Political systems are very complex to comprehend if one doesn’t know the role of most agencies, branches, and parties. Government functions are not as independent in ruling as one might think; for they are composed of multiple branches and most branches consist of politicians coming from multiple parties. Political Parties are accordingly the essence of politics, they define a country’s political system; one party, bi-partisan, or multiparty system. The inter-relation between parties and governments is an important phenomenon in political science, because parties are basically the connecting link between the people and their governments. (Panebianco p7) However, parties can also be a source of chaos in some cases, especially when they don’t agree on certain issues; they could cause a deadlock in the system as was visible recently with the American budget policy. Or they can take the disagreement into violence as was the case with the Lebanese civil war. Thus one cannot underestimate the important role of political parties, most if not all executives and legislatives come from a political party, one might have independent politicians in power but it’s usually rare. (Jankowski 22) Political parties also play a great role in spreading their ideologies to the citizens of their nations; in the US for example you have two similar yet different parties each spreading their ideologies to their followers. Therefore the role of political parties is a complex one and it shall be examined by understanding their role, how they aggregate support, what are their roles in governments, concluding with short case studies on Lebanon, Syria, and the UK.
The methodology used for writing this paper is based on literary review of articles related to t...
... middle of paper ...
...mid=125>.
Lawson, Kay, and Thomas Poguntke. How political parties respond: interest aggregation revisited. Routledge, 2004.
Hermeren, Henrik. "Government Formation In Multiparty Systems." Scandinavian Political Studies 11.A11 (1976): 131-146.
Jankowski , Richard . "Preference Aggregation in Political Parties and Interest Groups: A Synthesis of Corporatist and Encompassing Organization Theory." American Journal of Political Science 32.1 (1988): 105 - 125. Midwest Political Science Association. Web. 3 Jan. 2014.
Pappalardo, A.. "Electoral Systems, Party Systems: Lijphart And Beyond." Party Politics 13.6 (2007): 721-740.
Panebianco, Angelo. Political parties: organization and power. CUP Archive, 1988.
Lijphart, Arend. "Consociational democracy." World politics 21.2 (1969): 207-225.
Ware, Alan. Political parties and party systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
There has been much speculation whether political parties have become too strong in American politics and if that is a good or bad thing. My belief is that political party power in the United States is just about right where I believe that there are some instances where political parties have been in situations where they have too much power and instances where it is moderate. First off, political parties are crucial to our democratic government because it is composed of a group of people that the constituents elect to represent their issues or achieve a common goal. Being part of a group that shares your common interests or goals is more powerful than tackling an issue by your self. It gives you more voice and power in government. Also, political
Party is an inevitable feature of the democracy and it is defined as ‘an autonomous group of citizens having the purpose of making nominations and contesting elections in the hope of gaining control over governmental power through the capture of public offices and the organization of the government’ (Caramani, 2011, p.220). Parties are ubiquitous in modern political systems and they perform a number of functions, they are: coordination, contesting elections, recruitment, and representation (Caramani, 2011). Political parties are the product of the parliamentary and electoral game, and party systems reflect the social oppositions that characterize society when parties first appear (Coxall et al., 2011).
In discussing the problems surrounding the issue of factionalism in American society, James Madison concluded in Federalist #10, "The inference to which we are brought is that the causes of cannot be removed and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects." (Federalist Papers 1999, 75) In many ways, the nature of American politics has revolved around this question since our country's birth. What is the relationship between parties and government? Should the party serve as an intermediary between the populace and government, and how should a government respond to disparate ideas espoused by the factions inherent to a free society. This paper will discuss the political evolution that has revolved around this question, examining different "regimes" and how they attempted to reconcile the relationship between power and the corresponding role of the people. Beginning with the Federalists themselves, we will trace this evolution until we reach the contemporary period, where we find a political climate described as "interest-group liberalism." Eventually this paper will seek to determine which has been the most beneficial, and which is ultimately preferable.
The Two Party System of UK It has often been said that the United Kingdom possesses a two party political system. However, any balanced argument on this issue must take into account both the differing perspectives from which this subject can be viewed and the time period which is being evaluated. The two party theory is not universally accepted and many people argue that the UK can best be described as a multi party, dominant party or even a two and a half or three party system, depending on how the subject is approached. The most commonly held view is that Britain is a two party system.
Political parties, like interest groups, are organized groups that effort to influence the government by electing their associates to important government offices. The first party system appeared in the 1970s and pitted the federalist beside the Jeffersonian Republican. Over the years, the federalists progressively weakened and disappeared altogether after the pro-British sympathies of some Federalist leaders for the duration of the War of 1812 led to charges of betrayal against the party. From the collapse of the federalist until 1830s, American had only one political party, the Jeffersonian Republicans, who gradually came to be known as the Democrats. There was strong factional conflict within the Democratic Party, principally between the
Political parties have been around since almost the beginning of this great country. Although George Washington strongly opposed political parties, and also warned the nation to stay away from forming political parties, the first political parties were formed right under his own nose. In George Washington’s cabinet was where the first parties started. The cause of these parties was simply differences in views. The thought of leaders of these two completely different parties was Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson started what then was known of as Republican or the Anti-Federalist. On the other hand Hamilton started what was known of as the Federalist Party. Both of these parties formed in the seventeen hundreds. These two parties have evolved into today being known as the Democratic, and the Republican parties. On the contrary one of the largest third party groups, the tea party was formed just recently in the year two thousand and nine. All three of these political parties effect our government today.
During the second half of the past century the notion that, political science should be treated as a science became extremely popular among academics specially in the United States. One of the most prominent exposers of this school of thought was Anthony Downs, who developed a theorem to explain in a rather economic sense, how and why voters behave in a certain way when it comes to voting. Downs did not only applied his theory to the way voters behave, he also used it to explain the way political parties align themselves when it comes to elections in a two and a multiparty system nevertheless this essay will analyze Downs’ claims about a two party system only. This essay argues that the Downs’ model has proven to be accurate in many cases throughout history, nevertheless it makes a series of assumptions about voters and parties that can not be considered realistic neither in 1957, when he published his paper An Economic Theory of Political Action in Democracy in 1957 nor in 2013. This essay also acknowledges that fact that this theory might help to explain how parties behave but it is by no means the only explanation. Furthermore this essay will prove that it is a multiplicity of factors rather than an economic theory what can help us understand why parties behave the way they do. In order to support the argument previously stated this essay will state and critically analyze a number of Downs assumptions, then his theory will be outlined. Then it will carefully consider how effective it has been at predicting the way in which parties align themselves by examining the behavior of political parties during general elections in different countries.
There are two ways to get rid of the causes of factions, or political parties. The first way of removing these causes is to destroy the liberty essential to their existence. The second way to get rid of the causes is to give everyone the exact same o...
In the United States today, a third major political party is needed. The two current major parties are inadequate due to a lack of representation of the people, and recurrent stalemates that occur when a controversial decision has to be made. Adding a third major party would help with the voting decisions, representation of the people, and the government overall.
Guerin, Wilfred L., Earle Labor, Lee Morgan, Jeanne C. Reesman, and John R. Willingham. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. 125-156.
It is noteworthy to be stated clearly at the outset of the present paper that literary theories are composed of a mere plethora of highly debatable ideas, concepts and assumptions. They are in other words, strikingly vague, opaque and of a typical flexibility. According to Wellek and Warren (1966, p. 30) }there are then, not only one or two but literally hundreds of independent, diverse, and mutually exclusive conceptions of literature, each of which is in some way right~. That is, the diversity of literary theories and even the contradiction between them sometimes, is something natural.
Political ideologies (P.I) have existed since the dawn of human Civilization; they have been fought over, discredited, re-approached, and fought over again. Many exist and have been tried over thousands of years. Still the question that plagues humanity is, how best do we manage governmental affairs? It is best to understand that different political ideologies serve different purposes, and that governments must remain ideologically flexible depending on current national conditions.
Raman Selden, Peter Widdowson, and Peter Brooker. A Reader's Guide to Contemporary Literary Theory. 4th ed. London: Prentice Hall and Harvester Wheatrsheaf. 1997.
The government ensures that the citizens are living in a peaceful country, with security, better service delivery and it also a good thing allowing people to participate in decision making through voting. The political parties play a role in providing these resources to the people like; clean water, repair roads, remove garbage, etc. When we come to voting between different parties that under the government we vote for how they deliver services to the society. The election time where every party goes to an electoral campaign to present the candidate that they nominated to stand for them in the political office and make promises to the people into how they can change the world and how they can deliver services much better than the party that is already in charge. They normally d...
Literary criticism is used as a guideline to help analyze, deconstruct, interpret, or even evaluate literary works. Each type of criticism offers its own methods that help the reader to delve deeper into the text, revealing all of its innermost features. New Criticism portrays how a work is unified, Reader-Response Criticism establishes how the reader reacts to a work, Deconstructive Criticism demonstrates how a work falls apart, Historical Criticism illustrates how the history of the author and the author’s time period influence a text, and last of all, Psychological Criticism expresses how unconscious motivations drive the author in the creation of their work as well as how the reader’s motivations influence their own interpretation of the text (Lynn 139, 191). This creates a deep level of understanding of literature that simply cannot be gained through surface level reading. If not one criticism is beneficial to the reader, then taking all criticisms or a mixture of specific criticisms into consideration might be the best way to approach literary