1 / 18

Party systems:

Party systems:. What difference does the number and kind of parties make?. Political Science Honours Essay Information Meeting. For Political Science Honours students entering final year, but others welcome 1:00pm to 1:50pm Wednesday, March 25 Room SN-2064 Topics

rhona-mccall
Download Presentation

Party systems:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Party systems: What difference does the number and kind of parties make?

  2. Political Science Honours Essay Information Meeting For Political Science Honours students entering final year, but others welcome 1:00pm to 1:50pm Wednesday, March 25 Room SN-2064 Topics Overview of Honours essay guidelines Picking an Honours essay topic Selecting possible supervisors Approaching a preferred Honours essay supervisor Questions and answers

  3. New Political Science Curriculum Information Meeting 1:00-1:50pm Wednesday, April 1 Room SN-2105 For returning Political Science Honours, Majors and Minors Topics Course renumbering New courses New requirements New prerequisite policy "Grandfathered" status Sample course patterns Questions and answers

  4. The Dept. of Political Science presents Change will come but will change last? The American Party System after Obama Dr. Mike Hannahan Director of the Civil Initiative Project and Member, Department of Political Science University of Massachusetts at Amherst Thursday, March 19, 2009 3:30 -4:45pm SN2033 2 points toward participation grade for attending

  5. Stereotypes Multiparty systems are inherently unstable: • The more parties you have the greater likelihood that either • Cabinets will be short-lived Or • Regimes themselves will be susceptible to collapse (regime instability) instability

  6. Problem: is this valid? Available evidence suggests that is not: • The governments and regimes of most countries with multiparty systems are relatively stable • But some countries have not • Problem: what accounts for the difference?

  7. Polarized pluralism • Moderate v. polarized pluralism (Sartori) • Historically, certain countries with a large number of parties have suffered from chronic cabinet and sometimes regime instability: • Weimar Germany (1918-33) • 3rd Republic France (1875-1940) • Spain, 2nd Republic, 1931-1936 • 4th Republic France (1946-1958) • Italy, 1rst Republic (1945-1993)

  8. Explanations • All had not only a large number of parties, but were sharply polarized as well • Three of these had rather fluid, poorly disciplined parties • Spain, 2nd Republic • France, 3rd and 4th Republics • Only two, Weimar Germany and 2nd Rep Spain suffered regime collapse • Many Italian specialists doubt that Italy, despite frequent cabinet changes, was unstable

  9. Explaining stability • Depends on more than number of parties • Countries with multiparty systems find ways to cope: • Duty of heads of state (presidents or monarchs) to ensure that there is a government • Formal procedures • ‘Facilitators’ involved? • Formateurs and informateurs in the Netherlands

  10. Forming governments • Sweden and Scandinavia – role of parties themselves • Germany • Getting a government in the Netherlands • Role of the monarch • Informateurs • Formateurs • Getting a government in Belgium…

  11. The Federal Republic of Germany 1957-1983: SPD FPDCDU/CSU _______________________________ 1983-1989: GSPD FDP CDU/CSU _______________________________ 1990-present PDSGSPD CDU/CSU FDP (Left party) __________________________________

  12. Sweden pre-1990: Left SDCentre Liberal Conservative __________________________________ From the 1990s: Left SDCentreLib Cons New Democ. ___________________________________

  13. Netherlands: Pre-2000 SP GL PvdA D66 CDA VVD CU SGP __________________________________

  14. Netherlands: from 2002 2002 SP GLPvdA D66CDA VVD LPF CU SGP __________________________________ 2009 PvdD SP GLPvdA D66CUCDA VVD TONSGP PVV _______________________________________

  15. Italy: 1945-1993 DP PCI PRPSI PSDI PRI DC PLI Lega MSI _______________________________________________________________________ • Predominant position of DC (Democrazia Cristiana) • DC penchant for broad coalitions • Exclusion of Communists • Willingness not only to colonize state apparatus to generate patronage • Willingness to share that patronage with coalition partners (e.g. PSI) • Shifting coalitions: Pentapartitoin 1980s

  16. Italy after 1993/4 • Collapse of the pre-1993 party system • Impact of • tangentopoli • End of Cold War • Changes in electoral law • New party system: two ‘poles’ or clusters competing with each other: • Polo (Casa) del liberta • Forza Italia (Berlusconi) • Allianza Nationale (AN) – former neo-fascists • Lega Norte • Ulive (Olive) • DS Democratic Left = ex-Communists • Populare (left Christian Democrats • Margerita… • Others (recently, up to 9)

  17. Post-1993 Party System DS+ 8 othersFI AN Lega ______________________________________________________________ Ref.Ulive Liberta

  18. Bottom lines: • Multiparty competition is the norm in most European liberal democracies • Two party competition relatively rare • In many, party system change has increased the number of political parties winning seats in national parliaments • Few countries beset with problems of cabinet instability • Why not? • Most are enmeshed in networks of international organizations • Parties in some countries operate in clusters • Few countries are as polarized as Weimar Germany, 2nd Republic Spain or 3rd or 4th Republic France • Greater problems today with reach of parties – their ability to attract support & ground themselves in society -- than with the number of parties?

More Related