The Relative Autonomy of Party Practices: A Counterfactual Analysis of Left Party Ascendancy in Kerala, India, 1934–1940

Desai, Manali

doi:10.1086/367919

Cited by 31 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, my method emphasizes how associationism should be understood in terms of the specific historical trajectories through which authoritarian regimes consolidated in Spain and Italy in the early 1920s. This methodological strategy uses possibilities intrinsic to the historical sequences themselves to establish the importance of the conditions identified in the comparative section of the essay (Desai 2002;Elster 1978:175-232;Moore 1966:108-10;Moore 1978:385-91;Weber 1949:172;Zeitlin 1984:18-20). This analysis produces a different type of generalization than a standard Millian theory of explanation would demand.…”

Section: Ca As Se E S Se El Le Ec Ct Ti Io On N a An Nd D M Me Et Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Civic Associations and Authoritarian Regimes in Interwar Europe: Italy and Spain in Comparative Perspective

Riley

2005

Am Sociol Rev

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What is the relationship between civic associations and authoritarian regimes? While Tocquevillian theories have concentrated mostly on the connection between civic associationism and democracy, this article develops a Gramscian approach, suggesting that a strong associational sphere can facilitate the development of authoritarian parties and hegemonic authoritarian regimes. Two countries are used for comparison, Italy from 1870 to 1926 and Spain from 1876 to 1926. The argument here is that the strength of the associational sphere in north-central Italy provided organizational resources to the fascist movement and then party. In turn, the formation of the party was a key reason why the Italian regime developed as a hegemonic authoritarian regime. The absence of a strong associational sphere in Spain explains why that regime developed as an economic corporate dictatorship, despite many similarities between the two cases.

show abstract

Section: Ca As Se E S Se El Le Ec Ct Ti Io On N a An Nd D M Me Et Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Civic Associations and Authoritarian Regimes in Interwar Europe: Italy and Spain in Comparative Perspective

Riley

2005

Am Sociol Rev

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first is the "political articulation" mechanism (see De Leon et al 2009 for a full discussion), and the second is the duopoly mechanism. Together they form the theoretical case for what Manali Desai (2002) calls the "relative autonomy" of parties. The political articulation mechanism emphasizes how parties shape the electorate, reversing the causal flow posited by the electorate and class models.…”

Section: Theory and Analytic Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The political articulation mechanism emphasizes how parties shape the electorate, reversing the causal flow posited by the electorate and class models. Parties do not merely reflect social cleavages; they can reproduce, augment, and even develop certain cleavages while downplaying, bridging, or overcoming other divides (De Leon 2008;De Leon et al 2009;Desai 2002;Sar-tori 1969;Schattschneider 1960). Rogers M. Smith (1997: 9) argues that to rule effectively political actors "must find ways to persuade the people they aspire to govern that they are a 'people.'"…”

Section: Theory and Analytic Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The theoretical goal of the analysis is to demonstrate just how much the "relative autonomy" of parties (Desai 2002) mattered to patterns of racial closure in the nineteenth-century United States. Before commencing with the historical analysis of these three developments therefore, it is necessary to specify both the theoretical logic of party autonomy and the analytic strategy for identifying when this party autonomy matters.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Party Matters: Racial Closure in the Nineteenth-Century United States

Hiers¹

2013

Social Science History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The validity of this latter claim is attested by the fact that empirical and theoretical works hailing from a remarkable range of 3 Bourdieu's own attempt to go beyond Sartrean subjectivism and Levi-Straussian objectivism in Outline of a Theory of Practice (1977;French original: 1972) and in the later Logic of Practice (1990a;French original: 1980) during the same period (1972)(1973)(1974)(1975)(1976)(1977)(1978)(1979)(1980), while having acquired equally influential status of late was not as immediately influential in Anglophone sociology as Giddens. methodological and substantive persuasions as well as subfields of study-e.g., criminology, social psychology, historical sociology, sociology of organizations, sociology of religion, social movements, political sociology-in contemporary sociology take Giddens's conceptualization of structure-or the related notion of "structuration"-as the centerpiece of their theoretical orientation and empirical contribution (see for instance , Beisel 1993;Beisel and Kay 2004;Blair-Loy 1999;Desai 2002;Gerteis 2002;Heimer 1997;Logan 1996;Neuhouser 1998;Pedriana and Stryker 1994;Ridgeway et al 1998;Sherkat 1998;Sherkat and Ellison 1997;Smilde 2005;Stryker 1994;Young 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond the antinomies of structure: Levi-Strauss, Giddens, Bourdieu, and Sewell

Ližardo

2010

Theor Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, I attempt to address some enduring problems in formulation and practical use of the notion of structure in contemporary social science. I begin by revisiting the question of the fidelity of Anthony Giddens' appropriation of the idea of structure with respect to Levi-Strauss. This requires a reconsideration of Levi-Strauss' original conceptualization of "social structure" which I argue is a sort of "methodological structuralism" that stands sharply opposed to Giddens' ontological reconceptualization of the notion. I go on to show that Bourdieu's contemporaneous critique of Levi-Strauss is best understood as an attempt to recover rather than reject the central implication of Levi-Strauss' methodological structuralism, which puts Bourdieu and Giddens on clearly distinct camps in terms of their approach toward the idea of structure. To demonstrate the-insurmountable-conceptual difficulties inherent in the ontological approach, I proceed by critically examining what I consider to be the most influential attempt to resolve the ambiguities in Giddens structuration theory: Sewell's argument for the "duality of structure." I show that by retaining Giddens' ontological focus, Sewell ends up with a notion of structure that is at its very core "anti-structuralist" or only structuralist in a weak sense. I close by considering the implications of the analysis for the possibility of developing the rather neglected "methodological structuralist" legacy in contemporary social analysis.The notion of structure and the associated concept of "social structure" have been widely acknowledged since the origins of sociology as a scientific discipline to be an indispensable analytic tool. The problem of structure was salient in the minds of the early twentieth-century founders of American sociology who noted with despair how Theor Soc (2010) 39:651-688

show abstract

The Relative Autonomy of Party Practices: A Counterfactual Analysis of Left Party Ascendancy in Kerala, India, 1934–1940

Cited by 31 publications

References 34 publications

Civic Associations and Authoritarian Regimes in Interwar Europe: Italy and Spain in Comparative Perspective

Civic Associations and Authoritarian Regimes in Interwar Europe: Italy and Spain in Comparative Perspective

Party Matters: Racial Closure in the Nineteenth-Century United States

Beyond the antinomies of structure: Levi-Strauss, Giddens, Bourdieu, and Sewell

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About