Politics and Society

Power: Definition and Nature

Power is one of the most central concepts in political sociology. At its most basic, power is the possession of control, authority, or influence over others: a relationship in which one actor can exert influence over the mind and actions of another.

Max Weber defined power as "the opportunity existing within a social relationship which permits one to carry out one's will even against resistance, regardless of the basis on which this opportunity rests." This definition emphasises the relational character of power and its independence from legitimacy: power can be exercised with or without consent.

Amos Hawley radicalised this insight: "Every social act is an exercise of power, every social relationship is a power equation, and every social group or system is an organisation of power." Power is not exceptional but omnipresent in social life.

Bases of Power: Wealth, Status, Knowledge, Charisma, Force (illegitimate (violence, coercion), and Authority (legitimate) traditional, charismatic, rational-legal).

Features of Power: It is a structural aspect of social reality. It operates reciprocally but usually not equally reciprocally. It manifests itself in a relational manner and appears as a process, not a fixed part of social structure. Power is inherent in social stratification and simultaneously becomes its basis.

Steven Lukes: Three Faces (Dimensions) of Power

Lukes argued that Weber's definition is narrow because it focuses only on observable conflict and decision-making. In Power: A Radical View (1974), Lukes proposed three dimensions:

Dimension	Mechanism	Example
1st Face (Decision-Making)	Power exercised in open, observable conflict over decisions. Who wins? Weber's focus.	Parliament voting on a budget; electoral outcomes
2nd Face (Non-Decision-Making)	Power exercised by preventing certain issues from reaching the agenda: setting limits on what preferences can even be expressed. Bachrach and Baratz.	Caste issues historically kept off political agenda in India; trade unions denied bargaining rights
3rd Face (Shaping Desires)	The most insidious: power that shapes people's preferences so they don't even know what they really want. False consciousness. People accept their own subordination.	Dominant ideology that justifies inequality as natural; advertising creating false needs; Gramsci's hegemony

Lukes' critique of Weber: Weber focuses excessively on the first face only. Not all interest groups have equal power (e.g., refugees have no access to decision-making). Safe decisions are taken in disguise: the most important exercises of power leave no visible trace.

Theories of Power

A. Elite Theory

Elite theory holds that only a minority possesses the talent, intelligence, ability, and leadership to occupy positions of power. This minority influences government decisions and gains dominant positions beyond what general elections can challenge: democracy, in this view, is a utopia.

Vilfredo Pareto (Circulation of Elites): Society's higher stratum comprises the economic-wealthy, political rulers, the most holy (religion), the most artistic (art), and the most virtuous (ethics). The governing elite is subdivided into two psychological types, adapted from Machiavelli:

• Foxes: have vitality and imagination; prefer materialistic goals and strategies of emotional appeal and fraud; replace lions who lack manipulative skills
• Lions: conservative elites who have residue of persistence (faith in ideology, group loyalty)

Society degenerates when elites occupy status due to ascription rather than achievement. Elites circulate: foxes replace lions and vice versa in a continuous cycle. Critique: no method of measuring qualities; Parsons argues residues change with society; the difference between foxes and lions is merely a style of rule.

Gaetano Mosca (Class Theory of Power, The Ruling Class): Elite rule is a universal necessity and inevitability. All societies divide into a ruling class (subdivided into elites holding political power and property) and a ruled class (sub-elites: technocrats, managers, civil servants). Dominant interests are reflected in the ruling class who dominate structures and values. Mosca differs from Pareto: elites are restrained by various social factors; the ruled are not powerless in democracy.

Robert Michels (Iron Law of Oligarchy): Oligarchy is inevitable within democracy as it is part of technical and tactical necessity. The leadership class comes to dominate the power structure; it controls access to information, centralises power with little accountability. Any democratic attempt fails because the leadership class rewards loyalty. Elites are sustained by three principles in bureaucratic structures: need and specialisation, importance of psychological attributes, utilisation of facilities by old elites.

C.W. Mills (The Power Elite, 1956): Mills explained elite rule in institutional rather than psychological terms. He identified two kinds of elites: segmental (arts, music, science) and strategic (those who govern). Three institutions yield concentrated power in modern America: major corporations, the federal government, and the military. These institutional elites share the same lifestyle, family relationships, and perpetuate their rule through self-recruitment. They occupy command posts: key pivotal positions. However, unlike Pareto, Mills argued: elites have no moral or psychological superiority; elite rule is not inevitable; masses are not incompetent but are kept in a state of ignorance and powerlessness.

James Burnham (The Managerial Revolution): All power is in the hands of managers: a separation of operation and control has occurred. Capitalism is in decline; managers are the new elites.

T.B. Bottomore (The Elites and Society): Elites differ in industrial and developing societies. Society is moving towards egalitarianism; multiple elites are present in the developing world: dynastic, middle class, revolutionary intellectuals, colonial administrators, nationalist leaders.

Critique of Elite Theories: Power of public opinion is ignored. Karl Mannheim: in democracy, people remove leaders not working according to their wishes. Power changes moment to moment and issue to issue. David Riesman rejected Mills' theory, arguing there is so much diversity in the US in terms of thoughts and interests. Altruistic motives do exist. Robert Dahl in Who Governs?: found in New Haven, Connecticut, that power is dispersed (confirmed by Arnold Rose).

B. Pluralist Theory

Based on functionalism (Parsons) and classical pluralism, with emphasis on equilibrium, stability, and gradual change. Society is decentralised. Power is widely shared, diffused, fragmented, and derived from multiple resources. Diverse groups with conflicting interests ensure no single group plays a dominant role. Natural balance of power is preserved through bargaining and compromise.

Alexis de Tocqueville: Democracy becomes dysfunctional if dominated by one interest. The state is an "honest broker" mediating between competing groups.

Talcott Parsons (Variable Sum Conception): Criticised Weber's zero-sum conception of power. Power can decrease and increase: it is not constant. Modernity has raised the lifestyle of all (a positive-sum outcome). Power is a structural feature of society and a generalised facility or resource: a capacity to mobilise resources for the attainment of collective goals. Value consensus means goals are shared and power is used to further collective wellbeing. Western democracies are "deposits" of power: people can withdraw their deposit in the next election.

Critique of Pluralism: Not all interest groups have equal power. Certain groups (refugees, the very poor, the unorganised) are structurally excluded from pluralist bargaining. Safe decisions are taken in disguise (Lukes' 2nd and 3rd faces). Robert Dahl's own later work acknowledged inequalities in political resources.

C. Marxist and Neo-Marxist Theories

Classical Marxism: Those who own the means of production (the haves) have power like elites. Power is coercive but accepted due to false consciousness. In the Communist Manifesto, the oppression of one class by another is political power in its essence. Power is pervasive: the dominant class exercises it in every field through dominant ideologies.

Antonio Gramsci (Hegemony): There is no simple economic determinism: there is reciprocity between infrastructure and superstructure. Hegemony is achieved not by force alone but by ideas (concessions, dual consciousness: ideas are not always directly derived from capitalist interests). The ruling class manipulates culture (beliefs, explanations, perceptions, values) so that the dominant ideology becomes accepted as common sense: beneficial for all rather than a fake social construct. Hegemony operates through state apparatus and through civil society institutions (schools, churches, media).

Louis Althusser: Distinguished two forms of state power. Repressive State Apparatus: ruling class controls government, courts, police, military; people submit due to fear of legal prosecution. Ideological State Apparatus: religion, schools, and families controlled through ideology; people submit due to fear of social ridicule.

Nicos Poulantzas (Relative Autonomy of the State): Emphasised importance of social structure over individual action. Class origin does not matter: class position does. The structure of society is capitalist; thus the state is by default capitalistic in nature. No need for capitalists to be physically present in the governing class: the state serves capitalist interests structurally. Relative autonomy: the state must diffuse protests and promote a myth of inclusiveness, and bourgeoisie are not free from internal divisions.

Ralph Miliband: State functions to serve capitalist interests due to similar social origins of members of state, government, and ruling-class elites (elite self-recruitment). The state becomes an agent of the wealthy, though direct intervention is not always needed (operates via the 3rd face of power: indoctrination).

Bob Jessop (The Future of the Capitalist State, Neo-Marxist): Post-Fordist specialised production means capitalists don't always run the state. The state has operational autonomy: capitalism cannot exist without non-capitalist institutions. Shift from the Keynesian Welfare State model to a Schumpeterian Workfare Economy (unemployed should seek work) and post-national model emphasising international competition in the knowledge economy.

D. Foucault: Power, Knowledge and Discourse

Foucault's conception of power radically departs from all previous theories. In Power and Knowledge, he argued that power is not concentrated in one place or in the hands of particular individuals. Power is found in all social relationships and is not just exercised by the state. Power is intimately linked with knowledge: they produce one another. Where there is power, there is resistance.

Foucault does not think of power only in coercive terms. Paradoxically, he sees power as operating only when people retain some freedom: complete determination is not power but domination.

In Madness and Civilization, Foucault showed that discourse is a practice that systematically forms the objects it speaks about: psychiatry created the category of "the mentally ill." Power is part of the discourse of psychiatry; it is not something held by individual psychiatrists.

In Discipline and Punish, Foucault traced changes in punishment in the 18th-19th century. Punishment shifted from the body to the soul: intention changed to reform. People began to be judged for what they were, not just what they had done. This brought experts (psychiatrists, criminologists) into power relations, making discourses carry the power. He imagines the modern state as a Panopticon: a circular prison design where all prisoners can be watched from a central tower at any time. This pointing towards techniques of surveillance which encourage self-discipline: with the idea that humans have a soul that can be manipulated, the state tries to produce "Docile Bodies."

E. Michael Mann: Sources of Social Power

Mann argued that there has never been a truly isolated society: human behaviour is not exclusively caused by a particular territory. Power is the ability to pursue and attain goals through mastery of the environment.

Power takes two forms: Distributive power (power over others: the ability of individuals to get others to help them achieve their own goals) and Collective power (exercised by social groups, by one nation over another).

Two main ways power is exercised: Extensive power (ability to organise large numbers over far-flung territories in minimally stable cooperation: example: major religions) and Intensive power (ability to organise tightly and command high mobilisation or commitment: example: religious sects).

Power can also be Authoritative (deliberate commands are issued and consciously followed, e.g., a football player following a referee) or Diffused (spreads spontaneously without commands being issued, e.g., a company going out of business not because commanded but because unable to compete).

According to Mann, the four overall sources of social power are Economic, Ideological, Political, and Military (IEMP model). This approach is broader than Marx (who stressed economic power alone), broader than pluralism (which stresses ideological power in democracy), and broader than elite/state-centred theories (which emphasise political power): Mann's model embraces all four, including military power.

Political Parties

Political parties are organisations driven by clear ideologies, which influence members to join and elect a common leader. This leader is defined by ideology and rule of law.

• Weber: A party is an organised group action intended to capture power; it is an ideal type present in every society.
• F.W. Riggs: Any organisation that nominates candidates to elections.
• T.B. Bottomore: Groups with divergent interests form political parties; they are a link between state and sectional interest, with the ultimate aim to capture power.
• Seymour Lipset: Parties compete with each other to gain office.

In a democracy, parties represent popular opinion; they are obligated to fulfill supporters' interests or face electoral defeat (Parsons and Aron). They require support from various groups so cannot only represent sectional interest.

Forms of Political Party (Maurice Duverger): Mass Based (China, Cuba, mostly socialist or communist countries) and Cadre Based (in democracies, rank-based, hierarchical, division of responsibilities).

Maurice Duverger's classification by origin: parties of internal origin, formed inside the legislature from parliamentary groups and electoral committees (most early European liberal and conservative parties), and parties of external origin, created by organisations outside parliament such as trade unions, churches or socialist societies (the British Labour Party).

Party systems and their assessments:

System	Advantages	Disadvantages
Uni-party (Duverger)	Political stability; strict adherence to public policy; glorification of nationalism	Voice of people not given due acknowledgement; authoritarian government (David Lane)
Bi-party (Harold Laski)	Autocracy checked; strong opposition; responsible government	Divides the nation (Robert Smith); in globalised world, parties follow similar policies
Multi-party	True democracy; suitable for multicultural society (Sudipta Kaviraj, Zoya Hassan on India)	Political confusion; instability; opportunistic politics; elite pluralist parties governed by elite leaders

Pressure Groups

Unlike political parties, interest groups do not aim to form government: they seek to influence political parties and state departments. When an interest group seeks governmental aid in achieving its own ends and succeeds in influencing governmental policy to its advantage, it becomes a pressure group.

Two common types:

• Protective groups: Defend the interests of a particular section of society (trade unions, CII). Zero-sum game.
• Promotional groups: Support a particular cause rather than guard the interests of a particular group (Greenpeace, PETA). Membership is larger and more open.

Gabriel Almond's structural classification:

• Institutional interest groups: Within institutions like the army and business associations; formally organised professional persons, particularly bureaucracy
• Non-associational interest groups: Formed on the basis of religion, ethnic group, or kinship; common in developing societies (because stronger ascriptive identities)
• Associational interest groups: Formed by trade unions, businessmen, industrialists, or professional groups; articulation of interest is quite prominent; launch agitation if necessary
• Anomic interest groups: Form spontaneously (riots, militant demonstrations); no permanent structure; no organisation (terrorist organisations, criminal gangs)

Insider groups have access to power; outsider groups operate outside power circles. Durkheim in Professional Ethics and Civic Morals called pressure groups a tool for associative democracy, holding people together and acting as effective checks on the individual in industrial society. Bernard Barber called them the "third sector of democracy." Dawes and Hughes believe pressure groups are a continuous mandate for government and that democracy cannot be conceived without them.

Democracy

Democracy entails direct participation of all in the political process. Gandhi: it is not a legal phenomenon but a spiritual one involving respect for each other and decentralisation of power. Abraham Lincoln: rule by the people, of the people, for the people.

Types of Democracy:

• Participative: Direct participation via referendum, recall, plebiscite, initiative
• Representative: Delegate-based (the representative follows the instructions of the electorate) or trustee-based (the representative acts on his own judgement, as Edmund Burke argued). Bestows responsibility or power in the hands of a few to represent collective interest.
• Associative: Durkheim in Professional Ethics and Civic Morals: participation via voluntary organisations (socialist society), sensitise, check on bureaucracy, civic culture

Critique of democracy:

• Bottomore: Pluralist societies are undemocratic; democracy needs social and industrial democracy and equality of all
• Marx: Communist societies are true democracies
• Robert Michels: Iron law of oligarchy, in representative democracy, organisations develop a bureaucratic structure; few control the institutional landscape and suppress genuine people's participation. Dynasty rule, elite self-recruitment, catch-all parties (parties with divergent ideologies tend to become centrist after being voted in)
• Alexis de Tocqueville: Tyranny of majority
• Steven Lukes: 3rd face of power, state using its power to shape public opinion in its own favour
• J.S. Mill: "If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
• Episodic accountability: democracy limited to voting only; limited accountability mechanisms; illiteracy and ignorance of populace

Political Participation: Meaning, Modes and Barriers

Political participation refers to the voluntary activities by which citizens share in choosing rulers and, directly or indirectly, in shaping public policy (Herbert McClosky, 1968). It includes conventional acts such as voting and campaigning and unconventional acts such as protest, which Barnes and Kaase (Political Action, 1979) found had become normal in Western democracies.

• Lester Milbrath (Political Participation, 1965) arranged participation as a hierarchy. Gladiatorial activities (holding office, standing for election, active party work) involve very few. Transitional activities include attending meetings, contacting officials and donating. Spectator activities include voting and discussing politics. Below them are the apathetics. Milbrath and M.L. Goel (1977) later recast the scheme into several modes, including protest and community activity.
• Verba and Nie (Participation in America, 1972) identified four modes: voting, campaign activity, communal activity on local problems, and particularised contacting of officials.
• Protest and new forms: dharnas, bandhs, hunger strikes, petitions, public interest litigation and online campaigns.

Participatory democracy and its conditions: Carole Pateman (Participation and Democratic Theory, 1970) argued that participation in workplaces and local bodies educates citizens for democracy. Almond and Verba (The Civic Culture, 1963) linked stable democracy to a participant political culture rather than a parochial or subject one. Conducive conditions include literacy and political information, economic security and relative equality, civil liberties and a free press, a dense civil society, and decentralised institutions such as the panchayats and municipalities created by the 73rd and 74th Amendments (1992), with one-third of seats reserved for women.

Participation and voting in India: unlike Western democracies, where turnout rises with income and education, India's poor, rural, Dalit and Adivasi voters turn out at least as much as the affluent, a pattern Yogendra Yadav called the "second democratic upsurge" of the 1990s. Women's turnout matched men's in the 2019 Lok Sabha election. Lokniti-CSDS studies show voting shaped by caste and community, party loyalty, leaders and candidates, welfare benefits and local patronage.

Barriers to participation in India:

• Socio-economic: poverty and illiteracy limit participation beyond voting, as daily survival leaves little time for meetings or campaigns.
• Social structure: dominant castes have long controlled who speaks in the village, and patriarchal norms lead many women to vote as the family directs and produce proxy rule by "sarpanch patis".
• Money and muscle: costly elections, criminalisation of politics and opaque funding. The Supreme Court struck down electoral bonds in Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2024).
• Exclusion from the rolls: internal migrants often cannot vote where they work, and homeless and nomadic people face documentation barriers.
• Institutional: dynastic and centralised parties limit inner-party democracy, and accountability is largely confined to voting every five years.
• Alienation and fear: urban middle-class apathy, distrust of politicians, and violence in insurgency-affected areas.

The State

Weber's classic definition: the state is "a human community that successfully claims the monopoly over the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory." Other groups might resort to violence, but they are termed terrorists or hooligans. Thomas Hobbes: the state exercises sovereignty. Machiavelli: the state comprises institutions governing members within a territorial boundary; members confined in a boundary are deemed citizens and enjoy political, cultural, religious, social, and economic rights.

Contemporary problems for the state:

• Territorial problem: posed by globalisation (transnational flows undermine territorial control)
• Institutional problem: posed by blurring of boundary between state and non-state private organisations, civil society, NGOs, voluntary organisations

Theories of the State:

• Pluralist: State controlled by many parties and organisations, representing the interests of all; Lipset: institutionalisation of class-conflict through parties
• Elite: Mills: state represents elite interest; Michels: democracy is rule by oligarchic organisations through bureaucracy; elite interest not put to serious challenge
• Functionalist: Parsons: state needed to determine goals based on value consensus and to mobilise resources for their fulfilment
• Marxist: state committed to common interest of capitalists and staffed by ruling class; Westergaard and Risler: welfare state a myth, inequality still prevails; social security systems are merely concessions to suppress proletarian revolt
• Eric Nordlinger: state has genuine autonomy: Type 1 (state has different wishes from major groups and has resources and decision-making power), Type 2 (persuades opponents to change their mind; active role in manipulating public opinion), Type 3 (apathy of the public: leaves decision-making to the state)
• Theda Skocpol (Bringing the State Back In): state can have its own goals (reinforce authority, political longevity). State capacity depends on reliable income (taxes from rich), no foreign debt, increase in human resources. When state capacity decreases, revolution occurs (Russian, French, Chinese revolutions)

Nation and Nationalism

Nation (psychological) vs State (political) vs Country (geographical). A nation is a large group with common characteristics: language, traditions, customs, habitus, and ethnicity. It is more impersonal, abstract, and overtly political than an ethnic group; a cultural-political community that has become conscious of its autonomy, unity, and particular interests.

Joseph Stalin: A nation is not a racial or tribal but a historically constituted community, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture.

Benedict Anderson: An "Imagined Community": it is imagined because material conditions exist for imagining extended and shared connections, even though members will never likely meet. Paul James: "Abstract community", objectively impersonal even if each individual experiences themselves as part of an embodied unity. Vance Packard: "A nation of strangers."

Two types of nations: the civic nation (traced to the French Revolution: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity; Ernest Renan: a willingness to "live together") and the ethnic nation (exemplified by the German peoples: common ethnicity and culture as basis of political community).

Ernest Gellner's conditions of nationalism: Shared formal education system; cultural homogenisation and "social entropy" (natural decay of a social system); central monitoring of polity with extensive bureaucratic control; linguistic standardisation; national identification as abstract community; cultural similarity as basis for political legitimacy.

Eric Hobsbawm: Nationalist ideology represents a bourgeois construct: capitalism replaced traditional aristocracy and nationalism was the result of economic capital. Albert Cohen: Nationalism was the result of a reaction to colonialism in Third World nations. Andrew Pilkington: Otherisation: as globalisation grew, the idea that "we are different from others" also grew, eventually leading to nationalism flowing from elites to lower strata. Hybrid identities (one is English + British + European simultaneously). Hyphenated identities (minorities) need to be mainstreamed to form "inclusive nationalism."

Globalisation and the Nation-State

John Baylis and Steve Smith: globalisation is a process of increasing interconnection leading to a new era in politics (economic transformation, state has less control over national economy), electronic communication (no boundaries), global culture, homogeneity, cosmopolitan culture, global polity (UN, NGOs), and risk culture (AIDS, environment).

However: globalisation is not new and is not reducing the power of the nation-state; it has impacted Western societies more where infrastructure is present; it has exploited the poor; global problems have emerged (terrorism, drug and weapon trade, money laundering); global institutions may not be subject to democratic control.

Leslie Sklair (Sociology of the Global System): Transnational practices include economic transnational corporations, political capitalist-inspired politicians, and cultural ideological consumerism. Globalisation has mostly negative impact: class polarisation and ecological unsustainability.

David Held and Anthony McGrew (Democracy and Cosmopolitan Order): Globalists (globalisation transforms economy, global politics, risk), Sceptics (nothing new about migration and international trade; people have maintained strong national identities), and Transformationalists (nothing new about globalisation; in future it might change direction or be reversed; globalisation is bringing diverse people together which can become a source of conflict).

Citizenship

A citizen is not merely one who lives in a nation-state: aliens also do that. A citizen is one who participates in the process of government in two ways: rights (demands on the state) and duties (demands by the state). Harold J. Laski: the state is known by the rights it maintains.

T.H. Marshall's Theory of Citizenship: Citizenship is a status enjoyed by a person who is a full member of a community. It has three components that developed historically in sequence:

• Civil citizenship: individual freedom institutionalised in law (18th century)
• Political citizenship: right to participate in exercise of political power and to hold public office (19th century)
• Social citizenship: right to participate in the appropriate standard of living (20th century welfare state)

Marshall argued there is permanent tension between citizenship and the capitalist market: capitalism involves inequality while citizenship involves distribution of resources through rights.

Critique of Marshall: Only English experience: no comparative analysis. Expansionary analysis of citizenship without examining social processes that undermine it (gender differences, discrimination). It is not clear about the cause of the expansion of citizenship.

Talcott Parsons: citizenship is a measure of modernisation because it is based on values of universalism and achievement. Citizenship is treated as an aspect of bourgeois liberalism and sometimes as an aspect of radical democratic politics. Globalisation is transcending regionalism and parochial nationalism to make us global citizens. Dual citizenship is a new phenomenon where connections are more based on convenience rather than love of the motherland.

Civil Society

Civil society is the community of citizens linked by common interests and collective identity. It manifests the will and interests of citizens and is the third sector of society after government and business. It limits the power of the state and ushers in true and vibrant democracy by enhancing participation.

Key thinkers:

• J.S. Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville: Civil society is the domain of social association that checks excesses of the state (based on liberal democratic theory: rights-bearing individuals are free to pursue private associations with others)
• Hegel: Subordinated civil society to the state; thought of it as a mediating domain where the particular interests of individuals and the universal interest of the state can be reconciled to produce an ethical basis for modern society
• Gramsci: Civil society furthers dominant ideologies; it is a terrain of hegemonic struggle, not neutral
• Partha Chatterjee and Sudipta Kaviraj: Delineate western civil society from Indian; application of concepts of western civil society to India is wrong because the state in India is not as extensive as in the West
• Anthony Giddens: Groups falling outside both market and government can be termed civil society; voluntary groups, families, and civic associations can play vital roles in addressing community issues from crime to education; some elements of civil society seek radical transformations while others seek modest revisions or conformist reinforcement of established rules
• Jan Aart Scholte: Civil society enhances democracy through public education, giving voice to stakeholders (e.g., Singur farmers in West Bengal, unorganised labour), fuelling debate about governance (e.g., environmental issues), increasing transparency through public scrutiny, and fostering legitimacy through interaction between people and government

Caution (Scholte): Civil society can pursue anti-democratic goals, employ anti-democratic means, and produce anti-democratic consequences. Six parameters to judge the quality of an NGO: people's participation, cost effectiveness, institutional/environmental/financial sustainability, accountability, technical excellence, and equity concern for deprived groups and women.

Protest, Agitation, and Social Movements

Definitions and Distinctions

Collective action is a group of people engaged in some sort of interaction, within the group as well as with other groups, which creates a collective identity. It can be classified in terms of Duration, Ideology, Structure, Consequences, Objective, and Organisation (DISCOO). Individual Action → Social Action → Collective Action.

Protest is the process of opposition against any other person, group, issue, or society. Agitation is the activity of showing opposition to fulfil the purpose of protest. Both operate at manifest levels (verbal comments, expression of anger, disruptive activities, rioting) and latent levels (inaction, inefficient behaviour, distress, tension, disillusionment, alienation).

When the same dissatisfaction is: spontaneous in start, sustained, non-institutional (outside the state), and organised to achieve certain objectives, it becomes a Social Movement. Example: a driver beaten after an accident is not a social movement (not sustained), but Sanskritisation by Rajvanshis is. Social movements are institutionalised through Leadership, Objective, and Ideology (LOI), which give longevity to the movement (e.g., Bhoodan Movement, Naxal Movement).

Ghanshyam Shah's testing criterion: "Compulsive Demand" is the hallmark of agitation (Salt Satyagraha, Anna Hazare's fast unto death). All social movements are collective actions but not all collective actions are social movements.

Anthony Giddens' definition: Social movements are "collective attempts to further a common interest or secure a common goal through action outside the sphere of established institutions." Giddens identifies four dimensions of modernity and corresponding social movements: Capitalism → Labour movements; Industrialism → Ecological movements; Surveillance → Free speech/democratic movements; Military Power → Peace movements.

Theories of Social Movements

Herbert Blumer (Theory of Social Unrest): Social movements are motivated by dissatisfaction with some aspects of current society, which they seek to rectify outside formal party politics: trying to build a "new order of life." Types: active/outwardly directed (aiming to transform society, e.g., labour movement) and expressive (seeking to change individuals rather than society, e.g., religious revival movements).

Neil Smelser (Structural Strain/Value-Added Theory): Six conditions that must be present for a social movement to develop:

• Structural conduciveness: the environment must be social-movement friendly (environmental degradation creating conduciveness for ecological movements)
• Structural strain: social movements emerge in response to deprivation and inequality experienced by groups (LGBTs experiencing relative deprivation vis-à-vis heterosexuals)
• Growth and spread of a belief: forming a well-organised movement requires a clear statement of not just the problem but also its causes and solutions. If people are confused about why they are suffering, they will express dissatisfaction in an unorganised way through riots
• Precipitating factors: a specific event or incident sparks collective action: Arab Spring triggered by self-immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi; #MeToo gained momentum following allegations against entertainment figures
• Mobilisation of participants: once people share concern, they are ready to take action: distribute leaflets, stage rallies, build alliances. Social media and the internet have played significant roles
• Lack of social control: both too much or too little control can lead to development of social movements. Actions of media, police, courts, community leaders, and political officials can lead to success or failure

Resource Mobilisation Theory (McCarthy and Zald): Social movements develop when an organised group works towards generating resources. Resources include money, skill, property, equipment, media attention, supporters, and social media networks. Deprivation alone cannot be turned into a movement with just anger and resentment: it requires a proper organised group that can mobilise these resources.

Relative Deprivation Theory (Merton and Runciman): People who feel satisfied with their current condition are less likely to seek social change. People who are deprived of things deemed valuable in society (money, justice, status, privilege) join social movements. J-Curve Theory of Revolution (James Davies): revolution is a result of relative deprivation when periods of economic prosperity are suddenly reversed, expectations continue to rise while reality suddenly falls.

Political Opportunity Structure Theory (Charles Tilly and Doug McAdam): Three important components for formation of a social movement: insurgent consciousness (collective sense of injustice as motivation), organisational strength/leadership (sufficient resources, links to Resource Mobilisation Theory), and political opportunities (vulnerabilities of the existing political system due to formation of internal factions, support of organised opposition by elites, decline in effectiveness of repression, and increasing access to political participation).

Old Social Movements vs New Social Movements (NSMs)

	Old Social Movement	New Social Movement
Time period	Industrial	Post-industrial
Sphere of influence	Political and economic	Social and cultural
Issues	Materialist: challenge economic and political order. National struggles for independence; working class movements improving economic conditions	Post-materialist: animal rights, healthy lifestyle, quality of life, peace, clean environment, human rights, sexuality, consumer protection, social justice
Form	Trade unions; labour and peasant movements	Malala Foundation, MeToo, Anti-Apartheid, LGBT movement, Anti-Hijab movement, Amnesty International, Greenpeace, Black Lives Matter, Anti-Nuclear
Social composition	Lower middle or lower classes (depressed classes, workers, peasants)	Middle and upper middle classes: more affluent people tend to be more conservative on economic issues but more liberal on social issues (result of extensive education)
Role of state	Major target: mainly directed at influencing state policy	Oriented more towards civil society than the state
Organisation	Centralised and bureaucratic	Locally based, centred on small social groups, loosely held together by personal or informational networks (radios, newspapers, posters)
Scope	Regional/national	Global: draw international participants and rely on transnational networks

Habermas: NSMs advance new politics, whereas OSMs hovered around old politics. Giddens: NSMs are a response to globalisation: globalisation has resulted in risks that transcend national boundaries (pollution, rising ocean levels, oil spills, nuclear accidents); since the risks are global, people lose faith in governments and turn to NSMs as the most effective form of political participation. Pakulski and Waters: NSMs are an indicator of the fact that lifestyle and issues around it have become more important than economic issues.

Critique of NSM theory: Non-materialistic movements existed in the industrial era, and materialistic movements persist in the post-industrial economy. The women's movement, for example, focuses on many of the same issues, workplace conditions and pay, that have concerned labour organisations for decades.

Why Social Movements Decline

A social movement may decline for several reasons: when the goal is achieved and energy dissipates; when the movement is repressed by state authorities (frightening away participants, discouraging new recruits, imprisoning leaders); when factionalism develops and undermines unity; when the movement goes mainstream: becoming an accepted part of the system after realising some of its goals, so that it contributes to but no longer challenges the status quo. The US labor movement is now well-established; its leaders control vast sums of money and have more in common with the business tycoons they once opposed than with rank-and-file workers.

Social Movements in the Digital Era

Digital media have changed how movements recruit, communicate and protest. Manuel Castells (Networks of Outrage and Hope, 2012) describes networked social movements, from the Arab Spring (2010-11) to Occupy Wall Street (2011), which begin with outrage shared online, occupy urban squares and act in a hybrid space of internet and street. They are horizontal, often leaderless, viral and self-reflective. W. Lance Bennett and Alexandra Segerberg (The Logic of Connective Action, 2013) contrast collective action, built on formal organisations and shared identity, with connective action, in which individuals join through personal frames shared on social media, such as "We are the 99%".

Changes in the forms of protest:

• Hashtag campaigns and online petitions, as with #MeToo (2017), which spread to India in 2018.
• Citizen video that bypasses mainstream media: the viral video of Dalit youths being flogged at Una (2016) set off a Dalit march across Gujarat.
• Rapid mobilisation without parties or unions, as in India Against Corruption (2011) and the protests after the Delhi gang rape (2012).
• Hybrid protest: the farmers' protest of 2020-21 combined unions and gurdwara networks with its own newspaper, social media teams and diaspora support.

Challenges:

• Fragility: Zeynep Tufekci (Twitter and Tear Gas, 2017) argues that digital tools let movements grow fast without building organisational capacity, so they struggle to negotiate, change tactics or survive repression.
• Slacktivism: Malcolm Gladwell (2010) argued that weak online ties cannot sustain high-risk activism, which needs strong ties. Evgeny Morozov (The Net Delusion, 2011) warned that authoritarian states use the internet for surveillance and propaganda.
• State control: Access Now has recorded more internet shutdowns in India than in any other country in several recent years. In Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) the Supreme Court held that indefinite suspension of the internet is impermissible and that restrictions must be necessary and proportionate.
• Unequal access: the digital divide by gender, class, caste and region limits who can take part.
• Counter-movements and disinformation: Jen Schradie (The Revolution That Wasn't, 2019) found that well-organised conservative groups used digital tools more effectively than the left. Organised trolling and fake news polarise debate.

Assessment: social media have lowered the cost of mobilisation and widened participation, but lasting change still depends on organisation, leadership and ideology offline.

Ideology in Social Movements and the Turn to Identity Politics

An ideology is a system of ideas that diagnoses what is wrong, explains its causes, prescribes a remedy and sketches a better society. It legitimises action, sustains commitment beyond one grievance and links members who never meet. M.S.A. Rao (Social Movements in India, 1978-79) held that ideology distinguishes a movement from mere collective behaviour, and classified movements as reformist, transformative or revolutionary. T.K. Oommen treats ideology, organisation and leadership as the core components of a movement. David Snow and Robert Benford (1988) show ideology at work through diagnostic, prognostic and motivational framing.

• Ideology as essential: Gandhian ideology sustained Bhoodan, Maoism the Naxalite movement and Ambedkarite thought the Dalit movement. Neil Smelser likewise held that every collective episode needs a generalised belief, and that the type of belief separates a hostile outburst such as a riot from a norm-oriented or value-oriented movement.
• Ideology acquired later: many movements begin with a local grievance. Ramachandra Guha (The Unquiet Woods, 1989) showed that Chipko began as a peasant protest over forest rights and was later framed as environmentalism and eco-feminism.
• Loose frames: new social movements and leaderless digital protests rest on identities and frames more than on comprehensive doctrines.
• Primordial means, progressive ends: many Indian movements mobilise caste, tribe or religion for equality. The SNDP Yogam (1903) organised Ezhavas under Narayana Guru for reform, and the Jharkhand movement used tribal identity to win a state in 2000. Lloyd and Susanne Rudolph (The Modernity of Tradition, 1967) saw caste associations as vehicles of democratisation.

From Ideology to Identity Politics in India

Identity politics is mobilisation around group identities such as caste, religion, language, region or gender, seeking recognition and a share of power and resources. Charles Taylor ("The Politics of Recognition", 1992) and Nancy Fraser, who separated claims for recognition from claims for redistribution, theorised it.

• Ideological phase: from 1947 to the 1970s politics was organised around broad programmes: Nehruvian secularism and socialism within the Congress system, the Left, and the JP movement's call for Total Revolution (1974).
• The turn: around 1990 came Mandal (OBC reservation, 1990), Mandir (the Ram Janmabhoomi campaign and the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992) and the market reforms of 1991, which narrowed economic debate. Parties rooted in caste and region, such as the BSP (1984), the SP and the RJD, grew. Christophe Jaffrelot (India's Silent Revolution, 2003) traced the rise of lower castes in North Indian politics.
• Ideology within identity: this is not an "end of ideology" in Daniel Bell's sense (1960). Hindutva and Ambedkarism are themselves ideologies built on identity, and recent campaigns combine identity appeals with welfare.

Assessment: identity politics has deepened democracy by bringing excluded groups into power, but it can harden group boundaries, reduce politics to vote banks and push class issues aside. Critics such as Anand Teltumbde argue that identity-based Dalit politics has benefited a small elite while neglecting land and labour.

Revolution

A revolution is a forcible overthrow of a government or social order in favour of a new system: a fundamental change in political power or organisational structures that takes place in a relatively short period of time. Aristotle described two types: complete change from one constitution to another, and modification of an existing constitution. A sudden change in government brought about violently is often called a coup d'état or palace revolution. More broadly, revolution is a complete change of social structure where political change reflects one of its manifestations.

Marxian view: History of society is history of struggle between classes. Replacement of one mode of production by another is involved in a revolution. Althusser believed revolution would occur at the "weak link in the chain of capitalism" where social contradictions are most prominent. Fukuyama: democracy and economic capitalism constitute the true final revolution (End of History). Theda Skocpol: revolutions occur when state capacity weakens (Russian, French, Chinese revolutions).