Giovanni Sartori: Selected Summaries: SELECTED SUMMARIES

By MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU

We have summarized the essentials of the following texts: PARTIES AND PARTY SYSTEMS, Chapter 1, ELEMENTS OF POLITICAL THEORY, Chapter 2, HOMO VIDENS, COMPARATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL ENGINEERING, Part 2, Chapters 5 to 7 and POLITICS. LOGIC AND METHOD IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES, chapter 8.

• Language: English
• Publisher: BOOKS AND SUMMARIES BY MAURICIO FAU
• Release date: Oct 7, 2021
• ISBN: 9798201968960

MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU

Mauricio Enrique Fau nació en Buenos Aires en 1965. Se recibió de Licenciado en Ciencia Política en la Universidad de Buenos Aires. Cursó también Derecho en la UBA y Periodismo en la Universidad de Morón. Realizó estudios en FLACSO Argentina. Docente de la UBA y AUTOR DE MÁS DE 3.000 RESÚMENES de Psicología, Sociología, Ciencia Política, Antropología, Derecho, Historia, Epistemología, Lógica, Filosofía, Economía, Semiología, Educación y demás disciplinas de las Ciencias Sociales. Desde 2005 dirige La Bisagra Editorial, especializada en técnicas de estudio y materiales que facilitan la transición desde la escuela secundaria a la universidad. Por intermedio de La Bisagra publicó 38 libros. Participa en diversas ferias del libro, entre ellas la Feria Internacional del Libro de Buenos Aires y la FIL Guadalajara.

Book preview

Giovanni Sartori: Selected Summaries

SELECTED SUMMARIES

MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU

Published by BOOKS AND SUMMARIES BY MAURICIO FAU, 2021.

While every precaution has been taken in the preparation of this book, the publisher assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions, or for damages resulting from the use of the information contained herein.

GIOVANNI SARTORI: SELECTED SUMMARIES

First edition. October 7, 2021.

Copyright © 2021 MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU.

ISBN: 979-8201968960

Written by MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU.

Table of Contents

Title Page

Copyright Page

Giovanni Sartori: Selected Summaries

1.4

Comprá en www.labisagra.com.ar

Sign up for MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU's Mailing List

Further Reading: Pierre Bourdieu: Summarized Classics

Also By MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU

About the Author

About the Publisher

GIOVANNI SARTORI: SELECTED ABSTRACTS

PARTIES AND PARTY SYSTEM

CHAPTER 1 THE PARTY AS A PARTY

1.1. From faction to party

The term party gradually replaced the more derogatory faction, and also sect. The concept of party was initially linked to the ideas of division and partition. But while faction is used for a concrete group, party is used as an analytical concept, rather than to describe any particular group.

MAQUIAVELO did not use the word party, and generally condemned sects and all forms of factionalism. The same thing happened later with MONTESQUIEU.

It was BOLINGBROKE who first wrote about parties: The government of a party must always end in the government of a faction.... Parties are a political evil and factions are the worst of all parties.

He saw the degeneration of parties into factions as inevitable. In fact, Bolingbroke had a party whose aim was to do away with parties. His ideal was that of unity and harmony.

HUME, too, is in favor of erasing artificial and odious distinctions. However, Hume makes a typology of partisanship, distinguishing between personal and real groups, and within these the factions, which he detests, and the parties, against which he is more flexible. In his opinion, factions based on interests are the most reasonable. As for parties, Hume rejects those linked to religion, but accepts parties as a lesser evil.

PARTIES OUTWEIGH FACTIONS BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT BASED ON INTERESTS OR AFFAIRS ALONE, BUT ALSO ON COMMON PRINCIPLES, which is the same position as BURKE, for whom the party has a generous ambition for power, as opposed to factions that have only petty interests. He used the term connections to legitimize the role of parties, in an age of monarchies.

For Bolingbroke and Hume the unconstitutional threat came from the formula divide and rule, of the King taking advantage of a factional and impotent parliament. Burke understood that the divisions, the parties in parliament were in a better position to resist against the crown.

Whereas for Bolingbroke the party is the opposition to the unconstitutional sovereign, Burke placed the party within the sphere of government and conceived of it, not as the representation of the subjects against the sovereign, but as another sovereign. What is remarkable about Burke is that he conceived of the party before it came into existence.

In the FRENCH REVOLUTION, despite the existence of many opposing groups, they were all against the formation of parties. They understood that what creates a plurality of parties is nothing more than personal interest.

There is a great influence of ROUSSEAU, of individualistic ideals and of the idea of Reason. Parties and factions were, as for Halifax, a conspiracy against the nation. And in the UNITED STATES, there was the same rejection of parties, on the part of its founding fathers: MADISON and WASHINGTON. And Jefferson, creator of the Republican Party, understood it in the same way as Bolingbroke: as a party that would put an end to partisanship.

1.2. Pluralism

Parties were accepted when it was understood that diversity was not necessarily incompatible with public order. Constitutionalism spoke of mixed government, i.e. the doctrine of the division and balance of powers, without and against parties. PARTIES WERE NOT SEEN AS PARTIES BUT AS FACTIONS, I.E. PARTS AGAINST THE WHOLE RATHER THAN PARTS OF THE WHOLE. Unity and unanimity were the ideals of the eighteenth century, because its reference was not liberal democracy, but ancient democracy.

Party pluralism was born in Protestant countries. There are three TYPES OF PLURALISM:

1- CULTURAL, WHICH implies a vision where difference and not similarity, dissent and not unanimity, are what lead to a pleasant life.

2- SOCIETAL, where it is important to clarify that a pluralistic society (with differences) is not necessarily a pluralistic society (with accepted differences).

3- POLITICAL, which implies the diversification of power, dissent, which must be differentiated from conflict and consensus. Consensus is a pluralistic unanimity that limits conflict.

It is possible that first the unified nation must exist, and only later appear the divisions in parties, subdivisions compatible with unity.

The relationship between political pluralism and the MAJORITY RULE is that it indicates that the majority must respect the minority, because otherwise it can fall into the tyranny of the majority, as Madison, Tocqueville and John Stuart Mill maintained. Associations favor a pluralistic climate when they are multiple (being able to join several social groupings at the same time) and voluntary.

1.3. Responsible and responsive government

What the English began to practice in the 18th century was not government by parties, but RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT, which precedes government by parties, and which consists of ministers being responsible to Parliament. The party of this era, Burke's party, organized the connections in Parliament: it did not organize members outside Parliament. They were aristocratic and undemocratic parties.

A GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE TO THE HOUSES BECOMES, IN THE LONG RUN, A GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PEOPLE, AND THEREFORE A GOVERNMENT RESPONSIVE TO THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE. (See chart page 47).

Getting the VOTE, even limited to a few, is a decisive step. The more the members of Parliament need votes, the more the party in Parliament, i.e. the aristocratic party, must spread its tentacles outwards, transforming itself into an ELECTORAL PARTY: if votes are to be sought, complaints must be met and, to a certain extent, demands must be satisfied.

There, these