Page |1

Political Science: Political Thought and Political Organizations

Why do we need to study political thought?
Political thought or political philosophy is a big lesson. Political philosophy is all about political
thought on polity - those who rule and those who are ruled living within the institutions. Political
philosophy can be traced back in ancient from painting and message from the wall. Between 1337
and 1339, political thought was observed from painting of Ambrogio Lorenzetti. It is usually
called the Allegory of Good and Bad Government. It depicts the nature of good and bad government
respectively by means of figures who represent the qualities that rulers ought and ought not to
have, and then to show the effects of the two kinds of government on the lives of ordinary people.
So in the case of good government, the dignified ruler dressed in rich robes and sitting on
his throne, surrounded by figures representing the virtues of courage, justice, magnanimity,
peace, prudence, and temperance. Beneath him stand a line of citizens encircled by a long rope the
ends of which are tied to the ruler’s wrist, symbolizing the harmonious binding together of ruler
and people. In short, Lorenzetti’s portrayal of the effects of good government can be applied first
in the city and then in the countryside. The city is ordered and wealthy: merchants carrying
trades, dealers buying and selling goods, nobles riding gaily decorated horses; in one place a
group of dancers join hands in a circle. Beyond the city gate a well-dressed lady rides out to hunt,
passing on the way a plump saddle back, pig being driven in to market; in the countryside itself
peasants till the earth and gather in the harvest. It is the message representing Security.
In the case of representing evil government, it is less well preserved, but its message is
equally plain: a demonic ruler surrounded by vices like greediness, brutality and arrogance, a city
under military occupation, and a barren countryside devastated by ghostly armies. Here the
inscription held by the figure of Fear reads:
Because each seeks only his own good, in this city Justice is subjected to tyranny; wherefore
along this road nobody passes without fearing for his life, since there are robberies outside and
inside the city gates.
There is no better way to understand what political philosophy is and why political
thought is needed to study. Defining the political philosophy or thought is an investigation into
the nature, causes, and effects of good and bad government expressing in striking the visual form
of three ideas that stand at the very heart of the module, political thought. The first is that good
and bad government profoundly affects the quality of human lives. Because good government
broadens how the rule of justice and the other virtues allows ordinary people to work, trade, hunt,
dance, and generally do all those things that enrich human existence. At the same time, bad
government, tyranny breeds poverty and death. So that is the first idea: it really makes a
difference to peoples’ lives whether they are governed well or badly. People cannot turn their
back on politics, retreat into private life, and on their personal happiness.
The second idea is that the form government takes is not predetermined: Public or those
who are ruled have a choice to make. The mural painted in the Sala dei Nove – the Room of the
Nine – and these Nine were the rotating council of nine wealthy merchants who ruled the city in
the first half of the 14th century. So it reminds their responsibilities to the people of Siena, but also

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 Page |2

as a celebration of the republican form of government that had been established there, at a time of
considerable political turmoil in many of the Italian cities. The portrayal of evil government was
not just an academic exercise: it was a reminder of what might happen if the rulers of the city
failed in their duty to the people, or if the people failed in their duty to keep a watchful eye on
their representatives.
The third idea is that people can know what distinguishes good government from bad:
they can trace the effects of different forms of government, and they can learn what qualities go to
make up the best form of government. In other words, there is such a thing as political
knowledge. According to these paintings of ancient Italy, the virtuous ruler is shown surrounded
by figures representing the qualities that, according to the political philosophy of the age,
characterized good government. The virtuous rulers are meant to be instructive: they are meant to
teach both rulers and citizens how to achieve the kind of life that they wanted. In these backdrops,
it is necessary to question that are the claims people implicitly make actually true? Does it really
make a difference to those who are ruled lives what kind of government they have? Do they have
any choice in the matter, or is the form of our government something over which the people have
no control? And can public or people know what makes one form of government better than
another? These are some of the big questions that political philosophers and political thinkers ask,
as well as many smaller ones. But before trying to answer these questions, scholars who study
political thought need to add a few more words of explanation.
When talking about government, ‘the government of the day’ – the group of people in
authority in any society at a particular moment is needed to study broadly. Indeed something
broader than the state – the political institutions through which authority is exercised, such as the
cabinet of ministers, parliament, courts of law, police, armed forces, and so forth. It is the meaning
of the whole body of rules, practices and institutions under whose guidance people live together
in societies. That human beings need to cooperate with one another, to know who can do what
with whom, who owns which parts of the material world, what happens if somebody breaks the
rules, and so forth, they can perhaps take for granted here. But they cannot yet take it for granted
that people must have a state to solve these problems. One central issue in political philosophy is
why people need states, or more generally political authority, in the first place, and they need to
engage with the anarchist argument that societies can perfectly well govern themselves without it.
It opens the question on whether ‘good government’ requires having a state, or a government in
the conventional sense, at all. Another question that will remain open until the last chapter of the
book is whether there should be just one government or many governments – a single system for
the whole of humanity, or different systems for different peoples.
So far it argued that political philosophy deals with issues that are of vital importance to all
of states or human beings, and furthermore issues over which people have real political choices to
make. Another reason for dismissing the whole subject is, namely that politics is about the use of
power, and powerful people – politicians especially – do not pay any attention to works of
political philosophy. If you want to change things, according to this line of thought, people on the
street demonstrate, and cause some chaos, or alternatively perhaps see if people can find a

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 Page |3

politician to bribe or blackmail, but some people shouldn’t bother with learned treatises on the
good society that nobody reads. It is true that when political philosophers have tried to intervene
directly in political life, they have usually come unstuck. They have advised powerful rulers –
Aristotle acted as tutor to Alexander the Great, Machiavelli attempted to counsel the Medicis in
Florence, and Diderot was invited to St Petersburg by Catherine the Great to discuss how to
modernize Russia – but whether these interventions did any good is another question.
Treatises written during times of intense political conflict have often succeeded merely in
alienating both sides to the conflict. A famous example is Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan, a
masterpiece of political philosophy written while the English Civil War was still raging. Hobbes’s
arguments in favor of absolute government, were welcomed neither by the Royalists nor by the
Parliamentarians. The former believed that kings had been divinely ordained to rule, the latter
that legitimate government required the consent of its subjects. The bleak picture of the human
condition painted by Hobbes led him to the conclusion that we must submit to any established
and effective government, no matter what its credentials were. By implication Charles I had a
right to rule when he was in power, but so did Cromwell when he had succeeded in deposing
Charles. This was not what either side wanted to hear.

Political Authority
Looked at from the perspective of human history, this is a very recent phenomenon.
Human societies have usually governed themselves on a much smaller scale. In tribal societies
authority might rest in the hands of the village elders, who would meet to settle any disputes that
arose among the members of the tribe, or interpret tribal law. When societies emerged on a larger
scale, as in China under the Han dynasty or medieval Europe, they still lacked anything that
deserved to be called a state. Although supreme authority rested in the hands of the king or the
emperor, day-to-day governance was carried out by local lords and their officers. Their impact on
people’s lives was also much more limited, since they neither attempted to regulate them so
closely (except perhaps in matters of religion), nor of course did they attempt to provide most of
the goods and services that modern states provide. Political authority was woven into the social
fabric in such a way that its existence seemed relatively uncontroversial. The arguments that took
place were about who in particular should wield it (by what right did kings rule?), and whether it
should be divided between different bodies, for instance between kings and priests.
The emergence of the modern state, however, first in Western Europe, and then almost
everywhere else, has meant that the problem of political authority has preoccupied political
philosophers for the last 500 years. Here is an institution that claims the right to govern people
lives in countless ways. What can justify that claim? Under what circumstances, if any, do states
wield legitimate political authority? How far are the people as ordinary citizens obliged to obey
the laws they make and follow their other dictates? These very basic questions need to be resolved
to ask how best to constitute the state – what the form of government should be – and what limits
should be set to its authority.

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 Page |4

In the context of the state exercises political authority, political authority has two sides to it.
On the one side, people generally recognize it as authority, in other words as having the right to
command them to behave in certain ways. When people obey the law, for instance, they usually
do so because they think that the body that made the law has a right to do so, and they have a
corresponding duty to comply. On the other side, people who refuse to obey are compelled to do
so by the threat of sanctions – lawbreakers are liable to be caught and punished. And these two
aspects are complementary. Unless most people obeyed the law most of the time because they
believed in its legitimacy, the system could not work: to begin with, there would need to be huge
numbers of law-enforcement officers, and then the question would arise who should enforce the
law on them. Equally, those who do keep the law out of a sense of obligation are encouraged to do
so by knowing that people who break it are likely to be punished. I do not steal from my neighbor
because I respect his right of property. I hope that he respects mine too, but I know that if he
doesn’t I can call the police to get my property back. So people who comply with authority
voluntarily know that they are protected from being taken advantage of by less scrupulous
persons.
Political authority, then, combines authority proper with forced compliance. It is neither
pure authority, like the authority of the wise man whose disciples follow his instructions without
any compulsion, nor pure force, like the force exercised by the gunman who relieves you of your
wallet, but a blend of the two. But the question remains, why do people need it? After all political
authority, particularly when exercised by a body as powerful as the modern state, imposes a great
many unwelcome requirements on us, some of which (like paying taxes) make them materially
worse off, but others of which make the public do things that they object to morally (like fighting
in wars that we oppose). What reply can the people give to the anarchist who says that societies
can govern themselves perfectly well without political authority, and that the state is essentially a
racket run for the benefit of those who hold positions of power? But firstly, in defending the
political authority, by asking to imagine life in society without it – with the police, the army, the
legal system, the civil service, and the other branches of the state all were taken away. What
would happen then? Perhaps the most famous thought-experiment along these lines can be found
in Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan, published in 1651. Hobbes, had experienced the partial breakdown
of political authority brought about by the English Civil War, and the picture he painted of life in
its absence was unremittingly bleak. He described the ‘natural condition of mankind’ without
political rule as one of ferocious competition for the necessities of life, leaving people in constant
fear in case they should be robbed or attacked, and constantly inclined, therefore, to strike at
others first.

What is political science?

Political science is the academic field that takes as its role and general task the analysis of politics,
especially the politics of the state. It also concerns with the study of the nation, government and
politics and policies of government. It includes both understanding an explaining the world of
politics that around us. We all participate in politics, though most of the time we do so

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 Page |5

unknowingly. Politics is much more than voting in an election or working in government.

Reading or listening to news, making donation to aid groups or talking with friends and family
about social issues and values are a few of the many examples of political activity in our daily
lives. Political science is a very comprehensive and expanding social science. It can describe the
scope as political theory, political institution, comparative politics, political behavior, public
policy and public administration, international relations and political economy.
Origin and Development of Political Science
When all the social sciences were established in the nineteenth century, political science has
ancient roots, indeed, it originated about 2500 years ago with the work of Plato and Aristotle. The
history of political science properly begins with Plato (429-348 BC) whose writings on Republic,
Statesman and Law are the first classic of political science. These three studies survived as
political theories well into the nineteenth century and even until the present day. In the Republic,
Plato presents his ideal regime based on knowledge and possession of the truth. He then presents
four other regimes in descending order of virtue - Timocracy, Oligarchy, Democracy and
Tyranny. In the Statesman, he introduces rule of the one, the few, the many each in its pure and
impure version. This generates six-fold classification of regimes; Monarchy, Tyranny, Aristocracy,
Oligarchy, Democracy and Ochlocracy. It attains stability by combining principles: the monarchic
principle of wisdom and virtue, with the democratic freedom of freedom. This scheme was
adopted and improved upon by Aristotle. It is the first explanatory theory in the history of
political science.
Aristotle (384-322 BC) who was known to be farther of political science and his Politics
were drawn from the writings of Plato. He begins from Plato’s six-fold classification of states. He
maintained that democracy is one of the six basic kinds of regimes or constitutions. Fore Aristotle,
democracy is corrupt form of rule because the demos tend to be short-sighted and selfish. The
common people will recklessly pursue their own interest by taking property, wealth and power
from the few with no regard for the peace and stability of the polis. His classification includes
polity. According to him, polity differs from democracy because it mixes elements of rule by the
many. The virtue of the mixed constitution is that each group can keep an eye on the other.

Plato
Background
Plato was born in 428 BCE and died in 348 BCE. He founded the Academy in Athens in 386 which
flourished over 900 years and is regarded as the first university. Plato wrote a great number of
books. Of these works, the Republic, the Statesman and the Law are well-known and particularly
concerned with politics. The Republic was written around 380 BC concerning the definition of
justice and the order and character of the just city-state and the just man.
Plato’s Political Philosophy
In Plato’s thought political theory is closely connected with moral philosophy. The Republic
was written around 380 BC concerning the definition of justice and the order and character of the
just city-state and the just man. In Republic he says that different classes of the state are like

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 Page |6

different parts of an individual soul. Likewise, different types of states, with their characteristic
virtues and vices, are analogous to different of people, with their virtues and vices. Indeed, Plato
held that the state is like a giant person. As justice is the general virtue of the moral person, so also
it is justice that characterizes the good society. In the Republic, Plato argues that the best way to
understand the just person is to analyze the nature of the state.
Plato says in the Republic that there are people living in his own day who still believe that
all aspects of life should be regulated according to precepts. Men cannot live without a value
system which orders their lives, so it follows that Plato’s own world is one in which a number of
different value systems compete for the attention of thinking men. Plato wrote a world in which
all dogma—moral, political and religious –are important.
The State as a Giant Person
For Plato, the state grows out of the nature of the individual, so that the individual comes
logically prior to the state. The state is a natural institution – natural because it reflects the
structure of human nature. The origin of the state is a reflection of people’s economic needs, for,
Plato says, “State comes into existence because on individual is self-sufficing; we all have many
needs”. Such human needs required many skills. Therefore, there must be a division of labor, for
“more things will be produced and the work more easily and better done, when every person is
set free from all other occupations to do, at the right time, the one thing for which he is naturally
fitted.” It interprets that human needs are not limited to their physical requirements, for their goal
is not simply survival but a life higher than an animal’s. Still, the healthy state soon becomes
affected by a wide range of desires and “swollen up with a whole multitude of callings not
ministering to any bare necessity”.
This desire for more things will soon exhaust the resources of the community, and before
long, Plato says “we shall have to cut off a slice of our neighbors’ territory”. Then, neighbors want
a slice of ours. Therefore, neighbors will inevitably be at war. Wars have their origin in desires
which are the most fruitful source of evils both to individuals and states. With the inevitability of
war, it will now be necessary to have a whole army to go out to battle with any invaders, in
defense of all this property and of the citizens. Thus, emerge the guardians of the state, who at
first represent the vigorous and powerful people who will repel the invader and preserve internal
order. Now, there are two distinct classes of people: those who fill all the crafts – farmers, artisans,
and traders – and those who guard the community. From this latter class are then chosen the most
highly trained guardians, who will become the rulers of the state and will represent a third and
elite class.
The relation between the individual and the state now become plain: The three classes in
the state are an extension of the three parts of the soul. The craftspeople or artisans represent as a
class the lowest part of the soul, namely, the appetites. The guardians embody the spirited
element of the soul. And the highest class, the rulers, represents the rational element.
The assignment of all people to their respective classes would come only after extensive
training, and only those capable of doing so would progress to the higher levels. Although
theoretically all people would have the opportunity to reach the highest level, they would in fact

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 Page |7

stop at the level of their natural aptitudes. To make all of them satisfied with their lot, Plato
thought it would be necessary to employ a “convenient fiction … a single bold flight of
invention”. Thus, according to Plato, it convinces first the Rulers and the soldiers, and then the
whole community, that all that nature and education which are provided to them was only
experience. Plato implies that by nature some would be rulers and others craftspeople, and would
provide the basis for a perfectly stratified society. But, Plato recognized that children would not
have the same quality as their parents. Most importantly, Plato thought that everyone should
agree on who is to be the ruler and agree also on why the ruler should be obeyed.
Ideal State of Plato
In the republic, Plato attempted to construct an ideal state in which justice would prevail
and which would be free from disturbances and the self-seeking of individuals and classes. Plato
desired harmony and efficiency within this ideal state, not democracy or liberty. Plato found the
reason for the existence of the state in the diversity of men’s wants and the necessity of men
assisting each other to satisfy these wants. Plato thinks the Republic should be founded on the
basis of the division of labour. A state must include three classes of people: producers of
sustenance to supply the physical wants of the people, that is, farmers, artisans and merchants;
warriors to protect the people and ensure a sufficient territory for the state; and finally, officials to
regulate the general welfare of the people.
Plato calls members of the last two classes ’’Guardians’’. These three classes, working
together properly, would ensure the greatest welfare of the state. Every person within the state
would be assigned to the class for which he was best fitted. Thus, there would be perfect harmony
and unity within the state.
The Guardian Class
The education, family relationships and property rights of the guardian class are fully
discussed in his book, the Republic. The education of the guardians was so carefully considered by
Plato that it is often regarded as a treatise on education. Plato placed great emphasis on education
and believed that it was the means by which to remodel an imperfect society. Plato prescribed
compulsory public education for children of all classes. The training was divided into two parts.
The first part concerned the mind and came under the heading of "music”. It included the reading
of poetry and other forms of literature, singing, and the playing of music. The second part of
education concerned the body and came under the heading of "gymnastics”. It included the
teaching of self-discipline and other virtues.
This dual form of education was to continue until early manhood. Those who had shown
the greatest aptitude would be selected to continue their training. The others would become
members of the producing or working class. The next period of training was to cover the years
from twenty to thirty. Women as well as men were to be eligible. The curriculum in this stage of
education would be more advanced. The main studies would be logic, astronomy, and
mathematics. From thirty to thirty-five, after further selection, attention would be turned to
philosophy and training in dialectical thinking. Then, for a period of fifteen years, that is, from the

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 Page |8

age of thirty-five to fifty, those who had successfully gone through the various tests were to
assume the responsibilities of guardians, that is, of providing justice and order in the state.
Plato was willing to allow the producing class to have private families and monogamous
marriages. But such practices were not acceptable for the guardians. Plato reasoned that members
of the guardian class must be entirely unselfish if they were to discharge their duties successfully.
They could not be allowed the privileges of being partial to their children because such partiality
would take precedence over their duties.
Plato objected to the institution of marriage. Moreover, he also objected to the principle of
private property because private property stirred up greed and envy. The guardians had only one
reason for existing, to promote the well-being of the state. If private property interfered with this
purpose, it should be abolished. Plato proposed that the guardians should be prohibited from
owning property of any sort. They were to live in barracks and eat at common tables. Freed from
the concerns of physical life, they would be able to devote all their time to philosophy and rise to
heights of knowledge which would give them an insight into all human affairs. They would be fit
to guide the state by their wisdom without the need for law.
Forms of Government
The type of government which Plato prescribed for the ideal state was derived from the
principle that virtue is knowledge and that truth can be known only by those of the keenest
intelligence. According to Plato, if virtue is knowledge and if truth can be known only by the few
with great wisdom, then government ought to be placed in the hands of an aristocracy of
intelligence. In other words, philosophers should be rulers. Plato referred to this governing class
of men of great wisdom as the "guardian” class.
Plato argued that if the state is a giant person, then it would reflect the kind of people a
community has become. The state will, therefore, reflect these variations in human character. For
this reason, Plato argued that constitution cannot come out of sticks and stones; they must result
from the preponderance of certain characters which draw the rest of the community in their wake.
So if there are five forms of government, there must be five kinds of mental constitution among
individuals. And these five forms of government are aristocracy, timocracy, plutocracy,
democracy and despotism.
Plato was the first political thinker to arrange an imaginary cycle through which
governments passed in degeneration from the best to the worst. At the top, he placed aristocracy,
in which the ruling class was inspired by the idea of justice. This was followed by timocracy, in
which the ruling class was inspired by love of glory or honour rather than justice. The next one
was oligarchy when the rise of private property placed political power in the hands of those
possessing wealth. The gradual rise of the masses led to democracy which abused liberty and
resulted in anarchy. At the bottom of the scale was tyranny, which arose when conflicts among
the masses made a strong ruler necessary.
According to Plato, a state was made up of different kinds of souls will decline from an
aristocracy (rule by the best) to a timocracy (rule by the honourable), then to an oligarchy (rule by
the few), then to a democracy (rule by the people), and finally to tyranny (rule by one person, rule

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 Page |9

by a tyrant). Plato considered tyranny as the worst form of government. But Plato also disliked
democracy because the Athenians, who enjoyed complete democracy, had put Socrates to death.
Although he was an Athenian, Plato showed great admiration for the aristocratic Spartan system
of government.
The leaders of states want to survive and prosper in the international context. To survive
successfully, they need an appropriate and applicable view of the context of politics. Plato’s view
of how politics should be conducted is tied closely to his view of knowledge. He argues that the
ideal political system will not be achieved until philosophers are rulers and rulers are
philosophers.

Aristotle
Background
Greek philosopher whose thought dominated western philosophy and science
for two millennia. Aristotle was the pupil of Plato and later he founded his
own school, the Lyceum. Aristotle was born in the small town of Stagira on the
northeastern coast of Thrace in 384 BCE and assassinated in 322 BCE. When he
was 17 years old, Aristotle went to Athens to attend the Plato’s Academy.
Aristotle founded his own school at Athens. Aristotle is one of the most important founding
figures in Western philosophy and made significant contributions to various subjects.
In his Politics, as in his Ethics, Aristotle stresses the element of purpose. Just like human
being, the state is naturally endowed with a distinctive function. Combining these two ideas,
Aristotle says “it is evident that the state is a creature of nature, and that human beings are by
nature political animals.” Human nature and the State are so closely related that “ he who is
unable to live in society, or who has no need because he is sufficient for himself, must be either a
beast or a god”. Not only does human nature incline us to live in a state, but the state is
established with a view to some good and exists for some end. The family exists primarily to
preserve life. The state comes into existence in the first instance to preserve life for families and
villages, which in the long run cannot survive on their own. But beyond this economic end, the
function of the state is to ensure the supreme good of people, namely, moral and intellectual life.
The Aristotelian Politics contains a much more empirical grasp of how politics works in the
real political world. Aristotle’s chief contribution to political science is to bring the subject matter
of politics within the scope of the methods which he was already using to investigate other
aspects of nature. The naturalistic approach to politics is far from simple-minded. Aristotle does
not think that everything which just happens in the world is natural. The processes of nature are
subject to endless vicissitudes. Political science is meant to be useful, and political science’s
function as Aristotle sees it is to identify those aspects of political life which operate as nature
intended.
“Man perfected by society is the best of all animals; he is the most terrible of all when he lives
without law and without justice. If he finds himself an individual who cannot live in society,

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 P a g e | 10

or who pretends he has need of only his own resources, do not consider him as a member of
humanity; he is a savage beast or a god”
- Aristotle

The Structure of Government

”The Government is a contrivance of human wisodm to provide for human wants.”
– Edmund Burke
”In all tyrannical governents the supreme majesty or the rights both of making and ennfoecing laws, in
vested in the same or one and the same body of men, and when these two powers are united together there is
no poblic liberty.”
- William Blackstone
Threefold classification of fuctions can be categorized in underlying the principles that provide
the structure of government. An enquiry may now be made into the detailed arrangement of the
different branches of government. Today, in all civilized States, the three functions of government
are clearly distinguished and each functions of government are clearly distinguished and each
function is assigned to its appropriate organ; (i) the Legislature, (ii) the Executive, with the
enforcing of the orders of the courts, the carrying out the general rules emobdied in statues and
with the gneral administation of the business of the state and (iii) the Judiciary, or law-
interpreting organ, the application of general rules to particular cause.

The Legislature
The term ’legislature’ derives from the Latin word for law and it is simplistic to say that
’legislatures make law’. So, the legislature is the law-making department of the governemnt. The
legislative work is performed by parliament or an assembly. The making of law has assumed
incresning importance with the progress of civilization. Laws must be formulated before they can
be carried into effect or interpreted by law courts.
The legislatue, therefore, is regarded as the most important of the organs of the state. Law
making comes first before law is applied and law breaker is punished. Therefore, it seems that law
making departemnt is more important. But this is not always true in every country. However, law
making is the great and overruling power in every free government. Law-making power is placed
in a representative body known by different names in different countries such as Parliament in
England, Congress in the US, Reichstag in Germany, Duam in Russia, Diet in Japan , Lok Subha in
India, National People’s Congress in China, House of People’s Representative in Indonesia,
National Assembly in the Philippines and the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw in Myanmar.
Structure of Legislature: Size and Terms of the Houses
A legislature should be small enough to allow efficient debate, yet large enouch to permit
representation of all segments of the nation’s population. Leacock said that the legislative body
must consist of many different sections of the community. But, if the size of the legislature
becomes bog, varius complications arise in conducting the business before the House. Effective
debate is imposible in large body. A few persons only get an opportunity for speaking their mind
and the rest remain silent auditors. On the other hand, if the size of the legislature is very small,
NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs
 P a g e | 11

one representative has to be elected by a very large number of voters. In this case, it becomes well-
nigh impossible for the representative to maintain any genuine personal relations with the
electorate. Laski argues that no legislature ought ever to exceed five hundred members, if it is to
perfom its fuction efficently.
Legislatures vary in size in the world. Some states such as Sri lanka, New Zealand, and
Australia have between and 100 and 300 numbers. Some states such as the USA , Canada and
France have between 400 and 600 members. Others like Japan and Germany have the members
from 600 to 800. The Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (Congress) in Myanmar has 664 members. The term of
the legislature also vaires considerbly. The popularly elected members should have a term long
enough to permit them to gain experience in their duties, and shot enough to keep them
responsible to the electorate. Remaining permanet legislture in power for a long time is not
compatible with democratic principles as too long a term is likely to destroy its sense of fidelity
and responsibility to the electorate. Conversely, too short a term will deprive them of the
opportunity of duration of the legislature should be neither too long nor too short. A four or five
yera term is regarde as the best. The example of two year term is the American House of
Representatives. Three year term is in New Aealand. Four year tems exist in Japan and Germany.
Five year terms are in the UK, China, India (Lower House), France and My anmar. A term of six
years is found in the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and India (Upper House). The example of the highest
term of seven years is in Turkey.
Functions of the Legislature
Of the three organs of the government, the legislature is regarded as the most important,
because the executive and the judiciary are to work on the basis of the laws made by the
legislature. Legislative function, however, depends largely on the nature and character of law-
making bodies. Legislatures under dictatorship or legislatuers of dependent countries like India
before 1947 enjoyed little powers. They are merely consultaive in character. The legislatures in
countires having a parliamentary form of government are the most powerful, exercising its
control over almost all the spheres of governemntal activitiy. The executive is subordinate to the
legislature in this form of government as in England and France. In the presidential form, there is
an equal balance of powers, between the legislatuer and the executive. The Consitution of the
USA provides for mutual checks and balances and thus preents the encroachment upon the
sphere of one by the other. The legislatuer as an institution grew out of the elaboration of the
governemntal porcess and the emergence of democratic forms. The functiolns of the moder
legislature inevitably reflect its original purposes and their evolution. The maor functison of
legislature are:
1. Representation of opinion and interests
2. Formulation of policy
3. Control of finance
4. Supervision of the exective and
5. Enactment of law.

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 P a g e | 12

Legislative System
There are two legislative system (1) Unicameral System and (2) Bicameral System.

1. Unicameral Legislature
When the legislature consists of one house, it is called unicameral and when it consits of
two chambers, it is known as bicameral system. The reason for the adoption of the two-chambered
system are firstly that the experiment of having unicameral system did not prove successful in
many contries especially in England during the Commonwealth under Cromwell and in France
during the Revoluion. Secondly, under the unicameral system, the many advantages accruing
from the bicameral legislature are lost to a country.
Theoretical advantages of a unicameral legislature are that it can avoid duplication of
effort, expense, and needless argument; that it provides the electorate with a focus of
responsibility for legislative actions; that it may act more quickly in the law-making process; and
finally, that it is more democratically elected. However, these persuasive arguments may appear,
they are ot easily proved, nor do they expalin the incidence of unicameral houses.
2. Bicameral Legislature
Legislature composed of two chambers is called bicameral legislature. The legislature in
most of the states consists of two chambers. Generally, these chambers are named as upper house
and lower house. Most of the states of the world have adopted the bicameral system for its
mainfold advantages. First, the existence of a second chamber prvents the passage of hasty and ill-
considered legislation by a single house. A second chamber interposes delay between the
introduction and final adoption of a measure tand thus affords time for reflection and
deliberation. ”The necessity of the second chamber”, says Lecky, ”to exercise a controlling,
modifying, retarding influence, has acquired almost the position of an axiom”.
Secondly, it is argued that a second chabmer affords protection to the individual against
the despotism of a single chamber. The existence of a second chamber is said to be a guarantee of
liberty as well as to some chambered legislature, conscious of having only itself to consult, may
abuse its power, and try to absorb the powers of the executive and the judiciary. According to
Bryce, ”the necessity of two chambers is based on the belief that the innate tendency of an
assembly is to become hateful, tyrannical and corrupt, and needs to be checked by the existence of
another house of equal authority”.
A third advantage of the bicameral system is that it givers representation to special
interests or classes in the state. In almost every state there are different classes, such as, labour and
capital, nobels and commons etc., and unless every section of the community is represented in the
legislature, there would be oppressionof one class by another.
Fourthly, a second chamber based on the principle of nomination affords a chance to able
men to enter the legislature. Some eminent people do not like to undergo the trouble and
botheration of election, but their consel my be very valuable. Bryce thainks that in the present age
when people are losing their faith in politicians, there is special need of creating a second chamber
as a kind of reservoir of special knowledge. The Upper House should have a longer tenure than
the Lower Chamber, and should consist of more experienced men.
NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs
 P a g e | 13

Another advantage of doubtful merit is claimed for the bicameral system. Difference of
opinion between the two Houses makes the executive stronger as it can appeal from one House to
another. It amy be said that the bicameral system maintains the independence of the executive.
Gettle says ”two houses checking each other, give greater freedmom to the executive, and in the
long run secure the best interests of both departments.”

The Executive
”The Government is a contrivance of human wisodm to provide for human wants.”
– Edmund Burke
”Which is the best government? That whcich teaches self-government.”
- Goethe
”For only as men are brought into counsel, and stae their own needs and interests, can the
general interests of a great poeple be compounded into a policy that will be suitable to all ... It
ought to be a matter of common counsel; a matter of united counsel; a matter of mutual
comprehension.”
- Woodrow Wilson
The Executive: Political and Permanent
The executive is in charge of the different departments of state activityand also control the
insturments of physical force, that is, the military, the police, etc. The may largely help or hinder
the attainment of the objects of the state. The citizens, in their day-to-day life, come in contact
mainly iwth the executive. The executive, again, is not the mere agent of the legislature, for there
are many matters in respect of which it has the power to take the initiative. This brings us to
thedistinction made between two types of the executive. In a democaritc country, directly or
indirectly elected by the people and responsible to them, is a body of public men who decide
policy an drun the government, as long as they enjoy public confidence. They consitute for the
time being, the political executive of a government.
The other type is a body of public servants, who constitute the permanent executive. They
carry out the policy laid down by the government of the day; they are not interested in parties or
political programmes. They would, when they asked, advise the ministers on technical matters,
give all necessary information and make their suggestions to their departmental heads, through
proper channels. They are also responsible fo rcontinuity in the work of governments. When
political parties contest an election or when one set of ministers are replaced by another set, day-
to-day administration is not affected; the permanent executive carries on the work.
The term ”executive” denotes all those executive and administrative functionaries in a state
including everybody from the chief executive head down to the police constable who are
concerned with the executive of law. In a wider sense, therefore, the term includes all the
governmental agencies with the exception of the legislature and the judiciary. In a narrow sense,
the term denotes only the supreme executive, amy be an individual or a body, who is concerned
withthe formulation of policies and supervision and control of other subordinate departments
which carry out the will of the state.

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 P a g e | 14

When the executive is responsible to the legislature, usually to the lower house, the
executive is called Parliamentary Executive. When the executive is independent of the control of
the legislature, it is called non-parliamentary or Presidential Executive. The executive may be one
person or many, but in the most complete definition, the executive branch is made up of those
leaders who direct and carry out public policy. Working executives in the principal modern states
may be broadly classified into five major types: parliamentary, presidential, collegial, communist,
and dictatorial.
The Parliamentary Excuctive
The most widely adopted form of representative and constitutional government is the
parliamentary executive, or as it is sometimes called, the cabinet system. The central authority in
Great Britain is taken to include the King-in-Parliament. When a new election takes place, the
leader of the House of Commons, is entrusted with the duty of forming a Cabinet. The Cabinet
consists of the principal ministers. These, with the help of other ministers and permanent officials,
carry on the work of government. When the policy of the Cabinet is not supported by the majority
in the House of Commons, the ministers in a body resign, new government is formed. This form
of government is known as Cabinet or Parliamentary.
The Presidential Executive
”The independence of the legislative and executive power is the specific quality of Presidential
Government, just as their fusion and combination is the precise principle of Cabinet
Government.”
- Walter Bagehot
The presidential system provides for a chief executive who is elected for a definite term of
office, who holds a wide public mandate as a result of his election, an dwho in independent of the
legislative branch for his tenure. His formal power are defined in the documentary constitution
. Because he is both chief of state and politicla leader of the government, his prestige and
authority are doubly enhanced, example the Philippines and the USA.
In the USA, the President who is the chief of the executive, is elected by the people. The
members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, which together constitute the Congress,
are also elected by the people. Bothe the President and the Congress are responsible to the people
of the US directly an dnot to each other.
The President carries on the administration with the help of ministers appointed by him,
assisted by a number of permanent officials. Thus, the executive in the US is neither appointed by
the legislature nor dismissable by it. In respect of foreign affairs and certain appointments, the
President has to seek the approval of the Senate. This system of government is known as the
Presidential. The executive power may be broadly classified into diplomatic power,
administrative power, military power, judicial power or pardoning power, veto power, and
legislative and ordinance-making power.

The Judiciary
The judiciary decides disputes and punishes law-breakers. In order that judges may give proper
decisions, the independence of the judiciary must be assured. This is generally secured by making
NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs
 P a g e | 15

their tenure of office fixed, subject to removal in case of misconduct. It may be noted that in
interpreting laws, the judges sometimes make laws.
Judiciary consists of a body of judges acting individually or in groups. The powers of
judges vary from state to state. In the UK, the Judges are bound to apply any law passed by the
legislature. In the US, the Judges of the Supreme Court can override the enactments of the
legislature on the constitutional ground that the legislature has no right to enact.
Nature and Origin of the State
Aristotle defines a state is only realized when there is an association of families and
households in well-living with a view to complete and independent existence. He said that the
state was an association of human beings and was the highest form of human association. The
state was necessary for the satisfaction of men’s needs and desires. The most desirable life for the
state cannot be known unless people know the nature of the most desirable life for the individual.
The elements of welfare or of a happy life for the individual, Aristotle says, are three: external
goods, goods of the body, and goods of the soul. The happy man must possess all three, but in
different proportions. Happiness for the individual, therefore, ultimately depends upon the goods
of the soul, which are character and intelligence. The same is true of the state. The best state is one
which is happy and doing well; but it is impossible to be happy and do well without acting
virtuously; and the virtues of a state are in effect and form identical with those of an individual.
The best life therefore, whether for the individual or for the state, is on which possesses virtue
furnished with external advantages to such a degree as to be capable of actions according to
virtue. The best polity, therefore, is necessarily the system under which anybody can do best and
live happily.
He has a theory of social dynamics as well as of social ethics. The virtuous character of the
state, he says, is not an affair of fortune, but of knowledge and of moral purpose. Such character
can only be realized when all the citizens who enjoy political rights are virtuous. The point to be
considered, therefore, is the means by which a man becomes virtuous. There are three means by
which a person becomes good and virtuous.They are nature, habit and reason. Nature is given
and is beyond control of man but habit and reason are largely matters of education.

General Theory of Constitutions and Forms of Constitutions

Aristotle states that “the politician and lawgiver is wholly occupied with the city-state, and
the constitution is a certain way of organizing those who inhabit the city-state”. Aristotle defines
the constitution (politeia) as a way of organizing the offices of the city-state, particularly the
sovereign office. The constitution thus defines the governing body, which takes different
forms.For example, in a democracy it is the people, and in an oligarchy it is a select few (the
wealthy or well born). This sets the stage for the fundamental claim of Aristotle's constitutional
theory: “constitutions which aim at the common advantage are correct and just without
qualification, whereas those which aim only at the advantage of the rulers are deviant and unjust,
because they involve despotic rule which is inappropriate for a community of free persons”. The
distinction between correct and deviant constitutions is combined with the observation that the

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs

 P a g e | 16

government may consist of one person, a few, or a multitude. Hence, there are six possible
constitutional forms.
Table 1: Types of State and Government

State/Government Correct Deviant

One Ruler Kingship Tyranny

Few Rulers Aristocracy Oligarchy

Many Rulers Polity Democracy

The six-fold classification sets the stage for Aristotle's inquiry into the best constitution,
although it is modified in various . For example, he observes that the dominant class in oligarchy
is typically the wealthy, whereas in democracy , it is the poor.So that these economic classes
should be included in the definition of these forms. Also, polity is later characterized as a kind of
“mixed” constitution by rule of the “middle” group of citizens, a moderately wealthy class
between the rich and poor. Aristotle's constitutional theory is based on his theory of justice.
Aristotle distinguishes two different but related senses of “justice” — universal and particular —
both of which play an important role in his constitutional theory.

Citizenship
Since Aristotle had rejected slavery by conquest on the highly defensible ground that to
overpower people does not mean that we are superior to them in nature. Moreover the use of
force amy or many not be justified, in which case enslvement could very well be the product and
extension of an unjust act. At the sametime, he proposed proper treatment of slaves and liberty as
an advantage that should be always held as the reward of their good services.
Aristotle begins with a definition of the citizen, since the city-state is by nature a collective
entity, a multitude of citizens. Citizens are distinguished from other inhabitants, such as resident
aliens and slaves; and even children and seniors are not unqualified citizens (nor are most
ordinary workers). After further analysis he defines the citizen as a person who has the right to
participate in deliberative or judicial office. In Athens, for example, citizens had the right to attend
the assembly, the council, and other bodies, or to sit on juries.
Aristotle also believed in the inequality of citizenship. He held that the basic qualification
for citizenship was a person’s ability to share in ruling and being ruled in trun. A citizen had the
right and the obligation to participate in administration of justice. Since citizens would therefore
have to sit in the assembly and in the law courts, they would have to have both ample time and an
appropriae temperament and character. For this reason Aristotle did not believe that laborers
should be citizens, as they had neither the time nor the appropriate nental development, nor
could they benefit from the experience of sharing in the political process.

NDC 2015 Political Science Hand-outs