This study describes and compares Czech and Slovak party politics after 1989. The concept of cleavages is used as a theoretical starting point. The authors point out that although the communist period overshadowed the traditional cleavages dating from the second half of the nineteenth century, it is possible to analyze some politically-based cleavages in the respective party arrangements of the two countries. The main conclusion of the article is as follows: that despite differing trajectories of political development during the 1990s, at the present time, both the Czech and Slovak party systems show great similarities in terms of the prevalence of the socioeconomic cleavage. Socioeconomic cleavage emerged quite early after 1989 in the Czech Republic; in Slovakia the socioeconomic cleavage has become dominant only in recent years. This has contributed to the stabilization of the classic left-right model of political competition and the consolidation of the two countries' party systems.
An earlier draft of this article was presented at the European Consortium for Political Research Conference in September 2005 in Budapest, Hungary. This article has been elaborated within the framework of the Research Intention entitled Political Parties and the Representation of Interests in Current European Democracies (code MSM0021622407).
2.
For the volatility phenomenon cf. Gábor Tóka, "Party Appeals and Voter Loyalty in New Democracies," Political Studies46: 3 (1998): 589-611; for negative voting cf. Richard Rose and William Mishler, "Negative and Positive Party Identification in Post-Communist Countries," Electoral Studies17: 2 ( 1998): 217-34; for unclear meaning of Left and Right cf. Radoslaw Markowski, "Political Parties and Ideological Spaces in East Central Europe," Communist and Post-Communist Studies30: 3 (1997): 221-54.
3.
Michael Roskin , "The Emerging Party Systems of Central and Eastern Europe," East European Quarterly27: 1 (1993): 50-62; Laurentiu Stefan-Scalat, Pacts and Conflicts in Post-Communist Transformations. In a Search of a New Social Contract (Wien: Institut für Wissenschaften vom Menschen, IWM Working Paper, 7/ 2000).
4.
Seymour Martin Lipset and Stein Rokkan, "Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments: An Introduction ," In Seymour Martin Lipset and Stein Rokkan, eds., Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspective. (New York- London: The Free Press and Collier-MacMillan Limited , 1967), 1-64.
5.
Klaus von Beyme , Systemwechsel in Osteuropa ( Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1994 ); Geoffrey Evans and Stephen Whitefield, "Social and Ideological Cleavage Formation in Post-Communist Hungary," Europe-Asia Studies47: 7 ( 1995): 1178-204.
6.
Herbert Kitschelt , "The Formation of Party Systems in East Central Europe," Politics & Society20: 1 (1992): 7-51; Jack Bielasiak, "Substance and Process in the Development of Party Systems in East Central Europe," Communist and Post-Communist Studies30: 1 (1997): 23-44; Andrzej Antoszewski and Ryszard Herbut: Demokracje Europy środkowo-Wschodniej w perspektywie porównawczej ( Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego , 1998), 131-40; Nick Sitter, "Beyond Class vs. Nation? Cleavage Structure and Party Competition in Central Europe," Central European Political Science Review2: 3 (2001): 67-91; Paul G. Lewis, Political Parties in Post-Communist Eastern Europe (London- New York: Routledge, 2001), 140-48.
7.
Cf. Attila Ágh, The Politics of Central Europe (London- Thousand Oaks-New Delhi: SAGE , 1998), 55-62.
8.
Cf. Andrea Römmele, "Cleavage Structures and Party Systems in East and Central Europe," In Kay Lawson, Andrea Römmele, and Georgi Karasimeonov , eds., Cleavages, Parties, and Voters: Studies from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Romania (Westport : Praeger Publishers, 1999), 1-18; Herbert Kitschelt, Zdenka Mansfeldova, Radosław Markowski, and Gábor Tóka, Post-Communist Party Systems. Competition, Representation, and Inter-Party Cooperation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).
9.
Regarding the often "social-democratized" identity of the former communist parties, this is a cleavage with more of a "post-communist" or "ex-communist" basis than with a "communist" one. However, this terminology seems to be apt due to the way it has been utilized by its opponents.
10.
Cf.LarryDiamond , "Thinking about Hybrid Regimes," Journal of Democracy13: 2 (2002), 21-36.
11.
Michael Gallagher, Michael Laver, and Peter Mair, Representative Government in Modern Europe (New York: McGraw Hill, 2000), 244-67.
12.
Jon Elster, Claus Offe, and Ulrich Preuss, Institutional Design in Post-Communist Societies. Rebuilding the Ship at Sea (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 249.
13.
Vít Hloušek , Konfliktní linie v postkomunistických systémech politických stran," Politologický časopis7: 4 (2000): 379.
14.
Petr Fiala and Miroslav Mareš , "Konstituování systému politických stran v České republice (1989-1992)," Politologický časopis4: 1 (1997): 107. Jiří Kunc, Stranické systémy v re/ konstrukci (Praha: Slon2000), 182-209.
15.
Petr Fiala, Katolicismus a politika (Brno, Centrum pro studium demokracie a kultury1995),236-38.
16.
Herbert Kitschelt, Zdenka Mansfeldova, Radosl'aw Markowski, and Gábor Tóka, Post-Communist Party Systems. Competition, Representation, and Inter-Party Cooperation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 226-31, 244-60. The economic preferences and attitudes of the individual parties were fundamental for forming the governmental coalition. This becomes apparent in the light of comparison with the other Central and East European countries under transformation, in which some non-economic issues influenced the coalition preferences of the political elites to a greater extent at that time.
17.
Petr Fiala, Miroslav Mareš, and Pavel Pšeja , "Vývoj politických stran a jejich systému po listopadu 1989," In Jiří Večerník , ed., Zpráva o vývoji české společnosti 1989-1998 (Praha: Academia, 1998), 284.
18.
Cf.Giovanni SartoriParties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976), 334-42.
19.
The SPR-RSČ failed in the next 1998 parliamentary election and later died out. The ODA underwent an internal crisis before the 1998 election, lost most of its voters, and did not stand in the 1998 election. It attempted to revitalize its political potential within the Four-coalition project (see text).
20.
Miroslav Novák , "Utváření stranického systému v českých zemích," Politologický časopis6: 2 (1999): 136-38; Maxmilián Strmiska, "Utváření českého multipartismu: příběh na pokračování," Politologický časopis6: 2 (1999): 162-69.
21.
The analysis of 2000 shows that the voters of the KSCM declared themselves to be the furthest left on the left-right scale, followed by voters of the KDU-CSL, the ČSSD, the US, and the ODS. The ČCSSD voters, in particular, moved towards the centre; on the other hand, the electorate of the KDU-CSL moved relatively markedly to the left. Also, the US moved from the clear right in 1998 to the political centre. The position of the KSCM, the US, and the ODS voters corresponds to the declared political option represented by `their' parties. The positions of CSSD and the KDU-CSL voters differ slightly from the positions of their parties; see Klára Vlachová, "Levice-pravice v České republice v letech 1996-2000," In Zdenka Mansfeldová and Milan Tuček , eds., Současná česká společnost (Praha: Sociologický ústav Akademie včd české republiky, 2002), 265-66; cf. Klára Vlachová, "Party Identification in the Czech Republic: Inter-Party Hostility and Party Preference," Communist and Post-Communist Studies34: 4 ( 2001): 479-99.
22.
Klára Vlachová , "Názorová krystalizace a levicové posuny," In Jičí Večerník, ed., Zpráva o vývoji české společnosti 1989-1998 ( Praha, Academia1998), 263; Cf. Daniel Kunštát, "Strany a voliči v zrcadle předvolebních výzkumů Čtyřkoalice veřejného mínění," In Lukáš Linek, Ladislav Mrklas, Adéla Seidlová, and Petr Sokol, eds., Volby do poslanecké sněmovny 2002 (Praha: Sociologický ústav AV ČR , 2003), 116.
23.
Petr Kolář , "Vzestup a Čtyřkoalice," In Lukáš Linek, Ladislav Mrklas, Adéla Seidlová, and Petr Sokol, eds., Volby do poslanecké sněmovny 2002 (Praha, Sociologický ústav AV ČR2003), 207-19.
24.
Roman Chytilek and Otto Eibl, "Jak ODS bojovala o putujícího voliče ," Revue Politika4: 6 (2006): 4-5.
25.
Soňa Szomolányi, Kl'ukatá cesta Slovenska k demokracii (Bratislava: Stimul, 1999), 45-47.
26.
Jan Rychlík , Rozpad Československa.česko-slovenské vztahy 1989-1992 (Bratislava: Academic Electronic Press, 2002), 276.
27.
Milan Tuček , Ján Bunčák, and Valentína Harmadyová, Stratégie a aktéri sociálnej transformácie a modernizácie v českej a Slovenskej republike (Brno: Doplnčk , 1998), 43-52.
28.
Marek Rybář , "Stranícke rodiny a prípad Slovenska: Niekočko teoretických poznámok," Politologický časopis10: 3 (2003): 278-79.
29.
Lubomír Kopeček, "Stranický systém Slovenska," In Petr Fiala and Ryszard Herbut, eds., Stredoevropské systémy politických stran (Brno : Mezinárodní politologický ústav Masarykovy univerzity v Brně, 2003), 211-13.
30.
A relatively high degree of political pluralism continued to exist during the era when this cleavage was on the rise. In spite of the tendency to eliminate its opponents, restrictions were never so tough as to qualify the regime as authoritarian; cf. Juan Linz, Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2000), 159. Probably the most obvious evidence was the competitive character of the 1998 election. The regime was' however' far from what is commonly thought of as liberal democracy. Therefore it is legitimately classified as a hybrid regime; cf. S. Szomolányi, "Aký režim sa vynára na Slovensku ," In Soňa Szomolányi, ed., Slovensko: Problémy konsolidácie demokracie ( Bratislava: Slovenské zdru enie pre politické vedy, Nadácia Friedricha Eberta, 1997), 7-26; Peter Učeň, " Decade of Conflict Within Slovak Polity: Party Politics Perspective ," In Vladimíra Dvořáková., ed., Success or Failure? Ten Years After (Praha : Česká společnost pro politické vedy, Slovenské zdru enie pre politické vedy, 1999), 111-33; Tim Haughton, "Facilitator and Impeder: The Institutional Framework of Slovak Politics during the Premiership of Vladimír Mečiar," Slavonic and East European Review81: 2 ( 2003): 267-90.
31.
Cf. Milan Galanda and Juraj Hrabko, Poslanecký mandát na Slovensku (Bratislava: Inštitút pre verejné otázky, 1998).
32.
Luba' Lesná, Únos demokracie (Bratislava : G plus G, 2001), 101-17.
33.
Grigorij Mesežnikov , "Vnútropolitický vývoj a systém politických strán," In Miroslav Kollár and Grigorij Mesežnikov, eds., Slovensko 2002. Súhrnná správa o stave spolo nosti (Bratislava: Inštitút pre verejné otázky, 2002), 19; Kevin Krause, "Slovakia's Second Transition ," Journal of Democracy14: 2 (2003), 65-79.
34.
Vladimír Krivý and Grigorij Mesežnikov, "Politické strany a ich prívrženci ," In Olga Gyárfášová , Vladimír Krivý, and Marián Velšic, eds., Krajina v pohybe ( Bratislava: Inštitút pre verejné otázky, 2001), 103.
35.
Grigorij Mesežnikov , "Parlamentné vol'by 2002 a vývoj systému politických strán," In Grigorij Mesežnikov, Ožga Gyárfášová, and Miroslav Kollár, eds., Slovenské vol'by '02 ( Bratislava: Inštitút pre verejné otázky, 2003), 44.
36.
Vladimír Krivý , Viera Feglová, and Daniel Balko, Slovensko a jeho regióny (Bratislava: Médiá , 1996), 93-134; Marián Velšic, Zmena politického režimu na Slovensku v perspektíve verejnej mienky ( Bratislava: Inštitút pre verejné otázky, 2001), 104-5.
37.
Juraj Marušiak , "Smer-from Pragmatism to Social Democracy," In Lubomír Kopeček, ed., Trajectories of the Left (Brno: Democracy and Culture Studies Centre, 2005), 165-78.
38.
The governmental coalition moved their proposals forward not only with the help of the HZDS, but with the support from an increasing number of independent deputies.
39.
"SDKÚ je otvorená každej spolupráci," Newspaper Pravda, 6 November 2004.
40.
The Institute for the Public Opinion Polls of the Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic (ÚVVM SR), http://www.statistics.sk/webdata/slov/infor/uvvm/uvvm1205.htm .
41.
ANO leader Pavol Rusko suffered a big corruption scandal in summer 2005, and his party disintegrated. Most of the party deputies continued to support the Dzurinda government; a few (including Rusko) left for the opposition (ANO failed in the 2006 elections-see Table 3).
42.
This was a legal provision that was supposed to be accepted by Slovakia based on the concordat with Vatican in 2000. The substance of the law was the right to refuse action contradicting the Christian principles. This was particularly significant in health care. It should, among other things, allow doctors to refuse performing certain things-such as performing abortions, prescribing contraceptives, sterilization, etc.
43.
Ol'ga, Gyárfášová , "Retrospektívny pohl'ad na volebné správanie ," Sme/Smena 10 August 2006.
44.
Ibid.
45.
The form of Fico's government, however, provoked a reaction from the Party of European Socialists (PES) for which the participation of the nationalistic SNS in the government was unacceptable. The membership of Smer in PES was therefore suspended in autumn 2006.
