a range of functions

a network of sth.

an approach to sth

to create/to establish a bias

to exhibit -"-

to justify -"-

to outdo electoral promises

It cannot but take account of sth

horse trading

10. to contend v — соревноваться; contender n - соревнующийся. WORDS AND WORD COMBINATIONS

круг обязанностей сеть ч-л

подход к чему-либо сформировать предпочтение, предубеждение

проявлять/отдавать предпочтение ч-л

оправдывать предпочтения перевыполнить предвыборные обязательства она не может

не учитывать/не принимать во внимание поиск компромисса

SKIM reading: Work in pairs: look through the text and bring out the topical sentences conveying the main ideas of the text.

Text 2: party systems

Political parties are important not only because of the range of functions they carry out, but also because the complex interrelationships between and among parties are crucial in structuring how political systems work in practice. This network of relationships is called a party system. The most familiar way of distinguishing dot ween different types of party system is by reference to the number nl parties competing for power. Although such a typology is commonly used, party systems cannot simply be reduced to a 'numbers game'.

As important as the number of parties competing for power is their idative size, as reflected in their electoral and legislative strength. What is vital is to establish the 'relevance' of parties in relation to the formation of governments, and in particular whether their size gives them the prospect of winning, or at least sharing, government power, lhis approach is often reflected in the distinction made between major', or government-orientated, parties and more peripheral, 'minor' ones (although neither category can be defined with mathematical accuracy).

A third consideration is how these 'relevant' parties relate to one .mother. Is the party system characterised by cooperation and consensus, by conflict and polarisation? This is closely linked to the ideological complexion of the party system and the traditions and history of the parties that compose it.

The mere presence of parties does not, however, guarantee the existence of a party system. The pattern of relationships amongst parties only constitutes a system if it is characterised by stability and a degree of orderliness. Where neither stability nor order exists, a party system may be in the process of emerging, or a transition from one type of party system to another may be occurring.

One-party systems

Strictly speaking, the term one-party system is contradictory since system' implies interaction amongst a number of entities. The term is nevertheless helpful in distinguishing between political systems in which a single party enjoys a monopoly of power through the exclusion of all other parties (by political or constitutional means) and ones characterised by a competitive struggle amongst a number of panics. Because monopolistic parties effectively function as permanent governments, with no mechanism (short of a coup or revolution) through which they can be removed from power, they invariably develop an entrenched relationship with the state machine. Ilns allows such states to be classified as 'one-party states', their machinery being seen as a fused 'party-state' apparatus.

two-party systems

A two-party system is duopolistic in that it is dominated by two major' parties that have a roughly equal prospect of winning government power. In its classical form, a two-party system can be identified by three criteria:

• Although a number of 'minor' parties may exist, only two parties enjoy sufficient electoral and legislative strength to have a realistic prospect of winning government power.

• The larger party is able to rule alone (usually on the basis of a legislative majority); the other provides the opposition.

• Power alternates between these parties; both are 'electable', the opposition serving as a 'government in the wings'.

Two-party politics was once portrayed as the surest way of reconciling responsiveness with order, representative government with effective government. Its key advantage is that it makes possible a system of party government, supposedly characterised by stability, choice and accountability. The two major parties are able to offer the electorate a straightforward choice between rival programmes and alternative governments. Voters can support a party knowing that, if it wins the election, it will have the capacity to carry out its manifesto promises without having to negotiate or compromise with coalition partners. Two-partyism, moreover, creates a bias in favour of moderation, as the two contenders for power have to battle for¹ 'floating' votes in the centre ground. ^;

However two-party politics and party government have not beerv so well regarded since the 1970s. Instead of guaranteeing moderation,''' two-party systems such as the UK's, have displayed a periodic tendency towards adversary politics. This is reflected in ideological polarisation and an emphasis on conflict and argument rather thart consensus and compromise.

A further problem with the two-party system is that two evenly¹' matched parties are encouraged to compete for votes by outdoing each other's electoral promises, perhaps causing spiralling public spending and fuelling inflation. A final weakness of two-party syste: is the obvious restrictions they impose in terms of electoral an ideological choice. While a choice between just two programmes government was perhaps sufficient in an era of partisan alignment a class solidarity, it has become quite inadequate in a period of grea' individualism and social diversity.

Dominant-party systems

Dominant-party systems should not be confused with one-part" systems, although they may at times exhibit similar characteristics, dominant-party system is competitive in the sense that a number parties compete for power in regular and popular elections, but if

dominated by a single major party that consequently enjoys prolonged periods in power.

The most prominent feature of a dominant-party system is the tendency for the political focus to shift from competition between parties to factional conflict within the dominant party itself. Although [he resulting infighting may be seen as a means of guaranteeing argument and debate in a system in which small parties are usually marginalised, factionalism tends to revolve more around personal differences than it does around policy or ideological divisions.

Whereas other competitive party systems have their supporters, or ■ it least apologists, few are prepared to come to the defence of the dominant-party system. Apart from a tendency towards stability and predictability, dominant-partyism is usually seen as a regrettable and unhealthy phenomenon. In the first place, it tends to erode the important constitutional distinction between the state and the party in power. When governments cease to come and go, an insidious process of politicisation takes place through which state officials and institutions adjust to the ideological and political priorities of the dominant party.

Secondly, an extended period in power can engender complacency, arrogance and even corruption in the dominant party.

Thirdly, a dominant-party system is characterised by weak and liietfective opposition. Criticism and protest can more easily be snored if they stem from parties that are no longer regarded as genuine rivals for power. Finally, the existence of a 'permanent' party > >t government may corrode the democratic spirit by encouraging the electorate to fear change and to stick with the 'natural' party of government. A genuinely democratic political culture arguably inquires a general public that has a healthy distrust of all parties, and most importantly, a willingness to remove governments that have t.nkd.

Multiparty systems

A multiparty system is characterised by competition amongst more tli. i n two parties reducing the chances of single-party government and im leasing the likelihood of coalitions. However, it is difficult to 'I'f'iiie multiparty systems in terms of the number of major parties, as ■uli systems sometimes operate through coalitions including smaller i'u(ies that are specifically designed to exclude larger parties from I'l'vernment.

The strength of the multiparty systems is that they create internal . hecks and balances within government and exhibit a bias in favour of (■•kite, conciliation and compromise. The process of coalition

formation and the dynamics of coalition maintenance ensure a broad responsiveness that cannot but take account of competing views and contending interests.

The principle criticisms of multiparty systems relate to the pitfalls and difficulties of coalition formation. The post-election negotiations and horse trading that take place when no single party is strong enough to govern alone can take weeks, or (as in Israel and Italy) sometimes months, to complete. More seriously, coalition governments may be fractured and unstable, paying greater attention to squabbles amongst coalition partners than to the tasks of government.

A final problem is that the tendency towards moderation and compromise may mean that multiparty systems are so dominated by the political centre that they are unable to offer clear ideological alternatives. Coalition politics tends, naturally, to be characterised by negotiation and conciliation, a search for common ground, rather than by conviction and the politics of principle. This process can be criticised as being implicitly corrupt, in that parties are encouraged to abandon policies and principles in their quest for power.

♦ Discuss/check your considerations with the rest of the class.

AFTER-READING activity

♦ Read the text in more depth to do the 'After-reading' exercises.

Ex. 1. Comprehension check

1. What is called a party system?

2. What constitutes a party system?

3. Can the size of a party guarantee the victory at elections?

4. What are the main characteristics of a

one-party system? two-party system? dominant-party system? multiparty system?

Ex. 2. Terminology/Concepts

A. Translate the terminology into Russian: coalition, antiparty parties, intraparty democracy, primary elections, oligarchy, democratic centralism.

B. Match the notions with the definitions:

• is a party organisation principle, based on a supposed

balance between freedom of discussion and strict unity of action.

• ... is a grouping of rival political actors brought together either through the perception of a common threat, or a recognition that their goals cannot be achieved by working separately.

• Parties that set out to subvert traditional party politics by rejecting parliamentary compromises and emphasising popular mobilisation can be called

• ... are intraparty elections in which candidates are selected to contest in a subsequent 'official' election. They became the principal nominating device used in the USA, also being used to chose convention delegates and party leaders.

• ... is government or domination by the few.

• implies that a party is a democratic agent in that power

within it is dispersed widely and evenly, that there should be broad participation in the election of leaders and candidates, and in the discussion of party policy formulation.

• Work with the dictionary and consult the text to do ex. 3, 4

Kx. 3. Translate from English into Russian

Complex interrelationships between and among parties; party systems cannot be reduced to a 'numbers game'; ideological complexion of the party system; the mere presence of parties; a degree of orderliness; 'system' implies interaction amongst a number of entities; they develop an entrenched relationship with the state machine; a fused 'party-state' apparatus; to enjoy sufficient electoral ami legislative strength; power alternates between the parties; a '.ntvcrnnient in the wings'; 'floating votes'; two evenly matched parlies; parties are marginalised; governments cease to come and go; in engender complacency and arrogance.

1л. 4. Translate from Russian into English

Партии, ведущие борьбу за власть; типология; периферийные партии (партии местного значения); с математической точно-■ 11.ю; степень упорядоченности; строго говоря; избираемые шмоющие шанс на избрание) правительства; стабильность, вы-ипр и подотчетность; истинный выбор; пойти на компромисс с

c. structure

d. contradictory

e. approach, diverse i

f. to legislate

g. network

h. to occur

i. a broad range of issues

партнерами по коалиции; двухпартииность; гарантировать сдер­жанность, выдержку; вызывать быстрорастущие расходы на со­циальные нужды; безудержная инфляция; отличительная черта; внутренний фракционный конфликт; внутренняя борьба; вызы­вающее сожаление явление; размывать (разъедать) грань между; скрытый процесс политизации; подорвать демократический дух; иметь здоровое (естественное) недоверие ко всем партиям; ве­роятность коалиций; недостатки (западня).

Ex. 5. Fill in the blanks in column 'A' with the topical vocabulary units from column 'B', making all necessary changes

B.

a. to emphasize

b. to compose

The UN Charter ... of 70 articles. It was not easy to follow the speaker as he was making ... statements.

3.

Constitutional liberalism ... the rule of law, separated powers and free speach and assembly as the most important aspects of government.

The UN ... includes 6 main organs.

5.

The ... of relationships among parties is called a party system. The most familiar ... to distinguish between ... types of party system is by reference to the number of parties competing for power. The UN does not ... in the sense of enacting laws that nations are bound to implement. Setbacks for freedom ... in many countries.

10.

Within the UN all countries have a voice and vote in shaping policies of the international

community on

apologists and adversaries

k.

11.

to impose restrictions

When the speaker gets the audience's ... it is much easier for him to carry on. He spoke so convincingly that both his ... and ... applauded him.

12. The main aim of the Non- 1. response

Proliferation Treaty is ... on spreading nuclear weapons around the world.

Ex. 6. Make the following adjectives negative

important, familiar, particular, relevant, competitive, sufficient, realistic, representative, possible, responsible, adequate, affective, permanent, encouraging, democratic, stable.

Ex. 7. Paraphrase the sentences according to the model

Model: It is essential for all political parties to come to consensus on the matter.

// is essential that all political parties (should) come to consensus on the matter.

I. Political parties developed along with the expansion of suffrage and were composed later from the electoral process. It is quite natural.

1. Party organizations in Parliament structured in the form of committees were composed of active party members. IlJs important.

V Diversities of parties originate from either internal or external mobilization by those seeking to win governmental power. iLis quite typical.

■1. There is considerable overlap between the Democratic and the Republican Parties manifestos because each seeks to represent a wide range of interests. Isn't it strange?

v It is quite natural for American third parties to represent sufficient social and economic interests.

ь It is quite proper for you to emphasize that the USA is a two-party system country.