Αρχηγοί σε δεύτερο ρόλο πριν και μετά την αλλαγή τρόπου εκλογής κομματικής ηγεσίας

Abstract

This paper attempts to link the classical finding on strengthening the role of party leaders in modern election campaigns with the current trend of extending membership participation in leadership selection. The association of the two seems to be rather obvious, since the election of the leader from a wider electorate automatically extends the legitimizing basis of leadership and thus increases his/her supremacy over the highest and lower levels of party hierarchy. However, the empirical study of the degree of campaign focus on individual leaders elected by mass membership reveals that these leaders are not always the focal point of their parties' communication strategy. By contrast, leaders who were selected from both highly inclusive and highly exclusive electorates were just as likely to be given a 'second role'. Studying the modern history of party leadership elections in the British Conservative Party, which adopted a mixed system of selecting leaders from the parliamentary group and party members by late 1990, as well as the content of the party's communication strategy in the past twenty years, we conclude that the change in the rules regarding leadership selection is not always accompanied by the increasing visibility of the leader during the election campaign. Based on these findings, the paper argues that the direct election of leadership does not necessarily mean that the elected leader will be more popular than the leader of the rival party, a criterion which eventually outweighs the leader's organizational power in selecting the focal point of the electoral campaign.