Author: Michał Niebylski
Institution: University of Opole, (Poland)
Year of publication: 2020
Source: Show
Pages: 166-182
DOI Address:
PDF: ppsy/49-4/ppsy2020410.pdf

The article aims to present and discuss five theoretical models explaining the issue of ideological changes in Polish political parties. The paper is to shed light on an ideology’s dynamic nature and the process of building ideology in the political parties’ environment. The article features a discussion on the circumstances favoring the implementation of ideological changes and the methods used by parties to implement changes in their ideologies. The paper adopts two research hypotheses: 1) party ideologies are developed and modified by political parties in response to the changing (social, political, economic) circumstances in the inter-party rivalry. 2) The process of ideological changes serves political parties to lead an effective inter-party rivalry. The paper establishes that the factors with scientifically documented impact on party behavior in ideological terms are as follows: electoral result (parties that achieved a result below their expectations are more eager to revise their ideologies), political competition’s activity (parties react to ideological changes of their direct rivals), electorate preferences (political forces can change their approach in crucial issues to reflect the dominant views in their electorates) and acceptance of free-market principles by the main political actors. An analysis of Polish parties’ behaviors and the gathered source material also demonstrates that the parties’ inclination to implement ideological changes depends on organizational factors.


  • Antoszewski, A., Herbut, R. (2004). Leksykon politologii. Wrocław: Alta 2.
  • Adams, J., Clark, M., Ezrow, L., & Glasgow, G. (2004). “Understanding Change and Stability in Party Ideologies: Do Parties Respond to Public Opinion or to Past Election Results?”. British Journal of Political Science, 34, 589-610.
  • Adams, J., Haupt, A.B., Stoll, H. (2008). “What Moves Parties?: The Role of Public Opinion and Global Economic Conditions in Western Europe”. Comparative Political Studies, 42, 611-639.
  • Adams, J., Somer-Topcu, Z. (2009). “Policy Adjustment by Parties in Response to Rival Parties’ Policy Shifts: Spatial Theory and the Dynamics of Party Competition in Twenty-Five Post-War Democracies”. British Journal of Political Science, 39, 825-846.
  • Allen, Ch.S. (2009). “Empty Nets. Social Democracy and the ‘Catch-All Party Thesis’ in Germany and Sweden”. Party Politics, 15, 635-653.
  • Andersen, J.G., Bjørklund, T. (1990). “Structural Change and New Cleavages: The Progress Parties in Denmark and Norway”. Acta Sociologica, 33, 195-217.
  • Andrews, D.M. (1994). “Capital Mobility and State Autonomy”. International Studies Quarterly, 38, 193-218.
  • Bell, D. (2000). The End of Ideology: On the Exhaustion of Political Ideas in the Fifties. New York: Harvard University Press.
  • Budge, I. (1994). “A New Theory of Party Competition: Uncertainty, Ideology and Policy Equilibria Viewed Comparatively and Temporally”. British Journal of Political Science, 24, 443-467.
  • CBOS. (2003). Poparcie dla integracji z Unią Europejską, Komunikat z Badań, BS/46/2003 Warsaw, March.
  • CBOS. (2016). Stosunek do przyjmowania uchodźców, Komunikat z Badań nr 111/2016, Warsaw, July.
  • Cerney, P.G. (1997). “Paradoxes of the Competition State: The Dynamics of Political Globalization”. Government and Opposition, 36, 251-274.
  • Coole, R. (1994). “The Vulnerability of the Modern Cadre Party in the Netherlands”. In: R.S. Katz, P. Mair (Eds.) How Parties Organize: Change and Adaptation in Party Organizations in Western Democracies (278-303). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
  • Crouch, C. (2004). Post-democracy. Cambridge: Polity.
  • Dalton, R.J., Flanagan, S.C. (1984). “Parties under stress: Realignment and dealignment in advanced industrial societies”. West European Politics, 7, 7-23. The Issue of Ideological Changes in the Context of the Polish Political Parties 181
  • Dalton, R.J., Scarrow, S.E., & Cain, B.E. (2004). “Advanced Democracies and the New Politics”. Journal of Democracy, 15, 129-137.
  • Deschouwer, K. (1992). “The Survival of the Fittest: Measuring and Explaining Adaptation and Change of Political Parties”. Paper Presented at the Workshop on Democracies and the Organization of Political Parties, European Consortium for Political Research. Limerick, Ireland. Erikson, R.S., Mackuen, M.B.,
  • Stimson, J.A. (2002). The macro polity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Ezrow, L. (2007). “The Variance Matters: How Party Systems Represent the Preferences of Voters”. The Journal of Politics, 69, 182-192.
  • Ezrow, L., de Vries, C., Steenbergen, M., & Edwards, E. (2011). “Mean voter representation and partisan constituency representation: Do parties respond to the mean voter position or to their supporters?”. Party Politics, 17, 275-301.
  • Franklin, M.N. (2004). Voter Turnout and the Dynamics of Electoral Competition in Established Democracies since 1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Garrett, G. (1998). Partisan Politics in the Global Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Gray, J. (1996). After Social Democracy. Politics, capitalism and the common life. London: Demos.
  • Gray, M., Caul, M. (2000). “Declining voter turnout in advanced industrial democracies, 1950 to 1997: The effects of declining group mobilization”. Comparative Political Studies, 33, 1091-1122.
  • Gunther, R., Mughan, A. (1993). “Political institutions and cleavage management”. In: R.K. Weaver, B.A. Rockman (Eds.), Do institutions matter? Government capabilities in the United States and abroad (272-301). Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
  • Harmel, R., Heo, U., Tan, A., Janda, K. (1995). “Performance, Leadership, Factions and Party Change: An Empirical Analysis”. West European Politics, 18, 1-33.
  • Harmel, R., Janda, K. (1994). “An Integrated Theory of Party Goals and Party Change”. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 6, 259-287. Hay, C. (1999), The Political Economy of New Labour: Labouring Under False Pretences?. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
  • Hopkin, J., Paolucci, C. (1999). “The business firm model of party organisation: cases from Spain and Italy”. European Journal of Political Research, 35, 307-339.
  • Inglehart, R. (1971). “The Silent Revolution in Europe: Intergenerational Change in Post Industrial Societies”. The American Political Science Review, 65, 991-1017.
  • Janda, K., Harmel, R., Edens, C., & Goff, P. (1995). “Changes in Party Identity. Evidence from Party Manifestos”. Party Politics, 1, 171-196.
  • Katz, R.S., Mair, P. (1996). “Cadre, Catch-All or Cartel? A Rejoinder”. Party Politics, 2, 525-534.
  • Katz, P., Mair, R.S. (1995). “Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy. The Emergence of the Cartel Party”. Party Politics, 1, 5-25.
  • Kirchheimer, O. (1966). “The Transformation of the Western European Party System”. In J. Lapolombara, M. Weiner (Eds.), Political Parties and Political Development (pp. 177-201). Princeton-New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  • Kitschelt, H., Lange, P., Marks, G., & Stephens, J.D. (1999). “Conclusion: Convergence and Divergence in Advanced Capitalist Democracies”. In H. Kitschelt, P. Lange, G. Marks & J.D. Stephens (Eds.), Continuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Kornaś, J. (2004). “Myśl państwowa polskiej socjaldemokracji”. In T. Ślęzak, M. Śliwa (Eds.), Polska lewica w XX wieku. Historia-ludzie-idee. Kraków: Wyd. Naukowe Akademii Pedagogicznej.
  • Lavelle, A. (2007). “Social Democracy or Neoliberalism? The Cases of Germany and Sweden”. In G. Curran, E. van Acker (Eds.), Globalising Government Business Relations (117-144). Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education Australia.
  • Lavelle, A. (2008). The Death of Social Democracy. Political Consequences in 21st Century, Aldershot: Routledge.
  • Laver, M. (2005). “Policy and the Dynamics of Political Competition”. American Political Science Review, 99, 266-274.
  • Lees-Marshment, J. (2001). “The Marriage of Politics and Marketing”. Political Studies”. 49, 692-713.
  • McAnulla, S. (2010). “Heirs to Blair’s Third Way? David Cameron’s Triangulating Conservatism”. British Politics, 5, 286-314.
  • Mishra, R. (1998). “Beyond the Nation State: Social Policy in an Age of Globalization”. Social Policy Administration, 5, 481-500.
  • Mjedle, H.L. (2013). “How and Why Parties Respond to Membership Decline: The Case of the SPD and the CDU”. German Politics, 22, 253-269.
  • Müller-Rommel, F. (1985). “The Greens in Western Europe: Similar but Different”. International Political Science Review, 6, 483-499.
  • Schumacher, G., de Vries, C.E., & Vis, B. (2010). “Why Political Parties Change Their Positions: Environmental Incentives & Party Organization”, Paper Prepared for the 68th MidWest Political Science Association (MPSA) National Conference. Chicago.
  • Somer-Topcu, Z. (2009). “Timely Decisions: The Effects of Past National Elections on Party Policy Change”. The Journal of Politics, 71, 238-248.
  • Stimson, J., MacKuen, M., & Erikson, R. (1995). “Dynamic Representation”. American Political Science Review, 89, 543-565.
  • Strange, S. (1996). The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Thomson, S. (2000). The Social Democratic Dilemma: Ideology, Governance and Globalization. New York: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
  • Veugelers, J.W.P. (2000). “Right-Wing Extremism in Contemporary France: A “Silent Counterrevolution”?” ”. The Sociological Quarterly, 41, 19-40.
  • Weakliem, D.L. (1991). “The Two Lefts? Occupation and Party Choice in France, Italy, and the Netherlands”. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 1327-1361.
  • Zuba, K. (2010). “Trzecia droga po 10 latach z perspektywy brytyjskiej i polskiej. Ślepa uliczna czy wyjście ewakuacyjne?”. Studia Polityczne, 26, 195-213.

Wiadomość do:



© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart