Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Readings: Reserves: Aldrich, LaPalombara and Weiner, Neumann, Duverger, Kirchheimer, Epstein, Pizzorno.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Readings: Reserves: Aldrich, LaPalombara and Weiner, Neumann, Duverger, Kirchheimer, Epstein, Pizzorno."— Presentation transcript:

1 Readings: Reserves: Aldrich, LaPalombara and Weiner, Neumann, Duverger, Kirchheimer, Epstein, Pizzorno.

2  Why did political parties develop?  What is an internally created party?  What is an externally created party?  What is a cadre party? Mass party? Catch-all party?  How do we explain the evolution of political parties?

3  The formation of what we consider modern political parties can be linked to:  1) Growing autonomy of parliaments. ◦ Political elites had to ensure that political decisions could be reached.  2) Expansion of suffrage. ◦ Political elites had to appeal to the masses as the suffrage expands; new types of parties emerge to appeal to new voters.  3) Avenues to political power. ◦ Political elites saw a value in creating political parties as a way to wield political power.

4  Despite attempts to govern without political parties, they have developed.  The circumstances under which political parties form have critical effects on the political system.  Political parties have evolved to meet changing political and social environments.  Same patterns we observe in developed democracies seen as developing democracies become established.

5  Duverger (1954) ◦ Cadre parties  Neumann (1956) ◦ Parties of individual representation.  Politics centered on connections to aristocracy. ◦ Political office doled out as royal favors of sorts.  Difficult to conceive of modern political parties in this atmosphere. ◦ No attempt to appeal to the masses.

6  By the 18 th century, rule by royal prerogative is disappearing.  Eighteenth century politics centered on conceptions of suffrage based on property. ◦ Limited electoral audiences did not require political platforms that appealed to mass audiences.  But groups did develop within the legislature (i.e. internally created) ◦ Why? To be able to make decisions within the legislature.  Example: Tories vs. Liberals in the UK.

7  Constituency organizations relatively weak at this point. ◦ Limited suffrage reduced the need for constituency organization.  Temporary electoral committees (or caucuses) would spring up around election time to promote candidates. ◦ Connections are based not on quantity of members but on quality of connections. ◦ Caucuses dissolved in between elections, so the constituency organizations are not permanent.

8  Framers opposed the idea of political parties (Federalist 10).  Aldrich 1995  Big ticket issues such as placing the capital, and financial disputes surrounding the Revolution were hotly debated with no resolution. ◦ Formation of legislative factions useful to organize this debate.  Members owed position in both chambers to personal connections rather than mass support. ◦ Cadre organization  US parties then begin to “look like” political parties in 1828.

9  Duverger: 1954  Nascent political parties were a collection of caucuses roughly tied to parliamentary factions. ◦ Initially, not predicated on ideology  As calls for suffrage expand, demands from movements from outside parliament (i.e. working classes) challenge elite dominance  Once cadre parties have to seek support within the electorate, parliamentary factions merge with constituency caucuses. ◦ Cadre parties are the norm in a social context that emphasizes social rather than ideological connections. ◦ Cadre parties are not as viable in an ideologically based political system.

10  Duverger 1954 ◦ Mass parties  Neumann 1956 ◦ Parties of social integration  Growth of working class movements pressured political elites to expand suffrage.  Working class organizations could not rely on legislative connections to express their demands. ◦ These parties formed externally, drawing on mass support.  Caucus form of organization was not viable for these parties; branch organization more appropriate ◦ Members would pay dues and become active in local branches of the party.

11  Quantity of members key. ◦ Mass parties created cradle to grave organizations for their memberships; party organization always active.  Initially, mass parties were a function of the left ◦ Great for mobilization.  Parties of the right began to adopt the branch style of organization in response.  Push for large membership rolls on both sides of the political debate begins the era of mass parties.

12 CADRE PARTIESMASS PARTIES  Internally created  Organized via caucuses  Constituency organizations dissolved in between elections  Generally less ideologically charged.  Appeal to elites; “quality” of membership key.  Were predominantly liberal or conservative.  Externally created  Organized via branches  Constituency organizations permanently in place.  Generally more ideologically charged.  Appeal to masses; “quantity” of membership key.  Predominantly socialist/social democrat or Christian democrat.

13  US never develops truly mass based parties per se; party funding never based on dues.  Epstein 1966: ◦ US political parties remain funded by notables but attempt to appeal to masses.  Aldrich 1995: ◦ Van Buren attempted to create a party “bigger than its individuals”. ◦ Created mass based electoral mechanisms to win election in disparate regions; ideological vagueness suited party’s electoral goals. ◦ Whigs follow suit; Whigs and Democrats compete to controls spoils of office. ◦ Arguably collude to prevent the issue of slavery from coming to the forefront.

14  Neumann 1956 ◦ Parties of total integration  Seek to encapsulate the lives of the citizenry  Duverger 1956 ◦ Devotee parties  A type of mass party.  Aim to enroll the masses but closely guard the “purity” of the movement.  More open than caucuses but more restrictive than mss parties ◦ Typically referred to communist and fascist parties

15  Organization ◦ Communist parties adopt a cell rather than a branch structure.  Branch unites members on the basis of location  Cell unites members on the basis of occupation rather than location.  Typically much smaller than branches, intensity of devotion to cause is key. ◦ Fascist parties adopt a militia rather than a branch or cell approach  Militias tend to adopt a more military facade.  Involvement not limited to the typically “political” (i.e. violence/intimidation)

16  Kirchheimer 1966  Catch all parties: ◦ 1) Mass party in a post ideological state ◦ 2) Electoral success trumps ideology.  Major parties cooperate to forestall a rise in political extremism. ◦ Socialist parties are finally brought into government. ◦ As socialist parties enter government, class distinctions begin to wane.  Political parties begin to look for votes “outside their base” to gain political advantage.

17  Kirchheimer 1966  Strategy involves: ◦ 1) jettisoning “ideological baggage” ◦ 2) trumpeting efficiency of administration over ideological goals. ◦ 3) reducing the role of individual party member while boosting the role of the central party. ◦ 4) reducing emphasis on classe gardée to pull votes from other societal groupings. ◦ 5) creating channels within various interest groups to boost electoral support.  Only major parties can make this transition. ◦ Not all parties will go this route.  Example: Niche parties

18  Epstein 1967  Catch all strategy facilitated by new communications and informational technology (i.e. TV). ◦ TV reduces the emphasis on building mass membership bases.  Catch all parties need access to funds to buy advertising;. ◦ No problem for the middle class parties but tough for working class parties.  Parties seek to get the funds necessary to compete effectively. ◦ Unions become key for parties of the left; business organizations for parties of the right.

19 KIRCHHEIMER 1966EPSTEIN 1967  Problematic.  Mass parties provide critical integration and expressive functions not provided by catch all parties.  Reduced focus on controversial legislation.  Catch all parties may lose their traditional supporters as a result.  Normal.  Allows parties to jettison more ideological components.  Political parties are free to compromise.  Parties can gain freedom from ideological activists or groups.

20 PANEBIANCO 1988 MASS BUREAUCRATIC PANEBIANCO 1988 ELECTORAL PROFESSIONAL  Emphasize an elected bureaucracy.  Appeal to ‘electorate of belonging’  Internal leaders are “critical”  Financing through membership dues.  Emphasize ideology.  Emphasize political professionals in campaigns.  Appeal to ‘opinion electorate’  Public leadership is “critical”  Financing through public funds and/or interest groups.  Emphasize leadership and specific issues.

21  Pizzorno 1981  Convergence: Party statements and policies look different to party specialists and activists but not to the electorate. ◦ Linked to adoption of catch-all strategies as well as full expansion of the suffrage.  External pressure groups have been accepted into the system; their demands have now become “negotiable”  May reduce ideological spread between governing parties. ◦ But some argue this fosters disillusionment.

22  US political parties are typically viewed as cadre parties. ◦ Mass parties never caught on in the US ◦ Although both the Democrats and Republicans typically make “catch-all type” electoral appeals.  Aldrich 1995: ◦ Suggests evidence of convergence until the 1970’s. ◦ Highlights the role of supporters and activists to both major political parties.  Present era: seeing a return to ideological differentiation amongst the major parties.

23  Should point out that these are ideal types. ◦ Some overlap between eras. ◦ Some systems have parties with many different organizational types.  Example: Canada ◦ One organizational type has not necessarily “won out” across all democratic systems.  Convergence occurring in advanced democracies. ◦ Developing democracies show a similar pattern once the party system stabilizes. ◦ The typical response has been more elite cooperation across parties rather than differentiation.  Katz and Mair 1997: ◦ New laws have allowed “accepted” parties to “collude” to prevent the rise of new parties and maintain control of the governing apparatus.  It has been argued that the “cartelization” of party systems is prompting a rise in political extremism.

24  Game: Primitive Politics  Theme: Parties and Membership ◦ Readings:  Ware CH 2 and D/W Ch 5


Download ppt "Readings: Reserves: Aldrich, LaPalombara and Weiner, Neumann, Duverger, Kirchheimer, Epstein, Pizzorno."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google