Ostroverkhov Alexander

In Searching for Theory of One-Party Dominance: World Experience of Studying Dominant-Party Systems (II)

The article reviews more than 65-year experience of studying dominant-party systems based on the analysis of a set of empirical and theoretical works devoted to the phenomenon of one-party dominance. In the second part of the article (for the first part see Politeia, 2017, No 3) A.Ostroverkhov examines the existing definitions of a dominant-party system and assesses the prospects for the development of the theory of one-party dominance. In his opinion, it is impossible to understand what really constitutes one-party dominance and why dominant-party systems are formed without returning to theoretical and methodological achievements within the framework of the interpretive paradigm, especially dialectics, which proposes contradictions between positivism and anti-positivism should be taken into account and overcome.

DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2017-87-4-133-149

Pages: 133-149

In Searching for Theory of One-Party Dominance: World Experience of Studying Dominant-Party Systems (I)

The article reviews more than 65-year experience of studying dominant-party systems based on the analysis of a set of empirical and theoretical works devoted to the phenomenon of one-party dominance. In the first part of the article published in this issue A.Ostroverkhov examines the stages of one-party dominance conceptualization and compares the main approaches to defining a dominant party and a dominant-party system, revealing insurmountable contradictions between Political Sociology and Political Science regarding this problem. If Political Sociology views one-party dominance as a predominant influence of a particular party in a society caused by certain socio-psychological, cultural-historical, economic and politico-legal reasons, Political Science views it as a merely quantitative superiority of the ruling party over its rivals.

DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2017-86-3-136-153