www.ignou-ac.

in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

N
1
www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in1

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

ASSIGNMENT SOLUTIONS GUIDE (2014-2015)

M.P.S.-1
Political Theory
Disclaimer/Special Note: These are just the sample of the Answers/Solutions to some of the Questions given in the
Assignments. These Sample Answers/Solutions are prepared by Private Teacher/Tutors/Auhtors for the help and Guidance
of the student to get an idea of how he/she can answer the Questions of the Assignments. We do not claim 100% Accuracy
of these sample Answers as these are based on the knowledge and cabability of Private Teacher/Tutor. Sample answers
may be seen as the Guide/Help Book for the reference to prepare the answers of the Question given in the assignment. As
these solutions and answers are prepared by the private teacher/tutor so the chances of error or mistake cannot be denied.
Any Omission or Error is highly regretted though every care has been taken while preparing these Sample Answers/
Solutions. Please consult your own Teacher/Tutor before you prepare a Particular Answer & for uptodate and exact
information, data and solution. Student should must read and refer the official study material provided by the university.
SECTION I
Q. 1. Examine some recent debates on liberty.
Ans. Lately, the concept of liberty has veered towards the trident relationship. According to MacCullum, it deals with
a relationship between three terms: it denotes to the freedom of an individual Y, from an obstacle x, to do z. In other words
Mr. Y is free to do Z. He further maintained that it is futile to divide the discussion of the liberty into three terms such as
negative liberty, positive liberty and freedom from obstacles, as all theorists use it.
Liberty has gained importance in the modern times. It is the central concept around which individual freedom and
development revolves. It is very important for development of the human being. Without it, it is very difficult to imagine
all round and balanced development of personality. It is one the important conditions for the success of democracy.
However, it is very complex concept, having strong emotional appeal. The term liberty has been in use since medieval
time, but it has different meaning in the different times. But what is unique that a commonality has been perceptible in the
various usage of the term.
Though liberty is used in many senses, yet the most common and important sense in which it is used implies
freedom from any constraint or obstacles. Liberty means freedom from any obstacles that come in way of a person when
he or she exercises some choice. It means that an individual is free to choose his course action without being bothered by
the external constraint and obstacles.
Therefore, liberty is a necessary condition for the full, balanced and all round development of a person. Without it,
he or she would not be able to actualize his full potentiality. If he or she is not given liberty, his or her growth would be
stunted. He or she would remain incomplete. His or her dream of having a life of his or her choice would remain unfulfilled.
Thus, liberty is meant by to act according to his choice without being hindered by the external forces and obstacles.
It gives one opportunity to spend life, as he or she desires. It provides one with free choices and freedom to choose one
such option or choice that suits his or her personality.
Liberty ensures a life free from any obstacles. It provides freedom to act independently without any fear of retribution
or punishment. It may also mean to be able to act according to ones desires and goals, actualize ones dream and realize
ones potentiality. It would not be an exaggeration to say that liberty is the essence of the humanity and gives substance to
the concept of responsibility.
The responsibility of any kind can not be fulfilled unless one is ensured matching liberty. Without liberty, neither
one can share responsibility, nor one can enjoy power. In fact, liberty is ideal to which all individuals and whole humanity
aspires. No wonder many wars have been wedged for it, many revolutions have been inspired by it and many Independence
movements have been ignited by the fire of liberty.
Whether Indian Independence Movement and its spiral effect on other colonies of the so-called Third World, American
War of Independence, French Revolution, Glorious Revolution of Britain or Velvet Revolution in eastern Europeall
these have been inspired by liberty.
However, there are mainly two senses in which liberty is usednegative and positive.

N
2

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in2

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

The recent debate on liberty has some feminist underpinnings. As Patterson claims that Freedom began its long
journey in the western consciousness as womans value. He considers the origin of freedom and liberty as resulting from
slavery of women in ancient Greek. As he further maintains that the concept of the freedom is different from what is
being coined in the western countries. Ancient women were never satisfied with the purely negative view of personal
freedom, not only because they recognized its potential nihilism and moral vacuity but because they could see how an
emasculated negative liberty easily sublated into liberty as power over others.
Another viewpoint on the liberty has been propounded by alternative womens conception of freedom, consequent
upon the rise of the feminist movement in 60s. By elucidation the relationship between mother and male and female child,
it proves that the development of autonomy is factored by the interaction with other selves. Hence, the freedom and
liberty is required to be conceptualized in terms of other, rather than on the negative principles of non-interference.
This viewpoint is elucidated with the parenting relationship between mother with male and female child in a patriarchal
society. The male and female child experiences different treatment, factored by the different social and cultural roles
assigned to the male and female in patriarchal society. The mother for psychological and sociological reason, mother
meets out different treatment to the male and female child. Mothers effects more easily the separation and individuation
of their sons as compared to their daughters. While son manages to assert their individuality and freedom from their
mothers, the daughters remain dependent on mothers. This different psychological development of the male and female
child determines their relations with others. Therefore, it is no of much help to concede that freedom is affected by the
presence or the absence of others. It is ingrained in their psyche, and non-interference is not relevant in this regard.
Another leading feminist, Carole Pateman believes that the original social contract resulted into not only a civil
society, but a patriarchal civil society also. This is so because the contract was between men, apart from other things, to
enjoy equal sexual access to women. This gave rise to mens freedom and womens subjugation. Hence, according to
Patterson, civil freedom is just a masculine attribute. So the original contract was a social, sexual and slavery contract.
That is why the feminist like Patemen believes in the doing away with original social contract for attaining freedom for
women.
The main argument of the radical feminism is that a woman has been relegated to subordinate position to the men
because of the system of the patriarchy prevalent in the society. The patriarchal system has resulted into the subjugation
of the women in the society. When there was matriarchal system in the society, the women enjoyed equal rights in the
society.
However, with the coming of the patriarchal system in the society, both at macro and micro level, the women were
placed under male subjugation. It resulted into a situation wherein; half of the population which is female is controlled
by that half which is male.
The radical feminists consider that gender divisions are the most fundamental and politically significant cleavages
in the society. Their slogan, the personal is the political, indicates this cleavage in the society. That is why they believe
in the sexual revolution, reversing the trend in the society. They stand for the total restructuring of personal, domestic and
family life.
Q. 2. What is Rawls theory of justice? Discuss.
Ans. Rawlss theory of the justice is based on the correction of the liberal-utilitarian principles of the greatest happiness of the greatest number of the people. Differing from these principle, Rawl maintains that liberal-utilitarian view of
the justice is morally wrong. He appreciates their contribution to the justice, it justifies the sacrifice of the good of some
of individuals for the happiness of the greatest number. Rawl criticizes the utilitarian for their neglect to the welfare and
justice for each member of the society for the aggregate sum of the utility and happiness. It is more concerned about the
happiness of the aggregate or the whole as against the each and every member of the society.
Rawl views it morally flawed and provides an alternative to the utilitarianism. His view of the justice is inspired by
the Kantian Moral Idea of equality of every man and freedom. Kant opines that all men are equal because they enjoy the
same capacity to be moral and formulate moral laws. Hence, everyone should have equality in every possible respect, and
all men are equal, they should be treated equally.
As Rawls has maintained that justice is the first virtue of a society, and it should always take priority over other
good. It is nothing but the welfarism in another sense. Rawls put forward the theory of justice, which is in harmony with
the needs and requirements of the welfare state. As he has aptly commented: If law and Government act effectively to
keep the market competitive, resources fully employed, property and wealth widely distributed over time and to maintain
the appropriate social minimum, then if there is equality of opportunity underwritten by education to all, the resulting
distribution will be just.

N
3

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in3

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

Rawls stands for the privileges and inequalities, not for the maximisation of the social good as is the case with the
utilitarian. He champions the privileges and inequalities and positive discrimination for the improvement of the least
advantaged and downtrodden people. As he maintains that social and economic policies be aimed at maximizing the
long-term expectations of the least advantaged under conations of fair equality and opportunity.
Rawls justified the welfare state on the ground of the distributive justice. It harmonizes the relations between the
state and market. As free market economy results into the concentration of wealth and inequality, which undermines the
individual freedom and liberty, it must be regulated by the state. It gives importance to the individuals and does not allow
the market forces to undermine his individuality. If the market forces narrow down these choices, it is the duty of the
welfare state to do away with factors.
The welfare state is that it increases the individual liberty. The welfare state has to act as catalyst of socio-economic
change in the society. It has only distributes the national wealth and resources, but also to provide services and goods to
the society. The welfare state, with its interventionist ideology to attain the maximum welfare of the people, is based on
the foundations of the equality. Citizenship is one of the foundation of the welfare state. If it strengthens this foundation,
it benefits itself as well as enriching the citizenship.
But the welfare state has failed to deliver the desired result. The all problems of the society, for which welfare state
was conceivedinequality, poverty, injustice, hunger and depredation, concentration of wealth, etc. are far from being
resolved. Some thinkers like Barry maintain that integration of the welfare theory with the philosophy welfare state is an
intellectual error. This is so proper attention was not given to appropriate institutional mechanism, which resolve these
burning issues of the humanity.
This concept of the state activities takes its inspiration from his concept of the distributive justice. He maintains that
conditions for the success of this model is to ensure equal opportunities to all. The state must provide and ensure equal
opportunity. It insists that state should make investment in public health, education and other socioeconomic infrastructures.
Thus, Rawls concept of justice is based on the main three main tenets: Principle of Fairness, Protective Discrimination
and Social Justice.
Q. 3. What is Authority? Explain.
Ans. Authority is intrinsically related with power. It is based on the acceptance of the right to rule. Without authority,
it would be difficult to rule, as acceptance of the people is vital for it. Max Weber terms it as legitimacy.
The term authority or consent to rule has found its mention even in Hobbesian scheme of things. Even though his
Leviathan had complete control over its subjects, his rule would be based on the consent to rule. Hobbes, while corroborating
this has observed: It is not therefore the victory, that giveth the right of domination over the vanquished, but his own
covenant, that giveth the right of domination over the vanquished, but his own covenant. Nor he is obliged because he is
conquered, but because he cometh in and submitteth to victor.
Thus, consent or acceptance of the rule is very important for the exercise of authority. The mere use of power does
not make the rule acceptable, it must seem to be delivering some good or following some mutually acceptable set of rules
and laws. Only then it derives authority to rule.
Max Weber on Authority
Max Weber identifies three types of authority Charismatic authority, traditional authority, and legal authority. The
Charismatic authority has its legitimacy in the Charismatic leadership of a leader. The ruled or the subjects submit to the
authority because of the Charisma of leader. Its main basis is the belief of the people in the extraordinary quality of their
leader or ruler. As Weber comments; The legitimacy of charismatic rule rests upon the belief in the magical powers,
revelations and hero worship.
The traditional authority refers to the domination or hegemony based on the traditional power structures. The rule
and authority rests upon traditionalism. By traditionalism, Weber means a psychic attitude set for the habitual
work-a-day and to the belief in the everyday routine as inviolable norm of conduct. He further points out that
patriarchalism is the basis on which tradition rests upon.
Weber terms these two types as irrational ones, as their authority is based not on the functional relations but personal
ones.
In contrast to other two types of authority, the legal authority is rational one as its rule rests upon rules that are
rationally established by enactment, by agreement or by imposition. As Weber maintains: submission under legal
authority is based upon an impersonal bond to the generally defined and functional duty of office.
Thus political authority in legal authority finds its sustenance through national symbols, slogans, national flag, and
national events as Republic Day or the Independence Day. Weber maintains that in such type the authority acquires
acceptance or the legitimacy from the process of psychic manipulation.

N
4

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in4

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

However, it is difficult to trace out the any type of authority in its pure form. As Weber himself has pointed out this
fact, the great majority of empirical cases represent a combination or a state of transition among several such pure
types.
So the power and authority is intrinsically related with each other. The power to become authority must be grounded
in the mutually acceptable rules and laws. A political power has to be legitimate power if it were to find favour with the
people and general acceptability, hence its continuity. For that there should be belief among the people that power is being
exercised in accordance with the formal laws, rules and regulations.
For the continuation and sustenance of the political authority, the power must be exercised in consonance with the
authority. It must reinforce the authority by justifying its rule in accordance of the law of land. However, in case of coup
or the forcible takeover of the power, there may be divorce between political power and authority.
In such a situation, the right to rule may not find acceptance by the people. Hence, the new ruler would be enjoying
only political power, not authority. To gain authority, it would have to resort to some measures and steps that would find
acceptance with people, and would be in reference to the established rules and laws of the land.
For the time being, the new authority or the regime depends upon the political power. The new rule ultimately finds
acceptance with the people, and attains authority. Its continuation and sustainability is thus guaranteed. However, in case
of failure of attaining the legitimacy, the regime might be discontinued or removed by some other power that may find
acceptability later on.
SECTION II
Q. 4. (a) Communitarian position on state neutrality.
Ans. However, the Communitarianism has been propounded by the western scholars in wake of decline of the
community, and the virtual social breakdown in the western society based on rather crass individualism. The increasing
isolation of men in the western society and the urban areas, in other countries, from 1960 onwards and the resultant
problem were attributed to the lack of community life or the group feelings in general terms. If one takes an objective
view San any value judgement on the causes of the mindless violence, radicalism, dogmatism, soaring rate of crime
graphs, terrorism, religious fanaticism (incidentally the communal riots in India are an urban phenomena), the root cause
to these may be attributed to the lack of community life.
Historically speaking, the community in political theory has its earlier manifestation in the anarchist wing of socialism,
which emphasizes a community like social structure based on decentralization, cooperation and the self-management.
Proudhon and Kropotkin are the two main anarchists who support the primacy of the community life in solving all
problems.
Gandhiji also espoused the community, and his village republics are the answer to the modern problems. Among
the contemporary anarchists, Murray Bookchin is known for his bold assertion that the solution to the problem of a bleak
and dispersed nature of modern life lies in the increasing emphasis on community.
However, in the realm of the political philosophy, the communitarian thought has found its due contributions in the
works of Charles Taylor, Michael Sandel, and Alisdair Maclntyre, among the host of other prominent names. They
underline the virtual failure of the liberal individualism, and its shortcomings and inability to provide solution to the
problems of the modern life.
They argue that liberal individualism has institutionalized the narrow concerns, selfish and egoistic behaviours of
individual by posting a theory that regards individual as prior to society. That the man is a social animal, despite sounding
Aristotelian and conservative, it is still the panacea for the all ills emanating from individualistic, selfish, and egoistic and
isolationist life that liberal individualism gifted to the modern society. That is what Sandel means when he postulates that
the social relations form our social identities, and the cause of any problem arising thereof is to be found in that relations
only.
Historically speaking, the community in political theory has its earlier manifestation in the anarchist wing of socialism,
which emphasizes a community like social structure based on decentralization, cooperation and the self-management.
Proudhon and Kropotkin are the two main anarchists who support the primacy of the community life in solving all
problems.
Lastly, but not least the communitarianism differs from the liberal principles of justice or universal validity of the
value judgment. It argues that everything including the justice and the value is to be seen and analysed in a context.
Justice or any value must be adjudged in reference to the culture, related traditions or the practices, community backgrounds
and community belief system.
While left-wing communitarianism, like anarchism is grounded in view that the unrestricted freedom and social
equality should be the basis of the organization of the society and state apparatus, right-wing have faith in the traditional

N
5

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in5

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

values and authority of the society. The centrist, on the other hand, believes that the reciprocal rights and responsibilities
are the basis of the community.
(b) Idea of Republican Freedom.
Ans. The idea of the Republican Freedom steers clear of the idea of the negative and positive liberty. According to
civil republic traditions, the distinction between negative and positive freedom does provide the true essence and value of
the republican freedom. The republican freedom, despite being similar to the traditional concept of freedom provides a
richer and broader aspect of the freedom.
As Petit has rightly observed: The republican conception of liberty is akin to the negative one in maintaining that
what liberty requires is the absence of something, not necessarily the presence. It is akin to positive conception in holding
that which must be absent has to do with mastery rather than interference. Freedom consists not in the presence of selfmastery and not in the absence of interference by others, but rather in the absence of mastery by others: the absence of
the domination. Freedom is just non-domination.
Thus, according to republicanism, the relation between domination and interference is important in understanding
the freedom. The relation between the positive and negative freedom factors its nature and prospects.
The idea of Republican Government is in sync with the republican idea of freedom as non-domination. The Republican
Government works on the principles of non-domination and non-interference. In such Government, each citizen feels that
he or she is not being ruled by other or dominated by other people, but his own interests are behind the rule.
The principle of civic virtue, the idea of common good and the notion of the active civic participation are the
underlying principles of the Republican Government. It cautions people and Government the susceptibility of the corruption,
which is a potent threat to Republicanism.
The republican idea of the citizenship is dynamic one, assigning active role to citizens in governance. According to
republicanism, citizenship consists those rights, which provides citizens with freedom to actively interact with other
citizens under free conditions and in the pursuit of the freedom and equality..
The Constitutionalism is the most effective safeguard against the encroachment of individual liberty. Individual
freedom and liberty has been at the centre of many movements, controversies and idealism in political science.
If one takes Birds eye view of state, its origin and its relations, individual liberty and its preservation has been its
primary concern.
The republican idea of Government is based on non-domination and non-interference in the life and matters of
individuals and their activities. In a republican govern a citizen or a person does no feel that he or she is being ruled by
the Government or some other body. On contrary, he or she feels a part of the ruling and governing process. That is what
a republican Government stands for.
Q. 5. (a) New dimensions in the theory of federalism.
Ans. The Federal Governments have come under pressure due to interplay of various factors. Some recent trends
have been perceptible having long-term and short-term ramifications for federation. The breathtaking development in the
field of science and technology, particularly in IT, communication and satellite technology are factoring some changes in
the working of federal system.
As the world has been transformed into a Global Village due to advent of Internet, satellite, TV and sophisticated
technology of data and text transfer and other means of communication, these have impacts on the working of federation
as well. Consequently, the central Governments have become more powerful.
The advent of satellite technology and Internet has transcended the geographical boundaries of nation-state and
undermined its sovereignty through beaming of programmes and information not suitable for a society or having contents
dangerous for its sociopolitical fabrics. This has given central Government another excuse to tighten its grip over the
system. The growing economic liberalization in trade and commerce and dismantling of tariff barriers and protectionism
has forced central Government to acquire more powers. So that it could handle the challenges arising out of these opening
up of world economics and trade. This has made central Government more powerful.
Then there has emerged the concept of Cooperative Federalism in which more powers are being given to states. In
India too, there has been growing demand for state autonomy. And it was conceded in substantial way by 73rd and 74th
amendments in the Constitution. These two amendment Acts have given constitutional status to Panchayati Raj Institutions
and also to municipal bodies, with defined powers, functions and finances.
The globalization is certainly going to affect the federalism and the federal character of the state. The existing
theories of the cooperative and competitive federalism would be imparted new dimension in the globalizing world. It may

N
6

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in6

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

lead to the emergence of the new model of federalism. As federalism is a constitutional arrangement of power balance
between shared rule and self-rule; globalization is going to change this balance.
But many questions remain: how the globalization will affect it and what would be its ramifications? What would be
the effects of the globalized market on the federal and federating units? Would the globalization and the liberalization
factor the emergence of the new perspective, leading to the changed nature of the federalism?
The federalism has already undergone change in wake of the transformation from the federation based on the nation
state to that of ethnic federalism. What will be the further effects of WTO, IMF and World Bank on it? With ever growing
power and hold of the these world organizations, the relations between federal authority and the federation units in a
federation may change to the extent that it may assume new dimension and perspective. As Lidija Basta Fleiner has aptly
summed up this dilemma faced by the federalism; democratic control of the federalized power and the federation
control of democracy.
Consequent upon the globalization, political culture would undergo a change, showing greater decentralized loyalty
on one hand and Supra-state loyalty on the other. It is bound to result into structural tension and the conflict of the
loyalty. The structural tension resulting from the globalized world would compromise with ideal of democracy as based
on the majoritarian rule, and may apart anti-majoritarian character to the federalism.
The globalization would also affect the another pillar of the federalismjudiciary. The globalization with its all
pervading effects would lead to the increasing use of the power of the judicial review and this in turn would prepare the
ground for the greater independence of judiciary from the executive. It may degenerate into intergovernmental feud and
tension, and may prove to be apparent demise of the principles and ideals of the federalism.
There is another dimension to the effect of globalized world on the democracy. The liberal democratic state is
organized on the basis of equal representation and the resolution of the diversities. The diversities and the collective rights
of the different countries, based on the multi-cultural federal state are going to clash with globalization and the privatization,
as it would inevitably lead to the greater inequalities among the states.
(b) State versus Civil Society.
Ans. State is important concept in the arena of Political Science city-state in ancient Greece, ancient India had
developed the concept of state as mentioned in Shanti Parv of Mahabharat. The Saptang theory mentions seven elements
which make a state. The ancient thinkers like Plato, Aristotle and Cicero considered state and society as same. They used
the term state for the whole society. It was the modern political thinkers who gave state independent status, separate from
the society.
The civil society is generally mistaken for the political society for the state. While society in a general term, meant
by having all social relationships within its boundary, the civil society refers to a type of society existing at a particular
point of item. While society deals with an array of social relationships and the social activities, the civil society is primarily
concerned with public and public affairs.
The libertarianism believes in the spontaneous concept of the civil society. According to it, the order in the society
is not imposed from above or by the Government or the state. The civil society comprises all these associations and
commercial groups, which are of voluntary nature maintains that market does come under the civil society.
Civil society is not only a sum total of individuals living together for some purpose, but also all types of relationships
he forms with the fellow individual and groups. A society constitutes the totality of objectives, relationships, and institutions.
The Indian society or American society is used in this sense.
Various cooperative societies like Dairy Milk Society, Society for the Awareness of Communicable Diseases, Literary
Society come under this category. In this case, the term society is used for a part of whole society and it web of relationships
and groups.
Secondly, the society is formed for some common aims or objectives.
Thirdly, society is characterized by the mutual cooperation.
Fourthly, society is based on voluntary membership. Mutual benefit is another aspect of the society.
Finally, society fulfils the social instinct of individuals.
What should be the nature of the state? Though in India the state had obvious manifestation in age-old tradition of
Vedas, Shanti Parv of Mahabharat period, yet it was in polis of Greek city-state as propounded by Plato and Aristotle
that state emerged. However, Plato and Aristotle did not see any distinction between society and state, and in their view,
the state was apart of the society.
It was Cicero who took state out of narrow confine of polis, making it a commonwealth of agreements between
people and the state, where people become the part of the state after they agree on certain rules. The liberal concept of the

N
7

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in7

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

state sees state as the necessary and useful institution. The state should be concerned with political and public sphere of
the state activities while the individual should be left alone to deal with the social and individual sphere of activities.
The liberals consider the state as means to achieve the individual freedom and rights. The liberal thinkers distinguish
between the state and state. According to them, the society was prior to state. The state has come out from the society.
Hence state is not above the society. Maitland, Laski and MacIver have viewed state as any other association.
The Marxian concept of the state reflects the class bias as existing in any society. According to Marxism, the
prevailing method and mode of production determine the nature and function of the state or any institution in a society.
The Marxist concept of state is based on two sets of factors for analyzing the nature and function of the state. The general
factor is that the state is an institution determined by the existing classes or class antagonism prevailing in a society. And
the state is instrument of class domination, implying that the dominant class uses it for domination or exploitation of
dominated class. State most often than not takes the side of dominant class.
Power is the basis of the state. Then there would be a stateless society. The Marxian concept of the state has been
criticized for its economic determinism.
The state instead of withering away has become more powerful. Moreover, the modern state has turned into a
welfare state, doling out welfare measures to the working class or exploited class.
The society is prior to the state. This can be supported by anthropological literatures on the societies which have no
organized states. Moreover, the historical facts prove that the state came out of the society, not vice-versa.
Secondly, the aim of society is wider than that of the state. While state deals primarily with the political aspect of
human life, the society is concerned with every aspects of human life.
Thirdly, society is lager than the state. A state is limited to the territory over which its writ runs, while society
transcends the geographical and territorial limitations. There is no such condition for the society. A society can function
without having any organized set up.
Fourthly, the state possesses sovereignty, while society does not have any mechanism like that. The state is supreme
and no individual or group or association can challenge its authority. Society has not such coercive power.
Finally, while society deals with the both external and internal aspects of individual, the state is limited to the
external only. State law is different from that of society. While the state has legal sanction, that of the society has no legal
sanction. It implies that the state law is enforceable in the Court, while that of society is not enforceable.
Early writers like Plato, Aristotle did not make any difference between state and civil society. Even modern political
thinkers like Hegel and Bosanquet have considered state and society as one. Almost all dictators right from Hitler to
Mussolini have considered state and society.
But it is essential to differentiate between society and state. It completely bars any understanding of either society or
of the state. In terms of functions and scope the society is more inclusive than the state. While the state deals with
functions and scope pertaining to political phenomena and institutions, the society is concerned with all human activities,
including political one.
According to liberal thinkers, the domain of the state activity should be minimal as compared to civil society. The
unwarranted state activities were viewed with skepticism. The Marxist-Socialist view stood for greater state intervention
in all walks of society. It led beginning of an interventionist state. Recently the welfare state also came to be known as
the positive intervention of the state in the economic activities of the society.
Consequently the state has become more powerful. Many factorshistorical as well as modern shaped the emergence
of a powerful state, as compared to the civil society. The various socio-economic factors also made the society complex.
These have made the modern state more powerful.

8
www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in8