The document discusses political parties and India's party system. It explains that India has a multi-party system with no single dominant party. The Indian National Congress was the dominant party after independence due to its role in the independence movement but its dominance has reduced over time as other national and regional parties have emerged. It also profiles some important political philosophers in India like Jayaprakash Narayan, Ram Manohar Lohia, and Deendayal Upadhyaya and their ideas of total revolution, democratic socialism, and integral humanism respectively.

1. PARTIES AND THE PARTY
SYSTEM IN INDIA

2. WHAT IS A POLITICAL PARTY??
A political party is an organized group of people
who have the same ideology, or who otherwise
have the same political positions, and who field
candidates for elections, in an attempt to get them
elected and thereby implement the party's
agenda.

3. TYPES OF PARTY SYSTEM- ONE PARTY
SYSTEM
 In single-party systems, one political party is legally
allowed to hold effective power. Although minor
parties may sometimes be allowed, they are legally
required to accept the leadership of the dominant
party. North Korea and China are examples.

4. TWO PARTY SYSTEM
 Two-party systems are states in which there are
two political parties dominant to such an extent that
electoral success under the banner of any other
party is almost impossible and political parties are
traditionally parties that are ideologically broad and
inclusive. Example-USA

5. MULTI-PARTY SYSTEM
 Multi-party systems are systems in which more than
two parties are represented and elected to public
office.
 Australia, Canada, People’s Republic of
Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Ireland, United
Kingdom, and Norway are examples of countries
with two strong parties and additional smaller
parties that have also obtained representation.
 The smaller or “third” parties may hold the balance
of power in a parliamentary system, and thus may
be invited to form a part of a coalition government
together with one of the larger parties; or may
instead act independently from the dominant
parties.

6. INDIAN CONTEXT
 India is not the only country to have experienced
the dominance of one party but there many
countries with this experience
 But there is a crucial difference between these and
the Indian experience. In the rest of the cases the
dominance of one party was ensured by
compromising democracy.
 In some countries like China, Cuba and Syria the
constitution permits only a single party to rule the
country. Some others like Myanmar, Belarus, Egypt,
and Eritrea are effectively one-party states due to
legal and military measures.

7. PARTY FOUNDING YEAR FOUNDER
1. Socialist Party 1934 Acharya Narendra Dev
2. Communist Party 1925 M.N Roy
3. Bhartiya Jana Sangh 1951 Deen Dayal Upadhyaya
4. Swatantra Party 1959 C. Rajagopalachari

8. HOW DID CONGRESS WIN THE
ELECTIONS?
 The results of the first general election did not surprise
anyone.
 The Indian National Congress was expected to win this
election.
 When the final results were declared, the extent of the
victory of the Congress did surprise many. The party
won 364 of the 489 seats in the first Lok Sabha
elections and finished way ahead of any other
challenger.
 The Communist Party of India that came next in terms of
seats won only 16 seats. The state elections were held
with the Lok Sabha elections. The Congress scored big
victory in those elections as well. It won a majority of
seats in all the states

9. WHY WAS THE CONGRESS DOMINANT
AFTER FIRST THREE ELECTIONS?
 The roots of this extraordinary success of the Congress
party go back to the legacy of the freedom struggle.
Congress was seen as inheritor of the national movement.
 In Jawaharlal Nehru, the party had the most popular and
charismatic leader in Indian politics. He led the Congress
campaign and toured through the country
 Many leaders who were in the forefront of that struggle
were now contesting elections as Congress candidates.
 The Congress was already a very well-organised party and
by the time the other parties could even think of a
strategy, the Congress had already started its campaign.
 Thus, the Congress had the ‘first off the blocks’
advantage. By the time of Independence the party had not
only spread across the length and breadth of the country
as we had seen in the maps but also had an organisational
network down to the local level.
 Most importantly, as the Congress was till recently a
national movement, its nature was all-inclusive. All these
factors contributed to the dominance of the Congress
party.

10. CONGRESS AS AN IDEOLOGICAL AND
SOCIAL COALITION
SOCIAL COALITION
 Congress evolved from its origins in 1885 as a
pressure group for the newly educated,
professional and commercial classes to a mass
movement in the twentieth century.
 This laid the basis for its eventual transformation
into a mass political party and its subsequent
domination of the political system
 Thus the Congress began as a party dominated by
the English speaking, upper caste, upper middle-
class and urban elite. But with every civil
disobedience movement it launched, its social
base widened

11. • It brought together diverse groups, whose interests were
often contradictory. Peasants and industrialists, urban
dwellers and villagers, workers and owners, middle, lower
and upper classes and castes, all found space in the
Congress.
• Gradually, its leadership also expanded beyond the upper
caste and upper class professionals to agriculture based
leaders with a rural orientation

12. IDEOLOGICAL COALITION
 Many of these groups merged their identity within
the Congress. Very often they did not and
continued to exist within the Congress as groups
and individuals holding different beliefs
 In this sense the Congress was an ideological
coalition as well. It accommodated the
revolutionary and pacifist, conservative and
radical, extremist and moderate and the right, left
and all shades of the centre
 The Congress was a ‘platform’ for numerous
groups, interests and even political parties to
take part in the national movement
 In pre-Independence days, many organisations
and parties with their own constitution and
organisational structure were allowed to exist
within the Congress.

13. JAYPRAKASH NARAYAN AND TOTAL
REVOLUTION

14.  The journey of Jayaprakash Narayan from
Marxism to Gandhism resulted in Total
Revolution.
 It is based upon Gandhi’s basic postulates and it
envisages non-violent methods of changing society
with non-violent techniques
 Total Revolution, as a concept, was put forward by
Jayaprakash Narayan (at times referred to as JP) in
the wake of Bihar Movement in Patna on June 5, 1974.
In a public meeting at Gandhi Maidan, Jayaprakash
Narayan declared that the struggle was not going to
be limited to securing the demands of the students,
including the resignation of the Minister and the
dissolution of the Assembly in Bihar, but would aim at
bringing about a Total Revolution or Sampoorna
Kranti, which alone could solve the urgent problems
of the country and usher in a new society.

15. • Jaya Prakash Narayan is known for three key
contributions: Fight against Corruption, Principle of
Communitarian Socialism and Championing of ‘Total
Revolution’.
• Jaya Prakash Narayan was the first leader in post-
independence India who undertook a tirade against
corruption through the participation of youth,
particularly in Gujarat and Bihar.
• He advocated the office of Lokpal against corruption.
His principle of Communitarian Socialism views India
as a society of communities encompassing three key
layers, viz., community, region and rashtra – all
combining together as an example of true federation.
• His call for total revolution sought to encompass
moral, cultural, economic, political, educational and
ecological transformations.

16. • His political transformation included the right to recall,
the importance of village/mohalla samities in
democratic politics, and his call for Upper Ke Log to join
political struggle for a clean politics in the country.
• The essence for transformation according to Jaya
Prakash Narayan revolves around ‘Man’ who could be
the real catalyst of change in India

17. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA AND SOCIALISM

18. • Ram Manohar Lohia has been one of the main proponents
of socialism in India.
• He championed the idea of ‘Democratic Socialism’ while
associating his socialism with democracy.
• Lohia considered both capitalism and socialism equally
irrelevant for Indian society.
• His principle of Democratic Socialism has two objectives -
the economic objective in form of food and housing and
the non-economic objective in form of democracy and
freedom.
• Lohia advocated Chouburja Rajneeti in which he opines
four pillars of politics as well as socialism: Centre,
Region, District and Village – all are linked with each
other.
• Giving consideration to affirmative action, Lohia argued
that the policy of affirmative action should not only be for
the downtrodden but also for the women and the non-
religious minorities.

19. • Based on the premise of Democratic Socialism and
Chouburja Rajneeti, Lohia supported a ‘Party of
Socialism’ as an attempt of merging all political parties.
• The Party of Socialism according to Lohia should have
three symbols, viz., Spade [prepared to make efforts],
Vote [power of voting], and Prison [Willingness to make
sacrifices].

21. DEEN DAYAL UPADHYAYA AND INTEGRAL
HUMANISM
 Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya was a philosopher,
sociologist, economist and politician.
 The philosophy presented by him is called
'Integral Humanism' which was intended to
present an 'indigenous socio-economic model' in
which human being remains at the center of
development.
 The aim of Integral Humanism is to ensure
dignified life for every human being while
balancing the needs of the individual and society.
It supports sustainable consumption of natural
resources so that those resources can be
replenished.

22. • Integral Humanism enhances not only political but also
economic and social democracy and freedom. As it
seeks to promote diversity, it is best suited for a
country as diverse as India.
• The philosophy of Integral Humanism is based on the
following three principles:
1. Primacy of whole, not part
2. Supremacy of Dharma
3. Autonomy of Society
• Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya opposed both Western
'capitalist individualism' and 'Marxist socialism'.
• According to Deendayal Upadhyaya, capitalist and
socialist ideologies only consider the needs of the
human body and mind, so they are based on
materialistic purpose whereas spiritual
development is equally considered important for the
complete development of human being which is
missing in both capitalism and socialism.

23. • Basing his philosophy on the internal conscience, pure
human soul to be called Chhitti, Deendayal Upadhyaya
envisaged a classless, casteless and conflict-free
social system.