2009 Deegan Krause Cleavages

DifferenceDivide

and Cleavage

Kevin Deegan Krause, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan

Difference, Divide and Cleavage? Kevin Deegan-Krause, Wayne State University

Thinking about difference:

Gerald Frug: •“All things are alike in some

ways and different in other ways”










There are different ways to be different




EmpiricalAscriptiveDemographicInertialCensus

•Gender•Age•Residence•Education•Class•Denomination

•Ethnicity


BeliefValues<->Attitudes

SociologicalInternalSurveys

•Economy•Culture•Foreign Policy•“Materialism”•“Local” Needs


InstitutionalBehaviorPolitical

ExternalElection Results

•Political parties

•Christian Democrats•Social Democrats•Liberals•Conservatives•Communists•Radical right•Ecology movements•Agrarians•Regional/Ethnic5




•Social movements

•Civil society•Militia/Army•Trade Unions

•Other organizations











•Ethnicity








•Christian Democrats•Social Democrats•Liberals•Conservatives•Communists•Radical right•Ecology movements•Agrarians•Regional/Ethnic


•Ethnicity



ExternalElection ResultsBelief

Values<->AttitudesSociologicalInternalSurveys


•Christian Democrats•Social Democrats•Liberals•Conservatives•Communists•Radical right•Ecology movements•Agrarians•Regional/Ethnic




Cleavage

Kevin Deegan-Krause, Wayne State University

Cleavage

Difference, Divide and Cleavage?


Cleavagecleavage croatia



Cleavage



parties croatia



CleavageCleavage



Cleavage



Conflicts and controversies can arise out of a great variety of relationships in the social structure, but only a few of these tend to polarize the politics of any given system. There is a hierarchy of cleavage bases in each system and these orders of political primacy not only vary among polities, but also tend to undergo changes over time. Such differences and changes in the political weight of sociocultural cleavages set fundamental problems for comparative research: When is region, language, or ethnicity most likely to prove polarizing? When will class take the primacy and when will denominational commitments and religious identities prove equally important cleavage bases? Which sets of circumstances are most likely to favour accommodations of such oppositions within parties and in which circumstances are they more apt to constitute issues between the parties? Which types of alliances tend to maximize the strain on the polity and which ones help to integrate it?

Conflicts and controversies

in great varietyonly a few tend to

polarize

Which circumstances favor accomodation?Which constitute

“issues”?Which alliances maximize strain?

Which help to integrate?

region

ethnicity

languageclass

Lipset and Rokkan 1967


Center-Periphery

16th-17th

c. Reformation, Counter-Reformation

State-Church

18th c. National Revolutions

Urban-Rural

19th c. Industrial Revolution

Owner-Worker

19th-20th c.

Russian RevolutionsMaterialist-

Postmaterialist

20th c. Youth Movement, Feminism, Ecology

Parochial-Cosmopolitan

20th c. Globalization

Lipset and Rokkan 1967

Regional/Ethnic

Geographic

Religiosity

Socio-Economic

Sartori’s Ladder

High ExtensionLow Intension

Low ExtensionHigh Intension

Some ExtensionSome Intension

Few characteristicsLots of cases

Lots of characteristicsFew cases

Some characteristicsSome cases


Up-Ladder

Hi-extension

Mid-Ladder

Down-Ladder

Hi-intension

Ascriptive or Value or Behavior

“Cleavage” Rae & Taylor

Ascriptive andValue or Behavior

“Social Cleavage”“Political

Cleavage”

“Cleavage”

KitscheltDalton

Whitefield

Ascriptiveand Value And Behavior

“Structural and

Political Cleavage”

“Political Cleavag

e”

“Cleavage”Bartolini and Mair


Up-Ladder

Hi-extension

Mid-Ladder

Down-Ladder

Hi-intension


“Cleavage” Rae & Taylor


Social Cleavage

Political Cleavage


Structural and

Political Cleavage


Up-Ladder

Hi-extension

Mid-Ladder

Down-Ladder

Hi-intension


“Difference”


“Divide”


“Structural and

Political Cleavage”

“Political Cleavag

e”

“Cleavage”Bartolini and Mair



AscriptiveDifferenc

e

Attitudinal

Difference

Behavioral

Difference

PositionDivide

IssueDivide

CensusDivide

Full Cleava

ge


AscriptiveDifferenc

e

Attitudinal

Difference

Behavioral

Difference

PositionDivide

IssueDivide

CensusDivide

Full Cleava

ge

Full Cleava

ge


AscriptiveDifferenc

e

Attitudinal

Difference

Behavioral

Difference

PositionDivide

IssueDivide

CensusDivide

Full Cleava

ge



AscriptiveDifferenc

e

Attitudinal

Difference

Behavioral

Difference

PositionDivide

IssueDivide

CensusDivide

Full Cleava

geWrong

Limite

d

high Resemblance to “Cleavage” Politics low

mass

elite

Level of CausalMechanism

short-term rationality

personal/candidate voting

collective action

family socialization

cleavage building personalities

mass party

presidentialization

focus on median voter

catch all strategy

growing influence of courts, central banks, experts

populism

marginalization of parties

direct democracy

party system fragmentation

polarized party system

clientelism

pillarization

group/based discourse

party centered electoral systems

performance voting

commercial media

territorialization of politics

Agent produced-cleavages

Pure structural cleavages

Pure value cleavages

“Translated” structural cleavages

Subcultural and milleu parites

corporatism

Cleavage Rivals: Cleavages and Related Non-Cleavage Phenomena

Main (but ambivalent) alternatives


mass

elite




collective action



mass party

presidentialization


catch all strategy


populism


direct democracy



clientelism

pillarization



performance voting

commercial media







corporatism


Main institutional impediments


mass

elite




collective action



mass party

presidentialization


catch all strategy


populism


direct democracy



clientelism

pillarization



performance voting

commercial media







corporatism


Other institutional impediments


mass

elite




collective action



mass party

presidentialization


catch all strategy


populism


direct democracy



clientelism

pillarization



performance voting

commercial media







corporatism


Ambivalent institutional impediments

INSUFFICIENT

Identity / Values

Behavior/Institutions

Structure/Demographics

GroupnessValues

Structure Particiza

tion

Persiste

nce

Polit

iciz

ati

on

GroupnessValues

Structure Particiza

tion

Persiste

nce

Polit

iciz

ati

on

Cleavages@ - Enyedi and Deegan Krause, APSA 2008

Positional Structure

A Framework

=


Temporal Structure

A Framework

=t=1

t=2


++TemporalStability

--

Positional Stability++ --

A Framework


++TemporalStability

--

Positional Stability++ --

FreezingCleavage

DealignmentRealignment

A Framework


A Framework

Values

Group Consciousness

Socio-Demographics


A FrameworkPolitical System

Party Bloc

Party


A Framework

News & Politics

2009 Deegan Krause Cleavages