Including party members in intra-party deliberation and decision-making can be done in a wide range of ways, across a variety of party models. Some argue that using internally democratic procedures is more likely to select capable, appealing leaders who have more responsive policies and enjoy greater electoral success. Perhaps a democratic internal process strengthens a democratic culture generally? This National Democratic Institute research paper examines the advantages and risks of intra-party democracy. Political parties are crucial actors in representative democracies – but does it matter how parties arrive at the choices they present to voters?
If a democratic party’s responsibility is to nurture the public’s political competence, then participation in the democratic process must start within the party’s internal structure. If the outcome – clear and distinct electoral choices and a strong mandate by which to govern – is the priority, then a party’s organisational structure requires strong leadership, which may curtail the extent of internal democracy where it threatens to dilute policy. These ‘process’ and ‘outcome’ views are not necessarily incompatible.
Party organisation models can be characterised and compared by assessing their inclusiveness (number of decision-makers), centralisation (level of control a national executive committee exerts over regions), and institutionalisation (the established identity and procedures of the party, and its status as a significant actor). What are some of the ways of participating within party procedures, and how might these be restricted?
- Selecting Candidates and Leaders: to what degree can party members get involved in the selection process? Limitations include requiring members to be fully enrolled, paying fees and waiting for a period before being eligible to participate. Candidate nominations may be vetted by central party authorities, or a demographic quota imposed on the selection.
- Setting Party Policies: a variety of measures may be used to develop party policies, including consultations and internal plebiscites. When a specific policy is disputed, who may call referendums in order to debate and decide? Is this solely the prerogative of national leadership? Will a vote be considered advisory, or binding?
- Membership: what are the requirements of membership – how formal and demanding? Who keeps the records of members, and determines eligibility? What are the practical implications of creating a strongly inclusive party with wide voting rights?
- Parties enroll members in order to establish their legitimacy through mass support, to build links between leaders and supporters, to raise funds, utilise volunteer labour and source future candidates.
- Supporters enroll as members to express a political conviction, to get more involved in politics at various levels, to create social links and to benefit from economic perks linked to party membership.
Different party structures have different starting points for increasing internal party democracy. Internal structures can affect political outcomes in a number of ways.
- There are five general models of party organisation (the Dominant Leader, the Party of Notables, Individual Representation, Corporatist, and Basis Democracy) with different combinations of inclusiveness, centralisation and institutionalisation in their internal democracy.
- When building effective party structures, a variety of factors must be considered, including: the institutional environment, the accessibility of communication (financial and technical access to mass-media), the cultural and historical setting (such as trade union or church sponsorship), ideological commitments to democratic values, and the urge to imitate prospering parties structures.
- Internal and external pressures (such as changes in party law or electoral losses) both force change within a party’s structure: they may be primarily ideological or tactical.
- Despite a lack of consensus on whether increasing intra-party democratic procedures results in a general democratic benefit, there is nevertheless an argument for increased transparency and greater inclusivity in those nations where there is widespread disillusionment with politics.
