“Churchill's Party”: A necessary experiment in personalization

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Social Science Quarterly Pub Date : 2024-03-08 DOI:10.1111/ssqu.13355
Kit Kowol
{"title":"“Churchill's Party”: A necessary experiment in personalization","authors":"Kit Kowol","doi":"10.1111/ssqu.13355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AimThis article aims to determine the extent of “personalization” and “de‐institutionalization” within the Conservative Party in Britain during the period 1940–1945 when the Party was under the leadership of Winston Churchill.Materials and methodsThe article examines the different dimensions of “personalization” and “de‐institutionalization” as defined by Harmel, Svåsand, and Mjelde in this special edition. To do so, it uses a variety of sources including: internal party records, memoirs and biographies, contemporaneous diaries, letters to party leaders, and survey research undertaken by the organization Mass Observation.ResultsThe article identified that a limited degree of personalization took place during the period. This was largely in relation to the movement away from existing internal policy and procedures, especially those to do with electioneering. Evidence regarding other dimensions was mixed with a notable lack of change in the perceptions other parties and their leaders held about the Conservative Party.ConclusionThe article suggests that the personalization that occurred within the Party was largely a product of necessity, notably the unpopularity of the Conservative “brand” during World War II, compared to Churchill's own personal popularity, as well as the disruptions caused by the war itself. The article argues that this was enabled, to an extent, by the already high degree of latitude that the Conservative Party afforded its leaders. At the same time, the article notes the way in which defeat at the 1945 general election led to the Conservative Party “snapping back” to its pre‐war highly institutionalized form. Both findings highlight the extent to which electoral calculations were central to the process of personalization and its subsequent reverse.","PeriodicalId":48253,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Quarterly","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13355","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

AimThis article aims to determine the extent of “personalization” and “de‐institutionalization” within the Conservative Party in Britain during the period 1940–1945 when the Party was under the leadership of Winston Churchill.Materials and methodsThe article examines the different dimensions of “personalization” and “de‐institutionalization” as defined by Harmel, Svåsand, and Mjelde in this special edition. To do so, it uses a variety of sources including: internal party records, memoirs and biographies, contemporaneous diaries, letters to party leaders, and survey research undertaken by the organization Mass Observation.ResultsThe article identified that a limited degree of personalization took place during the period. This was largely in relation to the movement away from existing internal policy and procedures, especially those to do with electioneering. Evidence regarding other dimensions was mixed with a notable lack of change in the perceptions other parties and their leaders held about the Conservative Party.ConclusionThe article suggests that the personalization that occurred within the Party was largely a product of necessity, notably the unpopularity of the Conservative “brand” during World War II, compared to Churchill's own personal popularity, as well as the disruptions caused by the war itself. The article argues that this was enabled, to an extent, by the already high degree of latitude that the Conservative Party afforded its leaders. At the same time, the article notes the way in which defeat at the 1945 general election led to the Conservative Party “snapping back” to its pre‐war highly institutionalized form. Both findings highlight the extent to which electoral calculations were central to the process of personalization and its subsequent reverse.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
"丘吉尔的派对个性化的必要尝试
本文旨在确定 1940-1945 年温斯顿-丘吉尔领导英国保守党期间,该党内部的 "个人化 "和 "去制度化 "程度。材料与方法本文研究了哈梅尔、斯沃桑德和米尔德在本特刊中定义的 "个人化 "和 "去制度化 "的不同层面。为此,文章采用了多种资料来源,包括:党内记录、回忆录和传记、同时期的日记、写给党领导人的信件以及由 "群众观察 "组织开展的调查研究。这主要与现行的内部政策和程序有关,尤其是与竞选有关的政策和程序。结论文章认为,保守党内部出现的个性化在很大程度上是迫不得已的产物,尤其是与丘吉尔本人的受欢迎程度相比,保守党的 "品牌 "在二战期间并不受欢迎,而且战争本身也造成了混乱。文章认为,这在一定程度上得益于保守党给予其领导人的高度自由度。同时,文章还指出,1945 年大选的失败导致保守党 "退回 "到战前高度制度化的形式。这两项发现都强调了选举计算在多大程度上对个性化进程及其后的逆转起到了核心作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
10.50%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: Nationally recognized as one of the top journals in the field, Social Science Quarterly (SSQ) publishes current research on a broad range of topics including political science, sociology, economics, history, social work, geography, international studies, and women"s studies. SSQ is the journal of the Southwestern Social Science Association.
期刊最新文献
Domains of baseless belief and the characteristics of believers Attitudes toward abortion legality and abortion regulation: Insights from a nationally representative study An advanced learning approach for detecting sarcasm in social media posts: Theory and solutions Not ready to make nice: Congressional candidates’ emotional appeals on Twitter Climate‐related disasters and transparency: Records and the United States Federal Emergency Management Agency
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1