Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Explain the Philosophical approach to the study of Political theory…

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Explain the Philosophical approach to the study of Political theory. (10 marks) (b) Write a note on the relation between equality and liberty from the multi-cultural perspective. (10 marks) (c) Explain the Macpherson's view on power. (10 marks) (d) Mention the difference between Italian and German brands of facism. (10 marks) (e) Explain briefly the elite theory of democracy. (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में दीजिए : (a) राजनीति सिद्धांत के अध्ययन के दार्शनिक उपागम को समझाइए । (10) (b) बहु-सांस्कृतिक परिप्रेक्ष्य में समानता तथा उदारवाद के मध्य संबंध पर टिप्पणी लिखिए । (10) (c) शक्ति पर मैकफर्सन के दृष्टिकोण को समझाइए । (10) (d) इतालवी और जर्मन ब्रांड के फासीवाद के बीच अंतर का उल्लेख कीजिए । (10) (e) लोकतंत्र के अभिजन सिद्धांत को संक्षेप में समझाइए । (10)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2025 Political Science & IR questions

Directive word: Explain

This question asks you to explain. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'explain' requires clear exposition with causal reasoning across all five parts. Allocate approximately 30 words (20% time) per sub-part given equal 10-mark weighting. Structure each mini-answer as: definition/thesis → 2-3 explanatory points → brief synthesis. For (a) begin with normative enquiry; (b) balance equality-liberty tension; (c) foreground Macpherson's 'possessive individualism'; (d) use comparative tabulation for fascist variants; (e) contrast elite theorists (Pareto/Mosca/Michels). Maintain strict word discipline to complete all parts.

Key points expected

(a) Philosophical approach: normative enquiry, ethical foundations, universal principles, critique of behaviouralism, thinkers like Leo Strauss/Sheldon Wolin
(b) Equality-liberty nexus: multicultural recognition vs. individual autonomy, Bhikhu Parekh's multicultural citizenship, Kymlicka's minority rights, Indian constitutional balancing (Articles 29-30 vs. 14-21)
(c) Macpherson on power: possessive individualism, developmental power vs. extractive power, democratic transformation of liberal state, critique of market society
(d) Italian vs. German fascism: Mussolini's corporatist statism vs. Hitler's racial-biological ideology; Roman imperial nostalgia vs. Lebensraum; Church concordat vs. Gleichschaltung
(e) Elite theory: Pareto's circulation of elites, Mosca's political class, Michels' iron law of oligarchy, Schumpeter's competitive elitism, critique of classical democracy

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	10	Demonstrates precise calibration of 'explain' across all five parts: for (a) establishes normative-evaluative distinction; for (b) unpacks tension rather than collapsing concepts; for (c) traces Macpherson's historical-materialist method; for (d) treats 'mention' as requiring systematic comparison; for (e) distinguishes descriptive vs. normative elite theory	Uses 'explain' generically without part-specific adaptation; conflates description with causal explanation in 2-3 sub-parts; misses directive nuance in (d) by listing rather than differentiating	Misidentifies directives (e.g., treats 'explain' as 'define' or 'list'); fails to distinguish between explanatory and comparative demands across parts; ignores 'briefly' constraint in (e)
Content depth & accuracy	20%	10	Displays command of canonical texts: Strauss's 'What is Political Philosophy?' for (a); Parekh's 'Rethinking Multiculturalism' for (b); Macpherson's 'Democratic Theory' (1973) for (c); Payne's 'A History of Fascism' comparative framework for (d); full spectrum of elite theorists for (e) with correct attribution	Accurate but superficial coverage; conflates Macpherson with Marx or Mills; confuses Pareto's residues/derivations with Mosca's political formula; treats Italian/German fascism as identical	Factual errors: attributes possessive individualism to wrong thinker; confuses multiculturalism with pluralism; misidentifies elite theorists (e.g., attributes iron law to Pareto); anachronistic comparisons
Structure & flow	20%	10	Each 30-word unit follows disciplined micro-structure: (a) thesis→method→critique; (b) dialectical presentation→Parekh's resolution; (c) historical thesis→power typology→democratic implication; (d) parallel columns or point-by-point comparison; (e) theorist sequence→synthesis→democratic relevance	Loose paragraphing without clear signposting; uneven length distribution (some parts 20 words, others 50); missing internal transitions between explanatory elements	Unstructured bullet points or fragmented sentences; incomplete parts due to time misallocation; no discernible architecture within or across sub-parts
Examples / case-law / data	20%	10	Strategic exemplification: (a) contrasts Rawlsian with Straussian philosophical method; (b) deploys Indian constitutional provisions (Articles 29, 30, 350A) or Shah Bano debate; (c) cites Macpherson's critique of Locke's property theory; (d) references Lateran Accords (1929) vs. Reichskonkordat (1933) breach; (e) applies Michels to Indian party system	Generic Western examples only; misses Indian constitutional/empirical anchors where relevant; over-examples in one part leaving others bare	No examples or irrelevant illustrations (e.g., using Gandhi for philosophical approach); fabricated case-law; confuses Italian and German historical events
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	10	Each part closes with critical synthesis: (a) philosophical approach's contemporary relevance against post-truth politics; (b) India's asymmetric federalism as practical resolution; (c) Macpherson's legacy for participatory democracy; (d) fascism's transnational learning vs. national particularity; (e) elite theory's predictive power for democratic backsliding	Descriptive terminations without evaluative thrust; repetitive summary of points already made; missing closure in 1-2 sub-parts	Abrupt endings or missing conclusions; contradictory final statements; conclusion that merely restates question without analytical addition

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →