Richard Youngs, Thomas Carothers
{
"authors": [
"Thomas Carothers"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [
"Democracy and Governance"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "democracy",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "DCG",
"programs": [
"Democracy, Conflict, and Governance"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
Political Party Assistance: Mutual Learning Needed
Since political parties in both established and emerging democracies face similar challenges, Western party aid should avoid the donor-recipient paradigm and instead embody a productive spirit of mutuality.
Source: 21st Century Parties
Turbulence among political parties in established Western democracies is rife—whether it is the harsh churning within the British Labor Party, the serious challenges facing Spain’s two traditional parties, the notable gains by the right-wing parties in Denmark, France, and Sweden, or the unusually open-ended candidate competition within the U.S. Republican Party. These developments are taken by some observers as proof that mainstream Western political parties are losing, or indeed have already lost credibility as sources of ideas or assistance to counterparts in new or struggling democracies. But this need not be the case. At least it need not be if Western party aid groups can move even more decisively than they have so far away from their old habits.
In particular, they need to deemphasize training efforts to help build party organizations in other countries along the lines of an idealized model of what a well-established party should look like. Instead, Western party aid should take a more specific problem-centered approach, focusing on the vexing issues that are staring Western political parties in the face and that are also present in the political life of many developing and post-Communist countries. The spirit should be one of mutuality of both problems and responses, openly recognizing that Western parties are facing just as much public skepticism and criticism in many countries as are their counterparts in other parts of the world, and just as many uncertainties about how to grapple with changing political developments.
Some issues for such an agenda:
- Populism: How can democratic political parties best engage with and respond to rising new currents of populism and assertive populist figures of dubious democratic fidelity?
- Intolerance: What can political parties do to help tamp down the flames of intolerance that have been flaring up in many societies as a result of new pressures relating to migration and refugees, divisive identity politics, and radicalism?
- New forms of civic activism: How should political parties change themselves and their relationship to citizens in response to the widespread reality of new forms of civic activism, such as non-formalized movements or protest waves that erupt around the issue of systemic corruption?
- Tech generation: How should political parties reach and engage a rising generation of voters who rely heavily on social media and other online instruments as their main source of information, news, engagement, and debate?
- Inequality: How can political parties convince citizens that they are part of the solution rather than the problem with respect to rising inequality?
In all areas of international support for democracy, the old assumed line between a set of countries that have largely achieved success and a set of countries looking for lessons and help has been effaced by global political change. In all areas of democracy assistance, aid groups are struggling to adapt their efforts to a world in which democratic deficiencies are remarkably similar in many old and new democracies alike. Given that party aid is a more compact domain of international assistance than most other areas, and that Western party aid specialists are often close to the ground politically, they should be able to be leaders within the wider assistance community in crafting new types of programming that embody a productive spirit of mutuality learning and avoid old patterns of “provider” and “recipient.”
This article was originally published on 21st Century Parties.
About the Author
Harvey V. Fineberg Chair for Democracy Studies; Director, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
Thomas Carothers, director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, is a leading expert on comparative democratization and international support for democracy.
- Post-U.S. International Democracy Support: Aspiration in Search of SubstancePaper
- How Anger Over Corruption Keeps Driving Global PoliticsArticle
Thomas Carothers, McKenzie Carrier
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Multiple Wars Are Ruining Central Asia’s Efforts to Diversify Its Trade RoutesCommentary
This year’s wars have made alternative routes to transit through Russia no less risky for Central Asian countries.
Galiya Ibragimova
- The Latest Iran Deal Ignores the Lessons of the PastCommentary
By burying disagreements in imprecision, the new deal risks same fate as its predecessors.
James M. Acton
- Iran Wanted to Survive the War. Now What?Commentary
The United States and Israel may have unwittingly revived the Islamic Republic’s “zombie regime.”
Suzanne Maloney, Aaron David Miller, Karim Sadjadpour
- The Overlooked Link Between Disaster Response at Home and U.S. Power AbroadCommentary
Natural disasters are no longer local incidents but sources of systemic risk that threaten vital infrastructure and the economy—and public support for international engagement.
Leonardo Martinez-Diaz
- Taking the Pulse: Is European Diplomacy on Iran Outdated?Commentary
When the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding was announced, the UK, France, Germany, and Italy declared their readiness to help demine the Strait of Hormuz and lift nuclear sanctions on Tehran. But does Europe need new tools to recover a diplomatic role?
Rym Momtaz, ed.