Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Political party in india synopsis research paper
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Political party in india synopsis research paper
Uttar Pradesh is India’s most politically important state. With 80 seats in the Lok Sabha and 35 in the Rajya Sabha, it has the largest number of legislators in the Indian Parliament. The political might of this state can be imagined when one thinks of the fact that eight of India’s fourteen prime ministers are from Uttar Pradesh. Maharashta with 48 seats has the second largest number of seats in Lok Sabha, 32 less than Uttar Pradesh. In terms of population, if Uttar Pradesh was an independent nation, it would be world’s fifth most populated country.
Congress was once a dominant force in the state during the early years after independence but now the party’s dominance has been reduced to only a few seats in both the Lok Sabha as well as in the legislative assembly.
THE DOMINANT YEARS: FROM INDEPENDENCE TO 1967
The Congress was the single-most dominant party in the state of Uttar Pradesh after independence. In the first Lok Sabha elections, the Indian National Congress (INC) won by a huge margin. The INC won 364 seats out of the available 489 to form the government at the Centre. In Uttar Pradesh alone, Congress won 81 out of the available 85 seats. Also, winning 388 seats in the first legislative elections of the state shows their dominance during that era. One can understand their dominance by simply comparing the second-largest party in the state. Socialist party was the second- largest party with just 20 seats. So the INC got 19.4 times the seats the Socialist party won.
This win could largely be attributed to the INC’s role in the Indian independence struggle which they were able to transform into votes. In addition, the absence of a strong opposition party in the state further helped the...
... middle of paper ...
...to 36.45%. (Statistical Reports of the Election Commission of India)
Among the other political parties in the state assembly elections, the Socialist Party was the second largest party in the state. They won 20 seats in 1952 and 44 in 1957. The Bhartiya Jan Sangh was also there but they could only win a few seats in 1952 and 1957. The real fight from the opposition came in 1962 but was still not enough to give Congress a fight for the formation of government in the state. In 1962 there were a number of parties that won seats. However, not one single opposition party was able to take its tally over 50. In 1962, Bhartiya Jan Sangh won 48 seats, Praja Socialist Party won 38, the Communist Party of India won 14 seats and the Socialist and Swatanta Party won 24 and 15 seats in the state assembly elections. (Statistical Reports of the Election Commission of India)
The 1900 election gave the Conservatives 402 seats to the Liberals 183 seats continuing the Conservative dominance, in the last twenty years the Liberals had only seen three years in government. The 1906 election result gave the Conservatives only 157 seats, former Conservative Prime Minister, Balfour, lost his Manchester seat. The Liberals won 401 seats; these included 24 Lib-Lab MPs; the Liberals would also have the support of 29 Labour members and 82 Irish Nationalists. This was an excellent result which gave the new Government a majority of 356. Although the Conservatives were overwhelmingly defeated, their proportion of the votes did not go down compared to the election in 1900.
In the 1906 election, the number of seats won by Liberals increased from 184 to 377, in contrast the numbers of seats lost by the Conservatives went from 402 seats won in 1900 to 157 seats lost in the 1906 election, this represented the lowest number of seats held by a Conservative government since 1832. This dramatic reversal of constituencies held, is due to a number of reasons. An argument is that, due to some poor decisions made by the Conservative governments, they in fact contributed largely to the landslide result in the 1906 election. ‘They were in effect the architects to the own downfall.’
The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track, written by political scientists Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein, is a novel which describes how Congress has failed to fill its responsibilities to the people of the United States, and how Congress’s role in the American Constitutional System differs from the part it was designed to play. Mann and Ornstein describe the shift from Congress being a decentralized, committee-based institution to a more regimented one that focuses on political parties rather than committee. The authors believe that Congress cannot succeed in getting the United States back on track unless they start to follow the rules dictated in the Constitution. In addition, Mann and Ornstein
A variety of ideologies and parties nowadays is an inevitable and essential feature of the democracy. Every party by its nature tends to gain the official state legislature position, and essentially every party differs from other ones in its ideological core. The modern political system, parties, believes and attempts are different form those 50 years ago, and it is the normal sequent political world development. It is claimed that the modern party competition is not driven by ideology anymore. In this essay the definition of party systems, party competition, the changing shape of the modern parties will be discussed. Also, the question if the party competition is still driven by ideology will be answered in accordance with the relevant arguments.
Although there are similarities and differences in lever of party discipline between the MPs and the Senate, they both work and are effective. For the MPs, levers such as collective responability, the danger of being re-elected or suspension, and control over Question Period help in securing high party discipline and unity by defining a stiff boundary and pulled them together. While the Senate does not face the problem of being removed from the party for displeasing their party leaders as the MPs do, the very method of being appointed directly by the Governor General (under the advice of the PM) and their background similarities ensure that they think alike and therefore have high party discipline. In contrast, MPs have a relatively more individualistic reasons for maintaining high party discipline while the motive for the Senate is more group-oriented.
Such result is inevitable when there are both external and internal factors wrestling and, at the same time, supporting each other in every political match happening in Congress. External factors created the necessary condition in which internal changes could be and were discussed in the House and Senate. However, internal changes, in turn, have shaped and amplified the impacts that external factors created. Together, these intertwined factors have brought about their own changes to how Congress makes law.
Glick, J, Schaffer, C. 1991. "The Indian Homeland." U.S. News and World Report. July 8, vol.111, n2, pg26 (6)
...s vote for a party instead for an individual, and when the votes are tallied for the region the regional representative seats for that region are divided among the parties in proportion to the share of the vote that each party received.
When looking at and understanding the historical aspect of the party systems, it is important to note that there are some number of definitions of party systems. To some degree, a party system simply can be defined as the competition between parties in the political realm in efforts to gain the support for their give...
In Political Parties and Party Systems, Alan Ware summarizes the two main competing theories that attempt to explain party systems. First, the Sociological approach and then the Institutional approach. In order to comprehend his analysis it is necessary to realize that party systems are in a constant state of evolution, they do not remain stagnant. This evolution may, at times, be imperceptible and at others very noticeable, such as during a revolution; but the change is undoubtedly occurring. It is much easier to understand these theories if you view these two theories from a flexible standpoint as opposed to having a concrete beginning and end with exact delineations in between.
The outbreak of the war against Fascism and the wartime prosperity weakened all parties on the left. While the Communist Party suffered the most from the McCarthy period, all the left was seriously impaired, and by the mid-fifties little remained of organized radical politics. The Socialist Party was down to about 2,000 members, and had more or less withdrawn from electoral action in the face of the increasingly restrictive ballot-access laws passed by state legislatures around the country. In 1956 the Socialist Party and the Social Democratic Federation reunited, under pressure from the Socialist International (with which both groups were affiliated).
In On Democracy, Robert Dahl presents five criteria that states are required to meet in order to satisfy the primary aim of democracy, which is to provide political equality to all of its citizens (1998, 37). The criteria include effective participation, equal voting, enlightened understanding, open agenda setting and inclusion. (Dahl, 1998, 38). Above these criteria, this paper will only focus on effective participation and enlightened understanding to apply them to India; this is because its citizens are going through a tough time with the two criteria to become a state with effective democracy. Therefore, this paper will demonstrate that India is in the process of achieving effective participation, but significantly lacks enlightened understanding.
Since its independence in 1947, political stability has been a key factor which has ensured that India is the largest democracy in the world today. In spite ...
In a dominant- party system, a single party wins approximately 60 percent or more of the seats in legislature and two or more other parties usually win less than 40 percent of the seat. Opposition parties in dominant-party system are free to contest elections. The dominant parties have to compete for votes to maintain its power or to gain power. This democratic competition imposes a check and balance on the government of the day, promotes transparency and accountability and ensures that service delivery to the people are prioritized or it will be given the boot.
In modern society, political parties serve as a link between state and society. Anton Downs wrote a well-known definition for political parties as “a team of men seeking to control the governing apparatus by gaining office in a duly constituted election.” Political parties carry out a political leadership role in a modern democracy. To participate successfully in the political process and to contribute to the consolidation of democracy, political parties have to demonstrate certain functions. This essay will mainly discuss different functions of political parties in two different political systems, namely parliamentary system and presidential system. In both systems, political parties serve common functions of selection, exercising political