Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

PARTY GOVERNMENT I: PARTY ORGANIZATION Readings: Duverger, Kirchheimer, Katz and Mair.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "PARTY GOVERNMENT I: PARTY ORGANIZATION Readings: Duverger, Kirchheimer, Katz and Mair."— Presentation transcript:

1 PARTY GOVERNMENT I: PARTY ORGANIZATION Readings: Duverger, Kirchheimer, Katz and Mair

2 Guiding Questions  What are cadre parties?  Mass parties?  Catch-all parties?  Cartel parties?  How does party organization in Europe differ from the US?  How does party organization shape elections in European democracies? Politics in European democracies?

3 The Emergence of Political Parties: Pre 1890  Politics centered on connections to aristocracy.  Political office doled out as royal favors.  Difficult to conceive of modern political parties in this atmosphere.  No attempt to appeal to the masses.

4  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 developed within the legislature (i.e. internally created)  Why? To be able to make decisions. Example: Tories vs. Liberals in the UK. The Emergence of Political Parties

5  Duverger (1954)  Cadre parties  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. Cadre Parties (Pre 1890)

6 American Political Parties-Cadre  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.

7  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. The Emergence of the Mass Party

8  Duverger 1954  Mass parties  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. The Era of Mass Parties (1890- approx. 1945)

9 Contagion from the Left?  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.  Christian Democratic could draw on Catholic organizational strength.  Push for large membership rolls on both sides of the political debate begins the era of mass parties.  Clerical to confessional shift opened up voters for the Christian Democrats.

10 Cadre vs. Mass Parties 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.

11  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. American Political Parties-Mass

12  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. The Emergence of Catch All Parties

13  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 The Emergence of Catch All Parties: 1945 to approx. 1970

14  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. Contagion from the Right?

15 Consequences of Catch All? 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.

16  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. American Political Parties: Catch All

17 Challenges for Catch-All Parties  Katz and Mair 2009  Catch all era created new pressures:  Weaker social ties to traditional groupings.  Left-right debate over more services vs. lower taxes/less regulation.  Parties’ ability to deliver was undercut by:  1) Moderation of class cleavage made appeals to class less beneficial for parties.  2) Campaigns shift towards greater professionalization (at greater costs).  3) Social welfare state no longer economically viable. Requires cuts in services or increases in taxes to remain functional  4) Politics as a vocation  Response:  1) Depoliticize controversial issues/Delegate to non political entities. Convergence  2) Use public funding to reduce the costs of defeat.

18 The Emergence of Cartel Parties  Katz and Mair 1997  Cadre:  State/society interpenetrated by elites; parties as cliques of notables.  Trustee form of representation.  Mass:  Extension of franchise push state and society apart; parties as intermediaries between the state and classes in civil society.  Delegate form of representation.

19 The Emergence of Cartel Parties (1970-present)  Katz and Mair 1997  Catch-All:  State and society separated as entry into government weakens ties between party and societal class groups.  Parties act as brokers between state and society which aggregate demands from society while justifying policies from the state.  Thus, parties are moving closer towards the state and further from society.  Entrepreneurial form of representation.  Contends that parties have become agents of the state.

20 Cartelization of Party Systems  Katz and Mair 1997  Characterized by “the interpenetration of party and state, and also by a pattern of inter- party collusion.”  1) Politics as a profession Competition based on efficient stewardship.  2) Managed electoral competition Shared sense of survival.  3) Campaign resources provided by the state Campaign resources provided to parties “inside the state” US/UK outliers on public financing of campaigns.  4) Greater rights to participation within party.  Has important implications for governance.

21 Conclusions: Consequences of Cartelization  Creates a relatively permanent set of “in” parties.  Campaign finance rules make participation by “out” parties difficult.  Range of issues considered “fair game” for debate is constrained.  Delegation to apolitical entities and norms of “legitimacy” constrain this debate.  Electoral results may not always be reflected in governing coalitions.  Feedback mechanisms weakened.  New demands increasingly voiced by interest groups rather than cartel parties.  May provide impetus for extreme parties.

22 Next Unit  Theme: Party Government II: Political Parties and Ideology  Reading: Hay and Menon CH 12

Download ppt "PARTY GOVERNMENT I: PARTY ORGANIZATION Readings: Duverger, Kirchheimer, Katz and Mair."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google