{"id":3529,"date":"2026-08-11T22:11:37","date_gmt":"2026-08-11T16:41:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/notes\/national-and-regional-political-parties\/"},"modified":"2026-08-11T23:01:53","modified_gmt":"2026-08-11T17:31:53","slug":"national-and-regional-political-parties","status":"publish","type":"psir_note","link":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/notes\/national-and-regional-political-parties\/","title":{"rendered":"National and regional political parties"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
PSIR Notes<\/a>\u203a<\/span>I-B Indian Government and Politics<\/a>\u203a<\/span>National and regional political parties<\/span><\/div>\n
\n
Paper I \u00b7 Indian Government and Politics<\/div>\n

National and regional political parties<\/h1>\n
Syllabus \u00b7 Paper I-B \u00b7 10<\/b> \u2014 Party System : National and regional political parties<\/span>, ideological and social bases of parties; Patterns of coalition politics; Pressure groups, trends in electoral behaviour; changing socio-economic profile of Legislators.<\/div>\n<\/header>\n
\n
<\/p>\n

Political Parties \u2014 Meaning & Functions<\/h3>\n

Working definition<\/span><\/p>\n

A political party is an organised group that seeks to capture political power through elections and government formation.<\/p>\n

\n

A political party is \u201can association organised in support of some principle or policy which by constitutional means it endeavours to make the determinant of government.\u201d<\/p>\n

Robert M. MacIver<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n

A political party is \u201can organised collection of persons that claim or share the same political ideals and attempt to dominate the government by operating as a political unit.\u201d<\/p>\n

R. N. Gilchrist<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Functions<\/span><\/p>\n

Contest elections \u00b7 form governments \u00b7 act as opposition \u00b7 make laws \u00b7 shape public opinion \u00b7 recruit leaders \u00b7 aggregate interests \u00b7 articulate social demands \u00b7 connect people with government \u00b7 provide access to welfare schemes.<\/p>\n

Harold Laski<\/span> treats parties as indispensable to democracy. Against this, Mahatma Gandhi<\/span>, M. N. Roy<\/span> and Jayaprakash Narayan<\/span> supported party-less democracy<\/span>, stressing direct popular participation.<\/p>\n

Theories of Political Parties<\/h3>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Theory<\/th>\nKey thinker(s)<\/th>\nCore idea<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Normative<\/td>\nEdmund Burke<\/span><\/td>\nParties are groups united by common principles and national purpose.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Cadre & Mass<\/td>\n\u2014<\/td>\nCadre<\/span> parties: elite-based, disciplined, limited membership. Mass<\/span> parties: broad membership, grassroots mobilisation.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Cleavage<\/td>\nSeymour Martin Lipset<\/span> & Stein Rokkan<\/span><\/td>\nParties rest on social cleavages: centre vs periphery, state vs church, landed vs industrial interests, owner vs worker.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Institutional<\/td>\nMaurice Duverger<\/span><\/td>\nElectoral systems shape party systems. First-Past-The-Post tends to two-party competition; proportional representation to multi-party systems.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Rational choice<\/td>\n\u2014<\/td>\nParties maximise votes, power and influence. Median voter theorem<\/span> pulls them to the centre; issue positioning adapts to voters.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Cartel party<\/td>\nRichard Katz<\/span> & Peter Mair<\/span><\/td>\nEstablished parties use state resources to protect themselves from new competitors.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Organisational<\/td>\nRobert Michels<\/span><\/td>\nThe iron law of oligarchy<\/span> \u2014 power inevitably concentrates at the top.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Functional<\/td>\nGiovanni Sartori<\/span>; Otto Kirchheimer<\/span><\/td>\nAggregation, articulation, socialisation, recruitment. Kirchheimer\u2019s catch-all party<\/span> dilutes ideology to attract broad electorates.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Marxist<\/td>\nV. I. Lenin<\/span><\/td>\nParties express class interests; bourgeois vs proletarian. Lenin saw the Communist Party as the vanguard<\/span> of revolution.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n
\n

\u201cIn every party, the tendency towards oligarchy is inevitable. Democratic processes within parties are essential to counter this trend and ensure accountability.\u201d<\/p>\n

Robert Michels<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

India is an anomaly to Duverger\u2019s law<\/span>: First-Past-The-Post operates here with a multi-party system.<\/p>\n

Recognition of Parties \u2014 the ECI Criteria<\/h3>\n

India has a multi-party system<\/span>. Parties are classified as national, state and regional. The Election Commission of India<\/span> registers parties and grants symbols.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
National party (any one)<\/th>\nState party (any one)<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
2% of Lok Sabha seats from at least three states.<\/td>\nThree seats, or 3% of Assembly seats.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Or 6% vote share plus four Lok Sabha seats.<\/td>\nOr one Lok Sabha seat for every 25 seats allotted to the state.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Or recognition as a state party in four or more states.<\/td>\nOr 6% vote share plus one Lok Sabha and two Assembly seats; or 8% vote share in the state.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

Evolution of the Indian Party System<\/h3>\n

Party system<\/span><\/p>\n

A party system refers not only to the number of parties but also to their relevance, competition, alliances and power relations.<\/p>\n

M. P. Singh<\/span> maps the phases: movement party system (1920\u20131947); Congress System (1952\u20131969); confrontation between Indira Gandhi\u2019s Congress and the Jayaprakash Narayan movement; differentiation between national and state party systems in the 1980s; federal coalition system since 1989; BJP-led dominant (fourth) party system after 2014; and the re-emergence of coalition politics after 2024.<\/p>\n

From movement to dominance to coalition \u2014 and back.<\/span> Movement party<\/span> (1920\u201347 \u00b7 freedom struggle) \u2192 Congress System<\/span> (1952\u201369 \u00b7 one-party dominance) \u2192 Confrontation & state systems<\/span> (1967\u201389 \u00b7 splits, regional rise) \u2192 Federal coalitions<\/span> (1989\u20132014 \u00b7 NF, UF, NDA, UPA) \u2192 BJP fourth system<\/span> (2014 \u00b7 then allies return, 2024).<\/p>\n

The Congress System<\/h3>\n

Rajni Kothari<\/span> called Congress dominance the Congress System<\/span>. It worked as a broad umbrella party: it combined government and opposition functions within itself, reduced opposition parties to pressure groups, accommodated left and right tendencies, held a centrist ideology, represented multiple interests and became the central institution of Indian politics.<\/p>\n

\n

The Congress System was \u201cdominance coexisting with competition but without a trace of alteration.\u201d<\/p>\n

W. H. Morris-Jones<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Congress won majorities in 1952, 1957 and 1962 and stayed dominant until 1967. Despite a vote share below 48%, First-Past-The-Post<\/span> converted it into large seat majorities.<\/p>\n

Breakdown of the Congress System<\/h3>\n

From 1967 the system unravelled: Congress lost dominance in several states; regional parties and leaders emerged; lower classes and agricultural communities pushed back; Charan Singh<\/span>-led parties rose in the North; reservations for backward classes became an alternative agenda. Congress split in 1969. The Emergency (1975\u20131977) damaged its legitimacy, and the Jayaprakash Narayan<\/span> movement mobilised anti-Congress politics. The Janata Party (1977, a merger of five parties) followed; the 1989 election brought the Janata Dal-led National Front under V. P. Singh<\/span>.<\/p>\n

W. H. Morris-Jones<\/span> called the post-1967 shift a market polity<\/span>, where competition moved from within Congress to inter-party conflict.<\/p>\n

The BJP System & the Fourth Party System<\/h3>\n

The 2014 election marked a new phase. Chhibber<\/span> and Verma<\/span> read it as the arrival of the fourth party system<\/span>: the BJP became the system-defining pole, Congress was marginalised, the Left declined and many regional parties lost ground. Hindutva, welfare, leadership and nationalism combined; Narendra Modi<\/span>\u2019s leadership became central, backed by media strategy, organisation and finance.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Congress System (1952\u201369)<\/th>\nBJP \/ fourth system (2014\u2013 )<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Broad social coalition, national agenda, electoral dominance, weak national opposition.<\/td>\nShares the same broad coalition, national dominance and weak national opposition.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Flexible and accommodative.<\/td>\nFirmer ideological grounding in Hindu nationalism.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dominance was internally plural.<\/td>\nDominance is more centralised.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Opposition survived as pressure within the party.<\/td>\nRegional parties still challenge the BJP in many states.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

The 2024 Lok Sabha reset the picture: the BJP won 240 seats and the NDA reached 293, forcing reliance on the Janata Dal (United) and the Telugu Desam Party and reviving coalition bargaining. The fourth system weakened but did not disappear \u2014 Milan Vaishnav<\/span> and Caroline Mallory<\/span> argue many of its attributes remain intact despite the correction.<\/p>\n

Intra-Party Democracy<\/h3>\n

Intra-party democracy<\/span><\/p>\n

Internal transparency, participation and accountability within political parties.<\/p>\n

Problems in India<\/span><\/p>\n

High-command culture \u00b7 dynastic leadership \u00b7 centralised nominations \u00b7 weak internal elections \u00b7 factional manipulation \u00b7 money and muscle power \u00b7 ideological flexibility without accountability \u00b7 limited Election Commission authority under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Robert Michels<\/span>\u2019s iron law of oligarchy explains the concentration of power. Susan Scarrow<\/span> argues internal democracy strengthens party legitimacy, and Giovanni Sartori<\/span> calls parties schools of democracy. Critics counter: Maurice Duverger<\/span> warns it can weaken cohesion, Leon D. Epstein<\/span> stresses the cost to efficiency, and John H. Aldrich<\/span> warns internal processes can be captured by interest groups or charismatic figures.<\/p>\n

Reform track<\/span><\/p>\n

The 2nd Administrative Reforms Commission<\/span> notes over-centralisation distances authority from accountability; the Law Commission\u2019s 170th Report<\/span> and the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution<\/span> call for legislation on internal democracy and party functioning. Add transparency in finance, internal elections, candidate-selection reform, anti-defection reform and an enforceable legal framework.<\/p>\n

The Party System \u2014 Assessment<\/h3>\n

The Indian party system mirrors the country\u2019s federal, social and electoral complexity. It began with Congress dominance, moved into multi-party competition, entered coalition politics after 1989, became BJP-centric after 2014 and returned to coalition bargaining after 2024. Caste, religion, region and class continue to shape competition. First-Past-The-Post did not produce a simple two-party system because India\u2019s social cleavages are regionally varied<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Regional Parties & Federalism \u2014 Meaning<\/h3>\n

Regional party<\/span><\/p>\n

A party that operates primarily within a state or region and represents local interests, identities or aspirations.<\/p>\n

They may be regionally located, regionalist, caste-based, linguistic, religious-regional or tribal parties, or statehood movements turned parties.<\/p>\n

DMK \u00b7 AIADMK \u00b7 Shiromani Akali Dal \u00b7 National Conference \u00b7 PDP \u00b7 Shiv Sena \u00b7 Telugu Desam Party \u00b7 Assam Gana Parishad \u00b7 Trinamool Congress \u00b7 Samajwadi Party \u00b7 Bahujan Samaj Party \u00b7 Rashtriya Janata Dal \u00b7 Biju Janata Dal \u00b7 TRS \/ BRS<\/p>\n

Regional Parties \u2014 Causes of Rise<\/h3>\n

Decline of Congress \u00b7 linguistic reorganisation \u00b7 over-centralisation \u00b7 regional economic inequalities \u00b7 caste mobilisation \u00b7 assertion of Dalits and OBCs \u00b7 sons-of-the-soil movements \u00b7 uneven development \u00b7 cultural protection \u00b7 local leadership \u00b7 coalition politics.<\/p>\n

Vidyut Chakraborty<\/span> argues local leaders were closer to common people and more concerned with local issues; Surendra Mohan<\/span> that central leadership failed to protect cultural identities and address regional inequalities; Douglas Verney<\/span> links their rise to the decline of Congress and the unravelling of the Janata Party; N. T. Rama Rao<\/span> argued regional parties better understand state-specific problems. E. Sridharan<\/span> identifies parliamentary\u2013state election linkages, the federal system, grassroots connections and linguistic state organisation.<\/p>\n

Regional Parties \u2014 Claims & Agenda<\/h3>\n

Three core claims: national parties do not address specific regional interests; regional pride, honour, culture and identity must be protected; the Centre should devolve more powers.<\/p>\n

Agenda<\/span> \u2014 statehood, autonomy, special packages, cultural rights, language protection, caste representation, minority protection, resource control, employment for locals and federal devolution.<\/p>\n

Hard claims<\/span> \u2014 secession, radical restructuring, strong autonomy. Soft claims<\/span> \u2014 decentralisation, protection, fiscal devolution, greater representation.<\/p>\n

Regional Parties \u2014 Role & Impact<\/h3>\n

They shape coalition formation, national policy, Rajya Sabha negotiations, federal bargaining, resource distribution, language policy, identity recognition, welfare design and constitutional federalism.<\/p>\n

Zoya Hasan<\/span> notes more than 18 regional parties have held power at state and national levels; Christophe Jaffrelot<\/span> calls them kingmakers after the 1990s; E. Sridharan<\/span> that they reshape Centre\u2013State bargaining; Vernon Hewitt<\/span> and Shirin M. Rai<\/span> that national dependence on them reduced the misuse of President\u2019s Rule; Niraja Gopal Jayal<\/span> sees subaltern identity-based parties broadening democratic frontiers, and Prakash Sarangi<\/span> the opening of democratic space.<\/p>\n

Positive<\/span><\/p>\n

Strengthened federalism \u00b7 increased regional representation \u00b7 brought local issues into national politics \u00b7 reduced over-centralisation \u00b7 mobilised weaker sections \u00b7 gave voice to linguistic and cultural communities \u00b7 improved Centre\u2013State bargaining \u00b7 moderated exclusionary national parties during coalition periods.<\/p>\n

Negative<\/span><\/p>\n

Can promote narrow regionalism and parochial politics \u00b7 weaken national policy coherence \u00b7 cause coalition instability \u00b7 use money and muscle power \u00b7 deepen social and regional divisions.<\/p>\n

Zoya Hasan<\/span> warns that parties lacking their own ideology may mobilise existing fault lines; Milan Vaishnav<\/span> calls the rise of regional parties an \u201ceternal theme\u201d of Indian politics. The real question is not whether regional parties should exist, but whether they can balance regional aspirations, federal cooperation, national integration and inclusive development.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/h3>\n

Indian politics is best read as a continuing negotiation between social diversity and democratic institutions. Parties have moved from Congress dominance to coalition politics, BJP dominance and renewed coalition bargaining; pressure groups from elite lobbying to mass protest; voting behaviour from loyalty and identity alone to identity plus welfare, development and leadership. Representation has broadened socially but remains distorted by money, criminalisation and the under-representation of women and minorities. Indian democracy has survived because it has absorbed conflict through elections, parties, federalism and movements. Its next task is to convert representation into responsiveness, and electoral participation into substantive social justice.<\/p>\n

<\/span>Next<\/em>Ideological and social bases of parties<\/b><\/a><\/div>\n

<\/main><\/p>\n