babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » Italian politics are NOT an arguement against PR

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Italian politics are NOT an arguement against PR
Ken Burch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8346

posted 07 May 2007 11:02 PM      Profile for Ken Burch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Some babblers have argued that the long post-war dominance of the centre-right in Italian politics is a case against adopting PR.
This is a straw man.

Italian politics in the postwar era were NOT shaped primarily by Italy's electoral system.

They were driven by two particular forces:

1)The Cold War

2)The repeated intervention of both the US intelligence services and the Catholic Church(neither of which is technically headquartered in Italy, but both of which felt free to throw their weight around, usually in tandem, to prevent social change and the victory of left parties(other than the watered-down-to-nothing Socialist and Social Democratic rump parties that repeatedly propped up the Christian Democratic Party and got nothing whatsoever in exchange for their support).

These influences would have guaranteed centre-right dominance in Italian politics no matter WHAT system Italy used to allocate seats in its parliament.


From: A seedy truckstop on the Information Superhighway | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Pepper-Pot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13391

posted 08 May 2007 01:52 AM      Profile for Pepper-Pot        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It's an interesting point Mr. Burch makes, and I shall ask others to comment with more certainty.

But saying "Some Babblers" needs clarification. Is that the annoying mosquito minority, or is it the majority concensus 'round here ?

------------------------------------------------


But if I may detour slightly (a frequent stylistic indulgence of mine)...


It seems to me, that taking just 1 country, in isolation, without considering it's historical characteristics/nuances, is not a reliable or objective way to evaluate the PR model (or "pizza parliament" as sneering Neo-Cons like to refer to it as).

The way I look at it, is that the PR Pizza (talkin' Italy here, eh ? lol...) is preferable PRECISELY BECAUSE there is less unilateralism, concensus, and political monopolization of ideas.
I make this statement considering ALL of the PR Pizzas throught Europe and Nordic-Scandinavia.After all, the exception can often prove the rule.

---------------------------------------------

(Some crazy Dutch restaraunt folks put egg on the pizza I ordered there, but I was so hungry, I gobbled it up.I felt mildly capitalistic, so I only left a 5% gratuity.)


From: Vancouver | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
Steppenwolf Allende
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13076

posted 08 May 2007 02:15 AM      Profile for Steppenwolf Allende     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Some babblers have argued that the long post-war dominance of the centre-right in Italian politics is a case against adopting PR.
This is a straw man.

It's also historically inaccurate.

The "center-right," which until recently was the old Christian Democratic Party, formed coalition governments with the old Communist Party on several occasions--and a couple of those went well as they actually got a whole bunch of stuff done.

The most successful coalition was right after WWII, shortly after the general strike and the forced vote to abolish the monarchy (which the US military wanted to re-instate as part of the Marshall Plan). That CDP-CP coalition government lasted three years, and in that brief time wrote a new constitution, re-organized the entire public infrastructure and social safety grid, began a massive public reconstruction project and led a broad and successful social contract agreement on investment and development between the labour unions and cooperatives and the US government and US corporations.

By Canadian standards the old CDP might even be considered moderate NDP.

The only real center-right coalitions in Italy were the two Berlusconi-led ones in the mid-1990s and the last one in 2001-2006.


From: goes far, flies near, to the stars away from here | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 08 May 2007 11:44 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The Christian Democrats NEVER EVER formed any coalition with the Communists. The vatican forbade it. They did work with the much smaller socialist party though.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Ken Burch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8346

posted 15 May 2007 08:09 PM      Profile for Ken Burch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, there was never a formal "coalition" between the Christian Democrats and the Communists, but there was some sort of semi-coalitional "arrangement" between those parties in the late 1970's, IIRC.

And the Vatican's role is important, you're right, Stockholm. It's an interventional role the Holy See may be about to resume, as they have been working hard to pressure the Italian government not to bring in a civil partnership bill recently.

The Catholic Church is going to do itself a lot of damage if it takes the position that voters and elected officials in Catholic countries have no right to do anything that goes against Catholic teachings. Takes them right back to the 1930's, and we know who the pointy hat boys were in bed with then(figuratively speaking, at least as far as I know).


From: A seedy truckstop on the Information Superhighway | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 16 May 2007 05:16 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think that the one possible problem with PR that we see in the Italian example, is when you have a political system with a large party that is more or less at the centre of the political spectrum (i.e. the old Christian Democrats in Italy or the Liberals in Canada). There is a danger that you end up with no chance whatsoever of a government being formed without that big centre party and so you end up with the Christian Democrats or the Liberals being the largest party in the governing coalition until the end of time.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 16 May 2007 05:52 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
There is a danger that you end up with no chance whatsoever of a government being formed without that big centre party.

As Labour thought in Scotland, both for the Scottish Parliament and local councils.

But not so:

quote:
"After a generation, Labour's one-party states are history.

"There has been a seismic shift in Scottish public life, and councils will benefit from full democratic accountability."

Decades of Labour domination is crumbling in places where the "monkey in a red rosette" joke was still credible until Thursday, May 3.

"Over the past eight years, Labour has been a minority party but has been accepted as the biggest party in terms of seats. Others have been irritated by a perceived arrogance from Labour.

"It is now minority politics which requires a different style of working, in a consensual manner. Labour can no longer control Scotland. It has to come back as a different kind of party, as local government changes will be as significant as the parliament."



From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 16 May 2007 06:09 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I wouldn't call the Labour Party the "centre" party in the UK or Scotland since there is nothing of any significance to the left of it.

But, let's imagine for a moment having PR in Ontario. I suspect that from now until the end of time, we would alternate between Liberal-Conservative coalition governments and Liberal-NDP coalition governments - but for all intents and purposes no government will ever be able to formed in Ontario that doesn't include the Liberals since it is highly unlikely (though not impossible) that we will ever see an NDP-Conservative coalition with the Liberals in opposition.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 16 May 2007 08:21 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
we would alternate between Liberal-Conservative coalition governments and Liberal-NDP coalition governments . . .

The OCA members had quite a good discussion on that theme a couple of months ago. Almost none of them wanted to make coalition governments an explicit priority objective. The consensus was "we want a more representative system, and the voters can decide how many parties they want, and whether they want to give any one of them 50% of the votes."

For example, in Germany's 13 MMP provinces we find four one-party majority governments, we had one last time in Wales, and we almost got one in New Zealand five years ago until voters had last-minute qualms about giving even their beloved Helen Clark unbridled power.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Steppenwolf Allende
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13076

posted 16 May 2007 11:10 AM      Profile for Steppenwolf Allende     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The Christian Democrats NEVER EVER formed any coalition with the Communists. The vatican forbade it. They did work with the much smaller socialist party though.


The Christian Democrats had a working relationships with the Communist Party, as well as the socialists, even including a couple of them as cabinet ministers until 1948, when the Truman dictatorship threatened to withhold development and reconstruction grants unless both were excluded.

Forced to comply, Prime Minister Alcide De Gasperi dismissed them from the Cabinet, but kept them and a whole slew of others on the working and advisory committees of the economic and constitutional and infrastructure development ministries.


From: goes far, flies near, to the stars away from here | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 16 May 2007 12:04 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Between 1945 and 1948, there were coalition governments of national unity all over Europe and these all tended to include Communists. This was also the case in France. But the moment that the first post-war elections were held under a new constitution in France and Italy in 1948 - the Communist parties in those countries were totally frozen out. De Gasperi won close to absolute majority in 1948 and was more than happy to govern alone with the help of a few rightwing parties - rather than work with the Communists - esp. after the Christian Democrats ran their whole campaign that year stressing the evils of "godless Communism"
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Will S
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13367

posted 16 May 2007 12:45 PM      Profile for Will S        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Stockholm wrote:

quote:
I suspect that from now until the end of time, we would alternate between Liberal-Conservative coalition governments and Liberal-NDP coalition governments - but for all intents and purposes no government will ever be able to formed in Ontario that doesn't include the Liberals since it is highly unlikely (though not impossible) that we will ever see an NDP-Conservative coalition with the Liberals in opposition.

This presumes these three parties will be the only ones represented and capable of governing on a two-part basis. Three per cent of the popular vote is not a high threshold. If voters have a chance to vote for parties that could never hope of winning a FPTP constituency, we could see numerous other parties riding hobby horse issues. The Greens would likely have little trouble electing at least a couple of members. But we may also have to deal with religious parties or regional groups (something like the Northern Ontario Heritage Party could potentially elect MPPs).

Would we have long-term coalitions? Would we have issue-by-issue minority agreements? It's hard to say.


From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca