Political Parties · Class 10 Political Science: 100 flashcards

People organise a political party to win elected office and use government power to carry out a shared programme. Members support policies they believe will serve the public.

They explain their programme to voters and seek enough electoral backing to put it into practice.

A partisan is strongly attached to a particular group. That loyalty can lead the person to favour one side instead of assessing an issue fairly.

Parties express competing interests and policy preferences. Each takes a position rather than remaining neutral between all political views.

Leaders, active members and followers.

NCERT describes US selection as involving party members and supporters; in India, senior party leaders choose candidates. Member-based selection has spread to additional countries.

A government needs a workable direction. Parties combine related demands into a programme instead of trying to act on every individual preference at once.

It is the party in government. Its programme is expected to guide the policies pursued while it holds office.

Legislatures formally pass laws, but party leaders strongly influence voting because their legislators generally follow party directions.

Parties recruit and prepare leaders for ministerial responsibility. The political executive drawn from them makes major policy decisions.

They scrutinise rulers, offer competing views and organise criticism of failures or unsuitable policies.

Campaigns, activists and associated pressure groups draw attention to issues. Parties may also organise movements, helping shape the terms of public debate.

A local worker may be easier to reach than an official and can help a resident find the relevant public office or welfare scheme.

Voters can withdraw electoral support when a party ignores their demands.

An independent cannot bind other representatives to a national programme. Major policy promises would therefore lack collective backing, and the direction of government would be uncertain.

Each representative might answer for local work, but no organised group would accept responsibility for national government as a whole.

Rival village factions often nominate candidate panels even without party labels. This illustrates the continuing need to coordinate electoral activity.

They convey public demands, organise representatives into a governing group, and provide organised support for or criticism of government decisions.

As representative institutions developed, parties supplied the organisation those institutions needed to function and remain answerable to citizens.

NCERT contrasts a period when parties existed in relatively few countries with their later spread across countries of different sizes, histories and development levels.

More than 750. Not all of them are serious contenders in elections; usually only a handful really compete to win elections and form a government.

A system in which only one party is allowed to control and run the government. China, where only the Communist Party is allowed to rule, is the example.

Because the electoral system does not permit free competition for power, so a right to form a party is worth nothing in practice.

If only one party can govern, voters lack a genuine alternative. Democracy requires rival parties to have a fair opportunity to win office.

At least two parties must be allowed to compete in elections, and the competing parties must be given a fair chance to come to power.

Two major parties are the realistic competitors for a governing majority. Smaller parties may still enter elections and win seats. NCERT gives the USA and UK as examples.

The United States of America and the United Kingdom.

Several parties can realistically participate in government, either independently or with partners. India is the textbook example.

By various parties coming together in a coalition.

An alliance, also called a front, is a partnership of parties working together to contest an election and gain office.

There were three — one led by the NDA, one by the UPA, and the Left Front.

It often appears very messy and leads to political instability.

More groups can find political representation, allowing a broader range of interests to be heard.

It develops through a country's social divisions, political experience and electoral arrangements. Those conditions cannot be transformed instantly by selecting a model.

Society, regional and social divisions, political history, and electoral arrangements shape the pattern over time.

India's extensive regional and social diversity is difficult to represent adequately through only two or three parties.

That no system is ideal for all countries and all situations. It rules out ranking the systems in the abstract, since each country develops a party system conditioned by its special circumstances.

Parties do not enjoy much trust in South Asia — more people say their trust is 'not much' or 'not at all' than 'some' or 'great' — and the same is true of most other democracies, parties being one of the least trusted institutions all over the world.

The level of participation was fairly high. The proportion saying they belonged to a political party was greater in India than in many advanced countries like Canada, Japan, Spain and South Korea, and over three decades reported membership and the proportion feeling 'close to a political party' have both gone up steadi…

Only partly true for India. Trust is low, as it is worldwide, but participation in party activities is fairly high and has been rising.

Some parties mainly operate within one constituent state; others organise across several states or throughout the federation.

It is a country-wide party with units in various states, and on the whole every unit follows one set of policies, programmes and strategy decided at the national level.

All parties in India must register with the Election Commission, which treats all parties equally. Recognition is given only to large and established parties that meet detailed criteria of votes and seats, and brings special facilities.

It is given a unique symbol, and only the official candidates of that party can use that election symbol.

The textbook route to state recognition requires a 6% Assembly vote share together with at least two Assembly seats.

The textbook describes national recognition through 6% electoral support across four states, in Lok Sabha or Assembly polls, together with at least four Lok Sabha seats.

The six per cent of total votes is identical. What differs is the scale — one State Assembly against Lok Sabha elections or four States' Assembly elections — and the seat requirement, two against four in the Lok Sabha.

The Aam Aadmi Party, the Bahujan Samaj Party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Communist Party of India (Marxist), the Indian National Congress and the National People's Party.

AAP began on 26 November 2012 after the anti-corruption mobilisation of 2011. Its stated priorities included transparent, accountable and clean government. Its history includes forming governments in Delhi and Punjab.

Kanshi Ram founded the BSP in 1984 to advance the bahujan samaj: Dalits, Adivasis, OBCs and religious minorities. Its influences include Phule, Sahu Maharaj, Periyar and Ambedkar. Uttar Pradesh is its principal base in the textbook account.

Integral humanism, along with Antyodaya, from the ideas of Deendayal Upadhyaya. It seeks to build a strong and modern India drawing inspiration from India's ancient culture and values, with cultural nationalism or Hindutva an important element in its conception of Indian nationhood.

NCERT lists complete integration of Jammu and Kashmir, a common civil code irrespective of religion, and restrictions banning religious conversion among the BJP's stated positions.

Marxism-Leninism. It supports socialism, secularism and democracy and opposes imperialism and communalism, accepting democratic elections as a useful means of securing socio-economic justice. Strong support in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, above all among the poor, factory hands, farmers, farm labourers and intellec…

Its uninterrupted period in government in West Bengal lasted 34 years.

As a centrist party, neither rightist nor leftist. It espouses secularism and the welfare of weaker sections and minorities, and supports the new economic reforms but with a human face.

Congress governed at the Centre up to 1977 and again during 1980–89. Its support subsequently weakened, although it retained a nationwide presence. It later headed the UPA government during 2004–14.

It was the first party from the North East to be recognised as a national party. Formed in July 2013 under P.A. Sangma, it believes in the diversity of the country and that different regions have different developmental challenges, with education and employment to all and empowerment of all sections as its core philoso…

Recognition reflects electoral performance, not necessarily a narrow outlook. The Samajwadi Party and RJD, for instance, maintain organisations beyond their main areas of electoral success.

The Biju Janata Dal, the Sikkim Democratic Front, the Mizo National Front and the Telangana Rashtra Samithi.

Their number and strength expanded over three decades, making Parliament more diverse, and no one national party could secure a Lok Sabha majority on its own from 1989 until 2014. National parties were therefore compelled to form alliances with state parties, and since 1996 nearly every state party has had an opportuni…

Because parties are the most visible face of democracy, so it is natural that blame settles on them. Dissatisfaction with the failure of parties to perform their functions well is expressed all over the world.

Lack of internal democracy, dynastic succession, the growing role of money and muscle power, and the failure to offer a meaningful choice to voters.

Decision-making becomes concentrated among a small leadership group instead of being shared with ordinary members.

Without reliable membership records, regular organisational meetings and internal polls, members cannot effectively scrutinise their leaders.

Members lack information about internal affairs and effective opportunities to shape decisions.

They take ever more power to decide on the party's behalf. The phrase matters because the leaders are speaking for a body whose members have no way of checking them.

Since one or a few leaders exercise paramount power in the party, those who disagree find it difficult to continue in the party.

Personal loyalty to the leader becomes more important.

Opaque procedures restrict ordinary workers' opportunities to advance. Leaders can then favour relatives or close associates when distributing important posts.

Because people without enough experience or public backing end up holding power. The unfairness is to other members of the party; this second harm is to the country.

Family advantages in party leadership also occur outside India, including in long-established democracies.

Because they are focussed only on winning elections.

A party focused on electoral victory may prefer nominees who possess substantial wealth or can attract large donations.

Large donors can gain influence over a party's policy choices, extending their role beyond financing its campaign.

Parties sometimes back candidates with criminal connections because they expect them to win. This threatens the quality of democratic representation. The influence of wealthy individuals and large businesses worries supporters of democracy in many countries.

Parties must be significantly different. Several parties contesting is not the same as a real choice between them.

In the textbook comparison, Labour and the Conservatives share basic positions and differ more over policy details and implementation.

The chapter also describes reduced disagreement among major Indian parties over economic policy, limiting alternatives for voters seeking a different approach.

When familiar leaders switch parties, a different party label may still offer voters the same individuals.

In order to remain effective instruments of democracy.

Because in a democracy the last word lies with leaders who stand for political parties, and people can replace them only by another set of party leaders. If none of them wishes to reform, it is hard to see how anyone can force them to change.

Defection means an elected representative switching allegiance away from the party under whose label they won office.

The amendment sought to discourage representatives from switching sides for ministerial posts or financial rewards.

In NCERT's simplified account of anti-defection law, an MP or MLA who changes party can lose their legislative seat.

The chapter credits the measure with reducing defections, while noting that stronger leadership control can make internal disagreement harder.

An affidavit is a signed declaration made under oath and submitted to an authorised official.

NCERT describes a Supreme Court requirement for candidates to disclose assets and pending criminal cases in sworn declarations. Its aim was to curb financial and criminal influence.

Disclosure gives voters more information. The chapter nevertheless questions how its accuracy is checked and whether disclosure alone reduces wealthy or criminal influence.

To hold their organisational elections and to file their income tax returns.

The Election Commission required organisational elections and tax-return filing; NCERT warns that formal compliance need not give members a stronger voice.

The Constitution was amended against defection, the Supreme Court ordered the affidavits, and the Election Commission ordered organisational elections and income tax returns.

That parties maintain a register of their members, follow their own constitution, have an independent body to rule on disputes inside the party, and hold open elections to the highest posts.

The textbook proposes roughly one-third of party nominations for women and reserved representation within party decision-making bodies.

The proposal is public support for campaign expenses: either supplies such as fuel and paper, or cash linked to a party's previous electoral support.

The growing role of money power. If the state pays for election expenses, rich people and companies have less hold on the policies and decisions of a party.

Excessive rules may encourage evasion rather than meaningful change. Parties can also resist legislation that restricts their own leaders.

Citizens, campaign groups and journalists can press for reform through petitions, public discussion and collective action.

When refusing reform threatens electoral support, party leaders have a stronger reason to respond.

Reform-minded citizens can join parties and work for change within them. Democracy improves through active public involvement, not criticism alone.

The chapter encourages citizens to improve political participation rather than withdraw from it.