BPSE - 212

7th Part
Block-5

Q. What are the basic characteristics of the dominant party System

A. 1.  The party system during the first two decades after independence was termed as the Single Dominant Party system. It was a multi-party system where the ruling party played an overwhelmingly dominant role. Although a number of other political parties existed and operated politically, yet the central space of politics was occupied by the Indian National Congress only. The dominance of the Congress was determined by its immense organizational strength as well as its capability to capture a large number of seats both in the Union Parliament and the state legislatures.

2. The dominance of Congress as the ruling party did not mean the absence of competition. The numerous parties in opposition provided competition. Yet, such competition did not result in effectively challenging the dominant position of the ruling party. In electoral terms, it implied that although a number of opposition parties entered the electoral arena none of them singly or in combination could secure the substantial number of seats to replace the Congress as the ruling party. These parties were fragmented and poorly represented in the Union and the state legislatures.

3.  Due to their inability to provide an alternative to the ruling party or even to challenge its position of dominance, the opposition parties did not play the traditional role of opposition. On the contrary, their role was limited to that of constantly pressurizing, criticizing the ruling party. The parties in opposition, therefore, operated as the parties of pressure.

4. One of the important features of the Congress party that helped it to sustain its position of dominance was its capacity to represent divergent social groups and interests. As it drew its support from different sections of society, it played the role of a great umbrella party. During the nationalist movement, it had absorbed people with diverse backgrounds and ideology and had stressed the need for their unity within the party. It had therefore assumed the character of a broad coalition. After the independence period, it continued to absorb the dominant social elements and groups that helped it to maintain its unchallenged position of power. Through its accommodative and adaptive politics, it could curb the role and relevance of opposition.

5.  Being a political party representing diverse interests and ideologies, the Congress had a number of factions. Of these, some were relatively more dominant and played an important role in the decision making of the party. Others were the dissident factions. Several of these factions of the Congress were also ideologically closer to some of the opposition parties. The reason for this being, that almost each of the party in opposition had been a part of the Congress at one time or the other and while choosing to form an independent party outside it, had left a faction of similar ideological orientation within it. Therefore, there always remained a connection between the politics of Congress and that of the opposition parties. This made it possible for the opposition parties to put pressure on Congress and influence its decision making.

6.  The party system, therefore, worked on the basis of a consensual model. Ideological divisions within the Congress or outside were blurred during this period.

Q. Describe the Centrality of Congress.

A. Due to the dominant position of the Congress party in the political arena, it was known to be the Central institution of Indian politics. The Centrality of Congress was reflected at various levels:

i)  At one level, the central space of politics was occupied by the Indian National Congress. The dominance of the Congress was determined by its immense organizational strength as well as its capability to capture a large number of seats both in the Union Parliament and the state legislatures.

ii)  At another level, the important features of the Congress party that helped it to sustain its position of dominance was its capacity to represent divergent social groups and interests. As it drew its support from different sections of society, it played the role of a great umbrella party.

iii)  At the third level, the centrality of the Congress was reflected in its ideological standpoint. Through its accommodative and adaptive politics, it could curb the role and relevance of opposition. Being an umbrella party it had space for all kinds of ideological groups.

Q. What was the impact of the electoral politics based on the principle of Universal Adult Franchise on the politics of India?

A.  The major impact was the political mobilization of masses as well as the emergence of new political classes. Frequently held elections increased the political consciousness of the mass of Indians, especially those belonging to the backward and lower castes. The emergence of the new political classes was directly related to the rise of the rich peasant class in rural India who benefited immensely due to land reforms. By the beginning of the seventies, the land-owning socially dominant sections belonging mainly to the backward castes had attained sufficient economic

strength to demand a share in political power. The entry of these economically sound backward castes into the power politics had far-reaching consequences for Indian politics.

        Firstly, there was an increase in the number of people aspiring for a share in power. The domination of the traditional political elite was seriously challenged.

       Secondly, these new entrants did not share the political ideas of the traditional elite. They had not only different demands and different expectations from the political system but they also used a different political language. This newly emerged classes posed a serious threat to the traditional political elite in general and that of the Congress, in particular. Unable to integrate and balance varied interests, Congress was dislocated from its position of centrality.

The changed scenario of politics was also the result of the assertion of the lower castes that had become politically conscious. In the politics of numbers, the numerically strong lower castes and Dalits were brought into Politics. 

         Initially, they were used and served the interests of the traditional elite. But as the lower castes and Dalits started acquiring a more autonomous role in politics and became politically conscious this led to the formation of new parties based on aspirations and interests of Dalits and backward class. Formation of the BSP, Samajwadi Party, and Janta Dal are examples of such political formations. These parties clearly reflected the interest of the Dalits and the Backward Castes.

Q. Describe the basic characteristics of the party system in India.

A. 1) The party system as it is operating at present is based upon the multiplicity of political parties. As the influence of Congress declined, since 1989, there has been a definite increase in the number of political parties entering the political arena. Numerous regional and small parties have filled in the vacuum created by the

Congress. The strength of the major national parties has been decreasing and that of the smaller parties has been increasing. The composition of Parliament since 1989 is a reflection of the changed party scenario.

2) The kind of party system that is available at present is not hegemonic but competitive with sufficient scope for alternation. However, due to the inability of any single party to attain the majority, the alternation takes place not between the individual parties but between the groups of political parties.

3) The compulsion of the electoral mathematics and the requirement of coalition governments have resulted in the politics of alliance. Alliance takes place among a number of political parties that come together for contesting elections and forming the government.

4) The politics of alliance has had a number of consequences for the nature of party politics. The competitive political space has been widened with a greater number of political parties having a bearing on power politics. Rather than one party hegemonizing power (as in case of pre-1967 level of politics), or even two or three parties making serious claims on political power, there are a number of political parties that enter the political arena. As part of the one or the other alliance structure, these numerous political parties have a serious stake in the process of elections and in the formation of the government. Politics of alliance, therefore, has its direct consequence on the nature of government. Governance

is based upon a wider dispersal of power among the alliance partners.

5) The nature of the alliance has also transformed. Rather than the alliances formed after the election, now there is almost the accepted practice of having pre-poll alliances. Initially, alliances were amorphous with members having come together without ally common objectives, except the one related to power. But of late, there has been some kind of effort at drawing some common minimum program acceptable to all partners of the alliance.

6)  Acceptance of common program among the alliance partners does not necessarily mean that the alliance partners share a common ideology. Ideological cohesiveness, in fact, does not characterize the nature of the alliance. The ideological position of the parties that come forward to join an alliance, at times, is quite

paradoxical. To secure political power ideologically dissimilar parties to form an alliance.

7)  The politics of alliance has led to the polarisation of politics. In the initial years, such polarization took the shape of three alliance structures. Political parties, in the period after 1989 seemed to be organizing themselves around three poles, one led by the Congress, the second led by the BJP and the Third, which was termed as the

Third Front/United Front. The third pole was later weakened. Comprising of Janta Dal, Telugu Desam, the Left Parties and many other regional and state parties, it had been successful in forming the government in 1989 but it could not sustain either its unity or its political strength for a long time. It was very soon fragmented and its number in the Parliament was substantially reduced. Many of the parties representing the Third Front regrouped around the Congress or the BJP. The way alliances have been formed in the last few Parliamentary elections, there has emerged a bi-polarity. The Congress and the BJP are the two parties around which varied political parties have been grouped in recent elections.

8)  The contemporary party system is a reflection of the complexity and the heterogeneity that prevails with the Indian society. It is a representation of the diversity of political interests and opinions. It also reflects the wider reach of the participatory politics that has politicized diverse groups and articulated their political voice. This extensive nature of politicization as resulted in an accommodative

nature of party politics. The power politics is no more dominated by the big and hegemonic parties. On the contrary, there is sufficient importance for smaller parties. As partners in multiparty governance, these small parties have developed their bargaining power. That is the reason that these parties not only share power but also get a voice in political decision-making. As representatives of diverse groups including those who have been hitherto excluded from power politics and minorities, these smaller parties also help create more democratic political space.

9)  Thus there is a greater federalized context of the party system. This federalized context has been provided by the complex relationship between the national and the regional party system and signifies the assertion of the in India regional parties, on the other. In the -past two decades, a number of regional parties with their focus on regional demands have emerged. These regional parties, besides occupying significant political space at the state level are also playing a crucial role in central politics. It is due to their active presence at the national level of politics, that the party system is really acquiring a federal character. As the national parties are dependent upon the regional parties for the formation of the government, the latter have increased their bargaining power. As a result, there has been mainstreaming of regional parties. The distinction that existed earlier between the regional and the national party has also been blurred. The National parties have become regional in character and the regional parties are increasingly participatory in national politics and thereby acquiring national stature.

10)   As the 'national' parties are acquiring regional character, the regional parties are playing an important role in setting the national agenda. Importantly, the regional demands are being forcefully voiced in the national space of Indian politics. Earlier, this was not possible because the regional demands were placed in opposition to the national demands, and therefore, were considered as a threat to national unity. With the entry of the regional parties at the national level of politics, this is no more the case.

11)  This has important implications for the Indian federal structure. With the shift from the single-centered dominant party system to a multi-party system with a lot of space for smaller parties located in the states, there is also a definite shift in the center-state relations. The emerging party system has an essential component of the partnership between the national, regional and state-level parties. There is, therefore, a basis for a more egalitarian relationship between the center and the states. Party system itself is providing the institutional set up for the representation of the interest of the states. Many of the regional parties that are playing an important role in party politics have been demanding a reorganization of the center-state relationship with greater autonomy for the states. With their ascendancy, there has developed greater sensitivity towards the regional issues and there has emerged greater consensus on federalism. Even those national parties that have been traditionally favoring a strong center have been forced to accept the logic of federalism.

Q.  Factors that led to the growth of regional parties.

A.  The factors that give rise to regional parties may be cultural, economic and political. India is a multilingual, multi-religious and multi-ethnic country. A regional party is limited to a geographical region that may cover a state or a couple of states. The there main objective is to defend and preserve the religious-cultural identity of a region. They also raise the issue of neglect of a region which causes its economic backwardness. The cultural minorities may harbor the fear of being absorbed in the majority culture and losing their distinct identity. A desire to maintain this cultural distinctness has been at the roots of the regional movements led by the Dravida

Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), the Akali Dal, the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) and the AGP. The realization that the developmental needs of any region have been ignored for a long time may also give birth to regionalism and regional parties.                     Politically, the regional parties may be seen as a movement against centralization and in tune with the spirit of a true federation.

The emergence of the new political classes was directly related to

the rise of the new peasant class in rural India in the backdrop of the land reforms in different regions. By the beginning of the seventies, the land-owning socially dominant sections belonging mainly to the backward castes had attained sufficient economic strength to demand a share in political power. The entry of these castes into the competitive power politics had far-reaching consequences for Indian politics. 

           Firstly, there was an increase in the number of those aspiring for a share in power. The domination of the traditional political elite, therefore, was seriously challenged.

          Secondly, these new entrants did not share India with the political blues of the traditional elite. They had not only different demands and different expectations from the political system but they also used a different political language. This had the effect of posing a serious threat to the consensual politics of the traditional

political elite in general and that of the Congress, in particular. Unable to integrate and balance varied interests, Congress was dislocated from its position of centrality and resulted in the emergence of many regional parties.

Q. Compare the ideologies and social base of Congress & BJP.

A. Congress -

Ideology - The Congress Party has been committed to socialism, secularism, and democracy. It introduced the democratic socialism model of the economy in India was the major industries and infrastructure like ports, roads, electricity, dams, mining, banking, insurance, etc were all under the state control or under public sector units.

           The private sector was also given state patronage(elaborate).  The party stood for the rural and urban land ceiling. It was against the monopolies and also favored medium and small industries. At the Avadi session in 1956, Congress proclaimed its commitment to the socialistic pattern of society. Continuing with its belief in 1971

election the Congress gave the slogan of Garibi Hatao (remove poverty). Even the 20 -point program under emergency had a strong socialistic component. In the 1980s Congress shifted to the right. The 1984 manifesto did not mention socialism or the need for curbing monopolies. The 1989 election manifesto, Congress

stressed to empower people through the Panchayati Raj system .                   ln1999, the Congress election manifesto advocated the need of a capitalist economy integrated with the world capitalist system. It also favored the abolition of public monopolies except in the fields of defense and encouragement to the private sector. It reaffirmed its commitment to secularism and strengthening Panchayati Raj Institutions. It also promised to double expenditure on poverty alleviation. In foreign policy, the party has stood for

the Non- Alignment.

The Social Base - After independence, the Congress Party won three general elections without much of a challenge. This was because of the support it enjoyed among rural and u!ban, educated and uneducated, upper caste and lower caste, rich and poor almost all over the country. It was the shift of the middle caste votes,

especially from the latter half of the 1960s onwards, away from Congress that led to its losing elections in many states. The main support base of Congress has been the upper caste more particularly the Brahmins, Scheduled Castes and the Muslims.

BJP -

Ideology - Ideologically the BJP is committed to five principles- nationalism and national integration, democracy, positive secularism, Gandhian socialism, and value-based politics. The party rejects both capitalism and socialism because they promote the concentration of economic powers either in the hands of private individuals or state officials. In 1984 the party manifesto laid stress on the development of both agriculture and industry. It also emphasized the reduction of taxes and the introduction of an employment guarantee Program and recognition of the right to work as a fundamental right. In 1996 the BJP kept repeating its commitment to the swadeshi economy but it actually appropriated the Congress (1)'s slogan of liberalization. The BJP has accepted the principle of justice to all by agreeing to the reservation on caste lines. It promises a 33% reservation to women in parliament and state assemblies.

Social Base -

'The BJP, like its predecessor the Bharatiya Jana Sangha, has enjoyed a support base in the Hindi belt. It also has a strong presence in Gujarat and Maharashtra. Since 1989 the party has been trying to penetrate into south India. BJP's traditional support base was among upper castes, small and medium traders and shopkeepers. Among minorities, it gets votes largely from the Sikhs. It is mainly seen as a Hindu Party. From the 1990s, its base has broadened in rural and urban areas, and among the larger numbers of social groups.