Advertisement

Developing a Party System and Democratic Consolidation

  • Huang Teh-fu
  • Yu Ching-hsin
Part of the St Antony’s book series

Abstract

The stability of a democracy depends on the extent to which electoral competition between political parties is institutionalized. Robert Dahl has claimed that political democratization of authoritarian regimes consists mainly in institutionalizing the opposition party’s participation and competition in the political arena.1 There is no question that the opposition plays an important role in ending authoritarian rule. To maintain short-term political stability and effective governance, authoritarian regimes usually try to repress or restrict the scope of political competition. Even when saddled with rigid regulations and harsh restrictions, however, electoral competition provides the opposition with opportunities to mobilize and organize. Periodic elections or campaigns institute a linkage between the opposition and the masses, providing ample opportunities for grass-roots activity. As a result, electoral competition contributes to the development of political opposition and the weakening of authoritarian regimes, leading to their transition to democracy.

Keywords

Authoritarian Regime Party System Democratic Progressive Party Local Election Electoral Competition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Robert A. Dahl, Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1971), 4–14.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Teh-fu Huang, The Democratic Progressive Party and Political Democratization in Taiwan (Min Chu Chin Pu Tang Yu Taiwan Cheng Chih Min Chu Hua) (in Chinese) (Taipei: Taiwan Elite, 1992), 167–71; Teh-fu Huang, ‘Electoral Systems and Party Competition: An Investigation on Electoral Competition after the Lifting of Martial Law in Taiwan (Shuan Chu Chih Tu Yu Cheng Tang Ching Cheng: Taiwan Chieh Yen Hou Cheng Tang Ching Cheng Te Tiao Cha)’, Theory and Policy 7 (August 1993), 3–21 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Teh-fu Huang, ‘Local Factions, Party Competition, and Political Democratization in Taiwan’, Journal of National Chengchi University 61 (June 1990), 723–45.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Teh-fu Huang, ‘Electoral Competition and the Evolution of the Kuomintang’, Issues & Studies 31 (May 1995), 91–120.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    Michael Chang, Teh-fu Huang, Yun-han Chu, and Chungli Hsu, A Study of the ‘Self-help’ Incidents in the Taiwan Area during the 1980s (Taipei: The Council on Research, Development and Evaluation, Executive Yuan, 1991).Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    Giovanni Sartori, Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1976), 123.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    Samuel P. Huntington, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991), 266–8.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    Donald L. Horowitz, Ethnic Groups in Conflict (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1985), 331–2.Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    Donald L. Horowitz, ‘Democracy in Divided Societies’ , Journal of Democracy 4 (October, 1993), 18–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 11.
    Dandkwart A. Rostow, ‘Transitions to Democracy: Toward a Dynamic Model’, Comparative Politics 2 (April 1970): 350–2.Google Scholar
  11. 13.
    Hill Gates, ‘Ethnicity and Social Class’, in Emily M. Ahern and Hill Gates, (eds), The Anthropology of Taiwanese Society (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1981), 267.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Huang Teh-fu
  • Yu Ching-hsin

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations