Advertisement

Political Parties and Political Volunteering/Participation

  • Annette Zimmer
  • David H. Smith
  • Abdalhadi Alijla

Abstract

Political volunteering refers to civic engagement, citizen participation, political association and political party involvement, political campaign activity, political meeting attendance, voting, and other participation in conventional political activities (vs. in social movements, activism, protest, other unconventional political activities; see Handbook Chapter 24). We also examine briefly the nature of political parties and political pressure (interest) groups, their internal structures, membership, activities, external relationships and collaboration, and impacts. The S-Theory of Smith (2016c, 2017a, 2017b) is applied as a comprehensive, interdisciplinary model of why people do political volunteering. Related multivariate models like the Civic Voluntarism model of Verba, Schlozman, and Brady (1995) explain much variance in political volunteering/participation. Even in strong democracies there is a tendency for political volunteering to be done mainly by higher status and more educated people.

In this chapter, we suggest an approach that distinguishes among at least three dimensions that have a significant impact on who, how, and why a person takes part voluntarily in political life, in the public domain, and in community affairs:

Keywords

Civil Society Political Party Social Movement Political Participation Civic Engagement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Ainsworth, Scott H. 2002. Analyzing Interest Groups. Group Influence on People and Policies. New York: W. W. Norton & CompanyGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldrich, John. 2011. Why Political Parties? A Second Look. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  3. Alijla, Abdalhadi. 2011. Social Movement, Political Party or Armed Militia: Hamas as an Informal Institution. Saarbriicken, Germany: Lambert Academic PublishingGoogle Scholar
  4. Almond, Gabriel, and Sidney Verba. [1963] 1965. The Civic Culture. Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Almond, Gabriel, Bingham Powell, Russell Dalton, and Kaare Strom. 2007. Comparative Politics Today, 9th edition. New York: LongmanGoogle Scholar
  5. Almond, Gabriel, and Sidney Verba. 1963. The Civic Culture. Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  6. Awad, Mohammad. 2013. “International Funding to Palestinian NGOs and Its Impact on Social Capital in the West Bank.” The Public Sector Innovation Journal 18(1):1–29Google Scholar
  7. Barker, Rodney. 1999. “Civil Disobedience.” Pp. 225–236 in The Encyclopedia of Democracy, edited by S. M. Lipset. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Bartels, Larry M. 2012. “The Study of Electoral Behavior.” Pp. 239–261 in The Oxford Handbook of American Elections and Political Behavior, edited by J. M. Leighley. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  9. Baumgartner, Frank R., and B. L. Leech. 1998. Basic Interests: The Importance of Groups in Politics and in Political Science. Princeton: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  10. Berman, Sheri. 1997. “Civil Society and the Collapse of the Weimar Republic.” World Politics 49:401–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Borocz, J. 2000. “Informality Rules.” East European Politics & Societies 14:348–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boulding, Kenneth E. 1953. The Organizational Revolution. A Study in the Ethics of Economic Organization. New York: HarperGoogle Scholar
  13. Brady, Henry, Sidney Verba, and Kay L. Schlozman. 1995. “Beyond SES: A Resource Model of Political Participation.” American Political Science Review 89: 271–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brooker, Paul. 1995. Twentieth Century Dictatorships. New York: New York University PressGoogle Scholar
  15. Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, and A. Smith, 2012. The Dictator’s Handbook: Why Bad Behavior Is Almost Always Good Politics. New York: Public AffairsGoogle Scholar
  16. Castiglione, Dario, and Jan W. van Deth, eds. 2008. The Handbook of Social Capital. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  17. Cheeseman, Nic. 2015. Democracy in Africa. Successes, Failures, and the Struggle for Political Reform. Cambridge. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  18. Cigler, Allan J., and B.A. Loomis. 2007. Interest Group Politics. Washington, DC.: CQ PressGoogle Scholar
  19. Clifford, Bob. 2011. “Civil and Uncivil Society.” Pp. 209–219 in The Oxford Handbook of Civil Society, edited by M. Edwards. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dacombe, Rod. 2010. “Civic Participation.” Pp. 161-164 in International Encyclopedia of Civil Society, edited by H. K. Anheier, S. Toepler, and R. List. New York: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  21. Dahl, Robert A. 1989, Democracy and Its Critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
  22. Dalton, Russell. 2004. Democratic Challenges, Democratic Choices: The Erosion of Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  23. Dalton, Russell. 2013. Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. New York: CQ PressGoogle Scholar
  24. Dalton, Russell, and D. Shin, eds. 2006. Citizens, Democracy and Markets Around the Pacific Rim. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  25. Dalton, Russell, and H.-D. Klingemann, eds. 2007. The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  26. De Tocqueville, Alexis. [1832] 2000. Democracy in America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  27. Diamond, Larry, and R. Gunther, eds. 2001. Political Parties and Democracy. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  28. Diamond, Larry. 2008. “The Democratic Rollback: The Resurgence of the Predatory State.” Foreign Affairs 87(2):36–48Google Scholar
  29. Eliasoph, Nina. 2011. Making Volunteers: Civic Life After Welfare’s End. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  30. Fukuyama, Francis. 1992. The End of Histoty and the Last Man. New York: Simon & SchusterGoogle Scholar
  31. Glasius, Marlies. 2010. “Uncivil Society.” Pp. 1583-1588 in International Encyclopedia of Civil Society, edited by H. K. Anheier, S. Toepler, and R. List. New York: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  32. Glasius, Marlies, D. Lewis, and H. Seckinelgin, eds. 2004. Exploring Civil Society: Political and Cultural Contexts. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  33. Grossmann, Matt. 2012. “Interest Group Influence on US Policy Change: An Assessment Based on Policy History.” Interest Groups & Advocacy 1:171–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gunning, Jeroen. 2010. Hamas in Politics: Democracy, Religion, Violence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  35. Hatemi, Peter K., and R. McDermott, eds. 2011. Man Is by Nature a Political Animal Evolution, Biology, and Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  36. Helmke, G., and S. Levitsky. 2004. “Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics: A Research Agenda.” Perspectives on Politics 2: 725–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Henrich, Joseph, Steven J. Heine, and Ara Norenzayan. 2010. “The Weirdest People in the World?” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33(2–3):61-83.Google Scholar
  38. Hetherington, Marc J., and B. A. Larson. 2013. Parties, Politics, and Public Policy in America. Washington, DC: CQ PressGoogle Scholar
  39. Horowitz, Donald. 2000. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkeley, CA: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  40. Howard, Marc Morjé. 2003: The Weakness of Civil Society in Post-Communist Europe. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  41. Howard, Marc Morjé. 2010. “Civil Society and Democracy.” Pp. 186–192 in International Encyclopedia of Civil Society, edited by H. K. Anheier, S. Toepler, and R. List. New York: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  42. Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma PressGoogle Scholar
  43. Inglehart, Ronald. 1990. Culture Shifts in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  44. Jobert, Bruno, and Beate Kohler-Koch, eds. 2008. Changing Images of Civil Society. From Protest to Governance. New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  45. Kaase, Max. 2007. “Perspectives on Political Participation.” Pp. 783–796 in The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, edited by R. Dalton and H. Klingemann. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  46. Kaldor, Mary, and Denisa Kostovicova. 2008. “Global Civil Society and Illiberal Regimes.” Pp. 86–113 in Global Civil Society 2007/2008, edited by M. Albrow, H. Anheier, M. Glasius, M. Kaldor, and M. E. Price. London: Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  47. Keane, John. 1988. Civil Society and the State. New European Perspectives. New York: VersoGoogle Scholar
  48. Lakoff, George. 2008. The Political Mind: Why You Can’t Understand 21st-Century Politics with an 18th-Century Brain. New York: VikingGoogle Scholar
  49. Lauth, Hans-Joachim. 2000. “Informal Institutions and Democracy.” Democratization 7(4):21–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Leighley, Jan M., ed. 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Amenican Elections and Political Behavior. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  51. Linz, Juan. 2002: Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  52. Linz, Juan, and Alfred Stepan, eds. 1996. Problems of Democratic Transitions and Consolidation. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  53. Magaloni, Beatriz. 2008. “Credible Power-Sharing and the Longevity of Authoritarian Rule.” Comparative Political Studies 41(4-5):715–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Maisel, L. Sandy, and Jeffrey M. Berry, eds. 2010. The Oxford Handbook of Amenican Political Parties and Interest Groups. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  55. Marcus, George E., 2013. Political Psychology: Neuroscience, Genetics, and Politics. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  56. Marcus, George E., W. R. Neuman, and M. MacKuen. 2000. Affective Intelligence and Political Judgment. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  57. Matonyte, Irmina. 2011. “Civic Participation.” Pp. 248–254 in International Encyclopedia of Political Science, edited by B. Bardie, D. Berg-Schlosser, and L. Morlino. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  58. Medvic, Stephen K. 2013. In Defense of Politicians: The Expectations Trap and Its Threat to Democracy. New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  59. Meyer, David, and Sidney Tarrow, eds. 1998. The Social Movement Society: Contentious Politics for a New Century. Lanham, MD: Rowman & LittlefieldGoogle Scholar
  60. Mlodinow, Leonard. 2012. Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior. New York: Pantheon BooksGoogle Scholar
  61. Moro, Giovanni. 2010. “Civic Action.” Pp. 145-150 in International Encyclopedia of Civil Society, edited by H. K. Anheier, S. Toepler, and R. List. New York: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  62. North, Douglass C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  63. Nownes, Anthony J. 2012. “Interest Groups and State Politics.” Pp. 445–455 in Guide to Interest Groups and Lobbying, edited by Burdett A. Loomis. Washington, DC: CQ PressGoogle Scholar
  64. O’Donnell, Guillermo. 1993. “On the State, Democratization and Some Conceptual Problems: A Latin American View with Glances at Some Postcommunist Countries.” World Development 21(8):1355–1369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. O’Donnell, Guillermo. 1996. “Uma outra institucionalização: America Latina e alhures” [Another institutionalization: Latin America and elsewhere]. Lua Nova: Revista de Cultura E Politica 37:26–30Google Scholar
  66. Osborne, Robin. 2010. Athens and Athenian Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  67. Polanyi, Karl. 1944. The Great Transformation. New York: RinehartGoogle Scholar
  68. Putnam, Robert D. 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  69. Putnam, Robert D. 1995. “Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital.” Journal of Democracy 6(1):65–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Rabo, Annika, and Hisham Sharabi. 1992. Neopatriarchy: A Theory of Distorted Change in Arab Society. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  71. Roy, Sara. 2013. Hamas and Civil Society in Gaza: Engaging the Islamist Social Sector. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  72. Salamon, Lester. 1994. “The Rise of the Nonprofit Sector.” Foreign Affairs 73(4):111–124Google Scholar
  73. Sartori, Giovanni. 2005. Parties and Party Systems. A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  74. Schlozman, Kay L., Sidney Verba, and Henry E. Brady. 2012. The Unheavenly Chorus: Unequal Political Voice and the Broken Promise of American Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  75. Schofer, Evan, and Wesley Longhofer. 2011. “The Structural Sources of Association.” American Journal of Sociology 117: 539–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Skocpol, Theda. 1999. “Advocates Without Members: The Recent Transformation of American Civic Life.” Pp. 461-509 in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, edited by T. Skocpol, and M. P. Fiorina. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution PressGoogle Scholar
  77. Skocpol, Theda. 2003. Diminished Democracy: From Membership to Management in American Civic Life. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma PressGoogle Scholar
  78. Smith, David H. 1973. Latin American Student Activism: Participation in Formal Volunteer Organizations. Lexington, MA: Lexington BooksGoogle Scholar
  79. Smith, David H. 1976. Citizen Participation in Water Quality Control: A Nationwide Evaluation of the Impact of EPA Supported Water Quality Workshops. Washington, DC: National Technical Information ServiceGoogle Scholar
  80. Smith, David H. 1995. “Democratic Personality.” Pp. 941–943 in The Encyclopedia of Democracy. Volume 3, edited by S. M. Lipset. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly BooksGoogle Scholar
  81. Smith, David H. 1997. “The International History of Grassroots Associations.” International Journal of Comparative Sociology 38(3-4):189–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Smith, David H. 2014. “S-Theory: Explaining Individual Human Behavior.” [In Russian, in the Russian Language Journal] Институт языкознания PAH [Journal of Psycholinguistics] 22(4): 139–157Google Scholar
  83. Smith, David H. 2015. “S-Theory as a Comprehensive Explanation of Formal Volunteering: Testing The Theory of Everyone on Russian National Sample Interview Data.” Paper Presented at ARNOVA Annual Conference, Chicago, IL, November 19–21. Chestnut Hill, MA: Department of Sociology, Boston College. Unpublished Paper Submitted for Editorial ReviewGoogle Scholar
  84. Smith, David H. (forthcoming) 2016a. “Democracy in America 180 Years After De Tocqueville: Old and New Types of Citizen Participation in Local Government.” Chestnut Hill, MA: Department of Sociology, Boston College, unpublished paper submitted for editorial reviewGoogle Scholar
  85. Smith, David H. (in press) 2016b. “Four Global Associational Revolutions: Explaining Their Causes and Setting Straight the Socio-Historical Record.” Civil Society in Russia and Beyond (English translation of journal name, published in Russian, but this article is in English). 7Google Scholar
  86. Smith, David H. (forthcoming) 2016c. “Integrating Theories of Behavior in Order to Develop a More Comprehensive and Interdisciplinary Paradigm.” Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College, Department of Sociology, Unpublished paper submitted for editorial reviewGoogle Scholar
  87. Smith, David H. (forthcoming) 2017a. “Expanding Our Scientific Understanding of Political Activity: Testing S-Theory on Russian National Sample interview Data.” Lecture at City University London, London. March 30. Submitted for editorial reviewGoogle Scholar
  88. Smith, David H. (forthcoming) 2017b. S-Theory (Synanthrometrics) as “The Theory of Every-one”: A Proposed New Standard Human Science Model of Behavior, Especially Pro-Social Behavior. Bradenton, FL: David Horton Smith InternationalGoogle Scholar
  89. Smith, David H. (forthcoming) 2017c. The “Dark Energy” of the Nonprofit Sector: Noxious, Dissenting, and Eccentric Types of Deviant Voluntary Associations, Their Impacts, and How They Work. Bradenton, FL: David Horton Smith InternationalGoogle Scholar
  90. Smith, David H., Jacqueline Macaulay, and Associates. 1980. Participation in Social and Political Activities. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass PublishersGoogle Scholar
  91. Smith, David H., and John P. Robinson. (forthcoming) 2016. “Data Contradicting Putnam’s Two Participation Decline Theses: Recent Volunteering and Membership Rates and Trends in North America and Elsewhere.” Chestnut Hill, MA: Department of Sociology, Boston College. Unpublished Paper Submitted for Editorial ReviewGoogle Scholar
  92. Smith, David H., and Ce Shen. 2002. “The Roots of Civil Society: A Model of Voluntary Association Prevalence Applied to Data on Larger Contemporary Nations.” International Journal of Comparative Sociology 42(2):93–133Google Scholar
  93. Smith, David H., Robert A. Stebbins, and Michael A. Dover. 2006. A Dictionary of Nonprofit Terms and Concepts. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University PressGoogle Scholar
  94. Stolle, Dietlind. 2007. “Social Capital.” Pp. 654–674 in The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, edited by R. Dalton and H. Klingemann. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  95. Tuschmann, Avi. 2013. Our Political Nature: The Evolutionary Origins of What Divides Us. New York: Prometheus BooksGoogle Scholar
  96. Tusalem, Rollin F. 2007. “A Boon or a Bane? The Role of Civil Society in Third- and Fourth-Wave Democracies.” International Political Science Review 28(3):361–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Vedantam, Shankar. 2010. The Hidden Brain. New York: Spiegel & GrauGoogle Scholar
  98. Verba, Sidney, Kay L. Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  99. Walker, Edward T., John D. McCarthy, and Frank Baumgartner. 2011. “Replacing Members with Managers? Mutualism Among Membership and Nonmembership Advocacy Organizations in the United States.” American Journal of Sociology 116(4): 1284–1337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Web, Paul. 2009. “The Failings of Political Parties: Reality or Perception?” Representation 45(3):265–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annette Zimmer
    • 1
  • David H. Smith
    • 2
  • Abdalhadi Alijla
    • 3
  1. 1.Germany
  2. 2.USA
  3. 3.Palestine

Personalised recommendations