Introduction:

            Since the beginning of time, there had been a fierce debate on the subject of a flourishing political order and its link with the human capacity to reason. Many prominent political philosophers have tried to address the question that whether this notion of confidence in human mind is misguided or not, and has the political leadership used reason as a tool to achieve their objectives?

           

For the purpose of addressing this question and consideration of relationship between these concepts in detail, this paper includes the works of three prominent Western political philosophers, namely Thomas Hobbes, Immanuel Kant and Herbert Marcuse. Despite the fact that the views of these philosophers on the subject of the relationship between reason and political authority vary greatly, they have still made a considerable impact on the modern frameworks of the society.

            

This paper starts with the explanation of key concepts of the philosophers chosen to address the question. This paper then presents a comparison and critical analysis of the concepts of these political theorists. Finally after critically assessing and analyzing the political theories, it presents concluding remarks.

Read Full Article...»

“We are a nation of a hundred million, and, what is more, we are a nation with our own distinctive culture and civilization, language and literature, art and architecture, names and nomenclature, sense of value and proportion, legal laws and moral codes, customs and calendar, history and traditions, aptitudes and ambitions. In short, we have our own distinctive outlook on life. By all canons of international law we are a nation” (M.A. Jinnah) (Toor, 319).

The partition of India and the creation of nascent state of Pakistan for the Muslims of India on the basis of distinct culture and religion has been the subject of fierce debate since long. The two nation theory, according to which Hindus and Muslims are two different nations, has been challenged by many historians and many theorists have been invoked to address this issue and elaborated on the causes and consequences of the two nation theory. Some argued in favor of a separate homeland for the Muslims, while others denounced this notion of Muslims being one nation.  Although the opinion of different theorists on the question of demand of Muslims for a separate homeland varies, yet it is believed that this partition was one of the most drastic and tragic event in the entire history, and it resulted in the loss of lives of millions of people on both sides of the border.

These causes and consequences of the partition of India have been studied and interpreted differently by the historians and the creative writes. Different approaches have been used by them to describe this tragic incident.  Historians focused on the politics of the leadership of Muslim League and Congress at the time of partition and analyzed the historical events by the critical analysis, while creative writers analyzed the political scenario and the effects of the decisions made by the political leadership on the society and the individuals in the form of short stories, novels and poems.

Read Full Article...»

This is a review on Paul Wilkinson’s paper “Insurgency and Terrorism”, which explores the arguments presented by him on the concept of insurgency, different types of insurgency in the contemporary international system and the relationship between insurgency and terrorism. This review starts with a brief summary of Wilkinson’s paper followed by critical analysis of his work. To substantiate the arguments, this paper includes relevant examples, case studies and historical evidence.

Wilkinson starts his paper by introducing the concept of insurgency and different types of insurgent movements in the contemporary system. He argues that insurgency is a rebellion or rising against any government in power, which is mostly manifested as a low intensity conflict (Wilkinson, 2).  But then he draws attention towards the exceptional cases where these low intensity insurgent movements have gathered so much support that they turn into conventional warfare. For instance, the Bolshevik forces in the Russian civil war, the Taliban in the latest civil war in Afghanistan and the Chinese communists. He further argues that in the post Cold War world, the difference between the state of insurgency and the state of belligerency seems meaningless. His argument seems valid because if we observe the pre Cold War and post Cold War world, the number of low intensity conflicts in the post Cold War era has increased considerably. Wilkinson (3) illustrates it by presenting a survey of conflicts by PIOOM, according to which high intensity conflicts have declined in number, while the number of low intensity conflicts and the violent political conflicts has almost doubled.

Read Full Article...»

On the subject of inequality, it is difficult to define within limitations what inequality is, why it exists, how it affects individuals of a community and ways to counter it. In simple terms, inequality exists because individuals in society have different levels of access to resources like food, water, education, health care, etc within a society. This is what creates a difference between people who are rich or poor, well-educated or not, possess more wealth or power in political circles and many others.

These differences in status, existing since the very beginning of time, are now an undeniable truth and a universal element of the very fabric of society in every community, be it at a micro or macro level, spread all over the globe. In this essay, we will see through a number of approaches how they affect society, and how they’ve proved to be a hindrance in developing and nurturing better relationships between people on opposing ends of the social pyramid. In this context, the social differences can be categorized and explained through the unequal levels based on race, ethnicity or gender.

Race, from an anthropological perspective, is simply a social construct. As anthropologists explain, it means that although there are discernible physical differences between ‘races’, they can’t be extrapolated. So if one refers to the term race as pointing differences between groups of people based on their observable characteristic or trait is alright, but there is no reason to extrapolate these differences to mental capabilities. Still the term race has over the centuries connoted mental, moral and cultural differences between the people and not merely physical differences and has been used by racists in quite an offensive way.

The phenotypical differences may give rise to other traits but culture or acquired learning, and not innate ability, is the deciding factor which can successfully account for the wide-ranging differences between groups of people. Thus according to anthropologists, biological determinism is a limited theory and the nature vs. nurture debate heavily tilts in favour of nurture. It is important to emphasize the proclivity of diseases or other physical abilities and not just phenotypes can be biologically determined and some are documented: we demonstrate here that from both an objective and scientific (genetic and epidemiologic) perspective there is great validity in racial/ethnic self-categorizations, both from the research and public policy points of view [1].There is also scientific justification for this division of inheritance of traits in physical (innate) and cultural (acquired) traits as pointed out by Lahn and Ebenstein: These polymorphisms can affect traits such as pigmentation, dietary adaptation and pathogen resistance (where evidence is rather convincing), and metabolism, physical development and brain biology (where evidence is more preliminary) [2].

Read Full Article...»

The creation of Pakistan has been the subject of fierce debate for a long time. Ever since Pakistan was created, it has been going through its ideological and identity crisis. Many theorists have been invoked to address this issue and to elaborate on the two nation theory, according to which Hindus and Muslims were two different communities. Muslims of India were always a separate community, they had their own distinct culture, language and heritage and this notion of being distinguished resisted their assimilation into the Indian environment after British left India in 1947. Jinnah in his famous speech said, “We are a nation of a hundred million, and, what is more, we are a nation with our own distinctive culture and civilization, language and literature” (Toor, 319). This notion of Muslim nationhood was challenged by many theorists and historians after the creation of Pakistan, and many questions and objections were raised. “The relation of such nationalism to a territorial definition was at best problematic, and rendered further complex by the unnatural division of space and communities wrought by Partition” (Toor, 320). This notion also raised a number of questions regarding the identity of the nascent state, and the most important question is, “Is the demand of a separate homeland for the Muslims on the basis of distinct culture and religion viable?”

This paper focuses on the question of nationalism, the pre partition politics of the leadership and politics of identity in Pakistan. This paper starts with the literature review and critical analysis of the works of various authors on the subject of nationalism and identity crises in Pakistan. This paper then presents the findings to address the question. In the first part of the discussion, this paper explores the notion of nationhood and demand for a separate homeland for Muslims and the politics revolving around this notion of being a separate community in the pre partition period. This paper then explores the post partition politics of the League leadership and critiques the claim of the Muslims that they are a nation. To substantiate the arguments, this paper includes relevant examples, case studies and historical evidence.

This paper is mostly based on the secondary research including articles from JSTOR and books on the subject of nationalism and identity crisis in Pakistan. The articles chosen for the research are important because the authors of these articles are well known for their research on South Asian politics and history.

Read Full Article...»

It has been sixty three years since the creation of Pakistan in 1947. Since independence, it has been striving for development and the establishment of democracy.  The Objectives Resolution, which was adopted in 1949 by the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, also proclaimed that the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed (ObjectivesResolution). But what we see today, after sixty three years of independence, is that unfortunately a strong democratic system could not be established in the country.  India, on the other hand, not only sustained the democratic idea for more than half a century, but also today it enjoys the status of world’s largest democracy. Here the question is, “Is Pakistan, in essence, a democratic state? What are the factors responsible for the failure of the establishment of an effectual democratic system in the country?”

It has been the failure of the civilian representative government in performing their duties effectively which resulted in poor governance, and which consequently led to the military interference in Pakistani politics. While in India, the representative government of the people had never been crushed and taken over by the military dictators.

This paper compares the democratic regimes of both the countries and explores the factors which have hindered the establishment of genuine democracy in Pakistan. This paper starts with the literature review and critical analysis of the works of various authors on the subject of authoritarian rule and democratic regimes. This paper then presents the findings to address the question. In the first part of the discussion, this paper explores the factors which have taken Indian democracy to its peak, and in the second part, factors responsible for the failure of democracy in Pakistan have been explored.  To substantiate the arguments, this paper includes relevant examples, case studies and historical evidence.

Read Full Article...»