Mhi-2-em.pdf

A-PDF Watermark DEMO: Purchase from www.A-PDF.com to remove the watermark

IG NO U

Fr ie

nd

Ap

p

m o c . g t n r i a ead m R y e

Do

wn l

oa d

n s i d l k n o u O bo t r s o E f e . ub nd w eH a w Th w

1

ASSIGNMENT SOLUTIONS GUIDE (2018-2019)

M.H.I.-2 Modern World Disclaimer/Special Note: These are just the sample of the Answers/Solutions to some of the Questions given in the Assignments. These Sample Answers/Solutions are prepared by Private Teacher/Tutors/Authors for the help and guidance of the student to get an idea of how he/she can answer the Questions given the Assignments. We do not claim 100% accuracy of these sample answers as these are based on the knowledge and capability of Private Teacher/Tutor. Sample answers may be seen as the Guide/Help for the reference to prepare the answers of the Questions given in the assignment. As these solutions and answers are prepared by the private teacher/tutor so the chances of error or mistake cannot be denied. Any Omission or Error is highly regretted though every care has been taken while preparing these Sample Answers/ Solutions. Please consult your own Teacher/Tutor before you prepare a Particular Answer and for up-to-date and exact information, data and solution. Student should must read and refer the official study material provided by the university.

nd

Ap

p

m o c . g t n r i d a ea m R y e

IG NO U

Fr ie

SECTION – A Q. 3. What is the meaning of welfare state? Make a comparison between the English and the Japanese welfare states. Ans. The responsibility for the welfare of its citizens is one of the characteristics of the modern state. It regulates social and economic relations and works towards the social welfare of the people which is seen as the process of progressed. As opposed this, in the pre-modern period, the individual could only appeal to the Church or religious groups, family or the community when faced with poverty or illness. The causes of poverty were often seen either in fate or in individual failure. However, the modern state began to tackle the social problems that arose out of this through measures that grew in coverage both out of a strong sense of humanitarian concern as well as because of a fear of social unrest. According to some historians, disinterested reform served class interests so that the ascendancy of a new class led people to think in terms of social legislation. With time, the European experience has become the norm against which to measure the progress of all states. However, the history and traditions of a country can act as equally important influences on the shape and character of welfare policies and the philosophy that underlies them. There have been sharp and acrimonious debates criticizing state assistance for removing incentives for work as well as for placing an intolerable burden on the state exchequer. The help to the disadvantaged has been seen as a form of ‘reverse discrimination’. We find English and German social legislation showing the differing approaches and objectives and hence, it is important to bear in mind the diversity. Further, the history of social legislation in Japan shows how a non-western society that developed within the period of Western dominance was able to develop a welfare system that owed as much to the new doctrines and ideas coming from the west as to its own historical traditions. We can see the complex strands that have contributed to shaping the nature of welfare in the modern world by studying both Western and non-western countries. It has been observed that Britain has had a long history of public assistance to the poor and private charity. During early times, the poor were wards of the Church, but by Elizabethan period in the 16th century laws were enacted to set up a national system of relief that provided legal and compulsory help to the poor. In 1597-1598, The Poor Laws were codified and they were re-enacted in 1601. This meant that the parish became the basic unit of administration to manage relief work. A compulsory tax was imposed on each household and this money was used to provide relief to the aged, the infirm. At the same time, social reformers and social legislation was concerned with discouraging dependence on charity that would lead to idleness. The basic principle of the poor laws was work for those that will labour, punishment for those that will not, and bread for those who cannot. Many schemes were devised to put idle poor to work. However, in 1766, Benjamin Franklin commented that the country offered a

Do

wn l

oa d

in ks d l n o u O bo t r s o E f e . ub nd w eH a w Th w

2

premium for the encouragement of idleness, and you should not now wonder that it has had its effect in the increase of poverty. Similarly, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote a Memoir on Pauperism (1835). He found that one-sixth of the inhabitants of this flourishing kingdom live at the expense of public charity. At the same time, he was astonished because English poverty was of a different type. This poverty amidst plenty had nothing to do with subsistence but the lack of a multitude of things causes’ poverty. In any case, England had transformed what was private charity oven out of a moral duty into a legal obligation. Contrary to the European welfare policies that were marked by obligatory help on a long term basis, ideas of welfare in pre-modern Japan were based on an ideology of benevolent rule where the ruler helped to mitigate the suffering of his people through timely help. The cities set up relief shelters in the mid-17th century and provided temporary help after which the people were sent back to their villages. With time, these gradually became permanent facilities. During the late 18th century, a type of workhouse was started in Edo where the aim was to help those without a criminal background to learn new skills and become gainfully employed. These institutions were accompanied by ideas about how to tackle poverty and provide aid to the needy. We must remember that Japanese did not see the self as the individual but rather as the community. The Tokugawa Shogunate was overthrown and the Meiji Government established in 1868. This is the beginning of the creation of the modern state in Japan. The Meiji government believed that it was the responsibility of the state to create a strong and prosperous country and hence, it instituted a series of measures to set up the institutional structure of a modern state system. The government set up a scheme to commute their land rents into government bonds that would enable them to make the transition. At the same time, government practices were also influenced by the European ideas and experiences. In the last quarter of the 19th century, the idea that state welfare could debilitate the recipient remained very strong. The western ideas impacted the views on poverty in Japan. The influence of John Malthus Essay on Population had given rise to a vast literature against public assistance programmes. Henry Fawcett’s Pauperism: Its causes and remedies and other such works argued that poverty was due to individual failing and the answer was in self-improvement rather than government assistance. One of the most influential Meiji thinkers Fukuzawa Yukichi argued for a national relief law, on the basis of England’s New Poor Law of 1834 but only if it served to take people off state assistance. Thus, there was reduction of public relief by state bodies. The government tried to ensure that relief would be managed through the community and the family and in this the Civil Code of 1898 provided explicit support. This meant that the state intervened to force family and neighbours to aid the poor. In 1902, another attempt made to propose a poor relief bill in Japan. However, critics argued that it would encourage indolence, drain resources and increase the number of poor. Following the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905), Japanese government policies successfully integrated the individual and the state. The government emphasized at rebuilding the community. During the Local Improvement Campaign (1906-1918), the government used municipalities along with private organizations to organize community groups like the local repaying virtue societies (hotokusha). Moreover, the government encouraged local leaders to undertake social work and sponsored seminars. It was believed that unlike the West, Japan did not have a long tradition of private charity. Thus, the government guided private work. Private institutions continued to play a major role but the state managed many of the voluntary bodies often forcing people to donate. The government policies showed that the relief was not a matter of right anyway. After the World War I, Japan emerged as a major political actor at the international level. At the same time, the expansion of its domestic economy also helped to sharpen social problems. Thus, the country looked for welfare models in Britain, Weimar Germany and the United States. According to the Japanese bureaucrats, in these new times it was no longer possible to rely on family or neighborhood for relief. Therefore, the state must spend resources on ensuring public assistance. But, the earlier ideas were not jettisoned and the family system continued to be emphasized. Q. 4. Explain in brief main features of a socialist economy in Soviet Russia following the revolution of 1917. Ans. The October Revolution is known for the beginning of entirely new sets of economic principles and policies with the purpose of achieving a socialist state. Different phases of these programmes and their impact on the Soviet economy and society have been discussed below.

IG NO U

Fr ie

nd

Ap

p

m o c . g t n r i a ead m R y e

Do

wn l

oa d

n s i d l k n o u O bo t r s o E f e . ub nd w eH a w Th w

3

Significance It may be said that practices in Soviet Russia after the October Revolution were the first major large-scale experiment with socialism in Europe and became a model of socialism. It has been observed that by 1939, the main features of this ‘model’ were major state regulation of production, finance and trade, fundamental restrictions on private property, and a system of planning which schematized the economy and provided flexible targets and goals. Thus, the state control of the economy produced governments which used public welfare as their reference point. Therefore, the economy was called a ‘Planned Economy’. It is found that the system of ‘Planning’ was highly innovative as the control over the economy was unknown in any economy before 1917. The members of the incumbent Bolshevik Party were committed socialists and encouraged the notion that the Soviet economy was a socialist economy, and was an exemplar for socialism. They justified each step of economic reform as a contribution to socialism. The Soviet Planned Economy was considered the archetype of socialist experiment. The Bolsheviks set out to provide the benefits of industrial development to as many people, in as just a manner, in as short a time as possible. Here, we shall deal with how the Soviet system came to take shape during 1917- 1989, and how it evolved in the CMEA countries. After 1945, ideas from the Soviet model were taken up and used by ‘socialist’ governments in France, Britain and Italy. Debates Soviet industrialization has attracted a lot of debates some of which are given below: (i) Scholars have asked whether socialist industrialization on the Soviet pattern more concerned with socialism and justice than with economic growth of the country. According to Maurice Dobb and some other socialist historians, Soviet industrialization came about through policies that had an eye to economic and industrial growth as well as social justice. Accordingly, ideas of socialism defined by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, were important in everything that occurred; and steps taken for growth were a success. Some non-socialist historians like Jasny have agreed that growth was achieved, but others, like Alec Nove, held that, even if there was growth, the industrialization was inefficient and the weaknesses were the result of obsessions with socialist doctrines. E.H. Carr and R.W. Davies work goes against this kind of perspective. They argued that the Soviet leadership was divided on the meaning of socialism and evolved policy while adapting to problems of growth. However, Davies disagrees with Carr that this was generally true. According to him, concerns with doctrine and politics became crucial in the 1930s in Soviet policy. In the Russian Federation’s recent writings, there is a division of opinion about how important doctrine was in socialist industrialization. (ii) It has been asked if socialist industrialization on the Soviet pattern a product of Russian circumstances and inapplicable for other countries or regions. Some scholars believe that Soviet industrialization was not socialist since socialism could not be constructed in an underdeveloped country like Russia where industrial capitalism had been weak. The leader of the October Revolution, V.I. Lenin himself did not consider it possible for Russia to build socialism without a revolution in the West. Moreover, he was disturbed about the prospects of constructing socialism in a country which was mainly agricultural, where industrial and finance capitalism were features of the late 19th century. Accordingly, socialism in Russia is regarded as a travesty: economic experiment on a bad foundation with socialist jargon thrown in. But, there are some problems with this argument. It implies that socialist experiments cannot take place where there is no advanced capitalism. Marx was not certain about this. In correspondence with Vera Zasulich, the Populist activist, in the 1870s, Marx conceded that Russia might be able to proceed to socialism, bypassing capitalism, since Russia possessed institutions which lacked capitalist orientation and which were deeply influential at that time. (iii) Many scholars have debated if Soviet socialism was an instrument of a new ruling class in Russia and a Russian instrument to rule non-Russian territories of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. For instance, Leon Trotsky (The Revolution Betrayed), and the historian who has followed his ideas most closely, Isaac Deutscher have followed this perspective. (iv) There is the Anders Aslund perspective. This anti-Soviet economist has recently advanced the notion that Soviet production was so incompetent that it does not deserve serious attention as growth per sey.

IG NO U

Fr ie

nd

Ap

p

m o c . g t n r i d a ea m R y e

Do

wn l

oa d

in ks d l n o u O bo t r s o E f e . ub nd w eH a w Th w

4

Q. 5. Write short notes on any two of the following in about 250 words each. (ii) Nietzsche’s views on the Enlightenment Ans. Nietzsche brought forth a critique of the enlightenment and even its Romantic critics and argued that truth is an object of construction and creation rather than discovery. Romanticists had attempted to fill the void of the modern world by turning to nature, religion and tradition. In the late 19th century, Nietzsche questioned just it and held that neither proximity to nature nor religion could provide the free man with peace, joy or certainty but he accepted the spiritual wasteland in which the modern man walks alone. Against a return to the past and the greater happiness of barbaric period, he argued that our impulse towards knowledge is too widely developed to allow us to value happiness without knowledge, or the happiness of a strong and fixed delusion. According to him, knowledge within us has developed into a passion and it is possible that mankind will perish eventually from this passion for knowledge. However, even this situation did not daunt him. According to Nietzsche, man could no longer rely on custom and tradition also since it appeals to a higher authority that is obeyed not because it commands what is useful to us but merely because it commands. The free man is an individual, defying custom and norms of received morality. Thus, since the free man of the modern age cannot find solace either in religion or tradition, there are just two options – he may abandon the search for an ultimate meaning and create meaning by his own will and action. Nietzsche explored these alternatives and questioned the entire tradition of western rationalist thought right from Plato onwards. All schools of thought had one thing in common believing that they had arrived at the truth. While Plato claimed that reason could give man access to the ultimate reality, the enlightenment claimed that the application of scientific method has yielded the truth about the world. According to Nietzsche, each in its own way thus claims that it has discovered the truth about the external world that exists independently of us. Moreover, they claimed that this truth has been arrived at impersonally and objectively. Nietzsche believed that men have lived in this state of “theoretical innocence” for centuries and have failed to realize that the external world is in itself devoid of all meanings and values. Every time, a value is given to the world by us. It is only we who have created the world which is of any account to man. Accordingly, man is a creator, a continuous poet of life and hence Nietzsche was not undermining the significance of cognition. Nietzsche held that knowledge remained a supreme value, but if pure knowledge as revealed by reason or experiments is the only end then we would have to follow whatever direction these faculties take us in but this would be complete “madness”. Thus, knowledge has to be mediated by values which we may wish to construct the world and valued we find worth affirming. In this sense, the role of the artist becomes very significant because it is the work of an artist that creates and unravels alternative worlds for us. On the contrary, men of science aim to discover what is already there. Accordingly, Nietzsche held that poetry and myths were a valuable source of knowledge for us. It may be noted that the artist is not just the ‘other’ of the modern rational scientist but he is a creator. In his role as a creator, the artist embodies the ability to transcend the boundaries of the social and the rational. To sum up, Nietzsche and the Romanticists questioned certain basic tenets of the enlightenment. For instance, the present was the most advanced and civilized era in the history of humankind was debated. These critiques of the idea of progress, reason and industrial rationality sought to displace the centrality accorded to science during the enlightenment period. Broadly, the critics agreed that the new age of capitalism, scientific discovery and industrialization had provided a much softened world for the man. They accepted that it had offered a benign ethic of health, vitalism and welfare but argued that these developments challenged the existing conceptions without offering any alternative vision of the meaning of life. As a result, there began a search for an alternative to the industrial society, particularly, to the instrumental and technical rationality. Following romanticism of the late 19th century, other critics argued against the violence implicit in modern science, limitations of the enlightenment project of progress and the exploitative nature of the capitalism.a (iv) Meaning of underdevelopment. Ans. At present, there is an agonizing, inextricably designed bipolar world. On the one hand, we can see severe deprivation and social exclusion and on the other hand affluence and opulence. While three richest people in the world have assets that exceed the combined GDP of 48 least developed countries, there are 880 million who are malnourished and millions go without schooling. These deprived people are wholly or partially excluded from full participation

IG NO U

Fr ie

nd

Ap

p

m o c . g t n r i a ead m R y e

Do

wn l

oa d

n s i d l k n o u O bo t r s o E f e . ub nd w eH a w Th w

5

in the society in which they live due to underdevelopment which causes lack of options, entitlement to resources and lack of social-capital. The process by which a traditional society employing primitive techniques and capable of sustaining only a low level of income is transformed into a modern, high technology, high-income economy may be defined as economic development. Generally, lack of development may be defined as underdevelopment. The development goals set by the World Bank are reduction of poverty, low mortality rates, universal primary education, access to reproductive health services, national strategies for sustainable development and gender equality. Scholars have observed that many underdeveloped countries are not in a position to attain these high objectives due to grinding poverty, low income and lack of resources. However, we must not generalize about the underdeveloped world because although they resemble in many negative term but they vary in cultural, economic and political conditions. It is true that they share high and rising burden of unemployment and underemployment, widespread and chronic absolute poverty, growing disparities in income distribution, low and stagnant agricultural productivity, sizeable gap between urban and rural levels of living, lack of adequate education, health and housing facilities, and more or less stagnant occupational structure, dependence on foreign and often inappropriate technologies. However, we can observe significant differences among the underdeveloped countries in the size of the country, population and economy, their historical evolution, their natural and human resource endowments, the nature of their industrial structure and polity and other institutional structures. Low income compared to the developed world economies is considered to be a major characteristic of underdeveloped regions. But, per capita income is only a measure of average income based on market valuations since it is not a complete indicator of incidence of poverty. Therefore, to make a proper assessment of a country’s economy, some extra dimensions such as life expectancy, health facilities, conditions of employment and distribution of income. SECTION – B Q. 7. What is colonialism? Discuss the different stages of colonialism. Ans. It is considered that colonialism is the internal disarticulation and external integration of the rural economy and the realization of the extended reproduction of capital not in the colony but in the imperialist metropolis. Under the colonialism different modes of production from feudalism to petty commodity production to agrarian, industrial and finance capitalism coexist. Actually, unlike capitalism where profit or surplus is the right of private owners, in colonialism the surplus is the right of state who control the colonies. Basically it was not only the representation of modes of production but the social formation. Here class was not important but the societal structure is important. Here, national liberation struggle against colonial powers became important because exploitation is a constant feature of colonialism. And this struggles become political in nature. Basic Features of Colonialism Following were the basic features of colonialism: 1. Subordinate Position: Colonies were always as a subordinate part of mother country. 2. Unequal Exchange: Metropolis consider the colonies as a market of their produced goods and supplier of raw materials and during this exchange the balance of economy became always against the colonies 3. External Integration and Internal Disarti-culation: During this economic exchange colonies were attached to world economic system but the internal economic infrastructure were always disarticulated. 4. Drain of Wealth: Took place through unrequited exports and state expenditure on armed forces and civil services. 5. Foreign Political Domination: Political control by the colonizers. STAGES OF COLONIALISM Colonialism has generally three distinct stages. However, some countries went only one or two stages only as it was in the case of India, Egypt and Indonesia. Almost two century has the history for these three stages. With the change in the policy, institutions, culture, ideas and ideologies the nature of subordination changed. However these stages not clearly differentiated with each other but overlapped with each other. The stages were the result of four factors:

IG NO U

Fr ie

nd

Ap

p

m o c . g t n r i d a ea m R y e

Do

wn l

oa d

in ks d l n o u O bo t r s o E f e . ub nd w eH a w Th w

6

the historical development of capitalism as a world system; ● the change in the society, economy and polity of the metropolis; ● the change in its position in the world economy and lastly; ● the colony’s own historical development. First Stage: Monopoly Trade and Plunder This stage had two basic objectives. In this stage monopoly of the trade was main goal for the traders. Import of indigenously manufactured goods was the main trend for the trade’s profits and all kind of competitor kept out. For this dual policy was used for the abolition of local traders they used invasion while for Europeans they used the military defeat. Later political take over of the colony enabled them to steal the wealth of colony. Drain of wealth was the main feature of this stage as was in the case of India. It amounted to two to three per cent of the national income of Britain at that time. In this stage no basic changes in the societal structure was made only domination over economy and polity was present. Second Stage: Era of Free Trade In this stage, colonies were mainly used for the supplier of raw materials so that they can manufactured the goods in their factories. Industrial bourgeoisie of the metropolis saw the colony as a market for their manufactured goods. They tried to increase the exports from the colony so that they can make balance in payments and also to make more profits. In this stage, industrial bourgeoisie opposed the drain of wealth because it was against of his business interest. Actually they want this profit for longer period and in continuation. Trading was the main roots for business. It is also important that in this stage changes in the economy, polity, administration, social, cultural and ideological structure were initiated to enable exploitation in the new way. And it all happened in the name of development and modernization. The colony was now integrated to the world economy and its isolation from the world had been started abolishing. Investments from the capitalist in different sectors were allowed. Transport and communication has been developed for the better way exploitation of local raw materials. Ports were developed for the export. In this stage liberal imperialism got the attention due to the integration with the greater world. Also the concept of self-government introduced and for this purpose education and administration has been developed. Third Stage: Era of Finance Capital This stage was critical because it was the stage of struggle where the search for the raw materials and food grains and also the markets for the produced goods were seen. Investments became the major economic trends in this stage. And the new investments were only possible in the colonies and to protect the interest of investors the control over colonies increased. In this stage the thinking about protectionism increased because new kind of autocracy started prevailing in this stage. On the other the colonies did not respond according to these investments from the metropolis. Actually in the early stage it was overexploitation of raw materials so there was scarcity of raw materials emerged. In this stage they again changed the policy for modernization now it was limited modernization and tried to them underdeveloped but this policy of limited modernization became a constraint for the colonizers. However, this stage did not take off because colonialism has already broken the economies of colonies and it was not possible to make the investment and gain profit from them. So that the earlier two stages were very common in traditional and older colonies as it was the case in India. Q. 10. Write short notes on any two of the following in about 250 words each. (i) Economic theories explaining imperialism Ans. There are broadly two kind of theories associated with the imperialism- first, economic given by J.A. Hobson, Hilferding, Rosa Luxembourg and Lenin; and second political given by Schumpeter, Fieldhouse, Gallagher and Robinson. The other term used as metrocentric and pericentric. The Economic Explanations Political agenda was the common feature behind the economic explanation of imperialism which was described by the Hobson, Hilferding, Rosa Luxembourg and Lenin. Hobson tried to alert the British public that they are loosing their money for the benefits of financial capitalist while British foreign policy was dominated by those who only maximized their returns on their investments. Hilferding who was a German Social Democrat and the Finance ●

IG NO U

Fr ie

nd

Ap

p

m o c . g t n r i a ead m R y e

Do

wn l

oa d

n s i d l k n o u O bo t r s o E f e . ub nd w eH a w Th w

7

Minister of that time who actually given his life for being anti Nazi. Like Hilferding Rosa Luxembourg was also a Social Democrat leader in Germany. Vladimir Lenin was the hero of Russian revolution of 1917 who advocated that World War I was nothing but the clash of interest between different imperialist. In his book Imperialism (1902), Hobson used the term under consumption and explained that the increasing production through machine was not fully used by the domestic markets so they looked for foreign markets where they can sale their products and in return earn a good amount. So according to him imperialism was the result of capitalist system. Because that time the whole Europe was struggling with this kind of crisis so they started to capture and establish the colonies. This under consumption motivated the over saving for further investment. It started a vicious cycle of investment and returns in which colonies played a major role. According to Hobson dominant directive motive behind imperialism “Was the demand for markets and for profitable investment by the exporting and financial classes within each imperialist regime.” He rejected other motives be it power, pride and prestige or the mission of civilizing the natives. Das Finanzkapital, (Finance Capital) written by Rudolf Hilferding which was published in 1910 describe the nature of finance capitalism which was according to him was the last stage of capitalism. He tried to explain that in this stage basically big banks and financial institutions made substantive control over industrial houses. It was the period of monopoly capitalists who looks to foreign markets so they motivated the imperialist expansion. This was the only way through which they can secure their supplies of raw materials and can earn huge returns which finally became as a political rivalry and ended in the form of wars. Rosa Luxembourg in his study titled Accumulation of Capital (1913) explained the relationship between colonies and imperial powers. He gave the attention on unequal economic relations where colonies became as a supplier of raw materials and foodstuffs only and imperialist powers enjoyed the huge benefits over them. Lenin also explained the relationship between them but he also said that this relationship was not only unequal but also exploitative. They never want to invest in better standard of living for workers, while it was necessary for their domestic investment. So they invest in backward countries because the limits of profitable domestic investment have been reached. According to Lenin this kind of imperialist interest turned into rivalries and finally converted into war. So Lenin tried to expose the capitalist interest and convince the Russian population not to take part in the War. (iv) Define consumerism. Ans. A preoccupation with the acquisition of goods and commodities is often called “consumerism” in the modern period. In earlier times, it h ad negative connotations. This implied a lack of discretion among “buyers” and “consumers” regarding what goods to buy and why to buy them in an increasingly commercialized atmosphere. Consumerism is linked with the growth of industrial capitalism in Europe from the 18th century. Later, it spread at the global level and was accompanied by economies of scale and increases in production and productivity. These increases were sustained by growth in demand. Further, the improvements in technology and extensive use of the division of labour enabled manufacturers to produce on a large scale for wants, needs and fashions. Apart from this, commercialization of leisure and the penetration by innovative manufacturers, of religious practices, public health, and education reinforced the habits of acquisition and increasing consumption. Some believe that the regular use of commercial methods to make goods desirable encouraged an obsession with purchase and consumption. As a result, there would be consumerism or the near-compulsive concern with consumption. Moreover, the manufacturer’s concern with mass consumption led to a decline in interest in quality, ensuring that consumerism bred so-called “mass culture.” Thus, consumerism could also lead to poor management of household budgets and impoverishment also. We find that this perspective encouraged a critical approach on the character of consumption under industrial capitalism – and the attempt to avoid indiscriminate consumption under socialist industrialization. Finally, consumption came to be associated with citizenship, since it was connected with social status and politics. It may be noted that the popularity of the critique has consequently varied considerably. In recent times, the studies on “material culture” and “material politics” have firmly established that whatever the value of the critical appraisal of consumerism, manufacturers’ practice and consumer experience cannot be easily straitjacketed in the present circumstances. ■■

IG NO U

Fr ie

nd

Ap

p

m o c . g t n r i d a ea m R y e

Do

wn l

oa d

in ks d l n o u O bo t r s o E f e . ub nd w eH a w Th w

8