1. POLITICAL PARTIES An Instrument in Shaping the Collective Interest

2. ► Competitive party systems Work to build electoral support; find what voters want, get supporters involved, and represent these interests within the political process ► Authoritarian party systems Noncompetitive systems that seek to direct society; in some regimes, government & party closely linked, not opposition parties permitted. Party Systems

3. ► Majoritarian party systems  Accept democratic principles and compete for governmental positions through the electoral process in democracies  Either dominated by just two parties (US), or they have two substantial parties and election laws that create legislative majorities for one of them (Britain) ► Multiparty systems  The multiparty systems have combinations of parties, voter support, and election laws that virtually ensure no single party wins a legislative majority. Competitive Party Systems I

4. ► Consensual party systems Dominating parties not too far apart on policy, have reasonable amount of trust in each other and political system ► Conflictual party systems Dominating parties are far apart on issues or highly antagonistic toward each other ► Consociational party systems Mixed characteristics of the two main party systems Competitive Party Systems II

5. ► Exclusive governing parties Insist on control over political resources by the party leadership; do not permit activity by social groups, citizens, or other governmental agencies. ► Inclusive governing parties Recognize and attempt to coordinate various social groups in the society; accept and aggregate certain autonomous interests, while repressing others. Authoritarian Party Systems

6. ► Traditional authoritarian Regimes  Parties are less significant because of rule by an group who rule in their own interests, especially the gaining of wealth and privilege. ► Communist states  Parties were the central political instrument though which leaders sought, and sometimes achieved, total control over society. Hence there are few cases of authoritarian rule where the political party is the true source of power. ► Totalitarian States  Parties am at total political, social, and economic control  Subjugation and attempted transformation of society  Extensive use of violence Comparing Parties in Authoritarian States

7. ► Citizens organize political activity through parties ► Parties develop out of differences about how to achieve common goals ► Want to win office and put forward leaders in government ► Want to have an impact on public policy ► Even when losing office, parties perform a useful role in a democracy, by organizing the opposition. ► Create important links between the voter, groups and government. ► In order to succeed, parties make the effort to build consensus Purpose of Political Party IN DEMOCRACY

8. ► Parties mobilize ordinary citizens, either to vote or to achieve some other political goal ► Parties recruit and socialize leaders, even in one-party states ► Parties provide a long-lasting sense of party identification ► Parties can provide a means for party leaders to control rank and file members ► Parties provide links between:  branches of government in a separation of powers  levels of government in a federal system  citizens and government in all systems Functions of Political Parties IN DEMOCRACY

9. ► Parties mobilize support for the regime ► Parties recruit and train potential leaders ► Parties oversee the bureaucracy ► Parties spy on population (in totalitarian systems) ► Parties link between the bottom and top, but a means of social control by the top over the bottom ► Parties organize government and formulate government policies & programs ► Parties socialize people who are closely involved in party organizations & are engaged in “political education” (in communist system) Functions of Political Parties IN NON-DEMOCRACY

10. ► Dominant party system (e.g., Japan, Singapore)  One-party dominates for long periods of time  No legal ban on other parties, but only one party has chance to win office  There may be informal harassment of opposition parties ► Two party system (e.g., US, Canada, Britain)  Either party has genuine chance to win office, elections truly competitive  Additional parties not outlawed but have serious difficulty winning because of electoral system  Voters are limited to two choices Types of Political Parties I

11. ► Multi-party system (e.g., Italy, Germany)  Competitive elections within multiple parties ensure that no one party can dominate for long.  Parties tend to be more doctrinaire and distinctive, giving voters more choice.  In the system, it is difficult for any one party to win a majority.  Coalitions with similar parties become necessary.  The system is less stable because coalition partners may resign over particular government policies. Types of Political Parties II

12. ► In all democracies, at least one branch of government is filled through popular election: the legislature. ► In presidential democracies, the chief executive is elected by the people either directly or indirectly through an Electoral College or similar institution. ► The main difference is between single-member district system (one candidate is elected in each district) and multi-member district elections (as many as 150 different candidates may be elected in a single district) Voting and Elections I

13. ► Single-member District Elections  Plurality elections (candidate with the largest number of votes wins, regardless of the actual number)  Majority elections (the winning candidate must gain the votes of more than half the voters; if no candidate wins a majority, there is then often a run-off election to determine the winner) ► Multi-member District Elections  Usually combined with any variety of proportional representation (PR) system. PR systems try to assign seats (e.g., in a legislature) in proportion to the votes that each party receives. Voting and Elections II

14. ► In the Westminster or majoritarian model of democracy (in the form of a powerful present or a Westminster-style, dominant one- party cabinet), power is concentrated in the hands of the majority party. ► This consensus model of democracy compels PR to be associated with multiparty systems, coalition governments, and more equal executive-legislative power relations (in presidentialism, there is the danger of executive-legislative conflict while president holds strong and effective leadership role). ► The relationship between plurality elections and a two-party system are mutual (both favor each other). ► An argument in favor of plurality systems (e.g., US and UK) has been that they favor "strong" one-party governments that can pursue "effective" public policy. “Constitutional Choice” Lijphart, 1993

15. ► The records show that parliamentary-PR systems are better in dealing with the issues of representation, protection of minority interest, voter participation, and control of unemployment.  In the newly democratic and democratizing countries, the divided societies need peaceful coexistence among the contending ethnic groups.  Parliamentary and PR systems facilitate power sharing, conciliation, and compromise.  Although one-party cabinets or presidents may well be able to formulate economic policy with greater ease and speed in the short run, policies supported by a broad consensus are more likely to be successfully carried out and to remain on course. “Constitutional Choice” Lijphart, 1993

16. ► Change of party structure  In established democracies, weak, decentralized party organizations and social democratic parties are no longer fired by ideology.  In communist states, old-style communist parties virtually disappear. ► Decrease of party income  Increasingly depend on state subsidies rather than members’ subscriptions ► Party membership become falling & ageing ► Voters’ loyalties are weakening ► Individual politicians increasingly communicate with electors directly A “Crisis of Parties”?