Organizational form determines successor-party survival only under left-wing competitive threat.

Evidence

From Table 4 it is clear that when left-wing competitors are weak, there is no real difference between different party organizations. Parties that are dominated by officeholders and less dependent on mass memberships are as likely to be politically successful as parties that are less dominated by officeholders and more dependent on mass memberships. In other words, when there are no strong left-wing competitors, successor parties are likely to be politically successful regardless of organization. Where party organization appears really to make a difference is in cases where the successor parties face stiff competition from other left-wing alternatives. In Table 5, of the seven cases in which communist successor parties faced left-wing competitors that averaged at least 5 percent of the seats in the lower house of the national legislature, the three that were most clientelistic (the HSP, LDLP, and DLA) were also the most politically successful in having participated in government. The four parties that were less clientelistic had not participated in government in the 1990s. These results suggest that when successor parties face stiff competition from other left-wing parties, those dominated by officeholders and less reliant on mass memberships early on were more likely to be politically successful later. — John T. Ishiyama, Party Organization and the Political…, 86

Categorization

  • XREF: Parallels the reader’s comparative frame: organizational adaptation matters most under environmental threat — echoes contingency models of party survival and ‘structural adjustment’ arguments about post-communist party development. — connects to: Communist organizational legacies paradoxically enabled successor parties’ democratic survival; Moderation alone cannot rehabilitate discredited parties competing against credible anticommunist rivals — Anna M. Grzymala-Busse, Redeeming The Communist Past: The…, 652; Surviving successor parties without a radical break retain old networks and win elections untransformed. — Anna M. Grzymala-Busse, Redeeming The Communist Past: The…, 1500 (+8 more)
  • QUESTION: Does this clientelist advantage under competition extend to the post-Cold-War case generally, where the external threat frame itself vanished — did parties that leaned on officeholding roots weather the 1990s better regardless of ideology?

Broader Connections