|
1
|
- For nearly a century political scientists have written of the potential
of political parties to establish effective popular control over the
government.
- In a system designed to fragment political power, parties have been held
to be the one institution capable of providing a unifying centripetal
force. The functions that parties have been said to perform in American
society are impressive and diverse.
|
|
2
|
- 1. Generating symbols of identification and loyalty.
- 2. Aggregating and articulating political interests.
- 3. Mobilizing majorities in the electorate and in government.
- 4. Socializing voters and maintaining a popular following.
|
|
3
|
- 5. Organizing dissent and opposition.
- 6. Recruiting political leadership and seeking governmental offices.
- 7. Institutionalizing, channeling, and socializing conflict.
- 8. Overriding the dangers of sectionalism and promoting the national
interest.
|
|
4
|
- 9. Implementing policy objectives.
- 10. Legitimizing decisions of government.
- 11. Fostering stability in government.
|
|
5
|
- Given all of these functions, many political scientists have accepted E.
E. Schattschneider's famous assertion that modern democracy is
unthinkable save in terms of parties.
- Not surprisingly, then, the various indications that political parties
have weakened in recent years have been met with a great deal of alarm
among commentators on American politics.
- David Broder, for example, has stated flatly, "The governmental
system is not working because the political parties are not
working."
|
|
6
|
- Perhaps the most frequently cited consequences of the decline of parties
are the growing importance of special interest groups and the dwindling
of the principles of collective responsibility.
- The result, as Morris Fiorina has written, is that we now have "a
system that articulates interests superbly but aggregates them
poorly."
|