Politics Week 5

CY Leung

current chief executive in Hong Kong: he warns leaders that democracy is not good because poor majority would have importance and as an area of free business it should be looked after businesses --> democracy dangerous because power to people

Did Madison prefer plurality over majority rule or vice versa?

--> Madison was more scared of tyranny of majority than of ineffectivness so he always tends to disperse power (consociationalism; power sharing) #PR system

Plurality System (electoral systems) Disadvantages

-->In general those systems tend to discriminate against smaller parties BUT: --> In india no single party has emerged since 1989 and they always had coalitions which undermines the hypotheses that plurality always makes majority rules --> Plurality rule will not discriminate against smaller parties when they target religious, linguistic or ethic groups that live only in a particular are rather than attempting to appeal to whole country

Communism and fascism

Communism: • Exploitation of poor by wealthy (if not communism), thus one party should direct government and state and redistribute wealth Capitalism: • Economic system in which individuals hold and invest property • Lenin: citizens incapable of pilitical engagement --> role of elite Fascism: totalitarian based on racist principles, militarism, violence... --> Difference: Communism downplays nationalism in favor of commonalities between all workers while fascism stresses importance of national community

Electoral Rules and the Madison Dilemma

Electoral rules address the Madison Dilemma (balance between effective and limited government) in different ways. Plurality and majority rule electoral systems focus on promoting effective government by tending to give one party majority control. In contrasts Proportional Representation and mixed systems focus on limiting governments power giving smaller parties ability to win seats

FPP

First-Past-the Post --> The party (or parties) with the majority of district seats wins the election

Article 21, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948

Free, fair, and regular elections

District Manipulation (and Gerrymandering)

Gerrymandering → give power to draw districts to particular political force (and they draw districts in a way that is favored to them) • Example: Voter disparity in Japan's districts --> disparity between urban and rural area (rural voters have a lot more power) --> government unconstitutional as there is no equal representation in parliament • Congressional District 23, USA (problem there has gone since district divided now) • Congressional District 4 (diverse electoral district governed under one banner)

Which countries tend to have the least parties?

Homogenous societies where the institutional contests offer few opportunities to form parties have fewest parties (UK!)

Non-democracies and electorates. Instead?

In non-democraties either their is no electorate or there is one but it has no real role --> Instead, there is a selectorate, a small part of the population that choses leaders --> Reciprocal accountability: selectorate choses and removes leadership but eadership also selects and removes members of selectorate

Duverger's Law is a dead parrot. Why?

Outside the USA, first-past-the-post voting has no tendency at all to produce two party politics --> Maurice Duverger in the early 1950s, holds that the operations of first-past-the post voting system with single-member districts directly and strongly tends to cause two party politics

Key Characteristics of Parties (3)

Parties establish a presence in 3 ways: o Through the party in public office --> Members elected to executive or legislative --> Members appointed to high level bureaucratic posts o Through the party electorate (Wählerschaft) --> Compromises parties supporters in the electorate, it's members and local organizations but not the national-level organization --> Motivated by ideology and policy commitment to greater extend than party in office o Through the party organization --> Central office or national headquarters and staff

'Mixed' Systems

Plurality/Majority districts + Proportional lists --> Mixed Member Majoritarian (MMM) • Japan: 300 district seats plus 180 national list seats (PR list to alleviate disproportionality... but it doesn't) • The district seats and the list seats are simply added together • Districts seats bigger to increase power → also more wasted votes --> Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) • Designed to be a proportional system • Germany: 299 single member district seats + 299 national party list seats • Total seats are awarded by list vote • Seats are filled first by winners of electorate seats then by candidates on the party list • Parties may qualify if they reach a threshold (5% in Germany) or win a district

Oligarchy

Selectorate is small social, economic or political elite, select leader to represent their interests

What, in a nutshell, shapes the number and size of parties?

The key factors shaping the number and size of parties that seek to represent citizens interests are a) political institutions b) the diversity of political identities A focus on parties and party systems help us to see wheather country is democacy and how it adresses tradeoff between limited and effective government

Authoritarianism vs. Totalitarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism#Authoritarianism_and_totalitarianism

Totalitarianism • Charisma (High) • Role conception (Leader as function) • Ends of power (Public) • Corruption (Low) • Official ideology (Yes) • Limited pluralism (No) • Legitimacy (Yes) --> attempts to shape citizens' interests and articulates a coherent ideology, employing extensive efforts to mobilize support fort he regime, restricts social and political pluralism Authoritarianism Charisma (Low) Role conception (Leader as individual) Ends of power (Private) Corruption (High) Official ideology (No) Limited pluralism (Yes) Legitimacy (No) --> authoritarian regimes permit social pluralism and does not use ideology or coercive mobilization

Rotten and pocket boroughs

Was a parliamentary borough (administrative division, geographic) or constituency (electoral district) in England, Great Britain, and the United Kingdom in existence prior to the Reform Act 1832 which had a very small electorate and could be used by a patron to gain undue and unrepresentative influence within the Unreformed House of Commons.

Can a one party systems be democratic?

Yes, as long as they permit contestation and hold frequent and free elections

How do political parties differ from interest groups and social movements?

because they try to take political power

MMM/MMP disadvantages:

o Complicated systems o "Zombie" politicians --> An MP who is voted out in a district may return on a list --> ... because you can run as district MP or list MP or both o Strategic Voting --> Vote for party to get it over the threshold and support your favored government --> Vote for candidate to get party into government o Still problems with party control through managed lists

Disadvantages of Proportional Representation, PR (electoral systems)

o Party led systems --> Parties often decided lists and therefore have control over members of parliament o Possibility of extremist groups in legislature --> That's why countries have implemented thresholds (aka you can only get into parliament with minimum votes) o Less "effective" government --> Because not based on mandate model...practicality sets in o Almost always results in coalition government o Uncertainty after an election --> E.g. Belgium had post-election period to negotiate how the government should be formed o No geographical representation --> Who is "your" representative

Median Voter Model

o Policy is targeted at the "median voter" (representing the median voter who assumingly represents most voters) o The assumption of a spectrum of policy preferences --> The problem of multiple policy dimensions o Leads to parties' convergence (towards the center) → often on very moderate policies o Often is actually a "working mandate" → claim to represent the most voters

Consociationalism or consensus model

o Society alone cannot reconcile differences o Elites are elected to negotiate and reconcile differences o Both governing and opposition parties play a role --> Multi-party systems o Pillarization in The Netherlands --> Depending on (social) group where you're in you'd have your own party/programme etc. that represents your ideas o ... nobody can agree on everything, thus the elite negotiates on your behalf --> main element for stability is elite's behavior o "politics of accommodations"

(Majority) mandate model

o The party or parties with the majority win elections and rule o They have an obligation to implement their manifesto published at the time of the elections o Problem: not all aspects of party manifestoes reflect the will of the majority

Electoral System is ?

the political rules that translate votes into legislative seats and/or control of an elected executive.

Totalitarian ideology is distinct in 5 ways, what?

• 1) it's obvert, broadcasted publically by leaders • 2) it's systematic, governments create and update it • 3) institutionalized - bureaucrats as ideologues • 4) dogmatic: no alternative to gov's ideology • 5) Totalizing: behavioural guidence for all aspects of lives

What theories of representation do you know?

• Consociationalism or consensus model • (Majority) mandate model • Median Voter Model

Democracy as a "global" norm?

• Democratic nations will highlight their democratic values when their legitimacy or security is challenged • Even authoritarian regimes claim some "democratic legitimacy"

Elite Party

• Dominated by party in public office and have weak organization and few members in electorate. • Seek to obtain power based on their leaders fame/wealth --> Eg. Silvio Berluscony

Single Party Regime

• Dominates all institutions and restricts competition • Nazis, Soviets but today still china, vietnam, north korea..

Duverger's Law (Plurality System)

• Duverger's Law: Single seat plurality = two party system --> Losing votes in districts and third party votes are 'wasted' → only winner's votes matter; thus makes sense to vote for either one of the two top candidates --> Not actually a hard and fast "law" (Canada; UK) --> not universally applicable (e.g. India) Duverger claimed that his effect operated in two ways: 1) First, politicians know that a party can only ever win a seat by coming top in a local election district (or constituency) - that is, by winning the largest pile of votes (a plurality), whether or not the party has a local majority. So if you are not going to be in the top two parties locally, why stand? 2) voters know that only the top two parties are contenders, so why 'waste' their one and only vote on supporting an also-ran party that is going to come in at a third, fourth or lower place?

Personalistic Regimes

• Empowerment of single individum • Eg. King of the central african republic bokassa • North korea

Theocracies

• Leaders rise through religious clerical hirarchy • Selectorate = religious authorities • Vatican and maybe Iran

Mass Parties

• Members in the electorate and the party organization are relatively more important and play a more active role in determining the party's policy commitments and ideological profile • Depend on members willingness to commit time, energy and money • In many countries mass parties are formed as extensions of labour unions

Monarchies

• Non democratic system in which ruler has power based on birthright • Absolute monarchies: have no selectorate but practically nobles and royal family select monarch • Constitutional monarchy: king limited by constitution e.g. Jordan

Proportional Representation, PR (electoral systems)

• Parties are given a number of seats based on their proportion of votes • District magnitude • tend to disperse political power

Military regimes

• Rule limited to high ranking officers: junta (=group) • Two distinct advantages over civil government: firearms and institutionalized structure • Emerge in their role of defenders when governments seen as illigitimate

Plurality System (electoral systems)

• The nation is divided into single seat "districts" --> The district candidate with more votes than his/her rivals wins the seat --> The party (or parties) with the majority of district seats wins the election --> Also known as the First-Past-the Post (FPP) --> E.g. Canada • Duverger's Law

What's a free and fair election?

• Transparent election day polling --> Impartial election day poling --> Election proceed according to clear national law --> Ballot monitoring --> Secret ballot" → anonymous vote casting --> Election observation (e.g. by UN body) • Encouragement of full citizen participation --> No barriers to particular groups • Political parties operate freely --> And citizens may join political parties of their choice • Independent media • An independent and impartial judicial system --> Adjudicating post electoral disputes (becomes sometimes votes are disputed) --> E.g. Al Gore vs. George Bush → supreme court "decided" • There must be the possibility of defeating the incumbent

Majority Systems (electoral systems) & Donkey voting

• Used in districts with a single representative • A majority (50% + 1) is required --> Two-round elections • Alternative Voting (HoR) Australia --> Voters rank candidates • Donkey voting → Australia has compulsory voting so people who are not interested in politics just vote "whatever" • More proportional outcome than other (plurality) systems

FPP and Disproportionality

• Usually less than a majority gives its consent to government --> Majority government manufactured from plurality vote --> Majority government manufactured from minority vote • Difference in performance is exaggerated --> E.g. Tory got 36% of votes in 2010 and yet gets nearly half of the seats (306)

Large district representation

• huge landmass and high population centralization (low population in general) in particular areas (e.g. Australia/Canada) --> one person then may control these huge landmasses (districts/constituencies) --> logistical challenges for voting + extra pressure on MPs • Example: Kalgoorlie constituency, Australia --> 60x The Netherlands --> 90.000x Australia's smallest constituency --> Divided in 2010 • Example: Nunavut, Canada