Map 1.1 Location of Assam
2.2 Classification of factional situation and Factional pattern
45
factionalism within the party. But multi-party system is relatively on the safer side from these syndromes. Finally, factionalism occurs not because of a single factor, but multiple reasons and factors combine with the socio-political environment to give birth to factional situation. Faction once occurred has a tendency towards its proliferation, if not resolved by the organizational machinery addressing the grievances of the faction.
46
system but supranational or transnational party federations are only seen in European Parliament. For example European People’s Party or Party of European Socialists operates on transnational platform resulting in cooperative factionalism36.
Figure 2.1
Mapping and labeling factions
Courtesy: Francoise Boucek (2009) Intra-party type of faction is most common and studied form of factionalism in political science. Well known political parties like the Indian National Congress, the Conservative and the Labour party in Britain, the Republican and the Democratic Party in USA have intra party factions. The factions in these parties are more or less institutionalized and salient feature of the respective political system. One might safely put it philosophically that in democracy one is entitled to agree to disagree, differ on crucial issues, and express contesting voice. As a result, it is obvious that there could be a group of people who rallies behind the other view point and likely
36 ibid. 7-8
Non Political Sphere Political Sphere
Sports Business
Religion Parliamentary
Extra- parliamentary
Extra-party Executive Cross-party Intra-party
Rebel groups
Bipartisan Non-legislative
Multipartisan Legislative
Civil society groups
National Supranational
TH-1788_09614110
47
to form a faction. Therefore, factionalism is a universal phenomenon in democratic politics.
2.2.1 Patterns of factionalism
Factionalism in a political party may be of three kinds; unifactionalism, bifactionalism and multifactionalism. Factional patterns are conditioned by wide variety of factors operated within and outside the party environment. These are discussed below:
i) Unifactionalism refers to the situation when a single cohesive faction controls the power of the party concerned. The single factional group, thus, prevent emergence of any other faction in the party. Even if there is a second faction, it is disorganized and insignificant in terms of political power. Some political scientist does not regard unifactionalism as a specific pattern. However, V.O.Key (1949) has observed that competent and shrewd strategy, high degree of discipline over the local political leaders, affiliated with the party organization are the pillars of unifactional pattern. The ‘high command’ in such a pattern play crucial role by exercising democratic practice in case of dispute settlement, candidate selection and nomination for the election. Diverse political aspirant and man of political ability finds place in such a factional pattern on the basis of unquestioned loyalty.
Such type of factionalism is seen only in mature political culture and certain degree of homogeneity is important to maintain such pattern. The Democratic Party in the State of Virginia in the USA during 1940s demonstrated such unifactional pattern.
It was led by the Byrd faction named after its leader Senator Harry F. Byrd37.
ii) Bifactional pattern means presence of two well defined factions within a political party. Some glaring examples of bifactionalism are Stalin-Trotski rivalry in CPSU, Mahatma Gandhi-Subhash Chandra Basu ideological division in Indian National Congress, etc. In the absence of strong opposition, bifactionalism may serve as a boon for democratic polity. The presence of two durable factions in the
37 Prasanta Sen Gupta, “Intra-Party Politics : A Preliminary note”, Indian Journal of Political Science, Vol.40 No. 1 (March 1979) : 90-91
TH-1788_09614110
48
political party might lead to clarity and order in political programme. It might be an alternative to two-party competition, as was in the case of the state of Louisiana in the USA. Bifactional pattern added in Louisiana relatively stable polity and kept chaotic factional politics away in 1940s38.
Bipolar factional make up of a party may give way to multipolarization of factions due to change in political environment. After the independence, the Congress Party in India succumbed to such change. The party was no more a movement but transformed itself into a power structure to translate social and economic interests of the masses in reality. Divergent social and economic sub groups in their bid for realizing their aspirations entered into ‘conflict relationship’ within the Congress party39. Paul R Brass in his study of the Congress Party in Uttar Pradesh had shown how the dominant party managed multifactional pattern and came victorious in elections in the 1950s and 1960s. Indian politics is competitive and contentious.
Therefore, caste, religion, language and other primordial loyalties find a place in Indian political system leading to emergence of several social and political factions in the scenario. As a result, the number of contending group increases. It may be argued that the social environment in which the party operates, exercise influence over the factional structure of the party and may even initiate change in it.
iii) Multifactionalism is caused by lure of power and individual position in the party organization. As such, the leaders bargain among themselves for personal interest and sometimes form temporary alliance of mutual convenience. In multifactional pattern, many sub groups or cliques operate. Multifactionalism generally flourishes when politics is disorganized, individualistic or atomized.
Factional leaders in such a situation display demagogic qualities that attract voter’s attention. They win elections based on own qualities and exertions. Indian political parties mostly demonstrate multifactional pattern. Such faction sometime discontinues for either a solution acceptable is found or the faction opposing the
38 Allan P Sindler, “Bifactional Rivalry as an Alternative to Two-party Competition in Louisiana”, American Political Science Review, Vol.49 (1955)
39 Gupta, op cit. p 92
TH-1788_09614110
49
dominant one have become weak. It is seen that factional leaders or even supporters switch over factional bloc according to their convenience. Such factional pattern is loose factionalism. Generally ideological factions are tight factions. But in case of personal factional groupings, prestige and patronage becomes the prize in the absence of issues. Factional leaders often cross factional lines which are seldom tightly drawn. Thus, flux and fluidity, impermanence and uncertainty become the rule in multifactional pattern.