Abstract
Many years after its emergence in the vocabulary of comparative politics, the label of ‘anti-system’ is still one of the most used to describe a party or group that exerts a radical form of opposition. However, the term has been used in an increasingly idiosyncratic manner, which makes it inappropriate for comparative research. The origins of the concept reside in the writings of Sartori on party systems in the 1960s and 1970s, where it mainly referred to the totalitarian parties of the inter-war and post-war decades. Since its inception, however, the concept of an anti-system party has not only been used in party system analysis, but also in the context of empirical studies of various aspects of the life of democratic regimes, to indicate challenges to its stability, legitimacy or, more recently, consolidation. This article reconstructs the concept of ‘anti-systemness’ by disentangling its different empirical referents in party system theory and in the empirical analysis of democracy, and proposes a more refined typology of ‘anti-system parties’.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
