Psychological Basis of Politics:
Writes Professor Catlin, “Of all these inter disciplinary relations which are of practical importance for Political Science, the most important is that between Politics and Psychology. For the present writer it is fundamental.” Indeed, from the beginning of the twentieth century, this relationship has been very much emphasised. Graham Wallas was the political writer in England who first laid stress on the need to study psychological factors in political activities, like voting, in his book, Human Nature in Politics, written in 1908. Bentley in the United States also did so at about the same time.
Since then many political scientists have also said that political phenomena cannot be explained without explaining their psychological causes and motivations. According to Barker, “the application of the psychological clue to the riddles of human activity has indeed become the fashion of the day. If our fathers thought biologically, we think psychologically,” Many writers in recent times have used psychology to explain political life and movement Bagehot in his writings pointed out the relation between psychology and the English Constitution. Boutmy has explained the effect of the psychological factors on the character and working of the English and American political institutions.
Barker remarked that in the present day, “political theorists have turned social psychologists.” Lord Bryce in his Modem Democracies (1921) said, “Politics has its roots in Psychology.” In America, the political scientists of the University of Chicago, Merriam, Lasswell and others, have also laid great stress on the relationship between the two disciplines. As a matter of fact, the emphasis on close dependence of Politics on Psychology has given rise to the “behavioural revolution” in the U.S.A., soon after the Second World War.
The relationship between die two sciences of Politics and Psychology is shown in many ways. For instance, a democracy is a government of public opinion and propaganda. But public opinion and propaganda are psychological phenomena which a psychologist can best explain. Methods of psychology are increasingly applied by modem governments, especially in the army, intelligence, civil service examinations, in public opinion and elections and in the courts. Lord Bryce has rightly remarked that “Politics has its roots in psychology, the study (in their actuality) of the mental habits and volitional proclivities of mankind.” It is evident that the study of politics is incomplete without the help of psychology. No politician or statesman can disregard the psychological factors in politics and no law-maker can ignore the psychological aspects of his enactments.
In spite of the utility of Psychology for Politics, there are certain limitations of the psychological method. In the first place Psychology deals with mind and thoughts, as they are and not with what they ought to be, as Politics does. Secondly, the psychologist does not concern himself with the moral aspect and ends of the political life.
Thirdly, psychology has nothing to do with progress and dynamic processes, but Political Science cannot ignore these factors in the State and human mind. Although it is fashionable in the 20th century to explain politics and political matters by such psychological methods and techniques as psycho-analysis, they have gone too far. They explain external matters by too much of subjective analysis. They introduce in the study of Political Science the personal bias of the scientist Political study thus becomes a personal study rather than a scientific study.