IGNOU FREE MPS-003 India: Democracy and Development Solved Guess Paper 2025

1. Discuss the nature of relationship between democracy and development in post‑Independence India (e.g., 1947–67).

The relationship between democracy and development in post-Independence India (1947–1967) is a complex and nuanced one, characterized by a unique experiment in political governance. India’s early years after independence were marked by the simultaneous pursuit of democratic consolidation and economic development, a rare occurrence among newly decolonized nations. Unlike many post-colonial states that turned to authoritarianism for the sake of rapid development, India adopted and sustained a democratic political system while attempting a path of planned economic growth. The interplay between these two ideals — democracy and development — both reinforced and challenged each other in the first two decades after independence.

Democratic Foundations and Institutions

At independence in 1947, India faced enormous developmental challenges: widespread poverty, illiteracy, partition-induced displacement, weak infrastructure, and a colonial economy that had been systematically drained. Yet, despite these hurdles, the Indian leadership, under Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and the Indian National Congress, opted for a democratic Constitution, adopted in 1950, that enshrined universal adult franchise, fundamental rights, and parliamentary institutions. This bold decision to give every adult the right to vote — irrespective of literacy, caste, class, or gender — laid a strong foundation for participatory politics.

The success of the first general elections in 1951–52, conducted under the supervision of the Election Commission, and the peaceful transfer of power thereafter, marked a significant milestone in the consolidation of Indian democracy. Political pluralism and a free press further strengthened democratic norms, even as the Congress remained the dominant party.

Planned Economic Development

Simultaneously, the Indian state undertook an ambitious agenda of economic development. Nehru, influenced by socialist and Fabian ideals, emphasized state-led industrialization, import-substitution, and self-reliance. The Planning Commission was established in 1950, and India embarked on a series of Five-Year Plans, starting with the First Five-Year Plan (1951–56), which focused on agriculture, irrigation, and rural development. The Second Plan (1956–61), under the influence of economist P.C. Mahalanobis, shifted focus to heavy industries and public sector development.

This model, often termed the “Nehruvian consensus,” aimed to create a mixed economy where the state played a leading role in resource allocation, infrastructure development, and industrial growth. The state intervened in key sectors, controlled the commanding heights of the economy, and attempted to balance growth with social justice.

Tensions and Complementarities

The relationship between democracy and development during this period was not without tensions. The democratic framework often meant slow decision-making, bureaucratic red tape, and resistance from vested interests, which could hinder swift implementation of development policies. Moreover, electoral compulsions occasionally led to populist measures rather than economically sound decisions.

Yet, democracy also provided legitimacy and stability to the developmental agenda. Regular elections, local self-governance through panchayati raj (though not fully realized in this period), and the presence of an active opposition — despite Congress dominance — ensured a degree of accountability. The state’s developmental role was often

A network error occurred. Please check your connection and try again. If this issue persists please contact us through our help center at help.openai.com.

2. Examine the Constitution as an instrument of socio-economic transformation.

The Constitution of India, adopted on January 26, 1950, is not merely a legal document outlining the structure of governance but a transformative charter aimed at reshaping Indian society. It embodies the aspirations of a newly independent nation to overcome centuries of colonial exploitation, social inequality, and economic backwardness. In doing so, the Constitution has played a pivotal role as an instrument of socio-economic transformation, promoting justice, equality, and inclusive development.

1. Preamble as a Guiding Vision

The Preamble of the Constitution clearly articulates the goals of justice (social, economic, and political), liberty, equality, and fraternity. These ideals reflect the commitment of the framers to build a new India rooted in democratic values and inclusive growth. The emphasis on social justice and economic justice in particular establishes the intent to transform a hierarchical and unequal society into one based on fairness and equity.

2. Fundamental Rights and Social Equality

Part III of the Constitution, which deals with Fundamental Rights, is crucial in addressing historical inequalities and ensuring individual dignity. Articles 14 to 18 establish the principle of equality before law and prohibit discrimination on the grounds of caste, religion, sex, or race. The abolition of untouchability (Article 17) and the guarantee of equal access to public spaces and employment have helped uplift marginalized communities like Dalits and Adivasis.

Additionally, Article 15(4) and 16(4) empower the state to make special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes, laying the groundwork for affirmative action and reservation policies in education and employment.

3. Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs)

Part IV of the Constitution, the Directive Principles of State Policy, though non-justiciable, provide a roadmap for socio-economic governance. They instruct the state to strive for:

• Minimizing inequality in income and status (Article 38)
• Ensuring adequate means of livelihood for all citizens (Article 39)
• Equal pay for equal work for both men and women
• Providing free and compulsory education (Article 45, now Article 21A after the 86th Amendment)
• Improving public health and nutrition

These directives have guided policies such as land reforms, minimum wage laws, the expansion of public education, and welfare schemes like MGNREGA and the National Food Security Act.

4. Socio-Economic Justice Through Legislation

The Constitution has enabled the enactment of key laws aimed at restructuring socio-economic relations. For example:

• Land reform acts abolished the zamindari system and redistributed land.
• Labour laws secured workers’ rights and regulated working conditions.
• Social welfare legislations, such as the Hindu Code Bills, enhanced gender justice in matters of inheritance and marriage.

Through such laws, the Constitution has directly intervened in transforming feudal, patriarchal, and exploitative structures.

5. Federalism and Decentralization

The Constitution promotes socio-economic development through federalism and decentralization. The 73rd and 74th Amendments (added later but inspired by constitutional goals) have empowered local self-governments, ensuring that development reaches the grassroots. This has enabled communities to participate in planning and implementing welfare programs.

6. Judicial Activism and Public Interest Litigation

The judiciary has interpreted the Constitution in an expansive manner to promote socio-economic justice. Through Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and reinterpretation of Article 21 (Right to Life), the courts have made education, health, environment, shelter, and livelihood part of fundamental rights, thereby enforcing the Constitution’s transformative promise.

Conclusion

In sum, the Indian Constitution is not a static legal code but a dynamic framework designed to transform Indian society. By ensuring equality, guiding policy, empowering the marginalized, and expanding rights, it has acted as a powerful tool for socio-economic change. While challenges like poverty, caste discrimination, and gender inequality persist, the Constitution continues to provide the legal and moral foundation for building a just and equitable India.

3. Critically evaluate the role of Parliament in India.

The Parliament of India is the supreme legislative body of the country and plays a central role in the democratic governance of the nation. Comprising the Lok Sabha (House of the People) and the Rajya Sabha (Council of States), it performs a range of essential functions: lawmaking, overseeing the executive, ensuring representation, and facilitating debate on national issues. As a symbol of democratic sovereignty, the Parliament is expected to serve as a watchdog of public interest and a forum for resolving conflicts and building consensus. However, its performance has come under scrutiny due to increasing dysfunction, disruptions, and weakening accountability mechanisms.

Positive Contributions of Parliament

1. Lawmaking and Legislative Agenda:Parliament is the primary law-making institution. It has passed a wide range of laws on matters of national importance—from economic reforms and social welfare to national security and health. Notable legislative achievements include the Right to Information Act (2005), Goods and Services Tax (GST, 2017), and the MGNREGA Act (2005). These laws reflect Parliament’s ability to steer socio-economic progress.
2. Accountability of the Executive:One of Parliament’s most vital functions is to hold the executive (Council of Ministers) accountable. Through mechanisms like Question Hour, Zero Hour, parliamentary committees, and motions of no-confidence, members can scrutinize government performance, expose inefficiencies, and demand explanations.
3. Representation of the People:Parliament ensures that diverse voices, regions, and communities find representation in national policy debates. The Lok Sabha reflects the will of the people through direct elections, while the Rajya Sabha represents states and union territories, preserving the federal balance.
4. Budgetary Control:The Union Budget must be passed by Parliament, giving it direct control over public finances. The process includes detailed debates and departmental scrutiny, which help ensure fiscal transparency and proper allocation of national resources.

Challenges and Limitations

1. Decline in Quality of Debates:Parliamentary debates, once known for their intellectual depth and political nuance, have seen a decline in recent years. Often, sessions are marred by noisy disruptions, walkouts, and adjournments. This undermines the deliberative function of Parliament.
2. Decreasing Productivity:The number of sitting days and the time spent on detailed scrutiny of bills has significantly reduced. Many laws are passed without proper debate or referral to standing committees. For instance, several key bills have been passed within minutes, raising concerns about hurried legislation.
3. Executive Dominance:The growing power of the executive branch, especially when the ruling party enjoys a large majority, has weakened Parliament’s oversight role. The government often bypasses Parliament through ordinances or limits debate on sensitive issues.
4. Ineffective Committee System:While parliamentary committees are meant to offer in-depth examination of legislation and policy, their recommendations are not binding, and their proceedings are not always made public. Additionally, there has been a trend of bypassing these committees in the legislative process.
5. Criminalization and Commercialization of Politics:A significant number of MPs face serious criminal charges, and rising election expenditure has made Parliament vulnerable to influence from moneyed interests. This raises questions about the credibility and ethics of the institution.
6. Lack of Women and Minority Representation:Despite being a representative institution, women and minorities remain underrepresented in Parliament. Women currently make up less than 15% of the Lok Sabha, far below global averages.

Conclusion

Parliament remains a cornerstone of Indian democracy, entrusted with shaping the nation’s future through laws, debates, and accountability mechanisms. However, for it to fulfill its constitutional mandate effectively, reforms are necessary. These include strengthening the committee system, increasing session days, ensuring ethical conduct among MPs, and encouraging more inclusive representation. A strong, functional Parliament is essential for upholding the principles of democracy, transparency, and rule of law. Its revival as a vibrant, deliberative body is crucial for India’s democratic and developmental future.

4. Discuss mass/working‑class participation and its impact on political parties.

The participation of the masses, particularly the working class, has played a critical role in shaping India’s democratic and political landscape. Since independence, the expansion of political awareness, electoral participation, and organized labor movements have significantly influenced the policies, structure, and ideological orientation of political parties. Mass and working-class involvement has not only deepened democracy in India but also challenged elite dominance, compelling parties to address issues of social justice, labor rights, and economic redistribution.

Rise of Mass and Working-Class Participation

In post-independence India, especially from the 1950s onward, the working class began to emerge as an important political force. Trade unions, industrial workers, rural laborers, and informal sector workers mobilized through political and labor organizations. These movements were driven by demands for fair wages, better working conditions, land rights, and social dignity.

Mass participation was further strengthened by universal adult franchise, which empowered even the poorest and most marginalized citizens with a political voice. Over the decades, electoral participation by workers, peasants, Dalits, Adivasis, and other disadvantaged groups steadily increased, transforming India into one of the world’s largest and most participatory democracies.

Impact on Political Parties

1. Ideological Shifts and Class Politics

The growing strength of the working class forced political parties to respond to their demands. The Indian National Congress, which initially represented elite nationalist interests, began incorporating socialist rhetoric and pro-poor policies—especially under Prime Ministers like Indira Gandhi. Slogans like “Garibi Hatao” (Remove Poverty) reflected attempts to appeal to the working class and rural poor.

Leftist parties such as the Communist Party of India (CPI) and the Communist Party of India (Marxist), which emerged from labor and peasant movements, explicitly represented working-class interests. They organized strikes, led land reform campaigns, and emphasized class struggle. Their mass base allowed them to win electoral power in states like Kerala, West Bengal, and Tripura, where they enacted progressive reforms in education, health, and labor rights.

2. Growth of Labor Unions and Political Affiliation

Major political parties established trade union wings to organize and mobilize workers. For example:

• INTUC (Indian National Trade Union Congress) was affiliated with the Congress.
• AITUC (All India Trade Union Congress) was linked to the CPI.
• CITU (Centre of Indian Trade Unions) was tied to CPI(M).
• BMS (Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh) was connected to the BJP/RSS.

These unions served as channels for working-class demands and shaped the labor policies of their parent parties. In return, political parties used these organizations to mobilize mass support during elections and agitations.

3. Policy Influence and Welfare Legislation

Due to pressure from mass movements and working-class activism, political parties across the spectrum introduced welfare measures such as:

• Minimum wage laws
• Social security schemes (e.g., Employees’ Provident Fund, ESI)
• National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA)
• Land redistribution programs

These policies were responses to the organized political assertion of workers and rural laborers and became critical to the electoral strategies of mainstream parties.

4. Electoral Behavior and Vote Banks

Mass participation turned workers and peasants into key electoral constituencies or “vote banks.” Political parties began crafting targeted policies and campaigns to appeal to these groups. Caste, class, and regional identities often intersected, leading to the rise of parties like:

• Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), which combined Dalit and working-class mobilization
• Samajwadi Party, rooted in peasant and backward caste politics
• Regional parties like DMK and TMC, which gained support through labor mobilization and welfare populism

Challenges and Decline

In recent years, working-class influence has weakened due to the informalization of labor, decline in trade union power, and corporate influence in politics. Many political parties now rely more on populism, identity politics, and media campaigns than on sustained mass mobilization. Nevertheless, workers continue to participate electorally, and labor issues still shape political discourse—especially in times of economic crisis or unemployment.

Conclusion

Mass and working-class participation has been a vital force in shaping the direction and priorities of Indian political parties. It brought economic issues, labor rights, and social justice to the forefront of political debate. While its direct influence may have declined in recent decades, the legacy of mass mobilization continues to shape India’s democratic and policy landscape. Political parties ignore the voice of the working class at their own peril in a deeply unequal and labor-dependent society.

5. Analyse the changing role and nature of civil society in the era of globalization

Civil society, broadly defined as the sphere of voluntary associations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), community groups, social movements, and individuals operating outside the state and market, has undergone significant transformation in the era of globalization. Globalization, characterized by the increasing interconnectedness of economies, cultures, and communication, has expanded the scope, reach, and complexity of civil society, while also posing new challenges and opportunities. The traditional role of civil society—as a mediator between the state and the public—has evolved to include global advocacy, digital mobilization, and transnational collaboration.

Expanded Scope and Influence

Globalization has enabled civil society organizations (CSOs) to operate across borders, addressing global issues such as climate change, human rights, labor exploitation, gender equality, and sustainable development. Civil society is no longer limited to local or national contexts; many organizations now influence international policy and collaborate with global institutions like the United Nations, World Bank, and World Trade Organization.

For example, NGOs played a key role in shaping the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and later the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Campaigns like Make Poverty History and the Climate Justice Movement reflect civil society’s increasing ability to mobilize support and exert pressure on global platforms.

Shift from Confrontation to Collaboration

Historically, civil society was seen as a counterweight to state authority, often opposing authoritarianism or demanding rights. In the globalization era, however, civil society has also become a partner in governance. Many CSOs work in collaboration with governments, international agencies, and corporations to implement development programs, deliver welfare services, and monitor human rights.

This shift from confrontation to cooperation is visible in sectors like health, education, environment, and disaster relief, where NGOs are often seen as more efficient and flexible than state machinery. However, this also raises concerns about co-optation and loss of autonomy, as civil society risks becoming an extension of state or donor agendas.

Use of Technology and Digital Platforms

Globalization and the digital revolution have empowered civil society with new tools of communication and mobilization. Social media, digital petitions, crowdfunding platforms, and virtual campaigns have enabled even small organizations to reach global audiences. Movements like #MeToo, Fridays for Future, and Black Lives Matter have demonstrated how digital activism can transcend borders and bring about significant political and social change.

Digital technologies have also enabled citizen journalism, real-time monitoring, and e-participation, increasing civic engagement and accountability.

Challenges in the Globalized Era

Despite these opportunities, civil society faces several challenges in the age of globalization:

1. Shrinking Civic Space:
   Many governments have imposed restrictions on NGOs through foreign funding laws, surveillance, and repression. In countries like India, Russia, and China, civil society organizations have been accused of being influenced by foreign interests, leading to the cancellation of licenses and arrests of activists.
2. Dependence on Donor Funding:
   As many CSOs rely on international donors, there is concern that they may prioritize donor-driven agendas over local needs. This has led to critiques of the “NGO-ization” of activism—where professionalized NGOs displace grassroots movements and weaken community-based resistance.
3. Fragmentation and Representation Issues:
   The growing number of NGOs and advocacy groups has led to fragmentation within civil society. Questions also arise about their legitimacy—who do they represent, and how accountable are they to the people they claim to serve?
4. Co-optation by Market Forces:
   With the rise of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and philanthro-capitalism, civil society increasingly interacts with corporate actors. While this brings resources and innovation, it also risks blurring the line between public interest and private profit.

Conclusion

Globalization has fundamentally altered the nature and role of civil society. It has empowered civil society to operate globally, expanded its influence in policy-making, and enhanced its capacity through digital tools. At the same time, civil society faces challenges of autonomy, legitimacy, and survival in a world where both state repression and market co-optation are growing. To remain effective and relevant, civil society must balance cooperation with independence, adapt to technological shifts, and ensure that it remains rooted in the needs and aspirations of the people it seeks to represent.

6. Discuss the relationship between procedural and substantive democracy.

Democracy is a multifaceted concept that goes beyond merely holding elections. Scholars often distinguish between procedural democracy and substantive democracy to understand its varying dimensions. While procedural democracy emphasizes the mechanics and rules of democratic governance, substantive democracy is concerned with the actual realization of democratic ideals such as equality, justice, and human dignity. Both aspects are interconnected, and the health of a democracy depends on the balance and interaction between them.

What is Procedural Democracy?

Procedural democracy refers to the formal institutions and processes that enable citizens to participate in political decision-making. This includes:

• Regular, free, and fair elections
• Universal suffrage
• Rule of law
• Separation of powers
• Civil liberties (such as freedom of speech, assembly, and the press)
• Transparent and accountable institutions

The emphasis is on how democracy functions — ensuring that there are mechanisms for representation, conflict resolution, and power transfer without violence. A country can be considered a procedural democracy if it adheres to these formal processes, even if social inequalities and power imbalances persist.

What is Substantive Democracy?

Substantive democracy, on the other hand, focuses on what democracy delivers. It is concerned with the actual realization of democratic values such as:

• Socio-economic equality
• Social justice
• Protection of minority rights
• Equal access to education, healthcare, and opportunities
• Genuine political participation beyond voting

A substantive democracy ensures that the democratic process leads to the empowerment of citizens and the reduction of inequalities. It goes beyond formal rights to examine whether people can meaningfully exercise those rights.

Relationship Between Procedural and Substantive Democracy

Though distinct in focus, procedural and substantive democracy are deeply interconnected.

1. Foundation and Framework:
   Procedural democracy provides the framework or skeleton upon which substantive democracy can be built. Without regular elections, rule of law, and freedom of expression, there is no stable platform for achieving broader democratic goals. Thus, procedural elements are necessary but not sufficient.
2. Means vs. Ends:
   Procedural democracy is often seen as the means, while substantive democracy is the end. A democracy that only emphasizes procedures may remain formalistic and hollow if it fails to address issues of poverty, exclusion, and inequality. Conversely, without procedural safeguards, efforts to achieve substantive goals can slip into authoritarianism.
3. Mutual Reinforcement:
   A well-functioning procedural democracy can reinforce substantive outcomes by enabling public debate, accountability, and peaceful change. For instance, an independent judiciary and free press can expose corruption and ensure fair policy implementation, contributing to more equitable outcomes.
4. Democratic Deficit:
   Many countries exhibit a democratic deficit where procedural democracy exists without substantive democracy. Elections may be held regularly, but the benefits of democracy may be unequally distributed. This has been a concern in many post-colonial states, including India, where democratic institutions exist alongside persistent social and economic disparities.

Challenges in Balancing Both

1. Elite Capture:
   Procedural mechanisms can be manipulated by elites through money power, media influence, and patronage networks, weakening substantive outcomes.
2. Populism and Majoritarianism:
   Procedural legitimacy (winning elections) is often used by majoritarian governments to justify policies that undermine minority rights, press freedom, or judicial independence—thus weakening substantive democracy.
3. Economic Inequality:
   Even in robust procedural democracies, deep economic inequalities can hinder substantive participation. If only the wealthy can influence policies, the spirit of democracy is undermined.
4. Civil Society and Participation:
   Substantive democracy requires active civic engagement beyond voting. However, civil society is often constrained by restrictive laws, political repression, or lack of resources.

Conclusion

In essence, procedural and substantive democracy must go hand-in-hand. While procedural democracy ensures the legitimacy and structure of governance, substantive democracy ensures that the fruits of democratic rule are fairly distributed among all citizens. A democracy that focuses only on procedures without delivering substantive justice risks becoming shallow and unstable. Conversely, substantive goals pursued without procedural safeguards can lead to authoritarian tendencies. For democracy to be meaningful and resilient, both its form and substance must be cultivated and protected.

7. Explain the impact of media on public policy in India.

In a democratic society like India, the media is often referred to as the “fourth pillar” of democracy due to its vital role in shaping public opinion, creating awareness, and influencing the formulation and implementation of public policy. With the growth of print media, television, and especially digital platforms in recent decades, the media’s ability to impact policymaking has significantly increased. While media can play a positive role in promoting transparency, accountability, and citizen participation, it can also distort public discourse through sensationalism, bias, and misinformation.

Positive Impact of Media on Public Policy

1. Agenda-Setting Function:
   Media influences what the public thinks about by highlighting particular issues. This is known as the agenda-setting role of media. For example, sustained media coverage on issues like environmental degradation, farmer suicides, corruption, and violence against women has pushed these topics into the political spotlight, often leading to policy responses.
   • The Nirbhaya gang-rape case (2012) led to massive media coverage, public protests, and ultimately the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, which strengthened laws against sexual violence.
2. Public Awareness and Participation:
   Media acts as a bridge between the government and the public by disseminating information about policies, rights, and government schemes. Through news reports, talk shows, and social media campaigns, it encourages citizens to participate in debates and demand accountability.
   • Campaigns like “Swachh Bharat Abhiyan”, Digital India, and Jan Dhan Yojana gained mass traction largely due to media amplification.
3. Watchdog Role:
   Investigative journalism plays a critical role in exposing inefficiencies, corruption, and policy failures. This forces policymakers to act and reassess existing laws and programs.
   • The exposure of scams like the 2G spectrum scam and Commonwealth Games scam led to increased scrutiny over regulatory frameworks and public finance management.
4. Pressure on Government for Reform:
   The media creates public pressure that compels politicians and bureaucrats to respond. Continuous media scrutiny can force governments to take action, often in real-time.
   • Media coverage of migrant workers during the COVID-19 lockdown led to government interventions like special trains (Shramik Specials) and relief measures.

Negative Impact and Challenges

1. Sensationalism and “Trial by Media”:
   In the race for higher ratings or online engagement, media sometimes indulges in sensationalism, which can misrepresent facts and distort public opinion. This often leads to hasty or populist policymaking rather than evidence-based decisions.
   • Media-fueled hysteria in high-profile criminal cases can lead to public pressure on courts and police, undermining due process and justice.
2. Corporate and Political Bias:
   Many media houses are owned by large corporate groups or are affiliated with political parties. This affects the objectivity of media coverage and can lead to biased reporting that serves vested interests instead of the public.
   • Biased media narratives can manipulate electoral behavior and influence policy priorities that favor specific groups or ideologies.
3. Shallow Coverage of Complex Issues:
   Public policy often involves technical and complex subjects like taxation, climate change, health systems, and education reforms. Media tends to oversimplify or ignore such issues in favor of more sensational topics, thereby limiting informed policy debate.
4. Misinformation and Fake News:
   The rise of social media has also led to the spread of misinformation and rumors, which can provoke panic or lead to poor policy responses.
   • During the COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation about vaccines and remedies disrupted public health efforts and fueled hesitancy.

Conclusion

The media plays a powerful role in shaping public policy in India by informing, influencing, and pressuring policymakers. It acts as a mirror of public sentiment, a conduit for expert analysis, and a check on government action. However, its effectiveness is limited by commercial pressures, politicization, and ethical challenges. To ensure that media contributes positively to public policy, there must be greater emphasis on media ethics, fact-based journalism, and media literacy among citizens. A free, fair, and responsible media is essential for a vibrant democracy and effective governance in India.

9. Write an essay on farmers’/peasant movements in contemporary India

Farmers or peasant movements have long been a defining feature of India’s socio-political landscape. Rooted in colonial resistance and continuing through the post-independence era, these movements represent the collective voice of rural India, demanding justice, dignity, and economic security. In contemporary times, especially over the past two decades, farmers’ movements have gained renewed significance due to agrarian distress, policy neglect, and the growing influence of neoliberal economic reforms.

Background and Context

India’s agrarian sector supports over half of its population but contributes only around 15–18% of GDP. Despite being the backbone of the economy, farmers face multiple challenges: declining incomes, rising debt, unpredictable weather patterns, price volatility, and inadequate government support. These structural issues have led to widespread discontent, suicides, and mobilizations among the farming community.

Post-liberalization (after 1991), agricultural subsidies declined, market reforms were introduced, and public procurement mechanisms weakened. These changes, while intended to integrate Indian agriculture with global markets, often left small and marginal farmers vulnerable to exploitation and uncertainty.

Key Contemporary Farmers’ Movements

1. Maharashtra Farmers’ Long March (2018):

In March 2018, over 40,000 farmers under the banner of the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) marched 180 km from Nashik to Mumbai. Their demands included loan waivers, implementation of the Forest Rights Act, fair crop prices, and pension schemes. The peaceful and disciplined nature of the protest drew national attention and forced the Maharashtra government to agree to several of their demands.

2. Anti-Land Acquisition Protests:

Farmers and landowners in various parts of India have resisted forcible land acquisitions for industrial projects. The Niyamgiri Movement in Odisha (against Vedanta), Singur and Nandigram protests in West Bengal, and Jaitapur (against a nuclear power plant in Maharashtra) highlighted the need for fair compensation, consent, and environmental safeguards. These movements were crucial in shaping the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013.

3. Nationwide Farmers’ Protest (2020–2021):

The most significant farmers’ movement in recent history was the year-long protest against the three farm laws passed by the central government in 2020. Farmers, mainly from Punjab, Haryana, and western Uttar Pradesh, camped at Delhi’s borders for over a year. They feared that the laws would weaken the Minimum Support Price (MSP) system and allow corporate exploitation.

The protest saw massive participation, international solidarity, and peaceful resistance. After months of deadlock, the government repealed the farm laws in November 2021, marking a historic victory for the movement.

Key Characteristics of Contemporary Movements

• Mass Mobilization: These movements have involved large-scale participation across regions, cutting across caste, class, and gender lines.
• Democratic and Peaceful Protest: Most movements have maintained non-violent discipline, relying on constitutional means like petitions, marches, and sit-ins.
• Use of Media and Social Media: Farmers’ movements today effectively use digital platforms for mobilization, countering mainstream media narratives, and reaching global audiences.
• Leadership from Below: Many movements are decentralized, with local leadership and issue-based coalitions rather than centralized command.

Impact and Challenges

Farmers’ movements have succeeded in bringing agrarian issues into national consciousness. They have influenced policy debates around MSP, loan waivers, crop insurance, and land rights. However, several challenges remain:

• Fragmentation: The diversity of India’s agrarian communities sometimes leads to fragmented demands.
• Political Co-optation: Movements risk being absorbed or manipulated by political parties for electoral gains.
• State Repression: Protesters often face police action, legal cases, and vilification in the media.
• Structural Injustice: Deep-rooted inequalities, especially related to caste and gender, still affect movement inclusivity and leadership.

Conclusion

Contemporary farmers’ movements in India are a powerful reminder of the resilience and agency of rural citizens. They highlight not just economic demands but also democratic rights, social justice, and the need for inclusive policymaking. As India continues to urbanize and globalize, ensuring the welfare of its farming community remains essential for both social harmony and national development. Peasant movements, thus, remain central to shaping a more equitable and sustainable future.

10. Discuss ethnic politics and challenges to nation-building (e.g., North‑East India).

Ethnic politics refers to political mobilization based on ethnic identity—such as language, religion, tribe, or caste—often resulting in demands for autonomy, recognition, or even secession. In India, a diverse and multi-ethnic society, ethnic politics has played a critical role in shaping both the democratic structure and challenges of nation-building. The North-East region of India, home to a multitude of ethnic groups, provides a particularly illustrative case of how ethnic politics interacts with issues of identity, autonomy, and integration.

Ethnic Diversity in North-East India

North-East India comprises eight states—Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura, and Sikkim—and is marked by immense ethnic, linguistic, and cultural diversity. Over 200 indigenous communities inhabit the region, many of whom have distinct histories, languages, and socio-political institutions. This diversity, while enriching, has also posed unique challenges to the Indian nation-state in terms of integration, representation, and equitable development.

Ethnic Politics in the North-East

Ethnic politics in the region manifests in various forms:

1. Autonomy and Statehood Movements:
   Ethnic groups have often demanded greater autonomy or full-fledged statehood to protect their identity and rights. Examples include:
   • The creation of Nagaland (1963) after prolonged Naga nationalist agitation led by the Naga National Council (NNC).
   • The Mizo movement for independence in the 1960s, which culminated in the creation of Mizoram state (1987) after a peace accord.
2. Insurgency and Armed Conflict:
   Several insurgent groups—such as NSCN (National Socialist Council of Nagalim), ULFA (United Liberation Front of Asom), and PLA (People’s Liberation Army) in Manipur—have taken up arms against the Indian state, demanding independence or special status. These groups often accuse the central government of economic exploitation, cultural marginalization, and political neglect.
3. Inter-ethnic Rivalries:
   The assertion of one ethnic group often triggers fears of domination among others. For instance, the Bodo movement in Assam for a separate state has clashed with Assamese and Adivasi communities. In Manipur, tensions exist among Meiteis, Nagas, and Kukis, each demanding different forms of political recognition and territorial autonomy.
4. Migration and Demographic Change:
   The North-East has seen significant migration from Bangladesh and other Indian states, altering local demographics. This has fueled fears of cultural dilution and economic marginalization among indigenous groups, contributing to violent clashes and political mobilization.

Challenges to Nation-Building

Ethnic politics in the North-East poses multiple challenges to the broader process of nation-building in India:

1. Integration vs. Autonomy:
   The Indian state has often oscillated between policies of integration and accommodation. While special constitutional provisions (like the Sixth Schedule) grant autonomy to tribal areas, demands for self-determination persist. Balancing national unity with regional aspirations remains a complex task.
2. Security Dilemma:
   Persistent insurgency and militarization have made the region highly securitized. The implementation of laws like the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) has led to allegations of human rights violations, further alienating local populations.
3. Developmental Imbalances:
   The region suffers from underdevelopment, poor infrastructure, and limited connectivity. This economic marginalization feeds grievances and fuels ethnic discontent, making nation-building more difficult.
4. Political Representation:
   Although tribal groups are constitutionally guaranteed political representation, many feel that their voices are ignored in national policymaking. Ethnic politics emerges as a means to assert identity and claim a stake in governance.

Way Forward

To address the challenges of ethnic politics and strengthen nation-building, a multi-pronged strategy is essential:

• Dialogue and Peace Accords: Sustained political dialogue with insurgent and ethnic groups is vital. Peace accords, like the Mizo Accord (1986) and Bodo Peace Accord (2020), offer models for conflict resolution.
• Decentralization: Genuine federalism and greater local autonomy can accommodate ethnic aspirations within the constitutional framework.
• Inclusive Development: Economic empowerment through education, employment, and infrastructure can reduce alienation.
• Cultural Recognition: Celebrating and preserving ethnic diversity through policies and institutions can strengthen national unity without suppressing regional identities.

Conclusion

Ethnic politics in North-East India reflects deeper issues of identity, governance, and historical marginalization. While it poses significant challenges to nation-building, it also presents an opportunity to build a more inclusive and pluralistic democracy. A responsive, empathetic, and participatory approach from the Indian state is key to converting ethnic tensions into democratic accommodation and long-term national integration.

Buy IGNOU Solved Guess Paper With Important Questions  :-

 Follow For Updates: senrigbookhouse

Read Also :

• IGNOU FREE MPS-004 Comparative Politics: Issues and Trends Solved Guess Paper With Imp Questions 2025