Political Party Identification and Participation - Problems and Perspectives - Research Paper Example

Political Party Identification and Participation - Problems and Perspectives Significance of political party Identification and participation It is common for individuals to identify with a particular political party. In simple terms, this identification is called political party identification. An individual’s party identification is often determined by the political party he or she supports. Political parties normally have three parts; as government, as an organization, and as the party electorate. The normal people in the general population belong to this party electorate. These supporters or those who identify with a particular political party often show a strong tendency to vote for the candidate of that particular party. In addition, they register themselves as members of that party. These supporters tend to support all the policies of their political party blindly. There are various opinions among various scholars regarding party identification. While some opine that party identification is the result of people’s attachment to certain core political values, some others claim that party identification leads to political core values in an individual. In either way, political identification is an essential element in modern national politics. According to people like Green, palmquist, and Schickler, party identification is the sense of personal attachment one feels to a particular party as a result of the closeness he or she has to the social groups associated with that party (132). To illustrate, people often decide their political party taking into consideration how they feel about the social group which makes the base of that particular political party. The study by Goren proves that party identification is stable and rather long lasting (882). Admittedly, the first benefit of party identification is the proper representation of people’s requirements and their satisfaction. For example, individuals vote and support the party to which they feel attached. As a result, when the same party runs the government, the individuals feel satisfaction in the fact that their needs are properly considered and the core political values they believe in are promoted. Thus, there is higher satisfaction in democracy. Secondly, though there is the claim that party identification leads to partisan politics, there is the counter argument that party identification leads to a greater degree of unity. For example, Larry shows that an individual’s value selection is greatly influenced by their party affiliation (122). That means a large chunk of population, which believes in a particular political party, tends to blindly support what the party propagates. It will help in reducing individual differences in opinion to a great extent. This is evident from Feldman’s report that party identification leads to greater voter turnout in elections (431). That means identification to a political party encourages participation in democratic process. As Fiorina opines, party identification is the best way to ensure effective running of democracies. For instance, such political parties are the only platform for candidates to reach the masses in a short time (89). Without the presence of parties, the entire system will be in chaos as so many candidates might turn up and the population will be divided into so many divisions based on the demands of each small section. Thus, political system becomes an important aspect of a successful democracy. Along with this, political parties play a great role in coordinated social interaction. Forgetting minor differences in individual perceptions, people gather under the banner of political parties and promote group survival and welfare activities instead of individual needs. Finally, in times of trouble and complex social situations, parties provide cues that guide people. Thus, party identification is an important element of party system and political participation, and these both are essential for democracy. 2. Developments in party Identification The most obvious change in this area is a general fall in party identification in many nations. As Berglund et al. (108) observe, an analysis of the national election surveys of some old democracies like the UK, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden proves a fall in party identification. One reason as identified by Berglund et al. (113) is modernization. To illustrate, modernization brings a radical advancement in the political resources of citizens. Firstly, as education improves, people are able to digest the available political information and identify what is good for them independent of the party propaganda. As Berglund et al. (116) point out, this political mobilization enables individuals to have enough skills and resources to process the information they receive without cues from political parties. The increased access to media is another catalyst in the situation. Media now allows people to have all the latest information, both in hard and synthesized form. Thus, the role of giving cues to the masses is taken away by media from political parties. Yet another reason, found by Berglund et al., is a fall in party polarization (113). In other words, the scholars claim that party identification is directly proportional to polarization of political parties. When there is a decline in ideological conflicts between political parties or when individuals feel that all political parties produce more or less the same result, their party identification falls. In addition is the appearance of new political parties. New political parties often come up when there is a considerable degree of dissatisfaction among a noticeable chunk of population. When these political parties better represent the needs of some people, they tend to show affinity to the new parties. Finally, the study by Berglund et al. notices that this decline in party identification has a serious impact on voting patterns as well. To illustrate, the study noted that in the six countries it considered (UK, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden), nine out of ten people voted for the party they identified with in 1960s and 70s. However, by 1990s, this fell to an average of six out of seven people. That means there is a fall in defectors, which indicates a fall in party identification in voting habits (117). According to Feldman, the voting decision of people is influenced by a number of factors ranging from candidate qualities, government performance, and party identification. While candidate qualities and government performance are short-term factors, party identification is long term factor (435). This change in the impact of party identification is evident from the pew Research report. The report shows that the percentage of political independents, or the percentage of people who will vote irrespective of their party identification, rose from 29% to 37% between 1990 and 2012 (Trends in party affiliation). Thus, in total, it can be said that the trend visible in party identification is a fall over the years, and the reasons found are a decrease in political polarization, role of media, improvement in education, and the coming up of new political parties. 3. Problems Associated with party System Admittedly, party identification inevitably introduces a number of problems as well. First of all, as Goren points out, party identification is more stable in the minds of people than political core values like equal opportunity, limited government, traditional family values, and moral tolerance (886). In other words, party identification can act as a hindrance in electing the best candidates for the society. When people show more attachment to the party they identify with, they forget to take into consideration other important aspects like the performance of government and the personal credentials of electoral candidates. Thus, party identification can reduce the quality of democracy. Another issue associated with party politics is patronage. Goren alleges that political parties often expand their roles and hold too much power (888). The ruling party often controls and influences appointments to the public offices and many people join political parties for such favors. This sinecure has a negative impact on the quality of democracy because this hinders the constitutional responsibility to provide equal opportunity to all. Yet another problem is party disaffection. It is often seen that parties often move far away from the base, that is, the electorate. As a result, exchange of ideas from the base to the top of a political party is rather troublesome and often impossible. The effect of this is seen in the form of an increase in the number of political independents who do not consider party identification important in voting. In addition, oligarchic tendencies are affecting the quality of political party system. In large political parties, a few persons holding offices at the top enjoy uncontrolled concentration of power. It happens so often because many people who support a party do not become members of the party. This hesitation from people to actively take part in politics enables some people to enjoy too much of power. Another problem identified is the improper representation of various social and demographic groups. To illustrate, women and manual workers are often under-represented in political parties. Moreover, there is the question of legitimization. The mere problem is that in a democratic set up, it is still a controversy whether political parties are legitimate representatives of citizens, especially when a considerable proportion of people in a country have nothing to do with political parties. In addition, a considerable proportion of party members have very limited role in their parties’ functioning. Political parties are to be blamed for their increased efforts to appease media and to make short-term gains. The strong and long-lasting leaderships and ideologies are a story of the past, and now, there are political spin-doctors to represent parties in media. When this happens, political parties deviate from their function as a mediator between society and the government. Instead of representing and protecting the interests of society, parties spend more time justifying what they do through media. In addition, as the present-day parties are unable to say what special interests they are representing, there is no effective debate which will make different sections of the people feel that their specific interests are strongly represented by a political party. This results in further decline in party identification. In simple terms, lack of definite and lasting propaganda is a main problem in the political party system at present. 4. Important perspectives In a society like America, political parties have a number of great roles to play, ranging from collectively representing political interests, mobilizing people effectively, enabling socialization of people, promoting good leaders, controlling sectionalism and so on and on (Green, palmquist, and Schickler 135). However, as time passed, certain inevitable problems cropped. Firstly, the dilution in ideological conflicts resulted in people’s losing party identification. This change is exacerbated by improved education and availability of information through media. As a result, giving up party identification, people started giving more attention to the individual qualities of candidates. At this juncture, it is necessary for political parties to adapt themselves to the changing situations. As ideological differences are less severe, partisan politics is no more tenable. As time passes, more and more people will be party defectors. That means they will change their voting habit in accordance with recent developments and the credentials of candidates. Thus, in future, parties will need to come up with candidates who have credibility, and the ruling parties will be forced to act in a reasonable way because as the reports show, the number of political independents is on rise. So, the picture is clear. Political parties can no longer rest on their laurels and expect long term loyalty from the public. In other words, party identification and the consequent loyalty in voting behavior are not strong enough to bring any party to power. As far as there is no ideological difference, there is no scope for party identification and effective party system. So, it is necessary for parties to go back to grassroots and clearly identify the needs of people. It is time for them to brainstorm and come up with better ideologies which make people feel that voting for the party is significantly more useful than voting for another party. Thus, only difference can keep them alive in the present form. In total, political parties will have to go back to their basic responsibilities. They will need to develop strong propaganda which will effectively reflect the wishes of various sections of society, and while on power, they will have to act according to what they claimed because it is the lukewarm approach of the parties that made people lose party identification and look for the credentials of individual candidates instead. Works Cited Berglund, Frode, Soren Holmberg, Hermann Schmitt, and Jacques Thomassen. “Party Identification and Party Choice.” THOM ASSEN: The European Voter 5 (2005): 105-123. Print. Feldman, Stanley. “Structure and Consistency in Public Opinion: The Role of Core Beliefs and Values.” American Journal of Political Science 32.2 (1988): 416-440. Print. Fiorina, Morris. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981. Print. Goren, Paul. “Party Identification and Core Political Values.” American Journal of Political Science 49.4 (2005): 882-897. Print. Green, Donald, Bradley palmquist, and Eric Schickler. Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002. Print. “Trends in party affiliation.” Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. 4 Jun. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2013. Read More