How political theory addresses the quest for best governance

But how does Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia (happiness) differ from modern understandings of happiness? How does the pursuit of happiness influence the organisation of a polity? Let’s delve into the formation and purpose of political theory.

Happiness as the purpose of politics 

Before we delve into the question of political theory, it is important to first reflect on the activity of politics. Politics is an activity essential to human beings who must live as a collective. The Greek philosopher Aristotle famously referred to human beings as political animals (zoon politikon) to underline that the pursuit of a collective life is intrinsic to human nature. The activity of politics is central to how humans decide they must organise themselves and, above all, for what purpose. 

When the question of the purpose of political organisation arises, philosophers like Aristotle suggest that the polis – the Greek city-states of his time – must aim at the happiness of its citizens. The term that Aristotle used for happiness is eudaimonia, which is different from the way we understand happiness today. Eudaimonia is understood as a human life that is fulfilling and rich.

The idea of happiness as a recurring theme for organising a polity echoes across history. For instance, Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers of the United States of America, invoked ‘the pursuit of happiness’ as a foundational right in the American Declaration of Independence.

But the question of happiness and its pursuit is both elusive and philosophical. This means that there must be a deep reflection on political activity to best achieve the difficult aim of securing the happiness of the people. This is where the activity of political theory becomes indispensable. Political theory is a distanced and detached reflection on the intense and often hectic activity of politics and allows for a critical evaluation of how political organisations can best serve human well-being.

Formation of political theory is akin to childbirth 

Quite often the books, tracts, essays, pamphlets and speeches that become the basis of political theory emerge through a process akin to childbirth – accompanied by pain and birth pangs. Hannah Arendt, a leading political theorist of the 20th century, considered natality, or the act of giving birth, a central element of politics. 

In contrast to the intense pain that may accompany the writing of political theory, political theory can also arise during quieter and more reflective moments that intersperse the hectic pace of political activity. 

This is especially true of Stoic philosophers of the Roman empire like the statesman Seneca or Emperor Marcus Aurelius. Their political philosophy arose during those brief moments of reflection that served as breathers in the maelstrom of politics they faced as statesmen. This also holds true in the political theory of Niccolo Machiavelli, who wrote his famous book The Prince when he was sidelined from the political and diplomatic activity of the Northern Italian city of Florence.

During the 20th and 21st centuries, political theory has very often been written by the aloof university academics in the staid settings of the university and its lecture halls and classrooms – far removed from the rough and tumble of politics. From such academic quarters emerge the writings of the Oxford academic Isaiah Berlin who is best known for articulating two conceptions of liberty – positive and negative – and then favouring the latter, the negative variant.

This profusion of university academics contributing to political theory was not the case in the 19th century. During that time, one notices figures like John Stuart Mill, who was employed with the British East India Company for many years, wrote his celebrated essay On Liberty in 1859. Similarly, Edmund Burke – considered a foundational thinker of conservative political theory – was a parliamentarian who is well-known for his dogged pursuit of an impeachment trial against the Governor General of India, Warren Hastings, in the late 18th century. 

Political decline inspires political ideas

Very often political decline precipitates the writing of political theory. For instance, Plato wrote the large corpus of his political theory in works such as Republic and the Laws at a time when Athens was past its glory days and had been defeated in the Peloponnesian Wars by its famous rival Sparta. Plato is still read today across political science departments, perhaps for the simple reason that declining polities give remarkable insights into the how and why of organising polities. 

Another question that political theory has contended with is the kind of government best suited to a polity. Since the time of Plato and Aristotle, political theory has looked at society consisting of a part that rules and a part that is ruled. This gives rise to questions of legitimacy, authority and justice. These are concerns that have stayed with us for over two millennia.

By the mid-20th century, the tradition of normative political theory was considered dead. This coincided with the phase of the Behavioural Revolution in political science when American political scientists such as Robert Dahl and David Easton focused on observable and manifest displays of power rather than abstract ethical questions. 

However, this trend was reversed with the revival of normative political theory, most prominently in the writings of Harvard University’s John Rawls. His 1971 book A Theory of Justice brings the big normative concerns that have characterised political theory – such as justice, liberty, rights, fraternity and equality – back into political discourse.

When political theory from Global South becomes relevant

Political theory often emerges in response to crises. Of late, patterns of societal breakdown – as people become more isolated and anomic with greater individuality as a result of the influence of the internet and social media – are increasingly becoming evident. This could mean that political theory responds by re-emphasising the essentially collective and sociable nature of human beings by reviving concepts like solidarity. 

One can expect and hope that political theory in its finest traditions comes up with answers to the existential threats of climate change and artificial intelligence. Such challenges would have to be met on the terrain of reason that political theory is fundamentally premised on. 

It is important to note that that reason is distinct from interest and that crises often arise when the powerful and strong pursue their interests, at times, unreasonably. The behaviour of rich Western countries on climate change can be seen as a case in point. This is where political theory from the non-Western part of the world – especially India, China, Latin America and Africa – will become very important.  

Post Read Questions

Why did Aristotle describe humans as “political animals”? What is the purpose of political organisation according to philosophers like Aristotle?

Why is the question of happiness considered both elusive and philosophical in political theory?

How does the distinction between reason and interest contribute to political crises?

How do declining polities provide insights into organising societies?

What role can political theory from non-Western regions like India, China, Latin America, and Africa play in addressing global challenges like existential threats of climate change and artificial intelligence?

(Amir Ali is an Assistant Professor at the Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi)

Share your thoughts and ideas on UPSC Special articles with ashiya.parveen@indianexpress.com.

Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.

Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.