COMPARATIVE POLITICS: ISSUES AND TRENDS (MPS-004)

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT

Course Code: MPS-004

Assignment Code: ASST/TMA/2024-25
Marks: 100

Answer five questions in all, selecting at least two questions from each section.
Each question is to be answered in about 500 words. Each question carries 20
marks.

SECTION-I

1. Examine the significance and limitations of the comparative method in the study
of politics.

2. Explain the differences between the Social Contract theory and Marxian theory
of the origin of the State.

3. Critically examine the dynamics of the State–Multinational Corporation

relationships in the era of globalization.

4. What do you understand by self–determination? Evaluate the debate on the self–

determination.

5. Poverty anywhere in the world is a danger to prosperity everywhere. Comment.

SECTION-II

6. Define political party. What purpose do political parties serve in a democratic

polity?

7. Write short note on the following in about 250 words:

a) Nature of anti-colonial movements in Southeast Asia
b) Regional integration in Europe

8. What is community? Explain how ‘community identities’ are constructed.

9. Write short note on the following in about 250 words:

a) Feminist perspective of the state
b) Gandhian perspective of the modern state

10. What has led to nationalisation of science and technology? How has its
development varied in developed and developing countries?

*********
 1

MPS-004
SOLVED ASSIGNMENT 2024-25

Note: Attempt any five questions. 20*5 = 100 Marks

SECTION - I
Q.1 - Examine the significance and limitations of the comparative
method in the study of politics.
ANS.- The comparative method is a crucial tool in political science, used to analyze political systems,
institutions, processes, and behaviors across different countries or regions. By comparing multiple political
entities, scholars can identify patterns, similarities, and differences that help in developing general theories about
political dynamics. However, despite its strengths, the comparative method also faces several limitations. This
essay examines both the significance and the limitations of the comparative method in the study of politics.
Significance of the Comparative Method
1. Development of Theories and Concepts
One of the main advantages of the comparative method is its ability to contribute to theory building. By
analyzing different political systems, scholars can develop general concepts and theories that apply
across various contexts. For example, the study of democracies and authoritarian regimes across
different countries has led to the development of theories like “democratic consolidation” or
“authoritarian resilience.” Comparative analysis allows scholars to test hypotheses across different cases,
which helps in refining and improving theoretical frameworks.
2. Understanding Political Systems
The comparative method allows for a deeper understanding of individual political systems by placing
them in a broader context. By comparing a political system to others, scholars can better understand its
uniqueness or commonalities. For instance, comparing the parliamentary system in the United Kingdom
 2

with the presidential system in the United States highlights how different institutional designs affect
political behavior, power distribution, and governance. Through comparison, scholars gain insights into
how political systems function under varying circumstances.
3. Identifying Patterns and Trends
Another significant advantage of the comparative method is its ability to identify patterns and trends. By
examining multiple cases, political scientists can detect recurring themes, such as the relationship
between economic development and democracy, or how political institutions shape policy outcomes.
This broader understanding can provide insights into how different political variables interact, leading to
general conclusions that are more applicable across different political systems.
4. Informing Policy Decisions
Comparative analysis also has practical significance for policymakers. By studying how similar problems
are addressed in different political systems, policymakers can learn from the successes and failures of
other countries. For instance, policymakers may compare health care systems across countries to
identify best practices and avoid mistakes. Comparative studies offer valuable lessons that can guide
policy reforms and improve governance outcomes.
Limitations of the Comparative Method
1. Complexity and Diversity of Political Systems
One of the main limitations of the comparative method is the complexity and diversity of political
systems. Political systems operate in vastly different cultural, historical, social, and economic contexts,
making direct comparisons difficult. For example, comparing the political system of a stable Western
democracy with that of a fragile state in sub-Saharan Africa may be challenging due to differences in
political culture, historical experience, and institutional development. These variations can make it
difficult to draw generalizable conclusions across cases.
2. Selection Bias
Another limitation is the issue of selection bias. Political scientists must carefully choose which cases to
compare, and the selection process can influence the outcome of the study. For instance, comparing
only democracies or only authoritarian regimes may lead to skewed results that do not reflect the full
range of political systems. Selection bias can occur when scholars choose cases that confirm their
hypotheses rather than those that provide a balanced view. This can lead to faulty conclusions and limit
the generalizability of findings.
3. Difficulty in Controlling Variables
In political science, controlling for variables is particularly difficult because political systems are
influenced by a wide array of factors, including culture, history, geography, and economics. Unlike
laboratory experiments, where variables can be tightly controlled, the comparative method often deals
with complex, real-world systems where isolating individual variables is challenging. This lack of control
makes it difficult to establish clear causal relationships between political factors.
4. Limited Number of Cases
 3

Comparative political studies often suffer from a limited number of cases, particularly when focusing on
specific regions or types of political systems. With a small number of cases, it becomes difficult to make
broad generalizations or establish statistically significant patterns. While large-N studies can address this
issue by examining many cases, small-N studies (with fewer cases) often face challenges in making their
findings widely applicable.
Conclusion
The comparative method is a valuable tool in the study of politics, offering insights into the functioning
of political systems, the development of theories, and the identification of patterns. However, it is not
without its limitations. The diversity of political systems, selection bias, difficulty in controlling variables,
and the limited number of cases all pose significant challenges. Despite these limitations, the
comparative method remains essential for political analysis, as it helps scholars and policymakers alike
understand political dynamics in a global context.

Q.2 - Explain the differences between the Social Contract theory

and Marxian theory of the origin of the State.
ANS.- The origin of the state has been debated through various philosophical lenses over time. Two of the most
influential theories are the Social Contract Theory and the Marxian Theory. Both provide distinct interpretations
of the formation and function of the state, yet they represent contrasting worldviews. Below, we will explore
these theories and examine their fundamental differences.
1. Conceptual Foundation
Social Contract Theory
The Social Contract theory proposes that the state originated through an agreement among individuals.
Thinkers like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau argued that the state is a result
of individuals voluntarily coming together to form a society. In the pre-social or state of nature, humans
were free but lived in uncertainty and insecurity. To escape this condition, individuals collectively agreed
to establish a governing authority, which would maintain order, protect property, and enforce laws. The
state, thus, is seen as a creation of rational individuals for the common good.
Marxian Theory
In contrast, the Marxian theory, based on the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, views the state
as an instrument of oppression. Marx argued that the state arose from the development of class
divisions in society, particularly between the bourgeoisie (owners of the means of production) and the
proletariat (working class). The state, in this view, was not a neutral entity formed through agreement
but rather a mechanism created by the dominant class to maintain its economic and political power. The
state exists to perpetuate exploitation and suppress class struggle.
2. Role of Individual vs. Class
Social Contract Theory
 4

In Social Contract theory, the individual is at the center of the political system. The formation of the state
is driven by the self-interest and rationality of individuals seeking to protect their rights (life, liberty, and
property). The theory focuses on the consent of the governed, implying that the legitimacy of the state
is derived from the collective agreement of individuals to be governed. The state serves the interests of
individuals by safeguarding their rights and providing a framework for social cooperation.
Marxian Theory
Marxian theory, on the other hand, places the class at the core of its analysis. The state is not created by
individuals for mutual benefit but by the ruling class to protect its economic interests. Marx viewed
history as a continuous struggle between different economic classes. In this struggle, the state acts as a
tool of the ruling bourgeoisie to exploit and oppress the working class. Therefore, the state's primary
function is to uphold the interests of the dominant economic class, rather than to protect individual
rights.
3. View on the Nature of the State
Social Contract Theory
Proponents of the Social Contract theory generally see the state as a positive force. According to
Hobbes, a powerful state is necessary to prevent the chaos and conflict of the state of nature. Locke and
Rousseau had a more optimistic view, suggesting that the state can be a protector of individual rights
and a promoter of the general will, respectively. While they differ in their views of how the state should
function, they all agree that the state is a necessary and rational institution that ensures order and
justice.
Marxian Theory
For Marx, the state is fundamentally a negative force that serves the interests of the ruling class. It is
seen as a tool of oppression and control, ensuring the perpetuation of capitalist exploitation. The
Marxian theory envisions a future in which the state becomes unnecessary and “withers away” following
a proletarian revolution. Once class divisions are abolished, there will be no need for the state, as a
classless society will emerge, free from exploitation and domination.
4. Historical Evolution of the State
Social Contract Theory
Social Contract theory views the state as a historical and rational development arising from the need for
order, protection, and justice. It suggests that humans gradually moved from a state of nature to
organized society as a result of rational decision-making. The state represents the culmination of human
progress, and its form can evolve through further contracts or agreements among citizens.
Marxian Theory
Marxian theory sees the state as the result of historical materialism—the evolution of economic
systems. As society moved from primitive communalism to feudalism and eventually capitalism, class
divisions deepened. The state developed as a response to these economic changes and acts as a
mechanism to protect the capitalist system. Therefore, Marxian theory emphasizes the material basis of
 5

state formation, viewing it as an inevitable outcome of economic structures rather than a voluntary
agreement.
Conclusion
In summary, the Social Contract theory views the state as a voluntary and rational construct designed to
protect individuals’ rights and maintain social order, while the Marxian theory interprets the state as an
instrument of class oppression that maintains the dominance of the bourgeoisie over the proletariat.
While the Social Contract theory presents the state as a neutral arbiter of justice, Marxian theory sees it
as inherently biased in favor of the ruling class.

Q.3 - Critically examine the dynamics of the State–Multinational

Corporation relationships in the era of globalization
ANS.- In the era of globalization, the relationship between the state and multinational corporations (MNCs) has
become increasingly complex and interdependent. The dynamics between these two powerful entities are shaped
by economic, political, social, and legal factors that influence their behavior on the global stage. This examination
critically evaluates how the state-MNC relationship has evolved in the context of globalization and highlights the
key dynamics that define it.
Globalization and MNC Expansion
Globalization has enabled MNCs to expand their operations across national borders, leading to increased
international trade, investment, and cross-border supply chains. MNCs have become influential actors in
the global economy due to their ability to access multiple markets, harness global labor, and exploit
technological advancements. This expansion has provided MNCs with unprecedented economic power,
which often rivals that of sovereign states. Their operations contribute significantly to employment,
technology transfer, and economic growth in host countries, making them key players in shaping the
global economic landscape.
Shift in State Power and Sovereignty
As MNCs gain economic power, the traditional role of the state as the primary actor in regulating
economic activity has been challenged. The rise of globalization has led to a shift in power from states to
MNCs, as these corporations increasingly influence national policies through lobbying, investment
decisions, and control over key industries. States often find themselves negotiating with MNCs to attract
foreign direct investment (FDI), which has led to the development of favorable policies and incentives,
such as tax breaks and relaxed regulatory frameworks, to entice corporate investments.
While this relationship is mutually beneficial, it has raised concerns about the erosion of state
sovereignty. Critics argue that MNCs may undermine a state’s ability to pursue its own economic and
social policies by exerting pressure to align with corporate interests. For instance, the demands of MNCs
for deregulation and free-market policies can conflict with national development goals, environmental
protection, and labor rights. The state's capacity to protect its citizens' welfare may be compromised if it
becomes too dependent on corporate investments.
 6

Regulatory Framework and Governance

The relationship between states and MNCs is also governed by international and national regulatory
frameworks. States establish laws, regulations, and treaties to manage the operations of MNCs within
their borders. In turn, MNCs must comply with local laws, international trade agreements, and corporate
governance standards. However, the complexity of global operations often allows MNCs to exploit legal
loopholes, resulting in practices like tax evasion, environmental degradation, and labor exploitation.
The role of international organizations such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), International
Monetary Fund (IMF), and World Bank has also shaped the state-MNC relationship. These institutions
promote free trade, open markets, and neoliberal economic policies that benefit MNCs by reducing
barriers to international trade and investment. In many cases, states must comply with the conditions
imposed by these organizations to secure loans or trade agreements, further limiting their ability to
regulate MNCs independently.
Balancing Economic Growth and Social Responsibility
One of the most significant dynamics in the state-MNC relationship is the balance between economic
growth and social responsibility. MNCs are often viewed as engines of economic growth, bringing
investment, employment, and technological innovation to host countries. However, the pursuit of profit
by MNCs can lead to negative social and environmental consequences, such as labor exploitation,
environmental pollution, and widening income inequality.
States must navigate the challenge of maximizing the economic benefits of MNC investments while
minimizing the potential harm to their societies. This balancing act requires effective governance and
regulatory frameworks that ensure MNCs operate responsibly and contribute to sustainable
development. In recent years, there has been a growing emphasis on corporate social responsibility
(CSR), which encourages MNCs to adopt ethical practices and align their operations with social and
environmental goals. However, enforcing CSR standards remains a challenge, particularly in developing
countries with weak regulatory systems.
Conclusion
The dynamics of the state-MNC relationship in the era of globalization are characterized by
interdependence, negotiation, and power struggles. While MNCs bring significant economic benefits,
they also challenge state sovereignty and governance, raising concerns about regulatory control, social
responsibility, and sustainable development. States must strike a delicate balance between attracting
foreign investment and protecting their citizens' welfare, while MNCs must navigate the complex
regulatory environments of different countries. The future of this relationship will depend on how
effectively states and MNCs can cooperate to address global challenges while ensuring fair and
responsible economic practices.

SECTION - II
 7

Q.6 - Define political party. What purpose do political parties serve

in a democratic polity?
ANS.- Definition of Political Party
A political party is an organized group of individuals who share common ideologies, values, and political
objectives, and work together to gain political power by participating in elections. They aim to influence
government policies, laws, and decisions to reflect their ideology. Political parties play a key role in
democratic systems, where they represent various interests of the public and ensure that governance
reflects the will of the people.
Political parties differ in size, ideology, structure, and influence, but they typically operate under a shared
agenda or manifesto, outlining the goals and values they wish to promote in society. In most democratic
systems, political parties can be classified as left-wing, right-wing, or centrist, depending on their
ideological positions regarding social, economic, and political issues.
Purpose of Political Parties in a Democratic Polity
In a democratic polity, political parties serve several essential purposes:
1. Representation of Diverse Interests
One of the core functions of political parties is to represent the various social, economic, and political
interests of different groups within society. Whether they cater to specific regional, ethnic, religious, or
economic groups, political parties ensure that a wide range of voices are heard in the political process.
For instance, a party focused on labor rights would represent workers' interests, while a party focused on
environmental issues would advocate for sustainable policies. This diverse representation helps maintain
a balance in decision-making and prevents the dominance of any single group.
2. Political Mobilization
Political parties are critical in mobilizing citizens to engage in the political process. They educate voters
about important issues, policies, and candidates, encouraging them to participate in elections. Through
rallies, campaigns, and media outreach, political parties energize the electorate, enabling a democratic
system where citizen participation is essential. In this way, political parties bridge the gap between
citizens and the state, ensuring that public opinion is channeled into the political decision-making
process.
3. Forming and Organizing the Government
In parliamentary democracies, political parties play a central role in forming the government. The party
that wins the most seats in an election typically forms the government, with its leader becoming the
prime minister or head of state. Political parties are also responsible for creating a structured opposition,
providing a critical check on government power. In multi-party systems, coalitions between parties are
often necessary to form a majority, which fosters collaboration and compromise in policymaking.
4. Policy Formulation and Implementation
 8

Political parties formulate policies based on their ideologies and the needs of their constituents. These
policies are usually presented in the form of a manifesto during elections, outlining their plans for
governance. When in power, political parties work to implement their promised policies and agendas.
For example, a left-leaning party might prioritize social welfare programs, while a right-leaning party
might focus on economic growth through market liberalization. This process ensures that governance is
structured and goal-oriented, rather than arbitrary.
5. Political Accountability
Political parties hold elected officials accountable by providing a platform for competition and debate.
Voters can compare the performance of parties and their candidates, making informed decisions during
elections. If a ruling party fails to meet the expectations of its electorate, voters can replace them in the
next election with an opposition party. This cyclical process ensures that political parties and their
leaders remain accountable to the public, promoting transparency and responsiveness in governance.
6. Fostering National Unity
In diverse societies, political parties play an important role in fostering national unity by integrating
various social and cultural groups into the political process. While representing specific interests, parties
also encourage dialogue, negotiation, and compromise across different segments of society. By
participating in a shared democratic process, political parties help reduce social divisions and promote a
sense of national cohesion.
7. Educating the Electorate
Political parties educate the public on political issues, the functioning of government, and their rights and
duties as citizens. This role is critical in strengthening democratic institutions, as an informed electorate
is essential for the effective functioning of a democracy. Parties provide information through their
platforms, media outreach, and debates, helping citizens understand complex issues and make informed
decisions during elections.
Conclusion
Political parties are fundamental to the functioning of a democratic polity. They represent the interests
of various groups, mobilize citizens for political participation, organize government formation, and
ensure accountability and policy implementation. By fostering dialogue and providing choices to the
electorate, political parties serve as vital mechanisms for democratic governance, ensuring that political
power is distributed in accordance with the will of the people.

Q.7 a)- Nature of anti-colonial movements in Southeast Asia

ANS.- Nature of Anti-Colonial Movements in Southeast Asia
The anti-colonial movements in Southeast Asia were diverse and shaped by the distinct colonial
experiences, socio-economic conditions, and cultural contexts of the region. These movements were
united by a common goal: to overthrow foreign colonial rule and establish national sovereignty. The
nature of these movements can be understood through various dimensions:
 9

1. Diverse Forms of Resistance: Anti-colonial movements in Southeast Asia took many forms, from
peaceful protests and negotiations to armed rebellions. Countries like Indonesia, Vietnam, and
the Philippines witnessed armed struggles led by nationalist groups. In contrast, places like Burma
(Myanmar) saw a combination of passive resistance and military action.
2. Role of Nationalist Leaders: Charismatic leaders played a crucial role in galvanizing anti-colonial
sentiment. Figures such as Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, Sukarno in Indonesia, and José Rizal in the
Philippines became symbols of national identity and resistance. These leaders often had deep
connections to their countries' indigenous culture, which helped unify their populations against
colonial powers.
3. Impact of Global Events: Global events like World War I and II, the Russian Revolution, and the
rise of anti-imperial sentiments worldwide influenced anti-colonial movements. The weakening of
European colonial powers after World War II created opportunities for these movements to gain
momentum and eventually succeed in achieving independence.
4. Involvement of Various Social Classes: Anti-colonial movements in Southeast Asia often involved
a broad cross-section of society, including peasants, workers, intellectuals, and religious leaders.
In Vietnam, for instance, the Viet Minh movement united different classes against the French
colonial regime.
5. Influence of Ideologies: Various ideologies, such as communism, socialism, and nationalism,
influenced the direction of these movements. In countries like Vietnam and Indonesia,
communist ideologies gained significant traction as part of the broader anti-colonial struggle,
while in the Philippines, nationalist and liberal ideas were prominent.
In conclusion, the anti-colonial movements in Southeast Asia were shaped by local contexts but shared
the common goal of ending colonial rule and establishing independent nations.

b)- Regional integration in Europe

ANS.- Regional integration in Europe has been a transformative process, driven primarily by the desire for
economic cooperation, peace, and political stability after the devastation of World War II. The foundation of
modern European integration began with the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in
1951, bringing together six countries (Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and West Germany) to
regulate industrial production under a centralized authority. This initiative laid the groundwork for deeper
cooperation.
One of the most significant milestones in European integration was the creation of the European
Economic Community (EEC) in 1957 through the Treaty of Rome. The EEC aimed to establish a common
market, removing trade barriers and fostering economic cooperation between member states. Over the
years, the community expanded, integrating more countries and extending cooperation into various
sectors such as agriculture, energy, and regional development.
The Maastricht Treaty of 1992 marked another key phase in European integration by establishing the
European Union (EU). This treaty not only enhanced economic integration through the creation of a
 10

single currency, the Euro, but also expanded the EU's role in areas like foreign policy, security, and
justice. Today, the EU encompasses 27 member states, reflecting the breadth of its regional integration
efforts.
The Schengen Agreement, which allows for passport-free travel between most European countries, and
the establishment of a single market are additional examples of how European integration has
progressed. These developments have fostered greater economic interdependence, facilitated mobility,
and enhanced political cooperation across the continent.
However, regional integration in Europe has faced challenges, including the economic disparities
between member states, the Eurozone crisis, and political tensions around issues like migration and
sovereignty, notably demonstrated by the UK's decision to leave the EU (Brexit) in 2016.
Despite these challenges, regional integration in Europe remains one of the most successful examples of
international cooperation, promoting economic growth, stability, and a shared European identity.