Power s h a r i n g
1
Chapter I
Power sharing
Overview
With this chapter we resume the tour of democracy that we started
last year. We noted last year that in a democracy all power does not
rest with any one organ of the state. An intelligent sharing of power
among legislature, executive and judiciary is very important to the
design of a democracy. In this and the next two chapters we carry
this idea of power sharing forward. We start with two stories from
Belgium and Sri Lanka. Both these stories are about how democracies
handle demands for power sharing.The stories yield some general
conclusions about the need for power sharing in democracy. This
allows us to discuss various forms of power sharing that will be taken
up in the following two chapters.
© NCERTnot to be republished
2
Democra t i c Pol i t i c s
Belgium and Sri Lanka
I have a simple
equation in mind.
Sharing power =
dividing power =
weakening the
country. Why do we
start by talking of
this?
Ethnic: A social
division based on
shared culture. People
belonging to the same
ethnic group believe in
their common descent
because of similarities
of physical type or of
culture or both. They
need not always have
the same religion or
nationality.
Communities
and
regions of
Belgium
Belgium is a small country in Europe,
smaller in area than the state of
Haryana. It has borders with France,
the Netherlands, Germany and
Luxembourg. It has a population of a
little over one crore, about half the
population of Haryana. The ETHNIC
composition of this small country is
very complex. Of the country’s total
population, 59 per cent lives in the
Flemish region and speaks Dutch
language. Another 40 per cent people
live in the Wallonia region and speak
French. Remaining one per cent of the
Belgians speak German. In the capital
city Brussels, 80 per cent people speak
French while 20 per cent are Dutchspeaking.
The minority French-speaking
community was relatively rich and
powerful. This was resented by the
Dutch-speaking community who got
the benefit of economic development
and education much later. This led to
tensions between the Dutch-speaking
and French-speaking communities
during the 1950s and 1960s. The
tension between the two communities
was more acute in Brussels. Brussels
presented a special problem: the
Dutch-speaking people constituted a
majority in the country, but a
minority in the capital.
Let us compare this to the
situation in another country. Sri
Lanka is an island nation, just a few
kilometres off the southern coast of
Tamil Nadu. It has about two crore
people, about the same as in Haryana.
Like other nations in the South Asia
region, Sri Lanka has a diverse
population. The major social groups
are the Sinhala-speakers (74 per cent)
and the Tamil-speakers (18 per cent).
Among Tamils there are two subgroups.
Tamil natives of the country
Walloon (French-speaking)
Flemish (Dutch-speaking)
German-speaking
Brussels-Capital Region
Look at the maps of Belgium and Sri Lanka. In which
region, do you find concentration of different
communities?
© Wikipedia
© NCERTnot to be republished
Power s h a r i n g
3
Majoritarianism: A
belief that the majority
community should be
able to rule a country in
whichever way it wants,
by disregarding the
wishes and needs of the
minority.
are called ‘Sri Lankan Tamils’ (13 per
cent). The rest, whose forefathers came
from India as plantation workers
during colonial period, are called
‘Indian Tamils’. As you can see from
the map, Sri Lankan Tamils are
concentrated in the north and east of
the country. Most of the Sinhalaspeaking
people are Buddhist, while
most of the Tamils are Hindus or
Muslims. There are about 7 per cent
Christians, who are both Tamil
and Sinhala.
Just imagine what could happen
in situations like this. In Belgium, the
Dutch community could take
advantage of its numeric majority and
force its will on the French and
German-speaking population. This
would push the conflict among
communities further. This could lead
to a ver y messy partition of the
country; both the sides would claim
control over Brussels. In Sri Lanka, the
Sinhala community enjoyed an even
bigger majority and could impose its
will on the entire country. Now, let us
look at what happened in both these
countries.
Majoritarianism in Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka emerged as an independent
country in 1948. The leaders of the
Sinhala community sought to secure
dominance over government by virtue
of their majority. As a result, the
democratically elected government
adopted a series of MAJORITARIAN
measures to establish Sinhala supremacy.
In 1956, an Act was passed to
recognise Sinhala as the only official
language, thus disregarding Tamil. The
governments followed preferential
policies that favoured Sinhala
applicants for university positions and
government jobs. A new constitution
stipulated that the state shall protect
and foster Buddhism.
All these government measures,
coming one after the other, gradually
increased the feeling of alienation
among the Sri Lankan Tamils. They felt
that none of the major political parties
led by the Buddhist Sinhala leaders
were sensitive to their language and
culture. They felt that the constitution
and government policies denied them
equal political rights, discriminated
against them in getting jobs and other
opportunities and ignored their
interests. As a result, the relations
Ethnic Communities
of Sri Lanka
Sinhalese
Sri Lankan Tamil
Indian Tamil
Muslim
© NCERTnot to be republished
4
Democra t i c Pol i t i c s
What kind of a solution is
this? I am glad our
Constitution does not say
which minister will come from
which community.
Civil war: A violent
conflict between
opposing groups within
a country that becomes
so intense that it appears
like a war.
The Belgian leaders took a different
path. They recognised the existence of
regional differences and cultural
diversities. Between 1970 and 1993,
they amended their constitution four
times so as to work out an arrangement
that would enable everyone to live
together within the same country. The
arrangement they wor ked out is
different from any other country and
is very innovative. Here are some of
the elements of the Belgian model:
Constitution prescribes that the
number of Dutch and French-speaking
ministers shall be equal in the central
government. Some special laws require
the support of majority of members
from each linguistic group. Thus, no
What’s wrong if
the majority
community
rules? If Sinhalas
don’t rule in Sri
Lanka, where
else will they
rule?
single community can make decisions
unilaterally.
Many powers of the central
government have been given to state
governments of the two regions of the
country. The state governments are not
subordinate to the Central Government.
Brussels has a separate government
in which both the communities have
equal representation. The Frenchspeaking
people accepted equal
representation in Brussels because the
Dutch-speaking community has
accepted equal representation in the
Central Government.
Accommodation in Belgium
between the Sinhala and Tamil
communities strained over time.
The Sri Lankan Tamils launched
parties and struggles for the recognition
of Tamil as an official language, for
regional autonomy and equality of
opportunity in securing education and
jobs. But their demand for more
autonomy to provinces populated by
the Tamils was repeatedly denied. By
1980s several political organisations
were formed demanding an
independent Tamil Eelam (state) in
northern and eastern parts of Sri Lanka.
The distrust between the two
communities turned into widespread
conflict. It soon turned into a CIVIL WAR.
As a result thousands of people of both
the communities have been killed. Many
families were forced to leave the country
as refugees and many more lost their
livelihoods. You have read (Chapter 1
of Economics textbook, Class X) about
Sri Lanka’s excellent record of economic
development, education and health. But
the civil war has caused a terrible setback
to the social, cultural and economic life
of the country.
The photograph here is of a street
address in Belgium. You will notice that
place names and directions in two
languages – French and Dutch.
© Wikipedia
© NCERTnot to be republished
Power s h a r i n g
5
So you are
saying that
sharing of power
makes us more
powerful. Sounds
odd! Let me
think. Read any newspaper for one week and make clippings of
news related to ongoing conflicts or wars. A group of five
students could pool their clippings together and do the following:
Classify these conflicts by their location (your state, India,
outside India).
Find out the cause of each of these conflicts. How many of
these are related to power sharing disputes?
Which of these conflicts could be resolved by working out power
sharing arrangements?
What do we learn from these two stories
of Belgium and Sri Lanka? Both are
democracies. Yet, they dealt with the
question of power sharing differently.
In Belgium, the leaders have realised
that the unity of the country is possible
only by respecting the feelings and
interests of different communities and
regions. Such a realisation resulted in
mutually acceptable arrangements for
sharing power. Sri Lanka shows us a
contrasting example. It shows us that
if a majority community wants to force
its dominance over others and refuses
to share power, it can undermine the
unity of the country.
European Union Parliament in Belgium
Apart from the Central and
the State Government, there is a
third kind of government. This
‘community government’ is elected by
people belonging to one language
community – Dutch, French and
German-speaking – no matter where
they live. This government has the
power regarding cultural, educational
and language-related issues.
You might find the Belgian model
very complicated. It indeed is very
complicated, even for people living in
Belgium. But these arrangements have
worked well so far. They helped to
avoid civic strife between the two
major communities and a possible
division of the country on linguistic
lines. When many countries of Europe
came together to form the European
Union, Brussels was chosen as its
headquarters.
© NCERTnot to be republished
6
Democra t i c Pol i t i c s
Annette studies in a Dutch medium school in the
northern region of Belgium. Many French-speaking students in
her school want the medium of instruction to be French. Selvi
studies in a school in the northern region of Sri Lanka. All the
students in her school are Tamil-speaking and they want the
medium of instruction to be Tamil.
If the parents of Annette and Selvi were to approach
respective governments to realise the desire of the child
who is more likely to succeed? And why?
Why power sharing is desirable?
Thus, two different sets of reasons can
be given in favour of power sharing.
Firstly, power sharing is good because
it helps to reduce the possibility of
conflict between social groups. Since
social conflict often leads to violence
and political instability, power sharing
is a good way to ensure the stability of
political order. Imposing the will of
majority community over others may
look like an attractive option in the
short run, but in the long run it
undermines the unity of the nation.
Tyranny of the majority is not just
oppressive for the minority; it often
brings ruin to the majority as well.
There is a second, deeper reason
why power sharing is good for
democracies. Power sharing is the very
spirit of democracy. A democratic rule
involves sharing power with those
affected by its exercise, and who have
to live with its effects. People have a
right to be consulted on how they are
to be gover ned. A legitimate
government is one where citizens,
through participation, acquire a stake
in the system.
Let us call the first set of reasons
PRUDENTIAL and the second moral. While
prudential reasons stress that power
sharing will bring out better outcomes,
moral reasons emphasise the very act
of power sharing as valuable.
Prudential: Based on
prudence, or on careful
calculation of gains and
losses. Prudential decisions
are usually contrasted with
decisions based purely on
moral considerations.
The cartoon at the left refers to the
problems of running the Germany’s grand
coalition government that includes the two
major parties of the country, namely the
Christian Democratic Union and the
Social Democratic Party. The two parties
are historically rivals to each other. They
had to form a coalition government
because neither of them got clear majority
of seats on their own in the 2005
elections. They take divergent positions
on several policy matters, but still jointly
run the government.
© Tab - The Calgary Sun, Cagle Cartoons Inc.
© NCERTnot to be republished
Power s h a r i n g
7
As usual, Vikram was driving the motorbike under a vow of
silence and Vetal was the pillion rider. As usual, Vetal
started telling Vikram a story to keep him awake while
driving. This time the story went as follows:
“In the city of Beirut there lived a man called Khalil. His parents came
from different communities. His father was an Orthodox Christian and mother a Sunni
Muslim. This was not so uncommon in this modern, cosmopolitan city. People from
various communities that lived in Lebanon came to live in its capital, Beirut. They lived
together, intermingled, yet fought a bitter civil war among themselves. One of Khalil’s
uncles was killed in that war.
At the end of this civil war, Lebanon’s leaders came together and agreed to some basic
rules for power sharing among different communities. As per these rules, the country’s
President must belong to the Maronite sect of Catholic Christians. The Prime Minister must
be from the Sunni Muslim community. The post of Deputy Prime Minister is fixed for
Orthodox Christian sect and that of the Speaker for Shi’a Muslims. Under this pact, the
Christians agreed not to seek French protection and the Muslims agreed not to seek
unification with the neighbouring state of Syria.When the Christians and Muslims came to
this agreement, they were nearly equal in population. Both sides have continued to
respect this agreement though now the Muslims are in clear majority.
Khalil does not like this system one bit. He is a popular man with political ambition. But
under the present system the top position is out of his reach. He does not practise
either his father’s or his mother’s religion and does not wish to be known by either. He
cannot understand why Lebanon can’t be like any other ‘normal’ democracy. “Just hold
an election, allow everyone to contest and whoever wins maximum votes becomes the
president, no matter which community he comes from. Why can’t we do that, like in
other democracies of the world?” he asks. His elders, who have seen the bloodshed of
the civil war, tell him that the present system is the best guarantee for peace…”
The story was not finished, but they had reached the TV tower
where they stopped every day. Vetal wrapped up quickly
and posed his customary question to Vikram: “If
you had the power to rewrite the rules in
Lebanon, what would you do? Would you
adopt the ‘regular’ rules followed
everywhere, as Khalil suggests? Or stick to
the old rules? Or do something else?” Vetal
did not forget to remind Vikram of their basic
pact: “If you have an answer in mind and yet
do not speak up, your mobike will freeze, and
so will you!”
Can you help poor Vikram in answering Vetal?
Khalil’s
dilemma
© NCERTnot to be republished
8
Democra t i c Pol i t i c s
Recently some new laws were made in Russia giving more powers to
its president. During the same time the US president visited Russia.
What, according to this cartoon, is the relationship between democracy
and concentration of power? Can you think of some other examples to
illustrate the point being made here?
The idea of power sharing has
emerged in opposition to the notions
of undivided political power. For a
long time it was believed that all power
of a government must reside in one
person or group of persons located
at one place. It was felt that if the
power to decide is dispersed, it would
not be possible to take quick decisions
and to enforce them. But these
notions have changed with the
emergence of democracy. One basic
principle of democracy is that people
are the source of all political power.
In a democracy, people rule
themselves through institutions of
self-governance. In a good democratic
government, due respect is given to
diverse groups and views that exist in
a society. Everyone has a voice in the
shaping of public policies. Therefore,
it follows that in a democracy political
Forms of power sharing
power should be distributed among
as many citizens as possible.
In modern democracies, power
sharing arrangements can take many
forms. Let us look at some of the most
common arrangements that we have
or will come across.
1 Power is shared among different
organs of government, such as the
legislature, executive and judiciary. Let
us call this horizontal distribution of
power because it allows different organs
of government placed at the same level
to exercise different powers. Such a
separation ensures that none of the
organs can exercise unlimited power.
Each organ checks the others. This
results in a balance of power among
various institutions. Last year we studied
that in a democracy, even though
ministers and government officials
exercise power, they are responsible to
the Parliament or State Assemblies.
Similarly, although judges are appointed
by the executive, they can check the
functioning of executive or laws made
by the legislatures. This arrangement is
called a system of checks and balances.
2 Power can be shared among
governments at different levels – a
general government for the entire
country and governments at the
provincial or regional level. Such a
general government for the entire
country is usually called federal
government. In India, we refer to it
as the Central or Union Government.
The governments at the provincial or
regional level are called by different
names in different countries. In India,
Reigning Reins
© Olle Johansson - Sweden, Cagle Cartoons Inc. ©
NCERTnot to be republished
Power s h a r i n g
9
In my school, the
class monitor
changes every
month. Is that
what you call a
power sharing
arrangement?
we call them State Governments. This
system is not followed in all countries.
There are many countries where there
are no provincial or state
governments. But in those countries
like ours, where there are different
levels of government, the
constitution clearly lays down the
powers of different levels of
government. This is what they did in
Belgium, but was refused in Sri Lanka.
This is called federal division of
power. The same principle can be
extended to levels of government
lower than the State government, such
as the municipality and panchayat. Let
us call division of powers involving
higher and lower levels of
government ver tical division of
power. We shall study these at some
length in the next chapter.
3 Power may also be shared among
different social groups such as the
religious and linguistic groups.
‘Community government’ in Belgium
is a good example of this arrangement.
In some countries there are
constitutional and legal arrangements
whereby socially weaker sections and
women are repr esented in the
legislatures and administration. Last
year, we studied the system of ‘reserved
constituencies’ in assemblies and the
parliament of our country. This type
of arrangement is meant to give space
in the government and administration
to diverse social groups who otherwise
would feel aliena ted from the
government. This method is used to
give minority communities a fair share
in power. In Unit II, we shall look at
various ways of accommodating social
diversities.
4 Power sharing arrangements can
also be seen in the way political
par ties, pressure groups and
movements control or influence those
in power. In a democracy, the citizens
must have freedom to choose among
various contenders for power. In
contemporary democracies, this takes
the for m of competition among
different parties. Such competition
ensures that power does not remain in
one hand. In the long run, power is
shared among different political parties
that represent different ideologies and
social groups. Sometimes this kind of
sharing can be direct, when two or
more parties form an alliance to
contest elections. If their alliance is
elected, they for m a coalition
government and thus share power. In
a democracy, we find interest groups
such as those of traders, businessmen,
industrialists, farmers and industrial
workers. They also will have a share in
governmental power, either through
participation in gover nmental
committees or bringing influence on
the decision-making process. In Unit
III, we shall study the working of
political parties, pressure groups and
social movements.
© NCERTnot to be republished
10
Democra t i c Pol i t i c s
Here are some examples of power sharing. Which of the four types of power
sharing do these represent? Who is sharing power with whom?
The Bombay High Court ordered the Maharashtra state government to immediately
take action and improve living conditions for the 2,000-odd children at seven
children’s homes in Mumbai.
The government of Ontario state in Canada has agreed to a land claim settlement with
the aboriginal community. The Minister responsible for Native Affairs announced that
the government will work with aboriginal people in a spirit of mutual respect and
cooperation.
Russia’s two influential political parties, the Union of Right Forces and the Liberal
Yabloko Movement, agreed to unite their organisations into a strong right-wing
coalition. They propose to have a common list of candidates in the next
parliamentary elections.
The finance ministers of various states in Nigeria got together and demanded that
the federal government declare its sources of income. They also wanted to know the
formula by which the revenue is distributed to various state governments.
1. What are the different forms of power sharing in modern
democracies? Give an example of each of these.
2. State one prudential reason and one moral reason for power
sharing with an example from the Indian context.
3. After reading this chapter, three students drew different
conclusions. Which of these do you agree with and why? Give
your reasons in about 50 words.
Thomman - Power sharing is necessary only in societies
which have religious, linguistic or ethnic divisions.
Mathayi – Power sharing is suitable only for big countries that
have regional divisions.
Ouseph – Every society needs some form of power sharing
even if it is small or does not have social divisions.
4. The Mayor of Merchtem, a town near Brussels in Belgium, has
defended a ban on speaking French in the town’s schools. He
said that the ban would help all non-Dutch speakers integrate
in this Flemish town. Do you think that this measure is in
keeping with the spirit of Belgium’s power sharing
arrangements? Give your reasons in about 50 words. Exercises © NCERTnot to be republished
Power s h a r i n g
11
5. Read the following passage and pick out any one of the
prudential reasons for power sharing offered in this.
“We need to give more power to the panchayats to realise
the dream of Mahatma Gandhi and the hopes of the makers
of our Constitution. Panchayati Raj establishes true
democracy. It restores power to the only place where power
belongs in a democracy – in the hands of the people. Giving
power to Panchayats is also a way to reduce corruption and
increase administrative efficiency. When people participate in
the planning and implementation of developmental schemes,
they would naturally exercise greater control over these
schemes. This would eliminate the corrupt middlemen. Thus,
Panchayati Raj will strengthen the foundations of our
democracy.”
6. Different arguments are usually put forth in favour of and against
power sharing. Identify those which are in favour of power sharing
and select the answer using the codes given below? Power sharing:
A. reduces conflict among different communities
B. decreases the possibility of arbitrariness
C. delays decision making process
D. accommodates diversities
E. increases instability and divisiveness
F. promotes people’s participation in government
G. undermines the unity of a country
7. Consider the following statements about power sharing
arrangements in Belgium and Sri Lanka.
A. In Belgium, the Dutch-speaking majority people tried to impose
their domination on the minority French-speaking community.
B. In Sri Lanka, the policies of the government sought to ensure the
dominance of the Sinhala-speaking majority.
C. The Tamils in Sri Lanka demanded a federal arrangement of
power sharing to protect their culture, language and equality of
opportunity in education and jobs.
D. The transformation of Belgium from unitary government to a
federal one prevented a possible division of the country on
linguistic lines.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
(a) A, B, C and D (b) A, B and D (c) C and D (d) B, C and D
Exercises
(a) A B D F
(b) A C E F
(c) A B D G
(d) B C D G © NCERTnot to be republished
12
Democra t i c Pol i t i c s
9. Consider the following two statements on power sharing and
select the answer using the codes given below:
A. Power sharing is good for democracy.
B. It helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups.
Which of these statements are true and false?
(a) A is true but B is false
(b) Both A and B are true
(c) Both A and B are false
(d) A is false but B is true
List I List II
1. Power shared among different
organs of government A. Community government
2. Power shared among governments
at different levels B. Separation of powers
3. Power shared by different social
groups C. Coalition government
4. Power shared by two or more
political parties D. Federal government
8. Match List I (forms of power sharing) with List II (forms of government)
and select the correct answer using the codes given below in the lists:
Exercises
1 2 3 4
(a) D A B C
(b) B C D A
(c) B D A C
(d) C D A B
© NCERTnot to be republished
3
Nationalism in Europe
In 1848, Frédéric Sorrieu, a French artist, prepared a series of four
prints visualising his dream of a world made up of ‘democratic
and social Republics’, as he called them. The first print (Fig. 1) of the
series, shows the peoples of Europe and America – men and women
of all ages and social classes – marching in a long train, and offering
homage to the statue of Liberty as they pass by it. As you would
recall, artists of the time of the French Revolution personified Liberty
as a female figure – here you can recognise the torch of Enlightenment
she bears in one hand and the Charter of the Rights of Man in the
other. On the earth in the foreground of the image lie the shattered
remains of the symbols of absolutist institutions. In Sorrieu’s
utopian vision, the peoples of the world are grouped as distinct
nations, identified through their flags and national costume. Leading
the procession, way past the statue of Liberty, are the United States
and Switzerland, which by this time were already nation-states. France,
T h e R i s e o f N a t i o n a l i s m i n E u rope
Fig. 1 — The Dream of Worldwide Democratic and Social Republics – The Pact Between Nations, a print prepared by
Frédéric Sorrieu, 1848.
Chapter I
The Rise of Nationalism in Europe
New words
Absolutist – Literally, a government or
system of rule that has no restraints on
the power exercised. In history, the term
refers to a form of monarchical
government that was centralised,
militarised and repressive
Utopian – A vision of a society that is so
ideal that it is unlikely to actually exist
In what way do you think this print (Fig. 1)
depicts a utopian vision?
Activity
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
4
identifiable by the revolutionary tricolour, has just reached the statue.
She is followed by the peoples of Germany, bearing the black, red
and gold flag. Interestingly, at the time when Sorrieu created this
image, the German peoples did not yet exist as a united nation – the
flag they carry is an expression of liberal hopes in 1848 to unify the
numerous German-speaking principalities into a nation-state under
a democratic constitution. Following the German peoples are the
peoples of Austria, the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, Lombardy,
Poland, England, Ireland, Hungary and Russia. From the heavens
above, Christ, saints and angels gaze upon the scene. They have
been used by the artist to symbolise fraternity among the nations of
the world.
This chapter will deal with many of the issues visualised by Sorrieu
in Fig. 1. During the nineteenth century, nationalism emerged as a
force which brought about sweeping changes in the political and
mental world of Europe. The end result of these changes was the
emergence of the nation-state in place of the multi-national dynastic
empires of Europe. The concept and practices of a modern state, in
which a centralised power exercised sovereign control over a clearly
defined territory, had been developing over a long period of time
in Europe. But a nation-state was one in which the majority of its
citizens, and not only its rulers, came to develop a sense of common
identity and shared history or descent. This commonness did not
exist from time immemorial; it was forged through struggles, through
the actions of leaders and the common people. This chapter will
look at the diverse processes through which nation-states and
nationalism came into being in nineteenth-century Europe.
Ernst Renan, ‘What is a Nation?’
In a lecture delivered at the University of
Sorbonne in 1882, the French philosopher Ernst
Renan (1823-92) outlined his understanding of
what makes a nation. The lecture was
subsequently published as a famous essay entitled
‘Qu’est-ce qu’une nation?’ (‘What is a Nation?’).
In this essay Renan criticises the notion suggested
by others that a nation is formed by a common
language, race, religion, or territory:
‘A nation is the culmination of a long past of
endeavours, sacrifice and devotion. A heroic past,
great men, glory, that is the social capital upon
which one bases a national idea. To have
common glories in the past, to have a common
will in the present, to have performed great deeds
together, to wish to perform still more, these
are the essential conditions of being a people. A
nation is therefore a large-scale solidarity … Its
existence is a daily plebiscite … A province is its
inhabitants; if anyone has the right to be
consulted, it is the inhabitant. A nation never
has any real interest in annexing or holding on to
a country against its will. The existence of nations
is a good thing, a necessity even. Their existence
is a guarantee of liberty, which would be lost if
the world had only one law and only one master.’
Source
Source A
Summarise the attributes of a nation, as Renan
understands them. Why, in his view, are nations
important?
Discuss
New words
Plebiscite – A direct vote by which all the
people of a region are asked to accept or reject
a proposal
©NCERTnot to be republished
5
Nationalism in Europe
1 The French Revolution and the Idea of the Nation
The first clear expression of nationalism came with
the French Revolution in 1789. France, as you
would remember, was a full-fledged territorial state
in 1789 under the rule of an absolute monarch.
The political and constitutional changes that came
in the wake of the French Revolution led to the
transfer of sovereignty from the monarchy to a
body of French citizens. The revolution proclaimed
that it was the people who would henceforth
constitute the nation and shape its destiny.
From the very beginning, the French revolutionaries
introduced various measures and practices that
could create a sense of collective identity amongst
the French people. The ideas of la patrie (the
fatherland) and le citoyen (the citizen) emphasised
the notion of a united community enjoying equal rights under a
constitution. A new French flag, the tricolour, was chosen to replace
the former royal standard. The Estates General was elected by the
body of active citizens and renamed the National Assembly. New
hymns were composed, oaths taken and martyrs commemorated,
all in the name of the nation. A centralised administrative system
was put in place and it formulated uniform laws for all citizens
within its territory. Internal customs duties and dues were abolished
and a uniform system of weights and measures was adopted.
Regional dialects were discouraged and French, as it was spoken
and written in Paris, became the common language of the nation.
The revolutionaries further declared that it was the mission and the
destiny of the French nation to liberate the peoples of Europe
from despotism, in other words to help other peoples of Europe
to become nations.
When the news of the events in France reached the different cities
of Europe, students and other members of educated middle classes
began setting up Jacobin clubs. Their activities and campaigns
prepared the way for the French armies which moved into Holland,
Belgium, Switzerland and much of Italy in the 1790s. With the
outbreak of the revolutionary wars, the French armies began to
carry the idea of nationalism abroad.
Fig. 2 — The cover of a German almanac
designed by the journalist Andreas Rebmann in
1798.
The image of the French Bastille being stormed
by the revolutionary crowd has been placed
next to a similar fortress meant to represent the
bastion of despotic rule in the German province
of Kassel. Accompanying the illustration is the
slogan: ‘The people must seize their own
freedom!’ Rebmann lived in the city of Mainz
and was a member of a German Jacobin group.
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
6
Within the wide swathe of territory that came under his control,
Napoleon set about introducing many of the reforms that he had
already introduced in France. Through a return to monarchy
Napoleon had, no doubt, destroyed democracy in France, but in
the administrative field he had incorporated revolutionary principles
in order to make the whole system more rational and efficient. The
Civil Code of 1804 – usually known as the Napoleonic Code –
did away with all privileges based on birth, established equality
before the law and secured the right to property. This Code was
exported to the regions under French control. In the Dutch Republic,
in Switzerland, in Italy and Germany, Napoleon simplified
administrative divisions, abolished the feudal system and freed
peasants from serfdom and manorial dues. In the towns too, guild
restrictions were removed. Transport and communication systems
were improved. Peasants, artisans, workers and new businessmen
Fig. 3 — Europe after the
Congress of Vienna, 1815.
ICELAND
(DENMARK)
NORWAY
(SWEDEN)
SWEDEN
DENMARK
HABOVER
(G.B.)
NETHERLANDS
ENGLAND
WALES
IRELAND GREAT
BRITAIN
SCOTLAND
FRANCE
SPAIN
PORTUGAL
MOROCCO
ALGERIA
TUNIS
EGYPT
PALESTINE
SYRIA
CYPRUS
MESOPOTAMIA
ARMENIA OTTOMAN EMPIRE
CRETE
GREECE
BULGARIA
ROMANIA
SERBIA
HUNGARY
AUSTRIAN EMPIRE
AUSTRIA
GALICIA
BAVARIA
SWITZERLAND
PRUSSIA
POLAND
RUSSIAN EMPIRE
SARDINIA
CORSICA
SMALL
STATES
KINGDOM
OF THE
TWO
SICILIES
GEORGIA
PERSIA
MEDITERRANEAN SEA
ATLANTIC SEA
©NCERTnot to be republished
7
Nationalism in Europe
enjoyed a new-found freedom. Businessmen and small-scale
producers of goods, in particular, began to realise that uniform
laws, standardised weights and measures, and a common national
currency would facilitate the movement and exchange of goods
and capital from one region to another.
However, in the areas conquered, the reactions of the local
populations to French rule were mixed. Initially, in many places such
as Holland and Switzerland, as well as in certain cities like Brussels,
Mainz, Milan and Warsaw, the French armies were welcomed as
harbingers of liberty. But the initial enthusiasm soon turned to hostility,
as it became clear that the new administrative arrangements did not
go hand in hand with political freedom. Increased taxation,
censorship, forced conscription into the French armies required to
conquer the rest of Europe, all seemed to outweigh the advantages
of the administrative changes.
Fig. 4 — The Planting of Tree of Liberty in Zweibrücken, Germany.
The subject of this colour print by the German painter Karl Kaspar Fritz is the occupation of the town of Zweibrücken
by the French armies. French soldiers, recognisable by their blue, white and red uniforms, have been portrayed as
oppressors as they seize a peasant’s cart (left), harass some young women (centre foreground) and force a peasant
down to his knees. The plaque being affixed to the Tree of Liberty carries a German inscription which in translation
reads: ‘Take freedom and equality from us, the model of humanity.’ This is a sarcastic reference to the claim of the
French as being liberators who opposed monarchy in the territories they entered.
Fig. 5 — The courier of Rhineland loses all that
he has on his way home from Leipzig.
Napoleon here is represented as a postman on
his way back to France after he lost the battle of
Leipzig in 1813. Each letter dropping out of his
bag bears the names of the territories he lost.
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
8
If you look at the map of mid-eighteenth-century Europe you will
find that there were no ‘nation-states’ as we know them today.
What we know today as Germany, Italy and Switzerland were
divided into kingdoms, duchies and cantons whose rulers had their
autonomous territories. Eastern and Central Europe were under
autocratic monarchies within the territories of which lived diverse
peoples. They did not see themselves as sharing a collective identity
or a common culture. Often, they even spoke different languages
and belonged to different ethnic groups. The Habsburg Empire
that ruled over Austria-Hungary, for example, was a patchwork of
many different regions and peoples. It included the Alpine regions
– the Tyrol, Austria and the Sudetenland – as well as Bohemia,
where the aristocracy was predominantly German-speaking. It also
included the Italian-speaking provinces of Lombardy and Venetia.
In Hungary, half of the population spoke Magyar while the other
half spoke a variety of dialects. In Galicia, the aristocracy spoke
Polish. Besides these three dominant groups, there also lived within
the boundaries of the empire, a mass of subject peasant peoples –
Bohemians and Slovaks to the north, Slovenes in Carniola, Croats
to the south, and Roumans to the east in Transylvania. Such
differences did not easily promote a sense of political unity. The
only tie binding these diverse groups together was a common
allegiance to the emperor.
How did nationalism and the idea of the nation-state emerge?
2.1 The Aristocracy and the New Middle Class
Socially and politically, a landed aristocracy was the dominant class
on the continent. The members of this class were united by a
common way of life that cut across regional divisions. They owned
estates in the countryside and also town-houses. They spoke French
for purposes of diplomacy and in high society. Their families were
often connected by ties of marriage. This powerful aristocracy was,
however, numerically a small group. The majority of the population
was made up of the peasantry. To the west, the bulk of the land
was farmed by tenants and small owners, while in Eastern and
Central Europe the pattern of landholding was characterised by
vast estates which were cultivated by serfs.
2 The Making of Nationalism in Europe
Some important dates
1797
Napoleon invades Italy; Napoleonic wars
begin.
1814-1815
Fall of Napoleon; the Vienna Peace
Settlement.
1821
Greek struggle for independence begins.
1848
Revolutions in Europe; artisans, industrial
workers and peasants revolt against
economic hardships; middle classes
demand constitutions and representative
governments; Italians, Germans, Magyars,
Poles, Czechs, etc. demand nation-states.
1859-1870
Unification of Italy.
1866-1871
Unification of Germany.
1905
Slav nationalism gathers force in the
Habsburg and Ottoman Empires.
©NCERTnot to be republished
9
Nationalism in Europe
In Western and parts of Central Europe the growth of industrial
production and trade meant the growth of towns and the emergence
of commercial classes whose existence was based on production
for the market. Industrialisation began in England in the second
half of the eighteenth century, but in France and parts of the German
states it occurred only during the nineteenth century. In its wake,
new social groups came into being: a working-class population, and
middle classes made up of industrialists, businessmen, professionals.
In Central and Eastern Europe these groups were smaller in number
till late nineteenth century. It was among the educated, liberal middle
classes that ideas of national unity following the abolition of
aristocratic privileges gained popularity.
2.2 What did Liberal Nationalism Stand for?
Ideas of national unity in early-nineteenth-century Europe were closely
allied to the ideology of liberalism. The term ‘liberalism’ derives
from the Latin root liber, meaning free. For the new middle classes
liberalism stood for freedom for the individual and equality of all
before the law. Politically, it emphasised the concept of government
by consent. Since the French Revolution, liberalism had stood for
the end of autocracy and clerical privileges, a constitution and
representative government through parliament. Nineteenth-century
liberals also stressed the inviolability of private property.
Yet, equality before the law did not necessarily stand for universal
suffrage. You will recall that in revolutionary France, which marked
the first political experiment in liberal democracy, the right to vote
and to get elected was granted exclusively to property-owning men.
Men without property and all women were excluded from political
rights. Only for a brief period under the Jacobins did all adult males
enjoy suffrage. However, the Napoleonic Code went back to limited
suffrage and reduced women to the status of a minor, subject to
the authority of fathers and husbands. Throughout the nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries women and non-propertied men
organised opposition movements demanding equal political rights.
In the economic sphere, liberalism stood for the freedom of markets
and the abolition of state-imposed restrictions on the movement
of goods and capital. During the nineteenth century this was a strong
demand of the emerging middle classes. Let us take the example of
the German-speaking regions in the first half of the nineteenth
century. Napoleon’s administrative measures had created out of
New words
Suffrage – The right to vote
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
10
countless small principalities a confederation of 39 states. Each of
these possessed its own currency, and weights and measures. A
merchant travelling in 1833 from Hamburg to Nuremberg to sell
his goods would have had to pass through 11 customs barriers and
pay a customs duty of about 5 per cent at each one of them. Duties
were often levied according to the weight or measurement of the
goods. As each region had its own system of weights and measures,
this involved time-consuming calculation. The measure of cloth,
for example, was the elle which in each region stood for a different
length. An elle of textile material bought in Frankfurt would get you
54.7 cm of cloth, in Mainz 55.1 cm, in Nuremberg 65.6 cm, in
Freiburg 53.5 cm.
Such conditions were viewed as obstacles to economic exchange
and growth by the new commercial classes, who argued for the
creation of a unified economic territory allowing the unhindered
movement of goods, people and capital. In 1834, a customs union
or zollverein was formed at the initiative of Prussia and joined by
most of the German states. The union abolished tariff barriers and
reduced the number of currencies from over thirty to two. The
creation of a network of railways further stimulated mobility,
harnessing economic interests to national unification. A wave of
economic nationalism strengthened the wider nationalist sentiments
growing at the time.
2.3 A New Conservatism after 1815
Following the defeat of Napoleon in 1815, European governments
were driven by a spirit of conservatism. Conservatives believed
that established, traditional institutions of state and society – like the
monarchy, the Church, social hierarchies, property and the family –
should be preserved. Most conservatives, however, did not propose
a return to the society of pre-revolutionary days. Rather, they realised,
from the changes initiated by Napoleon, that modernisation could
in fact strengthen traditional institutions like the monarchy. It could
make state power more effective and strong. A modern army, an
efficient bureaucracy, a dynamic economy, the abolition of feudalism
and serfdom could strengthen the autocratic monarchies of Europe.
In 1815, representatives of the European powers – Britain, Russia,
Prussia and Austria – who had collectively defeated Napoleon, met
at Vienna to draw up a settlement for Europe. The Congress was
hosted by the Austrian Chancellor Duke Metternich. The delegates
Economists began to think in terms of the national
economy. They talked of how the nation could
develop and what economic measures could help
forge this nation together.
Friedrich List, Professor of Economics at the
University of Tübingen in Germany, wrote in 1834:
‘The aim of the zollverein is to bind the Germans
economically into a nation. It will strengthen the
nation materially as much by protecting its
interests externally as by stimulating its internal
productivity. It ought to awaken and raise
national sentiment through a fusion of individual
and provincial interests. The German people have
realised that a free economic system is the only
means to engender national feeling.’
Source
Source B
Describe the political ends that List hopes to
achieve through economic measures.
Discuss
New words
Conservatism – A political philosophy that
stressed the importance of tradition, established
institutions and customs, and preferred gradual
development to quick change
©NCERTnot to be republished
11
Nationalism in Europe
drew up the Treaty of Vienna of 1815 with the object of undoing
most of the changes that had come about in Europe during the
Napoleonic wars. The Bourbon dynasty, which had been deposed
during the French Revolution, was restored to power, and France
lost the territories it had annexed under Napoleon. A series of states
were set up on the boundaries of France to prevent French expansion
in future. Thus the kingdom of the Netherlands, which included
Belgium, was set up in the north and Genoa was added to Piedmont
in the south. Prussia was given important new territories on its western
frontiers, while Austria was given control of northern Italy. But the
German confederation of 39 states that had been set up by Napoleon
was left untouched. In the east, Russia was given part of Poland
while Prussia was given a portion of Saxony. The main intention
was to restore the monarchies that had been overthrown by
Napoleon, and create a new conservative order in Europe.
Conservative regimes set up in 1815 were autocratic. They did not
tolerate criticism and dissent, and sought to curb activities that
questioned the legitimacy of autocratic governments. Most of them
imposed censorship laws to control what was said in newspapers,
books, plays and songs and reflected the ideas of liberty and freedom
Plot on a map of Europe the changes drawn
up by the Vienna Congress.
Activity
Fig. 6 — The Club of Thinkers, anonymous caricature dating to c. 1820.
The plaque on the left bears the inscription: ‘The most important question of today’s meeting: How
long will thinking be allowed to us?’
The board on the right lists the rules of the Club which include the following:
‘1. Silence is the first commandment of this learned society.
2. To avoid the eventuality whereby a member of this club may succumb to the temptation of
speech, muzzles will be distributed to members upon entering.’
What is the caricaturist trying to depict?
Discuss ©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
12
associated with the French Revolution. The memory of the French
Revolution nonetheless continued to inspire liberals. One of the major
issues taken up by the liberal-nationalists, who criticised the new
conservative order, was freedom of the press.
2.4 The Revolutionaries
During the years following 1815, the fear of repression drove many
liberal-nationalists underground. Secret societies sprang up in many
European states to train revolutionaries and spread their ideas. To
be revolutionary at this time meant a commitment to oppose
monarchical forms that had been established after the Vienna
Congress, and to fight for liberty and freedom. Most of these
revolutionaries also saw the creation of nation-states as a necessary
part of this struggle for freedom.
One such individual was the Italian revolutionary Giuseppe Mazzini.
Born in Genoa in 1807, he became a member of the secret society
of the Carbonari. As a young man of 24, he was sent into exile in
1831 for attempting a revolution in Liguria. He subsequently founded
two more underground societies, first, Young Italy in Marseilles,
and then, Young Europe in Berne, whose members were like-minded
young men from Poland, France, Italy and the German states.
Mazzini believed that God had intended nations to be the natural
units of mankind. So Italy could not continue to be a patchwork of
small states and kingdoms. It had to be forged into a single unified
republic within a wider alliance of nations. This unification alone
could be the basis of Italian liberty. Following his model, secret
societies were set up in Germany, France, Switzerland and Poland.
Mazzini’s relentless opposition to monarchy and his vision of
democratic republics frightened the conservatives. Metternich
described him as ‘the most dangerous enemy of our social order’.
Fig. 7 — Giuseppe Mazzini and the founding of
Young Europe in Berne 1833.
Print by Giacomo Mantegazza.
©NCERTnot to be republished
13
Nationalism in Europe
3 The Age of Revolutions: 1830-1848
As conservative regimes tried to consolidate their power, liberalism
and nationalism came to be increasingly associated with revolution
in many regions of Europe such as the Italian and German states,
the provinces of the Ottoman Empire, Ireland and Poland. These
revolutions were led by the liberal-nationalists belonging to the
educated middle-class elite, among whom were professors, schoolteachers,
clerks and members of the commercial middle classes.
The first upheaval took place in France in July 1830. The Bourbon
kings who had been restored to power during the conservative
reaction after 1815, were now overthrown by liberal revolutionaries
who installed a constitutional monarchy with Louis Philippe at its
head. ‘When France sneezes,’ Metternich once remarked, ‘the rest of
Europe catches cold.’ The July Revolution sparked an uprising in
Brussels which led to Belgium breaking away from the United
Kingdom of the Netherlands.
An event that mobilised nationalist feelings among the educated elite
across Europe was the Greek war of independence. Greece had
been part of the Ottoman Empire since the fifteenth century. The
growth of revolutionary nationalism in Europe sparked off a struggle
for independence amongst the Greeks which began in 1821.
Nationalists in Greece got support from other Greeks living in exile
and also from many West Europeans who had sympathies for ancient
Greek culture. Poets and artists lauded Greece as the cradle of
European civilisation and mobilised public opinion to support its
struggle against a Muslim empire. The English poet Lord Byron
organised funds and later went to fight in the war, where he died of
fever in 1824. Finally, the Treaty of Constantinople of 1832
recognised Greece as an independent nation.
3.1 The Romantic Imagination and National Feeling
The development of nationalism did not come about only through
wars and territorial expansion. Culture played an important role in
creating the idea of the nation: art and poetry, stories and music
helped express and shape nationalist feelings.
Let us look at Romanticism, a cultural movement which sought to
develop a particular form of nationalist sentiment. Romantic artists
and poets generally criticised the glorification of reason and science
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
14
Fig. 8 — The Massacre at Chios, Eugene Delacroix, 1824.
The French painter Delacroix was one of the most important French Romantic
painters. This huge painting (4.19m x 3.54m) depicts an incident in which
20,000 Greeks were said to have been killed by Turks on the island of Chios. By
dramatising the incident, focusing on the suffering of women and children, and
using vivid colours, Delacroix sought to appeal to the emotions of the spectators,
and create sympathy for the Greeks.
and focused instead on emotions, intuition and mystical feelings.
Their effort was to create a sense of a shared collective heritage, a
common cultural past, as the basis of a nation.
Other Romantics such as the German philosopher Johann Gottfried
Herder (1744-1803) claimed that true German culture was to be
discovered among the common people – das volk. It was through
folk songs, folk poetry and folk dances that the true spirit of the
nation (volksgeist) was popularised. So collecting and recording these
forms of folk culture was essential to the project of nation-building.
©NCERTnot to be republished
15
Nationalism in Europe
The Grimm Brothers: Folktales and
Nation-building
Grimms’ Fairy Tales is a familiar name. The brothers
Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm were born in the
German city of Hanau in 1785 and 1786
respectively. While both of them studied law,
they soon developed an interest in collecting old
folktales. They spent six years travelling from
village to village, talking to people and writing
down fairy tales, which were handed down
through the generations. These were popular
both among children and adults. In 1812, they
published their first collection of tales.
Subsequently, both the brothers became active
in liberal politics, especially the movement
for freedom of the press. In the meantime they
also published a 33-volume dictionary of the
German language.
The Grimm brothers also saw French domination
as a threat to German culture, and believed that
the folktales they had collected were expressions
of a pure and authentic German spirit. They
considered their projects of collecting folktales
and developing the German language as part of
the wider effort to oppose French domination
and create a German national identity.
The emphasis on vernacular language and the collection of local
folklore was not just to recover an ancient national spirit, but also to
carry the modern nationalist message to large audiences who were
mostly illiterate. This was especially so in the case of Poland, which
had been partitioned at the end of the eighteenth century by the
Great Powers – Russia, Prussia and Austria. Even though Poland no
longer existed as an independent territory, national feelings were kept
alive through music and language. Karol Kurpinski, for example,
celebrated the national struggle through his operas and music, turning
folk dances like the polonaise and mazurka into nationalist symbols.
Language too played an important role in developing nationalist
sentiments. After Russian occupation, the Polish language was forced
out of schools and the Russian language was imposed everywhere.
In 1831, an armed rebellion against Russian rule took place which
was ultimately crushed. Following this, many members of the clergy
in Poland began to use language as a weapon of national resistance.
Polish was used for Church gatherings and all religious instruction.
As a result, a large number of priests and bishops were put in jail or
sent to Siberia by the Russian authorities as punishment for their
refusal to preach in Russian. The use of Polish came to be seen as a
symbol of the struggle against Russian dominance.
3.2 Hunger, Hardship and Popular Revolt
The 1830s were years of great economic hardship in Europe. The
first half of the nineteenth century saw an enormous increase in
population all over Europe. In most countries there were more
seekers of jobs than employment. Population from rural areas
migrated to the cities to live in overcrowded slums. Small producers
in towns were often faced with stiff competition from imports of
cheap machine-made goods from England, where industrialisation
was more advanced than on the continent. This was especially so in
textile production, which was carried out mainly in homes or small
workshops and was only partly mechanised. In those regions of
Europe where the aristocracy still enjoyed power, peasants struggled
under the burden of feudal dues and obligations. The rise of food
prices or a year of bad harvest led to widespread pauperism in
town and country.
The year 1848 was one such year. Food shortages and widespread
unemployment brought the population of Paris out on the roads.
Barricades were erected and Louis Philippe was forced to flee. A
Discuss the importance of language and
popular traditions in the creation of national
identity.
Discuss
Box 1
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
16
National Assembly proclaimed a Republic, granted suffrage to all
adult males above 21, and guaranteed the right to work. National
workshops to provide employment were set up.
Earlier, in 1845, weavers in Silesia had led a revolt against contractors
who supplied them raw material and gave them orders for finished
textiles but drastically reduced their payments. The journalist Wilhelm
Wolff described the events in a Silesian village as follows:
In these villages (with 18,000 inhabitants) cotton weaving is the
most widespread occupation … The misery of the workers is
extreme. The desperate need for jobs has been taken advantage
of by the contractors to reduce the prices of the goods they
order …
On 4 June at 2 p.m. a large crowd of weavers emerged from
their homes and marched in pairs up to the mansion of their
contractor demanding higher wages. They were treated with
scorn and threats alternately. Following this, a group of them
forced their way into the house, smashed its elegant windowpanes,
furniture, porcelain … another group broke into the
storehouse and plundered it of supplies of cloth which they
tore to shreds … The contractor fled with his family to a
neighbouring village which, however, refused to shelter such a
person. He returned 24 hours later having requisitioned the army.
In the exchange that followed, eleven weavers were shot.
Fig. 9 — Peasants’ uprising, 1848.
Describe the cause of the Silesian weavers’
uprising. Comment on the viewpoint of the
journalist.
Discuss
Imagine you are a weaver who saw the events
as they unfolded. Write a report on what you saw.
Activity
©NCERTnot to be republished
17
Nationalism in Europe
3.3 1848: The Revolution of the Liberals
Parallel to the revolts of the poor, unemployed and starving peasants
and workers in many European countries in the year 1848, a revolution
led by the educated middle classes was under way. Events of February
1848 in France had brought about the abdication of the monarch
and a republic based on universal male suffrage had been proclaimed.
In other parts of Europe where independent nation-states did not
yet exist – such as Germany, Italy, Poland, the Austro-Hungarian
Empire – men and women of the liberal middle classes combined
their demands for constitutionalism with national unification. They
took advantage of the growing popular unrest to push their
demands for the creation of a nation-state on parliamentary
principles – a constitution, freedom of the press and freedom
of association.
In the German regions a large number of political associations whose
members were middle-class professionals, businessmen and
prosperous artisans came together in the city of Frankfurt and decided
to vote for an all-German National Assembly. On 18 May 1848,
831 elected representatives marched in a festive procession to take
their places in the Frankfurt parliament convened in the Church of
St Paul. They drafted a constitution for a German nation to be
headed by a monarchy subject to a parliament. When the deputies
offered the crown on these terms to Friedrich Wilhelm IV, King of
Prussia, he rejected it and joined other monarchs to oppose the
elected assembly. While the opposition of the aristocracy and military
became stronger, the social basis of parliament eroded. The
parliament was dominated by the middle classes who resisted the
demands of workers and artisans and consequently lost their support.
In the end troops were called in and the assembly was forced
to disband.
The issue of extending political rights to women was a controversial
one within the liberal movement, in which large numbers of women
had participated actively over the years. Women had formed their
own political associations, founded newspapers and taken part in
political meetings and demonstrations. Despite this they were denied
How were liberty and equality for women
to be defined?
The liberal politician Carl Welcker, an elected
member of the Frankfurt Parliament, expressed
the following views:
‘Nature has created men and women to carry
out different functions … Man, the stronger, the
bolder and freer of the two, has been designated
as protector of the family, its provider, meant for
public tasks in the domain of law, production,
defence. Woman, the weaker, dependent and
timid, requires the protection of man. Her sphere
is the home, the care of the children, the
nurturing of the family … Do we require any
further proof that given such differences, equality
between the sexes would only endanger
harmony and destroy the dignity of the family?’
Louise Otto-Peters (1819-95) was a political
activist who founded a women’s journal and
subsequently a feminist political association. The
first issue of her newspaper (21 April 1849) carried
the following editorial:
‘Let us ask how many men, possessed by
thoughts of living and dying for the sake of Liberty,
would be prepared to fight for the freedom of
the entire people, of all human beings? When
asked this question, they would all too easily
respond with a “Yes!”, though their untiring
efforts are intended for the benefit of only one
half of humanity – men. But Liberty is indivisible!
Free men therefore must not tolerate to be
surrounded by the unfree …’
An anonymous reader of the same newspaper
sent the following letter to the editor on 25 June
1850:
‘It is indeed ridiculous and unreasonable to deny
women political rights even though they enjoy
the right to property which they make use
of. They perform functions and assume
responsibilities without however getting the
benefits that accrue to men for the same … Why
this injustice? Is it not a disgrace that even the
stupidest cattle-herder possesses the right
to vote, simply because he is a man, whereas
highly talented women owning considerable
property are excluded from this right, even
though they contribute so much to the
maintenance of the state?’ Source
Source C
New words
Feminist – Awareness of women’s rights and interests based on
the belief of the social, economic and political equality of the genders
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
18
Fig. 10 — The Frankfurt parliament in the Church of St Paul.
Contemporary colour print. Notice the women in the upper left gallery.
Compare the positions on the question of
women’s rights voiced by the three writers cited
above. What do they reveal about liberal
ideology?
Discuss
New words
Ideology – System of ideas reflecting a
particular social and political vision
suffrage rights during the election of the Assembly. When the
Frankfurt parliament convened in the Church of St Paul, women
were admitted only as observers to stand in the visitors’ gallery.
Though conservative forces were able to suppress liberal movements
in 1848, they could not restore the old order. Monarchs were
beginning to realise that the cycles of revolution and repression could
only be ended by granting concessions to the liberal-nationalist
revolutionaries. Hence, in the years after 1848, the autocratic
monarchies of Central and Eastern Europe began to introduce the
changes that had already taken place in Western Europe before 1815.
Thus serfdom and bonded labour were abolished both in the
Habsburg dominions and in Russia. The Habsburg rulers granted
more autonomy to the Hungarians in 1867.
©NCERTnot to be republished
19
Nationalism in Europe
4 The Making of Germany and Italy
4.1 Germany – Can the Army be the Architect of a Nation?
After 1848, nationalism in Europe moved away from its association
with democracy and revolution. Nationalist sentiments were often
mobilised by conservatives for promoting state power and achieving
political domination over Europe.
This can be observed in the process by which Germany and Italy came
to be unified as nation-states. As you have seen, nationalist feelings were
widespread among middle-class Germans, who in 1848 tried to unite
the different regions of the German confederation into a nation-state
governed by an elected parliament. This liberal initiative to nation-building
was, however, repressed by the combined forces of the monarchy and
the military, supported by the large landowners (called Junkers) of Prussia.
From then on, Prussia took on the leadership of the movement for
national unification. Its chief minister, Otto von
Bismarck, was the architect of this process carried
out with the help of the Prussian army and
bureaucracy. Three wars over seven years – with
Austria, Denmark and France – ended in Prussian
victory and completed the process of unification.
In January 1871, the Prussian king, William I,
was proclaimed German Emperor in a ceremony
held at Versailles.
On the bitterly cold morning of 18 January 1871,
an assembly comprising the princes of the
German states, representatives of the army,
important Prussian ministers including the chief
minister Otto von Bismarck gathered in the
unheated Hall of Mirrors in the Palace of Versailles
to proclaim the new German Empire headed
by Kaiser William I of Prussia.
The nation-building process in Germany had
demonstrated the dominance of Prussian state
power. The new state placed a strong emphasis
on modernising the currency, banking, legal
and judicial systems in Germany. Prussian
measures and practices often became a model for
the rest of Germany.
Fig. 11 — The proclamation of the German empire in the Hall of
Mirrors at Versailles, Anton von Werner. At the centre stands the
Kaiser and the chief commander of the Prussian army, General von
Roon. Near them is Bismarck. This monumental work (2.7m x
2.7m) was completed and presented by the artist to Bismarck on
the latter’s 70th birthday in 1885.
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
20
4.2 Italy Unified
Like Germany, Italy too had a long history of political fragmentation.
Italians were scattered over several dynastic states as well as the
multi-national Habsburg Empire. During the middle of the
nineteenth century, Italy was divided into seven states, of which
only one, Sardinia-Piedmont, was ruled by an Italian princely house.
The north was under Austrian Habsburgs, the centre was ruled by
the Pope and the southern regions were under the domination
of the Bourbon kings of Spain. Even the Italian language had
not acquired one common form and still had many regional and
local variations.
During the 1830s, Giuseppe Mazzini had sought to put together a
coherent programme for a unitary Italian Republic. He had also
formed a secret society called Young Italy for the dissemination of
his goals. The failure of revolutionary uprisings both in 1831 and
1848 meant that the mantle now fell on Sardinia-Piedmont under
its ruler King Victor Emmanuel II to unify the Italian states through
war. In the eyes of the ruling elites of this region, a unified
Italy offered them the possibility of economic development and
political dominance.
Fig. 13 — Caricature of Otto von Bismarck in
the German reichstag (parliament), from Figaro,
Vienna, 5 March 1870.
Describe the caricature. How does it represent
the relationship between Bismarck and the
elected deputies of Parliament? What
interpretation of democratic processes is the
artist trying to convey?
Activity
NORTH SEA
SCHLESWIGHOLSTEIN
MECKLENBURGSCHWERIN
THURINGIAN
STATES
HANOVER
WESTPHALIA
HESSEN NASSA
RHINELAND
BRUNSWICK
BAVARIA
BADEN
WURTTEMBERG
AUSTRIAN
EMPIRE
SILESIA
POSEN
BRANDENBURG
POMERANIA
WEST PRUSSIA
EAST PRUSSIA
BALTIC SEA
PRUSSIA
RUSSIAN
EMPIRE
Prussia before 1866
Conquered by Prussia in Austro-Prussia
War, 1866
Austrian territories excluded from German
Confederation 1867
Joined with Prussia to form German
Confederation, 1867
South German states joining with Prussia to
form German Empire, 1871
Won by Prussia in Franco-Prussia War, 1871
Fig. 12 — Unification of Germany (1866-71). ©NCERTnot to be republished
21
Nationalism in Europe
Chief Minister Cavour who led the movement to unify the regions
of Italy was neither a revolutionary nor a democrat. Like many
other wealthy and educated members of the Italian elite, he spoke
French much better than he did Italian. Through a tactful diplomatic
alliance with France engineered by Cavour, Sardinia-Piedmont
succeeded in defeating the Austrian forces in 1859. Apart from regular
troops, a large number of armed volunteers under the leadership of
Giuseppe Garibaldi joined the fray. In 1860, they marched into South
Italy and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies and succeeded in winning
the support of the local peasants in order to drive out the Spanish
rulers. In 1861 Victor Emmanuel II was proclaimed king of united
Italy. However, much of the Italian population, among whom rates
of illiteracy were very high, remained blissfully unaware of liberalnationalist
ideology. The peasant masses who had supported Garibaldi
in southern Italy had never heard of Italia, and believed that ‘La Talia’
was Victor Emmanuel’s wife!
Fig. 14(a) — Italian states before unification, 1858.
Fig. 14(b) — Italy after unification.
The map shows the year in which different
regions (seen in Fig 14(a) become part of a
unified Italy.
SWITZERLAND
VENETIA LOMBARDY
SAVOY
SARDINIA PARMA
MODENA
TUSCANY
SAN MARINO
PAPAL
STATE
KINGDOM
OF BOTH
SICILIES
TUNIS
MONACO
1858
1858-60
1860
1866
1870
SWITZERLAND
TUNIS
4.3 The Strange Case of Britain
The model of the nation or the nation-state, some scholars have
argued, is Great Britain. In Britain the formation of the nation-state
AUSTRIA
Look at Fig. 14(a). Do you think that the people
living in any of these regions thought of
themselves as Italians?
Examine Fig. 14(b). Which was the first region
to become a part of unified Italy? Which was the
last region to join? In which year did the largest
number of states join?
Activity
1858
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
22
was not the result of a sudden upheaval or revolution. It was the
result of a long-drawn-out process. There was no British nation
prior to the eighteenth century. The primary identities of the people
who inhabited the British Isles were ethnic ones – such as English,
Welsh, Scot or Irish. All of these ethnic groups had their own cultural
and political traditions. But as the English nation steadily grew in
wealth, importance and power, it was able to extend its influence
over the other nations of the islands. The English parliament, which
had seized power from the monarchy in 1688 at the end of a
protracted conflict, was the instrument through which a nation-state,
with England at its centre, came to be forged. The Act of Union
(1707) between England and Scotland that resulted in the formation
of the ‘United Kingdom of Great Britain’ meant, in effect, that
England was able to impose its influence on Scotland. The British
parliament was henceforth dominated by its English members. The
growth of a British identity meant that Scotland’s distinctive culture
and political institutions were systematically suppressed. The Catholic
clans that inhabited the Scottish Highlands suffered terrible repression
whenever they attempted to assert their independence. The Scottish
Highlanders were forbidden to speak their Gaelic language or
wear their national dress, and large numbers were forcibly driven
out of their homeland.
Ireland suffered a similar fate. It was a country deeply divided
between Catholics and Protestants. The English helped the Protestants
of Ireland to establish their dominance over a largely Catholic country.
Catholic revolts against British dominance were suppressed. After a
failed revolt led by Wolfe Tone and his United Irishmen (1798),
Ireland was forcibly incorporated into the United Kingdom in 1801.
A new ‘British nation’ was forged through the propagation of a
dominant English culture. The symbols of the new Britain – the
British flag (Union Jack), the national anthem (God Save Our Noble
King), the English language – were actively promoted and the older
nations survived only as subordinate partners in this union.
New words
Ethnic – Relates to a common racial, tribal, or
cultural origin or background that a community
identifies with or claims
The artist has portrayed Garibaldi as holding on to the base of
the boot, so that the King of Sardinia-Piedmont can enter it from
the top. Look at the map of Italy once more. What statement is
this caricature making?
Activity
Giuseppe Garibaldi (1807-82) is perhaps the
most celebrated of Italian freedom fighters. He
came from a family engaged in coastal trade and
was a sailor in the merchant navy. In 1833 he
met Mazzini, joined the Young Italy movement
and participated in a republican uprising in
Piedmont in 1834. The uprising was suppressed
and Garibaldi had to flee to South America, where
he lived in exile till 1848. In 1854, he supported
Victor Emmanuel II in his efforts to unify the
Italian states. In 1860, Garibaldi led the famous
Expedition of the Thousand to South Italy. Fresh
volunteers kept joining through the course of
the campaign, till their numbers grew to about
30,000. They were popularly known as Red
Shirts.
In 1867, Garibaldi led an army of volunteers to
Rome to fight the last obstacle to the unification
of Italy, the Papal States where a French garrison
was stationed. The Red Shirts proved to be no
match for the combined French and Papal troops.
It was only in 1870 when, during the war with
Prussia, France withdrew its troops from Rome
that the Papal States were finally joined
to Italy.
Box 2
Fig. 15 – Garibaldi helping King Victor
Emmanuel II of Sardinia-Piedmont to pull on the
boot named ‘Italy’. English caricature of 1859.
©NCERTnot to be republished
23
Nationalism in Europe
5 Visualising the Nation
While it is easy enough to represent a ruler through a portrait or a
statue, how does one go about giving a face to a nation? Artists in
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries found a way out by
personifying a nation. In other words they represented a country as
if it were a person. Nations were then portrayed as female figures.
The female form that was chosen to personify the nation did not
stand for any particular woman in real life; rather it sought to give
the abstract idea of the nation a concrete form. That is, the female
figure became an allegory of the nation.
You will recall that during the French Revolution artists used the
female allegory to portray ideas such as Liberty, Justice and the
Republic. These ideals were represented through specific objects or
symbols. As you would remember, the attributes of Liberty are the
red cap, or the broken chain, while Justice is generally a blindfolded
woman carrying a pair of weighing scales.
Similar female allegories were invented by artists in the nineteenth
century to represent the nation. In France she was christened
Marianne, a popular Christian name, which underlined the idea of a
people’s nation. Her characteristics were drawn from those of Liberty
and the Republic – the red cap, the tricolour, the cockade. Statues
of Marianne were erected in public squares to remind the public of
the national symbol of unity and to persuade them to identify with
it. Marianne images were marked on coins and stamps.
Similarly, Germania became the allegory of the German nation. In
visual representations, Germania wears a crown of oak leaves, as
the German oak stands for heroism.
New words
Allegory – When an abstract idea (for instance, greed, envy,
freedom, liberty) is expressed through a person or a thing. An
allegorical story has two meanings, one literal and one symbolic
Fig. 16 — Postage stamps of 1850 with the
figure of Marianne representing the Republic of
France.
Fig. 17 — Germania, Philip Veit, 1848.
The artist prepared this painting of Germania on a
cotton banner, as it was meant to hang from the
ceiling of the Church of St Paul where the Frankfurt
parliament was convened in March 1848.
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
24
Box 3
Meanings of the symbols
Attribute Significance
Broken chains Being freed
Breastplate with eagle Symbol of the German empire – strength
Crown of oak leaves Heroism
Sword Readiness to fight
Olive branch around the sword Willingness to make peace
Black, red and gold tricolour Flag of the liberal-nationalists in 1848, banned by the Dukes of the
German states
Rays of the rising sun Beginning of a new era
With the help of the chart in Box 3, identify the attributes of Veit’s
Germania and interpret the symbolic meaning of the painting.
In an earlier allegorical rendering of 1836, Veit had portrayed the
Kaiser’s crown at the place where he has now located the
broken chain. Explain the significance of this change.
Activity
Fig. 18 — The fallen Germania, Julius Hübner, 1850.
Describe what you see in Fig. 17. What historical events could Hübner be
referring to in this allegorical vision of the nation?
Activity
©NCERTnot to be republished
25
Nationalism in Europe
Fig. 19 — Germania guarding the Rhine.
In 1860, the artist Lorenz Clasen was commissioned to paint this image. The inscription
on Germania’s sword reads: ‘The German sword protects the German Rhine.’
Look once more at Fig. 10. Imagine you were a citizen of Frankfurt in March 1848 and were present during the
proceedings of the parliament. How would you (a) as a man seated in the hall of deputies, and (b) as a woman
observing from the galleries, relate to the banner of Germania hanging from the ceiling?
Activity
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
26
6 Nationalism and Imperialism
By the last quarter of the nineteenth century nationalism no longer
retained its idealistic liberal-democratic sentiment of the first half
of the century, but became a narrow creed with limited ends. During
this period nationalist groups became increasingly intolerant of each
other and ever ready to go to war. The major European powers, in
turn, manipulated the nationalist aspirations of the subject peoples
in Europe to further their own imperialist aims.
The most serious source of nationalist tension in Europe after 1871
was the area called the Balkans. The Balkans was a region of
geographical and ethnic variation comprising modern-day Romania,
Bulgaria, Albania, Greece, Macedonia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina,
Slovenia, Serbia and Montenegro whose inhabitants were broadly
known as the Slavs. A large part of the Balkans was under the control
of the Ottoman Empire. The spread of the ideas of romantic
nationalism in the Balkans together with the disintegration of the
Ottoman Empire made this region very explosive. All through the
nineteenth century the Ottoman Empire had sought to strengthen
itself through modernisation and internal reforms but with very
little success. One by one, its European subject nationalities broke
away from its control and declared independence. The Balkan
peoples based their claims for independence or political rights on
nationality and used history to prove that they had once been
independent but had subsequently been subjugated by foreign
powers. Hence the rebellious nationalities in the Balkans thought of
their struggles as attempts to win back their long-lost independence.
As the different Slavic nationalities struggled to define their identity
and independence, the Balkan area became an area of intense conflict.
The Balkan states were fiercely jealous of each other and each hoped
to gain more territory at the expense of the others. Matters were
further complicated because the Balkans also became the scene of
big power rivalry. During this period, there was intense rivalry among
the European powers over trade and colonies as well as naval and
military might. These rivalries were very evident in the way the Balkan
problem unfolded. Each power – Russia, Germany, England,
Austro-Hungary – was keen on countering the hold of other powers
over the Balkans, and extending its own control over the area. This
led to a series of wars in the region and finally the First World War.
©NCERTnot to be republished
27
Nationalism in Europe
Nationalism, aligned with imperialism, led Europe to disaster in 1914.
But meanwhile, many countries in the world which had been
colonised by the European powers in the nineteenth century began
to oppose imperial domination. The anti-imperial movements that
developed everywhere were nationalist, in the sense that they all
struggled to form independent nation-states, and were inspired by
a sense of collective national unity, forged in confrontation with
imperialism. European ideas of nationalism were nowhere
replicated, for people everywhere developed their own specific variety
of nationalism. But the idea that societies should be organised into
‘nation-states’ came to be accepted as natural and universal.
Fig. 20 — A map celebrating the British Empire.
At the top, angels are shown carrying the banner of freedom. In the foreground, Britannia — the
symbol of the British nation — is triumphantly sitting over the globe. The colonies are represented
through images of tigers, elephants, forests and primitive people. The domination of the world is
shown as the basis of Britain’s national pride.
©NCERTnot to be republished
India and the Contemporary World
28
Discuss
Project
1. Explain what is meant by the 1848 revolution of the liberals. What were the political, social
and economic ideas supported by the liberals?
2. Choose three examples to show the contribution of culture to the growth of nationalism
in Europe.
3. Through a focus on any two countries, explain how nations developed over the nineteenth
century.
4. How was the history of nationalism in Britain unlike the rest of Europe?
5. Why did nationalist tensions emerge in the Balkans?
Find out more about nationalist symbols in countries outside Europe. For one or two countries,
collect examples of pictures, posters or music that are symbols of nationalism. How are these
different from European examples?
Discuss
Write in brief
1. Write a note on:
a) Guiseppe Mazzini
b) Count Camillo de Cavour
c) The Greek war of independence
d) Frankfurt parliament
e) The role of women in nationalist struggles
2. What steps did the French revolutionaries take to create a sense of collective
identity among the French people?
3. Who were Marianne and Germania? What was the importance of the way in
which they were portrayed?
4. Briefly trace the process of German unification.
5. What changes did Napoleon introduce to make the administrative system more
efficient in the territories ruled by him?
Write in brief
Project
©NCERTnot to be republished
Fe d e ra l i sm
13
Chapter 2
Federalism
Overview
In the previous chapter, we noted that vertical division of power among
different levels of governments is one of the major forms of power
sharing in modern democracies. In this chapter, we focus on this form
of power sharing. It is most commonly referred to as federalism. We
begin by describing federalism in general terms. The rest of the chapter
tries to understand the theory and practice of federalism in India. A
discussion of the federal constitutional provisions is followed by an
analysis of the policies and politics that has strengthened federalism in
practice. Towards the end of the chapter, we turn to the local
government, a new and third tier of Indian federalism.
© NCERTnot to be republished
14
Democra t i c Po l i t i c s
What is federalism?
Let us get back to the contrast between
Belgium and Sri Lanka that we saw in
the last chapter. You would recall that
one of the key changes made in the
Constitution of Belgium was to reduce
the power of the Central Government
and to give these powers to the regional
governments. Regional governments
existed in Belgium even earlier. They
had their roles and powers. But all these
powers were given to these
governments and could be withdrawn
by the Central Government. The
change that took place in 1993 was that
the regional governments were given
constitutional powers that were no
longer dependent on the central
government. Thus, Belgium shifted
from a unitary to a federal form of
government. Sri Lanka continues to be,
for all practical purposes, a unitary
system where the national government
has all the powers. Tamil leaders want
Sri Lanka to become a federal system.
Federalism is a system of
government in which the power is
divided between a central authority and
various constituent units of the
country. Usually, a federation has two
levels of government. One is the
government for the entire country that
is usually responsible for a few subjects
of common national interest. The
others are governments at the level of
provinces or states that look after
much of the day-to-day administering
of their state. Both these levels of
governments enjoy their power
independent of the other.
I am confused.
What do we call
the Indian
government? Is
it Union, Federal
or Central?
Though only 25 of the world’s 192 countries have federal political systems, their citizens make up 40 per cent of
the world’s population. Most of the large countries of the world are federations. Can you notice an exception to this
rule in this map?
Source: Montreal and Kingston, Handbook of Federal Countries: 2002, McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2002.
Federal
political systems
Canada
United States
of America
Mexico
PACIFIC OCEAN
Micronesia
Argentina
Venezuela
ATLANTIC
OCEAN Brazil
St. Kitts
and Nevis
Belgium
Switzerland
Spain
Nigeria
Ethiopia
Comoros
Bosnia and
Herzegovina
Austria
Pakistan
Russia
India
Malaysia
Australia
INDIAN
OCEAN
South Africa
PACIFIC OCEAN
United
Arab
Emirates
Germany
© NCERTnot to be republished
Fe d e ra l i sm
15
Jurisdiction: The area
over which someone
has legal authority. The
area may be defined in
terms of geographical
boundaries or in terms
of certain kinds of
subjects.
7 The federal system thus has dual
objectives: to safeguard and promote
unity of the country, while at the same
time accommodate regional diversity.
Therefore, two aspects are crucial for
the institutions and practice of
federalism. Governments at different
levels should agree to some rules of
power-sharing. They should also trust
that each would abide by its part of
the agreement. An ideal federal system
has both aspects : mutual trust and
agreement to live together.
The exact balance of power
between the central and the state
government varies from one federation
to another. This balance depends
mainly on the historical context in which
the federation was formed. There are
two kinds of routes through which
federations have been formed. The first
route involves independent States
coming together on their own to form
a bigger unit, so that by pooling
sovereignty and retaining identity they
can increase their security. This type of
‘coming together’ federations include
the USA, Switzerland and Australia. In
this first category of federations, all the
constituent States usually have equal
power and are strong vis-à-vis the
federal government.
The second route is where a large
country decides to divide its power
between the constituent States and the
national government. India, Spain and
Belgium are examples of this kind of
‘holding together’ federations. In
this second category, the central
government tends to be more powerful
vis-à-vis the States. Very often different
constituent units of the federation have
unequal powers. Some units are
granted special powers.
If federalism
works only in big
countries, why
did Belgium
adopt it?
In this sense, federations are
contrasted with unitary governments.
Under the unitary system, either there
is only one level of government or the
sub-units are subordinate to the central
government. The central government
can pass on orders to the provincial or
the local government. But in a federal
system, the central government cannot
order the state government to do
something. State government has
powers of its own for which it is not
answerable to the central government.
Both these governments are separately
answerable to the people.
Let us look at some of the key
features of federalism :
1 There are two or more levels (or
tiers) of government.
2 Different tiers of government
govern the same citizens, but each tier
has its own JURISDICTION in specific
matters of legislation, taxation and
administration.
3 The jurisdictions of the respective
levels or tiers of government are
specified in the constitution. So the
existence and authority of each tier of
government is constitutionally
guaranteed.
4 The fundamental provisions of
the constitution cannot be unilaterally
changed by one level of government.
Such changes require the consent of
both the levels of government.
5 Courts have the power to interpret
the constitution and the powers of
different levels of government. The
highest court acts as an umpire if
disputes arise between different levels
of government in the exercise of their
respective powers.
6 Sources of revenue for each level
of government are clearly specified to
ensure its financial autonomy.
© NCERTnot to be republished
16
Democra t i c Po l i t i c s
Isn’t that
strange? Did our
constitution
makers not know
about
federalism? Or
did they wish to
avoid talking
about it?
Some Nepalese citizens were discussing the proposals on the adoption
of federalism in their new constitution. This is what some of them said:
Khag Raj: I don’t like federalism. It would lead to reservation of seats for
different caste groups as in India.
Sarita: Ours in not a very big country. We don’t need federalism.
Babu Lal: I am hopeful that the Terai areas will get more autonomy if they get
their own state government.
Ram Ganesh: I like federalism because it will mean that powers that were earlier
enjoyed by the king will now be exercised by our elected representatives.
If you were participating in this conversation what would be your response to each
of these? Which of these reflect a wrong understanding of what federalism is?
What makes India a federal country?
We have earlier seen how small
countries like Belgium and Sri Lanka
face so many problems of managing
diversity. What about a vast country like
India, with so many languages, religions
and regions? What are the power
sharing arrangements in our country?
Let us begin with the Constitution.
India had emerged as an independent
nation after a painful and bloody
partition. Soon after Independence,
several princely states became a part of
the country. The Constitution declared
India as a Union of States. Although it
did not use the word federation, the
Indian Union is based on the principles
of federalism.
Let us go back to the seven features
of federalism mentioned above. We can
see that all these features apply to the
provisions of the Indian Constitution.
The Constitution originally provided
for a two-tier system of government,
the Union Government or what we call
the Central Government, representing
the Union of India and the State
governments. Later, a third tier of
federalism was added in the form of
Panchayats and Municipalities. As in
any federation, these different tiers
enjoy separate jurisdiction. The
Constitution clearly provided a threefold
distribution of legislative powers
between the Union Government and
the State Governments. Thus, it
contains three lists:
l Union List includes subjects of
national importance such as defence
of the country, foreign affairs, banking,
communications and currency. They
are included in this list because we need
a uniform policy on these matters
throughout the country. The Union
Government alone can make laws
relating to the subjects mentioned in
the Union List.
l State List contains subjects of
State and local importance such as
police, trade, commerce, agriculture
and irrigation. The State Governments
What makes India a federal country?
© NCERTnot to be republished
Fe d e ra l i sm
17
alone can make laws relating to the
subjects mentioned in the State List.
l Concurrent List includes subjects
of common interest to both the Union
Government as well as the State
Governments, such as education, forest,
trade unions, marriage, adoption and
succession. Both the Union as well as
the State Governments can make laws
on the subjects mentioned in this list.
If their laws conflict with each other,
the law made by the Union
Government will prevail.
What about subjects that do not
fall in any of the three lists? Or subjects
like computer software that came up
after the constitution was made?
According to our constitution, the
Union Government has the power to
legislate on these ‘residuary’ subjects.
We noted above that most
federations that are formed by ‘holding
together’ do not give equal power to
its constituent units. Thus, all States in
the Indian Union do not have identical
powers. Some States enjoy a special
status. Jammu and Kashmir has its own
Constitution. Many provisions of the
Indian Constitution are not applicable
to this State without the approval of
the State Assembly. Indians who are
not permanent residents of this State
cannot buy land or house here. Similar
special provisions exist for some other
States of India as well.
If agriculture and
commerce are
state subjects,
why do we have
ministers of
agriculture and
commerce in the
Union cabinet?
Listen to one national and one regional news bulletin broadcast by All India
Radio daily for one week. Make a list of news items related to government policies or
decisions by classifying these into the following categories:
l News items that relate only to the Central Government,
l News items that relate only to your or any other State Government,
l News items about the relationship between the Central and State Governments.
There are some units of the Indian
Union which enjoy very little power.
These are areas which are too small to
become an independent State but
which could not be merged with any
of the existing States. These areas, like
Chandigarh, or Lakshadweep or the
capital city of Delhi, are called Union
Territories. These territories do not
have the powers of a State. The Central
Government has special powers in
running these areas.
This sharing of power between the
Union Government and the State
governments is basic to the structure
of the Constitution. It is not easy to
make changes to this power sharing
arrangement. The Parliament cannot
on its own change this arrangement.
Any change to it has to be first passed
by both the Houses of Parliament with
at least two-thirds majority. Then it has
to be ratified by the legislatures of at
least half of the total States.
The judiciary plays an important
role in overseeing the implementation
of constitutional provisions and
procedures. In case of any dispute about
the division of powers, the High Courts
and the Supreme Court make a decision.
The Union and State governments
have the power to raise resources by
levying taxes in order to carry on the
government and the responsibilities
assigned to each of them.
© NCERTnot to be republished
18
Democra t i c Po l i t i c s
l Pokharan, the place where India conducted its nuclear tests, lies
in Rajasthan. Suppose the Government of Rajasthan was opposed to
the Central Government’s nuclear policy, could it prevent the Government of
India from conducting the nuclear tests?
l Suppose the Government of Sikkim plans to introduce new textbooks in its schools.
But the Union Government does not like the style and content of the new
textbooks. In that case, does the state government need to take permission from
the Union Government before these textbooks can be launched?
l Suppose the Chief Ministers of Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Orissa have
different policies on how their state police should respond to the naxalites. Can the
Prime Minister of India intervene and pass an order that all the Chief Ministers will
have to obey?
© NCERTnot to be republished
Fe d e ra l i sm
19
Constitutional provisions are necessary
for the success of federalism but these
are not sufficient. If the federal
experiment has succeeded in India, it
is not merely because of the clearly laid
out constitutional provisions. The real
success of federalism in India can be
attributed to the nature of democratic
politics in our country. This ensured
that the spirit of federalism, respect
for diversity and desire for living
together became a shared ideal in our
country. Let us look at some of the
major ways in which this happened.
Linguistic States
The creation of Linguistic States was
the first and a major test for democratic
politics in our country. If you look at
the political map of India when it
began its journey as a democracy in
1947 and that of 2006, you will be
surprised by the extent of the changes.
Many old States have vanished and
many new States have been created.
Areas, boundaries and names of the
States have been changed.
In 1947, the boundaries of several
old States of India were changed in
order to create new States. This was
done to ensure that people who spoke
the same language lived in the same
State. Some States were created not on
the basis of language but to recognise
differences based on culture, ethnicity
or geography. These include States like
Nagaland, Uttarakhand and Jharkhand.
l Has your village or town
remained under the same State
since Independence? If not,
what was the name of the
earlier State?
l Can you identify three State
names in 1947 that have
changed later?
l Identify any three States which
have been carved out of a
bigger State.
How is federalism practiced?
2006 © NCERTnot to be republished
20
Democra t i c Po l i t i c s
When the demand for the
formation of States on the basis of
language was raised, some national
leaders feared that it would lead to the
disintegration of the country. The
Central Government resisted linguistic
States for some time. But the
experience has shown that the
formation of linguistic States has
actually made the country, more united.
It has also made administration easier.
Language policy
A second test for Indian federation is
the language policy. Our Constitution
did not give the status of national
language to any one language. Hindi was
identified as the official language. But
Hindi is the mother tongue of only
about 40 per cent of Indians. Therefore,
there were many safeguards to protect
other languages. Besides Hindi, there are
21 other languages recognised as
Scheduled Languages by the
Constitution. A candidate in an
examination conducted for the Central
Government positions may opt to take
the examination in any of these
languages. States too have their own
official languages. Much of the
government work takes place in the
official language of the concerned State.
Unlike Sri Lanka, the leaders of our
country adopted a very cautious
attitude in spreading the use of Hindi.
According to the Constitution, the use
of English for official purposes was to
stop in 1965. However, many non-
Hindi speaking States demanded that
the use of English continue. In Tamil
Nadu, this movement took a violent
form. The Central Government
responded by agreeing to continue the
use of English along with Hindi for
official purposes. Many critics think
that this solution favoured the Englishspeaking
elite. Promotion of Hindi
continues to be the official policy of
the Government of India. Promotion
does not mean that the Central
Government can impose Hindi on
States where people speak a different
language. The flexibility shown by
Indian political leaders helped our
country avoid the kind of situation that
Sri Lanka finds itself in.
Centre-State relations
Restructuring the Centre-State
relations is one more way in which
federalism has been strengthened in
practice. How the constitutional
arrangements for sharing power work
in reality depends to a large extent on
how the ruling parties and leaders
follow these arrangements. For a long
time, the same party ruled both at the
Centre and in most of the States. This
meant that the State governments did
not exercise their rights as autonomous
federal units. As and when the ruling
party at the State level was different,
the parties that ruled at the Centre tried
to undermine the power of the States.
In those days, the Central Government
would often misuse the Constitution
to dismiss the State governments that
were controlled by rival parties. This
undermined the spirit of federalism.
All this changed significantly
after 1990. This period saw the rise
of regional political parties in many
States of the country. This was also
the beginning of the era of
COALITION GOVERNMENTS at the
Centre. Since no single party got a
clear majority in the Lok Sabha, the
major national parties had to enter
into an alliance with many parties
including several regional parties to
form a government at the Centre.
This led to a new culture of power
sharing and respect for the autonomy
of State Governments. This trend was
Coalition government:
A government formed
by the coming together
of at least two political
parties. Usually partners
in a coalition form a
political alliance and
adopt a common
programme.
Why Hindi?
Why not
Bangla or
Telugu?
© NCERTnot to be republished
Fe d e ra l i sm
21
Here are two cartoons showing the relationship between Centre and States. Should the
State go to the Centre with a begging bowl? How can the leader of a coalition keep the
partners of government satisfied?
Are you
suggesting that
regionalism is
good for our
democracy? Are
you serious?
The States Plead for More Powers
© Kutty - Laughing with Kutty
© Ajith Ninan - India Today Book of Cartoons
Perils of Running a Coalition Government
supported by a major judgement of
the Supreme Court that made it
difficult for the Central Government
to dismiss state governments in an
arbitrary manner. Thus, federal
power sharing is more effective today
than it was in the early years after
the Constitution came into force.
© NCERTnot to be republished
22
Democra t i c Po l i t i c s
Linguistic diversity of India
How many languages do we have
in India? The answer depends on
how one counts it. The latest
information that we have is from
the Census of India held in 1991.
This census recorded more than
1500 distinct languages which
people mentioned as their mother
tongues. These languages were
grouped together under some
major languages. For example
languages like Bhojpuri, Magadhi,
Bundelkhandi, Chhattisgarhi,
Rajasthani, Bhili and many others
were grouped together under
‘Hindi’. Even after this grouping,
the Census found 114 major
languages. Of these 22 languages
are now included in the Eighth
Schedule of the Indian Constitution
and are therefore called ‘Scheduled
Languages’. Others are called ‘non-
Scheduled Languages’. In terms of
languages, India is perhaps the
most diverse country in the world.
A look at the enclosed table
makes it clear that no one
language is the mother tongue of
the majority of our population. The
largest language, Hindi, is the
mother tongue of only about 40
per cent Indians. If we add to that
all those who knew Hindi as their
second or third language, the total
number was still less than 50 per
cent in 1991. As for English, only
0.02 per cent Indians recorded it as
their mother tongue. Another 11
per cent knew it as a second or
third language.
Read this table carefully, but
you do not need to memorise it.
Just do the following:
l Make a bar or pie chart on
the basis of this information.
l Prepare a map of linguistic
diversity of India by shading the
region where each of these
languages is spoken on the map
of India.
l Find out about three
languages that are spoken in
India but are not included in this
table.
Scheduled Languages of India
Language Proportion of
speakers (%)
Assamese 1.6
Bangla 8.3
Bodo 0.1
Dogri 0.2
Gujarati 4.9
Hindi 40.2
Kannada 3.9
Kashmiri 0.5
Konkani 0.2
Maithili 0.9
Malayalam 3.6
Manipuri 0.2
Marathi 7.5
Nepali 0.3
Oriya 3.4
Punjabi 2.8
Sanskrit 0.01
Santhali 0.6
Sindhi 0.3
Tamil 6.3
Telugu 7.9
Urdu 5.2
Note: The first column in this table lists all the languages
currently included in the Eighth Schedule of the Indian
Constitution. The second column gives the proportion of the
speakers of each of these languages as per cent of the total
population of India. These figures are based on the Census of
India, 1991. The figures for Kashmiri and Dogri are based on
estimates, as the Census was not conducted in Jammu and
Kashmir in 1991.
+
© NCERTnot to be republished
Fe d e ra l i sm
23
Read the following excerpts from an article by noted historian,
Ramachandra Guha, that appeared in the Times of India on November 1,
2006:
Take the example of your own state or any other state that was affected by
linguistic reorganisation. Write a short note for or against the argument given by
the author here on the basis of that example.
‘
‘
© NCERTnot to be republished
24
Democra t i c Po l i t i c s
We noted above that federal
governments have two or more tiers
of governments. We have so far
discussed the two-tiers of government
in our country. But a vast country like
India cannot be run only through these
two-tiers. States in India are as large as
independent countries of Europe. In
terms of population, Uttar Pradesh is
bigger than Russia, Maharashtra is
about as big as Germany. Many of
these States are internally very diverse.
There is thus a need for power sharing
within these States. Federal power
sharing in India needs another tier of
government, below that of the State
governments. This is the rationale for
decentralisation of power. Thus,
resulted a third-tier of government,
called local government.
When power is taken away from
Central and State governments and given
to local government, it is called
decentralisation. The basic idea behind
decentralisation is that there are a large
number of problems and issues which
are best settled at the local level. People
have better knowledge of problems in
their localities. They also have better ideas
on where to spend money and how to
manage things more efficiently. Besides,
at the local level it is possible for the
people to directly participate in decision
making. This helps to inculcate a habit
of democratic participation. Local
government is the best way to realise one
important principle of democracy,
namely local self-government.
The need for decentralisation was
recognised in our Constitution. Since
then, there have been several attempts
to decentralise power to the level of
villages and towns. Panchayats in
So, we are like a
three-tier coach
in a train! I
always prefer the
lower berth!
villages and municipalities in urban
areas were set up in all the States. But
these were directly under the control
of state governments. Elections to
these local governments were not held
regularly. Local governments did not
have any powers or resources of their
own. Thus, there was very little
decentralisation in effective terms.
A major step towards decentralisation
was taken in 1992. The
Constitution was amended to make the
third-tier of democracy more powerful
and effective.
l Now it is constitutionally
mandatory to hold regular elections to
local government bodies.
l Seats are reserved in the elected
bodies and the executive heads of
these institutions for the Scheduled
Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other
Backward Classes.
l At least one-third of all positions
are reserved for women.
l An independent institution called
the State Election Commission has
been created in each State to conduct
panchayat and municipal elections.
l The State governments are required
to share some powers and revenue with
local government bodies. The nature of
sharing varies from State to State.
Rural local government is
popularly known by the name
panchayati raj. Each village, or a group
of villages in some States, has a gram
panchayat. This is a council consisting
of several ward members, often called
panch, and a president or sarpanch.
They are directly elected by all the
adult population living in that ward
