The Emergence of Mass Partisanship in Russia, 1993-1996

Abstract

Previous studies of Russia search for party identification an all-or-nothing fashion. We adopt an alternative approach to studying the emergence of mass partisanship new democracies. In accordance with established theories, we argue partisanship develops over time and evidence of partisanship its early stages may be found basic behavioral and attitudinal indicators. We stipulate three expectations for the emergence of partisanship: (1) attachment grows with the cumulative effect of political experience; (2) as attachment grows, other views -acquire greater partisan consistency; and (3) attachments have a rational basis. Guided by these expectations, we use panel survey data from early elections to distinguish nascent partisans. Comparison of the behavior of partisans identified by our approach to the behavior of partisans identified using self-reported party identification measures raises doubts about how well self-identification measures capture partisanship this context. ccording to received wisdom during much of its first decade, postcommunist Russia has shown little promise of acquiring a stable party system or mass partisan alignment (Hill 1994; Sakwa 1995; Shevtsova 1995; Nogee and Mitchell 1997). Instead, Russia's parties are commonly regarded as impotent, personalistic, and undifferentiated, and the party system as a whole appear[s] to be suspended perpetual crisis (Fish 1995, 340; see also WVhite, Wyman, and Kryshtanovskaya 1995, 183; Parrot 1997, 17-18; Urban and Gel'man 1997, 175). A seminal work on Russian elections, How Russia Votes, concludes in Russia more than three quarters of the electorate lack any party identification(White, Rose, and McAllister 1997, 135) and that most people are not partisans the Western sense and the majority are to a significant degree anti-party (137). Recent empirical work challenges the prevailing view. Miller and colleagues detect a sizable growth partisanship throughout the decade and have started to study the forces behind it (Miller, Reisinger, and Hesli 1998; Miller and Klobucar 1999). Evans and Whitefield (1998) contend a party system has indeed been evolving Russia (see also Fish 1995; Whitefield and Evans 1998, 1999). Despite these important developments, however, the well-entrenched view of party system as chaotic, shapeless, and lacking mass partisanship persists (Gel'man and Golosov 1998; Hough 1998; Robinson 1998; Rose, Mishler, and Haerpfer 1998). For observers of Russian politics, an accurate assessment of mass partisanship can shed light on the promise of stability this fledgling democ-

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 193 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.