Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T02:01:09.380Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Crisis of Party Democracy, Cognitive Mobilization, and the Case for Making Parties More Deliberative

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 February 2017

CARLO INVERNIZZI-ACCETTI  and
FABIO WOLKENSTEIN
CARLO INVERNIZZI-ACCETTI*
Affiliation:
City College of the City University of New York
FABIO WOLKENSTEIN*
Affiliation:
Goethe University Frankfurt
*
Carlo Invernizzi-Accetti is Assistant Professor of Political Science at the City College of the City University of New York (CUNY), 160 Convent Avenue, New York, NY 10031, and Associate Researcher at the Center for European Studies of the Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris (Sciences Po), 27 rue Saint-Guillaume, Paris FR 75007 (caccetti@ccny.cuny.edu).
Fabio Wolkenstein is Postdoctoral Fellow at the Goethe University Frankfurt, Theodor-W.-Adorno-Platz 6, 60323 Frankfurt am Main, Germany (wolkenstein@em.uni-frankfurt.de).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The much-discussed crisis of political parties poses a challenge to democratic theorists as institutional designers: how can the capacity of parties to mediate between society and state be resuscitated? In this article, we suggest that parties need to become more internally deliberative, allowing partisans to debate policy and more general visions for the polity. We outline a prescriptive model of deliberative intraparty democracy, drawing on the empirical literature on the changing structure of civic and political engagement. We argue that deliberative reforms are the most appropriate response to the demands of an increasingly more cognitively mobilized citizenry which seeks self-expression and nonhierarchical forms of political engagement. We highlight the model's distinctive strengths and defend it against several objections.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 111 , Issue 1 , February 2017 , pp. 97 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The authors would like to thank Christopher Bickerton, Dario Castiglione, Bruce Cronin, Daniel DiSalvo, Lisa Disch, Richard Katz, Jeffrey Kucik, Rajan Menon, Francesco Ronchi, Nadia Urbinati, Jonathan White, Lea Ypi, as well as the four anonymous reviewers at the American Political Science Review, for extremely helpful comments on previous versions of this article. We would also like to thank the organizers and participants of the “Workshop on political parties” held at the ECPR's 2015 Joint Sessions of Workshops in Warsaw, Poland for exchanges that laid the foundations for many of the ideas developed in this article. Fabio Wolkenstein acknowledges the valuable assistance of Leslie Taussig at the first stage of writing this article.

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, Perry. 2005. Spectrum. From Left to Right in the World of Ideas. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Ayres, Jeffrey. 1999. “From the Streets to the Internet: The Cyber-diffusion of Contention.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 566: 132–43.Google Scholar
Bader, Veit. 2014. “Crisis of political parties and representative democracies: rethinking parties in associational, experimentalist governance.” Critical Review of International Political Philosophy 17 (3): 350–76.Google Scholar
Barr, Robert. 2009. “Populists, Outsiders and Anti-Establishment Politics.” Party Politics 15 (1): 29–48.Google Scholar
Bartolini, Stefano, and Mair, Peter. 2001. “Challenges to Contemporary Political Parties.” In Political Parties and Democracy, eds. Diamond, L. and Gunther, R.. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich, and Gernsheim, Elizabeth. 2002. Individualization. Institutionalized Individualism and its Social and Political Consequences. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Christopher. 2012. European Integration. From Nation-States to Member States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bonotti, Matteo. 2014. “Partisanship and Public Reason.” Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 17 (3), 314–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carty, Kenneth. 2013. “Are Political Parties Meant to be Internally Democratic?” In The Challenges of Intra-Party Democracy, eds. Katz, Richard and Cross, William. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Alistair. 2004. “The Continued Relevance of Local Parties in Representative Democracies.” Politics 24 (1): 35–45.Google Scholar
Clark, Peter, and Wilson, James. 1961. “Incentive Systems: A Theory of Organizations.” Administrative Science Quarterly 6 (2): 129–66.Google Scholar
Cohen, Joshua. 1989. “Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy.” In The Good Polity, eds. Hamlin, A. and Pettit, P.. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cohen, Jean and Arato, Andrew. 1992. Civil Society and Political Theory. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Coleman, Stephen. 2004. “Whose Conversation? Engaging the Public in Authentic Polylogue.” The Political Quarterly 75: 112–20.Google Scholar
Crouch, Colin. 2000. Post-Democracy. London: Polity.Google Scholar
Daalder, Hans. 2002. “Parties: Denied, Dismissed or Redundant? A Critique.” In Political Parties: Old Concepts and New Challenges, eds. Gunther, Richard, Montero, José Ramon, and Linz, Juan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell. 2009. “Economics, Environmentalism and Party Alignments: A Note on Partisan Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies.” European Journal of Political Research 48 (2): 161–75.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell J., and Kuechler, Manfred, Eds. 1990. Challenging the Political Order: New Social and Political Movements in Western Democracies. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell J., Farrell, David M., and McAllister, Ian. 2011. Political Parties and Democratic Linkage: How Parties Organize Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell J., and Wattenberg, Martin, Eds. 2001. Parties without Partisans. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Delwit, Pascal. 2011. “Still in Decline? Party Membership in Europe.” In Party Membership in Europe, ed. Van Haute, E.. Brussels: Editions de l'Université de Bruxelles.Google Scholar
Detterbeck, Klaus. 2005. “Cartel Parties in Western Europe.” Party Politics 11 (2): 173–91.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John. 2000. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John. 2012. Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Duverger, Maurice. 1954. Political Parties. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Elster, Jon. 1998. Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Barbara. 1991. Political Protest and Cultural Revolution: Nonviolent Direct Action in the 1970s and 1980s. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Felicetti, Andrea, Niemeyer, Simon, and Curato, Nicole. 2016. “Improving Deliberative Participation: Connecting Mini-publics to Deliberative Systems.” European Political Science Review 8 (3): 427–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishkin, James. 2009. When the People Speak. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fukuyama, Francis. 1992. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Garner, Robert. 1996. Environmental Politics. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Gauja, Anika. 2015. “The Individualisation of Party Politics: The Impact of Changing Internal Decision-Making Processes on Policy Development and Citizen Engagement.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 17 (1): 89–105.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony. 1991. Modernity and Self-Identity. Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Goodin, Robert E. 2008. Innovating Democracy: Democratic Theory and Practice after the Deliberative Turn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Graber, Doris. 2003. Media Power in Politics. New York: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Gutmann, Amy, and Thompson, Dennis. 2004. Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jurgen. 1996. Between Facts and Norms. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hammond, Allen, and Lasch, Jonathan. 2000. “Cyber-activism: The Rise of Civil Accountability and its Consequences for Governance.” IMP: The Magazine on Information Impacts, May.Google Scholar
Hay, Colin. 2007. Why We Hate Politics. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Hazan, Reuven Y., and Rahat, Gideon. 2010. Democracy Within Parties. Candidate Selection Methods and their Political Consequences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Held, David. 1995. Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hibbing, John R. and Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth. 2002. Stealth Democracy: American's Beliefs about How Government Should Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hopkin, Jonathan. 2001. “Bringing the Members Back In? Democratizing Candidate Selection in Britain and Spain.” Party Politics 7 (3): 343–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkin, Jonatham, and Paolucci, Caterina. 2006. “Conceptualizing Political Clientelism: Political Exchange and Democratic Theory.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Ignazi, Piero. 1996. “The Crisis of Parties and the Rise of New Political Parties.” Party Politics, 2 (4): 549–66.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald, and Welzel, Christian. 2005. Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Katz, Richard S. 2013. “Should we Believe that Improved Intra-party Democracy would Arrest Party Decline?” In The Challenges of Intra-Party Democracy, eds. Cross, William P. and Katz, Richard S.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Katz, Richard S. 2014. “No man can serve two masters: Party politicians, party members, citizens and principal–agent models of democracy.” Party Politics 20 (2): 183–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, Richard, and Cross, William. 2013. The Challenges of Intra-Party Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Katz, Richard, and Mair, Peter. 1995. “Changing models of party organization and party democracy: The emergence of the cartel party.” Party Politics 1 (1): 5–28.Google Scholar
Katz, Richard, and Mair, Peter. 2009. “The Cartel Party Thesis: A Restatement.” Perspectives on Politics 7 (4): 753–66.Google Scholar
Kirchheimer, Otto. 1967. “The Transformation of the Western European Party Systems.” In Political Parties and Political Development, eds. La Palombara, J. and Weiner, M.. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 177–200.Google Scholar
Kitschelt, Herbert. 2000. “Citizen, politicians, and party cartelization.” European Journal of Political Research 37 (2): 149–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kölln, Ann-Kristin. 2014. Wie Reagieren Parteien auf Mitgliederschwund? Sankt Augustin/Berlin: Konrad Adenauer Stiftung.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter, Bochsler, Daniel, Matthes, Jörg, Lavenex, Sandra, Bühlmann, Marc, and Esser, Frank. 2013. Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Krouwel, André. 2012. Party Transformations in European Democracies. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Larana, Enrique, Johnston, Hank, and Gudfield, Joseph R., Eds. 1994. New Social Movements: From Ideology to Identity. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Rokkan, Stein. 1967. Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-national Perspectives. Toronto: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Mair, Peter. 1997. Party System Change: Approaches and Interpretations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mair, Peter. 2013. Ruling the Void. The Hollowing of Western Democracy. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Mair, Peter. 2014. On Parties, Party Systems and Democracy. Selected Writings of Peter Mair. Essex: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2009. “A selection model of political representation.” The Journal of Political Philosophy 17 (4): 369–98.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane, Bohman, James, Chambers, Simone, Christiano, Thomas, Fung, Archon, Parkinson, John, Thompson, Dennis F., and Warren, Mark E.. 2012. “A Systemic Approach to Deliberative Democracy.” In Deliberative Systems, eds. Mansbridge, Jane and Parkinson, John. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
May, John. 1973. “Opinion Structure of Political Parties: The Special Law of Curvilinear Disparity” Political Studies 21 (2): 135–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, David, and Tarrow, Sidney. 1998. The Social Movement Society. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Mazzoleni, Gianpietro, and Schulz, Winfried. 1999. “Mediatization of Politics. A Challenge for Democracy?” Political Communication 16 (3): 247–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAdam, Doug, McCarthy, John D., and Zeld, Mayer N.. 1996. Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Michels, Roberto. 1917 [2009]. Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. London: Transaction.Google Scholar
Miller, Warren, and Shanks, Merrill. 1996. The New American Voter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mudde, Cas. 2008. Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Muirhead, Russell. 2006. “A Defense of Party Spirit.” Perspectives on Politics 4 (4): 713–27.Google Scholar
Muirhead, Russell. 2014. The Promise of Party in a Polarized Age. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muirhead, Russell, and Rosenblum, Nancy. 2012. “The Partisan Connection.” The Circuit 38 (3): 99–112.Google Scholar
Muller, Jan-Werner. 2016. What Is Populism. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Müller, Wolfgang. 1989. “Party Patronage in Austria: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Findings”. In: Pelinka, Anton and Plasser, Fritz (eds.) The Austrian Party System. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Neblo, Michael, Esterling, Kevin, Kennedy, Ryan, Lazer, David, and Sokhey, Anand. 2010. “Who Wants to Deliberate—And Why?” American Political Science Review 104 (3), 566–83.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 1995. “May's Law of Curvilinear Disparity Revisited.” Party Politics 1 (1): 29–47.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 2001. Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty and the Internet Worldwide. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 2002. Democratic Phoenix. Reinventing Political Activism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Offe, Claus. 2013. “Europe Entrapped. Does the EU have the Political Capacity to Overcome its Current Crisis?” European Law Journal 19 (5): 595–611.Google Scholar
Olson, Macur. 1967. The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Panebianco, Angelo. 1988. Political Parties: Organization and Power. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Papadopoulos, Yannis. 2007. “Problems of Democratic Accountability in Network and Multi-Level Governance.” European Law Journal 13 (4): 469–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papadopoulos, Yannis. 2013. Democracy in Crisis? Politics, Governance and Policy. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Pitkin, Hannah. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Piven, Frances Fox, and Cloward, Richard. 2000. Why Americans Still Don't Vote: And Why Politicians Want It That Way. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Pizzorno, Alessandro. 1981. “Interests and Parties in Pluralism.” In Organizing Interests in Western Europe, ed. Berger, S. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Polletta, Francesca, and Lee, John. 2006. “Is Telling Stories Good for Democracy? Rhetoric in Public Deliberation After 9/11.” American Sociological Review 71 (October): 699–723.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard. 2003. Law, Pragmatism and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Price, Vincent. 2006 “Citizens Deliberating Online: Theory and Some Evidence.” In Online Deliberation: Design, Research, and Practice, eds. Davies, Todd and Noveck, Beth Simone. Stanford CA: CLSI Publications, pp. 37–58.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert. 2000. Bowling Alone. The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert, and Goss, Kristin. 2002. “Introduction” in Democracies in Flux: The Evolution of Social Capital in Contemporary Society, ed. Putnam, Robert. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rohrschneider, Robert. 1993. “New Party versus Old Left Realignments: Environmental Attitudes, Party Policies, and Partisan Affiliations in Four West European Countries.” Journal of Politics 55 (3): 682–701.Google Scholar
Rosenblum, Nancy. 2008. On the Side of the Angels. An Appreciation of Parties and Partisanship. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenblum, Nancy. 2014. “Partisanship and Independence: The Peculiar Moralism of American Politics.” Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 17 (3): 267–88.Google Scholar
Salamon, Lester, Anheier, Helmut, List, Regina, Toepler, Stefan, and Sokolowski, Wojciech. 1999. Global Civil Society Dimensions of the Nonprofit Sector. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. 1976. Parties and Party Systems. A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Scarrow, Susan. 2006. “Party subsidies and the freezing of party competition: Do cartels work?” West European Politics 29 (4): 619–39.Google Scholar
Scarrow, Susan E. 2015. Beyond Party Members: Changing Approaches to Partisan Mobilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scarrow, Susan E., and Gezgor, Burcu. 2010. “Declining Memberships, Changing Members? European Political Party Members in a New Era.” Party Politics 16 (6): 823–43.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, Eric. 1942. Party Government. American Government in Action. New York: Rinehart & Company.Google Scholar
Seyd, Patrick, and Whiteley, Paul. 1992. Labour's Grass Roots: The Politics of Party Membership. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Graham, John, Peter, and Sturgis, Patrick. 2013. “Taking Political Engagement Online: An Experimental Analysis of Asynchronous Discussion Forums.” Political Studies 61 (4): 709–30.Google Scholar
Steiner, Jürg. 2012. The Foundations of Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Strom, Kaare. 1990. “A Behavioral Theory of Competitive Political Parties.” American Journal of Political Science 34: 565–98.Google Scholar
Sundberg, John. 1986. “The Failure of Maintaining Party Membership in Denmark.” Paper presented at the ECPR Workshop on Internal Party Arenas, Gothenburg, April 1–6.Google Scholar
Teixeira, Ruy. 1992. The Disappearing American Voter. Washington, DC: Brookings.Google Scholar
Teorell, Jan. 1999. “A Deliberative Defense of Intra-Party Democracy.” Party Politics 5 (3): 363–82.Google Scholar
Thompson, Dennis. 2008. “Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science.” Annual Review of Political Science 11: 497–520.Google Scholar
Tocqueville, Alexis de. 1835 [2006]. Democracy in America. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia. 2008. Representative Democracy. Principles and Genealogy. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia. 2014. Democracy Disfigured. Truth, Opinion and the People. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Valentini, Laura. 2012. “Ideal vs. Non-Ideal Theory. A conceptual Map.” Philosophy Compass 7 (9): 654–64.Google Scholar
van Biezen, Ingrid, Mair, Peter, and Poguntke, Thomas. 2012. “Going, Going . . . Gone? The Decline of Party Membership in Contemporary Europe.” European Journal of Political Research 51 (1): 24–56.Google Scholar
van Biezen, Ingrid, and Piccio, Daniela Romée. 2013. “Shaping Intra-Party Democracy: On the Legal Regulation of Internal Party Organizations.” In The Challenges of Intra-Party Democracy, eds. Cross, William P. and Katz, Richard S.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
van Biezen, Ingrid, and Saward, Michael. 2008. “Democratic Theorists and Party Scholars: Why They Don't Talk to Each Other, and Why They Should.” Perspectives on Politics 6 (1): 21–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Haute, Emilie, and Gauja, Anika, eds. 2015. Party Members and Activists. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Van Holsteyn, Joop; Ridder, Josje Den, and Koole, Ruud. 2015. “From May's Laws to May's Legacy: On the Opinion Structure within Political Parties.” Party Politics, 1–16.Google Scholar
Verba, Sidney, Schlozman, Kay, and Brady, Henry. 1995. Voice and Equality. Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, James. 1962. The Amateur Democrat. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
White, Jonathan. 2014. “Transnational Partisanship: Idea and Practice.” Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 17 (3): 377–400.Google Scholar
White, Jonathan, and Ypi, Lea. 2010. “Rethinking the Modern Prince: Partisanship and the Democratic Ethos.” Political Studies, 58 (1): 809–28.Google Scholar
White, Jonathan, and Ypi, Lea. 2011. “On Partisan Political Justification.” American Political Science Review, 105 (2): 381–96.Google Scholar
Whiteley, Paul. 2010. “Is the Party Over? The Decline of Party Activism and Membership across the Democratic World.” Party Politics 17 (1): 1–24.Google Scholar
Whiteley, Paul, Seyd, Patrick, and Billinghurst, Adam. 2006. Third Force Politics: Liberal Democrats at the Grassroots. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wolkenstein, Fabio. 2016. “A Deliberative Model of Intra-Party Democracy.” Journal of Political Philosophy, 24 (3): 297–320.Google Scholar
Wright, William. 1971. A Comparative Study of Party Organization. Columbus: Charles Merrill Publishing.Google Scholar