Hostname: page-component-669899f699-b58lm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T06:49:40.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Roads to Rome: how visions of elitism and pluralism shake up the goal repertoire of electoral competition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2025

Davide Angelucci Open the ORCID record for Davide Angelucci [Opens in a new window] ,
Lorenzo De Sio Open the ORCID record for Lorenzo De Sio [Opens in a new window] ,
Jessica Di Cocco Open the ORCID record for Jessica Di Cocco [Opens in a new window]  and
Till Weber
Davide Angelucci*
Affiliation:
Department of Law and Economics, Unitelma Sapienza, Rome, Italy
Lorenzo De Sio
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Luiss University, Rome, Italy
Jessica Di Cocco
Affiliation:
Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute, Fiesole, Italy
Till Weber
Affiliation:
Departments of Political Science, Baruch College & The Graduate Center, City University of New York, New York, USA
*
Corresponding author: Davide Angelucci; Email: davide.angelucci@unitelmasapienza.it
Get access

Abstract

Electoral competition is typically organized around an evolving set of policy issues. Recent Italian politics suggests a revival of two classic dimensions concerning the mode of interaction that defines the very goals of a polity: elitism (whether goals should be defined from the top down or from the bottom up) and pluralism (whether a polity should only accept widely shared common goals or whether multiple, alternative goals may legitimately compete). While these concerns possibly became less relevant in the heydays of the party government model, recent literatures on populism, technocracy, and process preferences reflect renewed interest. We introduce a two-dimensional elitism–pluralism scheme that explicates the spatial arrangement of top-down and bottom-up visions of party government vis-à-vis models of populism and technocracy. To demonstrate the relevance of the two dimensions for party preference, we turn to the case of the 2022 Italian election, which followed a sequence of a populist, a mixed populist-mainstream and a technocratic government. Voter positions from specialized batteries of the Italian National Election Study are contrasted with party positions from an original expert survey. Findings indicate that preferences on elitism and pluralism complement standard dimensions of issue voting. An explorative analysis of comparative data suggests that many countries across Europe have the potential for similar developments. Electoral competition increasingly reflects concerns about its own principles.

Keywords

electionselitismgoal definition preferencesItalypluralismpopulismtechnocracyunicorn migration
Type
Research Article
Information
Italian Political Science Review / Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica , First View , pp. 1 - 16
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Società Italiana di Scienza Politica

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Akkerman, A, Zaslove, A and Spruyt, B (2017) ‘We the people’ or ‘we the peoples’? A comparison of support for the populist radical right and populist radical left in the Netherlands. Swiss Political Science Review 23, 377–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albertazzi, D and Vampa, D (eds) (2021) Populism and new Patterns of Political Competition in Western Europe. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Almond, GA and Verba, S (1963) The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andeweg, R and Thomassen, J (2005) Modes of political representation: toward a new typology. Legislative Studies Quarterly 30, 507–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreadis, I and Stravrakakis, Y (2017) European populist parties in government: how well are voters represented? Evidence from Greece. Swiss Political Science Review 23, 485–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, DC and Carman, C (2010) Yes WE can or yes HE can? Citizen preferences regarding styles of representation and presidential voting behavior. Presidential Studies Quarterly 40, 431–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernardi, L, Sandri, G and Seddone, A (2017) Challenges of political participation and intra-party democracy: bittersweet symphony from party membership and primary elections in Italy. Acta Politica 52, 218–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertsou, E and Caramani, D (2022) People haven't had enough of experts: Technocratic attitudes among citizens in nine European democracies. American Journal of Political Science 66, 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertsou, E and Pastorella, G (2017) Technocratic attitudes: A citizens’ perspective of expert decision-making. West European Politics 40(2), 430–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, CJ and Accetti, CI (2018) ‘Techno-populism’ as a new party family: The case of the Five Star Movement and Podemos. Contemporary Italian Politics 10(2), 132–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/23248823.2018.1472919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, C and Invernizzi Accetti, C (2021) Technopopulism: The New Logic of Democratic Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunclík, M and Parízek, M (2019) When are technocratic cabinets formed? Comparative European Politics 17, 759–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caramani, D (2017) Will vs. reason: the populist and technocratic forms of political representation and their critique to party government. American Political Science Review 111, 54–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casal Bértoa, F and Weber, T (2024) Presidential elections and European party systems (1848–2020). British Journal of Political Science 54, 874–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ceri, P (2009) Challenging from the grass roots: The Girotondi and the no global movement. In Albertazzi, D, Brook, C, Ross, C and Rothenberg, N (eds), Resisting the Tide: Cultures of Opposition Under Berlusconi (2001–06). London: Continuum, pp. 83–96.Google Scholar
Chiaramonte, A (2023) Italy at the polls. Four lessons to learn from the 2022 general election. Contemporary Italian Politics 15, 75–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiru, M and Enyedi, Z (2022) Who wants technocrats? A comparative study of citizen attitudes in nine young and consolidated democracies. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 24(1), 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, M (2021) Ideology, not affect: what Americans want from political representation. American Journal of Political Science 65, 342–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, R (1971) Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven; London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
De Sio, L and Weber, T (2014) Issue yield: a model of party strategy in multidimensional space. American Political Science Review 108, 870–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Sio, L, Maggini, N and Mannoni, E (2024) Al cuore della rappresentanza: i temi in discussione, tra domanda dell'elettorato e offerta dei partiti. In Chiaramonte, A and De Sio, L (eds), Un polo solo: le elezioni politiche del 2022. Bologna: Il Mulino, pp. 47–76.Google Scholar
Duverger, M (1950) Les Partis Politiques. Paris: Colin.Google Scholar
Gherghina, S and Geissel, B (2020) Support for direct and deliberative models of democracy in the UK: understanding the difference. Political Research Exchange 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2474736X.2020.1809474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giannone, D and Cozzolino, A (2023) Politics by other means: an analysis of the discourses of Italian technocratic Prime Ministers. Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 54, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/ipo.2023.16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, KA, Kaltwasser, CR and Andreadis, I (2020) The activation of populist attitudes. Government and Opposition 55, 283–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heyne, L and Costa Lobo, M (2021) Technocratic attitudes and voting behaviour ten years after the Eurozone crisis: evidence from the 2019 EP elections. Electoral Studies 70, 102288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karremans, J and Lefkofridi, Z (2020) Responsive versus responsible? Party democracy in times of crisis. Party Politics 26(3), 271–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, R (1987) Party government and its alternatives. In Katz, R (ed). Party Government: European and American Experience. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
Katz, R (2020) The model of party government. In Rohrschneider, R and Thomassen, J (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Political Representation in Liberal Democracies. Oxford, 249–267.Google Scholar
Katz, R and Mair, P (1993) The evolution of party organizations in Europe: the three faces of party organization. American Review of Politics 14, 593–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, R and Mair, P (1995) Changing models of party organization and party democracy the emergence of the cartel party. Party Politics 1, 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchheimer, O (1966) The transformation of the West European party system. In La Palombara, J and Weiner, M (eds), Political Parties and Political Development. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 177–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
König, PD, Siewert, MB and Ackermann, K (2022) Conceptualizing and measuring citizens’ preferences for democracy: taking stock of three decades of research in a fragmented field. Comparative Political Studies 55, 2015–2049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavezzolo, S, Ramiro, L and Fernández-Vázquez, P (2021) The will for reason: voter demand for experts in office. West European Politics 44, 1506–1531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipset, SM and Rokkan, S (1967) Cleavage structures, party systems, and voter alignments: an Introduction. In Lipset, SM and Rokkan, S (eds), Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives. New York: Free Press, pp. 1–64.Google Scholar
Mair, P (2013) Smaghi vs. the parties: representative government and institutional constraints. In Schäfer, A and Streeck, W (eds) Politics in the Age of Austerity. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 143–168.Google Scholar
Mair, P (2014) Representative versus responsible government. In Mair, P (ed.), On Parties, Party Systems and Democracy. Colchester: ECPR Press, pp. 581–596.Google Scholar
Michels, R (1911) Zur Soziologie des Parteiwesens in der Modernen Demokratie, Untersuchungen über Oligarchischen Tendenzen des Gruppenlebens. Leipzig: W. Klinkhardt.Google Scholar
Monaco, D (2023) The rise of anti-establishment and far-right forces in Italy: neoliberalisation in a new guise? Competition & Change 27, 224–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mudde, C (2007) Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, J-W (2014) The people must be extracted from within the people. Reflections on populism. Constellations 21, 483–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panebianco, A (1987) Political Parties: Organization and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, T, Bales, R and Shils, E (1953) Working Papers in the Theory of Action. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Pasquino, G (2003) A tale of two parties: Forza Italia and the Left Democrats. Journal of Modern Italian Studies 8, 197–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pilet, J‐B, Bol, D, Vittori, D and Paulis, E (2023) Public support for deliberative citizens' assemblies selected through sortition: Evidence from 15 countries. European Journal of Political Research 62(3), 873–902. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejpr.v62.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pirro, AL (2018) The polyvalent populism of the 5 Star Movement. Journal of Contemporary European Studies 26, 443–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porro, N and Russo, P (2000) Berlusconi and other matters: the era of ‘football-politics’. Journal of Modern Italian Studies 5, 348–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, R (1969) The variability of party government: a theoretical and empirical critique. Political Studies 17, 413–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schattschneider, EE (1942) Party Government. New York: Farrar and Rinehart.Google Scholar
Tarchi, M (2002) Populism Italian style. In Mény, Y and Surel, Y, (eds), Democracies and the Populist Challenge. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 120–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomassen, J (1994) Empirical research into political representation: Failing democracy or failing models. In Jennings, K and Mann, T (eds), Elections at Home and Abroad: Essays in Honor of Warren Miller. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press, pp. 237–65.Google Scholar
Van der Eijk, C and Franklin, M (2004) Potential for contestation on European matters at national elections in Europe. In Marks, G and Steenbergen, M (eds), European Integration and Political Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 32–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Eijk, C and Niemoller, B (1983) Electoral Change in the Netherlands: Empirical Results and Methods of Measurement. Amsterdam: CT Press.Google Scholar
Van der Eijk, C, De Sio, L and Vezzoni, C (2021) Harmonising data, analytical approaches and analysis issues. In Schmitt, H, Van der Eijk, C and Segatti, P (eds), Consequences of Context: How the Social, Political and Economic Environment Affects Voting. Colchester: ECPR Press, pp. 21–44.Google Scholar
Van Hauwaert, S and Van Kessel, S (2018) Beyond protest and discontent: a cross-national analysis of the effect of populist attitudes and issue positions on populist party support. European Journal of Political Research 57, 68–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vezzoni, C, Basile, L, Garzia, D, Maggini, N, Moreno, M and Paparo, Aldo (2023) Itanes 2022 - Italian National Election Study 2022. https://doi.org/10.13130/RD_UNIMI/JV77WR, UNIMI Dataverse, V2Google Scholar
Weber, T (2022) Quantitative populism: of shapes and shades. Polity 54, 519–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, T (2023) Populism by the numbers? Toward a quantitative morphology. In Diehl, P and Bargetz, B (eds), The Complexity of Populism. New Approaches and Methods. London: Routledge, pp. 178–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werner, A (2019) What voters want from their parties: testing the promise-keeping assumption. Electoral Studies 57, 186–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Angelucci et al. supplementary material

Angelucci et al. supplementary material
Download Angelucci et al. supplementary material(File)
File 26.6 KB