In recent elections, ‘progressives’ in centre-left parties have advocated for more democratised processes of candidate selection. We test whether more inclusive and decentralised selectorates align with higher numbers of progressive candidates nominated in national legislative elections by centre-left parties across three advanced western democracies between 2017 and 2021. In the Labour Party, more centralised selectorates aligned with higher numbers of progressives selected. For the SPD, we report null findings, likely due to additional incentives for factional co-operation in a multi-party system. In our most decentralised case, the Democratic Party, selection of progressives was congruent with district partisanship rather than selectorate inclusivity, with progressives more commonly selected in safe rather than competitive or unfavoured districts. This relationship was not present in our other cases. These findings highlight the importance of the decentralisation dimension for the factional allegiance of legislative candidates nominated.
Social Democratic parties have long been steady pioneers of European democracy, but over the past decade they have suffered a humiliating collapse. It is commonly asserted that European countries have entered a classless society. Subsequently, mainstream left parties adopted broad electoral strategies to appeal widely to the median voter, exemplified by the Blair-Schröder Third Way. Electoral backlash following the British and German social democratic party’s 1990s neoliberal shift, their approach to globalization as well as their handling of the financial crisis and refugee crisis have eroded their popularity. Subsequent frustration with the political establishment is exemplified by the cultural backlash thesis. However, a countermovement signified by postmaterialism and social liberalism calls for transformative social and political change. The two convictions clash on binary issues, exacerbating a righteous divide between sociocultural liberals and conservatives, recently popularized as the “anywheres” and the “somewheres”. This paper puts forth the necessity for social democratic parties to re-engage with the cleavage politics of today. This is particularly important as today’s cleavages are largely ideologically driven. Questions of electoral strategy, ideological positioning and mobilisation tactics are contested intra-party. Attention is paid to Corbyn’s Labour, whose move towards traditionalism at first earned electoral support, only to be discredited in 2019. In comparison, the German SPD embraced centrism in 2017 and were penalized for it. They must now respond and offer a strategic alternative following competition from the Greens and Die Linke.
When exploring assessments of factionalism, there is the tendency to rely on quantitative assessments based upon an institutionalised and consciously organised group. However, to rely solely on the assessment of factionalism as such undermines and dismisses much of the intra-party dialogue which facilitates, encourages or could undermine party cohesion and unity. Quantitative analysis can rely on quite static understandings of the faction; however, this research understands factionalism as dynamic and changeable dependent on a range of internal and external variables. The fluidity of the faction is demonstrated in the ways in which the faction can adopt or drop ideological positions dependent on the appetite of intra-party groups and the electorate. Its dynamism is also reflected through the different typologies of factions that exist. The dynamic forms that the faction take are exemplified through the case study analysis of the Labour Party within the UK. The Labour Party also provides an interesting analysis in understanding the wide range of external factors that factions must negotiate. This includes, but is not limited to, the changing ways in which we understand party allegiance, identity and voting patterns. Factionalism is ultimately an interpersonal event, and to accurately capture this detail, qualitative assessments are necessary.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.