Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Party Politics
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McAllister, I.
Right arrow Articles by White, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Democracy, Political Parties and Party Formation in Postcommunist Russia

Ian McAllister

Stephen White

The paper uses a survey conducted in late 1992 to examine popular support for and attitudes towards Russia's postcommunist political parties. The findings confirm that support for democratic reform is at best conditional, and negative mentions of political parties vastly outnumber positive ones. Although popular knowledge about currently active political parties is limited, five main parties attract majority support. A factor analysis of opinions of the main parties indicates three underlying dimensions: a centre/reformist dimension (subdivided into those who are partially aligned with the communists and those who oppose them); a right/nationalist dimension; and a left/communist dimension. The democratic reformist dimension attracts the largest popular support, followed by the communist dimension; the nationalist dimension attracts a negligible following. None of the three dimensions has any secure socio-economic basis within the electorate, however, and the differences that exist are mainly ideological. It is argued that the reformist and communist dimensions, perhaps under different labels, will form the basis for the more stable party system that is likely to emerge in the future.

Key Words: parties and party systems • social structure • cleavages • Russia

Party Politics, Vol. 1, No. 1, 49-72 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/1354068895001001003
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Party PoliticsHome page
J. Ishiyama and J. J. Quinn
African Phoenix? Explaining the Electoral Performance of the Formerly Dominant Parties in Africa
Party Politics, May 1, 2006; 12(3): 317 - 340.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Party PoliticsHome page
S. K. Wegren
The Communist Party of Russia: Rural Support and Implications for the Party System
Party Politics, September 1, 2004; 10(5): 565 - 582.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Party PoliticsHome page
J. T. Ishiyama
`Red versus Expert': Candidate Recruitment and Communist Party Adaptation in Post-Soviet Politics
Party Politics, July 1, 1998; 4(3): 297 - 318.
[Abstract]

Home page
 Comparative Political StudiesHome page
J. T. ISHIYAMA
The Sickle or the Rose?: Previous Regime Types and the Evolution of the Ex-Communist Parties in Post-Communist Politics
Comparative Political Studies, June 1, 1997; 30(3): 299 - 330.
[Abstract]

Home page
 Party PoliticsHome page
J. T. Ishiyama
Red Phoenix?: The Communist Party in Post-Soviet Russian Politics
Party Politics, April 1, 1996; 2(2): 147 - 175.
[Abstract]