Denominational Conflicts and Party Breakthrough: The Negative Case of the All-German People’s Party

IF 0.5 3区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
Matthias Dilling
{"title":"Denominational Conflicts and Party Breakthrough: The Negative Case of the All-German People’s Party","authors":"Matthias Dilling","doi":"10.1017/ssh.2022.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract National party breakthrough has often been attributed to new or previously minor parties seizing favorable political opportunities. The role of their strategic choices in response to political opportunities, however, has been underexplored because less attention has been paid to relevant negative cases, that is instances when parties encounter favorable conditions without breaking through. This article argues for a historical perspective when selecting these cases and investigates an often overlooked case from Germany’s early postwar democracy: Gustav Heinemann’s All-German People’s Party (GVP). Relying on archival data and historical research, this article reconstructs the conflicts between Catholics and Protestants that provided Heinemann with initially favorable conditions for party breakthrough. Strategic decisions on coalition building, the timing of party formation, and organization building explain the GVP’s failure to seize the opportunity. These findings highlight the importance of case selection as a part of the “historical turn” in political science and of new parties’ agency when explaining (the lack of) party breakthrough. The implications of these findings for the literature on new parties, case selection, and party system development are discussed.","PeriodicalId":46528,"journal":{"name":"Social Science History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ssh.2022.1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract National party breakthrough has often been attributed to new or previously minor parties seizing favorable political opportunities. The role of their strategic choices in response to political opportunities, however, has been underexplored because less attention has been paid to relevant negative cases, that is instances when parties encounter favorable conditions without breaking through. This article argues for a historical perspective when selecting these cases and investigates an often overlooked case from Germany’s early postwar democracy: Gustav Heinemann’s All-German People’s Party (GVP). Relying on archival data and historical research, this article reconstructs the conflicts between Catholics and Protestants that provided Heinemann with initially favorable conditions for party breakthrough. Strategic decisions on coalition building, the timing of party formation, and organization building explain the GVP’s failure to seize the opportunity. These findings highlight the importance of case selection as a part of the “historical turn” in political science and of new parties’ agency when explaining (the lack of) party breakthrough. The implications of these findings for the literature on new parties, case selection, and party system development are discussed.
教派冲突与政党突围:全德人民党的反面案例
摘要国家党的突破往往归因于新政党或以前的小政党抓住了有利的政治机会。然而,他们在应对政治机遇方面的战略选择的作用却没有得到充分的探索,因为人们对相关负面案例的关注较少,即政党在没有突破的情况下遇到有利条件的情况。本文在选择这些案例时,从历史的角度进行了论证,并调查了德国战后早期民主中一个经常被忽视的案例:古斯塔夫·海涅曼的全德人民党。本文借助档案资料和历史研究,重新建构了天主教和新教徒之间的冲突,这些冲突为海涅曼的政党突破提供了最初的有利条件。关于联盟建设、政党组建时间和组织建设的战略决策解释了GVP未能抓住机遇的原因。这些发现强调了案例选择作为政治学“历史转折”的一部分的重要性,以及在解释(缺乏)政党突破时新党代理的重要性。讨论了这些发现对新政党、案例选择和政党制度发展的文献的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Social Science History seeks to advance the study of the past by publishing research that appeals to the journal"s interdisciplinary readership of historians, sociologists, economists, political scientists, anthropologists, and geographers. The journal invites articles that blend empirical research with theoretical work, undertake comparisons across time and space, or contribute to the development of quantitative and qualitative methods of analysis. Online access to the current issue and all back issues of Social Science History is available to print subscribers through a combination of HighWire Press, Project Muse, and JSTOR via a single user name or password that can be accessed from any location (regardless of institutional affiliation).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信