Political parties occupy a unique intermediate position between civil society and the public political realm and provide a hybrid and semi-institutional connection between the two domains. In this article I argue that, in order to preserve their unique and hybrid nature, political parties ought to balance partiality and unity and abide by a set of normative criteria, above all respect for party pluralism and for the institutional framework in which they operate. By complying with these criteria, political parties can convey values and interests in a way that favours democracy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AldrichJ. (1995), Why Parties?, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
2.
DownsA. (1957), An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York: Harper.
3.
DuvergerM. (1959), Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State (trans. B. and NorthR.), 2nd rev. English edition, London: Methuen & Co.
4.
EpsteinL.D. (1980), Political Parties in Western Democracies, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
5.
GalstonW. (2002), Liberal Pluralism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6.
HampshireS. (1983), Morality and Conflict, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
HoltM.F. (1978), The Political Crisis of the 1850s, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
8.
KatzR.S. (1990), ‘Party as Linkage: A Vestigial Function?’, European Journal of Political Research18, pp. 143–161.
9.
KatzR.S. and MairP. (1995), ‘Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy: The Emergence of the Cartel Party’, Party Politics1(1), pp. 5–28.
10.
KatzR.S. and MairP. (1997), ‘Party Organization, Party Democracy, and the Emergence of the Cartel Party’ in MairP. (ed.), Party System Change: Approaches and Interpretations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 93–119.
11.
KircheimerO. (1966), ‘The Transformation of the Western European Party Systems’ in La PalombaraJ. and WeinerM. (eds.), Political Parties and Political Development, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 177–200.
12.
KitscheltH. (2006), ‘Movement Parties’ in KatzR.S. and CrottyW. (eds.), Handbook of Party Politics, London: Sage, pp. 278–290.
13.
KrouwelA. (2006), ‘Party Models’ in KatzR.S. and CrottyW. (eds.), Handbook of Party Politics, London: Sage, pp. 249–269.
14.
MuddeC. (2007), Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15.
MuirheadR. and RosenblumN. (2006), ‘Political Liberalism vs. “The Great Game of Politics”: The Politics of Political Liberalism’, Perspectives on Politics4(1), pp. 99–108.
16.
HersheyRandon M. (2006), ‘Political Parties as Mechanisms of Social Choice’ in KatzR.S. and CrottyW. (eds.), Handbook of Party Politics, London: Sage, pp. 75–88.
17.
RawlsJ. (2001), Justice as Fairness: A Restatement (ed. KellyE.), Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.
18.
RosenblumN. (2000), ‘Political Parties as Membership Groups’, Columbia Law Review100, pp. 813–844.
19.
RosenblumN. (2008), On the Side of the Angels: An Appreciation of Parties and Partisanship, Princeton, NJ and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
20.
SartoriG. (1976), Parties and Party Systems, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21.
WhiteJ.K. (2006), ‘What is a Political Party?’ in KatzR.S. and CrottyW. (eds.), Handbook of Party Politics, London: Sage, pp. 5–15.
22.
WhiteJ. and YpiL. (2010), ‘Rethinking the Modern Prince: Partisanship and the Democratic Ethos’, Political Studies58(4), pp. 809–828.
