UPPSC (UP) Exam  >  UPPSC (UP) Notes  >  Course for UPPSC Preparation  >  Relevance of Federalism, Confederalism and Pluralism - Essay, UPSC MAINS

Relevance of Federalism, Confederalism and Pluralism - Essay, UPSC MAINS | Course for UPPSC Preparation - UPPSC (UP) PDF Download

Relevance of Federalism, Confederalism and  Pluralism

structure

(1) Opening    —    The World today is in the stage of paradigm shift.


(2) Body    —    The new and compelling relevance of federalism.

    —    Determinants of federalism.

    —    Meaning of federalism.

    —    Pluralism and federalism are the mood of the present and the wave of the future.

    —    Ethnic pluralism.

    —    Concepts of Federalism and Federation.

    —    Global triumph of federal idea.

    —    Thrust for co-operative federalism.


(3) Closing    —    Demand of human rights and frontier-free neighbour-hood.

    —    Free movement of people, free flow of goods, free flow of services and free flow of capital.

Federalists across the globe today share the perception that the world today is in the stage of paradigm shift, from a centralised, over-arching, sovereign state system (developed between the middle of the seventeenth to the middle of the twentieth century) to a pattern of diminished state sovereignty and authoritarianism, giving space to expanding inter-state linkages and various forms of decentralised federal and confederal arrangements.

Sovereign states have certainly not withered away (and there is no need or prospect of that either), but states are acquiring newer forms of increasing accommodation of civil society, of ethnic diversities and socio-cultural specificities.

Earlier, the dominant goals of states were concentration of authority, centralised direction, acquisition of self-sufficiency and promotion of socio-cultural homogeneity. In our contemporary epoch, consequent on the new shift of paradigm, states (big and small, industrially powerful and economically developing) are increasingly recognising the compulsion of global interdependence, of non-centralised authority within the state, and of necessary and desirable accommodation of heterogeneity and pluralism. In this shift of paradigm within the state system, federal principle and a whole range of federal arrangements are gaining greater recognition, as a means and method of peaceful coexistence of ethnic diversities and problem solving efforts in a plural society. And in inter-state relations within a geo-political region, varied formats of confederal pattern are being used for common purposes, mutual progress and prosperity.

Globally, federal ideas and federal systems are acquiring increasing relevance in our age and circumstances, at four levels—(i) in the UN system and its agencies; (ii) in the world bodies covering multinational interests and transactions; (iii) in the regional groupings for economic, scientific, technological, cultural and political cohesion; and (iv) in the domestic management of large states marked by socio-cultural diversities.

One might hypothesise that three determinants of federalism are crucial: (i) Federalism as a social the me recognises pluralism as the valid basis of collective peaceful coexistence, (ii) Federalism as a political principle seeks to stabilise a pattern of constitutional diffusion of power in order to reconcile the twin concerns of common/generalised ‘shared rule’ with specific/particularist ‘self-rule’; (iii) Federalism as an administrative arrangement coordinates the legitimate distribution of power and jurisdiction between the general/central/federal authority and the constituent units/states/provinces/landers/cantons, etc.

Federalism in essence is a convenant-based arrangement of regulated partnership in a plural society. Pluralism and federalism now appear as the two essential principles for organising heterogeneous societies into a viable pattern of political sharing of power, by reconciling the twin processes of political unification and social diversity, of commonality for certain purposes and specificities for others.

Federalism is a political structure of unity in diversity. It is a mosaic of integrating the polity and preserving civil society based on socio-cultural diversities. In a word, federalism builds and sustains the unity of polity, and simultaneously preserves and promotes the plurality of society.

Federalism seeks to promote in their respective jurisdiction, certain trends of centripetalism and other trends of centrifugalism, without making them contrary to each other, or placing them in confrontationist moulds. In a federation the equation between centralism and decentralism, between Union and States, is not and is not expected to be adversarial, or of the ‘either-or’ dichotomy, but of convergence in a pattern of cooperative distribution of jurisdiction and power. If there is no Union/Centre/general authority then there is no federation. Similarly, if there are no states/provinces/regions/cantons/federating units, etc., then also there is no federation. Federation then is a dialectical amalgam of ‘apparent’ opposites, which ‘realistically’ are not opposites but components of a complex whole. The essence of the federal principle is the perpetuation of both union and non-centralisation. Federalism is thus not merely a structural arrangement but also a process of functioning.

Pluralism and federalism are the mood of the present and the wave of the future, in humanity’s quest for an egalitarian, just and equipoised pattern of collective existence. They seek to reconcile two basic imperatives of liberty and order in a world of variety and diversity.

In India, under the visionary leadership of the national movement for independence, as symbolised by the personalities of leaders like Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, we had long ago rejected both the ‘melting pot’ and the ‘salad bowl’ approach to reconciling and accommoda-ting diverse ethnic problems. On the other hand preference was given to the ‘bouquet’ approach, involving appreciation of diverse flowers, each with its own individuality yet ‘tied’ together as a single beautiful whole. We draw our metaphor from ‘flowers’ and the ‘garden’ and not from ‘kitchen’ and ‘cooking’.

Ethnic pluralities should be considered not as items to be ‘burnt’, ‘cooked’, ‘chewed’ and ‘digested’, but as ingredients of creation’s beauty in its varied human richness, demanding equal respect, admirations, legitimacy and dignity in an atmosphere of compassion, humanism and tolerance. Politically, legally and ethically it should be an essential part of federal culture to perceive the phenomena of plurality and federal-nation as a ‘bouquet’, and not as a ‘melting pot’ or a ‘salad bowl’.

It has been estimated that there are over 3000 ethnic or tribal groups in the world, conscious of their respective identities. Of the 195 sovereign states which are today members of the United Nations, over 160 are multi-ethnic in composition.

About forty per cent of the world’s population lives today within polities that are formally and constitutionally federal. About one-third of the human population lives in polities that utilise some form of federal arrangements in their po

litical systems. In other words, over seventy per cent of the human population are within the purview of one or the other pattern of federal dispensation.

In terms of political perception, the distinction between the twin concepts of Federalism and Federation is both profound and significant. This is becoming particularly evident in the contemporary epoch of world history. Precisely at a time when Federalism as the theory and ideology of governance is gaining universal approval and accolade, as the most preferred and relevant political arrangement in heterogeneous social situations for reconciling the necessary national territorial sovereignty of the state, with the desirable autonomies for ethnic, linguistic and religious diversities, Federation as the structure of power and statecraft, has been passing through the crisis of survival, stability and coherence in the last decade of the twentieth century.

Indeed the global triumph of the Federal idea and theory on the one hand, contrasted by the decline or tension in the practice of the federal systems on the other, constitutes a great irony of our times.

Of the 195 sovereign states in the world, only 25 are categorised as federal or quasi-federal states. (Till 1993 the number was 20, including the erstwhile Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and Senegambia.)

These include six out of the ten most populous states in the world (namely, China—which is functionally quasi-federal—India, the USA, Brazil, Nigeria and Pakistan) and all the six states with large territories (namely, Canada, China, the USA, Brazil, Australia and India). These 16 states account for well-over one-third of the land-mass and about half the total population of the world.

Four out of the twenty recognised federations in the world got dissolved between 1989 and 1993. These were Senegambia (in 1989), East Germany (in 1990) the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia (in 1992), and Czechoslovakia (in 1993).

Several others are passing through a phase of grave tension, conflict and violence due to different set of problems—regional demands for greater autonomy, newer and assertive demands of minority segments, ethnic and linguistic conflicts, etc. These include Ethiopia, Nigeria and Tanzania (in Africa), Brazil, Mexico and Canada (in America), Germany, Switzerland, Russia and erstwhile Yugoslavia (in Europe), India, Pakistan and Malaysia (in Asia).

All federations in the last two centuries exhibited a strong propensity for centralisation of power and decision-making. Of course there were strong political and economic compulsion necessitating such a development.

The need for stability of the system, territorial security and political integration and the requirements of integrated market-system for faster growth were some of the factors that promoted this trend.

While this had strengthened the sovereignty of the federal state, it vitiated the federal-balance between the Centre and the federating units, and eroded the necessary autonomy of the States and ethnic groups and weakened the democratic ethos at the grassroots level. It transformed the federal state into a maximal state and sapped initiative at the regional and local levels of political life. It contributed to the emergence of authoritarian structures and arbitrary style of politics in many federations.

By the eighties of this century, however, the situation seems to have radically changed, leading to questioning of concentration of power in the federal centre. New democratic challenges have shaken the earlier certitude reposed in centralised authority everywhere. Rigid centripetal structures are crumbling.

A new worldwide demand for human rights, democratic culture, regional autonomies has resulted in the thrust for cooperative federalism, based on demand for ‘independence’ (rather than ‘autonomy’) of the federating units, as a necessary prelude for a better union, as is the position of militants in Kashmir in India, or more than that the innovative but controversial concept of ‘sovereignty-association’ articulated by Parti Quebecois for determining the status of Quebec in the Canadian federation. Indeed the format of the new federal union is envisaged as less rigid and more flexible to accommodate socio-cultural diversities, almost in the mould of a confederation.

In a new world of globalisation of economy, close-knit universal communication and permeation of electronic media system, the earlier and familiar concept of exclusive state sovereignty has become weak, partially inoperative, and even obsolete. Even a diehard conservative like Winston Churchill, attached to the sovereign independence of Britain, once spoke about the prospects of a European Union as attaining “a larger sovereignty.”

The rigid sovereign state system is giving way on the one hand to pooling of inter-state sovereignties in regional confederal arrangements for shared socio-economic gains, and on the other, to increasing assertion of ethnic entities, not necessarily conflicting with the larger sovereign state, but demanding greater space for autonomy and group-rights, within the domestic area of the State jurisdiction.

Therefore, at one level a factor of great relevance today is the increasing demand, all over the world, for human rights—individual human rights, group human rights, socio-cultural and regional human rights. At the other level, the world is moving towards building viable regional identities, which as in the case of Europe, exhibit a frontier-free neighbourhood upholding the four basic principles of free movement of people, free flow of goods, free flow of services and free flow of capital. Tariff walls have collapsed. Tax boundaries are no longer obstacles. This is indeed the new weltanschauung of our age and time.

The document Relevance of Federalism, Confederalism and Pluralism - Essay, UPSC MAINS | Course for UPPSC Preparation - UPPSC (UP) is a part of the UPPSC (UP) Course Course for UPPSC Preparation.
All you need of UPPSC (UP) at this link: UPPSC (UP)
113 videos|360 docs|105 tests

Top Courses for UPPSC (UP)

FAQs on Relevance of Federalism, Confederalism and Pluralism - Essay, UPSC MAINS - Course for UPPSC Preparation - UPPSC (UP)

1. What is the relevance of federalism in the context of UPSC mains exam?
Ans. Federalism is relevant to the UPSC mains exam as it is an important concept in the Indian polity. Understanding federalism is crucial to comprehend the distribution of powers between the central and state governments, as well as the functioning of various institutions in the country. It is often asked in the exam how federalism impacts governance, intergovernmental relations, and the balance of power between different levels of government.
2. How does confederalism differ from federalism?
Ans. Confederalism and federalism are both systems of government that involve the sharing of powers between different levels of authority. However, the main difference lies in the degree of centralization. In federalism, power is shared between the central government and the states, with both having their own spheres of influence. On the other hand, confederalism is a looser arrangement where independent states come together to form a central authority, but retain their sovereignty and can withdraw from the association. This distinction is often asked in the UPSC mains exam to test the understanding of different systems of government.
3. What is the significance of pluralism in the context of UPSC mains exam?
Ans. Pluralism is an important concept in the study of political science and governance. It refers to the existence of diverse and competing interests, beliefs, and ideologies within a society. Understanding pluralism helps in analyzing the dynamics of power, decision-making processes, and policy formulation. In the UPSC mains exam, questions related to the impact of pluralism on democracy, representation, and social cohesion are often asked.
4. How does federalism contribute to the stability of a nation?
Ans. Federalism contributes to the stability of a nation by providing a framework for power-sharing and accommodation of diverse interests. It allows for the decentralization of authority, giving states or regions the ability to make decisions based on their specific needs and aspirations. This helps in preventing the concentration of power in a single authority and reduces the chances of conflicts. Additionally, federalism promotes cooperation and coordination between different levels of government, fostering a sense of unity and stability. Questions on the stability aspect of federalism are commonly asked in the UPSC mains exam.
5. How does pluralism enhance democratic governance in a country?
Ans. Pluralism enhances democratic governance in a country by ensuring the representation of diverse interests and viewpoints. In a pluralistic society, different groups and individuals can freely express their opinions and participate in the political process. This leads to a more inclusive and responsive decision-making process, as policies are shaped through negotiation and compromise. Pluralism also serves as a check on the concentration of power, preventing the dominance of a single group or ideology. The UPSC mains exam often asks questions on the role of pluralism in strengthening democratic institutions and promoting citizen participation.
113 videos|360 docs|105 tests
Download as PDF
Explore Courses for UPPSC (UP) exam

Top Courses for UPPSC (UP)

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Related Searches

pdf

,

UPSC MAINS | Course for UPPSC Preparation - UPPSC (UP)

,

video lectures

,

Relevance of Federalism

,

Objective type Questions

,

Free

,

practice quizzes

,

ppt

,

study material

,

Previous Year Questions with Solutions

,

MCQs

,

Summary

,

UPSC MAINS | Course for UPPSC Preparation - UPPSC (UP)

,

UPSC MAINS | Course for UPPSC Preparation - UPPSC (UP)

,

past year papers

,

Extra Questions

,

shortcuts and tricks

,

Confederalism and Pluralism - Essay

,

Semester Notes

,

mock tests for examination

,

Sample Paper

,

Relevance of Federalism

,

Confederalism and Pluralism - Essay

,

Relevance of Federalism

,

Viva Questions

,

Important questions

,

Confederalism and Pluralism - Essay

,

Exam

;