University of Utah Western Political Science Association

Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis by Giovanni Sartori Review by: Ruth K. Scott and Paul K. Warr The Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 3 (Sep., 1977), pp. 437-438 Published by: University of Utah on behalf of the Western Political Science Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/447948 . Accessed: 04/04/2014 07:42
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Utah and Western Political Science Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Western Political Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 5.13.70.13 on Fri, 4 Apr 2014 07:42:34 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Book Reviewsand Notes 437 A secondproblem exists of thelion'sshareof theessays.The withthecontent are in themain neither norsuggestive. analyses presented particularly imaginative Based upon them, thereis a demonstrable and chalneed forbothmorethorough at investigating raceand politics in Britain. efforts lenging empirical One instance ofthisfailing is in an essaybyRogerKing and MichaelWood on Enoch Powell,"The SupportforEnoch Powell." Theyanalyzed data havingto do withthe 1970 and 1974 elections.The conclusions theydraw are whatone might - Powell'ssupport and cutacrossparty was related to socioeconomic expect groups lines. My criticism: not go on withtheir and others, whydid thesetwo authors, and at theveryleastlook intothequestion for of whether or not support analyses Powellwas moreor less relatedto a broaderalienation from theBritish party systemthanitwas to racism or toboth? The Brier and Axfordpiece, "The Theme of Race in BritishSocial and PoliticalResearch,"makesa numberof good points. Even in theircomparative thereare problems, themostimportant ofwhichis thatthisis an success, however, essaywhichmakesdiscrete They make the aspointsbut does not hold together. sertion that"thereexists an eliteconsensus to excluderacialquestions from formal forsomeenterprising scholar's withthe grist politics."What fine mill;put together Enoch Powellcase theimagination runsto someinteresting The point suggestions. is leftdangling of Jurgen and we are thenintellectually discussion jostledby their Habermason late capitalism. and overall thebestessayof thelot,one whichstandsout foritsclarity Surely and is Daniel Lawrence's"Race, Elections and Politics." Space is short treatment, thereis onlytimeto make one point: Lawrenceconnects and the race to politics thatthe issueof race in elections and its impactis sugHe finds partystructure. oftherestlessness ifnotthealienation voter. oftheBritish gestive As an assembledge thisis not a contribution; althoughone can glean some from bearsgoodfruit. really pickings it,onlytheone essay
Ohio Wesleyan University
CARL F. PINKELE

Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Vol. 1. By GIOVANNISARTORI. (London: Cambridge Press,1976. Pp. 356. $32.50.) University

of a theoretical framework. HowPartieshave developedwithout thebenefit of such a of partiesnecessitates the development ever,a thorough understanding to explain is one ofmanypolitical scholars whohave attempted Sartori framework. the development of parties. Parties, and behavior Sartorisays,mustbe examined are the polity:in a one-party state,"party"and government because theyreflect and encourage in a multi-party state, partiessymbolize virtually synonomous: and legitimize dissent. diversity their of Duverger, in the tradition Sartorianalyzes partiesthrough Following in the politicalsysand by the numberof partiesoperating internal organization as ofparty subunits of thisauthor's liesin his recognition scheme tem. The novelty of political systems.In the past, theorists factorsinfluencing the development leadersand followers: examinedinternal onlybydichotomizing organization party theparty Sartoriclaimsthatthisapproachis too simplistic. Instead,he examines determine thebehavior whoseinteractions as an aggregate of subunits or fractions, of the whole. Fractions, then,may be evaluated throughsix dimensions: (1) - Does the subunit than the party knitorganization have a tighter Organization hold itsown seekitsown friends, itself?Does it operateits own loyalty networks, seek partypowerforits own conventions?(2) Motivation---Doesthe fraction - Is the fraction promotion?(3) Ideology sake, forspoils or for ideology/idea or pragmaticand practical? (4) Left or rightfanaticaland future-oriented or fascist lean towardcommunist, Does the fraction socialist, liberal,conservative led by a singleundisputed leader Is the fraction principles? (5) Personalism-or a coalitionof leaders?and (6' Policyrole- Does thegroupserveto obstruct, or createparty policy? support,

This content downloaded from 5.13.70.13 on Fri, 4 Apr 2014 07:42:34 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

438 Western PoliticalQuarterly The development, maintenanceand interactions of fractions are partially determined used selection methods.The selection by theparty's leadership process or not a particular whether fraction by each partydetermines getsa shareof the rewardsand sanctions which the partyhas to offer.Another variableaffecting fractions of partiescompeting forpoliticalpower. within the partyis the number as a means of While mostpartytheorists have eschewedthe numerical criterion contribution Sartorimakes a significant partyclassification, by expandingthe numberof "counting"categories.Instead of using Duverger'sone-party, twoseven typesof partysystems, distinpartyand multi-party scheme,he perceives ofparties within each number system: guished bythenumber one-party, hegemonic limitedpluralism, extreme party,predominant party,two-party, pluralismand atomization.In additionto the "number" another conused bySartori dimension, - multi-party cernsideology are distinguished between the systems by thedistance ideologicalpositionsadopted by the parties: single-party are, however, systems of ideology withinthe singleparty.Discussionof these classified by the intensity two dimensions, the numberof partiesand the ideologicaldistancebetweenthe - serves and itsaccompanying to indicatethedispersion ofpower, material parties and ideological within a political rewards, system. The purposeforwhichPartiesand PartySystems was written was ostensibly to replace Duverger'sclassic Political Parties in the realm of theory building. - the first Sartoritellsus his twofold the work was an "unpurposeforwriting withthemannerin whichDuverger classified was to happiness" parties;the other whiletheauthorcontributes of politicalparties.However, a generaltheory render of politicalparties his classification to the international study through significantly a comprehensive of politicalparties. we yethave not been offered theory scheme, thatwe mayadd to our catalogue We have been givenanother classificatory study economicstudies:alas, studies, studies, of normative empirical behavioral studies, of David Apterthat "what is studies. The assertion we have no comprehensive of politicalparties"is as applicabletodayas it was in 1963. lackingis a theory University of Utah
RUTH K. SCOTTand PAULK. WARR

Politics and the Future of Industrial Society. Edited by LEON N. LINDBERG. (New

York: David McKay Co., Inc., 1976. Pp. 286. $12.50; $6.95.) - muchofwhich on political This joins thesteadily literature futures growing thisis verygood. Neitherfact nor fiction, it is in the best is bad. Fortunately, who have triedto look of Herman Kahn, Daniel Bell and thoseothers tradition at the changes in political processesand institutional constructs systematically of post-industrial whichmay accompanythe development But thisbook systems. is morepoliticalthan the others.Unlikemuchof the genre, it is not overly concernedwith the United States. Composedof six originalresearch-essay chapters discussion and concluding it is a good example by Lindberg, plus an introduction in politics shouldand couldbe. ofwhatfutures research structure first foreach of the chapterprovidesample intellectual Lindberg's six chapters.His taskis made easierbecausethosechapters sharea comfollowing mon intellectual and discipline.Happily,nonehas fallenintotheconcepinterest tual pit of a definition of the future.For, as Lindberg pointsout,social scientists of change. As it turns have not done well in the study out,one of thereal contriof thisbookis in theconceptof change- depicting butions process. looksat alternative Chaptertwo,by Todd La Porteand C. J. Abrams, patas a model. On balance,theyopt forthe ternsof post-industria usingCalifornia - withemerging extremist and left as beingmoreprobable unstablesystem right citizen alienation. accompanied bymassive wingmovements utilizesa substantial rebodyof survey by Ronald Inglehart, Chapterthree, values in western searchdata in his analysisof changing he society.Essentially, - from materialism topost-industrial industrial seesthischangeas a secular process foundmorein the younger This new value system, non-materialism. generations

This content downloaded from 5.13.70.13 on Fri, 4 Apr 2014 07:42:34 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions