The Study of Party Factions as Competitive Political Organizations

Abstract

Downloaded from were contemporaries of the initial emergence of parties; on the contrary, antiparty views persisted until early in the twentieth century, although many basic themes and underlying assumptions underwent changes When the competitive politics of partisan groups first became the subject of hostile commentary, little distinction was made between &dquo;party&dquo; and &dquo;faction.&dquo; The Founding Fathers were apt to use the terms interchangeably, referring to what was to them a single phenomenon. Thus Madison, in his strongly worded objections of Federalist No. 10, most often referred to &dquo;faction&dquo; and the &dquo;spirit of faction,&dquo; but occasionally also to &dquo;party,&dquo; and in some instances to &dquo;the spirit of party and faction.&dquo; Washington, while most often identifying party as the object of his warning, also alternately spoke of &dquo;party&dquo; and &dquo;faction.&dquo; Because these men and their contemporaries did not have two distinct &dquo;party&dquo; and &dquo;faction&dquo; forms of politics before them, they could and did use the two terms as synonyms.3As political parties emerged and developed into distinct forms of political organization, the notion of &dquo;party&dquo; has outgrown early attitudes of opprobrium. With the acceptability of the legitimacy of political parties has come more objective consideration of party politics; this can in no better way be underscored than in noting the status which the concept of &dquo;party system&dquo; has achieved, together with its various subclassifications, such as &dquo;two-party system,&dquo; &dquo;multi-party system,&dquo; &dquo;dominant-party system,&dquo; etc. We may point also to a parallel and more recent evolution in attitudes toward interest groups. Hostile reactions have widely attended public discussions of &dquo;pressure groups,&dquo; in the nineteenth century and much of the present century. There has been a widespread tendency in both Europe and America to question the propriety of such inherently &dquo;selfish&dquo; groups for the political order. In the words of Professor Eldersveld, &dquo;they were considered by scholars as well as muckrakers, as engaged in questionable techniques and pursuing questionable goals. They were not considered as sanctioned by the community nor as having a legitimate regime status.&dquo;¢ In recent decades, however, interest groups ibid., pp. 26-41.

Public Policy and Governance: Some Thoughts on Its Elements

“…The congress can mediate to assess, on the representation of popular wills, the nominees to safeguard from any arbitrary or prejudicial exercise of appointment power. An open forum of congress offers the objective chance to evaluate nominees, which works to chill a secret or authoritative inside trade within the executive (Belloni, F. P., & Beller, D. C., 1976). The institution of congressional hearing enhances a political orientation as well as recognition of the public by democratic and intelligent way of congressional investigation.…”

“…Specifically, we can exclude any troubling figures to be appointed. It is certainly against the will of people provided if incompetent, law breaching, professionally unethical or other turbulent nominees assume the key responsibility of government (Belloni, F. P., & Beller, D. C., 1976). It has worked fairly modest over our nowadays practice.…”

“…The ruling Saenuri party as well as opposing democratic party have a common adherence for welfare and fair distributive system. Saenuri party often had been considered a liberal and conservative tone of political ideology, however, that context fairly diminished on the occasion of various recent elections (Belloni, F. P., & Beller, D. C., 1976). Some critique, thus, attributed a party politics in Korea as one of populist democracy.…”

“…Thus a faction or tendency generally less factors Korean party politics. Despite this, the context has same attributes as that of US southern states (Belloni, F. P., & Beller, D. C., 1976). The election times allow the manifestations of faction by divulging a genuine interest of politicians.…”

“…It would be scarce for the members to have a tendency on specific public issues. Their political fate on election, however, poses a serious challenge to adhere with their faction and leaders (Belloni, F. P., & Beller, D. C., 1976). Interestingly, the big issue of economic justice, in some unusual influence, induced a kind of faction in the Saenuri party.…”