Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:45:46.984Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From centrism to bipolarism (and back?)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2016

Alfio Mastropaolo
Alfio Mastropaolo*
Affiliation:
University of Turin, Italy
*
∗Email: alfio.mastropaolo@unito.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

According to a strong and lasting prejudice, which has recently been expressed with renewed vigour, the optimum form of democracy is bipolar. The bipolar pattern, however, is not the only one possible. If the relevant conditions are in place, other patterns are possible, such as the formation of government majorities through a convergence of ‘centrist’ and intermediate parties. This pattern is not free from problems, and one of the main issues of debate in the Italian case, with its long tradition of centrist governments, is over the apparent poor functionality of the party system. The functioning of a party system, however, depends on its circumstances, and a centrist party system can function just as well as its bipolar counterpart. Indeed, it is questionable whether Italy has gained from its new bipolar structure and whether the new structure will endure.

Keywords

Party systemsParty democracyCentrismDualismPolitical models
Type
Research Article
Information
Modern Italy , Volume 13 , Issue 4 , November 2008 , pp. 399 - 414
Copyright
Copyright © Association for the study of Modern Italy 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amato, Giuliano. 1976. Economia, politica e istituzioni in Italia . Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Amato, Giuliano. 1980. Una repubblica da riformare. Il dibattito sulle istituzioni in Italia dal 1975 ad oggi . Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Bull, Martin. 2007. La ‘grande riforma’ del centrodestra alla prova del referendum. In Politica in Italia. Edizione 2007 , ed. Briquet, J.-L. and Mastropaolo, A.. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Cartocci, Roberto. 2008. La costruzione politica del risentimento. Il Mulino 57: 104–9.Google Scholar
Chabod, Federico. 1951. Storia della politica estera italiana dal 1870 al 1896 . Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
Croce, Benedetto. 1928. Storia d'Italia dal 1871 al 1915 . Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
Cuomo, Ettore. 1996. Critica e crisi del parlamentarismo 1870–1900 . Turin: Giappichelli.Google Scholar
Duverger, Maurice. 1964. L'eternel marais. Essai sur le centrisme français. Revue française de science politique 13, no. 1: 33–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duverger, Maurice. 1967. La démocratie sans le peuple . Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Elia, Leopoldo. 1970. Governo (forme di). Enciclopedia del Diritto . Vol. 19. Milan: Giuffré.Google Scholar
Epstein, Renaud, Kokoreff, Michel, Lindgaard, Jade, and Tevanian, Pierre, eds. 2007. Dossier. Une révolution conservatrice à la française. Mouvements 52: 7–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farneti, Paolo. 1985. The Italian party system, 1945–1980 . London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Farneti, Paolo. 1989. La classe politica italiana dal liberalismo alla democrazia . Genova: Ecig.Google Scholar
Galli, Giorgio. 1966. Il bipartitismo imperfetto . Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Ieraci, Giuseppe. 2007. From polarized pluralism to polarized bipolarism: Parties, governments and policy space in Italy after the 2006 elections. Polena 3: 9–28.Google Scholar
Lijphart, Arendt. 1968. The politics of accommodation: Pluralism and democracy in the Netherlands . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lijphart, Arendt. 1977. Democracy in plural societies: A comparative exploration . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lijphart, Arendt. 1984. Democracies: Patterns of majoritarian and consensus government in twenty-one countries . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lijphart, Arendt. 1999. Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lupo, Salvatore. 2004. Partito e antipartito. Una storia politica delle prima Repubblica 1946–78 . Rome: Donzelli.Google Scholar
Maranini, Giuseppe. 1958. Miti e realtà della democrazia . Turin: Comunità.Google Scholar
Manzella, Andrea. 1990. La casa comune partitocratrica. Micromega 4: 44–53.Google Scholar
Mastropaolo, Alfio. 2000. Antipolitica. Alle origini della crisi italiana . Naples: L'Ancora.Google Scholar
Miglio, Gianfranco, ed. 1983. Verso una nuova Costituzione. Ricerca promossa dal Cesis su ‘Costituzione vigente e crisi del sistema politico‘. Milan: Giuffré.Google Scholar
Mosca, Gaetano. 1884. Sulla teorica dei governi e sul governo parlamentare. Studii storici e sociali . Palermo: Loescher.Google Scholar
Musella, Luigi. 2003. Il trasformismo . Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Pasquino, Gianfranco. 1973. Il sistema politico italiano tra neo-trasformismo e democrazia consociativa. Il Mulino 4, no. 22: 549–66.Google Scholar
Pizzorno, Alessandro. 1993. Categorie per una crisi. Micromega 3: 81–96.Google Scholar
Pizzorno, Alessandro. 1995. Dopo il consociativismo. Micromega 2: 236–60.Google Scholar
Rayner, Hervé. 2005. Les scandales politiques: L'opération mains propres en Italie . Paris: Houdiard.Google Scholar
Salvadori, M.L. 2001. Storia d'Italia e crisi di regime. Saggio sulla politica italiana 1861–2000 . Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. 1961. La sociologia del parlamento linee di interpretazione. Studi politici 2, no. 2: 352–82.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. ed. 1963. Il parlamento italiano . Naples: Esi.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. 1965. Partiti e sistemi di partito . Florence: Editrice Universitaria.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. 1966. European political parties: The case of polarized pluralism. In Political Parties and Political Development , ed. LaPalombara, J. and Weiner, M.. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar