The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics (232 page)

 
Back
  -  
 
New Search

Originally simply a synonym for ‘state’, as in the (Latin and) English title of
Plato's
Republic
, from the seventeenth century, the term came to mean a state without a king. Some definitions insist that only those states which have provisions for the (direct or indirect) election of the head of state may properly be called republics.
Madison
distinguished between a republic (‘a government in which the scheme of representation takes place’) and a democracy (‘a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person’). However, almost every state in the world which does not have a monarchy calls itself a republic, and this usage overwhelms nice distinctions.

 
Back
  -  
 
New Search

The term has had a very confusing history. Around 1800 the party system coalesced into Federalists and Democratic-Republicans. Broadly, the Federalists were urban and trade-oriented, while the Democratic-Republicans were rural and oriented towards the interests of small farmers. The Democratic-Republicans became the
Democratic Party
in 1828, Their opponents changed label from Federalist to Whig in the 1820s but this did not improve their fortunes. They took on the label Republican as a deliberate coinage (probably because like Cortina or Escort it had vaguely good connotations without offending anybody) when the anti-Democrat forces coalesced on an anti-slavery campaign in 1854. The Republican victory in the presidential election of 1860 ( see
Lincoln
) and the ensuing Union victory in the Civil War led to Republican dominance until 1876. The pact of that year, in which the Republicans were allowed to win a disputed presidential election on condition that federal forces withdrew from the South ( see
civil rights
), reinstated the Democratic hegemony in the South. At federal level, the Republicans were again hegemonic from 1896 to 1932 because the Democratic Party was captured by sectional interests. This was overturned by the
New Deal
coalition, which lasted until the 1960s. In the late 1960s some commentators predicted
The Emerging Republican Majority
(title of a book by K. Phillips , 1970), but no coherent majority has emerged, at least up until the Republican capture of both houses of Congress in 1994.
Ideologically, the Republican Party favours business and opposes welfare. Because US parties are so weak and open, it is hard to pin any other ideological label on to it. A large but not dominant faction attempts to hitch the party to the values of
Christian fundamentalism
. The party is sometimes known by the acronym GOP (for Grand Old Party). Its symbol is the elephant.

 
Back
  -  
 
New Search

 
Back
  -  
 
New Search

The process by which organizations replace or endorse existing officers. In political parties interest focuses on reselection for parliamentary candidates by local constituency parties. Three types of reselection are found: first, reselection by a constituency party elected committee on a discretionary basis; secondly, reselection by an electoral college composed of delegates of affiliated groups within the constituency party on a mandatory basis prior to each general election; and thirdly, reselection by all local constituency party members on the basis of the principle of one member one vote. The first type is common in parties which are élitist in values, prefer to see their candidates as representatives rather than as delegates, and seek longevity in candidate service. The British Conservative Party takes this approach, meaning that candidates are generally very secure. The second type is common in parties which prefer to see their candidates more as delegates than as representatives, and duly are prepared to sit in judgement on the parliamentary performances of those who have become MPs and deselect them as candidates for the next election if they have failed to reflect local party interests. The British Labour Party took this approach between 1981 and 1990 as a result of successful efforts by its left wing, strong in the constituency parties, to have a more decisive influence over MPs than the parliamentary party leadership, perceived as right-wing. However, since 1983 there has been a marked decline of the left in the party ( see e.g. Militant). Whilst deselections have occurred, most constituency parties allow their MPs considerable autonomy. The Labour Party switched to the third type at the 1993 party conference. This reflects desires to turn the party into a mass membership party, in which greater participatory democracy in reselection is achieved as an end in itself, and, so it is thought, without imposing constraints upon the autonomy of the nominated representative. The Liberal Democrats have always followed the third principle. For the position in the United States, see also
primary elections
.
JBr 

 
Back
  -  
 
New Search