Sartori and Italian politics: joy and sorrow

ABSTRACT

This article explores Giovanni Sartori’s contributions to the analysis and understanding of Italian politics. Sartori never studied and analysed the case of Italy in ‘splendid’ isolation from other cases. Rather he was at pains to place Italy within a broad and empirically grounded comparative perspective. On the basis of his approach, Sartori repeatedly intervened in the Italian public debate to suggest his own proposals for the improvement of the performance of the political system and, more in general, of the democratic regime. In this article, our discussion of Sartori’s approach and contributions to the field of Italian politics will follow three highly intertwined threads. First, we will deal with the contribution provided by Giovanni Sartori to the analysis and definition of the somewhat elusive Italian party system. Second, we will explore his relevant contribution to the study of electoral systems throughout the world, especially taking into account both the specificities and the oddities of the Italian electoral ‘laboratory’. Third, we will investigate the increasing tensions, especially, but not exclusively, provoked by Berlusconi’s enduring influence on Italian politics, between democratic principles, on the one hand, and the doctrine of liberalism and constitutionalism, on the other. The concluding section will evaluate Sartori’s contributions to the advancement/improvement of political science in Italy, in particular as a discipline capable of acquiring and producing knowledge that can and should be applied.

KEYWORDS:

• Electoral laws
• party systems
• polarised pluralism
• comparison
• public intellectual
• political engineering

Disclosure statement

Gianfranco Pasquino wishes to declare a significant conflict of interests: had he not studied with Sartori, he would have never become a Professor of Political Science.

Marco Valbruzzi wishes to declare an indirect conflict of interests: had Pasquino not become a Professor of Political Science, he would never been able to attend his courses and to graduate under his supervision.

Notes

1. Sartori ([1976] 2005, 156) relaxed this condition so as to include those countries with a tradition of single-party minority cabinets.

2. By the way, this conclusion – that context matters – has been recently reached, with a terrible delay, also by some US scholars (Htun and Powell 2013).

3. Indeed, in order to be admitted to the proportional allocation of seats, parties had to obtain at least 300,000 votes nationally and to win a seat in one constituency.

4. On this point, that is, how governments make choices about the timing of policy consequences, see Jacobs (2016).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Gianfranco Pasquino

Gianfranco Pasquino is Professor Emeritus of Political Science, University of Bologna.

Marco Valbruzzi

Marco Valbruzzi is a postdoctoral research fellow at the Department of Political and Social Sciences, University of Bologna.