3. BUSIN PARTIES
ESS-FIRM
CONTEXT
Growing professionalization of election campaign
Growing importance of political marketing
A. Panebianco- electoral-professional parties: growing reliance on outside actors and experts
Personalization of politics
„one man show parties"
Leader is program - e.g. Heinz Christian Strache
THE PERSONALISATION m OF POLITICS IN THE UK '
MEDIATED LEADERSHIP FROM ATTLEE TO CAMERON
ANA INES LANGER
CONTEXT
Growing anti-partisan sentiment
Dealignment
Political entrepreneurs (USA, Italy...)
Politics perceived through business's lenses
Ability to direct parties as a firm
POLITICAL ENTREPREN
EURS
Perceive politics as a business arena
Policies, program, pledges = marketing tools l. Wealthy billionaires entering the politics
Protecting and supporting their business interests l. Politicians without significant wealth
BUSINESS-FIRM PARTIES
■ Common traits to
■ Catch-all
■ Program flexibility
■ Electoral-professional party
■ outsourcing
■ But
■ Little orientation on interest groups
■ Private resources
VARIOUS CONCEPTS:
A.
KROUWEL: BUSINESS FIRM PARTY CLUSTER
1. Entrepreneurial issue parties (Harmel and Svasand 1993):
1. Established by a charismatic leader
2. Outside politics origins
3. Issues and program come exclusively from the leader
Examples: Anders Lange's Party for a Strong Reduction in Taxes, Duties and Public Intervention (1972), Progress Party in Denmark (1972)
2. Von Beyme: parties of professional politicians
3. Kenneth Carty: franchise organizations
4. Hopkin, Jonathan, and Caterina Paolucci (1999): Business-firm party: most developed concept
JONATHAN HOPKIN AND CATERINA PAOLUCCI (1999): BUSINESSFIRM PARTY
■ In countries with short or interrupted democratic tradition
■ New democracies (e.g. Spain)
■ Traditional democracies with party crisis (e.g. Italy)
■ Low party system institutionalization
■ Parties with short tradition
■ Weak parties
■ greater role and power of leaders
■ =^> unstable electoral gains
■ But difficulties for brand new parties
■ » room for wealthy entrepreneurs
Low level of institutionalization and little interest to increase it
BUSINESS
FIRM
PARTY:
MAJOR
TRAITS
Low interest in mass membership and coherent electorate
Outsourcing of partisan activities Voters perceived as consumers of politics Extremely important role of the leader
• Political entrepreneur
• High level of centralization of decision making on policy
Lack of official ideology + great degree of policy flexibility
• Polls, surveys, atmosphere in public
BUSINESS
FIRM
PARTY
Rational choice theory (e.g. Mancur Olson) in private sphere - applied on poli ~
Private firms seek customers and private profit public sphere (public profits/benefits)
Political entrepreneurs use this private-driven logics to politics
Parties under the pretext of public concern seek own private profits
= public policy = „by-product" (Olson)
Political program = outcome of demand and supply
PROS AND CONS
Quick decision making
Policy flexibility
Charismatic leader
Vulnerable
Lack of ideological anchor
Undemocrati c
Clash of interest
Hide their true raison d'etre
TWO TYPES
The party which works as a firm
E.g. Union of the Democratic Centre (Spain)
The firm, which turned into a party
E.g. Forza Italia (Italy)
UNION DE
CENTRO
DEMOCRATICO
UNION OF THE DEMOCRATIC CENTRE
■ result of Adolfo Suarez's need to establish a political vehicle to continue his premiership after elections 1977
■ recruited
■ Individuals
■ parliamentary candidates
■ possible rivals
■ coalition of small Liberal, Christian Democrat and Social Democrat groups associated with the moderate opposition to Franco and groups of reformist functionaries from the Movimiento (the Francoist single party)
ORIGINS OF THE PARTY
■ »» coalition of diverse ideological backgrounds made possible by 2 factors
1 . Broad agreement over the need to support Suarez's transition strategy
2.Suarez's extraordinarily powerful position
ADOLFO SUAREZ
1. unrivalled popularity in the 1976-77 period
2. achievement in creating the conditions for a negotiated democratisation
3. »» able to offer access to public policy influence in return for political support
4. Suarez's control over an unreformed state apparatus
5. »» overwhelming electoral advantages:
■ unlimited access to state television, good contacts in the Movimiento, easy access to campaign funding, and exclusive use of the opinion polling expertise in the state opinion research institute
■ Suarez - almost exclusive control over these resources
PARTY POLICY
■ 1977 candidate lists for the elections - fully controlled bySuarez
■ 1977 campaign
■ Avoiding ideological slogans
■ Image A. Suarez
■ Reformism
■ Need to integrate all sectors of society in a new political system
■ Modernization discourse
■ Original coalition of parties was dissolved
■ Highly centralized leadership
■ No opponent and alternative
■ Despite rhetoric no genuine interest in mass membership
JDEOLOGY"
eological flexibility
Great room for
maneuvering
Rejections to accept a clear ideology
ideologies are synthetic tions. They close out options. We want to be open and see no reason why we need an ideology.(...)The party is where its voters are.
CAMPAIGN
■ 1979 elections: professionalized campaign
■ Modern' American-style campaign techniques employed
■ publicity agencies and media consultants
■ instead of political rallies, youth and children's festivals and concerts with pop musicians
CRISIS 1979
■ crisis as a result of Suärez's series of political successes
■ Suärez's government came under political pressure in the face of
■ aggravation of the economic crisis
■ intensification of political violence in the Basque Country
■ »» major weakness of the business-firm party
■ lack of ideological orientation and its eagerness to attract superficial support from broad sectors of society
■ » difficulty in setting coherent objectives for political action
■ » no firm ground
CRISIS 1979
political debate changed
moved from very general issues of democracy and the reform of the state to divisive issues of economic policy, administrative reorganisation and social reform
» UCD incapable of sustaining a coherent political line
» all sectors of its electorate disillusioned by its refusal to provide a political lead
Jonathan Hopkin
PARTY FORMATION AND DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION IN SPAIN
The Creation and Collapse of the Union of the Democratic Centre
Losing voters
PARTY
COLLAPSE
(1982-1983)
Lack of clear party procedures
Lack of clear positions
Lack of firm roots in the society
UCD replaced by People's Party
CONCLUSIONS -UDC
weak electoral links = party vulnerable to the consequences of short-term political failures
• refusing to establish and protect a core electorate, parties deny themselves the cushion of loyal voters which can help parties survive periods of crisis
• if taken too far, can disorient the party and make coherent collective action impossible
CONCLUSIONS -UDC
r ^
strengthening of leadership authority makes parties dependent on their leaders
► i
party finances dependent on ad hoc contributions from varied interest groups
• unstable form of finance
• Business sectors who backed UCD in 1977 and 1979 withdrew their support in protest at Suarez's refusal to follow their instructions on economic policy
• -> fundamental cause of internal conflict
Forza Italia
LI Window of opportunity:
■ Crisis of the Italian politics: Mani Pulite
■ Collapse of the Italian party system LI Silvio Berlusconi
■ A wealthy billionaire with close ties to the former PM Bettino Craxi (1983-7)
■ A significant media owner (Mediaset group), popular TV stations
■ 1986 bought AC Milano
□ 1994 Forza Italia established
■ 3 months prior to the elections
■ Established from Fininvest (a huge business group)
■ Fininvest's managers and marketing - key role to the Fl success
■ Top-down management of the party
Forza Italia
■ Major aim: to protect business interests of Fininvest
■ debts
■ Risk: a new left-wing cabinet would undermine Fininvest dominance among commercial TVs
■ In the past: collaboration with B. Craxi, but Mani Pulite
■ In public:
■ Combating corruption
■ Eliminating incompetent politicians
Forza Italia
■ Significant resources:
■ Media
■ Money
■ Expertize (marketing know-how, surveys)
■ Top-heavy party
■ Strongly centralized
■ Weak membership
■ Power-less grassroots and medium-level organisations
Ideology
■ Unclear, but right-wing conservative lean
■ Manifesto elaborate by Giuliano Urbani
■ Limited state and bureaucracy
■ Lower taxes
■ Support for running business
■ Anti-communism
■ „shopping list" character