The countries which are still not under democratic government face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting a democratic government
(a)     This involves:
 ·      Bringing down the existing non - democratic regime
 ·      Keeping military away from controlling government and 
·       Establishing a sovereign and functional state
 

What sustains democracy in India?

Thinking about challenges : 
Serious challenges democracy faces all over the world. A challenge is a difficulty that carries within it an opportunity for progress. Once we overcome a challenge we go up to a higher level than before. Different countries face different kinds of challenges. 
1. In non-democratic government countries face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting democratic government. This involve keeping military away from controlling government and establishing a sovereign and functional state. 
2. Most of the established democracies face the challenge of expansion. This involve giving greater power to local governments, extension of federal principle to all units of the federation, inclusion of women and minority groups, etc. 
3. Deepening of Democracy : This involves strengthening of the institution and practices of democracy. This challenge takes different meanings and paths in different parts of the world. It usually means strengthening those institutions that help people' participation and control. 

Thinking about political reforms : 
All the suggestions or proposals about overcoming various challenges to democracy are called  'democracy reform' or 'political reform'. All the countries do not have the same challenges, so it cannot follow the same recipe of political reforms. 
Some crucial question need to be thought at the State and local level. So, we think of some broad guidelines that can be kept in mind while devising ways and means for political reforms in India:

1. It is very tempting to think of legal ways of reforming politics. But this temptation need to be resisted. Law has an important role to play in political reform. Carefully devised changes in law can help to discourage wrong political practices and encourage good ones. But legal constitutional changes by themselves cannot overcome challenges to democracy. Democratic reforms should be carried out mainly by political activists, parties, movement and politically conscious citizens. 
 2. Any legal change must carefully look at what results it will have on politic. Sometimes the results may be counter productive. Generally, laws that seek to ban something are not very successful in politics. Laws that give political actors incentives to do good thing have more chances of working. The best laws are those which empower people to carry out democratic reforms. 
3. The main focus of political reforms should be on ways to strengthen democratic practice. The most important concern should be to increase and improve the quality of political participation by ordinary citizen. 
4. Any proposal for political reforms should think not only about what is a good solution but also about who will implement it and how.

Redefining Democracy :
    1.    Democracy is a form of government in which the rulers are elected by the people. 
    2.    The rulers elected by the people must take all the major decisions. 
    3.    Election must offer a choice and fair opportunity to the people to change the current ruler. 
    4.    This choice and opportunity should be available to all the people on an equal basis. 
    5.    The exercise of this choice must lead to a government limited by basic rules of constitution and citizens right 

Illustration 10     
What type of challenge is faced by a non - democratic country for democratic set - up?
Solution: 
The countries which are still not under democratic government face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting a democratic government
(a)     This involves:
 ·      Bringing down the existing non - democratic regime
 ·      Keeping military away from controlling government and 
·       Establishing a sovereign and functional state
 

What sustains democracy in India?

Thinking about challenges : 
Serious challenges democracy faces all over the world. A challenge is a difficulty that carries within it an opportunity for progress. Once we overcome a challenge we go up to a higher level than before. Different countries face different kinds of challenges. 
1. In non-democratic government countries face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting democratic government. This involve keeping military away from controlling government and establishing a sovereign and functional state. 
2. Most of the established democracies face the challenge of expansion. This involve giving greater power to local governments, extension of federal principle to all units of the federation, inclusion of women and minority groups, etc. 
3. Deepening of Democracy : This involves strengthening of the institution and practices of democracy. This challenge takes different meanings and paths in different parts of the world. It usually means strengthening those institutions that help people' participation and control. 

Thinking about political reforms : 
All the suggestions or proposals about overcoming various challenges to democracy are called  'democracy reform' or 'political reform'. All the countries do not have the same challenges, so it cannot follow the same recipe of political reforms. 
Some crucial question need to be thought at the State and local level. So, we think of some broad guidelines that can be kept in mind while devising ways and means for political reforms in India:

1. It is very tempting to think of legal ways of reforming politics. But this temptation need to be resisted. Law has an important role to play in political reform. Carefully devised changes in law can help to discourage wrong political practices and encourage good ones. But legal constitutional changes by themselves cannot overcome challenges to democracy. Democratic reforms should be carried out mainly by political activists, parties, movement and politically conscious citizens. 
 2. Any legal change must carefully look at what results it will have on politic. Sometimes the results may be counter productive. Generally, laws that seek to ban something are not very successful in politics. Laws that give political actors incentives to do good thing have more chances of working. The best laws are those which empower people to carry out democratic reforms. 
3. The main focus of political reforms should be on ways to strengthen democratic practice. The most important concern should be to increase and improve the quality of political participation by ordinary citizen. 
4. Any proposal for political reforms should think not only about what is a good solution but also about who will implement it and how.

Redefining Democracy :
    1.    Democracy is a form of government in which the rulers are elected by the people. 
    2.    The rulers elected by the people must take all the major decisions. 
    3.    Election must offer a choice and fair opportunity to the people to change the current ruler. 
    4.    This choice and opportunity should be available to all the people on an equal basis. 
    5.    The exercise of this choice must lead to a government limited by basic rules of constitution and citizens right 

Illustration 10     
What type of challenge is faced by a non - democratic country for democratic set - up?
Solution: 
The countries which are still not under democratic government face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting a democratic government
(a)     This involves:
 ·      Bringing down the existing non - democratic regime
 ·      Keeping military away from controlling government and 
·       Establishing a sovereign and functional state
 

What sustains democracy in India?

Thinking about challenges : 
Serious challenges democracy faces all over the world. A challenge is a difficulty that carries within it an opportunity for progress. Once we overcome a challenge we go up to a higher level than before. Different countries face different kinds of challenges. 
1. In non-democratic government countries face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting democratic government. This involve keeping military away from controlling government and establishing a sovereign and functional state. 
2. Most of the established democracies face the challenge of expansion. This involve giving greater power to local governments, extension of federal principle to all units of the federation, inclusion of women and minority groups, etc. 
3. Deepening of Democracy : This involves strengthening of the institution and practices of democracy. This challenge takes different meanings and paths in different parts of the world. It usually means strengthening those institutions that help people' participation and control. 

Thinking about political reforms : 
All the suggestions or proposals about overcoming various challenges to democracy are called  'democracy reform' or 'political reform'. All the countries do not have the same challenges, so it cannot follow the same recipe of political reforms. 
Some crucial question need to be thought at the State and local level. So, we think of some broad guidelines that can be kept in mind while devising ways and means for political reforms in India:

1. It is very tempting to think of legal ways of reforming politics. But this temptation need to be resisted. Law has an important role to play in political reform. Carefully devised changes in law can help to discourage wrong political practices and encourage good ones. But legal constitutional changes by themselves cannot overcome challenges to democracy. Democratic reforms should be carried out mainly by political activists, parties, movement and politically conscious citizens. 
 2. Any legal change must carefully look at what results it will have on politic. Sometimes the results may be counter productive. Generally, laws that seek to ban something are not very successful in politics. Laws that give political actors incentives to do good thing have more chances of working. The best laws are those which empower people to carry out democratic reforms. 
3. The main focus of political reforms should be on ways to strengthen democratic practice. The most important concern should be to increase and improve the quality of political participation by ordinary citizen. 
4. Any proposal for political reforms should think not only about what is a good solution but also about who will implement it and how.

Redefining Democracy :
    1.    Democracy is a form of government in which the rulers are elected by the people. 
    2.    The rulers elected by the people must take all the major decisions. 
    3.    Election must offer a choice and fair opportunity to the people to change the current ruler. 
    4.    This choice and opportunity should be available to all the people on an equal basis. 
    5.    The exercise of this choice must lead to a government limited by basic rules of constitution and citizens right 

Illustration 10     
What type of challenge is faced by a non - democratic country for democratic set - up?
Solution: 
The countries which are still not under democratic government face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting a democratic government
(a)     This involves:
 ·      Bringing down the existing non - democratic regime
 ·      Keeping military away from controlling government and 
·       Establishing a sovereign and functional state
 

What sustains democracy in India?

Thinking about challenges : 
Serious challenges democracy faces all over the world. A challenge is a difficulty that carries within it an opportunity for progress. Once we overcome a challenge we go up to a higher level than before. Different countries face different kinds of challenges. 
1. In non-democratic government countries face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting democratic government. This involve keeping military away from controlling government and establishing a sovereign and functional state. 
2. Most of the established democracies face the challenge of expansion. This involve giving greater power to local governments, extension of federal principle to all units of the federation, inclusion of women and minority groups, etc. 
3. Deepening of Democracy : This involves strengthening of the institution and practices of democracy. This challenge takes different meanings and paths in different parts of the world. It usually means strengthening those institutions that help people' participation and control. 

Thinking about political reforms : 
All the suggestions or proposals about overcoming various challenges to democracy are called  'democracy reform' or 'political reform'. All the countries do not have the same challenges, so it cannot follow the same recipe of political reforms. 
Some crucial question need to be thought at the State and local level. So, we think of some broad guidelines that can be kept in mind while devising ways and means for political reforms in India:

1. It is very tempting to think of legal ways of reforming politics. But this temptation need to be resisted. Law has an important role to play in political reform. Carefully devised changes in law can help to discourage wrong political practices and encourage good ones. But legal constitutional changes by themselves cannot overcome challenges to democracy. Democratic reforms should be carried out mainly by political activists, parties, movement and politically conscious citizens. 
 2. Any legal change must carefully look at what results it will have on politic. Sometimes the results may be counter productive. Generally, laws that seek to ban something are not very successful in politics. Laws that give political actors incentives to do good thing have more chances of working. The best laws are those which empower people to carry out democratic reforms. 
3. The main focus of political reforms should be on ways to strengthen democratic practice. The most important concern should be to increase and improve the quality of political participation by ordinary citizen. 
4. Any proposal for political reforms should think not only about what is a good solution but also about who will implement it and how.

Redefining Democracy :
    1.    Democracy is a form of government in which the rulers are elected by the people. 
    2.    The rulers elected by the people must take all the major decisions. 
    3.    Election must offer a choice and fair opportunity to the people to change the current ruler. 
    4.    This choice and opportunity should be available to all the people on an equal basis. 
    5.    The exercise of this choice must lead to a government limited by basic rules of constitution and citizens right 

Illustration 10     
What type of challenge is faced by a non - democratic country for democratic set - up?
Solution: 
The countries which are still not under democratic government face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting a democratic government
(a)     This involves:
 ·      Bringing down the existing non - democratic regime
 ·      Keeping military away from controlling government and 
·       Establishing a sovereign and functional state
 

What sustains democracy in India?

Thinking about challenges : 
Serious challenges democracy faces all over the world. A challenge is a difficulty that carries within it an opportunity for progress. Once we overcome a challenge we go up to a higher level than before. Different countries face different kinds of challenges. 
1. In non-democratic government countries face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting democratic government. This involve keeping military away from controlling government and establishing a sovereign and functional state. 
2. Most of the established democracies face the challenge of expansion. This involve giving greater power to local governments, extension of federal principle to all units of the federation, inclusion of women and minority groups, etc. 
3. Deepening of Democracy : This involves strengthening of the institution and practices of democracy. This challenge takes different meanings and paths in different parts of the world. It usually means strengthening those institutions that help people' participation and control. 

Thinking about political reforms : 
All the suggestions or proposals about overcoming various challenges to democracy are called  'democracy reform' or 'political reform'. All the countries do not have the same challenges, so it cannot follow the same recipe of political reforms. 
Some crucial question need to be thought at the State and local level. So, we think of some broad guidelines that can be kept in mind while devising ways and means for political reforms in India:

1. It is very tempting to think of legal ways of reforming politics. But this temptation need to be resisted. Law has an important role to play in political reform. Carefully devised changes in law can help to discourage wrong political practices and encourage good ones. But legal constitutional changes by themselves cannot overcome challenges to democracy. Democratic reforms should be carried out mainly by political activists, parties, movement and politically conscious citizens. 
 2. Any legal change must carefully look at what results it will have on politic. Sometimes the results may be counter productive. Generally, laws that seek to ban something are not very successful in politics. Laws that give political actors incentives to do good thing have more chances of working. The best laws are those which empower people to carry out democratic reforms. 
3. The main focus of political reforms should be on ways to strengthen democratic practice. The most important concern should be to increase and improve the quality of political participation by ordinary citizen. 
4. Any proposal for political reforms should think not only about what is a good solution but also about who will implement it and how.

Redefining Democracy :
    1.    Democracy is a form of government in which the rulers are elected by the people. 
    2.    The rulers elected by the people must take all the major decisions. 
    3.    Election must offer a choice and fair opportunity to the people to change the current ruler. 
    4.    This choice and opportunity should be available to all the people on an equal basis. 
    5.    The exercise of this choice must lead to a government limited by basic rules of constitution and citizens right 

Illustration 10     
What type of challenge is faced by a non - democratic country for democratic set - up?
Solution: 
The countries which are still not under democratic government face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting a democratic government
(a)     This involves:
 ·      Bringing down the existing non - democratic regime
 ·      Keeping military away from controlling government and 
·       Establishing a sovereign and functional state
 

What sustains democracy in India?

Thinking about challenges : 
Serious challenges democracy faces all over the world. A challenge is a difficulty that carries within it an opportunity for progress. Once we overcome a challenge we go up to a higher level than before. Different countries face different kinds of challenges. 
1. In non-democratic government countries face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting democratic government. This involve keeping military away from controlling government and establishing a sovereign and functional state. 
2. Most of the established democracies face the challenge of expansion. This involve giving greater power to local governments, extension of federal principle to all units of the federation, inclusion of women and minority groups, etc. 
3. Deepening of Democracy : This involves strengthening of the institution and practices of democracy. This challenge takes different meanings and paths in different parts of the world. It usually means strengthening those institutions that help people' participation and control. 

Thinking about political reforms : 
All the suggestions or proposals about overcoming various challenges to democracy are called  'democracy reform' or 'political reform'. All the countries do not have the same challenges, so it cannot follow the same recipe of political reforms. 
Some crucial question need to be thought at the State and local level. So, we think of some broad guidelines that can be kept in mind while devising ways and means for political reforms in India:

1. It is very tempting to think of legal ways of reforming politics. But this temptation need to be resisted. Law has an important role to play in political reform. Carefully devised changes in law can help to discourage wrong political practices and encourage good ones. But legal constitutional changes by themselves cannot overcome challenges to democracy. Democratic reforms should be carried out mainly by political activists, parties, movement and politically conscious citizens. 
 2. Any legal change must carefully look at what results it will have on politic. Sometimes the results may be counter productive. Generally, laws that seek to ban something are not very successful in politics. Laws that give political actors incentives to do good thing have more chances of working. The best laws are those which empower people to carry out democratic reforms. 
3. The main focus of political reforms should be on ways to strengthen democratic practice. The most important concern should be to increase and improve the quality of political participation by ordinary citizen. 
4. Any proposal for political reforms should think not only about what is a good solution but also about who will implement it and how.

Redefining Democracy :
    1.    Democracy is a form of government in which the rulers are elected by the people. 
    2.    The rulers elected by the people must take all the major decisions. 
    3.    Election must offer a choice and fair opportunity to the people to change the current ruler. 
    4.    This choice and opportunity should be available to all the people on an equal basis. 
    5.    The exercise of this choice must lead to a government limited by basic rules of constitution and citizens right 

Illustration 10     
What type of challenge is faced by a non - democratic country for democratic set - up?
Solution: 
The countries which are still not under democratic government face the foundational challenge of making the transition to democracy and then instituting a democratic government
(a)     This involves:
 ·      Bringing down the existing non - democratic regime
 ·      Keeping military away from controlling government and 
·       Establishing a sovereign and functional state
 

Related Unit Name