Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Presidents --- Political culture --- Political leadership --- Opposition (Political science) --- Political opposition --- Political science --- Divided government --- History.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Die Demokratische Bauernpartei Deutschlands war ein Ziehkind der sowjetischen Besatzer. 1948 geschaffen, um die SED zu stützen, sah diese in der neuen Blockpartei nicht selten eine Rivalin, der sie mit Geringschätzung begegnete. Die DBD sollte nicht nur die Folgen der Bodenreform auf dem Land auffangen, sie war auch maßgeblich daran beteiligt, die Agrarrevolution von oben durchzusetzen, deren Umsetzung ebenso wie die Entscheidung über die Kollektivierungsschübe von 1952 und 1960/63 hier neu rekonsturiert werden. Angeleitet und kontrolliert wurde die DBD von drei Stellen: zuerst von den fast allmächtigen Besatzern, dann zunehmend von der SED und ihrem Apparat. Dass letztere den Staatssicherheitsdienst zu einer umfassenden Durchdringung der Parteispitze, ab 1959 regelrecht zur Steuerung der Blockpartei nutzte, kann hier erstmals detailliert aufgezeigt werden. Der DBD gelang es anfangs, die traditionell antikommunistische bäuerliche Bevölkerung anzusprechen und die verschiedenen sozialen Gruppen in den Dörfern zu integrieren. Die Kollektivierung jedoch spaltete die Basis und stieß viele Funktionäre ab. Gerade diese Auseinandersetzung, Hand in Hand mit der Eliminierung nonkonformen Personals, formte die DBD zu einer Kaderpartei. Als das Parteiprogramm keinen Unterschied mehr zu dem der SED aufwies, verfiel die Basis 1960 in Apathie.

Political parties --- Agriculture --- Demokratische Bauernpartei Deutschlands --- History. --- Parties, Political --- Party systems, Political --- Political party systems --- Political science --- Divided government --- Intra-party disagreements (Political parties) --- Political conventions

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The first mass political parties appeared in the United States in the 1830's, as the majority of adult white males identified ardently with the Democratic and Whig parties. Ronald Formisano opens a window on American political culture in this case study of antebellum voting and party formation in Michigan. Examining the social bases of voter commitment and the dynamics of grass roots loyalties from Jackson to Lincoln, he proposes that the forming of parties had little to do with issues of political economy, but rather with value conflicts generated by the evangelicals' promotion of a moral society.Borrowing from other disciplines, and elaborating some of the analytical techniques used by Lee Benson in The Concept of Jacksonian Democracy, Professor Formisano studies demographic and voting data to determine patterns of partisan loyalty. His study throws light on the roots of the modern Republican Party, links between religion and politics, and the role of ethnic and cultural loyalties in political life.Originally published in 1971.The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

Political parties --- History. --- Michigan --- History --- Parties, Political --- Party systems, Political --- Political party systems --- Political science --- Divided government --- Intra-party disagreements (Political parties) --- Political conventions

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The political parties in Congress are as polarized as they have been in 100 years. This book examines more than 30 years of congressional history to understand how it is that the Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill have become so divided. It finds that two steps were critical for this development. First, the respective parties' constituencies became more politically and ideologically aligned. Second, members ceded more power to their party leaders, who implemented procedures more frequently and with greater consequence. In fact, almost the entire rise in party polarization can be accounted for in the increasing frequency of and polarization on procedures used during the legislative process.

United States. Congress --- Political parties --- United States --- Opposition (Political science) --- Political opposition --- Political science --- Divided government --- United States. --- Social Sciences --- Political Science

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This is the first full-length book to examine how we interpret evidence of change and stability in modern parties and party systems. Amidst the widespread contemporary discussions of the challenge to modern democracy and the crisis of traditional forms of political representation, it offers a welcome emphasis on how party systems survive, and on how change, when it does occur, may be analysed and understood.

Political parties --- Parties, Political --- Party systems, Political --- Political party systems --- Political science --- Divided government --- Intra-party disagreements (Political parties) --- Political conventions --- History --- Europe --- Politics and government