Help
Book creator ( disable )

Dominant-party system

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Part of the Politics series
Party politics
Political spectrum
Left-wing
Centre
Right-wing
Platform
Types
Organization
Party discipline
Party system
Coalition
Lists
A coloured voting box.svg Politics portal

A dominant-party system, or one-party dominant system, is a political occurrence in which a single political party continuously dominates election results over running opposition groups or parties.[1] Any ruling party staying in power for more than one consecutive term may be considered a dominant (also referred to as predominant or hegemonic) party.[2]

Dominant-parties and their domination of a state, develop out of one-sided electoral and party constellations within a multi-party system (particularly under presidential systems of governance), and as such differ from states under a one-party system, which are intricately organized around a specific party. Sometimes the term "de facto one-party state" is used to describe dominant-party systems which, unlike a one-party system, allows (at least nominally) democratic multiparty elections, but the existing practices or balance of political power effectively prevent the opposition from winning power, thus resembling a one-party state.

Between 1950 and 2017, more than 130 countries were included in the list of dominant-party systems, i.e., almost every state in the world on national, sub-national and district levels, both democratic and authoritarian.[3]

Theory[edit]

Critics of the "dominant party" theory argue that it views the meaning of democracy as given, and that it assumes that only a particular conception of representative democracy (in which different parties alternate frequently in power) is valid.[4] Raymond Suttner, himself a former leader of the African National Congress (ANC), argues that "the dominant party 'system' is deeply flawed as a mode of analysis and lacks explanatory capacity. But it is also a very conservative approach to politics. Its fundamental political assumptions are restricted to one form of democracy, electoral politics and hostile to popular politics. This is manifest in the obsession with the quality of electoral opposition and its sidelining or ignoring of popular political activity organised in other ways. The assumption in this approach is that other forms of organisation and opposition are of limited importance or a separate matter from the consolidation of their version of democracy."[4]

One of the dangers of dominant parties is "the tendency of dominant parties to conflate party and state and to appoint party officials to senior positions irrespective of their having the required qualities."[4] However, in some countries this is common practice even when there is no dominant party.[4] In contrast to one-party systems, dominant-party systems can occur within a context of a democratic system. In a one-party system other parties are banned, but in dominant-party systems other political parties are tolerated, and (in democratic dominant-party systems) operate without overt legal impediment, but do not have a realistic chance of winning; the dominant party genuinely wins the votes of the vast majority of voters every time (or, in authoritarian systems, claims to). Under authoritarian dominant-party systems, which may be referred to as "electoralism" or "soft authoritarianism", opposition parties are legally allowed to operate, but are too weak or ineffective to seriously challenge power, perhaps through various forms of corruption, constitutional quirks that intentionally undermine the ability for an effective opposition to thrive, institutional and/or organizational conventions that support the status quo, occasional but not omnipresent political repression, or inherent cultural values averse to change.

In some states opposition parties are subject to varying degrees of official harassment and most often deal with restrictions on free speech (such as press laws), lawsuits against the opposition, and rules or electoral systems (such as gerrymandering of electoral districts) designed to put them at a disadvantage. In some cases outright electoral fraud keeps the opposition from power. On the other hand, some dominant-party systems occur, at least temporarily, in countries that are widely seen, both by their citizens and outside observers, to be textbook examples of democracy. An example of a genuine democratic dominant-party system would be the pre-Emergency India, which was almost universally viewed by all as being a democratic state, even though the only major national party at that time was the Indian National Congress. The reasons why a dominant-party system may form in such a country are often debated: supporters of the dominant party tend to argue that their party is simply doing a good job in government and the opposition continuously proposes unrealistic or unpopular changes, while supporters of the opposition tend to argue that the electoral system disfavors them (for example because it is based on the principle of first past the post), or that the dominant party receives a disproportionate amount of funding from various sources and is therefore able to mount more persuasive campaigns. In states with ethnic issues, one party may be seen as being the party for an ethnicity or race with the party for the majority ethnic, racial or religious group dominating, e.g., the African National Congress in South Africa (governing since the end of apartheid in 1994) has strong support amongst Bantu peoples of South Africa and the Ulster Unionist Party governed Northern Ireland from its creation in 1921 until 1972 with the support of the Protestant majority. Similarly, the Apartheid-era National Party in South Africa had the support of Afrikaners who make up the majority of White South Africans while English-speaking white South Africans tended towards more liberal and reform-oriented parties like the Progressive Federal Party.

Sub-national entities are often dominated by one party due to the area's demographic being on one end of the spectrum. For example, the current elected government of the District of Columbia has been governed by Democrats since its creation in the 1970s, Bavaria by the Christian Social Union since 1957, Madeira by the Social Democrats since 1976, and Alberta by Progressive Conservatives from 1971 to 2015. On the other hand, where the dominant party rules nationally on a genuinely democratic basis, the opposition may be strong in one or more subnational areas, possibly even constituting a dominant party locally; an example is South Africa, where although the African National Congress is dominant at the national level, the opposition Democratic Alliance is strong to dominant in the Province of Western Cape.

Current dominant-party systems[edit]

Africa[edit]

Americas[edit]

Canada[edit]

Canada's lower house, the House of Commons of the Parliament of Canada, is a multi-party system. Multiple political parties are represented, however every federal election since World War II has seen in essence only two federal parties win enough seats to form a government: the Liberal Party, and various iterations of a conservative party including the now defunct Progressive Conservative Party of Canada and the modern Conservative Party, which governed from 2006 to 2015.

With the emergence and strengthening of regional, and other non-traditional parties such as the Bloc Québécois following the Meech Lake Accord and the New Democratic Party, which have both served as the Official Opposition, both the Liberal and Conservative Party have relied on unofficial support from these smaller parties when in Minority Governments.

The Liberal Party of Canada has nonetheless been dominant in federal politics of Canada since its founding. So much so, that critics and academics alike have sometimes described the Liberal Party as "Canada's natural governing party".[11]

As of 2020, the Liberal Party of Canada has governed for 83 of the past 120 years. Canada's 23rd Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, has been the 13th Liberal to serve as Prime Minister.

The party ruled between 1935 and 1984 (the only exceptions being in 1957–1963 and 1979–1980), as well as 1896–1911, 1921–1930 (except a few months), and 1993–2006. In early 2006, the newly formed Conservative Party of Canada were elected, governing until 2015.

After a nearly a decade in opposition, the Liberals returned to power following the 2015 election and were subsequently re-elected as minority governments in the 2019 election and the 2021 election.[12]

  •  Alberta has been predominantly ruled by conservative parties since 1971. From 1971 to 2015, the ruling party was the Progressive Conservative Party. In the 2015 election, a split creating the Wildrose Party led to an NDP victory with 40.62% of the vote, due to the first-past-the-post electoral system awarding power solely on the number of seats won. The Wildrose and Progressive Conservative parties reconciled to form the United Conservative Party of Alberta, restoring the conservatives' dominant position and governing from 2019 to present.
  •  Saskatchewan has seen the Saskatchewan Party win four consecutive elections in 2007, 2011, 2016, and 2020; with a majority government secured for the party in each of them. The Saskatchewan Party won 51 of the 61 seats in the 2016 election.

United States[edit]

Main article: Political parties in the United States

As a whole, the US has a two-party system, with the main parties since the mid-19th century being Democratic Party and the Republican Party. However, some states and cities have been dominated by one of these parties for up to several decades, and during the 20th century, Democrats dominated Congress for 60 years.

Some parts of the US have differing party systems and third-party representation. Most notably the two main parties in Puerto Rico (home to 3 million Americans) are the New Progressive Party and the Popular Democratic Party, with 3 minor parties represented after the 2020 election.

Dominant-party systems can also exist on Indian reservations. The Seneca Nation of Indians, a tribe with territory within the bounds of the State of New York, has had the Seneca Party as the dominant party in its political system for several decades.

Congress[edit]
Main article: United States Congress

For 62 years from 1933 until 1995, the United States Congress was dominated by the Democratic Party. During this period, Republicans only held a majority in the House of Representatives for a total of 4 years: 1947–49 and 1953–55. In the Senate, Republicans held a majority for a total of 10 years: 1947–49, 1953–55 and 1981–87. This was largely due to the enduring popularity of the New Deal introduced by the Democratic Party during the Great Depression, and supported by the New Deal Coalition – a broad coalition of many different types of voters who all supported the Democratic Party's economic policies. The New Deal Coalition fractured in the mid-1960s and by the mid-1990s the Democrats had lost control of Congress in the "Republican Revolution."

Gerrymandering has also been a feature of politics for the House of Representatives, allowing parties to sometimes retain or gain a majority of seats, even when losing the popular vote nationally.

Following the 2020 elections, Democrats retained their majority in the House, although with reduced seats. After winning two runoff elections in the state of Georgia they got an effective 50/50 tie in the Senate (counting two independents who caucus with the Democrats). This meant the Vice President (Kamala Harris, a Democrat) was allowed to cast a vote as a tie-breaker, in the event of a 50–50 tie.

Presidency[edit]
Main article: United States presidential election

No party has dominated the Presidency since the end of the First Party System in the 1820s. The Democratic-Republican party controlled the Presidency for the longest period (24 years from 1801 until it splintered during and after the election of 1824), and its presidential candidate faced no organized opposition in 1820. Since then no party has had their candidates control the Presidency for more than 20 years in a row (the Democratic Party from 1933 to 1953), and since 1953 no party has controlled the presidency for more than 12 years in a row (the Republican Party from 1981 to 1993). The longest-serving President was Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt who served three consecutive terms from 1933 to 1945. Roosevelt was elected to a fourth term but died two months after inauguration. In 1951, the U.S. ratified the 22nd Amendment which limits a person to two full terms as President, but does not prevent candidates from one party from dominating the Presidency by winning consecutive elections.

The US uses an Electoral College system to elect its President, where votes in low population states have more weight. As a result, it's possible to win the Presidential election while another candidate wins more votes, nationally. In 1876, 1888, 2000 and 2016, a Republican candidate won the election and became President, while a Democrat received more votes.

Southern United States[edit]
Main articles: Solid South and Southern strategy

Historically, the Southern United States was dominated by the Democratic Party, and in particular sub-factions called the Southern Democrats and Solid South. This began prior to the American Civil War but was especially from the end of the Reconstruction Era in 1877 to the election of Republican President Herbert Hoover in 1928, who won five of the eleven former Confederate states. Southern Democrats originally supported the enslavement of African Americans, then after the American Civil War and Reconstruction, supported Jim Crow laws designed to heavily oppress and politically disenfranchise millions of black Americans.

In the 1960s, northern Democrats, including Southern Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson and his predecessor John F. Kennedy, supported the civil rights movement and passage of the Civil Rights Act, which alienated the Southern Democrats. Later, the Republican Party developed the southern strategy to gain support among the newly disaffected Southern voters, by appealing to a smaller federal government and conservative cultural values, such as opposition to abortion. This led to the South eventually becoming dominated overall by the Republican Party towards the end of the 20th century and into the 21st.

Urban-rural divide[edit]
Main article: Urban–rural political divide

In the 21st century, there is increasingly an urban-rural split where large urban areas tend to be dominated by Democrats and rural areas tend to be dominated by Republicans. This tends to hold true despite the overall leanings of the state or territory. That is, rural areas tend to vote Republican even in otherwise Democrat-dominated states, while urban areas tend to vote Democrat even in Republican-dominated states. This trend is increasing over time, with rural areas growing more heavily Republican, and inner city areas growing more heavily Democratic.[13]

Red and blue states[edit]
Main article: Red states and blue states

Some states have been dominated by a single party for a long period of time. States which have a long record of being dominated by one party are often called red or blue states, after the colour representing their dominant party (red for Republicans, blue for Democrats). Some states lie in the middle, not being heavily dominated by either party. States where elections are especially close, are often termed "purple."

Following the 2018 and 2020 elections, the Republican Party continued to hold a majority of state legislatures and a majority of governorships.

Dominated by the Democratic Party:

Dominated by the Republican Party:

Asia and Oceania[edit]

Eurasia[edit]

Europe[edit]

Formerly dominant parties[edit]

North America[edit]

Caribbean and Central America[edit]

South America[edit]

Europe[edit]

Asia[edit]

Africa[edit]

Oceania[edit]

  •  Australia: The Liberal Party (generally in a near-permanent Coalition with the National Party) held power federally from 1949 to 1972 and from 1975 to 1983 (31 out of 34 years). By the scheduled expiry of the 46th Parliament in 2022, the Liberal-National Coalition will have held power for 20 out of the 26 years between 1996 and 2022. Overall from 1949 to 2022, the Liberal Party will have held power for 52 out of the last 73 years. The longest-serving Prime Minister was Robert Menzies, who served from 1939 to 1941 (2 years) as a member of the United Australia Party, and from 1949 to 1966 (16 years) as leader of the Liberal Party.
    •  Northern Territory: The Country Liberal Party held power from the granting of self-government in 1978 to 2001 (23 years).
    •  New South Wales: The Labor Party held power from 1941 to 1965 (24 years), and from 1976 to 1988 and 1995 to 2011 (28 out of 35 years) – in total 52 out of 70 years from 1941 to 2011.
    •  Queensland: The Labor Party held power from 1915 to 1929 and from 1932 to 1957 (39 out of 42 years). The National Party then held power from 1957 to 1989 (32 years). These were facilitated by a Labor-designed malapportionment that favoured rural districts. The National Party under Joh Bjelke-Petersen increased the malapportionment with the Bjelkemander, allowing them to rule alone without the Liberals, and used the police to suppress dissent and opposition from Labor. The National Party dominance was ended by a corruption Inquiry, Bjelke-Petersen was forced to resign in disgrace and police and politicians were charged with crimes. Since 1989, Labor has held government aside from a National Party government 1996–1998 and Liberal-National Party government 2012–2015 (27 years of Labor government out of 32 years).
    •  South Australia: The Liberal and Country League held power from 1933 to 1965 (32 years). The Labor Party held power from 1970 to 1979, from 1982 to 1993 and from 2002 to 2018 (26 out of 38 years).
    •  Tasmania: The Labor Party held power from 1934 to 1969 and from 1972 to 1982 (45 out of 48 years), from 1989 to 1992, and from 1998 to 2014 (16 years) – in total 64 out of 80 years from 1934 to 2014.
    •  Victoria: The Liberal Party held power from 1955 to 1982 (27 years).
    •  Western Australia: The Liberal Party held power from 1947 to 1983 with two one-term interruptions between 1953 and 1956 and 1971 to 1974 (30 out 36 years).
    •  Australian Capital Territory: The Labor Party has held power since 2001 (in coalition with the Greens since 2012), previously holding government between 1989 and 1995 (24 years out of 30 years since self government).
  •  New Zealand: The Liberal Party governed from 1891 to 1912.
  •  Samoa: The Human Rights Protection Party governed from 1982 to 2021.

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Presidents in Singapore are not allowed to belong to any party
  2. ^ a b c The predecessors of the ÖVP are the Christian Social Party ruled from 1907 to the renaming 1933 and the Fatherland Front ruled from 1933 to the Anschluss 1938.
  3. ^ a b Formerly its predecessors PSI (before 1924), PCI, PDS and DS.
  4. ^ Prior to 1942, the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario was formally known as the Liberal-Conservative Association of Ontario.
  5. ^ Formerly its predecessors People's Labor Party (with SHP), People's Democracy Party, Democratic People's Party, Thousand Hope Candidates and Labour, Democracy and Freedom Bloc.

References[edit]

  1. ^ Ostroverkhov, A.A. (2017). "In Searching for Theory of One-Party Dominance: World Experience of Studying Dominant-Party Systems (II)". Politeia. 87 (4): 133–149 (p. 136). doi:10.30570/2078-5089-2017-87-4-133-149.
  2. ^ Ostroverkhov, A.A. (2017). "In Searching for Theory of One-Party Dominance: World Experience of Studying Dominant-Party Systems (I)". Politeia. 86 (3): 136–153 (p. 148). doi:10.30570/2078-5089-2017-86-3-136-153.
  3. ^ Ostroverkhov, A.A. (2017). "In Searching for Theory of One-Party Dominance: World Experience of Studying Dominant-Party Systems (II)". Politeia. 87 (4): 133–149 (p. 137). doi:10.30570/2078-5089-2017-87-4-133-149.
  4. ^ a b c d Suttner, R. (2006), "Party dominance 'theory': Of what value?", Politikon 33 (3), pp. 277–297
  5. ^ Mehler, Andreas; Melber, Henning; Van Walraven, Klaas (2009). Africa Yearbook: Politics, Economy and Society South of the Sahara in 2008. Leiden: Brill. p. 411. ISBN 978-90-04-17811-3.
  6. ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on April 1, 2012. Retrieved April 1, 2012.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) (in English)
  7. ^ Doorenspleet, Renske; Nijzink, Lia (2014). Party Systems and Democracy in Africa. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 174. ISBN 978-1-137-01170-1.
  8. ^ "Botswana's ruling Democratic Party wins general elections". BBC News. BBC. October 26, 2014. Retrieved October 22, 2015.
  9. ^ O'Gorman, Melanie (April 26, 2012). "Why the CCM won't lose: the roots of single-party dominance in Tanzania". Journal of Contemporary African Studies. 30 (2): 313–333. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.410.9369. doi:10.1080/02589001.2012.669566. S2CID 17134713.
  10. ^ https://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/34/37&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTION Archived September 4, 2015, at the Wayback Machine
  11. ^ Canada's 'natural governing party'. CBC News in Depth, December 4, 2006. Retrieved August 10, 2012.
  12. ^ "Liberal Party | The Canadian Encyclopedia". www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca. Retrieved August 20, 2020.
  13. ^ "The Urban-Rural Political Divide Is Growing". Bloomberg. November 7, 2019.
  14. ^ Democracy, Peoples' (June 24, 2007). "West Bengal: How The Left Front And Its Government Emerged". Archived from the original on August 15, 2017.
  15. ^ "Singapore Elections Department – Parliamentary Election Results". Archived from the original on September 10, 2015. Retrieved September 9, 2015.
  16. ^ "TURKEY – AKP ushering in 'dominant-party system', says expert". hurriyetdailynews.com. Retrieved May 30, 2015.
  17. ^ "Turkey Under the AKP: The Era of Dominant-Party Politics". journalofdemocracy.org. January 19, 2012. Retrieved May 30, 2015.
  18. ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on July 14, 2014. Retrieved June 4, 2014.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  19. ^ Dresden, Cornelius Pollmer (August 31, 2014). "CDU sucht nach einem neuen Partner". Sueddeutsche.de.
  20. ^ a b Steve, Paikin (August 4, 2016). "How the Big Blue Machine dominated Ontario politics for more than four decades". TVO. Ontario Educational Communications Authority. Retrieved January 4, 2020.
  21. ^ Malloy, Jonathan (February 2, 2018). "How the 'Big Blue Machine' broke down". The Globe and Mail. The Woodbridge Company. Retrieved January 4, 2020.
  22. ^ "Bundestagswahlen – Baden-Württemberg".
  23. ^ "Wahlen zum Europäischen Parlament in Baden-Württemberg".
  24. ^ "Landtag Bayern 1869–1918".
  25. ^ "Landtagswahlen im Saarland seit 1945".
  26. ^ "Bundestagswahlen – Saarland".
  27. ^ "Wahlen zum Europäischen Parlament im Saarland".
  28. ^ a b Bihari, Mihály (2013). "A magyarországi domináns pártrendszer". Politológia: a politika és a modern állam: pártok és ideológiák (in Hungarian). Budapest: Nemzedékek Tudása Tankönyvkiadó. pp. 291–295. ISBN 9789631976281.
  29. ^ Part 2: Communist take-over, 1946–1949. The Institute for the History of the 1956 Revolution.
  30. ^ "Learning to Lose: Adapting to Democracy in One Party Dominant Systems…". Archived from the original on June 4, 2014.
  31. ^ Stacey, Kiran (May 8, 2015). "Subscribe to read". Financial Times. {{cite news}}: Cite uses generic title (help)
  32. ^ Cairney, Paul; McGarvey, Neil (2013). Scottish Politics. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan Limited. p. 58. ISBN 978-0-230-39046-1.
  33. ^ Garnett, Mark; Lynch, Philip (2007). Exploring British Politics. London: Pearson Education. p. 322. ISBN 978-0-582-89431-0.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dominant-party_system&oldid=1077385967"