IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v14y2002i1p9-35.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Anti-System Parties

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanni Capoccia

    (Magdelen College, University of Oxford, giovanni.capoccia@magd.ox.ac.uk)

Abstract

Many years after its emergence in the vocabulary of comparative politics, the label of ‘anti-system’ is still one of the most used to describe a party or group that exerts a radical form of opposition. However, the term has been used in an increasingly idiosyncratic manner, which makes it inappropriate for comparative research. The origins of the concept reside in the writings of Sartori on party systems in the 1960s and 1970s, where it mainly referred to the totalitarian parties of the inter-war and post-war decades. Since its inception, however, the concept of an anti-system party has not only been used in party system analysis, but also in the context of empirical studies of various aspects of the life of democratic regimes, to indicate challenges to its stability, legitimacy or, more recently, consolidation. This article reconstructs the concept of ‘anti-systemness’ by disentangling its different empirical referents in party system theory and in the empirical analysis of democracy, and proposes a more refined typology of ‘anti-system parties’.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni Capoccia, 2002. "Anti-System Parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 14(1), pages 9-35, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:14:y:2002:i:1:p:9-35
    DOI: 10.1177/095169280201400103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/095169280201400103
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/095169280201400103?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Franco Ferraresi, 1988. "The Radical Right in Postwar Italy," Politics & Society, , vol. 16(1), pages 71-119, March.
    2. Sartori, Giovanni, 1970. "Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 1033-1053, December.
    3. Daalder, Hans, 1984. "In Search of the Center of European Party Systems," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 78(1), pages 92-109, March.
    4. Collier, David & Mahon, James E., 1993. "Conceptual “Stretching†Revisited: Adapting Categories in Comparative Analysis," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(4), pages 845-855, December.
    5. Budge, Ian & Herman, Valentine, 1978. "Coalitions and Government Formation: An Empirically Relevant Theory," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 459-477, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elham Mansoury Babhoutak & Dimokritos Kavadias & Nohemi Jocabeth Echeverria Vicente, 2020. "Exclusion and Antisystem Attitudes: The Impact of Perceived Discrimination in Attitudes towards Democracy and the Willingness to Use Violence among Adolescents in Brussels," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-17, October.
    2. Gustav Lidén, 2013. "What about theory? The consequences on a widened perspective of social theory," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 213-225, January.
    3. Victoria Finn, 2022. "A qualitative assessment of QCA: method stretching in large-N studies and temporality," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(5), pages 3815-3830, October.
    4. Thomas Rixen & Lora Anne Viola, 2015. "Putting path dependence in its place: toward a Taxonomy of institutional change," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(2), pages 301-323, April.
    5. Michener, Gregory, 2015. "Policy Evaluation via Composite Indexes: Qualitative Lessons from International Transparency Policy Indexes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 184-196.
    6. Matthijs Bogaards, 2000. "The Uneasy Relationship between Empirical and Normative Types in Consociational Theory," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(4), pages 395-423, October.
    7. Gong, Cheng & Ribiere, Vincent, 2021. "Developing a unified definition of digital transformation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    8. Rodrigo Barrenechea & Isabel Castillo, 2019. "The many roads to Rome: family resemblance concepts in the social sciences," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 107-130, January.
    9. John Gerring & Paul A. Barresi, 2003. "Putting Ordinary Language to Work," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 15(2), pages 201-232, April.
    10. August Wierling & Valeria Jana Schwanitz & Sebnem Altinci & Maria Bałazińska & Michael J. Barber & Mehmet Efe Biresselioglu & Christopher Burger-Scheidlin & Massimo Celino & Muhittin Hakan Demir & Ric, 2021. "FAIR Metadata Standards for Low Carbon Energy Research—A Review of Practices and How to Advance," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-20, October.
    11. Vüllers, Johannes, 2014. "Geographical Patterns of Analysis in IR Research: Representative Cross-Regional Comparison as a Way Forward," GIGA Working Papers 256, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    12. Gary Goertz & James Mahoney, 2005. "Two-Level Theories and Fuzzy-Set Analysis," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 33(4), pages 497-538, May.
    13. Christel Koop & Martin Lodge, 2017. "What is regulation? An interdisciplinary concept analysis," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 95-108, March.
    14. Xinyu Zhang & Yue Liao, 2023. "A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis of Populism Research (2000–2020)," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.
    15. Reuven Y. Hazan, 1995. "Center Parties and Systemic Polarization," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 7(4), pages 421-445, October.
    16. Peters, Ina, 2014. "Too Abstract to Be Feasible? Applying the Grounded Theory Method in Social Movement Research," GIGA Working Papers 247, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    17. Pursey Heugens & J. Oosterhout & Muel Kaptein, 2006. "Foundations and Applications for Contractualist Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 211-228, October.
    18. Xiaohong Yu & Zhaoyang Sun, 2022. "The company they keep: When and why Chinese judges engage in collegiality," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 936-1002, December.
    19. Thomas Denk, 2013. "How to measure polyarchy with Freedom House: a proposal for revision," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 3457-3471, October.
    20. A. M. A. van Deemen, 1991. "Coalition Formation in Centralized Policy Games," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 3(2), pages 139-161, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:14:y:2002:i:1:p:9-35. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.