This study focuses on the principal rules of government formation as well as on the deviant cases. On a party level, over 1,000 cases and approximately 250 government formations in 17 West European countries during the second half of the twentieth-century are analysed. By means of regression analyses, the study explores the effects of the size of the parties, other party characteristics, as well as characteristics in the party system on the choice of premier party and coalition party respectively. The results show that the choice of premier party to a great extent is decided by the size of the party and the position as median party. The choice of coalition party, however, is a far more complex process. Favourable and unfavourable conditions are defined, and the deviant cases are identified, compared and analysed with respect to the choice of PM party and the choice of coalition party respectively. The study shows that the deviant cases are not disparate. On the contrary, the deviant cases form a set of rules of their own.

The essay focuses on the neglected problem of democratic politics, i.e. on the role of leadership. Although in democracies public office holders are controlled to a certain extent, leaders still have wide room for political manoeuvre and decide without any ‘instruction’ of the citizens. Re-working Weber's and Schumpeter's theory, the author aims to build the model of leader democracy. He highlights the major traits of it in a comparison with the deliberative and the aggregative–utilitarian concepts of democratic theory. The theory of leader democracy is applied to the problem of representation, which, in contrast to mechanical mirroring, gains a new, dynamic and qualitative meaning.

A correlation between the strength of civil society and democratization is often assumed to imply a causal relationship between the two variables. In fact, this correlation may be spurious, both phenomena being shaped by deeper social processes related to modernization and individualization. An excessive focus on ‘civil society assistance’ may paradoxically hamper the deeper changes necessary for the development of a vigorous associational life and of democratic representation. It would therefore be more prudent to focus democratic assistance on the establishment of stable and efficient social and political institutions, and on the maintenance of key social infrastructures crucial to political legitimacy.

The neighbouring African states of Zambia and Zimbabwe have seen major changes to their systems of power following a series of elections between February 2000 and March 2002. These elections produced dramatic shifts in the balance between ruling parties and opposition forces, and challenged the continuance of powerful executive presidencies and one-party dominant political systems. The article explores the setting in which these electoral shifts occurred and attempts to mark out the domestic and international factors that have conditioned their impact. It concludes that profound structural changes are needed if either state is to move towards liberal democracy.

Finland's March 2003 general election saw Anneli Jäätteenmäki lead her opposition Centre Party to a narrow victory over Prime Minister Paavo Lipponen's Social Democrat-led ‘rainbow government’. A generally lacklustre campaign, highlighted by concerns over unemployment, Finland's place in Europe and uncomfortable foreign policy decisions, is notable for making Jäätteenmäki Finland's first female prime minister and for making the country the first in the EU to have women as both prime minister and president. These distinctions proved fleeting, as scandal –‘Iraqgate’– drove Jäätteenmäki from office after only two months. Scandal aside, the election demonstrates the difficulties for still-new EU members of juggling domestic economic concerns with European and broader international commitments.

The article starts by locating both the author and men in relation to feminism as an identity, which cuts across the public–private divide. It then attempts to illuminate the meaning of ‘being feminist’ by addressing three, tightly interwoven, issues. First is the question: what is the ‘woman’ who is the subject of feminism? The second section discusses the nature of feminism in its various guises, focusing mainly on feminism in Britain since the late 1960s. It engages with the notions of ‘post-feminism’, ‘global sisterhood’ and a ‘third wave’. Finally, the article analyses critically feminism's uneasy relationship with identity politics.