kkkk

POLITICAL
SCIENCE
INTRODUCTION TO GOVERNANCE
Man is indeed a social and political creature by his nature and obligation. Hence, man follows
the pattern of collective life which forms authority or control is as old as human life itself.
Man as an intelligent being who thought in terms of improving the pattern of his collective
and regulated behaviour of life. This phenomena deals with the features of man’s social and
political existence of the past, present and future perspectives that has led to the revolution of
social sciences. Aristotle is the father of political science and politics; in this one of them
would deal with the subject of man in relation to the phenomenon of rule, control, authority
and power. It covers many ancillary issues like sovereignty, citizenship, obedience, obligation,
punishment, resistance, revolution and reaction. It deals with political reality and critically
describe of the underlying principles of political behaviour that results in an issue of man and
state.
POLITICAL
SCIENCE
INTRODUCTION TO GOVERNANCE

Political science is a discipline which deals with its identity

through the efforts of solving any crisis that may arise in the
CIVIC

POLITICAL SCIENCE
branch of political science which is Civic Education learnt in
EDUCATION
Universities as a teaching subject. Its focus is based on the
Introduction to
historical background which began as a mere speculations of
Governance
the old peoples and their development.
Nature of State and the
By and large, political science has a lot of definitions that Theories
ma2ny scholars have ascribed to and differently defined.
Politics is used to describe the activities by which public
affairs are chosen and public policies are promoted with actual
administration of such affairs.

Politics is a study of study, government and power which

involves political, economic and ideological. Politic is
therefore concerned with state and government that are
required by the society for the establishment of conditions
ensuring a condition of competition and also maintaining a
system of law and order in which man may have the possible 1
development of his personality. Society is like a free and
 competitive arena that is governed by the laws of free contract, exchange and
competition.

In this regard, the possessive quality is found in individualism where an individual is

the proprietor of his own person or capacities owing nothing to society for them. The
individual is seen neither as a moral whole, nor as a part of a large social whole, but
as an owner of himself.

Country, state and nation are widely used to refer to the people who live within a
certain geographical boundary. These three terms are often used interchangeably as if
they mean exactly the same thing, but there are slight differences. A country is a self-
governing political unit. The term country can be used interchangeably with state, so
POLITICAL SCIENCE

a country and a state mean the same. State means all the people who are joined
together in a formal political union (regardless of whether the people are a single or
many tribes, ethnic groups, nationalities). The state decides on a national and official
language(s), a system of law, manages a currency system, uses a bureaucracy to
organize itself, asks their person for loyalty, and is recognized internationally.

A nation, however, is a tightly-knit group of people who share a common culture. The
Maasai people are a nation because they share a common language, institutions,
religion and historical experience. Nations do not necessarily live within a single
country; so the Maasai nation lives in both Kenya and Tanzania. Though, to confuse
matters, sometimes a combined word of “nation-state” is used when a particular tribe
of people, or ethnic group, all more or less live within the exact same borders as a
State. Zambia is an example of a nation-state because the inhabitants of Zambia are
all, mostly, Zambian (English languages).

A state is an association of families and villages for the sake of attaining a perfect and
2 self-sufficient existence. A state is an association of families and their common
affairs governed by a supreme power and reason. The state is the politically organized
people of a definite territory. The state is the people organized for law within a
definite territory. Thus a state is a people permanently occupying a fixed territory,
bound together by common laws, habits and customs into one body politic, exercising
through the medium of an organized government independent sovereignty and control
over all persons and things within its boundaries capable of making war and peace
and of entering into all international relations with the communities of the globe.
State is just a part of the society which implies the relations and associations of all
kinds.Political science is the study of state, government and power.

Characteristics of a State

POLITICAL SCIENCE
The modern world state refers to a legal or political unit that is comprised of – at least
it should have four elements: (i) a permanent population; (ii) a defined territory; (iii) a
government; and (iv) the capacity to enter into relations with other states. The
independent state should have the following:

i. A space or territory which has internationally recognized boundaries

(regardless of any ongoing boundary disputes),
ii. People who live there on an ongoing basis,
iii. Economic activity and an oragnised economy (a state regulates foreign
and domestic trade and issues money),
iv. A transportation system for moving goods and people,
v. A government which provides public services and security (e.g. education,
health, army, navy, police, etc.),
vi. Sovereignty (no other state has power over the state’s territory),
vii. External recognition (the state has to be voted by other countries).
3
State and Government
 State and government are identified as in concrete or practical terms. The state is a
bigger entity that includes all citizens of a country, but the government is a smaller
unit that covers only those who are employed to perform its function. The
membership of state is compulsory while the government is an agency for the
fulfillment of the purposes of the state.

State and Nation

A line is drawn between a nation and state despite the fact that the modern state is a
nation-state. A nation is a group of people bound together by the sentiments of
nationality. The binding force may draw sustenance from the commonness of race,
religion, language, culture, history and geography. But the state is a political entity
POLITICAL SCIENCE

constituted by four elements. Though, the most important point of distinction is that
while the state is a sovereign and a coercive association, the nation is just a group of
people bound by the ties of sentiments. A nation has no force to coerce others but a
state has. The state commands supreme power in that it stands above all other
associations and groups in the society. Its laws demand the compliance of all those
who live within the territory.

Nature of State

Different scholars have explained the nature of state using the theories such as
juridical theory, Organismic theory, Marxian Theory, Idealist theory, Evolutionary
theory, Genetic theory, Divine theory, Social Contract Theory and Force Theory.

Juridical Theory

Juridical theory refer a state as a legal person, it can be sued and sue others as make
and enforce the law. It is an institution that creates, interpret and enforce the law; and
4 act through the means of the law as sole source of law. No other agency has the
power to make and enforce law unless so delegated by the state itself.
In other words, the jurists regard state as a legal person that amounts to the juridical
personification of a political community. Though, it has been argued that the state is
nothing closer to any real thing but a fiction, it is purely created on the amount of
abstract. In practical terms, man alone can be a subject of rights and obligations, a
fiction cannot be a subject either of rights or obligations, nor is it capable of willing
or acting. The state, on the contrary is a reality, the fiction being merely in the mind
of the jurist or the provision of the law which attributes to it a legal quality which in a
physical sense is possessed only by human beings.

Organismic Theory

This theory has based on a very old idea of establishing an analogy between natural

POLITICAL SCIENCE
and social organisms. Cicero a Roman Catholic Cardinal argue that the state and
individual are likened to the human body. It has been further compared that the
sovereignty of the state to the soul of man, magistrates to joints, rewards and
punishments to nerves. He drew an analogy between the weakness and the diseases of
the human body. Rousseau compared the state to the human body both of which
possessed the motive power of force and will (legislative and executive power),
where the other one is the heart and other is like the brain of the state.

The main argument would be of both natural and social organism begin in simple
forms, grow and develop and later assume complex structures. An organism thus
possess the correlative attribute of a high degree of differentiation and a high degree
of integration. The state is not an organism in the strict sense of the term, but it is like
an organism. It is not like a physical organism but it is a mental structure that is like
an organism of because the attainment of the common purpose which depends on the
discharge of reciprocal functions by the different parts, and the unity of the structure
is thus organic and any change in the structure can only come from within and by way 5
 of a development affecting all the parts together, and the growth of the structure is
thus ‘organic’.

This can be associated to the alimentary canals (mouth, stomach, etc.) in the former,
and production centers in the distributor system consisting of the circulatory
apparatuses and the transportation system (roads, railways etc.) and a regulatory
system consisting of the nerve-motor mechanisms (brain, nerves, etc.) and
government.

One may discover ‘extreme unlikeness’ between the two in some respects. While the
natural organism is concrete in structure as its all parts are bound together in close
POLITICAL SCIENCE

contact, the social organized is discrete, its units are free and more or less widely
dispersed. As every individual in the society is endowed with a uniqueness and
consciousness, it is not man that exists for the society but the society does exists for
the good of the individual.

It should be noted that the organismic theory implies the justification of state
absolutism. The organism is the collection of parts, where each part has its fixed
place, and each part works under the absolute control of the nervous system.

Force Theory

The theory of force demonstrates that justice is the interest of the stronger, might is
right and war begot the king. Man is a creature of lust for power that prompts him to
display the might of his muscle and drag others into his subjection. It is believed that
the tradition is “the strong dominate the weak”. The male in the family, the chief in
the tribe, the king in the state. Thus, every dispute is settled by the use of force that
makes one victor, the other vanquished. The state is neither a creation of God, nor a
6
result of the irresistible social development, it is primarily the consequence of the
forcible subjugation through long continued warfare among primitive groups.
The force theory states that the state is fundamentally the result of forcible
subjugation through long continued warfare among political groups. In its
development the state was the “wolf-state” or “a band of robbers”, but ‘economic
impulses’ moved men to subjugate others and appropriate their labour for the sake of
their own nourishment and material comforts. No state when men were all hunters,
but its rudiments emerged when an organization of the herdsmen developed.
However, there are a dominant class who dominated one class and exploited ones,
thus six stages in the genesis of the state. These are:

i) Robbery and killing in the border areas and endless combats broken
neither by peace nor by armistice.

POLITICAL SCIENCE
ii) Peasants were defeated by the hunters and herdsmen who made
unsuccessful attempts to throw off the yoke of the foreigners and in the
end ceased resistance and reconciled themselves to their fate.
iii) They began to give away their surpluses to the conquerors as tributes and
were happy to be protected from recurring troubles of every day, while the
herdsmen were satisfied because they could depend upon the labour of
others.
iv) Division of labour developed which marked out the class of the rulers
from the class of the ruled. When they settled in particular place and
created a sort of homogeneity in respect of their way of life. It led to the
emergence of the sentiments of ‘nationality’ and ‘nationalism’.
v) Some quarrels among different sentiments of arbitration and adjudication
by the group of the rulers.
vi) Thus, the organized government came into being. The leader became the
king, official deputies his servants. His word was a ‘command’ and his
authority became the highest authority of the land. 7
 Darwin and Spencer of England attested to the principle of survival of the fittest.
Mussolini of Italy and Hitler of Germany frankly admired the course of ‘blood
and iron’.

Divine Origin Theory

This is the oldest or the earliest theory on the subject of origin as well as nature of
political authority. It treats authority as a creation of God and as such, it finds its
expression in the religious scriptures. All religions such as the Hindus, the Jews, the
Christians, the Muslims and others subscribe to the view that origin of political
POLITICAL SCIENCE

authority has a Divine sanction. For instance, in the ‘SantiParva’ of the Mahabharata,
Bhisma states “The people finding conditions without political authority intolerable
approached God Brahma with the request: ‘Without a Chief, O Lord, we shall
worship in concert and who will protect us.’ Then God granted the request and
appointed Manu to rule over them. However, Manu hesitated to accept the
appointment, as it would be very difficult to rule over people ‘who are always
deceitful in their conduct,’ until he was assured of the financial, moral and spiritual
support of the people.”

The King is treated as owing responsibility to God alone for all his deeds of
commission and omission as in Old Testament as God appoints, dismisses and even
slays the bad rulers. So in the New Testament of the Christians, the source of political
authority is contained in the will of God. In every clear and strong terms, the people
are enjoined to render obedience to the powers that be who are ordained of God. St.
Paul said to Romans that let every soul be subject unto the higher powers; for there is
8 no power but of God. Anyone who resist the power, resist the ordinance of God and
shall receive damination.
In other words, this view prevailed that the Pope was the ‘vicar of Christ on earth and
as such his word was a gospel truth’. Therefore, government is an institution founded
by God because of the fall of man. For instance, in Egypt the King was rated as the
son of sun-god; to the people of Japan the emperor is still the son of their sun-god
(Nippon); in China the emperor was regarded as the son of the Heaven; in India the
Hindus still regard some of the earthly rulers like Rama and Krishna as divine
incarnate; in the view of the Muslims, an Islamic state is meant to keep up the reign
of God (Allah) on earth.

The argument is that people have discarded their superstitions and come to think and
act rationally in most of the worldly situations. In this light of the doctrine of divine

POLITICAL SCIENCE
rights, first the bishops and then the rulers acted in the most despotic manner for
hundreds of years. Now the people are not prepared to accept that they have no part in
the creation of their political organization, but God prefers monarchical system alone,
or their ruler is not accountable to them for his acts of commission and omission. To
regard the State as the work of God is to give it a high moral status, to make it
something which the citizen may revere and support, something which he may regard
as the perfection of human life.

 The state created by God not only in the general sense in which everything
that exists is said to be the creation of the divine will but also in a special
sense of a deliberate, direct, specific act of creation with a particular end in
view; the peace on this earth for the preservation of human race.
 The ruler is the nominee of God on earth and, as such, he is the vice-regent of
God.
 All the rights of the ruler are a gift of the divine will and as such what he does
in the exercise thereof, his accountability is to his Creator alone. People have 9
no right to political resistance.
 Genetic Theory

The divine origin theory deals with a matter of faith, the genetic theory is based on
sociological facts. The argument is that state is an eventual extension of the family.
The first group of collective human life is the family or the household, the last is the
state. The earliest advocate of this theory is Aristotle in whose view a society of many
families is called a village and a village is most naturally composed of the
descendants of one family, the children and the children’s children for which reason
states were originally governed by kings, as the barbarian states now are, which are
POLITICAL SCIENCE

composed of those who had before submitted to kingly government; for every family
is governed by the elder, as are the branches thereof, on account of their relation there
into.

At this point, when many villages so entirely join themselves together as in every
respect to form but one society, that society is state, and contains in itself; the end and
perfection of government. It is certain that family is the first unit of social
development. Its composition is based on residence of authority in the family and its
growth into the clan or tribe and eventually into the state. In the family situation, the
eldest male parent was absolutely supreme in his household and his dominion
extended to life and death and was as unqualified over his children and their houses
as his slaves.

The absolute authority (patria potestas) of the pater families (head of the family) was
unqualified to the extent that he could sell or give away his property to anyone, or he
could chastise and even kill a member of his family. In this realm, it would be found
10 that the original family breaks up and many other families grow out of them with the
same tradition of final and unqualified authority in the hands of the male elder. The
larger unit became a tribe or a clan eventually became a state. The pre-requisite or
elementary group is the family, connected by common subjection to the highest male
ascendant.

Further, it should be understood that the aggregation of families forms the Genes and
Houses. The aggregation of the houses makes the tribe and aggregation of tribes
constitutes the commonwealth. The residence and nature of authority in two patterns
of family systems which is a concern of the sociologists. The state is a result of the
evolution that had its first manifestation in the formation of the families. The original
families broke up as a result of which many other families came into existence and
that formed a bigger unit like a clan or a tribe. When the bigger unit assumed the form

POLITICAL SCIENCE
of a state, the headship fell into the hands of a person who became their ruler or king.

Prof. Maclver supports the process social evolution as: the first of all societies, in
beasts and birds, and man, is the family, but it cannot exist in mere isolation. Each
new family is the union of two families. The web of blood relationship is thus woven
and rewoven which creates and sustains the kin with all its potentialities of extension
and subdivision.

Marxian Theory

This theory is fundamentally different from the theories discussed above. State is
neither a product of human consciousness, nor is it an artificial institution based on
the consent of the people, nor is it a mere consequence of a very long evolution
effected by the factors of kinship, religion, consent and force, nor is it an instrument
of positive good. It is nothing else than an instrument of exploitation and oppression
by one class over another. The state has the source of its origin in the evolution of the
fact of class contradictions and it should continue until class contradictions are finally 11
resolved.
 Lenin argues that an antagonistic class society the state is a political instrument, a
machine for maintaining the rule of one class over another. Marxism tells us that the
mode of production of the material means of life determines in general the social,
political and intellectual processes of life. In the social production of the means of
life, men enter into definite and necessary production relations which correspond to a
definite stage in the development of their productive forces. The haves would always
exploit the have-nots at the point of production. The first exploiting state was the
slave-owning state. In spite of certain differences all the three had one task in
common as to keep the people in check and crush any attempt of the working people
to emancipate themselves from exploitation. The state is characterized by three basic
features or attributes:
POLITICAL SCIENCE

i) A feature of the state is not its power of coercion in general which is to be

found in some form or other in any society, but above all its public power,
that is a power that does not coincide with the mass of population and is
exercised by a special category of people. Such as the army and police as
organs of the state and corresponding material attributes like prisons,
concentration camps and other places of confinement.
ii) The state organization of society presupposes the levying of taxes that are
needed for the upkeep of the apparatus of power.
iii) The subjects of state are divided not according to blood relationship but on
the basis of territory. The power of the state is exercised directly over a
certain territory and its population. The territorial division of people
effects the development of economic ties and the creation of political
conditions for their regulation. The state protects the interests of the ruling
class primarily within the boundaries of the given territory, keeping the
12 oppressed classes there in subjection.
The state is thus a political superstructure on economic basis. It is the organization of
power of the economically dominant class which, thanks to the state, acquires
political supremacy as well. The essence of the state is thus determined by the
relationship of the ruling class to other classes. The state is the organization of the
ruling class for the protection of its fundamental interests and any form of property
which this class represents. It basic function is exploiting society and hold down the
oppressed classes, for which purpose it relies on force, on the organs of coercion.

The Marxian theory of the nature of state may be criticized on three grounds:

 It is wrong to say that the state is a mere instrument of exploitation and

POLITICAL SCIENCE
oppression by one class over another. It is an agency of public welfare and its
ultimate aim is, as Aristotle said, to make ‘good life’ possible for its citizens.
 The factor of exploitation should not be treated as the only or decisive factor
in making and sustaining the entire political structure. The authority of the
elders over the younger kin was not exploitation, but it played a part in the
making of the state.
 To treat the state as a mere apparatus of coercion is once again a mistake. It is
true that state uses force to deal with it enemies. It exercises coercion to seek
the enforcement of its laws. Though, force is not the only factor that
commands obedience of the people. Thus the role of the other factors like
habits, social customs, good sense of the people, etc. should be given due
recognition.

The Marxist theory further takes into considerations of one factor where the state is
divided two hostile classes, each having its own interests. The origin of state,
therefore, should be traced in the fact of class antagonisms. With the invention of
13
agriculture and creation of private property, the dominant class came into being by
virtue of being the owner of the means of production. It required some authority to
 protect its interests that lay in the exploitation and oppression of the class having no
ownership of the means of production but depending upon the sale of its labour
power.

Idealist Theory

According to the earliest expression in the ideas of Plato and Aristotle of the ancient
period and its recent expressions in those of Rousseau of France, Kant, Fichte and
Hegel of Germany, this theory justifies a state as a ‘divine institution’, a
representation of the real will of man in an objectified form, a moralizing agency and
an infallible authority, an objectification of reason and an institution that alone can
ensure ‘good life’ to man.
POLITICAL SCIENCE

It is evident from the colourful statements of Plato and Aristotle who took state as ‘a
partnership in virtue’ to those of Hegel and Trietschke who identified it ‘with the
march of God on earth.’ While Rousseau affirmed that the ‘sovereign cannot impose
fetters that are harmful and useless to the community’, Green sanctioned that ‘state
can use force to create freedom’.

Hegel has expressed that the state is a perfected rationality an absolute fixed end in
itself or an ethical substance or a system in which man has raised his outward self to
the level of his inward self of thought. Though, Green argues that reconciling the
spirit of idealist philosophy with the line of British liberalism and advocated for the
Will not Force as the basis of the state.

It has to be understood tha/t human consciousness procreates claims in an

environment of freedom that are translated into ‘rights’ after receiving recognition of
the community and ultimately state is needed to protect the whole system of rights by
14
its machinery of law. The sovereign authority which uses force must in the ultimate
analysis be reduced to the society itself, or rather to the common consciousness of a
common end which constitutes the society. Thus, anything that creates rights, it
creates the sovereignty which is the condition of their maintenance. For instance, the
Zambian case where some political sympathizers argue that Presidency come and
given by God. Out of this incontrovertibly sound doctrine was developed a
philosophy which idealises the state and glorifies it almost to the point of deification,
which tends to regard it as an end rather than a means and treats it as omnipotent
(almighty or supreme) and Omni competent (capable or able).This places it upon a
pedestal at the foot of which its members are expected to bow down and worship it,
which teaches that it can do no wrong and that whether good or bad, its authority
must be obeyed without question, and that resistance to its commands or revolt
against its authority. This is so whether oppressive or unjust or wicked(iniquitous).

POLITICAL SCIENCE
Furthermore, it regards the state as having an existence apart from the people who
compose it, is a mystical, super-personal entity above the nation organized, it
possesses a will, rights, interests and even standards of morality of its own, separate
and distinct from those of the individuals’ will as the source of all civilization and
progress.

The criticism of this theory has been done with reasons such as the following:

a) Too abstract to e comprehended by a man of average disposition. It leads to

the tendency of state absolutism where the state is identified with an
objectified of human reason or to adulate with the analogy of ‘March of God
on earth’ which is too metaphysical (supernatural).
b) The ultimate result of treating state as an omnicompent institution would be to
reduce people to the status of deaf and dumb-driven cattle. The state calls for
service of extremist loyalty and self-sacrifice. All this true though the state is
15
set-up as an entity superior and indifferent to component individual, it
becomes a false god, and its worship the abomination of desolation.
 Evolutionary Theory

Evolutionary theory of the origin of state, emphasizes two important points. First, the
state is not a make but a growth. Secondly, not one but many factors have played their
part in state-building. Thus, the state is neither a handiwork of God, nor a result of a
superior physical force, nor a creation of a social contract, nor a mere expansion of
(patriarchal or matriarchal) family system and the like. As a result of a very long
process of evolution, it may be asked as to what are the factors that have played their
part in its gradual and imperceptible development. These are:
POLITICAL SCIENCE

Kinship: this factor is of blood relationship that led to the creation of family as the
first unit of collective life. A family consisting of a man, a woman and their children
became the first unit of an organized life. The family became a tribe and tribes
eventually became a commonwealth. The blood bond of sonship changed
imperceptibly into the social bond of wider brotherhood. The authority of the father
passes into the power of the chief. Thus kinship creates society and society at length
creates the state.

Religion: Religion emerged out of the way of life of the people living in the families
and tribes. It assumed the form of social practices associated with worshipping some
objects of nature or some mystical forces. Thus, when the bond of kinship became
weak, the bond of religion served the purpose.

Force: The element of force has played its own part in the conflicts and wars. It is the
element of force that placed man (father) as head of the family, the chief as the
supreme authority of the tribe, and the king as the highest ruler of the biggest unit.
16
History is full of tribal wars in which force decided the issue. The victors became the
masters and the vanquished had to accept the religion and servitude of their lords. The
coercive force exercised by the leader eventually developed into political sovereignty
and the sentiment of loyalty to the ruler was established and sanctioned.

Economics:Man has always performed some economic activities for the sake of
living. Economic life has a clear expression, where the institution of private property
also came into being that informed the people to have some arrangement for the
effective protection of their material possessions. As wealth increased and idea of
private property developed, laws were needed for the protection of property disputes.
Differences in occupation and in wealth created social classes or castes, and the
domination of one class by another for purposes of economic exploitation was an
important factor in the rise of government.

POLITICAL SCIENCE
Political Consciousness:The needs of the people for the security of their person and
property created need for defence against external attacks and for their social, moral
and intellectual development. All these things led to the emergence of political power
and the conscious adaptation of political institutions to meet certain definite ends.

Social Contract Theory:

The most important feature of Locke's work is that itanalyses the various aspects of
state and government. Locke notonly opposed the divine rights of kings advocated by
the Church ofEngland, but also opposed the doctrine of absolute sovereignty
advocated by his predecessor Hobbes. He ridiculed the view that allgovernment is
absolute monarchy that kings have a divine right toabsolute power, and that mankind
has no right to natural freedomand equality.Locke adopted the technique of social
contract to explain thatlegitimate political authority is derived from the consent of
17
thepeople, which can be withdrawn when the freedom of the individualsis violated or
infringed. The three cardinal principles that the TwoTreatises exposed and defended
 were freedom, consent, andproperty. Men are naturally in a state of perfect freedom
to ordertheir actions and dispose of their possessions according to their will
and wish within the bounds of the law of Nature.

The idea that the authority of the ruler is based on some kind of agreement between
him and his subjects is quite old. This can be traced in the Mahabharata and in
Arthasastra of Kautilya. A faint idea assumed the form of an elaborate hypothesis to
demonstrate that the existence of political authority was based on the consent of the
people. To prove it, they supposed a period without authority of any kind, what they
called ‘state of nature’ and is termination by a covenant whereby the people
surrendered their natural rights to be translated into civil rights by the action of a
POLITICAL SCIENCE

political authority instituted by them.

The social contract theory opens with the glorious words as man is born free, he is
everywhere in chains. In Rousseau’s view states that man is a noble savage. His life
was very simple and happy in the oldest phase of civilization, but it was perverted by
the growth of reason that inculcated the sense of distinction between ‘mine’ and
‘thine’. This all led to the rise of conflicts and wars as a result of which the peaceful
condition of mutual conflicts. The innocent creatures became selfish and aggressive,
natural life was destroyed. Thus the people living in the state desired a society of free
consent and not of force, a union of each with all on equal terms for common good; a
sovereignty vested in all and voiced by the general will for the maintenance of liberty
in law.

In this regard, social contract is meant that to terminate the state of nature, contract is
made by the people. Hobbes argues that the law of nature informs the people to
surrender their all natural rights in favour of a man or an assembly of men as the price
18
for living in a commonwealth that ensures them liberty, property and the entire
paraphernalia (equipment) of a good life. In other words, such a contract, society,
state and government (commonwealth) come into being a ‘common power’ is
instituted that would keep all in awe and ensure security of their life and possessions.

It shows that each individual agreed with all the others to surrender his right to
govern himself, to some particular man or assembly. By doing this, they established
the state, and the person or assembly upon whom they had bestowed their power was
the sovereign of whom they were subjects.

 According to Locke there are two contracts. The first is the open or social
contract done by the individuals to institute a political authority by them. As a
result ‘community’ comes into being that holds the sovereign authority.
 A tacit contract is made by community with a person who takes upon himself

POLITICAL SCIENCE
the responsibility of effectively protecting three natural rights of the people.
This is a contract of the society with the government and the ruler is
committed to the discharge of his obligations according to the terms of the
contract.
 The motivating force behind these contracts is that men come to understand
that improvement over the natural state may result from the organization of a
civil society and the creation of instruments that will correct the deficiencies
of the state of nature.
 Hobbes and Rousseau argues that there one contract whereby all surrender
their all in favour of all as a result of which a new authority in the name of
‘general will’ (common good) is created. Man is not only gains the equivalent
of what is lost but also acquires greater power to preserve what is left.

The state of nature is the ill, unhappy and intolerable condition of life. The life of man
is solitary, nasty, poor, brutish and short. The only standard that determines the way
of life in this horrible state is the law of nature that means a set of rules based on the 19

principle of expediency for the sake of self-preservation. It is pre-social as well as a

 pre-political condition in which there is no peace, no collective life, no other, no
commerce, no science, no learning, no property, no navigation, no culture, no
industry, no arts, no letters, but all warfare, continual fear and danger of violent death.
Man is the enemy of man who is a selfish creature and full of egotistic tendencies
man believes in the cardinal virtues of force and fraud. In this horrible state of war of
all against all, man is a ravening beast and his rights are limited only by his physical
power.

Naturally there is no distinction between right and wrong, just and unjust, moral and
immoral. The impulses which move man are passions born in him. In man there is no
innate desire towards transcendental good or any splendid ideal, rather as a material
POLITICAL SCIENCE

well-being is concerned with his own satisfaction, man is driven by self-interest

directed to fulfilment of the fundamental urges. In short, it is a condition asking every
man to “kill whom you can and take away what you can and from this spring all
possibilities of internecine (deadly, civil, Domestic) warfare.”

In the regard, Rousseau writes that one who wants to live in a country where
“the interest of the sovereign could not be separated from that of the subject.” When
this condition holds,the movements of the political machine, Rousseau says, that
would always tend “only to the commonhappiness.” This condition only obtains when
“the people and the sovereign were one and the sameperson”, which means the
government must be a democracy. On the contrary Rousseau writesthat if he could
have chosen his birth place, “I would have wanted to live and die free, that is to say,
subject
to the laws in such wise that neither I nor anyone else could shake off their honorable
yoke.” In a nutshell the themes of The Social Contract are puzzling. Rousseau
announces his project that Man is born free,though everywhere is in chains.In other
20
words, although man is not born naturally in subjection to others, we in fact
observeongoing political societies, which issue commands backed by dominating
force. Rousseau is going tocharacterize the conditions that render the exercise of this
political authority by governments morallylegitimate.Notice that one who rules others
by force and threats would seem to have the natural freedom that theindividual in the
state of nature as characterized by Rousseau enjoys. Man is not subject to the will of
others;others are subject to his will. Whatever exactly Rousseau means here, this is a
hint that several differentnotions of freedom or liberty will be in play in this
discussion, and we will need to keep straight what thesedifferent notions of freedom
are and which ones Rousseau thinks are worth caring about.

One might have the idea that Rousseau’s project is to see whether in society we can
somehow recapture asmuch as possible of the freedom that individuals enjoy in the

POLITICAL SCIENCE
state of nature. This makes itplain that this is not at all what Rousseau is up to. The
state of nature is irrevocably past, we cannot returnto it. Nor should we want to. In the
state of nature man is a beast, happy perhaps, but a beast. In society
man becomes capable of morality and capable of a kind of freedom that amoral
animals cannot enjoy.Rousseau also makes it clear at the outset that the project is not
to describe a utopia - an ideally desirablecondition that humans cannot reach. Rather
we are inquiring whether there can be a legitimate form ofcivil order, and in this
inquiry we are “taking men as they are and laws as they might be.” The description of
a social order that it is desirable for humans like us, not angels.

Thus, Rousseau notes that in the state of nature the human animal follows her
inclinationsunthinkingly. In the transition from the state of nature to the civil state
there is a transformation: “Onlythen, when the voice of duty replaces physical
impulse and right replaces appetite, does man, who hadhitherto taken only himself
into account, find himself forced to act upon other principles and to consult hisreason
before listening to his inclinations”. Rousseauian stateof nature, man is said to be
21
moved by pity as well as self-love, so he does not only take himself into accountin
deciding what to do. But whether one acts from pity or self-regard, one is acting to
 satisfy one’sstrongest desire of the moment. Rousseau supposes that with moral
notions in place for the individualtrained in society, one can be moved to act on rules
or principles one accepts even when their requirementsoppose our desires and
inclinations.

In leaving the state of nature by contract, one would lose “natural liberty and an
unlimited right toeverything” one wants to take or do, and one would gain “civil
liberty and the proprietary ownership of allhe possesses”. Civil liberty is the freedom
to do what the laws specify is allowed, it is freedomlimited by law. In the state of
nature one has no moral ideas, hence one lacks the idea of anythingbelonging by right
to one person or another. In civil society, one has moral notions, and can regard
POLITICAL SCIENCE

oneselfas rightly owning things and others as under duties to respect one’s morally
justified possessions.

In acrucial passage Rousseau adds that in civil society one for the first time gets
“moral liberty, which alonemakes man truly the master of himself. For to be driven
by appetite alone is slavery, and obedience to thelaw one has prescribed for oneself is
liberty”.Here is a reason for thinking the slave master may well be as much a slave, in
animportant sense, as theslave. Just acting on one’s desires is slavery - you can be
slave to your own desires. In contrast, moralfreedom or autonomy is obedience to a
rule or principle that you impose on yourself.With this idea in hand, Rousseau poses
the “fundamental problem”the problem to which the social contract is the solution.
The task is to “Find a form ofassociation which defends and protects with all common
forces the person and goods of each associate, andby means of which each one, while
uniting with all, nevertheless obeys only himself and remains as free asbefore”. The
solution in capsule form is immediately given.

22 The social contract must require “thetotal alienation of each associate, together with
all of his rights, to the entire community. For first of all,since each person gives
himself whole and entire, the condition is equal for everyone; and since thecondition
is equal for everyone, no one has an interest in making it burdensome for the
others.”Of course this sounds paradoxical. You turn your freedom over to the
community, and remain as free asbefore. Giving up all rights to the state somehow
ensures the protection of all one’s rights.

By and large, just to get all of the (apparent) paradoxes on the table, Rousseau notes
thateach individual has private interests, which might lead her to act against the
general will (the will of allcitizens directed toward the common good). When you will
to act on your private interests we can say youhave a private will. Rousseauwrites that
“in order for the social compact to avoid being an empty formula, it tacitly entails
thecommitment, which alone can give force to the others, that whoever refuses to

POLITICAL SCIENCE
obey the general willbe forced to do so by the entire body.

This means merely that man will be forced to be free.” But whatexactly does it mean
to be forced to be free? Is Rousseau making a good point or just playing fast andloose
with the language of freedom? When the ruler orders me to give up all my property
and be coercedto obey, and being forced to be free? Maybe if one violate just laws
another forfeit one’s liberty and deserve to be putin prison.Suppose one self-imposed
rule is to go on a low calorie diet, but be tempted by heaping bowls of icecream and
piles of chocolate candy and other delicious foods forbidden by my diet. If man
succumb totemptation, and pig out, which may be a slave to my appetites.

When Rousseau says the social contract gives us moral freedom, one would be
thinking of autonomy of action.Autonomy of action can be had only if circumstances
are favorable, and afford one freedom to act on one’sprinciples. (There might be
empirical connections between lacking opportunities to act as one chooses andthe
development of the character trait of autonomy of disposition. Perhaps slavery tends
to produceslavishness, as Rousseau asserts.)Notice also that nothing says the person 23
who achieves autonomy must be acting on correct or plausiblemoral principles. One
 is autonomous, even if despicable.Rousseau associates moral freedom or autonomy
with democracy of a certain type.

By and large, Rousseau is seeking tospecify procedures of law-making that guarantee

that, at least if the right sort of people are going throughthe procedures, the laws the
government administers will be oppressive to no one and will work fairly forthe good
of all. Here each can accept the law in good conscience, and in obeying this ideal
democratic lawone is not succumbing to slavish appetite or cowardly inclination but
is obeying laws that satisfy one’sconscience, so one attains autonomy in conforming
to law.One might think that democracy is not necessary for autonomy, for if one is
fortunate tobe ruled by a good king, who enforces Lockean rights fairly, one can obey
POLITICAL SCIENCE

the king’s laws withoutviolating ones principles. One might also think democracy is
not sufficient for autonomy: Democraticlegislation passed by fair procedures might
be substantively immoral, might enact tyranny of the majority,for example. In such a
case one could not, if one had reasonable moral principles, obey the law whileacting
only in conformity with one’s principles.One issue then is to get clear why Rousseau
associates being a participating member of a social contractsociety, a political society
whose policies accord with the general will, and being free in the sense ofsenses of
freedom that matter to him.

Notice that besides the issue, whether Rousseau does successfully show that the form
of democracy heembraces does guarantee individual freedom, there is also the issue,
why being free as Rousseau conceivesof it should have make-or-break significance.
Why is the freedom Rousseau prizes a value that trumps allothers?In this connection
one might hold that a society might trade off freedom for other benefits. One should
alsonotice that there are conceptions of freedom that Rousseau does not appear to
care about at all.
24
Considerwhat one would call wide option freedom. One has wide option freedom to
the extent that one has theopportunity to choose among a larger, rather than smaller,
set of diverse and valuable options. The largerthe set of significantly different and
valuable options any of which one can choose, the more wide optionfreedom one has.
In a hunter gatherer with assigned traditional social roles, with no choice of
occupation must be the maker of bows for hunting with bow and arrow. This might be
aninteresting and fulfilling occupation, but have no other choice. In contrast, if one
live in a modern big city,and could become either a baker, a butcher, a candlestick
maker, a lawyer, a masseuse, an insuranceunderwriter, a carpenter, a hunting guide, a
policeman, etc.

1. Natural rights: of man - life, liberty, and property

a) They are called natural because all men are born with them.

POLITICAL SCIENCE
b) These natural rights are not rights that are created by government or society;
one all enjoy them, before any considerations of government are mad.
2. State of nature – nobody’s rights are respected which is anarchy.
3. The people decide to contract with a government, to protect everyone’s rights. This
contract is a two-way relationship, as both sides have obligations to the other.

people Government
protects the rights of the
obey the government
people

4. If the government does not protect the people’s rights, the people are no
longerbound to obey that government, and have every right to set up a
newGovernment (that will protect their rights).

Locke tried to explain the origin and nature of political authority within the
framework of social contractualism. It is a justifiedGlorious Revolution and wanted to
establish a constitutional government. Further, it has be proclaimed that the 25

government should exist for the people to protect their liberty, property and life, but
 not vice versa. If the government fails to work for the welfare of the society, people
have every right to rebel against the government and they can change the government.
Locke developed his theory of social contract from the notion of state of nature. For
Locke, the state of nature is only a pre-political state. It means that there is
existenceof an organized society, but there is no established government. Man gives
up his freedom and power, because the enjoyment of it is very uncertain and
constantly exposed to the invasion of
others. Since, all men are equal in the state nature; there is no strict observer of equity
and justice.
POLITICAL SCIENCE

Consequently, the enjoyment ofproperty that they possess in the state of nature is
unsafe and insecure. This makes the individuals to look for a way out of this
condition that is full of fears and continual dangers. If the vicious and degenerate men
are forbidden to enter into the contract, then there is need of any society, but the state
of nature. The most important end of men's uniting into a commonwealth is for the
mutual preservation of their lives, liberties, and estates. Hence the power of society
can never be supposed to extend farther than the common good.It is by means of
contract the individuals agree to submit theirpowers (natural rights) to a majority rule
in order to organizethemselves as a community.

Although people surrendered their natural rights, it should not be understood that they
surrendered all aspects of those rights. In fact, they partially surrendered those natural
rights to make the contract functional. Once the contract becomes functional, the civil
society is established. This facilitates the individuals to form a government in the
nature of a fiduciary power, which is supreme for it represents the power of the
26 people. The government thus established enjoys prerogatives. However, it is
subordinate and accountable to the legislature. Also, it must be mentioned here that
the legislative power is separate from the executive power. The third is the federative
powers, whose function is to make treaties and conduct external relation of the state.

TWO CONTRACTS

People enter into a contract among themselves in order to protect their life, property
and liberty. Consequently, they enter into a civil society. Locke, unlike Hobbes,
spoke of two contracts. The first is a social contract by which the state or civil society
is created. It is otherwise known as Express Contract. By this contract, civil society is
created to meet the deficiencies of the state of nature. Unlike Hobbes, Locke stated

POLITICAL SCIENCE
that people surrendered only one aspect of their rights and only a limited surrender.
The second is known as a governmental contract or tacit contract. Here the contract is
between the community and the rulers by which the society authorizes the
government to make positive laws consistent with the laws of nature.

As the government enjoys only a judiciary power, this is subordinate to the first
contract. The second contract is not openly advocated by Locke. He further observed
that the legislative power becomes the supreme power in the commonwealth. This
power is based on the consent of the people. This legislative power should be
exercised only to promote the peace, safety and public good of the people. According
to Locke, the government is only a trust and the governmental contract is to exercise
powers for the peace and prosperity of the people. When the government does not
function for the good of the people, they have the right to overthrow the government.
Thus Locke made the monarch a party to the contract and established a constitutional
monarchy. Its authority should be based on the consent of the people and it has to
work for the welfare of the people.
27
INDIVIDUALISM
 Locke is one of the greatest individualists in the history of political thought. He
preached that the earth and all other institutions are made for the welfare of the
individual and not vice-versa. Prof. Vaughan says that "everything in Locke revolves
around the individual: everything is disposed so as to ensure the sovereigntyof
the individual. From Locke's view point individuals have the right to resist the state
when it goes against the individuals.

1. For Locke, all individuals are equal. Through this concept of equality other
rights such as the rights to life, liberty and property are derived.
2. In the state of nature, people possessed some natural rights, along with that the
state's purpose is to provide better protection for their life. So, Locke's state is
POLITICAL SCIENCE

justified on the ground that its existence is only for making rights more secure.
3. The consent of the individuals is the foundation for the state. A legitimate
government is one that possesses the consent of all the individuals.
4. His theory of negative stateis shown as evidence to the ideas of Locke on
individualism. Here the functions of the state are very limitedto prevent the
individuals from violatingthe rules and regulations.
5. Locke said that the purpose of the matter is the acquisition of pleasure and the
avoidance of pain by the individual. So, Locke's idea is that the goal of all
human institutions is to substitute pleasure in the place of pain.

Locke recognized and established the sovereignty of the people and

emphasized that the state exists only for the sake of people. Civil power is the
right of making laws with penalties. For the regulating and preserving of property,
and of employing the force of the community, in the execution of such laws all
this is only for the public. Locke maintained that the civil power is the right of
making laws with penalties for regulating and preserving of property, and of
28
employing the force of the community in the execution of such laws. Such a
power can arise only by means of consent.
Civil power can have no right except as this is derived from the individual right of
each man to protect himself and his property. The legislative and executive power
used by the government to protect property is nothing but the natural power of
each man resigned, 'into the hands of the community', or 'resigned to the public',
and it is justified merely because it is a better way of protecting natural rights than
the
self-help to which each man is naturally entitled. This is 'the original compact' by
which men are brought into one society. It is a bareagreement "to unite into one
political society, which is all the compact that is, or needs be, between the
individuals, that enter into, or make up a common wealth."

POLITICAL SCIENCE
CONSENTS

Since men by nature are free, politically equal, creatures of God, subject to the
laws of nature, and possessors of an executive power of the laws of nature, they
can become subjects of political authority only by their consent. Without consent
there can be no political community. As discussed elsewhere, Locke recognized
two kinds ofconsent, express and tacit. The former is an explicit commitment to
the commonwealth. It case there is no provision for explicit consent, the people's
obligation to obey the commonwealth can be gauged by their tacit consent. The
two problems with regard to tacit consent that Locke himself acknowledges are
what it is and how far it binds. According to him, tacit consent is demonstrated
when "everyman has any possession or enjoyment of any part of the dominion of
that
government, he has to oblige to the laws of that government for the enjoyment of
that possession; whether it is possession of land, to him and his heirs forever, or a 29
lodging only for a week and soon."
 THE STATE AND THE GOVERNMENT

Locke is a great democrat. He laid the foundation for the concept of Liberal
Democratic State. On the whole Locke regarded the settingup of a government as
a much less important event than the original compact that makes a civil society.
Once a majority has agreed to form a government, the whole power of the
community is naturally in them. The form of the government depends upon what
disposition the majority makes of its power. It may be retained or it may be
delegated to a legislative body. Following the experience of the English
revolution, Locke assumed that the legislative power is supreme in government.
POLITICAL SCIENCE

Legislative power can never be arbitrary. For the sake of freedom it is important
that legislative and executive power should not be in the same hands. Locke
basically believed that body politic and commonwealth came into being for the
welfare of the individuals and the community as a whole. Locke therefore
assigned the following
functions for the Government:

1. The government should attempt to create standards by which the individuals

should be in a position to decide as to what is right or wrong. The law of
nature which all followed in the state of nature is clear and rational yet selfish
interests make men blind of proper understanding. These also influence his
judgment of deciding as to what is right or wrong.
2. The government should provide its subjects with an impartial authority to
decide the dispute arising out of social misunderstandings in the community.
This is essentialbecause men were usually partial towards themselves. They
30 usually carry their interests rather too far off.
3. Locke believed that it was the duty of the state to safeguard the interests of its
individuals and subjects against undue intervention from outside agencies.
 Locke went to the extent of saying that the state has got a right to declare war
if it found that the life and property of its subjects is at sake. Thus
the state should not hesitate to sacrifice anything when it feels that the rights
of the individuals are being challenged. As he regards his concept of
constitutional government it is worthwhile to note that he is perhaps the first
thinker who realized that unless rule of man against man is based on consent it
has no
legal justification. His stress for constitutional government was physically
more in the days when he was expounding his philosophy.

Locke stated that government exists for the well-being of the society. He argued

POLITICAL SCIENCE
against the attainment of power through conquest. Further he made a distinction
between just and unjust warfare. A mere aggressor gains no right, and even a
conqueror in just war can never establish a right which contravenes the right of
the conquered to their liberty and property. Locke is against any
theory that a government can derive a just power merely through
conquest or from success by using force. Thus, a government whichbegins in
force can be justified only by its recognition and support of the moral rights
inherent in the persons and communities. The State and Government are created
by a contract, to ensure continual peace and right to life, liberty and property. This
political
institution is just a means to an end namely the good and welfare of people. The
state exists for the people and not the people for the state. The government is only
a machine which the people create fortheir own welfare.

Further, Locke observes that all true states must be founded on consent and this
consent can be expressed through the representatives of the people. Without
31
people's consent through some form or other, no true state can exist. Locke opined
that: Absolute arbitrary power, or governing without settled standing laws, can
 neither of them consist with the ends of society and government, which men
would not quit the freedom of the state of nature for, and tie themselves up under,
were it not to preserve their lives, liberties, and fortunes, and by stated rules of
right and property to secure their peace and quiet.

Therefore, an absolute state cannot be a true state for the welfare of people. A true
state can only be a constitutional state where the rule of law prevails. Locke held
that no political liberty could exist if a man is subject to the inconsistent,
uncertain, unknown arbitrary will of another man. Standing laws which are
clearly defined and known to the people should rule the society. Secrecy and
arbitrary decreescannot rule for the good of the people.
POLITICAL SCIENCE

A true state is always limited by the powers of the people and guarantees all the
natural rights to the people. In other words: The great end of men's entering into
society being the enjoyment of their properties in peace and safety, and the great
instrument and means of that being the laws established in that society, the first
and fundamental positive law of all commonwealths is the establishing of the
legislative power, as the first and fundamental natural law which is togovern even
the legislative. The first and fundamental natural law, which is to govern even the
legislative itself, is the preservation of the society and of every member in it. The
first and fundamental positive law of all commonwealths is the establishing of the
legislative power. This legislative is not only the supreme power, but sacred and
unalterable. The community has given its power in the hands of legislative.

Therefore, no edict of any individual has any force than the obligation of a law,
for the individual's edict has no sanction from the legislative that is chosen and
32 appointed by the public. But the legislative power cannot be absolutely arbitrary
over the lives and fortunes of the people. It is only limited to the public good of
society. The laws of nature do not cease in society, but they stand as an eternal
rule to all men including the legislative.

Hence, the legislative has no right to enslave, to destroy, or designedly

toimpoverish the subjects. Again, the legislative cannot assume itself the power to
rule by extemporary, arbitrary decrees. The legislative quires standing laws to
cling to power. Further, the supreme power cannot take the subject's property
without his consent; and taxes can be levied only by the consent of the majority.
Lastly, it cannot delegate the power of making laws to any other hands.

LIMITED SOVEREIGN

POLITICAL SCIENCE
Locke advocated for a limited sovereign state for reason and experience guided
him to envisage the view that political absolutism is not tenable. Describing the
characteristics of a good state, Locke stated that a state should exist for the people
who form it and not vice versa. It is to be based on the consent of the majority
subject to the constitution and to the rule of law. It is a limited state in the
sense that its power is derived from the people and is held in the
form of a trust. Apart from that, it is also limited by natural laws and
property rights. Locke argued that the state must deal with matters
strictly political in nature and has no warrant to interfere in other
provinces or demand more powers on the pretext of public safety or
welfare. According to him, the supreme power resided in the people
and the community had the inalienable right to institute and dismiss
off any government if it violates the trust. The supreme power of the
people, however, is kept in abeyance when the government is in power. The
government that they institute would be under periodic assessment. Hobbes 33
advocated for self-perpetuatingsovereign andnon-renewal of the consent. But in
 Lockean social contract, the performance of the government would be assessed
periodically.

The three organs of the government, according to Locke, are legislature, executive
and federative. Each of these organs holds some primary functions to proceed.
Legislature is the first organ that consists of people's representative. It has the
right to make laws. In other words, to introduce and make the law is the primary
function
of the legislator. The next organ is executive. Its primary function is to execute
the laws passed by the legislature. Implementation of the laws, which are
introduced by the legislature, is the primary function of executive. And the final
POLITICAL SCIENCE

one is federative. The federative organ has the power to deal with external affairs.
The federative organ is subordinate to the legislature, which represents the will
and wish of the people.

Locke did not agree with Hobbes that Government had absolute powers and
authority. He is of the opinion that the government is bound by certain limitations
or restrictions. They are:

1. The government could not have a right to destroy, enslave or

designedly to impoverish the subjects.
2. The government should govern not by unknown laws but by
the laws that have been promulgated and are known to judiciary.
3. The government had no authority to snatch rightly earned property of any of
his subjects without their consent because it does not stand for snatching the
property but for preserving that.
4. The legislation is like a trust for the nation and hence that could not be
34 transferred to any other authority.
5. The government could not abrogate the natural rights of the individuals.
6. The state should not act autocratically, but on the other hand it should function
for promoting utility.
7. The legislature must act according to the laws of nature. Locke shared the
view of Aristotle that governments could be divided into three forms namely
monarchy, aristocracy and democracy, but his strong opinion is that limited
democracy is the best form of government. He held that limited democracy is
a form of democracy in which the powers had been delegated to the
representatives who are guided by the electorates. Thus Locke advocated
limited sovereignty.

POLITICAL SCIENCE
SEPARATION OF POWERS

Locke assigned a top position to legislature. It has a supreme authority and place.
The other two organs namely the executive and the judiciary were subordinate to
that. He believed that legislatureand the executive must be separated from each
other in functions and personnel. However, this permitted the executive to issue
ordinances when legislature is not in session. Butthis idea was not fully further
developed.

In this realm, Locke asserted that absolute monarchy is inconsistent with civil
society. If the Prince is bestowed with both legislative and executive powers, then
nothing can stop him in exercising his power on any one. Thus nobody can
challenge the power of the Prince. In such an absolute monarchy, the subjects are
reduced to the level of slaves. To put it in the words of Locke:If the Prince holds
both the legislativeand executive power, there is no common judge who may
fairly, indifferently, and with authority to decide, and no standing rule to appeal
to, the subject is the slave of one man. No individual can be subjected to the 35

political power of another without his own consent. It is only with the help of a
 majority group
of individuals with mutual consent among themselves a community
can be formed. This community with a power to act as one body is the creation of
the will and determination of the majority of people. But after forming such a
society, every man puts himself under an obligation to every one of that society to
submit to the rule of the majority, failing which there would be no contract.

The governmentof the world that came into existence began with peace due to the
consent of the people. It is not well that those who have powers of making the
laws
should also have power to execute them. The favoured power is which divided or
POLITICAL SCIENCE

split. The power in one hand should harm the welfare of the state. The federative
power is the power of war and peace, leagues and alliances, and all transactions
with all persons and communities without the commonwealth. The federative and
executive powers are almost always united, and it is best that they are placed in
one hand.
The executive has the supreme execution of the laws, and should be
exempt from subordination. But the legislative may take both the
executive and federative powers out of the hands it has placed them in, when it
finds cause, and to punish any misadministration of the laws. The legislative is the
supreme power, but it is a fiduciary power to act for certain ends. So the people
have a supreme power, a powerful right, to remove and alter the legislative when
they find it act contrary to the trust reposed in it. But whilst the government
exists, the legislative is the supreme power. Not the prince, as Hobbes taught, but
the legislative is the soul of the commonwealth, and the legislative represents the
people; the people act as the judge whether the prince or the legislative act
36 contrary to their trust.

DISSOLUTION OF GOVERNMENT
 The obligation to obey the government depends on the fact that public power is
used for "peace, safety and public good of thepeople." Locke stated explicitly that
men cannot yield to the government more power that they actually possess in the
state ofnature, which means that they cannot be an absolute arbitrary power
over their lives and fortunes which are as much possible to be preserved. Lockean
men, therefore, are not committed to unfailing obedience. It is a rational and
limited agreement, which assures obedience for the preservation and enhancement
of life, liberty, and property. The validity of the contract would depend on the
continuation of the benefits. Also, Locke categorically stated that governments
could be altered, amended, changed or dissolved legitimately under the following
occasions.

POLITICAL SCIENCE
1. Whenever such a prince or single person sets up his own arbitrary will in
the place of laws.
2. When the prince hinders the legislaturefrom assembling in its
due time or from acting freely pursuant to those ends for which it is
constituted.
3. When by the arbitrary power of the prince, the elections and
the ways of elections are altered without the consent and contrary to the
common interest of the people.
4. The delivery of the people into the subjection of foreign power either by
the prince or by the legislature.
5. When the person, who has the supreme executive power neglects laws
already implemented, cannot be executed.

Locke's intention is to defend the moral right of revolution. Hence, 37

at the end of his Second Treatise he discussed the right to resist tyranny. He stated
that English society and English government are two different things. The second,
 namely, the government exists for the well-being of the society. This argument is
supported by a rather lengthy examination of the right that can be gained by conquest.
Locke distinguished between just and unjust warfare. A mere aggressor gains no right
and even a conqueror in a just war can neverestablish a right. The argument is
directed against any theory that a government can derive a just power merely through
conquest or from success by using force. Consequently a government which begins in
force can be justified only by its recognition and support to the moral rights inherent
in persons and communities. In other words, the moral order is permanent and self-
perpetuating, and governments are only factors in the moral order.

Locke argued that a political revolution which dissolves a government does not, as a
POLITICAL SCIENCE

rule, dissolve the community which that government rules. This means that the
political revolution dissolve only the government, but not the community. The
individual resigns his natural right to the community or the public, which presumably
must be some kind of entity if it can receive a grant of power. On the other hand, right
is lodged, only in the hands of individuals until they resign it. He regarded this
surrender of individual right as conditional against both society and government
because the individual power is resigned only with an intention to preserve theliberty
and property of every individual. And society itself is obliged to secure everyone's
property. A government as distinct from society is dissolved either by a change in the
location of legislative power or by a violation of the trust which the people have
reposed in it. Locke clearly stated that any invasion of the life, liberty and property of
subjects is ipso facto void, and a legislature, which attempts these wrongs, forfeits its
power. In this case power reverts to the people, who must make a new legislature by a
new act of constitutional legislation.

REVOLUTION
38
In Hobbesean theory, people do not have any power to over throw the government
except revolution. Revolution is the only alternative to go for other possibility or
alteration. They have to obey the rules and regulations of the ruler, the sovereign.
They have to be loyal to the rule of the sovereign. But in Lockean social contract,
unlike in Hobbesean social contract, the people have the right to over throwthe
government, which goes against the will of the subject, the people. The government
has to go for periodic assessment. Locke did not command unquestioned obedience to
the state.
He grants the right to revolt against the state if it is anti-people. When the state goes
contrary to the will and welfare of the people, only for which the state is created, the
people have a legal, moral,political and natural right to throw the state out of power.
Locke in clear terms says that the dissolution of government does not
necessarily lead to the dissolution of the state, created by the first contract, which is

POLITICAL SCIENCE
supreme, but only the governmental contract breaks.

The right to revolt does not approve of revolutions of any form and any size. A
revolution against the state should not be an act of minority. Lockean state is tolerant
state honouring difference of opinions. Even though revolution begins with minority,
it must through proper propaganda gain the support of the majority. The social
support of the majority makes the revolution meaningful, moral, political and legal. A
true state should not exercise only the negative means to force the people to obey or
to arrest revolutions.

It should also be a transformer state. Man should be educated and trained to transform
their selfish interests into public good. Punishments and artificial pains may be
introduced to prevent the uncontrolled selfishness. In Lockean state the age-old
conflicts of authority and freedom get reconciled. Locke observed that there would be
no civil society, if men do not understand the aim and significance of the rule of law.
The end of law is not to abolish or restrain but to preserve and enlarge freedom.
39
 ESTIMATION
Locke contended that the chief matter of property being now is not the fruits of the
earth and the beasts that subsist on if but the earthitself. As much land as a man tills,
plants, improves, cultivates, and can use the product of, so much is his property.
Nobody can invalidate his right to say everybody else has an equal title to it, and
therefore one wouldcannot appropriate, or cannot enclose, without the consent of all
his fellow commoners, all mankind. When God gave the world in common to all
mankind, commanded man also to labour, and the penury of his condition required it
of him. God and his reason commanded him to subdue the earthi.e., improve it for the
benefit of life and therein lay out something upon it that was based on oneself, out of
labour. By obeying the command of God, man claimed ownership rights only on that
POLITICAL SCIENCE

land he tilled, sowed and cultivated.

Man alone can make use of that particular land. Others have no right to enjoy that
particular land.Although Locke is an influential political philosopher, there exists a
lot of pit falls in his social contract theory. As a champion of natural rights, Locke
should never recommend for the surrendering of the part of natural rights to the
commonwealth in order to protect the property and freedom of the individuals.
According to Locke, property and freedom are inseparable from each other. In its
wider sense, property includes freedom, and in its narrower sense property is a means
to freedom. Locke wanted an established social order through a social contract. But
the people in that social order lacked property, which is a pre-condition for attaining
freedom. Of course,
Locke is aware of this fact. Nevertheless, Locke did not bother toredistribute the
property, which is so unequally distributed in the commonwealth. This clearly
establishes the view that Locke is interested in the welfare of a small part of the
40 community. Then,what is the use of having natural rights,which do not bring about
the equal rights of property? Jean Jacques Rousseau identified these problems and he
tried to improve upon the social contract proposed by Hobbes and Locke.

Creation of the State and Government

The social contract is the instrument that substitutes the state of nature with a civil
(political) society. The sovereign is the protector of the commonwealth (society) and
is not accountable to the people, because one is not party to the contract. One’s word
is law and obedience is mandatory. People have no right to revolt until the sovereign
deprives them of their right to self-preservation. By all means, the authority of the

POLITICAL SCIENCE
sovereign is absolute and the people are commanded to render him unquestioned
obedience.

In this system, since the King is a party to the contract and is committed to observe
the terms of the contract, this renders his status to be like that of a manager of a joint
stock company. Thus, whenever the people feel that their ruler is abusing their trust,
they may rise in revolt and renew their contract with a new ruler. Besides, direct
democracy is established as a result of the social contract as in the system of
Rousseau.

In this regards, sovereignty lies with the people who exercise it in name of general
will or the good of all. At this point, the abuse of the trust of the community does not
arise, simply because they cannot do anything that is harmful to the interest of the
public interest. Though social contract is speculative, deductive and imaginative, its
real value cannot be denied which displace the theory of Divine origin of state that
had become a powerful instrument in defence of kingly despotism. It provides a
powerful instrument for combating irresponsible rulers and a justification for
41
resistance against tyranny. Thus, out of it the idea of popular sovereignty came out
finally in the form of excellence of the representative government. Sovereignty is
 summa potestas (highest power of the state) or plenitude potestatis (supreme authority
of the state) in a sense different from what one would mean now by the term
sovereignty. Thus sovereignty is the supreme power of the state over citizens and
subjects unrestrained by law. It should understood that sovereignty in simple terms
signifies supreme power of the state. It has two dimensions i.e. internal and external.

a) The idea of sovereignty in the internal sphere means that the state has highest
power within the area under its control. All people and their associations are
under the control of the state. In patent terms, it signifies power of the state to
make and enforce a law throughout its territory. It is the final power to
command and enforce obedience and subject to no legal limitations.
POLITICAL SCIENCE

b) Thus the idea of sovereignty in the external sphere implies freedom of state
from any alien subjection or control. Dependent people cannot be called a
state because they live and have to act according to the will of some other
state.

ELECTORAL SYSTEMS OF THE WORLD

The most essential institutional mechanism of democracy is what has been argued by
Merriam, “the suffrage, the representatives, the apparatus of civil liberties, sound
administrative organization, and system of adjudication. In this realm, the purpose
here is to discuss the methods and institutions that holds democratic government and
how it is organized.

Thus suffrage or franchise and representation immediately engage our attention as on

how to recruit or elect them and who should have the right or entitled to vote having
in mind the organization of the electoral districts. Well in this premise, the strength
42
and stability of modern states is that they are based on the fact of democratic
attributes.
The democratic method is that institutional arrangement for arriving at political
decisions which realizes the common good by making the people itself decide the
issue through the election of individuals who are to assemble in order to carry out its
will.

The theories of suffrage and Franchise

Franchise literally means a person’s right to vote. The right to vote should be given to
all without any discrimination on some conventional ground. It regarded suffrage as a
necessary attribute of the membership of the state. State and individual were

POLITICAL SCIENCE
identified. The suffrage was not viewed as aright or as a privilege, but as a necessary
and a natural part of the active life of every citizen. Membership in the state has
obligation to take active part in its life under the tribal theory. The modern practice of
requiring citizenship as a qualification for voting represents a survival of this theory.

The Feudal theory is part of the middle ages when the system of representation was
developing, the right to vote was considered a vested privilege, attached to those
occupying ownership of land. Modern property qualifications for voting are a survival
of this theory, as are the systems of plural voting such as one which existed until the
first World War in Great Britain, where persons who owned estates in various parts of
the country had the right to vote in each of these places.

Natural Rights Theory is based on the origin state of nature, in which all men are free
and equal because they possess natural rights, and of the establishment of the state
and government by a voluntary contract created the doctrine of popular sovereignty.
Thus all political power is usually derived from the people who create it. In
accordance with these principles, the right to take part in government becomes a
43
natural right by means of which the general will of the people may be made
responsible to the consent of the governed.
 Legal Theory deals with the electorate viewed as one of the origins of government
whose composition and powers are determined by the laws of the state. At this point,
voting become a responsibility of the government and with the exercise of public
trust. This theory argue that suffrage, therefore, is not a natural but a political right
conferred by law. It has been served as a justification for various reform movements
for democracy in the twenty-first century.

Ethical Theory

It holds the desirability of right to vote not as a natural rights but as a means for the
most complete development of human personality and worth. By taking active part in
the government, the citizen becomes more interested in public questions and more
POLITICAL SCIENCE

intelligent concerning public policy than he otherwise would be. His capacity for self-
government is thereby increased, and his dignity and self-respect are enhanced by the
opportunity for self-expression in political affairs. This theory has been used to justify
the extension of suffrage, as a means of political education, to classes not fully
competent to exercise it wisely. The granting of suffrage to foreigners andrefugees
may cause Civil War in countries.

Election and it method

Election means recruitment of the representatives by the choice of the voters. It may
be done in one of the two ways. In case the voters choose a representative by their
votes, it is direct election.In case the voters choose a representative by their votes, it is
direct election. For example, the members of the British House of Commons,
Zambian Members of Parliament, or of the American House of Representatives are
directly elected by the voters of the country. Though, it is different from this, in a
situation where the voters elect some persons to elect someone else, it becomes
44 indirect election. The intermediary body is called “Electoral College”, e.g. American,
Zambian candidates are chosen by the representative who have been chosen by the
electors of one party.

Both methods of election have their merits and demerits. Take a look of the merits:

i) It establishes direct touch between the voters and their chosen

representatives.
ii) It stimulates the interest of the voters in public affairs, sharpens their
political consciousness, and makes them public-spirited.
iii) The representatives has a particular regard for the will of his constituents.
One would know that there is a need to act according to their wishes in
case one desires to be re-elected.

POLITICAL SCIENCE
iv) It has educative value, when the candidates go to the voters and ask for
their votes on the basis of their electoral pledges, it all adds to the political
awareness of the voters.

It would important to consider the demerits too. These are:

i) All voters are not equally intelligent and so clever candidates have more
chances to woo the voters in their own interest.
ii) Wrong and undesirable methods are adopted by the candidates for
securing votes. Even vilification campaigns are launched. Really is
distorted by false propaganda.
iii) Really good and conscientious people avoid such elections, though they
may prefer to try their fate in an indirect election.

Merits and demerits of the indirect election. The merits are:

i) It confines the electorate to a small body of persons possessing a higher

level of political ability and necessarily feeling a keener sense of 45
responsibility.
 ii) It tends to diminish the evils of party passion and struggle by removing the
object of the popular choice one degree and confining the function of the
electorate as a whole to the choice of those upon whom the ultimate
responsibility.
iii) It is well suited to infant democracies where the number of politically
conscious and intelligent people is very small.

Demerits are as follows:

i) In a sense, it is undemocratic, because it prevents a large number of people

from taking part in a sphere where they are expected to do it. Though very
much in criticism in the name of political inexpediency.
POLITICAL SCIENCE

ii) Since it deprives a large number of people taking part in the battle of the
ballot box, it can create conditions of political apathy or alienation.
iii) On account of the small size of the constituency, the chances of the
adoption of corrupt means are enhanced. Dishonest leaders may take it
easier to win by securing the votes of a lesser number of persons.
iv) Where the bi-party system is well developed, indirect method is likely to
degenerate into a cumbersome formality, since the immediate electors are
chosen under party pledges to vote for a particular candidates of
candidates.

Forms and Methods of Voting

There are two forms of voting have been devised in the world. First and foremost,
in case of voters vote in a way that their choice becomes clear for all to see, as by
raising their hands or by saying ‘aye’, it is called open or public voting. Thus, the
46
choice of a voters is not known to others or the public until at the count, this is
known as a secret ballot. Though some classical democrats have defended the
way of public ballot or oral.

In this regard, John Stuart Mill opined that the duty of voting just like any other
public duty, may be performed under the eye and criticism of the public. It was
also contended that the secret ballot system is made of votes of dishonest and
immoral. Thus, Treitschke argue that “secret ballot system is the shabbiest trick
that would ever proposed in the name of liberalism.” The secret ballot has
actually gained more and more weight after it was introduced and has become the
accepted mode of voting all over the world; unlike the open ballot system which
renders the voters abstain from voting for various reasons. The open ballot

POLITICAL SCIENCE
attenuates voters instead of political responsibility in the mind of voters. It also
accentuates the tendency of terrorism on the part of the powerful persons who
may go to the extent of dealing unfairly with their voters out of sheer vengeance.
In this realm, secret voting system replaced the open or public voting system,
though, Harrington defends secret voting system as an essential condition of a
free and fearless suffrage.

There may be many voting ways that would be enumerated as:

Majority Vote System (Past-Post the Post System or Plurality of Votes

System)

This system requires the winning candidate to secure the largest number of votes
cast to be declared elected without considering the percentage of votes obtained.
Ordinarily, the winner may secure more than fifty (50) per cent of the votes polled
or not. Mostly, in this form of election is not popular because the elected is
supported by the minority citizen therefore making the governance system to be
doubtful and less popular as the case was with the former Republican President 47

Mwanawasa. This system obviously has the demerit of the candidate is declared
 elected even without getting a clear majority of the votes polled. This amount to
the victory of the minority over the majority.

In this system, there is a possibility of the winner to poll only a small margin to
secure victory. For example, out 6,307 votes polled; candidate A would obtain
1,090 votes cast; Candidate B would get 2,740 votes; Candidate C gets 1, 300
while candidate D gets 1,156 votes, then B is declared elected. This sounds
undemocratic in essence. In order to do away with this defect, two other ways of
voting have been devised-second ballot system and alternative vote system.

Second Ballot System (Single Member Majoritarian System)or Run-off Vote

System
POLITICAL SCIENCE

This system requires the winner to get or obtain votes of more than 50 per cent. In
an event no candidate gets clear majority of votes polled, election I cancelled and
a re-election would take place in which two persons with largest number votes are
allowed to contest again. In case, there is a decline by any of the two, then the
chance would be extended to the third person may contest with other holder.
Therefore, in a case the two candidates, one polls or wins the absolute majority of
votes in the second ballot shall be declared President of that country.

This has been practised in France and Russia elections. This system is really
good, because it eliminates the possibilities of success in favour of a candidate
who may not get clear majority of the votes polled. Though, the only demerit of
this system is that election has to take place again which entail expensiveness and
time consuming. However, to address this expensiveness of the second ballot
system, the alternative vote system has been devised.

Alternative Vote System or Preferential (Contingent) Vote System

48
This system requires a winner to get a clear majority of the votes polled. In this
system no re-election is required for the candidate to be declared winner as the
Second Ballot System.

In this regard, the voter is given a ballot paper which contains names and symbols
of the candidate’s party on the left side and blank columns are left on the right
side in which a voter has to show his preferences by making a figures of 1,2,3,4
depending on the number of presidential candidates participating in that election.
This implies that after the poll, a quota is drawn by dividing the number of valid
votes by 1+1=2 and then adding 1 to the quotient. For instance, if the total number
of valid votes polled is 100, then quota would be: 1+1=2 ÷ 100 = 50 +1 = 51.

POLITICAL SCIENCE
Usually, counting will then begin. Thus the first preference votes would be
counted first. In an event, a candidate secure votes upto the figure of a quota, such
a candidate shall be declared a winner. In case no candidate gets votes upto the
figure of quota, the candidate with the least votes is eliminated and his votes
transferred to other candidates according to second reference marked on his ballot
papers.

Thus, if no candidate gets votes upto the figure of quota in the second round, then
another candidate with least number of votes is eliminated, and his votes are
transferred to other candidates according to subsequent preferences. This process
goes on until one candidate gets votes upto the figure of quota, or the number of
candidates remains equal to the vacant posts as a result of the process of
elimination. It applies to the Presidential election in India.

49
 Assignment: one

A social contract is made by the people in their individual as well as corporate

capacities; all surrender their all rights in favour of all, a corporate whole is
created with a will of its own desiring good of all. Discuss this statement as
argued with Locke John’s arguments.

Page: 4 Excluding Cover and Bibliography (reference) pages

POLITICAL SCIENCE

Font: 12 Times New Roman: Spacing 1.5

Examination Sample Questions 2016 Academic Year

1. Discuss the nature of the State based on the arguments of David Hume.
2. Give a detailed explanation on the Divine Theory on the nature of state.
3. Compare and contrast the Preferential Voting System and Proportional
Representation form of election to either merit or the demerit of the electoral
systems as to your verdict.
4. Zambia has just come from the general elections, according to your
understanding of the electoral system of this country which system would in
the caliber of the citizenry in order to promote governance.
5. Discuss the term election as in relation to governance.
6. Discuss the four elements of the nature of the state and it characteristics.
50 7. Give a detailed argument of John Locke and David Hume on the nature of
state as based on rights and freedom in relation to Governance.
8. Distinguish the Divine theory and Social Contract theory according to Hume.

POLITICAL SCIENCE

51