Chapter 4: Political Parties

Parties: (i) contest elections through chosen candidates; (ii) put forward policies and programmes for voters to choose from; (iii) make laws (legislators vote by party direction); (iv) form and run governments, recruiting and training leaders as ministers; (v) act as opposition when they lose, criticising and mobilising against the government; (vi) shape public opinion by raising issues; and (vii) provide people access to government machinery and welfare schemes through local party leaders.

Four main challenges: (i) Lack of internal democracy — power concentrated in a few leaders, no internal elections, dissent discouraged; (ii) Dynastic succession — top posts controlled by one family; (iii) Money and muscle power — wealthy or criminal candidates nominated, donors influence policy; (iv) No meaningful choice — shrinking ideological differences and leaders shifting parties.

(i) A law to regulate parties' internal affairs — compulsory membership registers, own constitution, independent dispute authority, open elections to top posts; (ii) make it mandatory to give about one-third tickets to women and a quota for women in decision-making bodies; (iii) state funding of elections (in kind or cash by votes secured). Beyond laws, (iv) people can pressure parties through petitions, publicity, agitations and media, and (v) good people should join parties — 'the problem of bad politics can be solved by more and better politics.'

A political party is a group of people who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government. They agree on policies and programmes for society to promote the collective good, and try to implement them by winning popular support through elections. A party is known by which part of society it stands for, which policies it supports and whose interests it upholds.

(i) It is a group that aims to contest elections and hold political power; (ii) it has an agreed set of policies and programmes for the collective good; (iii) it involves partisanship — it stands for a part of society; and (iv) it has three components: the leaders, the active members and the followers.

Political party.

(c) 1-C, 2-A, 3-D, 4-B: 1 → C (Congress — United Progressive Alliance), 2 → A (BJP — National Democratic Alliance), 3 → D (CPI-M — Left Front), 4 → B (Telugu Desam Party — State party).

A. Kanshi Ram. The BSP was formed in 1984 under the leadership of Kanshi Ram (it draws inspiration from Sahu Maharaj, Phule, Periyar and Ambedkar, but its founder is Kanshi Ram).

C. Integral humanism. The BJP draws on Deendayal Upadhyaya's ideas of integral humanism and Antyodaya, with cultural nationalism (Hindutva) as a key element.

(b) A and B. A and B are correct observations. C is wrong — parties are a necessary condition for modern democracy; governments cannot run without them.

Yes, launching a party can be a right decision, because 'the problem of bad politics can be solved by more and better politics' — committed, honest people joining politics is one genuine route to reform. To be truly different, Nagarik Shakti should: (i) practise internal democracy — maintain a membership register, follow its own constitution and hold regular open internal elections; (ii) avoid dynastic succession by giving ordinary workers a path to the top; (iii) be transparent about funds and keep money and muscle power out; and (iv) offer a clear ideological alternative (clean administration, grassroots participation). The fears of outsiders are natural, but can be answered by consistently democratic, transparent conduct rather than words.

(i) Missing: parties' function of putting forward policies/programmes and forming and running a stable government (and aggregating opinions). (ii) Independents are accountable only to their own constituency for local matters; no one is collectively responsible for national policy, so the government's utility stays uncertain. (iii) It shows parties are a necessary condition for democracy — representative democracy in large societies cannot function without them.

(i) A multiparty system with coalition/alliance politics. (ii) Because national parties needed regional partners, state parties gained a share of national power and their regional concerns were accommodated — strengthening federalism and democracy. (iii) It can appear messy and lead to political instability (hard-to-manage coalitions).

(i) The challenge of money and muscle power in parties. (ii) The Supreme Court's mandatory affidavit (declaring property and criminal cases) and the EC order requiring parties to file income-tax returns; state funding of elections is a further suggestion. (iii) There is no system to verify the affidavit information, and such measures are often treated as a formality, so the influence of the rich and criminals has not clearly declined.

(a) Both true and R explains A. A one-party system does not permit free competition for power, which a democracy requires — hence it is not a democratic option.

(d) A is false, R is true. The law did reduce defection (good), but R correctly notes a negative effect — it made dissent harder — so A ('only positive effects') is false.

(b) Both true, but R does not fully explain A. A is correct — high visibility does not mean popularity (people are often critical of parties). R is also correct (parties are among the least trusted, yet Indian membership has risen), but it adds evidence rather than directly explaining why visibility ≠ popularity.

Measures tried: anti-defection law (cut defection but curbed dissent); mandatory affidavits on property/criminal cases (information now public, but unverified); EC order to hold internal elections and file IT returns (often a formality). Suggestions: a law regulating internal party affairs, one-third tickets for women, and state funding of elections. Caution: over-regulation can be counter-productive — parties find ways to cheat and will not pass laws they dislike. Two non-legal routes: (1) public pressure through petitions, publicity, agitations and media; and (2) good citizens joining parties — since 'the problem of bad politics can be solved by more and better politics.'

(1) Against lack of internal democracy: maintain a public member register and hold regular, open internal elections to all top posts, so power is not hoarded by a few. (2) Against dynastic succession: bar close relatives of serving office-bearers from top posts and create a clear path for ordinary workers to rise on merit. (3) Against money/muscle power: publish all donations, cap candidate spending, and refuse tickets to those with serious pending criminal cases. (4) Against no meaningful choice: adopt and publish a distinct, written ideological programme and hold leaders to it, so voters get a real alternative. Each rule attacks the exact weakness the chapter identifies, making the party genuinely different.