SHUBHRA RANJAN IAS STUDY PVT LTD

ONLINE PSIR ANSWER WRITING SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND

TEST SERIES 2017
ANSWER KEY: TEST 2



Que. 1) Why is Karl Marx regarded as the founder of scientific socialism? Would
you describe him as evolutionary or revolutionary socialist?
Directives:
• You can start by introducing socialism and briefly explain its emergence
and give the place of Marx in socialism.
• You must then describe Marx’s view of earlier socialists and his reason
for calling them so.
• The next logical step would be to explain why Marx calls his socialism as
scientific to address the first part of the question. You can also give its
critical evaluation.
• You should finally deal with the second part of the question, whether
Marx should be associated with evolutionary or revolutionary socialism.

Ans. 1)

Socialism is a meta-ideology which C.E.M. Joad accurately described as “a hat

that has lost its shape because everyone wears it”. There have been many schools
of socialism, among which Marx remains an important “watershed point”. He is
one of the few thinkers where ideology is associated with name.
As a political ideology, Socialism emerged as a rival to classical liberalism in the
19th century as a response to the horrific conditions of the work and in the
backdrop of neglect of equality. Thus, it has focused on social and economic rights.
Marx despairingly dubbed the socialists who preceded him, like Charles Fourier,
Robert Owen, and St. Simon, as “Utopians”, for their emphasis on class harmony
and non–revolutionary views. The relationship between early socialists and Marx
was similar to the one that Plato shared with the Sophists. Like Marx, Plato
disparaged Sophism, but was indebted to its ideas.
But what differentiated Marx’s theorizing from the earlier brand of Socialism was
that he was the first to employ systemic analysis in an ambitious attempt to
expose capitalism’s contradictions, and showed with ‘scientific precision’, the
inevitability of the crisis of capitalism and communist revolution.
Marx described his scientific socialism as ‘praxis’, that is, having unity of thought
and action. Its component parts included dialectical materialism taken from
German philosophy, Marxist political economy influenced by British economy and
the theory and tactics of class struggle, taken from French politics.

However, Marx’s socialism cannot be called as scientific. It is just one of the noble
lies, and is simply an ideology. Even KARL POPPER criticized Marx’s claim of his
socialism as science since it was not open to falsification.
Moreover, we see the threads of both, revolutionary as well as evolutionary
socialism in Marx. The first stage of Marxist socialism would establish ‘dictatorship
of proletariat’ to be arrived through communist revolution, in accordance with
Marx’s belief that “violence is the midwife of change”, an approach reaffirmed by
LEO TROTSKY. This would be followed by the move from communism to socialism,
which exhibited peaceful means.

Que. 2) "Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please;
they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but circumstances
existing already, giving and transmitted from the past."-Karl Marx. Critically
examine.

Directives:
• You must first understand that the question is on Marx’s theory of
historical materialism, and explain that in brief in the introduction.
• You should then explain why history limits the choices man, and follow it
by why Marx gives scope for human role.
• You must then conclude by giving a critical evaluation of why how he
describes his dialectical materialism as science.

Ans. 2)
Marx has given the materialistic interpretation of history which is based on Hegel’s
claim that history occurs through a dialectic, or clash, of opposing forces. As per
the theory of historical materialism of Marx, economic structure is a basic
structure, with others forming the superstructure.

Marx is also known as an economic determinist as he suggests that economic

structure constraints choices. There is limited autonomy for individuals. Even if
capitalists want to be good, they cannot be good. Thus, man’s social and economic
structure will be largely determined by the overall structure of society.
However, Marx is also progressive, as he believes that despite the constraints of
economic structure, there is role of human agency as well. He does believe that
men can change history, and they do not have live under exploitative
circumstances. He appeals for workers of the world to unite as they have nothing
to lose but their chains. Communism can be achieved through the violent
revolution.

Although it may appear that there is contradiction in Marx’s analysis as on one side
he suggests history constraints human choices while giving scope for man to change
it. However, if we associate it with his politics, there are no such contradictions. It
rather explains that even though there has not been any change so far, Marx’s
appeal for revolution will bring about the change.
Marx also calls his historical materialism as science, which is based on the
objective understanding of history. However, it is not science but Marx’s politics.
KARL POPPER even says that Marx has committed the ‘guilt of historicism’ by using
history to further his own cause.

Que. 3) Gramsci was an innovative and wide ranging thinker whose

interpretations of Marxism helped rescue it from determinism and economic
reductionism. Critically examine the above statement.
Directives:
• You must start by giving an introduction of Gramsci.
• You should then explain what is economic determinism in Marx.
• In the body, you must mention why Gramsci attempts to revise it.
• Then, you must give the features of Gramsci’s model, consisting of
multiple structures, etc.
• In the conclusion, you should critically examine. Here, the statement is
correct. You can then give reasons in support of that argument.

Ans. 3)
The place of Gramsci in Marxism lies only second to that of Karl Marx himself. He
was an Italian philosopher who made an impact by making various modifications to
Marxism.
It is said that Gramsci has rescued Marxism from economic determinism, a belief
that only economic forces determine, shape and define all political, social,
cultural and every other aspect of a civilization. He stressed that most Marxists,
preoccupied as they were with economic laws of development, had lost sight of
the political dimension in human affairs. The influence of Italian philosopher
Benedetto Croce for his emphasis on cultural factors and their role in shaping
history, is evident on the shaping of Gramsci’s political thought.
Gramsci was troubled because he felt that Marxist predictions about the
inevitability of the destruction of Capitalism and of Communist revolution had not
seen the light of the day. He was inspecting whether there is any flaw in Marx’s
understanding of history. Gramsci realized that Marx, in his base – superstructure
model, had underestimated the role played by the elements of superstructure. He
took them for granted, as a mere reflection of the basic structure.
Gramsci revised this model into one comprising of multiple structures where
superstructures are also structures in themselves, which earned him the title of
“theoretician of superstructure”. While Marxist program of revolution was directed
only against economic structure, Gramsci suggests fight at two levels: first, ‘war of
position’ at the intermediate level that is civil society, with the aim to scrape away
the whole system of bourgeois attitudes and narratives and to create a proletarian
counterhegemony; to be followed by ‘war of manoeuvre’ against the state.
Thus, with the coming of Gramsci, Marxism was eradicated of this notion of
economic determinism, which was further reaffirmed by structural Marxist scholar
ALTHUSSER who gave three structures of society having two-way causality, instead
of economic level determining everything.

Que. 4) "The intellectuals are the dominant groups, 'deputies' exercising the
subaltern function on social hegemony and political government."- Gramsci.
Explain.
Directives:
• In the introduction, you must mention what the question is about. It is
on Gramsci’s analysis of intellectuals.
• Give the general meaning of intellectuals and then compare it with
Gramsci’s theory.
• In the conclusion, since the question is asking you to explain, simply
explain his theory and briefly conclude with the importance of his
theory.

Ans. 4.)
“All men are intellectuals, but not all men have in society the function of
intellectuals. “

-Gramsci
The above statement is an expression of Gramsci’s analysis of intellectuals.
Throughout history, it was assumed that intellectuals are those who engage in
critical study and reflection about the reality of society. As Noam Chomsky
suggested, “it is the responsibility of the intellectuals to speak the truth and
expose lies, however, this is not a truism to pass over without a comment.”
Gramsci highlighted that it is the other way round, and the role of intellectuals
should not be simplified to that of a neutral class. Moreover, when he wrote about
intellectuals, he was not referring to the academics who sat in the ivory towers or
wrote erudite pieces for academic journals only read by others of the same ilk.
Rather he believed that “all men are intellectuals, but not all men in society have
the function of intellectuals”, thereby defining intellectuals by their social
functions.
Gramsci gave the concept of hegemony and saw the role of intellectuals as a
crucial one in creating a hegemony. To counter this, Gramsci suggests the creation
of a ‘historical bloc’ by the subaltern classes which would have its own
intellectuals to create a counter-hegemony.
The concept fundamental to Gramsci’s theory of intellectual activity and social
process is the distinction between ‘traditional’ and ‘organic’ intellectuals.
Traditional intelligentsia are rooted in the classes that have hung-over from the
pre-capitalist society, and as such express the interests of the landed aristocracy,
monarchs and the Church, and sees itself (wrongly) as a class apart from society.
Whereas, organic intellectuals are those which have grown organically with the
growth of capitalism and appear in the form of bureaucracy, managerial class and
professionals. Gramsci maintained that they are deputies of dominant class, and
that the notion of intellectuals as being a distinct category independent of class
was a myth. Rather, it is marked by a kind of devil’s pact between intellectual
class and the dominant hegemonic forces. These specialized cadres, formed both
in the working-class political party and through education, had the duty of
organizing, administering, directing, educating or leading others. Gramsci’s
concept of organic intellectuals can also be reflected in the Indian context where
the civil services acted a support machinery for the maintenance of the colonial
rule.
To put a Deleuzian spin on the idea, the function of the organic intellectual is to
produce an image of thought that corresponds to the real existence of the social
group of which they are a part and from which they have emerged. 
Gramsci’s analysis of intellectuals has made a major impact on the field of
academics as well as he assigns a unique and crucial role to intellectuals in the
process of social change. His concept of hegemony coupled with role of
intellectuals has changed the very way of looking at intellectuals.

Que. 5) "Action, as distinguished from fabrication is never possible in isolation;

to be isolated is to be deprived of the capacity to act"- Hannah Arendt. Explain
with reference to Arendt's theory of Political.

Directives:
• You must first give the introduction of Hannah Arendt in terms of her
thinking and give key terms like ‘thinking without barriers’.
 • You should then give her theory of political action and mention her
influences.
• You must explain what she means by action.
• You can finally conclude by comparing her theory of political and the
conventional view of political.
Ans. 5)
Hannah Arendt is a 20th century political philosopher whose writings do not easily
come together into a systematic philosophy and so, she calls her thinking as
‘thinking without barriers’. Still, the most distinguishing aspect is her concern for
participation in civic affairs, for which she earned the title of ‘scholar of civic
republicanism’.

Arendt classifies human action into two types- vita activa and vita contemplativa,
corresponding to action and thinking, respectively. For her, action is more
important. In ‘The Human Condition’, she rejected the Western philosophical
tradition from  Plato  through  Marx, arguing that the apex of human achievement
was not philosophical thought, but active life.
She further classifies action into labour, work and ultimately, ‘action’. Labour
corresponds to natural action in which man is animal laborans; work involves
profession which makes man as homo faber; but it is because of ‘action’ which is
topmost in the hierarchy of vita activa and which man performs in the company of
others, that man attains the status of human i.e., zoo politikon.
Political action, for Arendt, is participation in public affairs. Politics is a matter of
people sharing a common world and a common space of appearance so that public
concerns can emerge and be articulated from different perspectives. This is the
only way to ensure true freedom. If man does not participate in deliberation and
law making, the adverse consequences can be as severe as totalitarianism.
Her theory of political is an unconventional understanding as she places politics in
the realm of civil society, as opposed to a possession of the state.

Que. 6) "Dialectics is nothing more than the science of general laws of motion
and development of nature, human society and thought."- Engels in Anti-
Duhring. Critically evaluate the laws of dialectical materialism.
Directives:
• You must start by explaining what is dialectical materialism.
• You should then mention from where Marx has taken this theory. It is
important to note that even though the question mentions Engels, you
must not get confused. The answer has to be based on the Marxist theory
of dialectical materialism only.
 • In the body of the answer, you should give the three laws of dialectics.
• You must then mention why Marx calls his dialectics as science.
• Since the question is asking you to critically evaluate, you must conclude
with criticisms of his theory.

Ans. 6)
The theory of dialectical materialism is an important aspect in Marxist theory and
is a philosophical approach to reality which emerged from the teachings of Karl
Marx and Friedrich Engels. The idea of dialectics, according to them, is an idea of
struggle. Marx believed that the movement in history is powered by the movement
of struggle.

The laws of dialectics were already worked out in detail by Hegel. However, Hegel
gave it an ‘idealist’ base. They appear in a mystified, idealist form. It was Marx
and Engels who first gave dialectics a scientific, that is to say, materialist basis.
Marx agreed with Hegel that there was a constant movement in the dialectical
process, but emphasised the real rather than the ideal, the social rather than the
intellectual, matter rather than the mind. For Marx, the key idea was not the
history of philosophy, but the history of economic production and the social
relations that accompanied it.
The three laws of dialectical materialism include:
1. Unity of opposites
2. Negation of negations
3. Quantity changes into quality
In this world, everything has its contradiction or negation. Till opposites exist,
contradictions exist. The movement of dialectics continues till opposites exist and
the lesser truth remains behind and finally, once the contradiction ends, the
movement stops. Quantitative changes keep on happening till a turning point
arrives when we realise the occurrence of a qualitative change.
Dialectics, simply put, means the interaction between thesis and anti-thesis. And
the process goes on till a final synthesis is produced, which for Marx and Engels
manifest into a classless society.
Though well analysed and as Engels claims it to be scientifically grounded, theory
of dialectical materialism has many intrinsic flaws and has also attracted criticism.
It is described as being an ideology only, instead of masking it with science. G. A.
Cohen strongly emphasises the materialistic and deterministic character of Marx's
theory of history. He insists that the development of the productive forces is the
primary motive force for historical change, and portrays. Marxism as a form of
technological determinism. He also criticises dialectical philosophy as it involves
methods and assumptions which are ultimately incompatible with those of  the
analytic approach.

Que. 7) "The sad truth is that most evil is done by people who never make up
their minds to be good or evil."-Hannah Arendt. Comment.

Directives:
• You must first understand what the question is about. It is based on
Hannah Arendt’s concept of ‘Banality of Evil’ and mention it in the
introduction itself.
• You must then explain her way of thinking in context of this theory.
• In the body, you must elaborate on how she believes that evil has
become banal and also mention her works.
• In the conclusion, you can give her analysis of evil, and the importance
of her theory.

Ans. 7)
This statement relates to Hannah Arendt’s concept of ‘Banality of Evil’, which
came into prominence from her reportage on ‘Eichmann in Jerusalem’, based on
the trial of Adolf Eichmann.

This work marks a shift in her concerns from the nature of political  action, to a
concern with the faculties that underpin it - the interrelated activities
of thinking and judging.
Her concern was to know the causes of evil, which she traced to the failure or
absence of faculties of ‘critical thinking’ and judgement. From Eichmann’s trial,
she concluded that he operated unthinkingly, following orders. The human
dimension of these activities were not entertained, so the extermination of the
Jews became indistinguishable from any other bureaucratically assigned and
discharged responsibility.
In her later work ‘The Life of the Mind’, Arendt made the real message behind the
given mentioned statement even more clear. Arendt held that that most evil is
done by people who never make up their minds to be good or evil.” The problem
for Arendt is, therefore, not a metaphysical “Evil” which enters our lives in some
way or another but rather a “mere” lack of reflection on the morality of an action.
Thus, it was not the was not the  presence  of hatred that enabled Eichmann to
perpetrate the genocide, but the  absence  of the ‘imaginative capacities’ that
would have made the human and moral dimensions of his activities tangible for
him.
Arendt’s thesis was that people who carry out unspeakable crimes, like Eichmann,
may not be crazy fanatics (neither brilliant nor sociopaths) at all, but rather
ordinary individuals who simply accept the premises of their state and participate
in any ongoing enterprise with the energy of good bureaucrats.
Evil, according to Arendt, becomes banal when it acquires an unthinking and
systematic character. Evil becomes banal when ordinary people participate in it,
build distance from it and justify it, in countless ways. There are no moral
conundrums or revulsions. Evil does not even look like evil, it becomes faceless.
Thus, Arendt helps us to understand the weight of collective responsibility: if evil
is banal, then we all have a responsibility to eradicate it in our everyday lives. We
can’t simply point the finger at others.

Que. 8) Hegemony does mean something more specific than power and
domination. Elaborate.
Directives:
• You must pick out the central concept mentioned in the question, which
is power, and explain its centrality in political science.
• You should then give the different dimensions of power.
• In the body, you must explain Gramsci’s concept of hegemony, and
explain how it is different from domination.
• You can then conclude by giving the importance of hegemony and how it
plays out in the arena of civil society.

Ans. 8)
Power may be regarded as one of the central concepts of political science. H.
Lasswell and A. Kaplan have even defined political science in terms of ‘study of
the shaping and sharing of power.’ There are many dimensions of power,
understood in terms of violence, force, domination but the most common
underlying factor is the materialistic and economic aspect.
One of the greatest contribution by Gramsci to political science lies in his
understanding of the concept of power as ideological power. He gave the concept
of hegemony which referred to the capacity of the bourgeoisie leaders to displace
the rival world views and become, in effect, the common sense of the age. This
type of cultural power is invisible, but has greater effect as it is exercised by
capturing consciousness.
Thus, he argued that capitalist class system was upheld not simply by unequal
economic and political power, but also by what he termed as ‘hegemony of the
bourgeoisie ideas and theories’.
As per Gramsci, hegemony should not be confused as dominance as it is legitimised
leadership. Moreover, hegemony, at its best, looks invisible. It is in this context
relevant to say that ‘the best trick the devil ever pulled was making people think
he didn’t exist’. Hegemony acts on the minds of the people. This power, is
exercised by manufacturing consent and does not require coercion. It is a power
of attraction.
The arena for generation of hegemony lies in the civil society, where the
predominance of consent is created by the intellectual class. As a consequence,
the person who is exploited starts enjoying the exploitation itself. Thus, Gramsci
believes that as long as there is no counter-hegemony, developed through the war
of position, there is no scope for changing the situation.