Answer the following questions in about 150 words each:

(a) Discuss the psychological approach to the study of comparative politics. (10 marks)

(b) Neo-liberalism lightened neo-realism's dark view of international politics. Comment. (10 marks)

(c)

Question

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each:

(a) Discuss the psychological approach to the study of comparative politics. (10 marks)

(b) Neo-liberalism lightened neo-realism's dark view of international politics. Comment. (10 marks)

(c) Explain the non-traditional security threats in the context of food and environmental crises. (10 marks)

(d) Discuss the political socialization of open and closed societies. (10 marks)

(e) Comment on the Red Lipstick Movement in the context of feminist rights. (10 marks)

UPSC Answer Check · Accepted Answer

This multi-part question requires balanced treatment of five 10-mark sub-parts within 150 words each (~750 total). For (a) 'discuss', present Harold Lasswell's political psychology and Gabriel Almond's civic culture framework. For (b) 'comment', contrast neo-realist anarchy (Waltz) with neo-liberal institutionalism (Keohane/Nye) on cooperation. For (c) 'explain', define non-traditional security and link food crises (India's PDS challenges) with environmental degradation. For (d) 'discuss', compare Almond-Verba's civic culture in open societies versus indoctrination in closed systems. For (e) 'comment', contextualize South Korea's 2018 protest movement against patriarchal norms. Allocate roughly 30 words per sub-part for introduction, 100 for analytical body, and 20 for concise conclusion in each.
- (a) Psychological approach: Harold Lasswell's psychoanalysis of political behavior, Almond-Verba's civic culture typology (parochial-subject-participant), and the role of personality studies (Authoritarian Personality by Adorno et al.)
- (b) Neo-liberalism vs neo-realism: Absolute vs relative gains, institutionalism's mitigation of anarchy, Keohane's After Hegemony on cooperation under anarchy, and the 'lightening' through interdependence
- (c) Non-traditional security: Human security paradigm shift, food security crises (India's NFSA implementation challenges), climate-induced displacement, and the securitization of environment
- (d) Political socialization: Almond-Verba's comparative framework, agents in open societies (family, school, media) vs closed societies (state-controlled indoctrination, single-party apparatus)
- (e) Red Lipstick Movement: South Korea's 2018 feminist protest against spy-cam pornography, intersection with #MeToo, patriarchal backlash, and its significance for East Asian feminist mobilization
- Cross-cutting: Integration of behavioral revolution legacy in (a) and (d), regime-type analysis connecting (d) to comparative frameworks
- Theoretical precision: Distinguishing neo-liberalism (economic policy) from neo-liberal institutionalism (IR theory) in part (b)
- Contemporary relevance: Linking India's climate vulnerability and agrarian distress in (c) to lived security experiences

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	10	Correctly interprets all five directives: 'discuss' for (a) and (d) requires balanced argumentation; 'comment' for (b) and (e) demands evaluative stance with evidence; 'explain' for (c) needs causal exposition; no directive confusion (e.g., not merely describing when asked to comment)	Generally understands directives but treats 'comment' and 'discuss' similarly without distinct evaluative weight for (b) and (e); may miss that 'explain' in (c) requires process-tracing of security threats	Misidentifies directives—treats all as 'describe' or 'list'; fails to provide evaluative judgment where 'comment' demands it; confuses psychological approach with psychoanalysis alone in (a)
Content depth & accuracy	20%	10	Demonstrates precise theoretical command: Lasswell's 'politics of prevention' and Almond's three civic cultures for (a); Waltz's structural realism vs Keohane's complex interdependence for (b); Copenhagen School's securitization for (c); Almond-Verba's five-nation study for (d); South Korea's 2018 protest specifics for (e)	Covers main theorists but with gaps—mentions Lasswell without civic culture, or neo-realism without specifying Waltz; generic treatment of non-traditional security without food-environment nexus; vague reference to 'Korean feminism' without movement specificity	Substantial factual errors: conflates psychological with psychoanalytic exclusively; confuses neo-liberalism (economic) with neo-liberal institutionalism; misidentifies Red Lipstick Movement's country or timeline; treats political socialization as only about childhood
Structure & flow	20%	10	Each 150-word segment follows clear micro-structure: definitional anchor → theoretical elaboration → contemporary application → brief synthesis; seamless transitions between sub-parts with thematic coherence (e.g., Almond-Verba bridging (a) and (d))	Adequate paragraphing but uneven balance—some parts over-developed (e.g., lengthy neo-realism exposition in (b)) while others under-developed (e.g., cursory closed society treatment in (d)); transitions between sub-parts mechanical	Poorly fragmented: bullet points without integration, or single block paragraph per part; no internal structure within 150-word segments; missing transitions between (a)-(e) creating disjointed appearance; word count severely imbalanced across parts
Examples / case-law / data	20%	10	Strategic exemplification: (a) cites The Civic Culture data or Lasswell's case studies; (b) references EU institutional cooperation or NATO endurance; (c) invokes India's farmer protests (2020-21) or climate vulnerability index; (d) contrasts India/Scandinavia with North Korea/China; (e) specifies 2018 Hyehwa Station protests and subsequent legal reforms	Generic or dated examples: 'USA and USSR during Cold War' for (b) without specificity; 'global warming' for (c) without Indian/substantive anchor; 'some Asian country' for (e); examples technically relevant but not sharply illustrative	Absent or erroneous examples: no country cases for (d); invented movements for (e); anachronistic references (e.g., pre-2018 'Korean feminist protests'); examples contradict theory (e.g., citing NATO as neo-liberal institution without qualification)
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	10	Each sub-part concludes with synthesis: (a) assesses psychological approach's decline post-behavioralism; (b) evaluates whether neo-liberalism truly 'lightened' or merely modified realism; (c) argues for integrated food-environment-security governance; (d) reflects on globalization's impact on socialization agents; (e) assesses movement's limitations in structural patriarchy; demonstrates cumulative analytical progression across parts	Summative rather than analytical conclusions—restates main points without evaluative thrust; some parts conclude strongly while others trail off; limited cross-referencing between sub-parts despite thematic overlaps	Absent or purely descriptive conclusions; no evaluative engagement with 'comment' demands in (b) and (e); fails to synthesize across the five parts; ends with unsupported assertion or irrelevant flourish; no analytical progression from (a) through (e)

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Discuss the psychological approach to the study of comparative…

Directive word: Discuss

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Key points expected

Evaluation rubric

Practice this exact question

More from Political Science & IR 2025 Paper II