Political Leaders Beyond Party Politics

Musella, Fortunato

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-59348-7

Cited by 37 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many former democratic leaders now enjoy glorious afterlives, which makes it easier for incumbent leaders to step down from a powerful and prestigious electoral office (see, for example, Theakston and De Vries, 2012). It has even been suspected that some political power holders may (mis)use their political status while in office for preparing their ‘new life’ in business (see Musella, 2018: ch. 5).…”

Section: Leadership Succession In Democratic and Non-democratic Regimmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership succession in politics: The democracy/autocracy divide revisited

Helms

2020

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Leadership succession marks a truly ubiquitous phenomenon with manifold and wide-ranging implications, which explains the major attention that issues of succession have received in the international literature. Most contributions to the field continue, however, to focus on political succession in either democratic or non-democratic regimes. This article develops an integrated perspective on key aspects of leadership succession at the level of political chief executives in democracies and autocracies. A comparative assessment across time and space reveals several features that challenge established notions, and stereotypes, of leadership succession in democratic and autocratic regimes. The empirical ambivalences identified suggest that the way leaders come to and fall from power should be made a more explicit part of conceptualisations of political regimes, and comparative evaluations of their respective democratic quality.

show abstract

Section: Leadership Succession In Democratic and Non-democratic Regimmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership succession in politics: The democracy/autocracy divide revisited

Helms

2020

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The plebiscitarianism inherent in personalization of top leadership is an expression of a transformed configuration of the political party with its power concentrated in the leader. Here, we can observe the transition from a labour-intensive to a capitalintensive mode (i.e., a decreasing role of membership and a growing role of professional staff in electoral campaigns), verticalized decision-making processes, the declining relevance of middle managers, increased financial resources directly available to the leader, and cronyism developing within the party due to non-top personalization within the organization, especially in locally elected parties (Ignazi, 2017;Musella, 2018). It is precisely in these transformation processes that tensions arise between the procedural dimension of democracy and the increased relevance, trust, and legitimacy borne by individual political interpreters.…”

Section: Plebiscitarian Politics and New Political Partiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Platform Party between Digital Activism and Hyper-Leadership: The Reshaping of the Public Sphere

Blasio

Viviani

2020

MaC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The so-called crisis of representation has formed the theoretical framework of many studies on media and democracy of the past thirty years. Many researches have highlighted the crisis of legitimacy and credibility of the ‘traditional’ parties (Katz & Mair, 2018) and communication was considered, at the same time, one of the causes of acceleration towards post-representative politics (Keane, 2013) but also an indispensable tool for re-connecting citizens to politics. Various phenomena have developed within this framework: a) the birth of political aggregations as a result of mobilization in the digital ecosystem; b) the development of digital platforms for democratic participation; c) the birth of parties defined as ‘digital’ or ‘platform’; and d) the growing centrality of digital political activism, both as a phenomenon within the digital communicative ecosystem (also in the context of social media) and as a result of the transformation of social movements. This article studies the role of platform parties as a space for the emergence of authoritarian tendencies (hyper-leadership) but also as an organizational opportunity for the development of new forms of digital activism. In particular, the article presents a research on the use of digital platforms (and their political and organizational consequences) by political parties in Italy, France, and Spain. The study shows the relationships between the evolution of digital ecosystems and the way in which political organization is organised, also highlighting how the new forms of mobilization and aggregation have opened up different yet interconnected public spaces.

show abstract

“…Moreover, parties have less to say vis-à-vis voters. The changes that have affected voters and the candidates–leader relationship have been labelled as personalisation (Blondel et al, 2009; Garzia, 2014; Karvonen, 2010; McAllister, 1996, 2007; Mughan, 2000; Musella, 2018), and different reasons have been considered as the main explanatory variables. This perspective concerns mainly the leader, and therefore, potentially, the presidents.…”

Section: The Presidential Party (Pp)mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Presidential Party: A Theoretical Framework for Comparative Analysis

Passarelli

2019

Political Studies Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Presidents of the Republic are crucial actors in both presidential and semi-presidential regimes. Despite the fact that these two systems represent the majority of all the world’s political systems, the focus on the head of state has only relatively recently been covered comparatively and systematically. Although big gaps still persist in relation to many aspects of ‘presidential power’, advances have been made, and the ‘presidential’ world has been analysed with more sophisticated tools and concepts. However, the ‘presidential party’ remains relatively understudied at both the theoretical and the empirical levels. The ‘party of the president’ is the key political actor that affects presidential activity during his or her mandate. The article aims to present a theoretical framework and a potential guideline for comparative studies. Starting from a critical review of Shugart and Carey’s seminal book, I propose a conceptualisation of the presidential party and the theoretical possible effects of it on the legislature, which might be useful for further empirical analysis.

show abstract

Political Leaders Beyond Party Politics

Cited by 37 publications

References 0 publications

Leadership succession in politics: The democracy/autocracy divide revisited

Leadership succession in politics: The democracy/autocracy divide revisited

Platform Party between Digital Activism and Hyper-Leadership: The Reshaping of the Public Sphere

The Presidential Party: A Theoretical Framework for Comparative Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About