Over the past decades, European democracies have experienced diminishing trust in their political representative institutions leading to a decline in party membership as well as both reduced electoral turnout and overall political participation (Van Biezen et al., 2012). In response, many European parties began reforming themselves allowing for the direct participation of party members or even non-members in various intra-party arenas, such as leadership selections through primaries. Parties claim that such reforms increase intra-party democracy (IPD) by making internal organisation more inclusive and by providing all party members or even non-members with decision-making power perilously reserved to the party elites (Hazan and Rahat, 2010). However, the positive effect of increased IPD on membership is highly contested and surprisingly few relevant empirical and comparative studies exist. The central research question of this thesis is what are the (different) consequences of adopting different types of primary rules for party members? Hence, my aim is to examine whether the introduction of primaries is in fact as negative for party members as outlined by Katz and Mair (1994), Lefebvre (2011) or Hopkin (2001) or, alternatively, whether it represents a chance to revitalize parties as membership organizations (Macpherson, 1977; Ware, 1979; Bille, 2001). Primaries are defined as selection process for party leaders and candidates in which the final vote rests with either party members in closed primaries, or loosely defined group of party supporters or the wider electorate, open primaries. Thus, introducing a primary leads to a change in the level of intra-party democracy, as it shifts power from a more exclusive selectorate to either of the two selectorates outlined above. While this project focuses on primaries that select top-executive candidates, the theory and conceptual framework developed can be applied to primaries more broadly. The general argument put forward is that to capture the differentiated effects of party primaries we have to study the interplay between the rules determining who can vote (selectorate) and who can run (candidacy requirements) in primaries. This thesis answers its central research question by developing a conceptual framework that combines these two dimensions for party primaries that select the party leader in public office. First, it outlines the underlying logic of the conceptual framework that links the two dimensions and then provides a theoretical discussion of its consequences for party members looking specifically at the interaction between the two. To assess the consequences of different primary reforms, the thesis focuses on four dimensions of party membership: the party membership level, the turnout in primaries, the quality of membership and the attitude towards the leadership. This perspective highlights that different combinations of selection rules and candidacy requirements in primaries result in four distinct types of intra-party democracy from the perception of party members. In turn, these types lead party members to respond in a distinct fashion. Using a mixed-method case study approach, the second part of the thesis tests the theoretical framework for various Western European parties. The analysis will mainly use primary and secondary document analysis as well as new and existing survey data complemented by qualitative in-depth membership surveys. The main conclusion is that only some combinations of primary rules can lead to a positive effect for members while others do not. For example, closed primaries with open candidacy requirements will lead to more active participation of members, while open primaries with open candidacy requirements will reduce membership participation considerably.

An investigation of the origins and history of the Locofoco party, with particular emphasis upon the divergent theories which made up its heterogeneous ideology, is the first object of this study. A comparison can be made between this ideology and the national administration by studying the developments that took place in 1837 and by evaluating the reasons for the ultimate defeat of the Van Buren Democrats three years later.

µL

The author's Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin, 1914. / Reprinted from Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly, v. 24, no. 1, Jan. 1915. Bibliography: p. 3-5.

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Catholic University of America, 1928. / At head of title: The Catholic University of America. Bibliography: p. 129-133.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Catholic University of America, 1928. / At head of title: The Catholic University of America. Bibliography: p. 129-133.

This thesis examines the united and popular front campaigns in the north east of England. The region was important for the national success of both projects since it was dominated by a moderate and loyal labour movement. Chapter one examines united and popular front activity in the region in 1936 and provides an explanation of why there was so little of it. The second chapter focuses on divisions within the labour movement which provided significant barriers to united and popular front supporters. Chapter three examines the divisions related to the significant number of Catholics within the labour movement. It argues that Catholic disquiet over the labour movement's attitude to the Spanish civil war did not provoke serious internal divisions, though Catholics remained opposed to Communism and therefore to the united and popular fronts. The Unity Campaign of 1937 and its effect is discussed in chapter four. This campaign drew very little support from within the labour movement and failed to improve relations between the left parties. Its effect, however, was not as damaging as some have claimed. The following four chapters deal solely with aspects of the popular front. Chapter five discusses the 1938 United Peace Alliance campaign and examines the fresh potential that the aftermath of the Munich settlement offered. The 1939 Cripps Petition campaign is examined in chapter six. Both campaigns failed to mobilise significant labour movement support in the region. Chapter seven considers the attitudes of Conservatives and Liberals to the popular front. Liberal support was almost non-existent. Liberal attitudes were generally characterised by opposition to both socialism and communism, therefore their natural allies were the Conservatives, who largely supported Chamberlain and thus opposed the popular front. Chapter eight, on the Tyneside foodship, assesses the argument that the 'Aid Spain' campaigns constituted the closest thing to a popular front in Britain. Generally speaking, these campaigns cannot be seen as de facto popular fronts as they were humanitarian and not political. The thesis concludes that the united front was not very united, nor was the popular front very popular in the region, reflecting their failures at national level.

Throughout its history, internal conflict has divided and threatened to rupture the British Labour Party. Yet even by the standards of a party accustomed to internal dissension, conflict during the period 1951-59 was particularly intense. It becomes the purpose of the thesis to consider the sources and nature of conflict during the period, and in particular to examine the character of the Bevan/Gaitskell relationship relative to that conflict. It was found that Bevan and Gaitskell were both intellectuals and advanced theoreticians whose analyses led them to adopt different if not always opposing policy positions. On occasions these differences heightened the rivalry between them, and provoked conflict. However, Bevan in particular was willing to restrain his radical, fundamentalist insticts in the interests of preserving party unity. He was also prepared, on occasions, to attempt the influence of policy development not through rebellion, but rather as a participating member of the party leadership group. Just as it is possible to overestimate the importance of ideological difference as a source of conlict between the two men, so too the importance of rivalry between them for power and position is easily overestimated. The research indicates that conflict within the party was created not so much by direct rivalry between Bevan and Gaitskell as by the reaction of Gaitskell, Morrison and most particularly the trade union leadership to the threat posed by organized Bevanism, and by the subsequent reaction and interaction of the fundamentalist and social democratic associates of Bevan and Gaitskell.

No description available.