2.4 UK political parties in context Flashcards
what is a one party system
this is where only one party is allowed to operate- associated with highly authoritarian regimes and are not considered democratic
e.g china
what is a dominant party system?
referring to systems that do allow parties to operate freely, but where one party has a realistic chance of taking power, it is stable but there is a lack of accountability and competition e.g. Scotland
what is a two party system
only 2 parties have a realistic chance of winning/forming a government. it implies that 2 parties win the vast majority of seats at elections and most of the seats in the representative assemblies of the state
e.g USA
what is a two and a half party system
these are systems where there are two main parties that contest elections but also a sizeable third party, these third parties can be seen as holding the balance of power between the 2 main parties, much as the lib dems did in the 2010 election
e.g canada
what is a multi party system
these are common in Europe and growing more. there are several parties competing for votes and power, there is no set number to define multi-party but the key is that more than 2 parties have a realistic chance of being part of the government and the governments tend to be made up of coalitions
e.g italy
why do small parties find it difficult to make an impact
- they lack funding
- the electoral system may discriminate against them
- they lack media exposure
- they lack organisation in communities
- people consider voting for them to be a wasted vote
what qualities of leaders to voters prefer?
-experience
-decisiveness
-ability to lead
-media image
-intelligence
-apparent honesty
how has leadership played an important part in party success?
- in the past we have seen leaders who have damaged the prospects of their party. such as Gordan brown, ed Miliband and nick clegg, and others who enhanced their party’s fortune such as thatcher and tony Blair (until they both fell from grace). however it was amongst smaller parties that leadership became important in 2015. Nicola sturgeon made a hugely favourable impression in TV debates as did Farage and the popular strong leader Charles Kennedy who took the lib dems to their most successful result in 2005. Farage was a master of the media, ensuring his party was always in the news, while sturgeon enjoyed very positive public rating in the opinion polls
how has unity played an important part in party success?
- in the 1980s the cons united around the leadership of thatcher while labour was split between its left and right wings. in fact, the party did literally split in 1981, this resulted in two huge victories for the conservatives at the 1983 and 1987 elections
- in 1997, labour was an almost totally united party around the banner of New Labour under Blair. The conservatives under John Major had been wracked by internal division, mainly over the uk’s position in Europe. the result was a crushing victory for labour
- in 2015, the united conservative party dominated the disunited labour party. however in the 2017 general election campaign, labour succeeded in its unity around a radical manifesto, which resulted in dramatic improvement in its fortunes
- in 2019, having suspended moderate conservatives from the party and required all candidates to sign a pledge to back getting Brexit done, the cons party was able to unify around the central issue of Brexit while the labour party found itself divided over the issues of Brexit, antisemitism and the radical nature of its manifesto
how has leadership played an important part in party success?
- the electorate will often be influenced by the image of the party as portrayed by the media.
- there is a connection between the political views of the leadership of a newspaper and the political stance of the paper itself
- tv and radio broadcasters e.g the BBC have to be neutral, nevertheless TV in particular does give exposure to party leaders. e.g in 2010 lib dems leader nick clegg’s performance in the tv debates was widely praised. partly as a result the lib dems did well enough to enter into a coalition with the conservatives
- social media e.g twitter allows politicians and political actors to speak directly to the public
arguments for the case that media is influential in determining party success
- the media is the prism through which public perceptions of the parties are created
- the inning party usually has the support of most print newspapers
- since 2010, the leadership debates have become key moments in general election campaigns
- parties are increasingly developing resources to use social media to influence voters as well as utilising social media to collect data and target voters in increasingly sophisticated ways
- leaders spend more time cultivating positive media images
arguments against the case that media is influential in determining party success
- influential media tends to reflect, rather than lead, attitudes to parties
- despite nearly all print newspapers opposing him, Corbyn performed well in the 2017 general election
- there is little evidence to suggest that leadership debates have affected public perception or changed minds
- social media tends to act as an echo chamber and rarely changes opinions or attitudes towards parties
- other factors like leadership and policies, may be more influential
evidence parties enhance representative democracy
- they are vital in the selection of candidates for office, without parties, candidates would campaign as individuals, which would make it difficult for voters to understand what collective policies might result from their decisions
- they mobilise support for political programmes, not just individual policies. this is known as aggregation, without such aggregation, policies would become incoherent
- parliament itself relies on party organisations to operate in an affective way. the parties organise debates and ensure that ministers are called to account. they also organise the staffing of parliamentary committees
evidence parties don’t enhance representative democracy
- parties can also distort representation. the governing party is always elected without an overall majority of the national vote and yet it claims to have the mandate of the people. the ‘winner takes all’ nature of party politics may result in government that is too partisan and does not seek consensus of support for policies
- parties also tend to reduce issues to ‘binary’ decision making, that is, they tend to claim that one type of decision is either wholly wrong or right. in reality this is rarely the case, but adversarial party policies tend to create these kinds of false choices
