Social origins of parties: cleavags

Question 1

2 approaches to classifying party systems

Answer 1

1. Traditional comparative approach:
   –>aim to categorise party systems into distinct classes/types (example two-party systems)
   Using this approach, party systems barely change.
   - very strict conditions
2. Other approach does not use classification, but uses continuous numeric variables to summarise/define party system.
   These variables are almost always based on calculation of number + relative size of parties present.
   With this approach, differences in party systems are a matter of degree rather than of kind.
   * party system change is a continuous phenomenon; it does not specify, however, what kind of change is happening.

Question 2

When does a party system change?

Answer 2

When there is a change in structure of competition

Question 3

How can party competition change

Answer 3

1. Change is prevailing pattern of alternation in government (change of government)
2. extent to which the governing alternatives in system prove stable or consistent over time or wheter they involve innovative alternatives
3. question of who governs and to which extent is the access to government open to a wide range of parties or limited to a smaller subset of established governing parties.

Question 4

Party system

Answer 4

Parties as parts of a whole and that they get their identity from relationship with other parties.
also debate that it is related to cleavages (bottom-up). Party systems are systems of competition

Question 5

Cleavages

Answer 5

From demand side. Basis of political mobilisation
Deep structural divides that persist through time and through generations
Deep divisions within society: class, ethnicity, religion.

Question 6

How are cleavages different than issues?

Answer 6

Issues can be absorbed into larger structure. Larger cleavages can embody larger issues within it

Question 7

3 components to cleavages

Answer 7

1. objective reality
2. subjective identification
   3 institutionalised or political mobilised
3. Objective reality:
   There has to be an objective problem or division in society
   Individuals who would like the church to play less of a role in society
   Individuals who would like the church to continue to play an important role in society
4. Subjective Identification
   Individuals have to be aware of this division
   It has meaning or relevance for them
5. Political mobilization
   There has to be an institutionalization of the cleavage
   Political party, union, social movement

Question 8

4 sets of cleavages

Answer 8

Church - State
Center -Periphery
Urban- Rural
Worker-Owner

Question 9

1. objective reality

Answer 9

There has to be an objective problem or division in society
Individuals who would like the church to play less of a role in society
Individuals who would like the church to continue to play an important role in society

Question 10

2. subjective identification

Answer 10

Individuals have to be aware of this division
It has meaning or relevance for them

Question 11

3. Political mobilization

Answer 11

There has to be an institutionalization of the cleavage
Political party, union, social movement
threshold (drempel) for cleavage is quite high. It is important for this to happen because a cleavage has to structure the system.

Question 12

National Revolution

Answer 12

How states become states

Question 13

Cleavages that National Revolution has created

Answer 13

Church - State
Center -Periphery

Question 14

How was church-state cleavage created

Answer 14

as states become states (1600-1800)
it is about power + centralisation.
Authority who tries to centralise power, has to deal with survial.
Fight over power with church.
In catholic countries this emerges into cleavages: due restistance to centralisation

Question 15

Cleavages that Industrial Revolution has created

Answer 15

Urban- Rural
Worker-Owner

Question 16

How was urban-rural cleavage created?

Answer 16

Tension between urban and rural (early industrialiasation)
as production moves to the city and economy emerges here
a division emerges between city and countryside.

Becomes more uniform, more universal.

Question 17

How was the worker-owner cleavage created?

Answer 17

At heart of te industrialisation, in all countries.
Factory workers moved to te cities to work versus the owners of production.

Question 18

Four cleavages from four party systems

Answer 18

1. Left- Right (Uk –> worke-owner)
2. Left-rRight with overlapping reliious cleavages (GR, NL, IT): Christian democrats.
   Workers + business men –> vote religious party
3. Left-Right with overlapping regional cleavages (SP): Regional idenity
4. Left-Right wit larger farmer-liberal versions (Scandinavia)
   Same thing: urban-rural.

Question 19

Why was the worker-woner the dominant cleavage in United Kingdom?

Answer 19

Because of early industrialisation/ land owning classes absorbed as productive.
Church divide resolved internalised

Question 20

Do these cleavages stil hold?

Answer 20

No
cleavages are emerging

Question 21

1970s rise of Post-material values

Answer 21

Cleavages started to dissolve due tot rise of Post material values.
Voting became issue-based.
Rise of new cleavages

Question 22

Society changes in 1970s

Answer 22

1. Rise of Welfare state –> whole new form of employment + new middle class (teachers, doctors etc)
2. Women started to work more
3. Nature of working class starts to change (what kind of work you do)
4. process of secularisation
5. more young people going to university (huge impact!)
6. Globalisation

Question 23

Party system changes in 1970s

Answer 23

Old party identities start to become weaker, class begins to change and starts to become more fragmented.
However, the whole system is not completely abandoned.
Working class still tend to vote social Democratic and the religious Christian Democratic.
This support is however not exclusive anymore, and this class becomes smaller.
Old system doesnt disappear but fizzles out.
De-alginment: voters become more volatile

Question 24

How do we explain these changes in 1970s/ party system?

Answer 24

Post material values:
Whole new generation coming about:
- student protests
- environmental issues
-identity questions
–> younger people have different values

Older generation more concerned with economic growth, and younger with quality of life.
IMPORTANT:
these people are higher educated + middle class -> they ‘‘should’’ have a high trust in government, however the opposite is true!

Question 25

! Scarcity + socialisation Hypothesis !!!

Answer 25

Scharcity hypothesis about hierarchy of needs.
Individuals need to fulfill their most basic needs. (foods, shelter, security)
Onces these are fulfilled –> able to fulfill higher needs.
–> this leads to socialisation hypothesis

During formative years, one develops ones needs/core values.
Wihtin times of scarcity + insecurity (lack) there are more material values.
In times of less scarcity and more security –> more post-material values

Question 26

What are post-material values?

Answer 26

• Self-realization
• Challenging authority
• often related to specific issues:
• the environment
• Questions of identity
  -local participation
• Value change is generational
• Older generations remained more material
• Younger generations became more post-material
• It is cohort effect
  Due to material conditions
• Due to socialization

Question 27

New dimensions Post-material values

Answer 27

Rise of new types of values that determine politics.
We see that a new dimension becomes more important. –> liberal-cultural dimension.
This has consequences for political affliations, it divides the left (new left-green left).
It means some left-wing voters go right (neo-conservatism) due to material values.
A rise of new dimension leads to realisnment of politics.

Question 28

Are values really a cleavage?

Answer 28

Not perse. It becomes a cleavage when it gets insitutionalised (new party)
Some see it as dissolving of cleavages and belonging (cognitive mobiliation)
others think cleavages are still more important

Question 29

Cognitive mobilisation theory!!

Answer 29

Voters have changed how they identify with political parties.
This is due to increase in education and level of political sophistication
This means that those who have higher political skills + resources tend to follow the cues of parties less,
and these voters votre more focused on issues.
This is especially the case among younger generation, new middle-class + post-materialists: critical of authority + more volatile.
role of media + alternative forms of information

Question 30

block volatility

Answer 30

volatility between blocks.
Populist parties can pull voters from blocks.

Question 31

High volatility periods cause

Answer 31

Usually new populist parties
+ economic crises

Defined as ‘’the net change within the electoral party system resulting from individual vote transfers’’

Question 32

2 ways to look at embedding voters

Answer 32

1. GAL-TAN approach
2. demarcation + integration approach

Question 33

GAL-TAN approach

Answer 33

Green-Alternative- Liberal versus Traditional Aurhoritarian- Nationalist.
Politics two-dimensional
Tension between GAL en TAN.

EU- integration as critical juncture
This leads to polarization between:
Highly educated, young, migrants , city dwellers (cosmopolitan)
Versus
Low skilled, old, nationalists, hinterland dwellers (nationalist)

Embedded in larger issues of national identity

Question 34

Demarcation-integration approach

Answer 34

Demarcation integration approach
Globalization as new critical juncture (like national + industrial revolution)
Political paradox of globalization (new cleavage)

Politics is 2 dimensional:
* Economic dimension
* Cultural dimension

Globalisation challenges core of nation state. INternatinalisation of economics, politcs and culture create people to become more open or closed.

Question 35

How should we understand party systems, from the demand-side perspective?

Answer 35

Perhaps old cleavages are more resistant than we think
The issue voting
The new cleavages
GAL-TAN
Demarcation-integration (replaces left-right cleavage)
Has there been a realignment? Or just dealignment?
Are demand side explanations enough? Or do we need to turn to supply side explanations as well?