From Consensus to Dissensus
A Note on Postindustrial Political Parties
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7728083 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Brent S Steel (0000-0003-0081-340X), Brent Steel, Taketsugu Tsurutani |
| Year | 1986 |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 235 |
| Publication date | 1986-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Comparative Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0010-4159 • E-ISSN: 2151-6227 |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/421845 |
| OpenAlex | W2318627325 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 6 |
Much of postwar period in advanced industrial democracies was characterized by a consistent decline of ideological asperity and substantive policy conflict between major parties of right and of left. The decline was so palpable in eyes of some analysts that they once confidently spoke of the end of ideology. Politics in these democracies lost traditional hot political climate of combat and struggle and instead became, in words of one European journalist, boring.' Thus arrived an era of political consensus-convergence of right and left-and an age of depoliticization.2 Indeed, during postwar period through 1950s, and 1960s, and perhaps into first years of 1970s, it did not seem to matter much in these nations whether government was in hands of party of right or that of left. Whatever differences remained between them were tactical--questions of and how much-and not substantive, that is, not of objectives. Khrushchev's caustic observation about party competition in United States, that it did not make any difference which horse won because both were from same stable, was basically accurate and applied to most of western democracies. Major parties, of right as well as of left, had ceased to be agents of differing visions of societal destiny and had instead become instruments of intermediation and consensus-building, and they appeared to be quite successful. That age of policy consensus seems to have deteriorated, however. In its place, there have emerged in some democracies trends toward repoliticization and dissensus. Ideological contentiousness is on rise again. Resurgence of policy differences between some parties of right and those of left, as a consequence, is becoming noticeable. And which party is in power seems again to make differences in policy outcome. These trends are, of course, not uniform among advanced industrial democracies. In some, such as Britain, they are quite pronounced; in others, for example West Germany, they may be considered incipient; in still others, they are not ascertainable at all. Why in some but not in others? This essay attempts first to summarize briefly causes of consensus that obtained during much of postwar period (and still obtains in a number of these democracies) and then to examine those of new dissensus and repoliticization where this new trend seems more noticeable
Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Post-industrial society · Sociology · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies · Populism, Right-Wing Movements · Public Administration
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,13 |
| Citation span | 1986 - 2025 (40) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |