Political Processes in India

Spread the love

Political Processes in India

Role of Caste in Indian Politics
Role of religion in Indian politics
Role of Regionalism in Indian Politics
Role of Linguistics in Indian Politic
The current political processes of India are correlated with the pre-independence conditions. After the Mughal rule, the English rule continued for about 200 years in India. Indians fought for freedom from British rule
Successfully conducted a long-term strong freedom movement. The long-term interaction between the freedom movement and the British rule laid the groundwork for the current political processes in India.

The main features of political processes were established in a formulaic form by the constitution and these processes continue to receive the guidance of political traditions. The main features of India’s political structure are justice, liberty, equality, dignity of individual, nation building and fraternity – along with fundamental rights, universal adult suffrage, multi-party parliamentary democratic system. hindering the attainment of goals. Four major social characteristics of India are influencing the political process namely caste, religion, language and region. Understanding the effects of social characteristics is highly relevant to understanding political processes.

The basis of political processes are socio-cultural processes and these socio-cultural processes social interaction generally manifest in the form of cooperation, competition, conflict, arrangements and assimilation.

These forms of social interaction are called social processes. in other words social

Processes are the basic ways by which humans interact and establish relationships. They refer to recurring patterns of behavior that are commonly found in social life. According to Gillin and Gillin, social processes are those modes of interaction that we have when individuals and groups meet and establish systems of relationship or when there are changes or disruptions to existing ways of life.

If we put it, then there is a sequence of some events which remains constant in social life and which is certain

produces results. The essential elements of social process are:-


sequence of events
repetition of events
relationship between events
continuity of events
specific result


Political sub-system is an important part of any social system. It sets the goals of the social system and analyzes the relations of power and authority. Thus political processes are the archetype of interactions that take place in a society to gain power and authority. Thus, political processes are sequences and repetitions of events based on power and authority that have definite consequences.

The political sub-system of Indian society is multi-party democratic. Here many political parties compete through elections to get power and power and try to get power by getting majority. Hence political party formation, voting behaviour, public opinion formation, political mobilisation, social movements, electoral issues and role of civil servants are the major determinants of the Indian political process. The political processes of India are based on the basic social determinants of India like caste,

Religion, regionalism and linguisticism have always been influencing.


Caste system of Indian social system is a major basis of Indian social system. Indian society is divided into many strata on the basis of caste system and it has affected all aspects of Indian society. The influence of the caste system on politics in Indian society has been widespread and internal. The caste system determines roles, privileges and disabilities based on birth status. Pro. A. R. According to Desai, the caste system in India determines for an individual their status, functions, opportunities and restrictions.

Caste System


In defining the caste system, J. H. Hutton, N. Of. Dutt, G. s. Ghurye, M.S. Srinivas and S. The contribution of C. Dubey has been remarkable. J. H. Hutton in his book “Caste in India” has considered caste as a system in which society is divided into many ‘self-centered groups’ and units isolated from each other. And the mutual relations of these units are culturally determined in order of superiority and inferiority. Hutton has used the term ‘self-centered group’ for different castes, this meaning is related to casteism and not to the caste system. For this reason, it is accepted that the caste system of India is such a complex institution in itself that it is not possible to explain its nature by any single definition. There are some differences in the rules and beliefs of caste in different regions of India. a race

Many sub-castes are endogamous at some place and at some place the rules of exogamy are given more recognition. In such a situation, N. Of. Dutta and G. s. Ghurye has given a definite definition of caste and clarified it on the basis of characteristics.

N. Of. According to Dutt, it is a system under which –

 A member of a caste cannot marry outside his caste

 There are many restrictions on members of one caste in the field of food and drink with members of other castes, this restriction is for all castes, this restriction is not of the same nature for all castes,

 Most of the castes have their definite occupations,

 There is a stratification of high and low among all castes, in which the prestige of Brahmins is based.

 Ghurye has explained all the features of the caste system by dividing it into structural and institutional parts.

The interrelationship of caste and politics in India has been studied by many sociologists and political scientists. The most important of these studies is the study of M.N. Srinivasa belongs to Srinivas was the first to point out the influential role of caste in Indian politics. After this A. C. Mayer, Rajni Kothari, Andre Bette, Kathleen Gough, F. Yes. Baillie, Edmund Leach, T.K. Ommen, Yogesh Atal, Rudotf and

Rudolph, H.A. Gold, M.S. Rao etc. Sociologists have studied the relationship between caste and politics. Presently, scholars like Deepkar Gupta, Yogendra Yadav etc. are taking this work forward.

Differences are found in the interpretation of the relationship between caste and politics, but four major theoretical ideologies are universally accepted regarding the relationship between caste and politics.

 According to the first, political relations are only the expression of social relations and social organizations determine the form of political system. The supporters of this ideological ideology consider politics as a means only. Among the thinkers who consider politics as a shadow of Prati in India, A. R. Desai is the leader.


 Supporters of other ideological ideology consider both caste and politics as independent and want to save politics from caste defects. Rajni Kothari is critical of this ideology and says that till date there has never been a complete polarization of caste and politics in Indian society.

 Supporters of the third school consider caste more important than politics because politics revolves around caste. If a person wants to rise high in politics, he has to take his caste with him. Jai Praka Shanarayan had said that caste is the most important political party in India. Binner, Jones and Tickner etc. gave their support to this ideology. Various political parties in India organize caste groups to gain power.


 The supporters of the fourth ideology consider caste and politics to be interrelated and accept that both influence each other. Politics needs power to fulfill its goals and manipulations have to be done to get power. The support of organizations is essential for manipulation. Caste provides major organizational group for this and politics tries to organize itself through this means because politics affects caste because caste protects its interests through politics. Therefore, in the form of ‘casteism of politics’ and ‘politicization of caste’ both are interrelated.


At present, both sociologists and political scientists are engaged in empirical research on the role of caste in politics. Most political scientists consider caste as a variable in explaining politics, while sociologists look at the role of caste in political development and political processes.




B.S. Baviskar has presented the relationship between caste and politics on three grounds:


Is it legal for ethnic groups to participate in political activities? Do castes persist after becoming active in the political field?



What was the impact of caste on Indian politics? Has caste affected the democratic process in India in a positive and favorable direction? Has this caused any hindrance in the process of modernization, especially in democratic politics?


What is the fundamental and decisive factor in the interaction of caste and politics? Does caste influence politics or does politics change the nature of the caste system?

Various political sociologists have presented comprehensive answers to these three questions:-

In answer to the first question, Leach, Gough and Bailey have argued that the main characteristics of the caste system in its primitive form are interdependence and co-operation and there is no place for competition among different castes for political power. Competition for political power or politics is confined only to the dominant castes. Andre Bette considers this approach in the caste system not based on empirical studies but based on the archetype of caste.

On the basis of some critics, we cannot say that there is no place of politics in this. Political competition and conflict among different castes is a reality today and there must have been such conflicts in the past. As a result of activism in politics, castes do not end, but they maintain their existence.

The answer to the second question is that caste (giving importance to stratification) is antithetical to the spirit of a natural democratic system (based on egalitarianism) but Rudolph refuted this argument. According to him, the traditional institution like caste has encouraged the uneducated people in India for political participation. In this way, the caste system is not an obstacle in the process of modernization, it is only an agency of it.

Regarding the answer to the third question, many scholars have given more importance to caste than to political processes in studying the interrelationship between caste and politics. Rajni Kothari has expressed disagreement with the views of these scholars and has clearly tried to state that caste and politics,

Both affect each other equally. Hence it is unfair to give more importance to any one. their

According to the idea, political formations have their own separate autonomous and independent existence if politics is based on caste.

If influenced by politics, the nature and structure of the caste also changes due to the influence of politics. Gold has also rendered the ‘caste model of Indian politics’ giving equal importance to caste and politics. He says that caste system and political structures (such as factions and political parties) have several disparities such as solidarity, interdependence, exclusivity and homogeneity.

Rajni Kothari’s point of view is correct that caste and politics equally affect each other. In fact, the whole controversy is the result of giving importance to the variables in political science and giving importance to social variables in sociology, which has been solved by political sociology to a great extent. According to them, the caste system has a temporal aspect, due to which no one caste can dominate the country’s politics. dominance has not been established. Caste integration has been helpful in providing loyalty to the democratic system because different castes together form some alliances and their loyalty remains towards the democratic system. Due to political participation and activism by castes, consciousness has increased among its members. In fact, politics has provided a medium to the castes to raise their social status.

In the context of interaction between caste system and politics, Rajni Kothari has presented three forms of caste system (Jeetmam.echambaje):-

 Cosmic Form (Jim Mambonsant.Echambaz)

 Form of Integration

  ǔotna bodh ( gim.echambaj and bibdevpavnedme )


Politics is now seen as an instrument of influential modernity. It is seen as helpful in establishing a new society rather than destroying caste. Now the structure of political institutions is getting wider, in which the feeling of caste gets a new form, the relationship between bread and daughter has weakened. Political trends have given birth to new organizations. Caste was no longer the basis of political support or power. There has been a change in the outlook of people in modern politics. It has been understood that in today’s era only caste and community cannot work, therefore many castes had to form factions in election politics. This leads to integration among different castes. The power of a political party remains intact only when people of all castes support it.


In Indian society, both caste and politics are interrelated and support each other. The idea of some scholars that the democratic system will end the caste system has not proved to be true. This question is justified at the theoretical level but the reality is opposite. Some people ask this question in the context of mutual relations between caste and politics. Whether the role of caste in Indian politics is a boon or an intention?


Some scholars like D.R. Gadgil calls it the ‘cancer of politics’ and calls it nation building, national

Considered as an obstacle in integration and modernization.




Religion is an essential element of human being which affects all aspects of life. According to Kingsley Davis, religion is so ubiquitous, permanent and ingrained in human society that we cannot understand society without clearly understanding it.

Religion and politics are closely related to each other. From the empirical studies done in America, France and Belgium, we come to know that religion influences the political behavior of the individual. For example, Jews participate more in politics than Catholics and are more active than Catholics.



Indian society is a society with religious diversity. The religious diversity of India according to the 2001 census can be explained through the following table.



Serial no. religion population

(in crore) per cent

Hindu 84.13 81.17
Muslims 12.62 13.04
Christians 2.21 2.16
Sikh 2.07 2.02
Buddhist 0.81 0.79
Jain 0.41 0.40


Others 0.43 0.42


Arrival of foreign cultures in India since ancient times

It is happening and efforts are being made to maintain all the religious anger. For this reason, the Indian society kept getting divided into many sects. The polytheistic nature of Hinduism has also contributed to this. in India before independence

Its impact on religious diversity and politics can be clearly seen. While the Congress was fighting for the independence of the whole country, the Muslim League was demanding its division into two nations. Also, a group of Sikhs was demanding a separate Khalistan. During the freedom struggle, the British took proper advantage of religious diversity to maintain their rule in India. After independence, India was accepted as a secular people’s state. In the Indian constitution, citizens of all religions have been provided with fundamental rights equally. Compliance. Protection of cultural and educational rights of religious minorities has been provided in Article 29, whereas in Article 30, minorities can establish educational institutions of their choice.

And the authority of administration has been given.



Indian social scientists have not done much study on the role of religion in politics. Most of the studies are related to religious minority communities (mainly Muslims) or Hindu-Muslim communities.

It is natural for this to happen because due to religious diversity, various types of tensions have been arising in the Indian society. Although political interests are not always behind communal tension, yet religion has been used to create tension in politics.


Not only this, political parties (such as Muslim League and Akali Dal) have been formed on religious basis and religion is used to influence election campaigns and voting behaviour.

India is theoretically a secular public state, but in practice, religion

And communalism is one of the main factors affecting politics. The role of religion in politics in India can be explained on the basis of the following facts:


 After independence, many political parties (such as Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabha, Akali Dal etc.) have been formed on the basis of religion and communalism in India. According to Maurice Jones, if communalism is taken in a broad sense, then communalism can be seen in some degree or the other in all parties.

 Religion and communalism are used to influence the election campaign and voting behavior. Abbots, imams and clergy have over the years openly used their influence to influence elections.


 Many religious organizations in India (such as Jamaate Islam, Jamiat-ul-Hind etc.) play the role of powerful influential groups in politics. And try to influence government policies as much as possible.


 Many religious organizations are used for political propaganda and demand for separate states (like Khalistan) on the basis of religion.



 In the formation of the cabinet, representation of different sects is given on the basis of religion.


Communalism in Indian politics has remained as a serious problem since pre-independence. Dr. Goyal has emphasized that communal tension and riots should be seen as an indicator of lack of fundamental integration rather than as a disruptive factor. It is true that this causes some hindrance in integration, but with modern technology and ideas, this is not surprising. Among the causes of communalism, there is a Muslim separatist tendency and their economic backwardness is also hopeless. Due to this, Muslims and many other minority communities have not been included in the main Indian national stream even today. Communalism is found not only among minorities but also among Hindus, that is, there are some people and organizations who believe in a Hindu nation. Being a secular state, even the government is not able to interfere much in religious matters.



Some people consider it as the apathy of the government. Because the government failed to ban these communal organizations.

After independence, the direct influence of religion on politics can be seen in the temple movement of 90s. Due to the temple movement, the right-wing political party ‘BJP’ gained power in Indian politics and in 1999 gained power at the center. Although secularism remains a major issue in the current Indian politics, religion does affect the democratic process.

Dr. Goyal has given three measures to prevent communal tension and disturbances: –

The administrative system should be made more effective so that communal tensions can be predicted and effective steps can be taken to prevent them.


Communal elements should be exposed so that the public does not support such elements.

Communalism about nationalism should be countered by political propaganda. Educational institutions and educational processes should be encouraged to oppose these elements and ideas.


Regarding communalism it can be said that the situation

He is not incurable yet. Asghar Ali Engineer has rightly written that ‘people’s groups are religious, not communal. mixed in all sects

Religious and intellectual leaders also exist. ………..we can certainly reduce the frequency and depth of communalism.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.