Political Parties Summary
Exam
7 shorter questions (concepts, arguments, readings…) 150-300 words
Make sure you answer the questions
Make sure that give a sufficient explanation of the concepts
Make rue that you clearly explain your answer
1 essay question
Be sure to answer the question
Be clear to develop an argument
Be sure to explain your concept
If necessary, be sure to justify your choices
Be sure to have a real essay structure: introduction; body of the essay; conclusion
Lec 2 Party Models
1
, Democracy without political parties?
According to some political scientists, in democracy society, political parties are inevitable.
People believe that political parties are necessary even though individuals have not so much
trust in political parties. Anyway, democracy was not possible without parties. The type of
party model we have is important for type of democracy we have. It is not about more or
less party, but it is about what kind of party. It is about linkage. But even more importantly,
parties organize cleavages sometimes and sometimes they do not. However they do
mobilize parties.
The Cadre party
- Origins: It is first party and it was emerged late 17 th century. It was created by small
groups which was consisted of prominent individuals in the community. They were
notables, land owners, business men etc., They slowly took out power from monarchy
and formed parliament.
- Ideology: They had low level of ideological coherence and party platform. Elites claimed
to present national interests.
- Organization: They were loosely organized. Party conventions were rare and low links
with civil society.
The Mass party
- Origins: It can be deemed as the real first party. It began 19 th century when there were a
huge industrialization and extension of the franchise which made more people voted.
Back then, socialism started rise but also secularization. The mass party began to replace
the cadre party. Some cadre parties remained but for the most they changed or
dissolved. The main mass parties are Christion Democratic (secularization) and Social
Democratic parties (industrialization). They started getting involved in parliament.
- Ideology: Unlike the cadre parties they had a strong ideology such as equality and
revolution. The ideology was part of the identity of the party, and it was articulated in a
strong party.
- Organization: Organization was centralized, and it was hierarchical. They also had a
strong local organization emerged from civil society. Members were the core therefore
the role of membership was important. The organization was built mainly to socialize
members, create a strong identity, make structures that the state did not do. Party
financed by members campaigning was important for identity, gaining members and
winning elections.
The Catch-all Party
- Origins: The catch-all party was originated from changing class structure and people’s
interest about welfare state such as education, health care and pension. Middle class
became larger, and the role of fascism and the second world war affected on the Catch-
all party. Before democracy was fragile but it started to institutionalize.
- Ideology: Ideology became less important and same as the role for class and
denomination. The point was to access different group in society.
- Organization: Party member role downgraded. Membership was still important but
more and more state subsidies (Of course, it depended on countries) parties. It was less
about integrating but more about mobilizing for elections. Leadership for catch-all party
was personalized and professionalized. Campaigning was more media centred.
The Cartel Party (4)
2
, - Origins: Cartel party can be seen as an extension of catch-all party. Party became part of
the state because the party needed the state as well (because of subsidies that parties
get from the state). Society became more complex then we needed bureaucracy. The
state society became more complex and specialized. Division of labour and knowledge of
the state were also changing.
Transformation of state-party relationship (The party gets observed into the state)
Transformation of funding of parties (The party gets less dependent on external funding)
Transformation of state society (Complexity, specialization, division of labour,
knowledge of the state)
- Ideology: Ideology became less important. Parties were less adverse from working
together. There were definitely ideological boundaries.
“You i6ware never out of government”
- Organization: Party member’s role downgraded even more but it was more dependent
on the state for financial and other resources. Party was becoming less responsive and
the leadership within the party was personalized.
- What is the cartel party in sum? Cartel means all parties work together in an implosive
way. But also parties work close with the state. Parties less embedded within civil
society. There was an ideological blurring since competition over issues had its
boundaries.
*Now we have mainstream parties, memberless parties, personal parties, movement
parties, neo-mass parties, local and non-aligned movement parties.
Lec 3 Political Ideologies
Political ideologies
- What? They are a set of ideas and this set of ideas should have some internal coherent
structure. They are a lens through which to interpret social and political reality.
- What do? They are important for political parties because they simplify social and
political reality. They mobilize voters. They act as a form of linkage identity with voters
and the underlying basis for party perspectives on policy. We use them as a component
of our classification of parties.
The Classical Liberals
- It was the first real political family and first real political party. However, it is now one of
the smallest except The Netherlands. The role of current liberals has been limited
because after the fall of Berlin wall and the Soviet Union, we are all liberals in some
sense.
- Liberals in the 19th century: The 19th century was the century of liberals. The origins are
the rising bourgeoisie and the middle class. They opposed traditional classes such as
land owners, monarchs and the church. They fought for constitutional reforms and
personal liberties. They remained an elite or cadre party. The individual, Freedom,
Reason, Justice and Toleration are the core of classical liberalism. In some sense, they
are all connected each other. It was quiet radical. Growing in suffrage and growing of
working class changed fate of liberal parties in the late 19 th century. New voters turned
to socialist parties. It was a challenge to this type of party and as such to liberalism. In
the end, it led to disappearing of liberal parties or reducing of its.
3
Exam
7 shorter questions (concepts, arguments, readings…) 150-300 words
Make sure you answer the questions
Make sure that give a sufficient explanation of the concepts
Make rue that you clearly explain your answer
1 essay question
Be sure to answer the question
Be clear to develop an argument
Be sure to explain your concept
If necessary, be sure to justify your choices
Be sure to have a real essay structure: introduction; body of the essay; conclusion
Lec 2 Party Models
1
, Democracy without political parties?
According to some political scientists, in democracy society, political parties are inevitable.
People believe that political parties are necessary even though individuals have not so much
trust in political parties. Anyway, democracy was not possible without parties. The type of
party model we have is important for type of democracy we have. It is not about more or
less party, but it is about what kind of party. It is about linkage. But even more importantly,
parties organize cleavages sometimes and sometimes they do not. However they do
mobilize parties.
The Cadre party
- Origins: It is first party and it was emerged late 17 th century. It was created by small
groups which was consisted of prominent individuals in the community. They were
notables, land owners, business men etc., They slowly took out power from monarchy
and formed parliament.
- Ideology: They had low level of ideological coherence and party platform. Elites claimed
to present national interests.
- Organization: They were loosely organized. Party conventions were rare and low links
with civil society.
The Mass party
- Origins: It can be deemed as the real first party. It began 19 th century when there were a
huge industrialization and extension of the franchise which made more people voted.
Back then, socialism started rise but also secularization. The mass party began to replace
the cadre party. Some cadre parties remained but for the most they changed or
dissolved. The main mass parties are Christion Democratic (secularization) and Social
Democratic parties (industrialization). They started getting involved in parliament.
- Ideology: Unlike the cadre parties they had a strong ideology such as equality and
revolution. The ideology was part of the identity of the party, and it was articulated in a
strong party.
- Organization: Organization was centralized, and it was hierarchical. They also had a
strong local organization emerged from civil society. Members were the core therefore
the role of membership was important. The organization was built mainly to socialize
members, create a strong identity, make structures that the state did not do. Party
financed by members campaigning was important for identity, gaining members and
winning elections.
The Catch-all Party
- Origins: The catch-all party was originated from changing class structure and people’s
interest about welfare state such as education, health care and pension. Middle class
became larger, and the role of fascism and the second world war affected on the Catch-
all party. Before democracy was fragile but it started to institutionalize.
- Ideology: Ideology became less important and same as the role for class and
denomination. The point was to access different group in society.
- Organization: Party member role downgraded. Membership was still important but
more and more state subsidies (Of course, it depended on countries) parties. It was less
about integrating but more about mobilizing for elections. Leadership for catch-all party
was personalized and professionalized. Campaigning was more media centred.
The Cartel Party (4)
2
, - Origins: Cartel party can be seen as an extension of catch-all party. Party became part of
the state because the party needed the state as well (because of subsidies that parties
get from the state). Society became more complex then we needed bureaucracy. The
state society became more complex and specialized. Division of labour and knowledge of
the state were also changing.
Transformation of state-party relationship (The party gets observed into the state)
Transformation of funding of parties (The party gets less dependent on external funding)
Transformation of state society (Complexity, specialization, division of labour,
knowledge of the state)
- Ideology: Ideology became less important. Parties were less adverse from working
together. There were definitely ideological boundaries.
“You i6ware never out of government”
- Organization: Party member’s role downgraded even more but it was more dependent
on the state for financial and other resources. Party was becoming less responsive and
the leadership within the party was personalized.
- What is the cartel party in sum? Cartel means all parties work together in an implosive
way. But also parties work close with the state. Parties less embedded within civil
society. There was an ideological blurring since competition over issues had its
boundaries.
*Now we have mainstream parties, memberless parties, personal parties, movement
parties, neo-mass parties, local and non-aligned movement parties.
Lec 3 Political Ideologies
Political ideologies
- What? They are a set of ideas and this set of ideas should have some internal coherent
structure. They are a lens through which to interpret social and political reality.
- What do? They are important for political parties because they simplify social and
political reality. They mobilize voters. They act as a form of linkage identity with voters
and the underlying basis for party perspectives on policy. We use them as a component
of our classification of parties.
The Classical Liberals
- It was the first real political family and first real political party. However, it is now one of
the smallest except The Netherlands. The role of current liberals has been limited
because after the fall of Berlin wall and the Soviet Union, we are all liberals in some
sense.
- Liberals in the 19th century: The 19th century was the century of liberals. The origins are
the rising bourgeoisie and the middle class. They opposed traditional classes such as
land owners, monarchs and the church. They fought for constitutional reforms and
personal liberties. They remained an elite or cadre party. The individual, Freedom,
Reason, Justice and Toleration are the core of classical liberalism. In some sense, they
are all connected each other. It was quiet radical. Growing in suffrage and growing of
working class changed fate of liberal parties in the late 19 th century. New voters turned
to socialist parties. It was a challenge to this type of party and as such to liberalism. In
the end, it led to disappearing of liberal parties or reducing of its.
3
