88 UNIT7 POLITICAL PARTIES AND PARTY SYSTEMS* Structure 7.0. Objectives 7.1 Introduction 7.2. Political Parties 7.3. Functions of Parties 7.4 Party and Party Systems 7.4.1 Two Party System 7.4.2 Multi-Party System 7.43 One Party System 7.44 Dominant Party System 7.5. Trends in the Evolution of Party Organisation 7.6 Let us Sum up 7.7. References 7.8 Answer to Check Your Progress Exercises 7.0 OBJECTIVES Political parties are not part of the formal definition of democracy. They have however become indispensable in organised polities and most visible institutions of a democracy. This unit examines the role of political parties and party systems in contemporary politics. After going through this unit, you should be able to: © Define a political party; ‘* Describe the functions performed by parties in a democracy; © Identify different types of party systems; © Trace the evolution of party policy and organisation; and ‘© Analyse the importance of political parties in a democratic structure. TA NTRODUCTION In ancient Greece, the city-state of Athens practised a system of direct democracy in which citizens participated in the decision-making process (though citizenship “Dr. Priyamvada Mishra, Asst. Professor in Political Science, Symbiosis Law School, Noidawas restricted to adult males; and slaves and women were excluded). Today, citizens in a few Swiss Cantons (all voters meet in annual assemblies also called Landsgemeinde) and some towns of New England continue to gather, debate and vote in open meetings. But everywhere else, direct democracy has become impractical. Modern states are too large in territory and in population for a sizeable fraction of the citizenry to directly participate in governance. Moreover, the range and complexity of most issues that fall under public consideration are such that it has become impossible for a citizen to master them. As a result, indirect or representative democratic systems began to take shape in the late 18 century Europe and spread gradually to the rest of the world, In these systems, the citizens instead of deciding directly choose through regular elections, a number of politicians to set policy and govern them. Both because of the scale of modem political systems and the electoral and parliamentary dynamics of representative democracies, politicians were compelled to create or join electoral and legislative ‘teams’ or parties, that is, stable organizations through which they coordinate their political activity across electoral districts, in parliamentary assemblies, and in executive or governmental committees. These parties and party systems have become the constituent elements of modem representative democracies. Today, they are the most visible institutions of a representative democracy. They are the linkage making institutions between political leadership and voters, political elite and civil society, the rulers and the ruled in all representative democracies, In this unit, we will trace the evolution of political parties, identify their defining features, and describe the types of party systems 7.2 POLITICAL PARTIES It is difficult to imagine a modern democratic state without political parties. It is the political party which gathers people on common lines, mobilises them, shapes popular opinion and puts it across on a wider front on behalf of its supporters. However, during the early years of their evolution, up until the mid-19" century, party organisations and people identifying with them were regarded with suspicion and concern. They were regarded as harmful entities serving opposing groups within the society at the expense of individual liberty and common good. In fact, such groups were derogatively called as ‘factions’ rather than ‘parties’, It was only with the expansion of civil rights and electoral franchise in the latter half of the 19" century that political parties started gaining acceptance and popularity. At the beginning of the 20th century, Moisei Ostrogorski, a Russian political thinker recognised the growing importance of political parties in politics and prophetically said that “wherever this life of parties is developed, it focuses the political feelings and the active wills of its citizens” (1902). Indeed, in the next couple of decades, mass political parties were battling for votes in Western Europe while in other parts of Europe, ruling parties in totalitarian states (communist and fascist) sought to reconstruct society according to their vision of ideal society. In the developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, nationalist parties began to emerge as mass partics, mobilising people against colonial rule. Today, political parties have become synonymous with organised polity. In democratic systems, they have become indispensable, so much so that 20th century democracy has often been described as ‘party democracy’. Political Parties and Party Systems 89Patterns of Political Participation and Representation 90 If political parties are the agencies which facilitate the political process, what are they and what distinguishes them from other social groups, like civil societies, associations, clubs ete.? Given their ubiquity, we would assume that it would be easy to arrive at a consensus. But political parties have been evolving over time and in specific national contexts-with different genesis, organizations, ideologies, electoral campaign resources, pattems of competition etc. Political science scholars have therefore found it difficult to arrive at a precise definition of a party. Moreover, their definition of political parties has undergone change over a period of time. In his famous political pamphlet, Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents (1770), Edmund Burke defined a party as a “body of men united for promoting by their joint endeavours the national interest upon some particular principle in which they are all agreed” Roughly a century later, Max Weber, the famous German sociologist, shifted the attention from the promotion of national interest to that of power. He argued that, “(parties) action is oriented toward the acquisition of social power, that is to say, toward influencing social action no matter what its content may be’. Following Weber, Robert Michels, Maurice Duverger and Joseph Schumpeter have emphasised that the primary goal of a political party is conquest of power or a share in its exercise. Schumpeter, the Austrian political economist, for instance has defined a party as “a group whose members propose to act in concert in the competitive struggle for political power”. In a similar vein, Anthony Downs, an early exponent of rational choice theory in politics, defined a party as “a team of men seeking to control the governing apparatus by gaining office in a duly constituted election’, Gilchrist elaborates this aspect and defined a politcal party as ‘an organised group of citizens who profess to share the same political vie and who, by acting as a political unit, try to control the government” Giovanni Sartori, an Italian scholar of comparative politics, shifted attention from the function of conquest of governmental office to the candidate selection function. According to him a party is “any political group identified by an official label that presents at elections, and is capable of placing through elections (free or non-free), candidates for public office”. These definitions of political parties, as you can see, focus on some aspects and dimensions of political parties and miss out on others. For instance, as White has highlighted, not all parties ‘compete’ to appoint some candidates in public office. There are a few small parties which are not interested in gaining access to the government or parliamentary seats. Instead, they function to lend voice to a peculiar identity or standing claims. In some cases, their function is to say that they are ‘there’, i.e. the voters and the elected representative exist, even though they represent a tiny minority of the electorate From the perspective of comparative politics, we need to have a minimal operational definition so that we know what a party is and what a party is not This has become important in recent years because of emergence of several social and hybrid organisations that seek to have a voice in policy process. In this context, La Palombara and Myron Weiner (1966: 6) provide a broader, albeit alonger definition of party, which can be described as an operational definition; in their words: When we speak of political parties, we do not mean a loosely knit of group of notables with limited and intermittent relationships to local counterparts, Our definition requires instead: (1) continuity in organization, i.e., an organization whose expected life span is not dependent on the life of current leaders; (LI) manifest and presumably permanent organization at local level, with regularized communication and other relationship between locals and national units, (IM) self- conscious determination of leader, at both national and local levels to capture and to hold decision making power alone or in coalition with other, not simply to influence of exercise of power; and (IV) a concern on the part of the organization for seeking followers at the polls or in some manner striving for popular support. ‘A look at some of the functions of a political party also helps in better understanding what a party is and what it is not. In fact, as we saw, some scholars in the process of defining a party have drawn our attention to the vital functions of a party. 7.3__ FUNCTIONS OF PARTIES What do parties do for democratic governments that make them indispensable or the sine qua non of a modem political society? We identify six categories of functions that political parties perform in a democratic political system Firstly, political parties unite sectional interests, bridge the geographical differences, and induce cohesion. In other words, parties perform the function of interest aggregation, that is, they gather together (aggregate) the various interests, priorities and options of their leaders and constituents and shape them into common goals and policy proposals. This ensures both order and system maintenance. The interest aggregation function of political parties stands in sharp contrast to that of interest or pressure groups which work only for the advancement of the cause their own groups Secondly, political parties contribute to democratic government by nominating candidates for election to public office. In the absence of parties, voters would be confronted with a bewildering array of selfnominated candidates, each seeking a narrow victory over others because of personal friendships, fame, or name. Parties minimize this danger by setting up their candidates in different constituencies. They carry out campaigns to win elections. They also defray the cost of contesting elections where the candidate is from an economically disadvantaged background. Again, political parties help democratic government by structuring voting choice reducing the number of candidates on the ballot to those who have realistic chance of winning. Parties that have won sizeable portions of the vote in past elections are likely to win comparable portions of the vote in the future also. This discourages non-party or non-serious candidates from running for the office. ‘This in turn focuses the election on the contest between parties and on candidates Political Parties and Party Systems OLPatterns of Political Participation and Representation 92 with established records, which reduces the amount of new information that voters need to make a rational decision. Another critical function of a party is that of coordination within government. In addition to coordinating within society and between government and society at large through its interest aggregation function, a political party acts as a bridge between the legislature and the executive in both presidential and parliamentary forms of government. Political parties structure coordination between different levels of government-national, regional and local. As we saw in Unit 5 of this course, the presidential system, as in the United States, is based on the principle of scparation of powers between the three organs of the government. The President and leaders of the House of Representatives and Senate are not required to cooperate with one another. Political parties are the major means for bridging the separation of powers, of producing co-ordinated policies that can govern the country effectively. Individuals of the same party in the presidency, the House, and the Senate are likely to share political principles and thus to cooperate in making policy. In a parliamentary political system, where the formation and continuance of the real executive, i.e, the Council of Ministers, depends on the support of the majority in legislature, political parties perform the task of disciplining the members of the majority to keep them united for providing the lifeline support to the government. This role of political parties has, in fact, made them informal governments in democracies as the powers of the legislature have now been usurped, to a great extent, by political parties. Similarly, in both federal and unitary forms of government, political parties structure coordination between different levels of government. When parties perform this function comprehensively and effectively, “it becomes reasonable to regard parties as organisations, rather than the individual politicians who hold office in their name, as central political actors”. (Richard Katz) Political parties also help voters choose candidates by proposing alternative programmes of government action in the form of party manifestos. The specific policies advocated in an election campaign may vary from candidate to candidate and from election to election, the types of policies advocated by candidates of one party nonetheless usually tend to differ from those proposed by candidates of other parties. In the case of the United States, for example, even though the neutrality of the names of major political parties, namely, Democratic and Republican suggests that they are undifferentiated in their policies, in reality, however, these parties regularly adopt very different policies in their platforms. Though victory is certainly the first commandment of a political party, in a democracy defeat of party also does not mean its demise. In that case, a party functions as a critic and watchdog of the government's policy. Political parties, thus, play an extremely significant role in democracies. While, on the one hand, they must maintain and strengthen the structure of democratic norms and values; on the other, they have to secure maximal mobilisation for social and economic development. Political parties have thus to induce both political and socio- economic development.Check Your Progress 1 Politica Parties and Party Systems Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer. ii) Check your answer with the answer given at the end of the unit. 1) On which two aspects does Edmund Burke emphasize in his definition of a party? 2) How can political parties be distinguished from ideological organizations, associations, clubs? 7.4 PARTY AND PARTY SYSTEMS In a system of democratic politics, political parties constantly interact and respond to each other in a competitive struggle to shape or influence the government. This inter-party competition generates a systemic pattern or institutional arrangement of party life and party interaction known as the ‘party system’. Party system represents the whole political spectrum in which political parties are the constituent units. There are significant variations in the arrangement, functions and number of political parties in a system. These and other similar characteristics are often used to describe and classify the party system of different polities. For instance, they have been classified based on competitiveness of opposition (Robert Dahl, 1966), on the degree of institutionalisation (Mainwaring, 1999) and on the extent of citizen involvement in politics (La Palombara and Weiner, 1966). The most widely accepted criterion, however, has been the number of parties, often defined in terms of their relative sizes. Several scholars of comparative politics have classified party systems based on the numbers of parties or their relative sizes, Most of such classifications have been modification of the system initially proposed by the two French political scientists, Maurice Duverger and Jean Blondel. Duverger (1954) pioneered the classification of party systems by identifying two broad categories: (i) one party system and (ii) pluralist party system, In the first category, he included two types (a) one-party system, and (b) dominant party system, whereas, in the second category, he included: (a) two- party system and (b) multi-party system, Blondel (1968) carried forward the work on classification of party system by not only defining the types identified by Duverger in operational terms, but also introduced additional categories. OnPatterns of Political Participation and Representation 94 the basis of share of votes, Blondel distinguished two party systems, two-and-a- half party systems, multiparty systems with a predominant party and multiparty systems without a predominant party. His typology was derived by investigating clusters in the average share of the vote won by the largest two parties and then considering the ratio of the first party’s share to that of the second and third parties. In the two party systems like in the case of the United States, New Zealand, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Austria, the two party share was 90 percent and above and closely balanced between the two parties. In the next cluster, the two party share ranged from 75-80% of the vote cast but there was a wider average difference (10.5%) between the first and second parties as in Canada, the Federal Republic of Germany and Ireland. Taking account of imbalance in the share of the vote, Blondel categorized these as two-and-a-half rather than three party systems, Blondel classified all others as genuinely multiparty systems that can be divided into multiparty systems with a predominant party (for example, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Italy and Iceland) and multiparty system without a predominant party (Netherlands, Switzerland, France, and Finland). These types are distinguished by the share of the vote obtained solely by the largest party; the threshold being set at 40 percent. Blondel’s typology has been useful in highlighting the differences and similarities among pure two party systems and systems (prevailing in Canada and the Federal Republic of Germany) where two larger parties coexisted with a relatively smaller ‘half’ party with a capacity to play a balancing role between them. Keeping in view the broad classifications given by Duverger and Blondel, we may classify all the parties as: two-party systems; multisparty systems; and one= party systems. All the three are discussed below, along with a variant, the one- party dominant system. 7.4.1 Two-Party System In a two-party system, the two major political parties generally share core values though they may differ on specifies. Neither of the two is more stable or powerful than the other on a permanent basis. There is a constant competition between the two parties for securing majority of popular votes and seats in the legislature. Both the parties keep on occupying either the treasury benches or sit in the opposition, though this may not always be alternate. Besides, there may be one or more smaller parties also in the two-party system. But the smaller parties neither come to power nor do they normally influence the outcome of elections, though at times smaller parties may associate themselves with one or the other major party. As we saw, in Blondel’s calculus, these parties fall under the category of two and half parties. At times, a third emerging party may even compete with the major parties, as was done in 1970s by the Liberal-Democratic Party in Britain. Some examples of two-party system are given below: 1. The modem political party system in the U.S. is a two-party system dominated by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. These two parties have won every United States presidential election since 1852 and have controlled the United States Congress to some extent since at least 1856.2. United Kingdom is not quite a two-party system as other parties have significant support. The major parties were Conservative and Labour Party. The Liberal Democrats were the third largest party until the 2015 general election when they were overtaken by the Scottish National Party in terms of ats and UK political party membership, and by the UK Independence Party in terms of votes. 3. Two political groups dominate the Australian political spectrum, forming a de facto two-party system. One is the Australian Labour Party (ALP), a centre- left party which is formally linked to the Australian labour movement. The other group is a conservative grouping of parties that are in coalition at the federal level. 7.4.2 Multi-Party system With the evolution of society and the democratic processes, multiple parties emerged each with its unique ideology and beliefs or objective. Multi-party system is characterized by the presence of a fairly large number of parties, big or small, contesting for power through election, This system is found in both developed and developing countries. In this system, the party which gets the highest number of seats forms the government. You will be reading about methods of representation later in this block, here you should note that in some situations when no party receives clear majority to form the government, two or more like minded parties may come together and form a coalition government Such governments generally adopt a common minimum programme for governance, as they do not have commitment to any one ideology. A few good examples of multi-party system are the following: L. Switzerland has a multi-party system. Since 1959, the four largest parties have formed a coalition government, according to a Zauberformel or "magic formula’. This arithmetic formula divides the seven cabinet seats among representatives of the four largest parties. 2. Austria has a multi-party system. Of the over 700 registered political parties, only few are known to the larger public like Austrian People’s Party, Social Democratic Party of Austria and Freedom Party of Austria. Since the 1980s, four parties have consistently received enough votes to get seats in the national parliament. 3. Belgium is a federal state with a multi-party system, with numerous parties like New Flemish Alliance, Christian Democratic and Flemish and Socialist Party who factually have no chance of gaining power alone, and therefore must work with each other to form coalition governments. Almost all Belgian political parties are divided into linguistic groups, either Dutch-speaking parties, Francophone parties or Germanophone parties 4, New Zealand national politics features a pervasive party system. Usually, all members of Parliament's unicameral House of Representatives belong to a political party. Independent candidates succeed rarely. While the two primary parties do indeed still dominate the New Zealand political landscape, the ‘country now more closely resembles a multi-party state since the introduction of proportional representation, where smaller parties can reasonably expect to Political Parties and Party Systems 95Patterns of Political Participation and Representation 96 play a role in government. As of May 2018, five parties have representatives in Parliament. 5. Political parties in Italy are numerous and since World War II no party has ever gained cnough support to govern alone. Parties thus form political alliances and coalition governments. In the 2018 general election three groupings obtained most of the votes and most of the seats in the two houses of the Italian Parliament: a centre-right coalition, composed of the League, Forza Italia, the Brothers of Italy and minor allies; the anti-establishment Five Star Movement; a centre-left coalition, composed of the Democratic Party and minor allies. 6. India is an established multi-party democracy comprising of national, regional, state level parties. As per latest publication from Election Commission of India, the total number of parties registered was 2599, with 8 national parties, 53 state parties and 2538 unrecognised parties. Multiple parties collaborate together to form coalition government both at State and Centre 7.43 One-Party system As the name suggests, this system allows a single party to hold power. Minor parties can be allowed to exist, but they have to by default accept the leadership of the single existing party. This single party might not exactly be referred to the government, but the cadre and leadership within the party are more influential than the government. Single party systems are often placed lowest in the scale of democratic index and are equated with authoritarian regime and tyranny. Some of the prominent examples of one-party system in contemporary times are given below 1, North Korea is governed by Kim dynasty which will rule eternally according to the fundamental principles of the ruling party known as the Workers Party of Korea. 2. People’s Republic of China was declared as a de-facto one party state, i.e Communist Party of China with the President as the General Secretary. 3. The only legal political party in Vietnam is known as the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV). The party centrally controls state organs, the media, and the military. The Vietnamese Fatherland Front party (VFF) exists without many powers because the constitution of Vietnam gives CPV the supremacy under Article 4. 4. In Cuba no political party can hold campaign meetings. The President of Communist Party of Cuba is elected to office for every five years, and there is no restriction as to number of times, he can contest for the same seat. 7.44 Dominant Party System In a dominant party system, several political parties exist but only one party has the capabilities to form the government. In this system, though rooted in democratic traditions, other parties have rare chance of coming to power. The emergence of the dominant party system can be attributed to several factors such as popularity among the masses, its historical lineage, charismatic leadership, strong organizational structures, etc. The Congress dominance in India from1952-1967 could be seen as the predominant party system. The Bharatiya Janata Party which is in power at the Centre since May 2014 and in many states in India is also seen as dominant party. 7.5. TRENDS IN THE EVOLUTION OF PARTY ORGANISATION In the early stages of their evolution, parties were created internally within the parliament, to voice common concerns and fight an effective campaign, They are also referred to as caucus parties. As we saw, in the early 19th century, very few people qualified for suffrage and therefore a few elites, nobles, aristocrats and wealthy people came together for the governance or implementation of public policies. With the rise of nationalism in many parts of Asia, Africa and Latin America in the first half of the 20" century as well as the spread of adult franchise, the parties broadened their appeal. This led to the rise of mass parties, parties with large membership and a bureaucratic, centralised, and hierarchical form of organisation. These mass parties originated outside the parliament, challenging the established ideology or rule, trying to seek their own representation. Until the mid-20" century, most Wester democracies were dominated by particularistic parties, that is, parties that confine their appeal to a particular segment of the population. Conservative parties tended to reflect the attitudes of the aristocratic upper classes and the wealthier members of the business class, while working-class parties sought their votes almost exclusively from the working masses in urban industrial centres. Agrarian parties promoted the interests of farmers. These parties were defined essentially by their social class base. But in the latter half of the 20th century, universal adult franchise on the ‘one hand and the massive loss of lives and property during the Second World War weakened the traditional social cleavages. These changes compelled political parties to move towards catch-all organisation or rainbow coalitions that appealed to a wide variety of social groups and interests. The term “catch-all” party was coined by Otto Kirchheimer who while studying party transformation in Europe observed that many parties (Social Democratic and Christian Democratic parties) in order to win elections and take over the government, were trying to catch all the votes they can, drawing them from a diversity of social classes, religions, ethnic groups, and other segments of the population, In the process they were loosening their commitment to specific groups or principles. Many, both within the party and outside, lamented that the rise of catch-all parties was leading to disappearance of ‘principled opposition’ which led to a politics devoid of substance, conflict and choice. Nevertheless, particularistic parties continued to exist in Europe and elsewhere advancing the interests of religious groups, environment, women’s rights ete. In the recent past, with the spread of information and communication technologies, political parties are facing new organisational challenges. New technologies and social media are making it easier for parties to connect with their supporters and mobilise new group of people. While this has decreased the financial burden on the parties, which carlier relied on mass meetings, one-on- Political Parties and Party Systems 97Patterns of Political Participation and Representation 98 ‘one campaigning, parties no longer require deeper roots in society. Secondly, in many countries parties are losing their mass and competitive character and becoming cartel parties. Cartel parties often collaborate with each other for state resources (money and patronage) as well as career stability and continuity for their leaders. Parties, in other words, are becoming part of the machinery of the state. Finally, it is said that party policy and organisation is now as much a technical and professional matter as an ideological one. The widespread use of communication technologies in society has led parties to rely on professionals to bolster their public image. Most successful parties run highly centralised and technically skilled party operations and election campaigns. This often involves opinion polling, focus groups, spin doctors, carefully planned public relations and use of mass media, including social media Check Your Progress 2 Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer. ii) Check your answer with the answer given at the end of the unit. 1) Distinguish between a dominant party system and one-party system. 2) Define a coalition government, 7.6 LET US SUM UP Parties and party systems have become the constituent elements of modem representative democracies. Today, they are the most visible institutions of a representative democracy. They are the linkage making institutions between political leadership and voters, political elite and civil society, the rulers and the ruled in all representative democracies. Parties perform vital functions, making them indispensable in a democratic set up. Political parties are instrumental in aggregating interests, channelizing the efforts of people bound by common belief structure, providing leadership, giving shapes to movement, forming governments, and checking on the policies of the ruling parties, working for the larger interests of society etc. Classification of party systems on the basis of numbers is the widely accepted system. As we saw, Duverger and Blondel evolved the number-based classification system which has stood the test of time with minor modifications. Based on this classification, wehave briefly examined Two-party systems; Multi-party systems; One-party systems and the dominant party system. In Britain and the United States, for example, a system of two-party prevails while in majority of countries including India, France, Bangladesh, Switzerland etc, a multi-party system has come into existence. On the other hand, in authoritarian and communist countries like China, Cuba and North Korea, one- party system operates, Unlike the United States, most democracies around the world follow the British system of parliamentary democracy. Most of them have multi-party system where different parties compete for votes in the election. But such a multi-party system often does not produce clear majority in election, resulting in the formation of coalition governments. 7.1_REFERENCES Newton, Kenneth and Jane Wandeth. (2010). Foundations of Comparative Politics. Cambridge University Press Kitschelt, Herbert, (2007). Party Systems, In Charles Boix and Susan C Stokes, (Eds). The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics. London, Oxford University Press. Katz, S Richard. (2018). ‘Political Parties’, In Daniele Caramani (ed). Comparative Politics. Oxford University Press, London Ware, Alan. (1995). Political Parties and Party Systems. London, Oxford University Press. Maor, Moshe. (1997). Political Parties and Party Systems: Comparative Approaches and the British Experience (Theory and Practice in British Politics). London, Routledge. Mehra A K, D D Khanna and G W Kueck. (Eds). (2003). Political Parties and Party Systems. Sage Publications, New Delhi, India Sharman, Campbell and Richard Johnston. (2015). Parties and Party Systems. Structure and Context. Vancouver, University of British Columbia Press. 7.8 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS EXERCISES Check Your Exercisel 1) Burke’ definition focuses on two aspects: a) Political parties are organizations composed by persons; and b) Parties have specific goals they want to pursue. 2) Political parties have an objective of occupying power ite. to form a government. Political parties can be regional, linguistic in nature but are very wide as compared to ideological organizations, associations, clubs. Political Parties and Party Systems 99Patterns of Political Participation and Representation 100 Check Your Progress2 } 2) In a dominant party system, several political parties exist but only one party has the capabilities to form the government, whereas one party-system clearly has single accepted political party. However, in both the cases, that single party only wins elections. A coalition government is a form of government in which political parties cooperate, reducing the dominance of any one party within that "coalition" The usual reason for this arrangement is that no party on its own can achieve a majority in the election.