When Movements Anchor Parties: Electoral Alignments in American History

Abstract

The author of this book is an assistant professor of political science at Johns Hopkins University, and the work is unashamedly an exercise in his discipline. Nonetheless, an immensely impressive feature is its command of American historical writing, for it is based on a great many secondary sources. While the book's principal attention is to the two great political alliances of recent times—between organized labor and the Democratic party and between the Christian Right and the Republican party—the analysis does extend to abolitionism, Populism, and the 1960s antiwar movement. Daniel Schlozman is interested in the relationships between social movements and political parties, and he is correct that we need a better understanding of the complex processes involved. Social movements (though the term social is not altogether satisfactory; in Britain the term extra-parliamentary is sometimes used) characteristically originate outside party structures but may seek particular policy outcomes, sometimes developing as pressure groups. Opportunities may also allow a movement to forge an alliance with a party or even enter it—reaching an accommodation that can become institutionalized. When movements reach this status they become what Schlozman calls “anchoring groups” (p. 3). Anchoring groups cannot act independently without endangering the party alliance; parties are usually anxious to keep the benefits brought by the group, such as funds and voters. While such alignments may come about because of the circumstances at any particular point in time, once effected and institutionalized the arrangement takes on a measure of permanence and may continue to shape party priorities for decades.