Path: Janda: Political Parties, Home Page > Part 1: Table of Contents > Chapter 14
Chapter 14: Validating the Conceptual Framework (pp. 135-161), p. 150
(you can navigate to other pages by clicking on page numbers below)
p. 135
p. 136
p. 137
p. 138
p. 139
p. 140
p. 141
p. 142
p. 143
p. 144
p. 145
p. 146
p. 147
p. 148
p. 149
p. 151
p. 152
p. 153
p. 154
p. 155
p. 156
p. 157
p. 158
p. 159
p. 160
p. 161

TABLE 14.6 : Relationship between Party Strategies and Direct Tactics


Strategy Variable


Direct Tactics

6.00 Open Competition


Advertising candidates by mass media: radio, TV, newspapers


Advertising candidates by signs, posters, billboards, mail


Promoting candidates through direct contact and canvassing


Holding public meetings and rallies for candidate exposure


Registering voters, transporting them to polls

6.10 Restricting Competition


Interfering with opposition advertising


Harassing opposition party workers


Harassing opposition voters, buying votes


Falsifying vote reports


Coopting political opponents

6.20 Subverting the System


Boycotting elections, destroying ballots or election records


Terrorizing the population


Leading strikes and riots against the government


Sabotaging government facilities


Attempting assassinations, attempting coups

[a] Correlations significant at the .01 level or greater, one-tailed test.

these tactics as being directly linked with (i.e., peculiar to) a strategy of open competition. In view of the rather consistent relationships among the other tactics and strategies--supporting the validity of the scoring overall--it seems that the weakness is in the initial identification of these tactics with a strategy of open competition. The three tactics appear instead to be of general political utility to parties and are not peculiarly used by parties committed to a strategy of open competition. Both restrictive and subversive parties may find it useful to advertise their candidates with signs and posters, for example. While subversive parties may not risk promoting their candidates through direct contact with voters or holding public meetings, both tactics are certainly feasible for restrictive parties. The observed correlations between these tactics and the restrictive and subversive strategies support these interpretations, but the limited number of cases cautions against pursuing the findings any further. Bearing these limitations in mind, one still has evidence for the validity of the strategy variables.

Whereas the tactics considered so far were directly linked to particular party strategies, the remaining party tactics were thought to have more general political utility and were thus labeled as indirect tactics. Three classes of indirect tactics were proposed. They dealt with (1) propagandizing ideas and programs, (2) entering alliances with other parties, and (3) providing for welfare of party members. The specific tactics proposed under each of these headings should be positively intercorrelated among themselves. These expectations were fulfilled in each of the three cases, but the strengths of some correlations were too low to inspire confidence that certain tactics deserved to be treated as classified. The three sets of indirect tactics and the results of the data analysis are described briefly below.

Four tactics were proposed as indicators of a more general activity dimension called "propagandizing ideas and programs." The argument was that greater use of each tactic signified a higher degree of propagandizing activity and the expectation was that use of one tactic would be associated with use of the others. The tactics were

6.31 Operating mass communications media: party newspaper, radio/TV station
6.32 Operating party schools (not general education schools)

next page, 151