For the interaction of society and political parties within the electoral system in southern Africa, it is necessary to systematically investigate the social structures (cleavage analysis) and measure the success or failure of political parties against the backdrop of the election programmes (manifesto research). The focus of this research is the six polyarchies of Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Zambia and South Africa. In countries with the voting system of proportional representation, neither coalition governments nor alternative government parties have ruled since 1990. In countries with a majoritarian voting system, either coalitions have formed a government, or one party has remained unchallenged for decades. The research results show that the previous electoral outcomes are the reflection of the cleavage structure, and there are indicators in the societies examined that can meet the theoretical expectations of democratic societies in the future. In part I, the theoretical framework for the cleavage analysis and party analysis is established, which applies for the six case studies of part II. The societies are examined in terms of eight cleavages, their extension and their political relevance. The cleavages are related to the settlement area, the occupation, the income distribution, the religion, the ethnicity (race), the language heritage, the educational level and citizenship (the proportion of foreigners). In the context of the electoral system, political parties represent the social interest. Their goals are recorded as contents of the manifesto, which can be used for Wordscores to compare the political parties on the policy domains Freedom and democracy, Political system, Economy, Welfare and quality of life, Fabric of Society and Social Groups. Each domain is described by two contrasting definitions, which are used for aggregating Left-Right categorisation of the parties. The regional results in the comparative study (part III) define the categories Left, Right and Liberal of political parties. The qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) is used to define the content of the left-wing, right-wing and liberal political parties in the context of Southern Africa. At the same time, the contents of the definitions are factors in the success of parties in Southern Africa. Parties with right-wing content are found mainly among the government parties, and parties with politically left-wing or liberal content are mainly opposition parties.

The book examines the cleavage structures and the positioning of political parties in countries of Southern Africa including Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa and Zambia. Each case compares the relevant cleavages according to the formulae set of Rae and Taylor with the policies of the competing political parties according to the Manifesto Research Group Wordscores analysis. The comparative perspective concludes with the definitions of Left, Right and Liberal in the context of the Southern Africa and shows determinant of party success and failure.

Within southern Africa, there has been a steady increase in the number of dominant party systems -- systems where one party dominates over a prolonged period in an ostensibly democratic system with regular elections and multiple parties participating. This party system has replaced the one-party system that dominated Africa's political landscape after the first wave of liberations in the 1950s and 1960s. Friend or foe? Dominant party systems in southern Africa: Insights from the developing world seeks to understand this trend and its implications for southern Africa's democracies by comparing such systems in southern Africa with others in the developing world (such as Mexico, India, South Korea and Taiwan). In particular, the case of Zimbabwe stands out as a concerning example of the direction a dominant party can take: regression into authoritarianism. Mexico, India, South Korea and Taiwan present alternative routes for the dominant party system. The salient question posed by this book is: Which route are Botswana, Namibia and South Africa taking? It answers by drawing conclusions to determine whether these countries are moving towards liberal democracy, authoritarianism or a road in between.

Why have seemingly similar African countries developed very different forms of democratic party systems? Despite virtually ubiquitous conditions that are assumed to be challenging to democracy - low levels of economic development, high ethnic heterogeneity, and weak state capacity - nearly two dozen African countries have maintained democratic competition since the early 1990s. Yet the forms of party system competition vary greatly: from highly stable, nationally organized, well-institutionalized party systems to incredibly volatile, particularistic parties in systems with low institutionalization. To explain their divergent development, Rachel Beatty Riedl points to earlier authoritarian strategies to consolidate support and maintain power. The initial stages of democratic opening provide an opportunity for authoritarian incumbents to attempt to shape the rules of the new multiparty system in their own interests, but their power to do so depends on the extent of local support built up over time.

The empirical starting point for anyone who wants to understand political cleavages in the democratic world, based on a unique dataset covering fifty countries since WWII. Who votes for whom and why? Why has growing inequality in many parts of the world not led to renewed class-based conflicts, seeming instead to have come with the emergence of new divides over identity and integration? News analysts, scholars, and citizens interested in exploring those questions inevitably lack relevant data, in particular the kinds of data that establish historical and international context. Political Cleavages and Social Inequalities provides the missing empirical background, collecting and examining a treasure trove of information on the dynamics of polarization in modern democracies. The chapters draw on a unique set of surveys conducted between 1948 and 2020 in fifty countries on five continents, analyzing the links between votersÕ political preferences and socioeconomic characteristics, such as income, education, wealth, occupation, religion, ethnicity, age, and gender. This analysis sheds new light on how political movements succeed in coalescing multiple interests and identities in contemporary democracies. It also helps us understand the conditions under which conflicts over inequality become politically salient, as well as the similarities and constraints of voters supporting ethnonationalist politicians like Narendra Modi, Jair Bolsonaro, Marine Le Pen, and Donald Trump. Bringing together cutting-edge data and historical analysis, editors Amory Gethin, Clara Mart’nez-Toledano, and Thomas Piketty offer a vital resource for understanding the voting patterns of the present and the likely sources of future political conflict.

A comparative study of the role of political parties and movements in the founding and survival of developing world democracies.