Conceptual and Methodological Aspects of New Political Parties’ Research Cover Image
  • Price 4.50 €

Konceptuální a metodologické aspekty výzkumu nových politických stran
Conceptual and Methodological Aspects of New Political Parties’ Research

Author(s): Daniel Šárovec
Subject(s): Politics / Political Sciences
Published by: Česká společnost pro politické vědy
Keywords: new political parties; newness; party system; Czech Republic

Summary/Abstract: The article Conceptual and Methodological Aspects of New Political Parties’ Research focuses on the issue of new political parties, especially in terms of theoretical debate. In general, based on the current state of knowledge, it can be said that every political party is new at the time of its inception, but not every political party meets the relevant characteristics of novelty according to the related theoretical concepts. Many authors who deal with this topic agree with this.The field of research regarding new political parties has been relevant in the context of a broader research of political parties since the second half of the 20th century, especially in the context of so-called post-material topics. Approaches to research by new political parties are diverse and often focus on other aspects of research. For this reason, a group of new political parties is not perceived as an independent "party family", but rather as a particular overarching concept, which is further developed in the appropriate direction by various authors. To date, new texts are continually being created that focus on this topic from multiple angles. This text reflects some of the latest approaches and outlines the relevant theoretical overlaps that can be adequately sought in the context of the study of new political parties.Based on the study and critical reading of analyses focusing on the phenomenon of new political parties, the three main (and not exclusively single) conceptual and methodological questions can be deduced more generally, which are significant and in principle inevitable within the given topic. These are (1) ambiguity in the definition approach, (2) variability of individual analytical frameworks and (3) a question of (dis)continuity of individual actors. In the case of these difficulties, the theoretical debate focuses on the presentation of various variants of how to approach ambiguous starting points.In terms of definitions, the term new political party is subordinate to the broader term political party. However, in practice several different views on this concept clash, and this must be considered in a further analysis. This situation then determines the individual levels of new political parties’ research logically. Another problematic tension aspect is to be found between concepts such as traditional/established/old parties × pseudo-new parties × new parties and genuinely new parties. The variability of individual analytical frameworks is decisive in this respect mainly because it is necessary to distinguish between the creation of a new entity and the possible subsequent success of the electoral entity. Although these levels can be very closely linked, the two stages are subject to different principles. It is also important to follow other theoretical concepts, such as memberless parties.When monitoring and analysing development continuity, it is also often possible to ask how to classify specific new political actors. It is often difficult to determine whether it is a genuinely new entity, a spin-off formation, or whether, for example, a new formal entity is the result of a merger of two or more existing entities. The individual models show that there is no consensus in the approaches to new party research on how to classify these problematic cases accurately in terms of clarity and straightforwardness. The chosen theoretical framework of the analysis can naturally bring different findings. The issue regarding the differences between the political science aspects of research and the legislative ones is equally important. Although legislation may differ significantly across countries, the conceptual aspects of political science can be applied without distinction, possibly with partial modifications. The difference between novelty as a dynamic and dichotomous variable is then, to a certain extent, another determining feature of how authors can approach this phenomenon’s analysis.Within the outline of problematic aspects of the study of new political parties in the Czech party system, two points that have not been debated much so far were chosen. The first is the Register of Political Parties and Movements, and the other is the declared versus real novelty of some Czech political entities.The Register of Political Parties and Movements offers the possibility to search for a specific political party either by name or by identification number. However, a party’s name should be accurate; otherwise the required entry in the Register may not be found. Other categories are type and condition. If it is not apparent during the search whether the searched subject is registered as a political party or as a political movement, then the surest choice is to click on both variants. The same applies in case of any ambiguities concerning the current state of the searched subject.In the user interface, it is necessary to write the name of the searched subject or the identification number. At the same time, relevant subcategories such as a type (a political party or political movement) and status (active, abolished parties and movements, suspended activities, deletion from the Register) must be strictly adhered to. If the person interested in information from the Register is unsure about what to choose, marking all the mentioned subcategories is this best recommendation.Working with the Register of Political Parties and Movements has shown that if a political party changes key information such as its name as part of its registration, it is difficult to trace earlier names. Although the Register records, for example, the dates of amendments to the Articles of Association, it does not offer their specific wording. From individual actors, it is hard to analyse the continuity and discontinuity of the party organisation with the help of this publicly available data source.The last subchapter focuses on an insight into the trajectories of more or less known or important actors of the Czech party system. Attention is paid to entities such as LIDEM – Liberální demokraté (LIDEM – Liberal Democrats), Věci veřejné (Public Affairs, VV), Moravská a Slezská pirátská strana (Moravian and Silesian Pirate Party, MS Piráti), Svoboda a přímá demokracie (Freedom and Direct Democracy, SPD), Politické hnutí PRO 2016 (Political movement PRO 2016), TOP 09, iČesko (iCzechia), Kozí alternativa (Goat Alternative), Hlas (Voice), Trikolóra hnutí občanů (Tricolour Citizens' Movement), Národní socialisté – levice 21. století (National Socialists –21st Century Left), Strana Práv Občanů ZEMANOVCI (Party of Civic Rights – Zeman's people) or List Jaromíra Soukupa (Jaromír Soukup’s List).It turned out that it is precisely the appropriately chosen definition and theoretical framework for the analysis of novelty that subsequently generates the relevant conclusions. And although it is empirically evident what development these actors went through, it is certainly not clear how exactly, reliably and straightforwardly typologize them in the context of their declared or real novelty.This discussion paper aims to provide further insight into the ongoing fruitful debate on approaches to exploring new political parties. Although the text defines the sub-topics of the research, it is certainly not a limited and final list. The article’s intentions are focused on the broader context of individual pitfalls and the introduction of various authorial approaches. The consultative nature of the text brings new partial findings, especially to the Czech environment, and also points to the debate that has taken place so far.

  • Issue Year: 26/2020
  • Issue No: 1
  • Page Range: 67-86
  • Page Count: 20
  • Language: Czech