Our Political Parties Are Weak

Calvin Coolidge

Spellcaster
Forum Administrator
Honoured Citizen
Citizen
For those of us who have been following the United States Presidential Election (read: all of us), you might remember an organization called the Republican Party. This summer, that party nominated a candidate who the establishment made very clear that they did not want to represent their party. Enough of the Republican electorate, however, had made it clear that they did want him to represent their party. So, the Republican establishment gave into the will of the people and nominated Donald Trump, signaling a shift in party power that will begin to show its true effects in the coming months. Of course, what I just said was oversimplified, and may have left out some of the more stickler-y details about "the will of the people", and related subjects, but the main point here is that the Republican Party was unable to prevent its members from choosing an undesirable candidate (in the eyes of the establishment) to nominate, thus showing that the Republican party is weaker than it once was.

At this point, you might be wondering why I am recapping the story of Donald Trump's nomination to you, and with good reason. I wanted to talk about the power of political parties in Europeia, and figured that starting with a popular example of weakening political party power was as good a place to begin as any. So, without further ado, let's get into this. We have two political parties in this region: the Action Coalition of Europeia (ACE), and the Europeian Progressive Party (EPP). For all intents and purposes, these parties have had very little impact on recent elections, and are not nearly as strong as the more infamous iterations of political parties in Europeia's past (National Conservative Party, Democratic Action Front, and Europeian Action Action Coalition are some examples of powerful parties that come to mind). As we go through our current Presidential election, it seems parties will, again, not have much impact, but that's more to do with our current candidate field, not so much any reflection on the parties themselves. However, I figured it was time to examine why these political parties are failing to make much of an impact on Europeian elections, what a strong party looks like, and then ask if having strong parties is even what we want.

To begin, let's define what we're dealing with. According to the Political Parties Act (2012), "A 'Political Party' is defined as an organisation consisting of members who are united for a common political purpose." If you want to explore more about what that law stipulates parties are, and what it grants them, you can check out this excerpt from another article I wrote about the Political Parties Act in 2014.
This definition is still a little vague, though. Is there a specific number that has to be reached before a group becomes a political party? Also, how long could a party be maintained? These questions, and more, will be answered in the section "Recognition of Political Parties".
3) In order to maintain a registered Political Party, the following conditions must be satisfied:

1. a minimum of three citizens shall be required as members; and

2. a reasonable level of political activity must be maintained.

(4) The registration of Political Parties is subject to evidence that the criteria in s3 would be satisfied upon its formation, and the discretion of the Office of the Supreme Chancellor.

(5) Failure to uphold the criteria of s3, or other activity requiring such intervention as deemed by the Office of the Supreme Chancellor, shall result in the de-registration of the Political Party in question, and the consequent reversal of any benefits granted under s7 of this Act.

(6) Upon petition, such a de-registration may be reversed by a Supreme Chancellor at his discretion, provided that there is reasonable evidence that the criteria of s3 would be satisfied upon its renewed registration.

There's your answer, Europeia. You need at least three citizens, and you have to be "reasonably" active. Whether that means hot naked yoga, or simply a few toe touches every now and then, I'll never know. If either one of those criteria are not met, the Supreme Chancellor has the power to break up your party. If you finally get your act together, though, you can petition to get it back, if the Supreme Chancellor deems you worthy of his favor.

Once you've gone through all the trouble of getting a political party, what sort of perks do you get? The section "Rights of registered Political Parties" explains,
(7) Registered Political Parties shall be entitled to maintain a Europeian subforum, and shall be entitled to restrict access to an internal headquarters through either mask-based access or password protection.

Essentially, you get a bunch of secret stuff that nobody will ever see outside of your party. If that sounds like your idea of fun, then please, the bar mitzvah is across the hall.
So, that's what political parties are in Europeia, but why do we even have parties in the first place? According to most political science textbooks, political parties' main goals are to nominate candidates to public office, win political power through elections, and promote ideas about/enact public policy. This is what separates political parties from other interest groups, who don't run their own candidates for office, and typically seek more specific policy goals than parties.

Now that we have that in our heads, let's look at our political parties now to see if they match that description or reasoning. A cursory glance through both parties' subforums will show you that they are not in the candidate nominating business. While some recent candidates have identified themselves as a representative of their party on the ballot, it's clear they were not officially chosen to represent their party, they just personally identify as a member, and are disclosing that to the electorate. All the parties do, if anything, is endorse an independent candidate later in the election. Technically speaking, then, we don't really have political parties in the region right now, we have political interest groups. Or, we would, if they had a public policy agenda, and they really don't. The ACE abandoned any sort of political platform months ago, and the closest thing the EPP has to any legislative agenda is that they want separation of powers between the Court and the Senate, sometimes. At this point, it should be clear why our current "parties" have little impact on elections.

To truly have an impact on elections, parties need to stand for something, and they need to get people involved. Political parties, if they are being serious, need three parts, according to political scientist V.O.
  • The party-as-electorate, which includes all citizens who identify with the party, whether or not they are registered as party members, so long as they self-identify as a member or vote for the political party in primary or general elections.
  • The party-as-organization, which comprises the institutions, such as the national committees, that administer party affairs and act directly towards the goal of electing candidates to government.
  • The party-in-government is made up of all elected and appointed officials who are affiliated with the party and who further the party’s political goals, such as the President or Speaker.
These three parts need to work in tandem to advance the ideas of the party. V.O. goes on to state "Parties can promote democratic government and facilitate citizenship by aggregating and articulating the interests of citizens and politicians; by organizing coalitions of smaller interest groups; by assisting in coordinating elections; by coordinating the legislative process; and finally, by facilitating collective political action."

And during the election, here's what each part of the political party should be doing:
  • Electorate: Recruit candidates and resources
  • Organization: Selects candidate(s) to represent the party, mobilize voters
  • Government: Work with fellow party members to carry out agenda, try and sway public perception of party's actions during the previous term
The strongest political parties do these things effectively, not just in Europeia, but in the real world, too.

We now have an idea of what weak political parties look like (the parties in the region now), and what strong political parties look like (above). The question now is: which are better for the region? Ultimately, your opinion on this will come down to a few different factors.

First, how you feel about how voters make their decisions. In the real world, political parties often serve as a voting cue to uninformed voters, so they know what they're getting with a candidate when they see a political party listed to the candidate's name. Voters also have a general opinion about how things are going for them, and when things are going well, they vote for the incumbent party, when things aren't going well, they vote for the opposition. That's called retrospective voting, and it's a system that thrives when you have active political parties.

In Europeia, our voting cues are less based on political parties (at least in our current setup), and more based on the candidate's history. This works as a "shortcut" for most "low-information voters" in Europeia who don't read the platforms. They generally know what a person is like, what they stand for, etc. because we have a small community of about thirty to forty active citizens at any given time, so we know each other. Political parties, then, aren't really needed in this area to provide information on what a candidate stands for. Of course, if we get parties that actively pursue an agenda, and have candidates who agree to pursue that agenda, things could change, and that could be another voting cue, so that's not really a problem. On this issue, it's pretty much a wash on whether strong or weak parties benefit the region more, with maybe a slight edge to strong parties, for giving us more information.

Second, parties can also be used to mobilize voters, and direct citizens towards their preferred candidate. Again, however, since we live in a small community, an individual citizen, or a small group of citizens can already mobilize voters in a very effective manner, as we have seen in competitive elections. So, not much need for strong parties, since this job will be done anyway.

Lastly, parties unite candidates in common public policy goals. This is something we don't really see without strong political parties in Europeia. As we saw in the last Senate election, most of the candidates just talked about the same couple of legislative ideas, without much varying opinion, and the candidates that got elected were not really selected because of their opinion or agenda, but their capacity to legislate effectively (whatever that means to you). In Presidential elections, since there are only two choices, the differences in opinion and agenda are usually rather clear, so voters typically vote for President based on a mix of their perception of the candidates' ability to govern effectively, as well as their public policy agenda.

With strong political parties, however, public policy agendas will shift to the forefront of any campaign, as there will be more of a clash of opposing opinions, and voters will likely want to select candidates who agree with their beliefs over candidates that don't, all else being equal (though the case could certainly be made that people may want a "balanced Senate", or whatever, that will likely fade as partisan politics heat up, and Senators will need a majority of like-minded Senators to pass anything through, particularly if there is a President from the opposing party).

That's what a strong political party region should shift into, if the parties truly commit to being "strong" political parties, who actively try and enact their agenda, which is fundamentally different from another party's. Some may find the partisanship that will arise out of this scenario to be in the region's best interest, as it will encourage more lively discussions over differing beliefs than what we have now, which mostly involves widespread agreement on most issues, with a few minor squabbles here and there. Those opposed to this system may worry that there are not enough important issues in Europeia to reasonably disagree on to such an extent, and may feel that the divisiveness will just lead to needless gridlock, that will end up doing more harm than good for the public. Both opinions have merit, and both certainly exist in the region. Those who favor weak parties are living in an ideal situation right now, though recent Senate battles and calls for more disagreement may be spreading the seeds for a political revolution in the near future.

What will truly end up happening? I can't say for sure, but there is definitely a discussion to be had there. That's all for now, thank you for reading this article. I highly encourage readers to get involved in the discussion below, and hope that we are able to come up with some sort of bearing on where our region's collective head is at. Until next time, this is Calvin Coolidge, powdering his Whig.
 
The last two significant party forces were run for the implementation of specific agendae by specific people, which, once fulfilled or abandoned, ceased to animate the parties with any sort of zeal.

Good article, Calvin.
 
I dont support political parties for one very simple reason: I havent been allowed to join one for the longest time. Ive either been AG or on the Court, both of which are legally required not to be a member of a party.
 
Drecq said:
I dont support political parties for one very simple reason: I havent been allowed to join one for the longest time. Ive either been AG or on the Court, both of which are legally required not to be a member of a party.
Which is... very silly, because our parties do diddly squat.

I've always thought political parties could greatly expand our political discourse, and serve to formalize the existing campaign processes and political coordination, but inclusion is important to Europeians, and too many individuals fear that parties would divide our community. Frankly, I'd bet they're right.

Still though, anyone who pays attention will notice certain people typically vote the same way, deliberately or not. You might say that our real parties are these invisible webs.
 
One of the best media pieces in a while.
 
A very good article. Personally I'd lover to see a party system here but I just can't see it happening due to the reasons you'very mentioned.
 
A political party based around views of either limited government control or one of more expanded power could potentially work but "single issue" parties flame out after their cause has been resolved/defeated and a lot of other historical parties have been more social in nature
 
Back
Top