Abstract
The most noticeable feature of authoritarian party structures is that the local party actors are subordinate to the decisions of their party leaders. In this respect, the starting point of this study has been to understand why the local party actors choose to accept such domination by their leaders or whether they ever attempt to change it. Solving this puzzle required a closer analysis of the internal party dynamics in authoritarian party structures, and thus this study, first, attempted to theorize authoritarian party governance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
See for instance the reports TESAV [Toplumsal, Ekonomik, Siyasal Araştırmalar Vakfı], Siyasi Partiler ve Demokrasi Sempozyumu: 17 Haziran 2005 (Ankara: TESAV); TESAV, Siyasi Partiler ve Seçim Kaunlarinda Değişiklik Önerileri Sempozyumu: 18–19 Şubat 2005 (Ankara: TESAV, 2005); TOBB [Türkiye Odalar ve Borsalar Birliği]; and Siyasi Partiler ve Seçim Kanunları Önerisi (Ankara: TOBB, 2000).
Mansur Çelik, “Yenilginin Sorumlusu Bulundu,” Milliyet, August 3, 2007, accessed April 8, 2008, http://www.milliyet.com.tr/2007/08/03/siyaset/siy03.html
Mahmut Övür, “Önseçim CHP’de 11 Nisan Depremini Engelledi,” Sabah, April 5, 2011, accessed May 2, 2011, http://www.sabah.com.tr/Yazarlar/ovur/2011/04/05/onsecim-chpde-11-nisan-depremini-engelledi.
Scott Mainwaring and Timothy Scully, eds., Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995).
Freedom House, “Freedom in the World,” accessed August 10, 2009, http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=363&year=2009
Timothy R. Scully, “Reconstituting Party Politics in Chile,” in Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America, ed. Scott Mainwaring et al. (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995), 126.
Omar Sanchez, “Transformation and Decay: The De-Institutionalisation of Party Systems in South America,” Third World Quarterly 29 (2008): 315–337.
Weingast, “Congressional Bureaucratic System,” 153; and Seth Goldstein, “Party Leaders, Power and Change,” Party Politics 8 (2002): 327–348.
Copyright information
© 2011 Pelin Ayan Musil
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Musil, P.A. (2011). Conclusions, Implications, Future Studies. In: Authoritarian Party Structures and Democratic Political Setting in Turkey. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137015853_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137015853_8
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-34100-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-01585-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)