PSIR - Strategy, resources & discussion - ForumIAS

PSIR - Strategy, resources & discussion

Hi peeps. Let’s do this!

1. Previous papers from 2009 (both papers are in the same PDF):here

2. Topic-wise PYQs: here 

3. Look for PDFs of books here: b-ok.cchttp://libgen.rs/archive.org

4. Model answers from SR:here 

5. OnlyIAS notes, if you need extra matter for a few topics:here 

6. SR notes, typed:politicsforindia.com

Bajrang Lonikar,Saloni2607and89 otherslike this
295k views

1.2k comments

Deleted
@Neelesh yes you can contact me


3.1k views
@whatonly only one of the books is available in the market currently. Not updated though


whatonly,
3.1k views
Deleted
If anyone wants buy gs score psir advance+test series at lesser price pls msg in Dm
2.4k views
Do anyone have shubhra mam test 1 of psir crash course 2020 please post
2.6k views
Anyone willing to sell SR crash course for mains at lower price then ping me.
2.7k views
In today's editorials in the Hindu there was a line I really liked. "Theory of interests is superseding ideology in foreign policy." I felt like this statement also goes along very well with the "world of convergences" as described by our EAM. 
Caesar,Param_Royand1 otherslike this
2.6k views
In today's editorials in the Hindu there was a line I really liked. "Theory of interests is superseding ideology in foreign policy." I felt like this statement also goes along very well with the "world of convergences" as described by our EAM. 

Has this been not mostly the case with India? Interests over ideology?

whatonly,
2.6k views

Caesarsaid

In today's editorials in the Hindu there was a line I really liked. "Theory of interests is superseding ideology in foreign policy." I felt like this statement also goes along very well with the "world of convergences" as described by our EAM. 

Has this been not mostly the case with India? Interests over ideology?

Well interests has been at the core of foreign policy throughout history for sure, but in the few decades after the establishment of the UN ideology played a significant role (liberalism and democracy). For example, NAM was a policy created as both an ideology and in the self-interest of developing nations. In the current scenario, NAM has lost its relevance. Not because it's ideology is flawed but because nations like India find no real benefit from it i.e. interests. So I would argue that while interests were always a core part of foreign policy, the role of ideology has decreased which causes the relative importance of interests to increase in foreign policy formulation. So the statement that the theory of interests is superseding ideology doesn't mean interests were not present before, but only that it is gaining more importance than ideology. Though I think the realist school of international relations would argue that ideology has never played a role in international relations and that it was only interest or the drive for power that shaped international politics. 

whatonly,
2.4k views
Also Brexit could be taken as another example. The ideology behind the EU still holds true but the self-interests of the British were seen to be negatively impacted which is what resulted in Brexit. 
whatonly,
2.4k views
Hello guys!. Preparing for 2022. As I have started just 2 months back. Thinking of PSIR as an optional. As I am working so the dynamic part and overlap with GS may help and I am interested in thinkers. Is PSIR good for a working professional? And What about coaching? Shubra Ranjan tablet course will do? Or Piyush Choubey? Guide please.
whatonly,
2.2k views
» show previous quotes

Well interests has been at the core of foreign policy throughout history for sure, but in the few decades after the establishment of the UN ideology played a significant role (liberalism and democracy). For example, NAM was a policy created as both an ideology and in the self-interest of developing nations. In the current scenario, NAM has lost its relevance. Not because it's ideology is flawed but because nations like India find no real benefit from it i.e. interests. So I would argue that while interests were always a core part of foreign policy, the role of ideology has decreased which causes the relative importance of interests to increase in foreign policy formulation. So the statement that the theory of interests is superseding ideology doesn't mean interests were not present before, but only that it is gaining more importance than ideology. Though I think the realist school of international relations would argue that ideology has never played a role in international relations and that it was only interest or the drive for power that shaped international politics. 

That’s a good explanation. 

Is there any example of a decision being made by a country choosing ideology and sacrificing a significant interest? Most examples have both in the same direction.

This would be a realist view, but one could say that ideology has always been a nice way to package and back up decisions that were made based on practical interests, like the European identity ideal for the EEC/EU, or NAM. As the world order stabilises with respect to one country’s dominance (US), or as a nation’s confidence and consequence in the world rise (India) the ideological cover might simply become unnecessary to sell a stand taken, both at home and globally. Might enables assertion of right. Besides, an ideology compatible with present day issues, that are far more complex, is naturally harder to devise. Perhaps what seems like pragmatism today, with enough academic writing and debate about it, might even be representable as ideology tomorrow!

3.8k views
» show previous quotes

Well interests has been at the core of foreign policy throughout history for sure, but in the few decades after the establishment of the UN ideology played a significant role (liberalism and democracy). For example, NAM was a policy created as both an ideology and in the self-interest of developing nations. In the current scenario, NAM has lost its relevance. Not because it's ideology is flawed but because nations like India find no real benefit from it i.e. interests. So I would argue that while interests were always a core part of foreign policy, the role of ideology has decreased which causes the relative importance of interests to increase in foreign policy formulation. So the statement that the theory of interests is superseding ideology doesn't mean interests were not present before, but only that it is gaining more importance than ideology. Though I think the realist school of international relations would argue that ideology has never played a role in international relations and that it was only interest or the drive for power that shaped international politics. 

That’s a good explanation. 

Is there any example of a decision being made by a country choosing ideology and sacrificing a significant interest? Most examples have both in the same direction.

This would be a realist view, but one could say that ideology has always been a nice way to package and back up decisions that were made based on practical interests, like the European identity ideal for the EEC/EU, or NAM. As the world order stabilises with respect to one country’s dominance (US), or as a nation’s confidence and consequence in the world rise (India) the ideological cover might simply become unnecessary to sell a stand taken, both at home and globally. Might enables assertion of right. Besides, an ideology compatible with present day issues, that are far more complex, is naturally harder to devise. Perhaps what seems like pragmatism today, with enough academic writing and debate about it, might even be representable as ideology tomorrow!

Yupp exactly. Ideology will never survive unless it overlaps with interests.

whatonly,
2.3k views
Hello guys!. Preparing for 2022. As I have started just 2 months back. Thinking of PSIR as an optional. As I am working so the dynamic part and overlap with GS may help and I am interested in thinkers. Is PSIR good for a working professional? And What about coaching? Shubra Ranjan tablet course will do? Or Piyush Choubey? Guide please.

I personally think if you are someone that can decently understand concepts when you read about them and just spend some time thinking things through coaching is not necessary. Like if you can comprehend what is being written in books like OP Gauba and Andrew Heywood, coaching is not a must. I personally read the basic books and used SR notes for value addition. This works for Section A of both papers. For IR, I just read a lot of articles and books on it because I have a lot of interest in the subject. For Section B of Paper I, I don't really know. It's, by far, my weakest part of PSIR. 

Hitman2021,
2.3k views
Deleted
Does anybody have shubhra ranjan test series. M willing to pay for model answers and crash course material dm me
2.1k views
Can anyone clarify the post-colonial theory of state? The material I have come across includes various analyses of the post-colonial states themselves from multiple perspectives like the modernisation paradigm, systems approach, dependency theories, etc heavily. In my understanding the focus should remain on the post-colonial theorists like Spivak, Homi Bhabha, Said. So my question is do we talk about the post-colonial state, or the post-colonial thinkers’ views on the concept of state? 
2.1k views
@mehar66 the p.c. theorists view on p.c. state should be considered. Otherwise many theories can explain the state of dev'ing p.c. world. focus should be on Said, bhabha, etc rather than Dependency or WST(which are marxist views applicable to dev'ing/p.c. state)


2.4k views
@dragon_rider Yes. National interest always reigns supreme. Even with the nam ideology, nations had always put their n.i. first. Only EU appeared as an org where nations regarded collective interest as important, which as you have highlighted is again facing a tough challenge


dragon_rider,
2.4k views
@whatonly China is one example, which no longer considers it important to back it's external actions by any ideology or doctrine


Villanelle,
2.4k views
@Caesar Also nearly every nation in West Asia. They act purely out of security considerations most, if not all the time. Like Iran wouldn’t mind supporting Sunni group Hamas in the Gaza as long as it helps balance Israel. Or how UAE and Bahrain eventually gave into relations with Israel dumping the Palestinian cause, or how Turkey and Pakistan won’t dare mention about Uighur persecution.

Ideology is just a facade used for calculated political gains - more so back home, than in the international arena. Drum beating helps with political gains, like has been the case with Turkey. Foreign policy wise, nearly all nations are juggling contradictory and self defeating stances. 


Caesar,
2.3k views
guys,I'm preparing for 2021,has anyone read "The India Way " book by EAM S.Jaishankar.Can we get valuable points from there?.Also ,every coaching institute tells to read David Malone's "Does the elephant dance",Is this book still relevant for people writing exam in 2021?
2.2k views
Write your comment…