Exogenous Voter Preferences and Parties with State Power: Some Internal Problems of Economic Theories of Party Competition

This paper deals with the theories of electoral or party competition in liberal democracies which have been put forward in ‘economic’ models of democracy by Downs, Riker and Ordeshook, Robertson and others. There can be few doubts about the growing importance or appeal of these models, especially for North American political science. Barry, for example, argues that ‘we have seen the last of the “sociologists” in political science’, while in contrast the economic approach has ‘flourished quantitatively and qualitatively’. Barry attributes this change-round since the early 1960s to political scientists' penetration of sociologists' ‘characteristically sloppy logic and flabby prose to discover the deeper problems of circularity and vacuousness inherent in the approach’. In contrast, economic models have claimed the mantle of strictly developed deductive theory and displayed remarkable elusiveness as objects of criticism. Most attacks have been represented as irrelevant by appealing to the Friedmanite epistemology which denies any significance to the descriptive ‘realism’ of a deductive theory's assumptions. As Downs argued: ‘Theoretical models should be tested by the accuracy of their predictions rather than by the reality of their assumptions’. That such a naive verificationism cannot discriminate between the (potentially large) range of non-falsified explanations has not impeded economic models' progress, largely because a similar position is espoused in almost all competing ‘mainstream’ electoral analysis.

[1]  George J. Stigler,et al.  De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum , 2010 .

[2]  Patrick Dunleavy The Political Implications of Sectoral Cleavages and the Growth of State Employment: Part 1, the Analysis of Production Cleavages , 1980 .

[3]  W. Miller What was the Profit in Following the Crowd? The Effectiveness of Party Strategies on Immigration and Devolution , 1980, British Journal of Political Science.

[4]  Benjamin I. Page,et al.  Reciprocal Effects of Policy Preferences, Party Loyalties and the Vote , 1979, American Political Science Review.

[5]  Patrick Dunleavy The Urban Basis of Political Alignment: Social Class, Domestic Property Ownership, and State Intervention in Consumption Processes , 1979, British Journal of Political Science.

[6]  W. Miller Social Class and Party Choice in England: A New Analysis , 1978, British Journal of Political Science.

[7]  Latsis,et al.  Method and Appraisal in Economics: Contents , 1976 .

[8]  John W. Gorman,et al.  Comment: What Have You Done for Me Lately? Toward An Investment Theory of Voting , 1976, American Political Science Review.

[9]  M. Laver STRATEGIC CAMPAIGN BEHAVIOUR FOR ELECTORS AND PARTIES: THE NORTHERN IRELAND ASSEMBLY ELECTION OF 1973 , 1975 .

[10]  W. Korpi Conflict, Power and Relative Deprivation , 1974, American Political Science Review.

[11]  D. Wittman Parties as Utility Maximizers , 1973, American Political Science Review.

[12]  V. Weizsäcker,et al.  Notes on endogenous change of tastes , 1971 .

[13]  Michael Taylor,et al.  Decision Rules and Policy Outcomes , 1971, British Journal of Political Science.

[14]  I. McAllister The Northern Ireland Social Democratic and Labour Party: Political Opposition in a Divided Society , 1977 .

[15]  Ian Budge,et al.  Party identification and beyond: Representations of voting and party competition , 1976 .

[16]  David Bruce Robertson,et al.  A theory of party competition , 1976 .

[17]  A. Downs An Economic Theory of Democracy , 1957 .