Partisan Dealignment in Britain 1964–1974

Abstract

Britain enjoys a textbook reputation as the historic home and model representative of a stable two-party system. From the factors most frequently cited by way of explanation – the electoral system, the absence of cross-cutting social cleavages – it is implied that this uncommon state of affairs is a natural and permanent part of British politics. This reputation is, in fact, somewhat exaggerated. At no time have MPs or parliamentary candidates in Britain been confined to two parties only (in contrast to the United States); and for most of the period since the introduction of the majority male franchise and the beginning of mass parties in 1884 the configuration of party forces in the Commons would be best described as multi-party (1884–1922), three-party (1922–31), or dominant one-party (1931–45). Britain's experience of a stable two-party politics has therefore been both recent and relatively short-lived; it is only since the Second World War that two parties – Conservative and Labour – have alternated in exclusive incumbency of government office on the basis of an evenly balanced duopoly of electoral support and parliamentary seats.

Political distinctiveness: An identity optimising approach

“…Party identification has traditionally been thought of as being predominantly class-based and to result in relatively non-self-reflective voting behaviour (Converse, 1964). In recent years, the social base of party support has changed and diffused as a result of class dealignment (Crewe, D Abrams Sarlvik and Alt, 1977;Rose, 1980). Evans, Heath and Payne (1991) have argued that the political parties have consequently changed their electoral strategies to appeal to different social groups so that social class is no longer a centrally defining characteristic of party support.…”

The Australian democrats: Protest vote or portent of realignment?

“…Realignment suggests that the established alignment between class and party will alter and that the major parties will become aligned along a new social cleavage. This is conceptually different from dealignment, which occurs when voters gradually cease to identify with the major parties in the system (see Burnham, 1975;Crewe et al, 1977).…”

Explaining Turnout Decline in Britain, 1964–2005: Party Identification and the Political Context

“…Lastly, over the last few decades there has been a substantial decline in the strength of party identification (see also Crewe et al 1977;Dalton 2000;Clarke et al 2004). This phenomenon is not just limited to Britain or the United States.…”