Abstract
In contrast to established party systems, the transformation of post-communist party systems is not only shaped by shifts in electoral preferences, but also by the changing organizational loyalties of politicians. Post-communist politicians pursue a wide range of organizational strategies such as party fusions, fissions, start-ups, and interparty switching. By focusing on the interaction between these organizational strategies and voters’ electoral preferences, we argue that the seeming instability of post-communist party systems actually reveals distinct patterns of political change. The article develops an analytical framework, which incorporates politician-driven interparty mobility and voter-induced electoral change. It uses this framework to show that the apparently inchoate party systems of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania actually follow definable modes of transformation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arter, David. 1996.Parties and Democracy in the Post-Soviet Republics: The Case of Estonia. Brookfield: Aldershot.
Bartolini, Stefano and Peter Mair. 1990.Identity, Competition and Electoral Availability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bielasiak, Jack. 1997. “Substance and Process in the Development of Party Systems in East Central Europe.”Communist and Post-Communist Studies 30, 1: 23–44.
Bungs, Dzintra. 1993. “The Shifting Political Landscape in Latvia.”RFE-RL Research Report 2, 12: 28.
—. 1993. “Twenty-three Groups Vie for Seats in the Latvian Parliament.”RFE-RL Research Report 2, 23: 44.
—. 1993. “Moderates win parliamentary elections in Latvia.”RFE-RL Research Report 2, 28: 1–7.
—. 1993. “Elections and Restoring Democracy in the Baltic States”RFE-RL Research Report 2, 38: 12–17.
Clark, Terry. 1995. “The Lithuanian Party System.”East European Politics & Societies 9: 41–62.
Desposato, Scott. 2000. “Institutional vs. Societal Explanations of Party Development: A Comparative Analysis of Brazil’s State Legislatures.” Paper presented at the Midwestern Political Science Association Meeting, Chicago (April).
Duverger, Maurice. 1951.Les Partis, Politiques. Paris: Armand Colin.
Elster, Jon, Claus Offe, and Ulrich Klaus Preuss. 1998.Institutional Design in Post-Communist Societies: Rebuilding the Ship at Sea, Theories of Institutional Design, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Geddes, Barbara. 1995. “A Comparative Perspective on the Leninist Legacy in Eastern Europe.”Comparative Political Studies 28, 2: 239–274.
Girnius, Saulius. 1992a. “Lithuania’s Sajudis Declines but Parties Remain Weak.”RFE-RL Research Report 1, 15: 8.
—. 1992b “The Parliamentary Elections in Lithuania.”RFE-RL Research Report 1 48: 6.
Girnius, Saulius. 1993. “Lithuanian politics seven months after the elections.”RFE-RL Research Report 16.
Gobins, Marcis and Manfred Kerner. 1997. “Politische Parteien in Lettland. Personlichkeiten, Programme, Perspektiven.”Osteuropa, 47, 2: 139–149.
Grofman, Bernard, Evald Mikkel, and Rein Taagepera. 2000. “Fission and Fusion of Parties in Estonia, 1987–1999.”Journal of Baltic Studies 31, 4: 329–357.
Ishiyama, John. 1993. “Founding Elections and the Development of Transitional Parties: The Cases of Estonia and Latvia, 1990–1992.”Communist and Post-Communist Studies 26, 3: 277–99.
—. 2001. “Sickles into Roses: Successor Parties and Democratic Consolidation in Post-communist Politics.” Pp. 32–54 inParty Development and Democratic Change in Postcommunist Europe: The First Decade, ed. P. G. Lewis. London: Frank Cass.
Kitschelt, Herbert, Zdenka Mansfeldova, Radoslaw Markowski, and Gabor Toka. 1999.Post-communist Party Systems: Competition, Representation, and Inter-Party Cooperation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kreuzer, Marcus. 2001.Institutions and Innovation: Voters, Parties, and Interest Groups in the Consolidation of Democracy: France and Germany, 1870–1939. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Kreuzer, Marcus, and Vello Pettai. 2002. “The Calculus of Party Affiliation in Post-communist Democracies. Party Switching, Fusions, Fissions and the Institutionalization of Party Systems.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 29–September 1, Boston.
Krickus, Richard. 1997. “Democratization in Lithuania.” Pp. 290–334 inConsolidation of Democracy in East-Central Europe, eds. K. Dawisha and B. Parrot. Cambridge Cambridge University Press.
Krupavicius, Algis. 1998. “The Post-Communist Transition and Institutionalization of Lithuania’s Parties.”Political Studies Annual 46, 3: 465–91.
Lewis, Paul. 2000.Political Parties in Post-Communist Eastern Europe. London: Routledge.
Lijphart, Arend. 1999.Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lipset, Seymour M., and Stein Rokkan. 1967. “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems and Voter Alignment: An Introduction.” Pp. 1–64 inParty Systems and Voter Alignments, eds. S. M. Lipset and S. Rokkan. New York: Free Press.
Mainwaring, Scott. 1999.Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization: The Case of Brazil. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Mair, Peter. 1990. “The Electoral Payoffs of Fission and Fusion.”British Journal of Political Science 20, 1: 131–141.
—. 1997.Party System Change: Approaches and Interpretations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Mershon, Carol and William B. Heller. 2001. “Party Fluidity and Legislators’ Vote Choices: The Italian Chamber of Deputies, 1996–2000.” Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 30–September 2, San Francisco.
Miller, Arthur H., Klobucar, Thomas F., Reisinger, William M., and Hesli, Vicki L. 1998. “Social Identities in Russia, Ukraine, and Lithuania.”Post-Soviet Affairs 14, 3: 248–87.
Pettai, Vello and Marcus Kreuzer. 1999. “Party Politica in the Baltic States: Social Bases and Institutional Context.”East European Politics and Societies 13, 1: 148–90.
Plakans, Andrejs. 1997. “Democratization and Political Participation in Post-communist Societies: The Case of Latvia.” Pp. 245–89 inThe Consolidation of Democracy in East Central Europe, eds. K. Dawisha and B. Parrot. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Reich, G.M. 2001. “Coordinating Party Choice in Founding Elections: Why Timing Matters.”Comparative Political Studies 34, 10: 1237–1263.
Reisinger, William M., Arthur H. Miller, and Vickie L. Hesli. 1995. “Public Behavior and Political Change in Post-Soviet States.”The Journal of Politics 57, 4: 941.
Schedler, Andreas. 1995.Under- and Overinstitutionalization: Some Ideal Typical Propositions Concerning New and Old Party Systems. Working Paper 213, Kellogg Institute, University of Notre Dame.
Shabad, Goldie, and, Kazimierz Slomczynski. 2001. “Interparty Mobility among Political Elites in Post-Communist East Central Europe.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 28–September 2, San Francisco.
Taagepera, Rein and Matthew Shugart. 1989.Seats and Votes. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Toka, Gabor. 1998. “Party Appeals and Voter Loyalty in New Democracies.”Political Studies Annual 46, 3: 589–610.
Tucker, Joshua A. 2002. “The First Decade of Post-Communist Elections and Voting: What Have We Studied, and How Have We Studied It?”Annual Review of Political Science 5: 271–304.
Veser, Reinhard. 1995. “Politische Parteien in Litauen.”Osteuropa 45, 10: 936–945.
Whitefield, Stephen. 2002. “Political Cleavages and Post-Communist Politics.”Annual Review of Political Science 5: 181–200.
Zielinski, Jakub. 2002. “Translating Social Cleavages into Party Systems: The Significance of New Democracies.”World Politics 54, 2: 184–211.
Additional information
Marcus Kreuzer is assistant professor of political science at Villanova University. His work focuses on how electoral and legislative institutions shape the organizational and electioneering practices of parties in interwar Europe and post-communist democracies. He also is studying the origins of liberal democracy in nineteenth century Europe. He is author ofInstitutions and Innovation—Voters, Politicians and Interest Groups in the Consolidation of Democracy: France and Germany, 1870–1939 (2001).
Vello Pettai is lecturer in political science at the University of Tartu, Estonia. He specializes in comparative ethnopolitics and party politics. He has published previously inNations and Nationalism, Post-Soviet Affairs, East European Politics and Society, andJournal of Democracy.
We would like to thank for Artis Pabriks and Darius Zeruolis for sharing their knowledge of Latvian and Lithuanian party politics as well as John T. Ishiyama, Scott Desposato, and two anonymous SCID reviewers for commenting on an earlier draft. Funding for this research came from an Estonian Science Foundation grant, nr. 4904. We gratefully acknowledge their support.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kreuzer, M., Pettai, V. Patterns of political instability: Affiliation patterns of politicians and voters in post-communist Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. St Comp Int Dev 38, 76–98 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686269
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686269