Analyses & Alternatives (분석과 대안)

Korea Consensus Institute(KCI) (사단법인 코리아컨센서스연구원)
권호 표지

Democratization and Politics of Trasformismo : Explaining the 1990 Three-Party Merger in South Korea

  • Received : 2017.09.04
  • Accepted : 2017.09.20
  • Published : 2017.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Research on democratic transitions has relatively ignored the question of why some countries experience a regressive form of political pacts, while others do not. This paper develops a simple game-theoretic model to explain the phenomenon of collusive pacts in the process of democratization. Trasformismo is a term that refers to a system of political exchange based on informal clientelistic politics. The existing studies of the politics of trasformismo have emphasized the timing of industrialization and the tradition of strong state as conditions of the politics of trasformismo. However, not every late industrializers and not every strong states experienced some variants of collusive political pacts in their trajectories of democratization. In this paper, I contend that the politics of trasformismo is rather a generalizable pattern of political elites' behavior under particular circumstances. By developing a simple game theoretic model, this paper suggests the conditions under which political actors are likely to collude to a regressive form of political pacts. The model shows that the likelihood of collusion to a regressive form of political pacts is a function of a set of parameters. First, a higher level of incumbency advantage in electoral competition is likely to be associated with a higher probability of collusive political pacts. Second, a higher degree of the monopoly of political representation of political parties without a close link with a variety of societal forces is likely to induce collusive behavior among politicians. Third, the ruling party leader's expectations about the likelihood of a safe extrication are related to collusive political pacts. This paper then engages in a case study of the 1990 three-party merger in South Korea. The 1990 Korean case is interesting in that the ruling party created a new party after having merged with two opposition parties. This case can be considered a result of political maneuver in a context of democratization. The case study suggests the empirical relevance of the game-theoretic model. As the game of trasformismo and the case study of the 1990 three-party merger in South Korea have shown, the collusive political pact was neither determined by a certain stage of economic development nor by a particular cultural systems. Rather, it was a product of the art of trasformismo based on party leaders' rational calculations of the expected likelihood of taking governing power.

Keywords

References

  1. Ames, B. (1978). Political Survival: Politicians and Public Policy in Latin America. University of California Press, Berkeley.
  2. Barnes, S. B. (1966). Italy: Oppositions on Left, Right, and Center, in Robert A. Dahl (ed.), Political Oppositions in Western Democracies. Yale University Press, New Haven.
  3. Bawn, K. (1999). Constructing "Us": Ideology, Coalition Politics, and False Consciousness. American Journal of Political Science Vol.43, No.2, p.320.
  4. Brownlee, J. (2007). Authoritarianism in an Age of Democratization. Cambridge University Press, New York.
  5. Choi, J. (1993). Political Cleavages in South Korea, in Hagen Koo (ed.), State and Society in Contemporary Korea. Cornell University Press, Ithaca.
  6. Choi, J. (1994). Is It Democracy? An Analysis of Kim Young Sam's Reform in South Korea. Paper presented at the 16th World Congress of the International Political Science Association, Berlin.
  7. Di Palma, G. (1981). To Craft Democracies. The University of California Press.
  8. Di Palma, G. (1978). Political Syncretism in Italy: Historical Coalition Strategies and the Present Crisis. Working Paper, Institute of International Studies, The University of California, Berkeley.
  9. Geddes, B. (1994). Politicians' Dilemma: Building State Capacity in Latin America. University of California Press, Berkeley.
  10. Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks. International Publishers, New York.
  11. Grew, R. (1978). Italy, in Grew, R. (ed.), Crisis of Political Development in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  12. Kim, H. (1997). Rational Choice Theory and Third World Politics: The 1990 Party Merger in Korea, Comparative Politics.
  13. Kurth, J. R. (1979). Industrial Change and Political Change: A European Perspective, in David Collier, (ed.), The New Authoritarianism in Latin America. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  14. LaPalombara, J. (1965). Italy: Fragmentation, Isolation, and Alienation, in Lucian Pye and Sidney Verba, (eds.), Political Culture and Political Development. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  15. Linz, J. & Stepan, A. (1996). Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
  16. Luebbert, G. (1991). Liberalism, Fascism, or Social Democracy: Social Classes and the Political Origins of Regimes in Interwar Europe. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  17. O'Donnell, G. & Schmitter, P.C. (1986). Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: A Tentative Conclusion. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
  18. Pepinsky, T. (2009). Economic Crises and the Breakdown of Authoritarianisms: Indonesia and Malaysia in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge University Press, New York.
  19. Przeworski, A. (1991). Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge University Press, New York.
  20. Tsebelis, G. (1990). Nested Games. University of California Press, Berkeley.