To what extent do recent elections in the UK and the USA support the dealignment thesis?

Authors Avatar

To what extent do recent elections in the UK and the USA support the dealignment thesis?

        

        In order to answer this question, key terms in it need to be defined, explained and explored. In this essay, I am going to be answering three questions, which, will point, toward a final conclusion. Firstly, we will need to discover the source of the dealignment thesis, what are its characteristics and what are its implications. Secondly, I am going to have to investigate, whether, either, the UK or the USA, in recent elections, bear any characteristics of the dealignment thesis. Thirdly, I am going to conclude whether recent elections in Britain and America support the dealignment thesis. It is my belief that although we can find characteristics of the dealignment theory, elections are too complex and exclusive events to assign one label to them. Indeed, I believe there are even more important factors that affect election results.

        Walter Dean Burnham, an American political scientist, first put the dealignment thesis forward in his discussion of ‘electoral desegregation’, in 1970.  Two years later Wallenberg was to describe they’re as being a “dealignment in American politics”, it was this expression that was to become more commonly used. The dealignment thesis, put simply, is the concept that, citizens instead of shifting allegiances from one party to another, have in fact dropped any allegiance at all. Voters are now very susceptible to election-to-election appeals (S. Maisel, 2001: 57). The electorate now, its is argued have “weaker less cumulative allegiances” (I. Crewe, 1983: 183) Therefore, traditional predictors of whom the electorate now vote for, based on party partisanship, class, and ideological alignment, cannot, now be used.  I am going to show how, disenfranchisement from these three factors supports, the dealignment thesis.  

        Party partisanship is, a key feature of the dealignment thesis. Ivor Crewe argues that it is the, “strongest single correlate for long term party loyalty.” (I Crewe, 1983: 188) Its essence is that voters feel a strong affinity towards one of the parties and will vote for them despite the political situation. Seemingly, it can be summed up, as “Voters' loyalties were emotional rather than rational.” (www.rdg.ac.uk) If we look back to our definition of dealignment, we can see that one of its characteristics was that fewer voters were aligned to a party. I must question whether recent elections have shown there to be a decrease in non-partisan voters indicating dealignment in voting in the UK and USA. Certainly, there seems to be much support for the decrease in partisanship amongst scholars in Britain; “party loyalties have increasingly become overridden by other short term factors in recent election.” (I Crewe, 1983: 189)  While in the USA “partisan ties have become weaker than they were twenty or even thirty years ago.” (S.Wayne, 2001: 74). Two factors, those who feel no identification to any party, and those who feel a very strong identification to the party can demonstrate party partisanship. In Britain in 2001 “only 14% described themselves as ‘very strong’ party supporters.” This was from a high point of 40% in the 1960’s. (J. Fisher et al., 2003: 163) In 1996 52% of voters “did not identify with either party.” (E.C Ladd, 1997: 15) While in America the situation is mirrored, in 1996, “29% of voters strongly identified with Republican or Democrats.” While in 1964 this figure was 38% (D. McKay, 2002: 35) “Voters are becoming more ambivalent towards their parties.” (S.Maisel, 2001: 57) We can see that those who are ‘very strong’ supporters of parties are becoming fewer. The other determinate of dealignment in voting was whether there was an increase in those who were independent of any party affiliation. In USA “between 1960 and 1993 the number of voters calling themselves independent rose from 23% to 33%.” (D. McKay, 2002: 36) Therefore a third of voters in USA were without a preference of who to vote for, “indeed it may well be 50% or more.” (D. McKay, 2002: 36) In Britain “dilution of partisanship occurred with reasonable uniformity.” (I. Crewe, 1983: 191) Recent election data and commentary seem to support the dealignment thesis however we must be cautious “residual attachments to major parties remain widespread.” (I. Crewe, 1983: 19)

Join now!

        We described dealignment as, ‘the reduction if not loss of class alignment to a specific party’. Indeed, class “has been the primary choice almost exclusive social base of party choice.” (I. Crewe, 1983 p192) in Britain the debate about embourgeoisement resurfaced. There were areas of working class voters who became more prosperous, particularly in the south. Increased share ownership combined with the decrease in price and increased availability blurred the lines between the working and middle class. This was compounded by the decline in traditional industrials, with the emergence of new industries. Conservatives therefore held a grip on the prosperous ...

This is a preview of the whole essay