Sociology 2021 Paper II 50 marks Discuss

Q2

(a) What is identity politics ? Discuss the main trends in Dalit movements in India. (20 marks) (b) Is Indian society moving from "Hierarchy" towards "differentiation" ? Illustrate your answer with suitable examples. (20 marks) (c) Discuss the salient features of 'new middle class' in India. (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) पहचान की राजनीति क्या है ? भारत में दलित आंदोलन के प्रमुख रुझानों की व्याख्या करें । (20 अंक) (b) क्या भारतीय समाज "पदानुक्रम" से "विभेदीकरण" की ओर अग्रसर है ? उपयुक्त उदाहरणों के साथ इस पर प्रकाश डालें । (20 अंक) (c) भारत में 'नव मध्यम वर्ग' के विशिष्ट लक्षणों की चर्चा करें । (10 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2021 Sociology questions

Directive word: Discuss

This question asks you to discuss. 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 'discuss' requires balanced exposition and critical engagement across all three parts. Allocate approximately 40% of word budget to part (a) given its 20 marks and dual demand (definition + trends), 35% to part (b) for its theoretical complexity, and 25% to part (c). Structure as: Introduction defining identity politics and previewing the three-part argument; body treating each sub-part with internal coherence; conclusion synthesising how identity, hierarchy and class together illuminate contemporary Indian stratification.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Identity politics defined (Taylor, Fraser, or Indian context); Dalit movement trends: from temple entry (Ambedkar) to political assertion (BSP), post-Mandal competitive politics, and contemporary digital/cultural assertion
  • Part (a): Shift from emancipatory to identity-recognition frames; internal differentiation within Dalit politics (sub-caste, regional variations)
  • Part (b): Hierarchy (Dumont's Homo Hierarchicus) vs. Differentiation (Luhmann/functional differentiation or Srinivas's vertical-horizontal mobility)
  • Part (b): Empirical evidence: persistence of caste in marriage/occupation vs. emergence of class-based consumption, urban anonymity, and market-mediated relations
  • Part (c): New middle class defined (post-1991, post-Mandal); salient features: consumption-driven, aspirational, politically ambivalent, caste-skipping but not caste-less
  • Part (c): Fernandes's 'politics of forgetting' or Rajagopal's 'split public'; distinction from old middle class (Nehruvian, public-sector)

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Demand-directive understanding20%10For (a), treats 'discuss' as demanding both conceptual clarity and trend-analysis; for (b), recognises the evaluative thrust of 'is moving' and sustains a thesis-antithesis structure; for (c), moves beyond listing to analytical discussion of why features matter.Covers all three parts but treats directives descriptively; (b) becomes a list of hierarchy/difference examples without adjudicating the transition claim.Misreads one or more directives—treats (a) as pure definition, (b) as yes/no without nuance, or (c) as enumeration without analysis.
Theoretical framing20%10Deploys at least three named frameworks appropriately: for (a) Taylor/Fraser on recognition or Ambedkar's annihilation of caste; for (b) Dumont's Homo Hierarchicus paired with either Luhmann's differentiation or Srinivas's sanskritisation/westernisation; for (c) Fernandes, Rajagopal, or Satish Deshpande on new middle class.Names theorists but applies them mechanically or conflates concepts (e.g., equates differentiation with diversity).No theoretical architecture; relies on commonsense sociology or journalistic observation.
Indian / empirical examples20%10For (a): specific phases—Mahad satyagraha, Round Table Conference, Republican Party of India, Dalit Panthers, BSP's sarvajan strategy, Una movement, Bhima-Koregaon commemorations; for (b): marriage data (NFHS), occupational segregation (NSS), urban consumption patterns; for (c): IT sector, gated communities, anti-reservation protests as class-caste articulation.Mentions BSP or 'IT professionals' without specificity; uses generic 'urbanisation' for (b).No Indian empirical grounding; relies on invented or Western examples (US civil rights for Dalit movement).
Multi-paradigm analysis20%10For (a): contrasts emancipatory vs. identity-politics readings of Dalit assertion; for (b): sustains a dialectical argument—hierarchy persists in marriage/ritual, differentiation advances in labour markets/politics, with caste-class hybridity as outcome; for (c): notes both progressive (democratic deepening) and conservative (exclusionary nationalism) potentials of new middle class.Acknowledges complexity in one part but not others; conclusion adds no synthetic tension.Wholly one-sided—declares hierarchy dead or unchanged, or presents new middle class as uniformly liberal or reactionary.
Conclusion & sociological imagination20%10Synthesises across parts: shows how identity politics (a), hierarchy-differentiation tension (b), and new middle class formation (c) together reveal Indian stratification as simultaneously rigid and fluid; connects personal biography (caste identity) to public issue (democratic politics); suggests future trajectory or research agenda.Summarises three parts separately without cross-cutting synthesis; conclusion is mechanical.No conclusion, or a single sentence per part with no integration; fails to demonstrate sociological imagination.

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 →

More from Sociology 2021 Paper II