Catch-all Policy of the Parties in Member and Non-Member Countries of European Union (on the Example of Sweden and Georgia)

Abstract

The parties have one of the key areas in political processes. Their reorganization and transformation has been going on years. It was changing systematically, in content, qualitatively, though it did not lose its role and importance. The parties, as in the most states of the world, as in Georgia, are the main creators of political process. Ideology and the party have been in close association with each other for years, though if we look at modern party systems, in most cases; obviously, there will be alienation between them. Catch-all and less ideology of the parties are becoming more noticeable. Catch-all parties have the biggest chance of winning in the elections, because they prefer the priorities to voters and not ideology, accordingly, they respond better to changes than the parties within an ideological framework.

The term – Catch-all policy of the parties, which was acknowledged by political scientists and observers, was established by German-American scientist Otto Kirchheimer, who worried about transformation of the parties. He wrote that Swedish social-democracies minimized the political competition at the expense of their program’s reduction. It should be noted, that the ideology of the present government party of Georgia can be assessed as a social-democracy. The well-known scientist Alen discusses Sweden among “the third model” countries, which embarked on this course at his time. In fact, the third way marks an alternative, which can be located between state socialism and the capitalism of the free market. The political situation of Georgia, at this stage, is more bias to the third way model. Only the future will show, how this model will work out. The example of Sweden will enable us to understand the ongoing political processes in Georgia profoundly, as the political system of Sweden is a constitutional monarchy, and in the present political space of Georgia, a tendency towards the model of a constitutional monarchy is clearly being revived; In the past, Sweden had a conflict with Russia, which is bounded with its territories. Georgia also has a border with Russia and the biggest problem in the country exactly remains the conflict with Russia.

To compare Georgia with Sweden politically is rather difficult. After a 70-year regime Soviet Union, the country tries to escape from its problems. Georgia has a lot of resources, to be able to join the developed countries. The natural resources of the country, as well as the geographical location and a successfully conducted economy will aid Georgia in becoming a politically strong state.

Sweden, thereby, with its infrastructure, tourism, water power and natural resources could solve social and economic problems. By maintaining neutrality in the 20th century, Sweden could raise the level of living of the population, which strengthened it and helped it become one of the leading countries in the world.

Sweden, during its existence, carried out one or more reforms to solve economic and social problems, in addition, during the years, it has preserved and only after the rebuilding of the country – in 1995 it became a member of European Union. The example of Sweden is considerable for such a country like Georgia, because it has a lot in common with Sweden.

The purpose of research, regarding the example of Sweden and Georgia, is to show characteristics of catch-all policies of the parties, what finally, affects the effective development and formation of the state.