Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
SUSS POL 203 Study Unit 2 Democracy (The Economic Origins of Democracy…
SUSS POL 203 Study Unit 2 Democracy
The Economic Origins of Democracy
Classic Economic Explanations for Democracy
classic modernisation theory
cultural modernisation theory
This theory posits that as a country’s
social structures
become
more modern
(i.e., more individualistic, achievement-oriented, and scientifically-minded, etc.), the country is able to
establish
more of the pre-requisites for
economic growth
economic modernisation theory
This theory posits that countries are more
likely
both to
become democratic
and to stay democratic
as they develop economically
Lipset's Social Requisites of Democracy
According to Lipset,
modernisation
occurs
when capitalist development
results in fundamental
changes
to a
society’s social system
,
including the majority of the population moving away from agrarian life and into an industrial and service-based economy.
Other changes that come in tandem with this economic shift are
urbanisation
, higher educational attainment, and increasing societal complexity
Economic and technological developments are closely linked and result in fundamental
changes
in every area of society, including
the ways that people think about themselves
and the social, economic, and political world around them
As a result of these new demands, the
political system
can no longer effectively operate in a dictatorial manner
Economic Explanations Revised
Weakness of classic modernisation theory
Does
not explain the internal mechanisms
– such the negotiations, social movements, concessions, or lack thereof – between the ruling elite and the masses that allow for regime change to take place.
Another blind spot is its
inability to explain why
some
countries
that have
ostensibly modernised have not fully democratised
Robinson's Economic Development and Democracy
Robinson presents a series of longitudinal statistical data to show that democracy is more likely to be created under the following
two conditions
When there is
sufficient social unrest
in a non-democratic regime that cannot be defused by limited concessions and promises of pro-citizen policies
When the
costs of democracy
anticipated by the
elite
are limited so that they are
not tempted to use repression
to deal with the discontent of the citizens under the nondemocratic regime.
Robinson
does not draw a causal link
between economic development and democratisation
The collapse of a non-democracy begins when social unrest cannot be defused via concessions and pro-citizen policies
-This suggests is that
nondemocratic regimes can persist
if
living conditions and other demands that could spark
social unrest are kept to a limited range
even if social unrest were to occur, there remains the possibility that the
non-democratic regime can continue
its rule
if
its institutions are politically
developed enough to meet the new demands put forth
by the citizens
Adam Przeworski Survival Story
Przeworski argued that
economic development
promotes the survival of democracy but not
does not affect whether a country becomes a democracy in the first place
Reason for the strong correlation between democracy and economic development is that
rich democracies survive longer than poor ones
and not because becoming rich is what triggers democratisation.
countries, where the a
verage person has a high income
, tend to
remain democratic
because a regime change to a dictatorship is a fairly large risk (i.e. one could potentially lose everything)
On the other hand, however,
for poor citizens living in a democracy
, one has
nothing to lose by switching to a dictatorship
. In fact, if one has some connection to the new dictator or ruling party, there is a small possibility that one will become wealthier
Class Theories
The Role of the Middle Class in Democracies
there are five main reasons why the rise and growth of the middle class is conducive to the establishment and maintenance of democratic political systems.
1. Social link
These groups form a middle level
between the traditional elites
(landowners, the military, and nobility)
and
the majority of
working people
(peasants, artisans, labourers, farmworkers, paupers)
3. Advocate for social welfare
They
press for education, healthcare
, improved housing, and geographical mobility to improve the quality of their workforce
4. Pillar of civil society
The middle class forms its own associations and voluntary organisations, which form the backbone of civil society that
further stimulate democracy
.
2. political participation
In the struggle to secure their economic position and political power, the rising middle class
demands personal freedom and the right to participate
in government affairs
5. balances social cleavages
the middle class, with an interest in stability and predictability in economic and social affairs, have a moderate impact on societal conflicts,
preferring moderate solutions and rejecting extreme positions.
The Cultural Origins of Democracy
Why Culture Should Not Be Ignored
Disadvantage of applying culture
Political culture is said to be a soft concept that is
difficult to quantify
unlike other variables such as economics and social class. Culture is often used as a post-hoc (after the event) explanation that is not put to an empirical test.
Political culture explanations
risk being circular
: we infer what people believe from how they behave and then explain why they behave from what they believe.
For example: people behave democratically because they hold democratic values, and we know that they hold democratic values because they behave democratically
Advantage of applying culture
Political culture acts as a
link between the micro
-politics of individuals
with the macro
-politics of institutions and states, subjective (values and attitudes) with the objective (e.g. voting behaviour), and history and traditions with current circumstances and events
Another advantage is the fact that studies of political culture are often
based on wideranging quantitative data
that have come from extensive survey research
studies of political culture often rely on the accumulation of data regarding how citizens see themselves acting and engaging in the political world.
Coming to know the dominant political values in a country, for example, can help us come to understand what motivates people to do politics in the way that they do.
Culture and Democracy
cultural theories stress the fact that the
expectations and demands of citizens
are crucial for democracy
there are specific cultural requirement for democracy
Almond and Verba’s The Civic Culture
Almond and Verba understand political culture as
a pattern of political orientations
to political institutions/mechanics such as parliament, elections, or the nation
There are
three different types
of political orientation
The
first is cognitive
, which is the degree to which citizens know about their political system including important historical events, political leaders and other figures, and the electoral system
The
second is affective
, which is the extent to which citizens feel that politics is worth their time
The
final is evaluative
, which is the extent to which citizens feel that
(1) they can make their views heard and that
(2) the political leaders are responsive to their demands
Almond and Verba’s method: three ideal type
Almond and Verba’s method was to collect
survey data
on the most important aspects of three categories in various countries and then
compare the citizens’ overall orientation
to politics with the political system under which they live.
After collecting the data, they
classified
the citizens’ orientation to politics into
three ideal types
The first is what they call a
parochial culture
in which there is a low level of awareness and interest in politics.
This general orientation was found to be most prevalent in underdeveloped nondemocracies.
The second is
subject culture
in which people are aware of politics and what government does; however, there is little participation from the citizens themselves.
This general orientation was found to be most prevalent in more developed non-democracies
The third is what they termed a
participant culture
in which citizens are both knowledgeable about politics and actively engaged in them.
This general orientation was typically found in democracies, although in some cases an “overload” of demands and lack of trust in the political leadership resulted in a more volatile political situation.
Almond and Verba’s Conclusion
The
most stable democracies
, as Almond and Verba found, had political
orientations in between the ideal types of subject culture and participant culture
.
In such “civic cultures”, citizens are “active but trusting” and “political cultures are mixed to produce neither too much nor too little participation”.
Almond and Verba were also able to demonstrate that, in situations whereby the political orientations did not match the usual regime type, these systems were more likely to be politically unstable
Inglehart's findings
As Inglehart has identified, there is a
strong correlation between post-material values and democratic systems of government
.
Post-material values include citizens’ personal emphasis on civil liberties, political and community participation, selfexpression, quality of life, and tolerance.
Inglehart has also found that
societies with higher levels of interpersonal trust are more likely to be democratic
.
Meanwhile, as Newton and Van Deth summarise, “populations with material and survival values centring on money, safety and job security are likely to have authoritarian governments”
Bowling Alone
According to Putnam, there is a link between affect in associational life (i.e. social clubs/ organisation) and democracy.
lack of associational life
indicates reduces trust and a public spiritedness between a community’s members.
This is conducive to
non-democratic
forms of political organisation
Nations and Society: Asian Values
The Asian Values Debate
The belief that all societies should become
democratic is an Anglo-American or Eurocentric idea
that does not respect non-Western forms of political culture and political organisation
“pragmatic” Asian Values
According to Subramaniam, this “pragmatic” proposal had the following lines of reasoning.
First, that Western liberal democracy is one interpretation of the democratic ideal and not the sole one.
This means that there is the
possibility of other types of democracies
, including democracies based on Asian Values.
Second, that each country has its own set of “natural, human, and cultural resources” including its own unique historical and political experiences.
In turn, this means that “the mode of governance or
political system must accommodate those unique features
but also devise responses that will resonate with members of the society”
Political Outcomes of Asian Values
Stability
: Social order and political stability are valued over individual rights and liberal democracy.
This is for the reason that individual rights and political pluralism are understood as destabilising.
Ethical standard
: state maintains a clear role in promoting moral and ethical standards as Collective social norms tend to have greater weigh
This, of course, is “antithetical to the liberal understanding of the role of the state as being neutral with respect to a society's moral or ethical bases.”
Democracy is one out of many processes
: Democracy is not an end in itself and is valid only to the extent that it achieves other, preferred, social goods (order and economic prosperity).
Social capital and trust
: Asian Values-style democracy is based on consensus building and trust in political leaders. Trust should be sustained as long as the leaders achieve and maintain good governance (wealth, stability, moral soundness).
Top-down
: Government should provide the necessary conditions for economic growth: “firm policy direction”, social stability, communal peace.
Democratic Regimes: Institutional Variants
Presidentialism
The Perils of Presidentialism
As Shively has argued, there are
five main liabilities
of the presidential system
clear mutual independence of the executive and legislature tend to encourage
antagonistic relations
between the two
With no constitutional mechanism to resolve the deadlock, politicians and citizens in presidential democracies may look to the military to break the stalemate”
Slower policy making process
presidential systems are thought to make it difficult for policy to be made quickly.
Since policy can often be stuck in a cycle of rejection and amendment,
particularly if two different parties control the presidency and the legislature
, the policy-making process can often be
inefficient
.
Possible watered-down policy
this back and forth between the president and the legislature can result in watered-down policy as the only option for the policy to pass the deadlock (Shively, 2001).
While this process is supposed to promote checks and balances and prevent the steamrolling of policy,
it can also result in less effective policy
Lack of accountability
since policies in presidential systems must be passed between the legislature and the president, including after amendments by each branch, it becomes
difficult for citizens to identify who is responsible for the final policy
.
This can often result in a lack of accountability, particularly as the
president and legislature may hail from different parties
and may blame each other for a policy failure
Deadlock
since the presidential system draws cabinet members from outside the legislature, it does not need to rely on coalition building (Shively, 2001).
As a result, it can also find itself
at loggerheads with the legislature.
Concentration/steam-rolling of power
certain policy-making areas are often concentrated in the hands of the president.
This is a liability as presidents can often
appeal to their supporters
over the heads of the other institutions (the legislature and the judiciary) that have been designed with the intention of providing checks and balances.
How Do Social Cleavages and Electoral Systems Shape Politics
Party Systems
alludes to the differences in the number and size of political parties that operate in the legislature
unlike government systems or electoral systems,
party systems
are
not enshrined in the constitution
(aside from some authoritarian states)
Five major types
Clark and his co-authors identify five major party systems and give a brief explanation of their composition.
Two-party systems
Only
two major political parties
have a
realistic chance of holding power
. Nearly all elected offices are held by candidates endorsed by one of the two major parties.
This system is
typically found in democracies
.
Multi-party systems
More than two parties have a realistic chance of holding power, often in a coalition.
The
majority of democracies
are multi-party democracies.
One-party dominant systems
Only
one party
has a
realistic chance of winning
.
In hybrid regimes, certain
opposition parties
maybe
allowed to operate
,
but various means are used to keep them out of power
.
In democracies, this system is a result of
the long-running popularity of one party
a divided opposition, and
the effective utilisation of patronage systems.
Non-partisan democracies
There are no official parties.
Single-party systems
There is
one party legally allowed
to hold power.
Minor parties, if allowed, are always legally required to accept the leadership of the dominant party.
This type of a system is a
feature of authoritarian regimes
Duverger's Role of Social Cleavages
According to Duverger,
two main variables
are responsible for
determining a country's party system
:
the
social structure
(defined in terms of the
number of active social cleavages
in the society) and
the
electoral system
used to determine the way
the way that legislators are elected
Social structure
Social sturctures are regarded as the ‘engine’
that drives the multiplicity of parties whereas
electoral laws serve as the ‘brake
pedal.
In terms of social structure, the number of
parties
in a national legislature will be
determined by
the
number and type of social cleavages
in the country
Social cleavages
can be understood: - as the
divisions in a society
that may prompt members from either side of the divide to
seek some form of political representation
to
defend their interests
against those on the other side of the divide.
high number of cleavages in society does not directly translate into a high number of political parties
Cross cutting clevages: - the
demand for a larger number of parties
is
more likely
to happen
if there is a high level of cross-cutting cleavages
as opposed to reinforcing cleavages
Electoral system/ Duverger's
Law
increasing
the number of
social cleavages
in a country
has less an effect on party system
size
if
the
electoral system is non-proportional
than it is proportional
a non-proportional representation system such as first-past-the-post puts the brakes on the number of parties that will form in the system, despite a large number of social cleavages.
Strategic Effect
this scenario of fewer parties in the legislature as a result of the non-proportional system is compounded further when we factor in what Duverger calls the strategic effects of electoral laws.
strategy of voters
First of all, there is the strategy of voters.
In a first-past-the-post system, voters may strategically choose a party that has more chances of winning than the one that more closely reflects his or her own interests.
strategy of political elites
Secondly, there is the strategy of political elites.
Rather than choosing to enter politics for a party that most closely reflects his or her interests, a political entrepreneur may
choose to get involved in a party that has a more realistic chance of winning.
This results in the formation and evolution of larger parties (sometimes through merger) that represent an “alliance” of different social groups that would not be able to win an election via a more specific party vehicle.
How Do Political Parties Differ
Categories of Political Parties
Diamond, L., & Gunther, R. (2003). Species of political parties: A new typology
Aim of Diamond and Gunther
attempt to
re-evaluate the prevailing typologies
of political parties by,
retaining
widely used concepts and terminology wherever possible,
consolidating
and clarifying party models in some cases, and
defining
new party types in others
The underpinning reason
Contextually outdated
nearly all of the existing typologies of political parties were
derived from studies of West European parties
over the past century and a half
Appreciating newer features
many of the parties that first emerged in the late twentieth century have prominent features that cannot be captured using classic party typologies developed a century earlier
Minimise concept stretching
In the absence of an expanded and updated typology of parties, the small number of party models that make up the most commonly used typologies has often led to an excessive ‘concept stretching
Diamond and Gunther's criteria
We classify each of 15 ‘species’ of party into its proper ‘genus’ on the basis of three criteria
the
nature of the party’s organization
(thick/thin, elite-based or mass-based, etc.)
the programmatic
orientation
of the party (ideological, particularistic-clientele-oriented, etc.)
tolerant and pluralistic (or
democratic
)
versus
proto-hegemonic (or
anti-system
)
Other dimensions of party life
Diamond and Gunther also deal with two other dimensions of party life that are significant
sociological
,
i.e. the nature of the clientele towards which the party pitches its appeals, and
whose interests it purports to defend or advance
internal dynamics
The second involves the internal dynamics of party
decisionmaking
, particularly the nature and
degree of prominence
of the party’s leader,
ranging from a dominant
charismatic
figure, at one extreme,
to more
collective
forms of party leadership, at the other
Types of Political Parties
ethnicity-based parties
Parties based on ethnicity
typically lack the extensive and elaborate organization
of mass-based parties
Distinguishing factor: narrow Electoral logic
Unlike most mass-based parties, they do not advance a programme (whether incremental or transformative) for all of society.
Their goals and strategies are narrower: to
promote the interests of a particular ethnic group, or coalition of groups
unlike nationalist parties, their programmatic objectives
do not typically include secession or a high level of decision-making
and administrative autonomy from the existing state.
Instead, they are
content to use existing state structures
to channel benefits towards their particularistically defined electoral clientele
Given the fact that ethnic parties mobilize powerfully emotive symbolic issues of identity and even cultural survival, they are prone to be dominated by, and even organized around,
a single charismatic leader
Congress (Social-democratic)
a coalition, alliance or federation of ethnic parties or political machines, although it may take the form of a single, unified party structure.
Hence, at the local level it may share some organizational features and programmatic commitments with the ethnic party (such as the distribution of benefits through a vast array of patron–client networks), but within the national political system it behaves dramatically differently
Its
electoral appeal is to national unity and integration
rather than division
Its social base is broad and heterogeneous, and the party’s goal is to make it as inclusive as possible. However, its very breadth renders it
vulnerable to fracture along ethnic or regional lines
.
Ethnic (Proto-hegemonic)
seeks only to mobilize the votes of its
own ethnic group
ethnic parties have an extremely
low level of
ideological or programmatic
commitment and coherence
.
Neither do they typically have a very developed organizational structure or formal membership base. Lacking any functional interests or ideological agenda
Electoralist parties
Parties belonging to this genus are
organizationally thin
, maintaining a relatively skeletal existence
At election time, however, these parties spring into action to perform what is unequivocally their
primary function, the conduct of the campaign
They utilize ‘modern’ campaign
techniques i.e. meida and mass comm
and they rely heavily on professionals who can skilfully carry out such campaigns
These parties differ from each other with regard to two defining dimensions:
two of them lack strong
ideological or programmatic commitments
, while one does seek to advance a distinct set of programmes;
and two of them are decidedly
pluralistic
, while the third may or may not have hegemonic ambitions
Catch-all
This
pluralistic and tolerant
ideal type is primarily distinguished by the party’s
shallow organization,
superficial and vague ideology, and
overwhelmingly electoral orientation,
as well as by the prominent leadership and electoral roles of the party’s top-ranked national-level candidates
The
overriding
(if not sole)
purpose
of catch-all parties is to
maximize votes
, win elections and govern
To do so, they seek to aggregate as wide a variety of social interests as possible
Programmatic
This is a modern-day, pluralist/tolerant, thinly organized political party whose
main function
is the
conduct of election campaigns
, and those campaigns often
seek to capitalize on
the personal attractiveness of its
candidates
the programmatic party is closer to the classic model of a mass-based, ideological party in three respects:
Clear vision
- First, it has much more of a distinct, consistent and coherent programmatic or ideological agenda than does the ideal-type catch-all party, and it clearly incorporates those ideological or programmatic appeals in its electoral campaigns and its legislative and government agenda
Clear mission
- it seeks to win control of government (or a place in it) precisely through this sharper definition of a party platform or vision
Clear support base
- while its organization and social base may, in a majoritarian system, resemble that of the catch-all party, in a highly proportional system, such as Israel’s, the programmatic party has a narrower, more clearly defined social base, and possibly some firmer linkages to like-minded organizations in civil society
Personalistic
its
only rationale
is to provide a vehicle
for the leader to win an election
and exercise power
It is not derived from the traditional structure of local notable elites, but, rather, is an organization
constructed or converted
by an incumbent or aspiring national leader exclusively
to advance his or her national political ambition
its organization is weak, shallow and opportunistic
mass-based parties
the mass-based party, emerged as a manifestation of the political mobilization of the working class in many European polities
In an effort to disseminate the party’s ideology and establish an active membership base, the
party seeks to penetrate into a number of spheres of social life
Two types of distinctions
further divide this genus into six different species of party
Basic ideology
- The first involves the basic thrust of the party’s programmatic commitments, ideology, and/or unifying belief system. Most commonly, these have involved varying types of commitment to (1) socialism, (2) nationalism or (3) religion
Pluralistic or hegemonic
- The second dimension involves the extent to which each of these is either tolerant and pluralistic, on the one hand, or is committed to securing a hegemonic position within the political system and imposing its radical programmatic commitments on society.
Pluralist parties assume
that they will always be functioning within a
democratic system
; they therefore
accept its institutions and rules of the game
Proto-hegemonic parties
, in contrast, strive over the long term towards the
replacement of the existing pluralist society
and democratic system with one that is better suited for the achievement of their
radical transformative objectives.
Accordingly, they accept existing institutions and rules only insofar as they are expedient and cannot be replaced over the short run, and their behaviour is, at best,
semi-loyal
Nationalism
Pluralist Nationalist Party (Social-democratic)
One of the key functions of nationalist parties is
not only to
convince citizens to cast ballots
for the party,
but also to use the party’s election campaign and its affiliated secondary organizations to
foster and intensify their identification with the national group
and its aspirations
involve a
demand for some level of territorial self-governance
, ranging from autonomy within a multinational state to outright independence or the redrawing of international boundaries in response to an irredentist claim (Think Taiwan)
Internally, by virtue of its socially democratic inclination, there will
often be tension between
those demanding a more
militant stance
in defence of the group’s nationalist demands and
those
stressing cooperation
with other parties in forming government coalitions and pressing for the enactment of incrementally beneficial legislation
Ultranationalist (Proto hegemonic)
Aim
: seek
hegemonic domination
of polity and society
through repression or cooptation
of existing secondary organizations, coupled with a broad penetration into society in an effort to resocialize all persons to actively support the regime
advance an
ideology
that (Think -
faccist
)
exalts the nation or race above the individual,
detests minorities and openly admires the use of force by a strong,
quasimilitary party often relying upon a uniformed party militia.
Features include
:
highly selective recruitment process,
intensive indoctrination of members, strict internal discipline,
the overriding objective of seizing power through force if necessary and
anti-system or semi-loyal participation in parliament
Charismatic leaders
Socialism
Leninist (proto hegemonic)
Leninist parties have as their objective the
overthrow of the existing political system
and the implementation of
revolutionary change in society
closed structure
based on the semi-secret cell rather than the open branch
Decision-making within the party is
highly centralized and authoritarian
Class-mass (social-democratic)
In the typical class-mass party the
centre of power
and authority in the party is
located in the executive committee
of its secretariat,
although formally
the ultimate source of
legitimate authority is the full party congress
Open stance towards politics
the open, tolerant stance of these parties has
made possible considerable intraparty conflict
, particularly
between pragmatists
whose primary concern is electoral victory
and ideologues
who place much higher value on ‘constituency representation’ and ideological consistency with a more orthodox reading of the party’s ideology
may give rise to a split of the party
Support base
establish bases within their class constituency through groups organized both
geographically
(the local ‘branch’) and
functionally
(trade unions)
Religion
Denominational (Social-democratic)
Similarities with mass-based parties
They share many of the organizational characteristics of the mass-based party, including
the existence of a
large base support
of dues-paying members,
hierarchically structured
party organizations linking the national and local levels,
party newspapers and broadcasting outlets, allied secondary organizations
Difference
They differ in one important respect from parties based on secular ideologies:
since the basis of the party’s programmes is a set of religious beliefs that are determined by a combination of tradition and interpretation by religious institution outside of the party itself,
the party is not fully in control of its core ideological precepts
whenever they are directly linked to religious values (such as those relating to abortion, divorce, sexual preference or some manifestations of artistic expression).
This
can lead to intraparty tensions
whenever party leaders choose to modify the party’s electoral appeals or programmatic commitments in such a manner as to conflict with those values
Fundamentalist (proto hegemonic)
theocratic party model
The principal difference between this and the denominational-mass party is that the fundamentalist party
seeks to reorganize state and society around a strict reading of religious doctrinal principles
, while denominational-mass parties are pluralist and incremental in their agenda
there is
little or no room for conflicting interpretations
of the religious norms and scriptures that serve as the basis of the party’s programme
Support
mobilize support not only by
invoking religious doctrine and identity
, and by proposing policies derived from those principles, but also t
hrough selective incentives
; they often perform a wide range of social welfare functions which aid in recruiting and solidifying the loyalty of members
elite-based parties
Elite-based’ parties are those whose
principal
organizational structures are minimal
and
based upon established elites
and related interpersonal networks within a specific geographic area
Clientelistic Party
the emergence of the clientelistic party was
a direct response
by local elites
to the challenges posed by the political mobilization of formerly ‘subject’ populations
:
as
traditional deference
to local elites began to
break down
, electoral mobilization
relied increasingly on clientism
and exchange of favours or overt coercion
Clientelistic party is a
confederation of notables
(either traditional or of the newly emerging liberal-professional or economic elite),
each with his own
geographically, functionally or personalistically based
support
, organized internally as particularistic factions
has a weak organization and places
little or no stress on programme or ideology
Its
principal function is to coordinate the individual campaign efforts of notables
, usually indirectly or loosely, for the purpose of securing power at the national level
based on hierarchical chains of interpersonal relationships of a quasi-feudal variety, in which relatively durable patterns of loyalty are linked with the exchange of services and obligations
Traditional Local Notable Party
the first party type to emerge
emerged at a time of sharply
limited suffrage
in semi-democratic regimes
right to vote and hold office was restricted to a small number of enfranchised voters
Local notables could often count on their traditionally-based prestige
or personal relationships with their few and socially homogeneous
to secure office
movement parties
a type of partisan organization that
straddles
the conceptual
space
between ‘party’ and ‘movement
genus of party types should be regarded as
‘openended'
Post-industrial
Extreme-Right supporters of the extreme right have been driven by
their atomization and alienation to search for more
order,
tradition,
identity and
security,
at the same time as they attack the state for its intervention in the economy and for its social welfare policies
Left-Libertarian
‘left-libertarian’ parties are quintessential ‘post-materialist’ in their attitudinal orientation and behaviour
Reject economics issue
There are no barriers to membership in the group making the
social base
and attitudinal orientation of activists
even more diverse