Path: Janda: Political Parties, Home Page > Part 1: Table of Contents > Chapter 6
Chapter 6: Issue Orientation (pp. 53-77), this is p. 64
(you can navigate to other pages by clicking on page numbers below)
p. 53
p. 54
p. 55
p. 56
p. 57
p. 58
p. 59
p. 60
p. 61
p. 62
p. 63
p. 67
p. 70
p. 73
p. 74
p. 77

TABLE 6.8a: Mid 1950s: BV5.07 Alignment with East-West Blocs

TABLE 6.8b: Early 1960s: BV5.07 Alignment with East-West Blocs

equated with the exercise of any form of political control or influence by one political community over another" (Daalder 1968, p. 101). Even with the end of colonialism in the classic sense of formal sovereignty over subordinate political units, the broader issue of foreign influence over previously dependent peoples remains alive in the use of "neocolonialism," in which "overt colonial rule is thus replaced by economic and other forms of control, including the provision of aid, and the nominally free countries are Balkanized and manipulated in the imperial interest" (Emerson 1968, pp. 3-4). Colonialism in the classic sense was clearly a salient issue for parties in formerly dependent countries. As Hodgkins points out, "the colonial situation obliges African parties to regard the realization of independence or self-government, in some form, as their primary aim" (1961, pp. 151-152). Much the same situation, of course, applies to parties in former colonies in Asia, but achievement of self-government per se no longer figures as an issue in other areas of the world, notably Latin America, where "neocolonialism" is opposed instead. In our usage, we treat "anticolonialism" as including "anti-neocolonialism" as well.

"Anticolonialism" must be distinguished from whatever abridgments of sovereignty accompany "supranational integration," another basic variable in our issue orientation cluster. The issue of supranational integration involves agreement between two or more already sovereign nations to surrender portions of their autonomy or sovereignty subject to joint rule making, rule adjudication, and rule enforcement. The relationship among the political units entering a supranational organization is presumed to be essentially a symmetrical one. On the other hand, the issue of anticolonialism involves an asymmetrical relationship between a single nation, which is either politically or economically superior, and another political unit relegated to a subordinate political or economic status.

The manner in which party policy is likely to be expressed on the anticolonialism issue whether the party opposes or favors the exercise of political influence or economic control of a people by a separate and alien political community depends on the status of the nation in which the party operates. Is it in the superior or subordinate position? If in the superior position, then party policy is expressed in terms of relinquishing or maintaining control of the subject peoples, with the most extreme leftist position as relinquishing territory and the most extreme rightist position as the maintenance of the empire. If the country is in the subordinate position, then party policy is expressed in terms of winning independence or accepting political rule, with the most extreme leftist position as not only eliminating subordinate political status but also rejecting future cooperation with the former colonial power. The most extreme rightists, on the other hand, stand ready to accept a subordinate role, cooperating with the colonial administrators in governing the territory.

The anticolonialism issue involves given nations and peoples in specific asymmetric relationships, for example, France as a colonizing nation with Algeria as a former colony. Party policies within these two political units tend to become unit specific, that is, prescribing policy for France with respect to Algeria or Algeria with respect to France. While these policies are usually focused on a single unit-specific relationship for parties in

go to page 65