4
extension of Sartori’s definition that considers institutionalization as a dichotomy.
In
Mainwaring’s point of view, “institutionalization refers to a process by which a practice
or organization becomes well established and widely known.”(Mainwaring, 1999: 25)
He proposes four dimensions of institutionalized party system: the stable party
competition, the strong party roots in a society, the legitimacy of parties, and the party
organization(Ibid., 26-7).
Mainwaring’s definition seems to encompass both the value
infusion and routinization within an organization.
Furthermore, the advantage of his
definition provides us to assess the party system in the third-wave democracies without a
strict demarcation as Sartori’s definition.
Thus, I will apply his definition of
institutionalization to analyze Taiwan’s party system so that I can compare it with the
other third-wave democracies.
Overview of the Weakly Institutionalized Party System (1986-2001)
Before the abolition of martial law in 1986, Taiwan is an authoritarian regime.
After 1986, the DPP-which is the first and the most powerful opposition party appears
shortly after the lift of the martial law.
Although the establishment of the DPP begins
the era of party competition, the KMT is still the ruling party till 2000.
Nevertheless,
the social base of the KMT weakens gradually since the early 1990s.
The serious
factional struggle has led many of the members to withdraw from it and set up new
parties, such as the New Party(NP), the People First Party(PFP), and the Taiwan
Solidarity Union(TSU).
The establishment of these parties have undermined the social
base of the KMT seriously and resulted in the decline of vote share for the KMT.
As
new parties emerged consecutively, the party system has not been stable yet.
Because of
the short period of the evolution of political parties, it is difficult for the majority of
Convention