The "ac" code is for "adequacy-confidence"--a
data
quality measure ranging from 0 (low) to 9
(high)
Party Name and Code number
French Republican Radical and Radical
Socialist Party, 112, Parti Republicain Radical et
Radical-Socialiste (Usually called just Radical
Socialist)
Institutionalization Variables,
1.01-1.06
1.01 Year of Origin and 1.02 Name
Changes
1901, ac7
15, ac4
Most sources agree on 1901 as the date of
origin for the Radical Socialist Party, although some sources fix
the origin as 1885 when parliamentary deputies were grouped
together as radicals. But there is general agreement on the
organization beginning in 1901. From one standpoint, there has
never been a name change, for radicals have operated in French
politics since the party's founding and through our time period.
However, the party participated in a series of publicized
alliances which featured distinct labels, and changing party
labels complicated the history of the radicals. Thus, in 1946, the
radicals entered the Rassemblement des Gauches (RGR), which
included the radicals until 1956, when the RGR was formed as a
separate party by Faure after his expulsion from the radicals.
Then in 1962, some Radical Socialist deputies formed the
Rassemblement Democratique. Several other terms were applied to
radical deputies of various inclination--not counting the union
Democratique et Socialiste de la Resistance (UDSR), included in
the RGR and often included in tallying radical votes. Our name
change code reflects a major change in each period--1941-49,
1950-56, and 1957-62, for a score of 15. The ac is low indicating
that our judgment is disputable.
1.03 Organizational
Discontinuity
14, ac9
A major split occurred in the party in 1955
with Faure's expulsion and the ascendancy of the followers of
Mendes-France over the so-called neo-radicals on the right wing of
the prty. Another but less important fissure developed over the
Departuf Morice in 1956. Another major split developed in 1958,
when Mendes-France and some of his supporters left to form the
Centre D"action Democratique.
1.04 Leadership Competition
16, ac9
There was a continuing struggle for power
in the party, especially since Mendes-France and his followers
tried to assume control and reorient its policies. There were
often times when it was hard to tell who was in charge, but the
post of party president was contested, won, and lost in the party
congresses.
1.05 Legislative Instability
Instability is .28, ac5
Radical parliamentary representation
includes "associates", primarily the UDSR, although the radicals
and UDSR delegates maintained separate groups in the assembly,
even when united as the RGR.
1.06 Electoral Instability
Instability is .22, ac7
Data are for four elections held in 1951, 56, 58, and 62. The a/c
suffers because of questions as to which "associated" party
groupings ought to be included in the Radical Socialist
column.
Governmental Status Variables,
2.01-2.07
2.01 Government Discrimination
0 for 1950-62, ac6
The electoral law of 1951 worked to the
disadvantage of the communists and the Gaullists, and the law of
1958 worked to the disadvantage of the communists, but the
interpretation of this code is that the law was neutral with
respect to the radicals
2.02 Governmental Leadership
7 out of 8 for 1950-57, ac9
1 out of 5 for 1958-62, ac9
The radicals could claim these premiers
from 1950 through 1957 - Queuille in 50 and 51, Faure in 52, Mayer
in 53, Mendes-France in 54 and 55, Faure again in 55,
Bourges-Maunoury in 1957, and Gaillard in 1957. Gaillard also held
the post for several months in 1958.
2.03 Cabinet Participation
8 out of 8 for 1950-57, ac9
1 out of 5 for 1958-62, ac9
The radicals operated very much as a
governmental party during the first part of our time period,
figuring in cabinet coalitions in almost a continuous string
throughout. But with the advent of the fifth republic, the
radicals were excluded from government participation as they
opposed the new constitutional structure.
2.04 National Participation
5 for 1950-57, ac6
5 for 1958-62, ac5
According to 1956 sample survey data, these
four regions of France--Paris and north, west, east, and
center/south--contributed to the radical socialist vote somewhat
disproportionately when compared to their proportions of the
population. The radicals derived about 40 percent of their support
from the center/south region, which had only about 28 percent of
the population. The average deviation of support across these four
regions was 9.5 percentage points.
2.05 Legislative Strength
Strength is .14 for 1950-57, ac6 and .08
for 1958-62, ac5
Radical parliamentary representation
includes "associates", primarily the UDSR, although the radicals
and UDSR delegates maintained separate groups in the assembly,
even when united as the RGR.
2.06 Electoral Strength
Strength is .13 for 1950-57, ac7 and .10
for 1958-62, ac7
Data are for four elections held in 1951,
56, 58, and 62. The a/c suffers because of questions as to which
"associated" party groupings ought to be included in the Radical
Socialist column.
2.07 Outside Origin
4, ac6
Two major radical groups in parliament, the republican radicals
and the socialist radicals, fused to form the radical republican
and radical socialist party in 1901, becoming the largest party in
the chamber of deputies.
Issue Orientation Variables, 5.01-5.15
5.01 Ownership of Means of
Production
1 for 1950-62, ac7
Committed to private property it accepted
some government ownership and controlmore control than owners
hip.
5.02 Government Role in Economic
Planning
0 for 1950-62, ac5
Except for a period in the middle 1950"s,
prompted by the urgings of Mendes France, the radicals were
generally in opposition to government direction of the economy
except for plans of agricultural development. The overall score
reflects ambivalence at best.
5.03 Redistribution of Wealth
1 for 1950-62, ac6
Worked against the extension of income tax
and even favored reduction of inheritance taxes to create
wealth.
5.04 Social Welfare
1 for 1950-62, ac6
Seemed concerned over the statism that
would develop from the extension of social welfare programs. Its
record on social welfare measures was mixed. It supported the
principle of social security but was concerned about its
implementation.
5.05 Secularization of Society
2 for 1950-62, ac7
Traditionally anti-clerical, the radicals
divided over the issue of state subsidies to church schools, with
the majority voting in opposition to the Barange measure. While
Laicite, or anti-clericalism, was still a rallying point for the
radicals, the issue clearly became blunted over the
years.
5.06 Support of the Military
1 for 1950-62, ac3
Very little evidence in the literature on
this question. Radicals did tend to oppose the atomic strike force
for France in the 1960"s.
5.07 Alignment with East-West
Blocs
5 for 1950-62, ac7
Anti-Soviet attitudes were especially
prominent during the neo-radical period before and perhaps after
Mendes-France.
5.08 Anti-Colonialism
3 for 1950-57, ac8 -
1 for 1958-62, ac5
The link between the radicals and colons,
French settlers in Algeria, was strong during the first half of
our time period, with reports that the radical party was heavily
funded by the colons. For a period during Mendes-France's
leadership around 1956, the party swerved away from its strong
stand in opposition to Algerian independence, but the withdrawal
from colonial commitments was not well received. After
Mendes-France's departure, the radicals lapsed back into a
colonial posture, trying to salvage as much as possible from the
Algerian situation, although the party was not as coherent in its
colonial position.
5.09 Supranational Integration
0 for 1950-62, ac5
French participation in European
integration divided the party, whose deputies held views ranging
from moderate European integrationism to intense
nationalism.
5.10 National Integration
1 for 1950-62, ac3
Although the literature does not address
this issue specifically, the inference would be that the party's
strong roots in local governments would render it something far
less than integrationist in the establishment of national
authority. But note the low adequacy-confidence code associated
with this judgment.
5.11 Electoral Participation
5 for 1950-62, ac3
This issue was no longer salient in French
politics, but the radicals were presumed to favor the existing
situation of universal adult suffrage.
5.12 Protection of Civil Rights
3 for 1950-62, ac3
The literature does not dwell on
discrimination against minority groups, so the radicals" position
has to be inferred from radical philosophy. Despite their
opposition to the right in the Dreyfus affair, the radicals cannot
be described as strongly in favor of civil rights because this
would involve a willingness to use state power to suppress
discriminatory practices, which is contrary to the radicals" fear
of centralized state authority. Note, however, the uncertainty of
this judgment as reflected in the low adequacy-confidence
code.
5.13 Interference with Civil
Liberties
3 for 1950-62, ac3
Again, this is a position that has to be
inferred in the absence of specific information, but the intense
individualism that exudes from the radical philosophy suggests
that the party opposes restrictions on free expression of
opinion--at least on political matters.
5.14 / 5.15 US--Soviet Experts Left-Right
Ratings
US says 2, center
Soviets say, 2 party serving the petty and middle bourgeoisie,
wealthy peasants, and intelligentsia, but also a party of the
democratic left.
Goal Orientation Variables, 6.01-6.55
6.00 Open Competition in the Electoral
Process
4 for 1950-62, ac9
The radical party was clearly
electorally-oriented. The literature does not depict the party as
especially energetic in election campaigns, however.
6.10 Restricting Party
Competition
0 for 1950-62, ac9
Owing to their position in the middle of
the left-right continuum, the radicals had considerable leeway in
forming electoral alliances with other parties for elections of
deputies. But this practice ought not be interpreted as
restricting competition. Excepting the radicals support of
electoral legislation that discriminated against the communists
and, for a time, gaullists, the radicals did not follow a policy
of restricting party competition.
6.20 Subverting the Political
System
0 for 1950-62, ac9
These activities were not part of the
radicals orientation to politics.
6.30 Propagandizing Ideas and
Program
6.31--0, ac3. There is evidence of party
affiliation, but no decisive statement as to whether the party
operated these newspapers.
6.32--0, ac3. The radical socialists did
not appear to have operated party schools.
6.332 for 1950-57, ac6 and 2 for 1958-62,
ac9. The radical socialists frequently passed resolutions and
programs defining its political ideology.
6.34--1 for 1950-57, ac6 and for 1958-62,
ac1. The radical socialists published position papers. In 1956,
this was organized on a quarterly basis. There is no information
relating to the second half of our time period.
6.50 Providing for Welfare of Party
Members
0, ac3
There is no reference to any radical socialist participation in
social welfare activities for its members.
Autonomy Variables, 7.01-7.05
7.01 Sources of Funds
7 for 1950-62, ac3
The sale of membership cards and
subscriptions to publications seems to have provided the bulk of
radical finances, although the literature does not discuss party
finance much. It is clear that campaign funds were supplied to
radical candidates by the Counseil National du Patronat Francais
(CPNF), the national council of French employers, which also
supported other non-communist candidates. But in the absence of
better information, we doubt that this outside support accounted
for more than 1/3 of radical expenditures.
7.02 Source of Members
4 for 1950-62, ac6
The radical party was rather unique in
extending membership to organizations and newspapers as well as
individuals. But newspaper membership appears to have declined
during our time period.
7.03 Sources of Leaders
3 (sector 03), ac6
Accepting deputies elected to parliament in
the 1956, 1958, and 1962 elections as party leaders, it seems that
about 60 percent can be classified in the
educational/scientific/professional category.
7.04 Relations with Domestic
Parties
4 for 1950-57, ac9
7 for 1958-62, ac8
During the first half of our time period,
the radical party was involved in a series of electoral,
parliamentary, and governmental alliances. But with the ascendancy
of the UNR in 1958, it was deprived of the opportunity to fashion
governmental alliances and engaged only in opportunistic electoral
alliances.
7.05 Relations with Foreign
Organizations
4 for 1950-56, ac6
5 for 1957-62, ac6
For some years after the war, the radicals
were active in the liberal international, but this participation
waned toward the end of our time period, and the party apparently
was not represented at most meetings.
Organizational Complexity Variables,
8.01-8.07
8.01 Structural Articulation
4 for 1950-62, ac8
The national congress, national council,
and executive committee or bureau were the mai ational organs of
the radical party. While representation to the congress was
supposedly at a ratio of 1 delegate per 100 members in the local
committees and federations, there was little check on membership
other than purchase of membership cards. Moreover, admission to
the congress could be purchased itself, making the exact
composition of the congress an unstable matter. The national
council was huge itself, often more than 1,000, although only 150
constituted a quorum. The bureau numbered about 70.
8.02 Intensiveness of
Organization
3 for 1950-62, ac7
The basic unit of the party was commonly
identified as the local committee, which varied in membership from
about 15 to 300. The territorial scope of the local committee was
stated in party statutes to be the legislative district, although
the literature almost uniformly cites the canton, of which there
were about 3,000 in France, to be the most common basis for local
committees.
8.03 Extensiveness of
Organization
6 for 1950-62, ac6
It appears that local committees of the
radical party were located throughout France, but the literature
is not explicit about coverage.
8.04 Frequency of Local
Meetings
ac1
No information
8.05 Frequency of National
Meetings
7 for 1950-62, ac9
What was called the commission executive
and later the bureau usually met weekly.
8.06 Maintaining Records
5 for 1950-62, ac7
The radical party did not tend to publish
papers itself as much as they had papers affiliated with the
party, but it did maintain a periodical publishing program.
Apparently the party had no research division at all, and
federation membership lists were not generally available to the
national organization until 1959. Even then, there is some
question of their quality.
8.07 Pervasiveness of
Organization
8 for 1950-62, ac4
The radicals were strong in the farmer's
cooperative movement and had specialized groups for women, youth,
and government workers, But these groups probably had few
adherents and party control was probably not Great.
Organizational Power Variables, 9.01-9.08
9.01 Nationalization of
Structure
3 for 1950-62, ac9
Federations within the party had
considerable autonomy of action. Until 1959, they kept their own
membership lists, which provided the basis for their
representation at the national congresses, and they often bought
up membership cards to increase their voting strength in the
congress.
9.02 Selecting the National
Leader
3 for 1950-62, ac8
Sometimes called the party chairman and
sometimes the party president, he was elected by the congress for
a two-year term and limited to two terms in office. It was
understood that no one holds the party leadership post while also
prime minister.
9.03 Selecting Parliamentary
Candidates
4 for 1950-62, ac5
Selection of parliamentary candidates was
effectively decentralized in the hands of the federations before
1958 and in the hands of the local committees ads, when the
districts became smaller. Despite provisions in the party statutes
for the national office to endorse radical party
candidates--although not to approve the candidates--there is no
mention of national endorsement of candidates in the literature,
which is also silent on the extent of participation by the rank
and file members--thus taken to be minimal at most.
9.04 Allocating Funds
5 for 1950-62, ac5
The national organization sold membership
cards to federations, thus providing the national organization
with funds for allocation. But the federation did not always sell
all the cards to individual members, for wealthy notables were
known to purchase blocks of cards to increase the federation's
strength at the national level.
9.05 Formulating Policy
6 for 1950-62, ac9
The executive committee, dominated by
parliamentary members of the party, and more particularly the
smaller bureau, also dominated by parliamentary members,
formulated major policy decisions within the radical
party.
9.06 Controlling Communications
3 for 1950-62, ac4
There is little evidence about the amount
of influence exercised by the radical party press, but radical
newspapers operated at both the national and provincial level.
However, it is unlikely that the national organization wielded any
sort of editorial control over the content at either level, but
especially the provincial press.
9.07 Administering Discipline
0 for 1950-62, ac9
Party statutes invested specific sanctions
of discipline in the hands of the executive committee. Indeed, a
whole title of the statutes, composed of four articles, dealt with
the subject of discipline. But the literature is unanimous in its
judgment that sanctions were not used. Undoubtedly, the 2/3 vote
required in the executive committee to apply sanctions contributed
to their lack of use. Still, the party expelled members on
occasion, but the absence of disciplinary measures in the face of
numerous violations of party positions must determine the scoring
here.
9.08 Leadership Concentration
3 for 1950-62, ac8
The office of party chairman or president
clearly was the most important office in the party, but leadership
within the radical party was not concentrated in that office. Only
decisions issuing from the national council or the bureau could be
said to bind the party to courses of action, and even these
decisions might not be followed by local notables or parliamentary
representatives.
Coherence Variables, 10.01-10.06
10.01 Legislative Cohesion
.66 for 1950-57, ac8
.66 for 1958-62, ac5
The radicals are frequently described as
completely lacking in discipline and parliamentary cohesion.
However, this judgment must be viewed in comparison to the French
communists and socialists, who seldom suffer defections. When
cohesion is determined from 79 roll calls on principal votes for
1950-58 as reported in Williams, Crisis and Compromise, the Rice
Index is 66. Comparable data were not available after
1958.
10.02 Ideological Factionalism
6 for 1950-62, ac9
The so-called neo-radicals, representing
the rightist wing of the party, were vigorously opposed and
eclipsed by the followers of Mendes-France in the middle 1950"s.
Although this particular ideological division faded, it left its
mark on the party, and right-left factionalism bothered the
radicals throughout our time period.
10.03 Issue Factionalism
2 for 1950-62, ac9
Colonial policies, first over Indo-China
and later over Algeria, continually divided the party, but these
did not seem to produce factions with formal organizations of
their own.
10.04 Leadership Factionalism
for 1950-57, ac9
4 for 1958-62, ac9
Mendes-France organized the party around
himself in the middle 1950"s, and his followers were popularly
referred to as Mendesists. Later, smaller organized factions
developed around Gaillard and Morice.
10.05 Strategic or Tactical
Factionalism
3 for 1950-57, ac9
2 for 1958 62, ac8
The radicals have been bothered by the
question of working with the right or the left. Early in the
1950"s, the party was also divided over the question of support of
Degaulle, with some interest expressed in double membership in the
RPF and radical party. This type of bigamy was eventually
disallowed by the party.
10.06 Party Purges
for 1950-62, ac9
Wholesale expulsion of party members or
leaders was not characteristic of the radicals inclination or
capability.
Involvement Variables, 11.01-11.06
11.01 Membership Requirements
3 for 1950-62, ac9
By party statute, membership was extended
upon completion of an application form and payment of dues.
However, membership cards were purchased by wealthier federations
within the party to increase their representation in party
congresses, and there were probably far more paper members than
party members.
11.02 Membership Participation
3 for 1950-62, ac3
With the exception of the middle 1950"s,
when representation was reported to have reached a peak of about
100,000 in the party, the membership was usually considerably
less--cited as 20,000 in 1959. Many of the members appeared to be
elected officials of one sort or another. Because of their obvious
involvement in the party in furthering their own electoral
fortunes, these members can surely be classified as "militants" in
our definition, leading to a middle code for membership
participation.
11.03 Material Incentives
3, ac3
In a party whose membership consists
largely of elected officialsor candidates for elective office--the
militants become mainly these officials or candidates. It is
assumed that the prime motivating force for these militants is the
set of tangible rewards that derive from winning
office.
11.04 Purposive Incentives
0 for 1950-62, ac3
The radicals were pictured as a party of
political compromisers and opportunists who advanced various
interests of local notables. For a brief period under Mendes,
France's leadership, the radicals pursued a program of social and
political reform, but he ran afoul of the party's conservative
leaders and resigned his position after only two years of
leadership.
11.05 doctrinism
0 for 1950-62, ac6
the only consistent doctrine of the
radicals is anti-clericalism, but this does not exist in a
codified form, and there is no anti-scripture that is prescribed
reading. Our consultant, however, feels that the writings of Alain
(Emile Chartier) in opposition to the centralization of power in
the executive did draw references from radical
socialists.
11.06 Personalism
0 for 1950-62, ac3
Mendes-France was certainly the most
personalistic of the radical leaders during our time period. But
it seems that the admiration for Mendes-France was more widespread
among the population in general than radical party members in
particular. No doubt his personal popularity attracted people into
the party, witness the membership peak in 1956, but his personal
qualities did not seem to account for the motivation of party
militants. Leaders were not so important within the MRP. Even its
former leader, Bidault, was expelled by the party, and his
departure caused little defection by party members.