UNIT I

9. State doesn’t leave the poor and the weak to feed for themselves.
Goes out of their way to rescue and improve – ‘food for work’, fair price
shops’, providing work to the unemployed.
10. Welfare state strikes a balance between a capitalist and collective
state. It wants to maintain a free society with a mixed economy of social
and economic planning.
Socialistic Obligations of the State:
(1) Reject capitalism as an economic philosophy
(2) To end exploitation of the poor and workers
(3) To check concentration of wealth in a few hands
(4) To avert hoarding and black marketing of essential commodities
(5) To remove artificial scarcity and profiteering
(6) To halt the deliberate and mischievous economic upheavals in the
form of booms and depressions
7) Social and economic equality
(8) Harmony in the society
(9) Collective ownership of the means of management of production,
resources and control on distribution;
(10) Planned economic development and economic justice and
promotion of social service
Obligations of State According to Individualism
According to Individualism, the individual should be left alone as far as
possible and the state must perform only minimum functions. The
exponents of individualism support greater individual initiative and
freedom from state control. They oppose the omnipotent and the
omnipresence of the state and want the individual totally free from the
State interference. They say "that government is good which governs the
least."
According to individualism, the following are the obligations or duties of
the state:
(1) Individual protection, detection of crime and inflicting punishment:
(2) Maintenance of law and order;
(3) Arbitration and administration of justice:
(4) Application of the laws of native - X
(5) To oversee that the people carry-on their social and economic
activities;
(6) Imposition and collection of taxes for the maintenance of the
machinery of the state; and (7) Protection of state from external
aggression and internal disorders.
Thus, individualism advocates that the state has to perform only
'regulatory' duties and not to undertake any social and general welfare
activities.
 Obligation of State under Monarchy:
Obligations of a Sovereign King
Plato has explained that obligations of a philosopher king as under:
(1) He must watch against the excessive inflow of property and
wealth in the state.
(2) He must keep the size of the state consistent with unity and self
sufficiency.
(3) He must ensure due performance of allotted duties by each
citizen; and
(4) He must ensure that no change is made in the system of
education.
According to Plato, the philosopher king is subordinate to the
fundamental and unchanging social order.
Aristotle listed the following obligations of a state
(1) To ensure a perfect, virtuous and self-sufficient life of its members.
(2) To satisfy the natural needs of its members;
(3) To develop man's good facilities into a habit of good action;
(4) To provide means to the individual for the attainment of
intellectual, moral and physical excellence and to enrich themselves;
(5) To educate its citizens in virtue;
(6) To provide security against external or internal danger.
UNIT V
OBEY LAWS QUESTION:
WHAT IS A LAW?
 Men live in society. They differ in their ideas, aims and ideals.
Hence there must be some ‘uniform rules’ to control their
activities. These uniform rules which regulate human
behaviours are called laws. The concept of law occupies a
significant place of political theory.
 Law is closely associated with State that state without law is
anarchic and law without state is meaningless.

DEFINITION OF LAW:
1. Salmond: “Law is the body of principles recognised and
applied by the state in the administration of justice.”
2. John Austin: “The law is a body of rules determined and
enforced by a sovereign political authority.”

Obedience to law refers to an act which binds a person to

some performance. It is the binding power of duty, promise or
contract.
Unjust Laws: -
 Unjust means ‘unfair’. These are those laws which is against
to the bases of the law.
 One can find the question of just or unjust question regarding
positive law only. Because only in case of positive law only
one can find maker, implementer, protector of the law.
 Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Unjust means
‘not just’, ‘unfair’, ‘bad’ etc. An unjust law is a code that is out
of harmony with the moral law.
 Sometimes, governments pass unjust laws with their brute
majority in the legislature under pressure of some interested
groups. Though people must obey the laws whether they are
good or bad. People revolt against bad laws by their nature.
 In certain occasion of unjust laws and atrocities by the rulers
the people may refuse to obey the laws and decide not to
carry out their obligations. Unjust laws cease to be law by
becoming ineffective for it only by being accepted and
obeyed that law remains effective and continues to be law.
 Unjust laws are the laws that treat one or more persons
more harshly or more favourably than others in the same
situation.
 A father who picks on one child and makes a favourite of
another is an unjust parent. Similarly, if the government
imposes heavy taxes or restrictions on people or a group of
people such laws are unjust laws.

The problem of obedience to unjust law:

Disobedience means refusal to obey the commands of law.
The obligation of the state is to make laws which are beneficial
to the people, and which are acceptable to public. Similarly, the
obligation of individuals is to obey laws of the state. The
problem arises only when the laws are unjust.

SITUATIONS OF JUSTIFIED DISOBEDIENCE:

It is argued that some actions are legitimatized by law even
when they are departures from it. For example, a doctor
performed an abortion on a girl, who was pregnant as a result
of rape, knowing fully well that as per law he was committing a
crime. He was in fact held not guilty because the court
retrospectively enlarged the scope of necessity. Non-
enforcement or non- prosecution of some offences are
examples of legitimatized disobedience.

SAFEGUARDS AGAINST UNJUST LAWS

In modern society, democratic form of government makes laws
through legislatures consisting of representatives elected by the
people. According to the doctrine of separation of powers, the
judiciary has the power of judicial review when an act is against
the rights given by the constitution. There are so many
safeguards against enacting unjust laws in a democratic state.
They are:
1. Opposition parties – The opposition parties initiate
amendments to the bills proposed by the ruling parties,
wherever they feel that certain clauses are unjust.
2. Executive – The president or the head of the state may
ask the legislature to consider once again the changes to
be made by sending back the bills.
3. Judiciary – The judiciary cannot interfere in the affairs of
the enactment but, in the interest of justice and to protect
the fundamental freedoms of the individual, in certain
cases, take up judicial review and quash unjust parts of
acts or the provisions of such unjust laws.
4. Public agitation – In certain occasions, common people
also agitate against unjust laws by demonstrations,
hartals, boycotts, etc.
5. Public Opinion through press and the mass media –
Press criticizes unjust laws through articles, letters to the
editors and the statements of eminent public figures. Mass
media educate the public regarding unjust laws.
WHY DO PEOPLE OBEY THE LAW?
People obey the laws because of following reasons:
1. People view it as a legitimate authority
2. Law has an impact on our daily life
3. To avoid legal consequences
4. Because people respect authority
5. Because people feel it is morally right to obey the law
6. Fear of punishment

1. Legitimacy of Authority:
 Individuals perceive the governing body as a legitimate
authority that has the right to enact laws and regulations.
 This legitimacy can stem from various factors such as
democratic processes, historical precedent, or societal
consensus.
2. Social Contract and Agreement:
 first, a citizen may have assented to that law either expressly
or impliedly and thus agreed to obey it. Where individuals, by
residing within a state or participating in its governance
through actions like voting, tacitly agree to abide by its laws.
3. Impact on Daily Life:
 Laws directly affect individuals' daily lives, influencing their
actions, decisions, and interactions with others.
 Adhering to laws ensures smooth functioning within society
and promotes stability and orderliness.
4. Avoidance of Legal Consequences:
 Fear of legal repercussions, such as fines, imprisonment, or
other penalties, motivates people to obey the law.
 Compliance serves as a means of self-preservation,
preventing individuals from facing negative consequences
for their actions.
5. Respect for Authority:
 Some individuals obey the law out of respect for the
authority that enforces it, recognizing the importance of
maintaining social order and harmony.
 This respect may be instilled through upbringing, cultural
norms, or personal beliefs about the role of authority in
society.
6. Morality and Ethics:
 Many people feel a moral obligation to obey the law,
believing that it reflects fundamental principles of justice,
fairness, and societal welfare.
 Adherence to laws aligns with individuals' moral compasses,
reinforcing their sense of responsibility towards the
community and its well-being.
7. Fear of Punishment – (same as avoid legal
consequence)
 The prospect of facing punishment or consequences for
disobedience acts as a deterrent, influencing individuals to
comply with legal requirements.
 Fear of punishment serves as a powerful motivator,
prompting individuals to prioritize adherence to the law to
avoid undesirable outcomes.

IMPORTANCE OF OBEYANCE:
1. Man is a societal being and even tough law is made and
enforced by the state, it is always accepted by the society.
 Law is simply a future prediction device which keeps the
state and its subject in order to avoid the Anarchy.
2. Law governs much of what everyone does, day in and day
out. It tells us what our rights and duties are. It allows us to
assert rights that we have. It lets us know the
consequences of not doing what we are supposed to do.
3. There is no reason to think that, without law, people would
all behave nicely and reasonably. With law, we clearly
know what we are responsible for doing and what will
happen to us if we violate a law. Without law, people could
and would do whatever they wished.
4. Law plays an important indirect role in regard to social
change by shaping a direct impact on society. For
example: A law setting up a compulsory educational
system.
5. Law certainly has acted as a catalyst in the process of
social transformation of people wherein the dilution of
caste inequalities, protective measures for the weak and
Vulnerable sections, providing for the dignified existence
of those living under unwholesome conditions etc. are the
illustrious examples in this regard.
6. Law imposes sanctions on unlawful activities. If we had no
law, people could steal from us, hurt us, damage our
property, or do any number of other acts that society has
agreed it does not find acceptable. Conversely, we could
steal from others or harm them without laws to discourage
us from doing so.

CAN STATE USE FORCE AGAINST ITS CITIZENS?

To Machiavelli, the state is only a power system. Yet he admits
that the power of the state is not for its own sake but for the
sake of the prestige, honour and well-being of the people. Use
of force by state against the citizens is necessary to save
others from unwanted or unwarranted interference. Means any
action against social good. Liberty implies the freedom of action
for the social good and not for unwarranted interference.

PUNISHMENT
Kinds of Punishment:
1. Capital Punishment / Death Penalty:
 In the history of punishment, capital punishment/death
penalty has always occupied and very important place. In
ancient times and even in the middle age, sentencing of
offenders to death was very common kind of punishment.
 Death sentence has always been used as an effective
punishment for murderers and dangerous offenders. It has
both deterrent and preventive effect.
 The justification advanced in support of capital punishment is
that it is lawful to forfeit the life of a person who takes away
another's life.
 The killer deserves execution under this mode of
punishment, legal vengeance solidifies and social solidarity
against lawbreakers and therefore it is legally justified.
 Capital punishment/death penalty awarded in India is certain
exceptional cases. The offenses which are punishable with
the death sentence under the Indian Penal Code.

2. Deportation
 Deportation of criminals is also called banishment. Hardened
criminals
were generally exiled to far off places with a view to
eliminating them from the community.
 The object of this is to dissociate offender from his
surroundings so as to reduce his capacity to commit crime.
This form of punishment has been incorporated in the penal
law of India.
3. Corporal punishment
 Corporal punishment was very common until late 18th
century. Corporal punishment includes modulation, flogging
(or whipping) and torture etc.

4. Fine and confiscation of property:

 This type of punishment was imposed for offenses which
were not serious in nature and were punished with the fine.
 This type of punishment was especially used for offenses
involving the breach of traffic and revenue laws. I
 t is considered as an appropriate punishment for minor
offenses and crimes related to the property. Financial penalty
may either be in form of fine or compensation or costs.

5. Imprisonment:
 Imprisonment represents a most simple and common
punishment which is used all around the world. If properly
administered,
 imprisonment can serve all the three objects of punishment.
It may be deterrent because it makes an example of the
offender to others. It may be preventative because
imprisonment disables the offender, at least for some time,
for repeating the offense. If properly used, it might give
opportunities for reformatting the character of the accused.

6. Solitary Confinement
 This punishment may be considered as an aggravated form
of imprisonment. In this type of punishment, convicts are
confined in solitary prison-cells without any contact with their
follow prisons.
 The Indian Penal Code lay down the limits beyond which
solitary confinement cannot be imposed in India.

7. Indeterminate Punishment:
 Another kind of imprisonment is indeterminate sentence. In
this case, the accusative is not sentenced to imprisonment
for any fixed period.
 The period is left determinant at the time of the award. When
the accused show's improvement, the sentence may be
terminated.

8. Stoning:
 The punishment of stoning is barbaric in nature. It was in
practice during the medieval period.
 In Islamic countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia offenders
found guilty of sex were punished by stoning to Death.

THEORIES OF PUNISHMENT:
1. Deterrent Theory:
 There are two theories in which this theory can be divided
further. They are specific deterrence and general deterrence.
 In specific deterrence, punishment is designed such that it
can educate the criminals. Also, it is maintained that the
punishment reforms the criminals. This is done by creating a
fear that the punishment will be repeated.
 A general deterrence is designed to avoid future crime. It is
done by making an example of each defendant. Thus, it
frightens the citizens to not do what the defendant did.

2. Retributive Theory:
 Retribution is the most ancient justification for punishment.
This theory insists that a person deserves punishment as he
has done a wrongful deed. Also, this theory signifies that no
person shall be arrested unless that person has broken the
law.
 Here are the conditions where a person is considered as an
offender are:
i. The penalty given will be equivalent to the grievance
caused by the person.
ii. Performed a crime of certain culpability.
iii. That similar persons have been imposed for similar
offenses.
iv. That the action performed was by him and he was only
responsible for it. Also, he had full knowledge of the
penalty system and possible consequences.

3. Preventive Theory:
 Punishment is, preventive or disabling. Its primary and
general purpose being to deter by fear, its secondary and
special purpose is wherever possible and expedient, to
prevent a repetition by the wrong doer by the disablement of
the offender.
 This theory has used a restraint that an offender if repeats
the criminal act is culpable for death, exile or imprisonment.
 The theory gets its importance from the notion that society
must be protected from criminals.
 They first realized that the social and economic forces should
be removed from society. Also, one must pay attention to
individuals who show anti-social behaviour. This is because
of psychological and biological handicaps.

4. Reformative Theory:
 According to this theory, offences are a result of a conflict
between the interests of the wrong doer and those of the
society.
 The reformative theory was born out of the positive theory
that the focal point of crime is positive thinking. Thus,
 according to this theory, the objective of punishment needs
to be reformation by the offender.
 So, this is not a punishment virtually but rather a
rehabilitative process. Thus, this process helps in making a
criminal a good citizen as much as possible.

SHORT NOTE ON NELSON MANDELA

Introduction:
 Nelson Mandela was a South African anti-apartheid
revolutionary, political leader, and philanthropist.
 He served as President of South Africa from 1994 to 1999,
becoming the country's first black head of state elected in a
fully representative democratic election.
 Mandela's government focused on dismantling apartheid's
legacy by tackling institutionalized racism and promoting
racial reconciliation.
 He was ideologically an African nationalist and socialist,
serving as president of the African National Congress (ANC)
from 1991 to 1997.
 He studied law and became involved in anti-colonial and
African nationalist politics, joining the ANC in 1943 and co-
founding its Youth League in 1944.

MANDELA TO POLITICAL OBLIGATION

1. Doctrine of Non-Violence:
Nelson Mandela, amidst South Africa's oppressive apartheid
regime, navigated the nation's transition to democracy, defying
predictions of civil war. Influenced by Mahatma Gandhi's
principle of non-violence, Mandela initially embraced passive
resistance. However, faced with escalating brutality, he founded
Umkhonto we Sizwe, adding a military dimension to the
struggle against oppression. Mandela's journey mirrored
Gandhi's, both leaders mobilizing against colonial oppression
until non-violence alone couldn't counter the oppressor's force.

2. Joining of ANC and Bus Boycott Movement:

Nelson Mandela actively participated in a bus boycott aimed at
reversing fare increases, demonstrating his early involvement
in civil rights activism. Joining the African National Congress
(ANC), Mandela was influenced by figures like Walter Sisulu
and Oliver Tambo, who played significant roles in shaping his
political views. This led to the formation of the African National
Congress Youth League (ANCYL), with Mandela serving as a
member of its executive committee, marking a pivotal moment
in his political career.

3. Movement Against Racial Segregation:

During the 1948 South African general election, which excluded
non-whites from voting, the National Party's rise to power
marked a significant shift towards institutionalized racial
segregation, known as apartheid.
Mandela, along with his allies in the ANC, advocated for direct
action against apartheid, drawing inspiration from tactics
employed by the Indian community, such as boycotts and
strikes.
Despite initial opposition within the ANC, Mandela and his
cadre allies led a push for a more militant approach, guiding the
ANC towards a radical and revolutionary path against
apartheid.
4. Against Petty Apartheid:
In 1953, the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act intensified
"petty apartheid," segregating public spaces like buses,
beaches, and post offices to minimize interracial contact.
Economically, discriminatory laws like the Bantu Building
Workers Act criminalized skilled work for Africans, while the
Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act restricted strikes by
black workers and the Industrial Conciliation Act suppressed
black labour unions. Politically, the government stoked fear
among white communities, citing threats from communism and
black activism. Despite minimal white opposition, Mandela
mobilised the masses against these oppressive laws, marking a
significant step in the fight against apartheid.

5. Fight against Discriminatory Educational Policies:

Under apartheid, black youth faced severe discrimination in
education. The 1953 Bantu Education Act enforced an inferior
education system with a limited curriculum that portrayed
Africans as menial labourers. Additionally, the Extension of
University Education Act barred black students from attending
"white" universities, establishing segregated educational
institutions. Censorship was rampant, with many books
banned, and access to television was restricted until the 1970s.
Monumental structures like the Voortrekker Museum glorified
white supremacy. Despite these challenges, Mandela and
others fought against these discriminatory policies to ensure
equal educational opportunities for all.
UNIT II
LAW:
What is Law?
 Law is the body of official rules and regulations, generally
found in constitutions, legislation, judicial opinions hence
Law is a formal mechanism of social control.
 Law is a system of rules created and enforced through social
or governmental institutions to regulate behaviour.

Root word of Law:

- Law derived from the Old Teutonic Word: Lag, which means -
To place, to Set, to Fix something in an even manner.
- The Deeper Sense of Law from - Latin word = Jus, Junger
which gives the meaning of Bond or Tie.
Definitions:
3. Salmond: “Law is the body of principles recognised and
applied by the state in the administration of justice.”
4. John Austin: “The law is a body of rules determined and
enforced by a sovereign political authority.”

NATURE/ FEATURES OF LAW:

1. Law is a general rule of human behaviour in the state. It
applies to all people of the state.
- Law is universal, in the sense that no individual or group is
exempt from law.
2. Law is definite and it is the formulated will of the State. It is
a rule made and implemented by the state.
3. Sovereignty of State is the basis of law and its binding
character.
 4. Law is backed by the coercive power of the State.
Violations of laws are always punished. Punishments are
also prescribed by Law.
5. Law should maintain the principles of justice and
impartiality.
6. The purpose of Law is to provide peace, protection, and
security to the people and to ensure conditions for their
all-round development.
Law also provides protection to the rights and freedoms of
the people.
7. All disputes among the people are settled by the courts on
the basis of an interpretation and application of the laws of
the State.
8. Rule of law, equality before law and equal protection of
law for all without any discrimination, are recognised as
the salient features of a modern legal system and liberal
democratic state.

SOURCES OF LAW:
Sources of law mean the sources from where law or the binding
rules of human conduct originate. In other words, law is derived
from sources.
1. Custom:
Custom has been one of the oldest sources of law. In ancient
times, social relations gave rise to several usages, traditions
and customs. These were used to settle and decide disputes
among the people. Customs were practiced habitually and
violations of customs were disapproved and punished by the
society.
Gradually, the State emerged as the organised political
institution of the people having the responsibility to maintain
peace, law and order; naturally, it also began acting by
making and enforcing rules based upon customs and
 traditions. In fact, most of the laws had their birth when the
State began converting the customs into authoritative and
binding rules. Custom has been indeed a rich source of Law.
2. Religion and Morality:
 Religion and religious codes appeared naturally in every
society when human beings began observing, enjoying,
and fearing natural forces. These were accepted as
superior heavenly forces (Gods and Goddesses) and
worshiped.
 Religion then started regulating the behaviour of people
and began invoking “Godly sanction”, “fear of hell”, and
“possible fruits of heaven”, for enforcing the religious
codes. It compelled the people to accept and obey
religious codes.
 The rules of morality also appeared in society and defined
what was good & what was bad, what was right and what
was wrong.
 The State converted several moral codes and religious
rules into its laws, to regulate the actions of people.

3. Legislation:
 Since the emergence of legislatures in 13th century,
legislation has emerged as the chief source of Law.
 Traditionally, the State depended upon customs and the
decrees or orders of the King for regulating the behaviour of
the people.
 Later, the legislature emerged as an organ of the
government. It began transforming the customary rules of
behaviour into definite and enacted rules of behaviour of
the people.

4. Judicial Decisions:
 In contemporary times, Judicial Decision has come to be an
important source of Law. It is the responsibility of the courts
to interpret and apply laws to specific cases.
 The decisions of the courts – the judicial decisions, are
binding on the parties to the case. These also get accepted
as laws for future cases. But not all judicial decisions are
laws.
 Only the judicial decisions given by the apex court or the
courts which stand recognized as the Courts of Record,
(like the Supreme Court and High Courts of India) are
recognized and used as laws proper. Lower Courts can settle
their cases on the basis of such judicial decisions.

5. Equity:
 Equity means fairness and sense of justice. It is also a
source of Law. For deciding cases, the judges interpret and
apply laws to the specific cases.
 But laws cannot fully fit in each case, and these can be silent
in some respects. In all such cases, the judges depend on
equity and act in accordance with their sense of fair play
and justice.
 Equity is used to provide relief to the aggrieved parties and
such decisions perform the function of laying down rules
for the future. As such equity acts as a source of law.

6. Scientific Commentaries:
 The works of eminent jurists always include scientific
commentaries on the Constitution and the laws of each state.
These are used by the courts for determining the meaning
of law. It helps the courts to interpret and apply laws.
 The jurists not only discuss and explain the existing law but
also suggest the future possible rules of behaviour. They
also highlight the weaknesses of the existing laws as
 well as the ways to overcome these. Interpretations given
by them help the judges to interpret and apply Laws to
specific cases.
 The works of jurists like, Blackstone, Dicey, D.D. Basu and
others have been always held in high esteem by the judges
in India.

TYPES/ KINDS OF LAW:

Broadly speaking there are two main kinds of Law:

(i) National Law
the body of rules which regulates the actions of the people in
society, and it is backed by the coercive power of the State.

(ii) International Law

the body of rules which guides and directs the behaviour of the
states in international relations. It is a law among nations and is
not backed by any coercive power.

National Law is the law by which the people are governed

by the state. It stands classified into several kinds:
1. Constitutional Law

2. Ordinary Law:

1. Constitutional Law:
Constitutional Law is the supreme law of the country. It
stands written in the Constitution of the State. The
Constitutional Law lays down the organisation, powers,
functions and inter-relationship of the three organs of
government. It also lays down the relationship between the
people and the government as well as the rights, freedoms
(fundamental rights) and duties of the citizens.
2. Ordinary Law:
It is also called the national law or the municipal law. It is
made by the government (legislature) and it determines and
regulates the conduct and behaviour of the people. It lays down
the relations among the people and their associations,
organisations, groups and institutions. The legislature makes
laws, the executive implements these and judiciary interprets
and applies these to specific cases.
 Ordinary Law is classified into two parts: Private and
Public Law
a) Private Law:
Private Law regulates the relations among individuals. It lays
down rules regarding the conduct of the individual in society
and his relations with other persons. It guarantees the
enjoyment of his rights. It is through this law that the State acts
as the arbiter of disputes between any two individuals or their
groups.
b) Public Law:
The law which regulates the relations between the individual
and the State is Public Law. It is made and enforced by the
State on behalf of the community.

 Public Law stands sub divided into two categories:

General Law, and Administrative Law.
2(b)(i) General Law:
It lays down the relations between the private citizens (non-
officials or who are not members of the civil service) and the
State. General Public Law applies to all the citizens in their
relations with the State.
2(b)(ii) Administrative Law:
It lays down the rules governing the exercise of the
constitutional authority which is delegated by the Constitution of
the State to all the organs of government. It also governs the
relations between the civil servants and the public and lays
down the relations between the civil servants and the State.

LIBERTY
Liberty is derived from a Latin word “Liber”, which means free
or independent. The concept of liberty occupies a very
important place in civics. Liberty means the unrestricted
freedom of the individual to do anything he likes to do. But this
sort of unrestricted liberty is not possible in society.
Nature:
The concept of liberty can be understood by considering human
freedom compared to that of animals. While animals are
governed by instincts like the "struggle for existence" and
"survival of the fittest," humans possess the unique quality of
freedom. Unlike animals, humans have aims and goals in life,
and they create social structures and organizations. Humans
also have the ability to tame and control animals. In summary,
freedom is a defining characteristic of humanity.
Definition:
1. Montesquieu: - “Liberty means the power of doing what we
ought to do”.
2. Prof. Seely: - “Liberty means the absence of restraints”.
KINDS OF LIBERTY:
1. Natural Liberty,
2. Social / Civil Liberty
3. Moral Liberty.
1. Natural Liberty:
It implies complete freedom for a man to do what he wills. In
other words, it means absence of all restraints and freedom
from interferences.
However, this kind of freedom is not true liberty because it's like
living in the wild without any rules. Real liberty relates to how
people interact in society. Social philosophers like Hobbes,
Locke, and Rousseau talked about this kind of liberty being
present in the "state of nature" before organized society
existed. But today, true liberty exists within a state where there
are rules and regulations.

2. Social / Civil Liberty:

It relates to man’s freedom in his life as a member of the social
organization. They have the right to do what they want as long
as it aligns with the rules set for the common good. Civil or
social liberty includes the rights and privileges that society
acknowledges and the state safeguards in both private and
public aspects of an individual's life.
Subcategories:

a. Personal Liberty: This is about the freedom to make choices

in aspects of life that mostly affect the individual. It's about
being surrounded by one's own decisions and their
consequences.
b. Political Liberty: It's the power of people to participate in state
affairs, like voting and forming public opinion. It's also about
controlling and forming the government.
c. Economic Liberty: This refers to the freedom of individuals in
their roles as workers or producers. It includes freedom from
the fear of unemployment or not having enough.
d. Domestic/Family Liberty: This relates to liberty within the
family unit. It includes aspects like giving equal rights to
spouses, treating marriage as a contract, and ensuring the well-
being of children.
e. National Liberty: This is about a nation being independent
and not under the control of another. It often involves struggles
for independence and is linked with patriotism.
f. International Liberty: It's about the world being free from
conflict and war, settling disputes peacefully, and reducing the
use of force and aggression. It's based on the belief that peace
can be achieved when nations abandon war and focus on
peaceful resolution of conflicts.

3. Moral Liberty:

This freedom has been discussed by philosophers from ancient

times like Plato and Aristotle to modern thinkers like Rousseau,
Kant, Hegel, Green, and Banquet. It's about individuals being
able to act according to their rational selves. Each person has
their own personality and wants to develop it fully. They also
want the same for others and respect their worth and dignity.
This type of freedom is linked to a person realizing their true
self.
 Two aspects of liberty:
Positive Liberty: Positive liberty is about more than just
removing restrictions. It's about giving people opportunities they
need to grow, especially when they're held back by socio-
economic conditions. It means removing obstacles that stop
individuals from pursuing happiness. Rights are essential for
liberty, so the government should regulate and provide
opportunities to create positive conditions for everyone's
welfare.
Negative Liberty: Negative liberty means the absence of
restrictions. This idea suggests there should be no limits on
individual freedom. Supporters of this theory include Locke, De
Tocqueville, Burke, Paine, Bentham, Spencer, and Mill. They
believe the state should not interfere with natural individual
freedom and should impose minimal restraints. As long as a
person doesn't infringe on others' liberty, they should be free to
act as they wish.

 EQUALITY:
Equality, like liberty, is an important pillar of democracy. In
common parlance the term equality is used for identity of
treatment and identity of rewards.
However, absolute equality is not possible. Equality can
mean both negative and positive things. In the negative
sense, it means no special privileges and breaking down
barriers like birth, wealth, caste, colour, or creed. In the
positive sense, it means providing enough opportunities for
everyone in society.
Adequate opportunities don't have to be the same for
everyone, but they should be fair. So, equality really means
giving everyone fair chances without discrimination based on
status, caste, creed, or any other factors.

KINDS OF EQUALITY:
The concept of equality is dynamic one and has kept on
changing according to times.
1. Civil Equality: Civil equality means treating everyone
equally under the law. No matter their status or position,
all citizens should be treated the same, without
discrimination based on things like caste, creed, sex, or
social status. Laws should benefit everyone and shouldn't
favour any particular group.
2. Political Equality: Political equality gives every citizen the
right to participate in government affairs, without
discrimination based on factors like caste, colour, creed, or
sex. Citizens should have equal opportunities to vote, run
for office, criticize the government, and hold public
positions. It's based on universal adult franchise and
respect for human dignity.
3. Social Equality: Social equality means there should be no
discrimination based on social status, colour, caste, creed,
or rank. No one should get special privileges because of
their social status or caste. Achieving social equality
requires changing social habits and institutions, and
education can help too.
4. Economic Equality: Economic equality doesn't mean
everyone should have the same wealth. Instead, it means
wealth shouldn't be concentrated in a few hands, and
everyone should have a minimum standard of income
assured to them. Economic equality is seen as crucial for
other types of equality to exist.
5. Natural Equality: The idea of natural equality suggests that
everyone is created equal by nature. However, not
everyone has the same abilities or qualities, so this idea is
often considered a myth.
6. Legal Equality: Legal equality means everyone is treated
the same under the law and entitled to equal protection. It
ensures that everyone's life and liberty are protected
equally, and anyone who breaks the law faces equal
 penalties. It also implies providing justice quickly and
affordably so that everyone, regardless of their social or
economic status, can access it.
Relationship between Equality and Liberty:
i. Negative View: Some, like Lord Acton and F.A. Hayek,
argue that liberty and equality are incompatible. They
believe that efforts to create equality often lead to tyranny
and greater inequality.
ii. Positive View: Others see liberty and equality as
compatible. They believe that both are essential for human
dignity and the development of individual capacities.
iii. Liberal Perspective: Liberals emphasize the idea of
"equality of opportunity," where everyone has the freedom
to compete on a level playing field. In this view, some
inequality is acceptable as long as everyone has the same
opportunities.
iv. Marxist Perspective: Marxists view equality through the
lens of class struggle. They argue that true equality can
only exist in a classless society, which can be achieved
through the dictatorship of the proletariat. In this
perspective, liberty and equality are closely linked, but
only achievable through the elimination of class
distinctions.
******************************
> Delegated Legislation:
Delegated legislation is a technique to relieve pressure on
legislative time so that it can concentrate on principles and
formulation of policies. India, rules and regulation, orders,
notifications by laws form part of delegated legislation.
Meaning:
- Delegated legislation refers to laws made by entities other
than the main legislative body, like the parliament. It's a way
for the executive branch to create rules and regulations to
supplement existing laws.
This type of legislation has become more common due to
various factors. While traditional theory suggests that only
legislators should make laws, in reality, the executive also
performs legislative functions.
According to legal scholar Salmond, legislation can be either
supreme or subordinate. Supreme legislation comes from the
highest authority, like parliament, while subordinate
legislation is made by entities other than the main legislature.
Delegated legislation falls under the category of subordinate
legislation, as it's made by entities other than the sovereign
power, usually under powers granted by the main legislature.
So, in simple terms, delegated legislation refers to laws
made by organizations or individuals other than the main
parliament, based on powers given to them by the parliament
itself.
 Advantages:
It saves time for legislature.
ii. It can be easily done in consultation with parties affected.
iii. It allows for flexibility
iv. Expert opinion s required in legislation
v. Parliament is not always in session
vi. Delegated legislation is resorted to use in case of
emergencies.
vii. It can be used on an experimental basis.

 Limitations:
i) It has long term bearing on legislative control, because
the legislature is the supreme organ of the state as it
consists of three main organs which are: Judiciary,
Legislative and Executive.
ii) Executive has become more powerful with delegated
legislation; it has encroached upon the domain of
legislature by making rules and regulations.
iii) Possible misuse for political gains, executive can
always misuse or abuse the power for short term
political gains. It can make legislations in such a way to
benefit the ruling party
iv) This concept opposes the rule of Separation of Power.
v) It is not in acceptance with the principle of rule of law
vi) Delegated legislation changes with political changes
resulting in political and administration instability.

Reasons for growth:

1. Pressure on Parliamentary Time: With the government's
role expanding into various areas, there's too much
legislation for parliament to handle in detail. So,
parliament sets the general policy and lets the executive
handle the specifics through rules and regulations. It's like
a parent giving some tasks to a capable child to ease the
workload.
2. Technicality: Sometimes, laws need to cover highly
technical subjects that lawmakers may not fully
understand. In such cases, experts are needed to draft the
legislation. For example, laws about gas, atomic energy,
or drugs require specialized knowledge that lawmakers
may not have.
3. Flexibility: Laws can't foresee every possible situation.
When unforeseen issues arise, it's impractical to wait for a
lengthy legislative process to make changes. Delegated
 legislation allows the government to act quickly. For
instance, rules about bank rates or police regulations may
need to be adjusted promptly.
4. Experimentation: Delegated legislation lets the
government experiment with new ideas. This allows for the
rapid application of experience and adjustments to laws
based on that experience. For example, in matters like
road traffic, experiments can be conducted to improve
regulations.
5. Emergency: During emergencies like wars, natural
disasters, or economic crises, quick action is crucial.
Delegated legislation grants the government special
powers to address urgent situations, as the legislative
process isn't designed for immediate solutions.
6. Complexity of Modern Administration: Today's
administration is complex, with government involved in
various economic and social areas. Traditional legislative
processes may not be effective in regulating these
sectors. Delegated legislation gives authorities the
flexibility to regulate private trade and business effectively
within established boundaries.

UNIT III

 IDEALISM – T.H. GREEN:

- TH Green was born in Yorkshire in 1836. He was a 19th
century British Philosopher know for his contributions to
political and moral philosophy, particularly in the realm of
liberalism (and idealism).
- He was influenced by Plato, Aristotle, Rousseau, Kant and
Hegel. He was engaged in the idealist revision of liberalism,
and tried to combine Liberalism with Hegelian Idealism.
- T.H. Green was not only interested in giving the principles of
his philosophy, but also in participating in practical English
Politics. Green came to be acknowledged as one of the
leading philosopher of the 19th Century.
- Green’s idealism, unlike that of Hegel, is of the moderate
type. He gave a liberal interpretation to the idealism of
different thinkers, hence regarded as a sober idealist.

> Green’s Thought

- One of his notable statements is that "will not force is the
basis of the state." This statement reflects Green's
emphasis on the importance of free and voluntary
cooperation, in the functioning of the state.
- Green believed that the state should not rely solely on
coercive power or force to maintain order and secure the
well-being of its citizens. Instead, he argued that the state
should be based on the voluntary consent and cooperation of
its members. This implies that the state should respect the
individual freedoms and rights of its citizens and that the
exercise of political authority should be limited to the extent
necessary to protect those rights.
- According to Green, the state should be a positive force in
society, working towards the promotion of individual freedom
and the common good.
- Green believes that the state is a natural and necessary
institution for survival of mankind.
- State is only a means to an end. Green states that State
should perform the function of removing hindrances from the
path of development of individual’s personality. The state
must not do anything which creates obstacles in the path of
one’s development.
-
- He believed that the state should provide the necessary
conditions for individuals to develop their full potential and
lead fulfilling lives.
- This includes ensuring equal opportunities, access to
education, and social welfare measures that address poverty
and inequality.
- Says that the chief function of the state is to uphold
individual’s rights and create conditions which will enables
individuals to develop their personality. Green restricts state
from interfering in one’s self-determination and providing
freedom to the individual to develop as per his own ideals.
- Emphasizes that the state should be based on consent, not
force. The state should derive its authority from the free
agreement and collective will of its citizens, rather than
coercive power.
- This aligns with his philosophy of positive freedom, which
emphasizes the active participation and self-realization of
individuals within a just and equitable society.

In regard to the right to property, Green is both individualistic

and socialist. He emphasises that private property enables the
individual to give expression to his personality and hence it is
required that everyone must be allowed to have private
property.
Also believes it is the responsibility of the state to punish
criminals who are anti-social and go against the freedom of
others so as to remove the obstacles on the path of rights and
prevent the future violation of rights.
In essence, Green's statement reflects his belief in the
importance of a democratic and participatory state that respects
individual rights, fosters cooperation, and seeks to create
conditions for human flourishing.
It signifies his rejection of authoritarianism and his advocacy for
a state that is founded on the principles of consent, freedom,
and the common good.

Merits of Idealism:
1. Idealists established a close connection between politics and
ethics. They consider the state as an ethical institution.
2. Idealists looked for high goals. It is always good for a society
to set big goals. Though they could not be achieved easily, it is
good to have ideals or directions where the individual and
society should move.
3. Idealist give a high place to mind and will. They believe
morals and ethics.
4. Idealists give importance to the state. they subordinate the
individual to the authority of the state.
 UTILITARIANISM – JEREMY BENTHAM
- Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) was a philosopher, economist,
jurist, and legal reformer who developed the first systematic
account of utilitarianism.
- He was the father of utilitarian school of thought.

Meaning of Utility:
Bentham used the word ‘utility’ as a synonym for the word
‘good’ or ‘value’. Everything that brings happiness is good and
anything that does not bring happiness is not good. The desire
of every individual is to be happy and pleasant.
- Bentham says,” Utility is property in any object, whereby it
tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good or
happiness of the greatest number.”

UTILITARIANISM:
- Utilitarianism is an effort to provide an answer to the practical
question “What ought a person to do?” The answer is that a
person ought to act so as to maximize happiness or pleasure
and to minimize unhappiness or pain.
- The utilitarian morality recognises in human beings the
power of sacrificing their own greatest good for the good of
others.
- The Classical Utilitarian Approach was based on the views of
Bentham and Mill.
-

PLEASURE-PAIN THEORY
- According to Bentham, human beings are creatures of
feeling and sensibility.
- All experiences are either pleasurable or painful. That action
is good which increases pleasure and decreases pain. That
action is bad which decreases pleasure and increases pain.
- Bentham found pain and pleasure to be the only intrinsic
values in the world - and through this he derived the rule of
utility: that the good is whatever brings the greatest
happiness to the greatest number of people.
- The yard stick to judging the goodness or badness of every
individual’s action is the pleasure-pain theory.

SOURCES OF PLEASURE OR PAIN:

Bentham lists out the following four sources of pleasure or pain:

1. Pleasure and pain which occur due to physical or natural

sanction: We experience or expect them in the ordinary
course of nature, not purposely modified by any human
interposition.
2. Pleasure and pain that occur due to moral sanctions: These
are pleasure and pain which we experience or expect at the
hands of our fellows prompted by the feeling of hatred or
goodwill.
3. Pleasure and pain that occur due to political sanctions: Such
pleasures or pain are received from the magistrate or the
legislator.
4. Pleasure and pain which occurs due to religious sanction.

HEDONISTIC CALCULUS:
Bentham also provided a theory known as ‘Hedonistic
Calculus’. He claims that by using it one can measure the
pleasure of utility.
- Man does only that thing which gives him the maximum utility
and through it the maximum pleasure. If we want to know
which thing gives the maximum happiness, we must be able
to measure utility.
- Acc. to him, what applies to individual morals, applies equally
to state craft.
- That action of the state is good which increases pleasure or
decreases the pain of the largest number of the individuals
comprising it. All actions must be judged on this criterion.
- If the state promotes the greatest good of the greatest
number it is good, otherwise it is bad. The principle of utility
is held to be the rational guide both private morals and to
 public policy. Hence, utilitarianism implies both individualism
and democracy.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DOCTRINE OF UTILITY:

Bentham’s utilitarian doctrine has the following characteristics:
1. It is a hedonistic (pleasure) and pragmatic. It is not egoistic
and altruistic.
2. It is based on quantity to happiness but not on the quality of
happiness.
3. It is concerned with the result but not the motive.
4. It tells us whose pleasure or happiness is to be sought.
5. It tells us how to regulate our conduct.
6. It is universal.
7. It is objective, verifiable, unequivocal, and clear.
(necessary or not?)
If asked only for Utilitarianism theory – Write about J.S Mill too
- John Stuart Mill; (1806–1873) was a follower of Bentham,
and, through most of his life, greatly admired Bentham's
work even though he disagreed with some of Bentham's
claims - particularly on the nature of ‘happiness.’
Bentham, had held that there were no qualitative differences
between pleasures, only quantitative ones. This left him open to
a variety of criticisms.
1. Bentham's Hedonism was too egalitarian. It treated all
pleasures equally, without considering their complexity.
2. Bentham's belief in pleasure equality led to criticism that
human pleasures were no better than animal pleasures.
3. This belief also meant that animals, being sentient, had the
same moral status as humans. Mill wanted to apply
utilitarianism to laws and society.

Mill argued for women's suffrage and free speech to increase

overall happiness. He believed that rights are based on utility,
so if a right or duty causes harm, it's not genuine. He used the
example of women's suffrage to illustrate this, emphasizing that
denying women education and opportunities reduces
happiness. In his work on Utilitarianism, Mill also stated that
virtue is essential for a good life and society. He believed that
coercion is justified to ensure people fulfill their duties for the
greater good.

MERITS:
1. Focuses on happiness as the ultimate goal:
Utilitarianism is popular because it prioritizes happiness as
the main goal for society. By focusing on the effects of
actions, rather than just the process, it can lead to
improvements like reducing unemployment and increasing
household incomes, which ultimately contribute to people's
overall happiness.
2. Teaches us that harming others is morally wrong:
Instead of individual perspectives, it emphasizes community-
based ethics. Highlights that individual happiness should not
come at the expense of others. It promotes the idea that
harming others for personal gain is ethically unacceptable.
3. Easy to implement:
Utilitarianism is simple to implement because it focuses
solely on happiness. To apply it in society, we gather in
groups and evaluate the positive and negative effects of
 each choice together. This decision-making process is
natural to us from childhood and easily fits into group
dynamics.
4. Secular system focused on humanity:
Utilitarianism is secular and human-centered, avoiding the
complexities of spirituality. With numerous religions
worldwide, it's challenging to agree on spiritual beliefs. By
prioritizing happiness in moral decisions instead of focusing
on supernatural beliefs, utilitarianism avoids inconsistencies
and provides a clear, universal approach.
5. Seeks to create the highest good:
Utilitarianism acknowledges that achieving equal happiness
for everyone may be impractical. Prioritises the majority's
happiness over everyone's equal happiness. Instead, it aims
to maximize overall happiness within society, thereby
reducing harm and promoting well-being.
6. Focuses on the democratic process:
Utilitarianism aligns with democratic principles by valuing the
majority's happiness. In democracy, decisions are made by a
50% plus one vote majority, aiming to balance everyone's
interests fairly. This approach is common in modern
governance based on democratic principles.
7. Provides an objective, universal solution:
Utilitarianism provides a universal solution by considering the
positive and negative consequences of actions. It allows for
an objective assessment of what is morally right or wrong,
applicable to all human societies.

 LIMITATIONS:
1. Doesn’t consider any other element besides happiness:
Utilitarianism solely prioritizes majority happiness in
determining morality, overlooking other valuable aspects of
human life. While happiness is important, there are other
factors such as love and long-term considerations that also
contribute to human well-being. Therefore, while Utilitarianism
has its advantages, it does not encompass all of our life
experiences.
2. Creates an unrealistic perspective for society:
Imagine the scenario: there are eight people right now who
would benefit from having your organs. Acc. to principles of
Utilitarianism, it might seem justified to sacrifice your life for the
happiness/ well-being of the majority. However, this overlooks
the importance of considering the well-being of the minority.
It highlights the potential harm that utilitarian principles can
cause when the majority's happiness is prioritized over the
minority’s.
3. Unpredictable:
Utilitarianism can be unpredictable because accurately
predicting the future is rare. Ethical choices should be based on
current circumstances rather than potential future outcomes.
Focusing on the present helps us determine the best path for
improving society, as relying solely on future possibilities may
lead to achieving nothing.
4. Relies on Consistent decisions:
Utilitarianism also requires people to make consistent
decisions, which can be challenging as humans often change
their minds. People may act selfishly in difficult situations,
regardless of their upbringing or beliefs. Religions, for example,
often provide comfort for an unpredictable future rather than
prioritizing the greater good. If society shifted to utilitarianism,
this inconsistency in decision-making could pose challenges.
5. Multiple definitions of happiness:
Utilitarianism depends on various definitions of happiness, as
everyone perceives happiness differently. While some common
ground can be found, people's perspectives on happiness are
diverse. This complexity means we must either compromise on
a shared definition of happiness or prioritize the majority's
perspective.
6. Potential for the majority to rule through tyranny:
For instance, in the USA, in a society where 67% of evangelical
people oppose same-gender marriage, laws based on
utilitarianism could prevent LGBTQIA+ individuals from
marrying until enough people change their views. This
highlights the challenge of minority rights in a utilitarian
framework.

 INDIVIDUALISM:
The individualistic theory of the State is as old as the State
itself. The root of this theory may be traced back to the earliest
political philosophy of the Sophism of ancient Greece However,
as a political philosophy, it developed in the writings of John
Locke, an English political philosopher of the 17th century, who
was an ardent advocate of individualism. Individualism came
into prominence in the 18th and 19th centuries. A group of
economists known as the physiocrats in France in the 18th C
were considered to be the pioneers of individualism. Introduced
of “laissez-faire” or “leave individual alone”
8. Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, Herbert Spencer and F.A.
Hayek are main exponents
9. of this theory. Adam Smith advocated free competition and
noninterference of the
10. State in economic system.
- Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, Herbert Spencer and F.A.
Hayek are main exponents of this theory. Adam Smith
advocated free competition and noninterference of the State
in economic system.
Statement of the Theory of Individualism:
11. He said, “Every man is free to do that which he wills,
provided he infringes not upon
12. the equal freedom of any other man.” F.A. Hayek strongly
denounced planning and
13. the State interference. He condemned planning as “a road
to serfdom” (slavery)
14. Meaning and Statement
15. The individualistic theory is otherwise known as “the
Laissez Faire Theory.” The term
16. “laissez faire” in the French language means ‘let alone’ or
‘leave alone’
- The individualistic theory is otherwise known as “the Laissez
Faire Theory.” The term “laissez faire” in the French
language means ‘let alone’ or ‘leave the individual alone’.
- It means, there should be minimum interference, in his
functions, by the government. It should be left to the will of
the individual to do what he desires.
17. It puts emphasis on individual happiness and
18. prosperity. It assumes that individual is the centre of
activities in any social system
- It puts emphasis on individual happiness and
prosperity. It assumes that individual is the centre of activities
in any social system.
- The individualistic theory considers the State as ‘a
necessary evil’. It is an evil because it encroaches
upon the freedom of individuals. The state or the government
should only interfere when it feels that one individual is
unnecessarily interfering in the liberty of the other.
- The function of the government should be limited to the
protection of the citizens’ life and property; beyond this the
individual should be left completely free.
- Thus, according to Mill, the main function of the state is
protection. Therefore, the maintenance of army, police, navy
and courts is justified, but the things which ‘ire not directly
protective, like Post Office, Telegraph, Railways, Education,
Hospitals, etc., should not be run by the government.

 The Individualist Theory of The Nature and Functions of

The State
- The individualistic theory advocates maximum
freedom of the individuals and minimum functions of the
State. It supports the idea of “that State is the best which
governs the least.” Hence the individualists advocate
“maximum possible individual freedom and minimum
possible State action.
- According to individualism theory, since individuals are free,
rational and capable of self-determination, their interests are
better promoted by letting them choose for themselves what
sort of life they want to lead.
- Individual interests are harmed by attempts by the state to
enforce a particular view of good life.
- The individualists stand for a police State. The
function of a policeman is only preventive or negative
in character. Likewise, the State should prevent the
lawbreakers and hinder the hindrances on the path of
individual in realisation of his best self.
- “The State is simply a policeman, and its duty is neither more
or less than to prevent robbery and murder and enforce
contracts.
19. Most of the individualists allow the State to
perform the
20. following two categories of functions
- Most of the individualists allow the State to perform
the following two categories of functions:
1) Maintenance of law and order within State.
duty of the State to protect life, liberty, and property of the
individuals. It should protect individuals from physical injury,
slander, and personal harms.
2) Protection of individuals against the external aggression.
or internal rebellion.

 MERITS:
1) Ethical Defence: Individualism argues that people should be
free to develop their personalities without state interference.
Maximum freedom fosters self-development and
incentivizes individuals to excel.

2) Economic Defence: Individualism promotes free

competition, which leads to prosperity in industries and
commerce. Competition ensures efficient resource
allocation and encourages hard work.

3) Scientific Defence: Individualism aligns with the theory of

evolution, suggesting that competition leads to the survival
of the fittest. It advocates for self-reliance and merit-based
success.
 4) Practical Argument: Experience shows that government
intervention often leads to inefficiency and corruption.
Private enterprises tend to be more effective and profitable
than public ones, so the state should limit its involvement.

5) Faith in the Individual: Individualism places great trust in

individuals, viewing society as a collection of autonomous
beings. People should have sovereignty over their own
bodies and minds, with state intervention only justified to
prevent harm to others.

6) Increase in Production: Free trade theory boosted industrial

production worldwide. Countries experienced industrial
revolutions and produced goods on a large scale. The
pursuit of profit led to advancements in industry,
mechanization, and transportation, resulting in global
progress and prosperity.

7) Promotion of Self-Reliance: Individualism promotes self-

reliance by cautioning against excessive reliance on
government assistance. By emphasizing the value of
individual effort and discouraging unnecessary government
intervention, it has strengthened modern thought and
encouraged personal empowerment.

 LIMITATIONS:

1) State is not a necessary evil: The idea that the state is a

necessary evil is inaccurate. Aristotle argued that while
states originally formed for survival, they exist for the pursuit
of a good life. In modern times, states provide welfare
services and support societal progress.
2) Laws do not curtail liberty: John Stuart Mill's claim that
increased state activity leads to curtailed individual liberty is
outdated. Many laws today aim to benefit society, such as
those protecting workers' rights, without infringing on
individual freedoms.

3) Man is not always the best judge of this interest: While

individualists argue that people are best suited to judge their
own interests, this isn't always true. Society may better
understand a person's needs, especially regarding health
and safety.

4) Open competition is undesirable: Advocating for open

competition can lead to negative outcomes, particularly for
labourers and consumers. State regulation is necessary to
prevent exploitation and ensure fair competition.

5) The Doctrine of the survival of the fittest is most dangerous:

Embracing the survival of the fittest theory can lead to
societal chaos, where the strong dominate the weak. This
undermines justice and fosters anarchy.

6) Welfare of the individual lies in the welfare of the society:

Contrary to individualist beliefs, an individual's welfare is
intertwined with society's welfare. Society is essential for
individual development, and prioritizing individual interests
over societal well-being is misguided.
7) Learning from Past Mistakes: While the state has made
errors, limiting its functions based solely on past mistakes is
flawed. The state has also enacted beneficial measures such
as social security and education, and it can learn from past
errors to improve future policies.
8) State for furthering human welfare: Transferring essential
functions like infrastructure and healthcare solely to private
entities isn't viable. Private institutions often fail to provide
these services adequately, necessitating state involvement.
9) Misconceptions About Individuals and Society: Individualists'
beliefs that humans are inherently selfish, and society is a
collection of disconnected individuals are inaccurate.
Humans are social beings, and society functions as an
organic entity, not merely a sum of individuals.

UNIT IV
- Power – answer written
 AUTHORITY:
Introduction –
Having the authority to enforce laws, demand obedience, make
judgments, control, and grant permission all signify power.
Authority is a person or persons, or a body exercising power of
command as the civil and military authorities.
Authority refers to power that has been institutionalized and is
recognized by the people over whom it is exercised. It is
established to make decisions and order the actions of others.
It is a form of legitimate power. Legitimacy means that those
subject to a government’s authority consent to it.
Meaning:
The word Authority is derived from the old Roma notion,
‘Auctor’ and ‘Auctoritos’. Authority is more supreme than power.
- Authority means the institutionalized exercise of legitimate
power backed by law or constitution and common consent
- The word authority includes central and state governments.
- Authority is the power or recognized right to command or act,
whether it is original or delegated, inherent or given, like
parents' authority over children, or a prince's authority over
subjects.
Definitions:
- Herbert A Simon: “Authority is the power to make decisions
which guides the action of another.”
- Jouvene: “Authority is the ability of man to net his proposals
accepted.”
- Max Weber – “Political authority is based on the acceptance
of the right to rule, and this is also called legitimacy.”
- McIver: “Authority is often defined as being power, the power
to command obedience.”
Nature and Characteristics (Weber - Legitimacy):
- Authority is vested in a person or a body exercising power of
command, having superior power.
- The subordinate obeys the rules and regulations framed by
the superior. The authority may be transferred by a principal
to agent.
- Authority is nothing but a power to do something; it is
sometimes given in words or writing and in the modern
period mainly by ways of rules, regulations and constitutions.
- Political authority is based on the acceptance of the right to
rule, or what Max Weber called ‘legitimacy’. The rules framed
by a superior officer must be obeyed by his subordinates, if
his authority springs from proper legitimacy.

Types of Authority:
Max Weber, a German sociologist and a political economist has
explained typology of authority in his book ‘the theory of social
and economic organization, 1971. His three-fold classification
of theory is as follows:
1. Traditional Authority:
Traditional authority, means the right to rule emerging from a
continuous exercise of political power. Traditional authority is
derived from long established customs, habits and social
structures and the legitimacy of those in power. Authority from
this point of view is legitimate if sanctioned by tradition.
According to de Maistre, tradition is supreme over reason.
Examples include hereditary monarchs, tribal leaders, and
heads of families or villages.
2. Charismatic Authority:
‘Charisma’ means ‘gift of grace’. People willingly follow
someone who possesses exceptional qualities as a leader. This
type of rule gains legitimacy from beliefs in the leader's
extraordinary abilities, hero worship, and revelations.
When the right to rule is accrued from the great qualities and
charisma of a political leader, it is called Charismatic Authority.
3. Legal-Rational Authority:
This form of authority gains legitimacy from established rulers
and established written laws of the state, which are often
complex.
It's known as "legal-rational authority" and is mentioned in the
constitution. In modern societies, legal-rational authority is
crucial, with government officials being the best examples.
- Weber observed that societies progress from traditional and
charismatic authorities to rational and legal ones, as the
instability of charismatic authority leads to its transformation
into a more structured form.
Other types of authority:
4. General and Special Authority:
An authority is general when it extends to all acts, or all
connected with a particular employment, and special when
confined to a single act.
5. Legal And Political Authority:
- Legal authority is established by creating rules that
subordinates obey, and those rules are set by rational means
such as legislation, agreement, or imposition. The legitimacy
of the authority comes from these rules, and individuals are
expected to obey them.
- Political authority is obtained with the people giving
voluntarily their consent. It enhances the nationality of the
people of the state.

6. Centralized And Decentralised Authority:

- In the unitary states like the UK, France etc, the authority is
centralized.
- In federal states like India, USA etc, the authority is
distributed or decentralised between the centre and the
states of the nation.

7. De facto And De Jure Authority:

- De facto authority is when someone effectively influences
others' behaviour and gets their proposals accepted, even
without the formal right to do so. It's about practical
influence, regardless of official status.
- De jure authority, on the other hand, has the formal right to
issue commands and expect obedience. This authority
operates within established rules and exercises power
through speech and word. It's backed by legal legitimacy and
concerns itself with adherence to predefined rules.

 RESPONSIBILITY
Introduction:
The Concept of Responsibility is a word that, through time, has
acquired a variety of meanings. It is commonly used in political
discourse.
Responsible actors as those who take their tasks and duties
seriously, act only after due deliberation, and consider
themselves answerable to others for the consequences of their
actions.
Meaning:
Responsibility is the task entrusted by managers to
subordinates. It means a moral commitment to do the work
assigned.
The following points help to understand the concept of
responsibility:
• A person should perform the assigned task.
• It cannot be delegated. Even where a superior delegates
authority to perform certain tasks, he remains responsible to
his superiors for those tasks.
• It must be equal with authority. Lack of parity between
authority and responsibility will not achieve the desired
results.
• It flows from bottom to top. Every subordinate is responsible
for his superior for the
• Completion of assigned tasks.
• It can be qualitative or quantitative. Preferably, responsibility
should be fixed in quantitative terms as it helps to frame
standards of performance against which performance can be
measured.
Definitions:
1. Allen - “Responsibility is the obligation of an individual to
carry out assigned activities to the best of his or her
ability”.
 2. G R Terry - “Responsibility is the obligation of a person to
achieve the results mutually determined through
participation by the superiors and himself”

Kinds of Responsibility:
1. Institutional responsibility:
Institutional responsibility denotes the responsibility of the
administrative agency towards public welfare that is, being
responsive to the public interest. Example: CBI
- It's applied across various professions to maintain
professional integrity by enforcing rules and laws against
illegal and unethical behaviour that harms individuals or
institutions.

2. Professional responsibility:
Professional responsibility generally refers to a duty an
employee owes to his employer and his clients. An employer
expects an employee to provide professional quality service
and communication at all times, through oral and written
communication.
It is also known as an ethical responsibility. Professional
responsibility specifically refers to a code of ethics or oath of
office required in certain professions.
Eg: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath, Politicians take an oath
of office, Attorneys have a professional responsibility etc.
3. Political Responsibility:
Political responsibility denotes the responsibility of the
executive to the legislature which is, in turn, responsible to the
people. Under this political responsibility just like rights, there
are different kinds of responsibilities.
Eg: Paying taxes, obey laws, jury duty etc.
4. Social Responsibility:
Social responsibility refers to the duty of individuals,
organizations, and corporations to act in ways that benefit
society as a whole.
Eg: Stay informed, register to vote, help the needy.

 ACCOUNTABILITY:
Introduction:
In ethics and governance, accountability is answerability,
blameworthiness & liability.
In leadership, accountability means recognizing and taking
responsibility for actions, decisions, and policies, as well as
overseeing administration, governance, and implementation
within one's role or position. This includes the duty to report,
explain, and be answerable for the outcomes.
Meaning:
- Accountability is an assurance that individuals or
organizations will be assessed based on their performance
or behaviour in areas where they have responsibilities.
- Accountability refers to the process that make decision
makers answerable to one’s for whom decisions are taken
i.e., the decision maker and the beneficiary.
Definition:
McFarland: “Accountability is the obligation of an individual to
report formally to his superior about the work he has done to
discharge the responsibility.”
ACCOUNTABILITY vs RESPONSIBILITY
The term responsibility and accountability are often used
interchangeably by the people, due to some similarities like the
flow of both of these two is from bottom to top.
- Responsibility and accountability differ in that responsibility
means doing what one is asked to do, whereas
accountability involves agreeing to do what one is supposed
to do.
-
Accountability means being responsible for the results when
someone in charge delegates a task. Even though an
employee carries out the task, their boss still takes
responsibility for the outcome.
- Accountability flows from bottom to top, meaning the
subordinate is responsible to the superior. When someone is
accountable, they have to explain what happened because
of their actions or decisions. It shows that they're willing to fix
things or accept blame if the work isn't done right.

Difference b/w accountability and responsibility:

1. Assignment vs. Acceptance: Responsibility is assigned
to individuals, whereas accountability is accepted by them.
2. Nature of Action: Responsibility involves doing what one
is asked to do, while accountability entails agreeing to do
what one is supposed to do.
3. Obligation vs. Answerability: Responsibility refers to
obligation to perform the delegated task. Accountability is
the answerability for the consequence of the delegated
task
4. Outcome Ownership: In responsibility, the individual
carries out tasks, but in accountability, they take
 ownership of the final results, even if they're not directly
involved in performing the task.
5. Direction of Obligation: Responsibility often flows bottom
to top, it implies that subordinate is responsible to the
superior for their actions. When flows top-down, where
tasks are assigned by higher-ups to subordinates.
Accountability, on the other hand, only flows bottom-up,
with subordinates answering to their superiors for the
tasks they've completed.
6. Shared vs. Individual: Responsibility can sometimes be
shared among multiple individuals or teams, especially in
collaborative settings. Accountability, however, is often
more individualized, with specific individuals held
answerable for specific tasks or outcomes.
7. Explanation and Consequences: Those who are
accountable must explain the outcomes of their actions,
decisions, and omissions. Responsibility may involve just
completing the assigned tasks without the same level of
scrutiny or consequences for outcomes.

In political philosophy, there are several grounds and situations

where a person may argue that disobeying laws is justified:
1. Unjust Laws: If a law is considered unjust or morally
wrong, individuals may argue that they have a moral
obligation to disobey it. This can be based on principles of
natural law or human rights that supersede man-made
laws.
2. Civil Disobedience: Civil disobedience involves
intentionally breaking a law in protest against perceived
injustice or oppression. This is often done in a non-violent
manner and aims to bring attention to an issue or
advocate for social change.
3. Conscientious Objection: Individuals may refuse to obey
laws that conflict with their deeply held religious or moral
beliefs. This can include actions such as refusing to
participate in military service or perform certain medical
procedures.
4. Emergency Situations: In cases of extreme necessity or
emergency, individuals may be justified in disobeying laws
to protect themselves or others from harm. This can
include actions such as trespassing to seek shelter during
a natural disaster.
5. Lack of Legitimacy: If a government or legal system is
seen as illegitimate or lacking democratic authority,
individuals may argue that they are not morally obligated
to obey its laws. This can occur in cases of authoritarian or
oppressive regimes.