The Trend Towards Partyless Democracy

Technological advancements and world events in recent decades, certainly in Western democracies, have overseen significant changes in previously established political parties (Baumgartner, Jones, 2010, p.18). This trend conveys we are heading towards a new era of partyless democracy (Cooper, Hurley, 1979, p.15). Mair notes that partyless democracy is what occurs when parties “become so disconnected from the wider society, and pursue a form of competition that is so lacking in meaning, that they no longer seem capable of sustaining democracy in its present form” (Accetti, Wolkenstein, 2017, p.2). To analyse whether partyless democracy may become a norm in the future, it is useful to examine the patterns of countries who have seen major shifts in this field. The UK and the US are therefore valuable examples; they are two of the most established democracies in the world, and throughout the twentieth century, there was a general consensus that both countries encompassed two-party systems with a strong sense of national party affiliation (Bershidsky, 2019). This, juxtaposed with what we are now seeing in both countries, clearly suggests that we are headed towards a partyless democracy as citizens are becoming disillusioned with politics; finding other outlets to air their grievances (Wheeler, 2008). The legitimacy of parties has also been extremely weakened by the current disinterest and long-term decline of loyal affiliation to political parties, with many feeling like they have little choice in their vote due to their being only two parties that can realistically gain power (Williamson, 1993, p.1330). Although absolute partyless democracy has not yet been seen in practice, the evidence suggests that we are definitely heading this way, even if it is a more realistic long than short term goal.

In the UK and the US, there has been a steep decline in party allegiance, demonstrated by dwindling levels of party membership and allegiance (Tilley, Evans, 2012). This can be seen through the Conservative Party, who boasted around three million members after the Second World War, yet had only 124,000 in March 2018 (Audickas, Dempsey, Keen, 2018, p.9). Kamarck, Podkul and Zeppos (2018) state that according to Gallup polls from 2004 to 2018, “both [Democrats and Republicans] find themselves less popular now than they did in 2004 with a substantial rise in those who identify as independents”. This conveys how affected citizens’ relationships with political parties are, potentially showing a trend towards partyless democracy (Jennnings et al. 2016). Previously, there was a certain level of commitment that people assumed when joining a political party, however research shows that voters are now much less likely to seek this kind of responsibility (Webb, 1995, p.305). Mair and van Biezen (2001, p.9) note that this decline often seems characteristic of long established democracies (such as the UK and the US) as there is clearly a decline in big “P” politics.

This trend towards partyless democracy can also be demonstrated by the seeming lack of interest in democracy in general (Donovan, Carp, 2006, p.673). The number of people who vote in both the UK and the US has been fairly low. For example, even though policing is a pertinent matter according to the electorate, in the UK, there was only a 15% turnout for the 2012 police crime and commissioner elections in England (Park et al., 2013) . Park also notes that in the last UK general election, a third of people registered to vote did not do so, this is similar for the Presidential elections in the US (FairVote, 2018). Trends also show that people don’t vote purely based on their loyalty to a party, but on short term influences (Mair, 2005, p.3). Mair notes that this consumerist approach then encourages parties to think more about the short term, which often creates problems with major issues that need long term solutions. This further alienates the voter from conventional party systems. This new way of thinking separates the politicians from the citizens, whereby people feel that they are not involved or able to actively participate in politics themselves (Wright, 2013). Due to this, more people are backing away from conventional politics, which means that the major actors receive less support. Manin claims that this promotes audience democracy, which means that citizens are able to alter and influence decisions more when the parties are weak, therefore leaving countries more susceptible to a partyless democracy (Mair, 2005).

Traditionally in the UK, party identification was related to social class. The working class often aligned itself with the Labour Party, whilst the upper classes were more likely to vote for the Conservative Party (Oesch, 2008, p.341). However, in the latter half of the twentieth century there was a long period of consensus politics that changed this (Beckett, 2018). The centrist nature of the parties can be attributed to the increase in embourgeoisement and social mobility in the UK, which has blurred class lines, with people less likely to have an affinity with a party based on a defined social class (Mair, 2005, p.18). According to Park et al. (2018), around 87% of people said that they identified with a political party in 1983, and this dropped to 76% in 2012. Although this does not necessarily mean that people feel they have less of a civic duty to vote, it is noted that only 62% of people believe that it’s everyone’s duty to vote, a 14% decrease on 1987. This provides evidence to uphold the claim that there is a new era of anti-politics, whereby citizens have lost faith in the nation and become discontent with government (Jennings, Stoker, Twyman, 2016). Anti-politics has been seen to be linked to the rise of populism. This is useful in reference to Mair’s description of partyless democracy, whereby people are seeking other forms of democracy, such as backing parties who claim to be representing the citizen and distance themselves from the stereotypical politician (Mair, 2005, p.18). UKIP is an effective example to highlight this in the UK, whereby a political party with a single aim (in this case leaving the European Union), campaigns for change, yet when the issue is resolved, is not powerful enough to actually oversee and implement plans (mainly due to the First Past the Post electoral system) which creates problems in the forms of coherence and pressure for the government of the day when trying to meet these demands (Young, 2018, p.26).

Similarly, in the United States there has been a significant party decline (Wattenberg, 1998, p.10). Since the early 19th century, there has been a clear distinction of two-party competition (Gibson et al., 2003, p.51). This in turn led to a close competitiveness of the two parties, high levels of voter turnout, high levels of loyalty and high levels of cohesion in Congress. Albeit, throughout the 20th century we see a “realignment” with these party norms (Everson, 1982, p.50). Everson notes that this in part can be accounted for by the large un-mobilised electorate (such as women and certain ethnic groups) who were not allowed to vote but could be swayed by either of the two parties. However, since the twentieth century there has been a weakening of ideology in the American political system. Postell (2018) observes that “party unity today appears to be based on agreement rather than loyalty. A party that engenders loyalty is able to overcome its internal differences by appealing to the broader principles that unite it. When today’s parties encounter differences that divide them internally, they fall apart.” This is emphasised by the recent trend of citizens voting for Presidential candidates based on their personality or how they are portrayed throughout their campaigns (Glass, 1985, p.317). Everson (1982, p.53) claims that “it has become as popular to run against one’s party as it has been to run for Washington political office by attacking Washington politicians”. Due to this, Presidents are more likely to face a gridlocked and factitious Congress, hindering their effectiveness in their role. Postell notes that what now actually holds the power is the “unelected, apolitical administrative state” as an alternative to conventional party structures, highlighting the shift towards partyless democracy in the US.

Albeit, the likelihood that we will see a full version of partyless democracy any time soon is small. This is because parties have historically been the vehicle through which democratic systems have been able to function and thrive (Kitschelt, 2000, p.845). Additionally, assessing partyless democracy becoming the norm not just in the UK and the US, but globally, poses an entirely different challenge as democracies and domestic situations all vary. Therefore simply analysing the UK and US provides limits to the scope of the question. Although people may be slightly disillusioned with politics in general, this does not mean that they will campaign for a complete abolishment of parties all together, they may just campaign for specific issues such as democratic innovation in the form of citizens assemblies as suggested by Jennings et al. (2016, p.5). There are also copious amounts of literature on this subject, which means that the problem has already been identified and therefore major parties such as the Republicans in the US have already taken steps to try and mitigate this, for example, through the creation of regional party directors and the creation of local election campaign divisions and it is likely that other parties will also do the same (Everson, 1982, p.57). The idea of partyless democracy actually emerging is a fairly recent phenomenon and consequently it is hard to assess whether politicians who have taken a step in this direction, such as the composition of the Independent Group in the UK, will prove successful in getting the public to embrace such a change (Carr, 2019). Mass media also means that people are now more involved in politics more than ever, being able to engage with democracy and seek accountability. Chadwick and Stromer-Galley (2016) suggest that it is this revolution which is prompting talk about the decline of parties, when in fact parties simply need to catch up with the technological change. They suggest “that parties may be going through a long-term process of adaptation to post-material political culture” (p.286). However, parties are increasingly having to tackle new challenges and it seems that they are unable to keep up, yet technology is only likely to move forward at an increasingly rapid pace (Armstrong, 2018). This is demonstrating the lack of ability from parties to adapt with the modern world, suggesting that to meet public demand, a new form of democracy is likely to be on the horizon.

After analysing the data, it is clear that we are heading towards partyless democracy. As Brady and Cain (2018) note, “political parties served their most important function by providing cues or guidelines that individual voters could use in interpreting complex political events and in making numerous electoral decisions.” However, now with the creation of mass media, the electorate can become educated and more easily involved with politics through a variety of channels. Due to universal suffrage in both the UK and US, everyone now has a metaphorical voice (through their vote or direct democracy) to collectively alter the way in which their country is being run and due to technology, citizens have more platforms with which to use this voice. This is creating new kinds of politicians and a new kind of party democracy. Many are straying away from the conventional norms and rallying support through different means. The lack of choice between the two parties in the UK and the US has disillusioned the electorate, giving many little credible choice. Also, little can be done about this rise in consumerism and partisan dealignment which therefore suggests that we could be headed towards a partyless democracy. The increase in populist parties has also led people to be concerned with singular issues, putting more pressure on the government of the day to deliver, when much of the time they don’t have the power or resources to do so. This leads to greater discontent of the electorate, meaning they search for other ways to exercise power, cumulating in a trend towards partyless democracy.