Conceitos · Pedro Doria

*The Great Retreat*, by Didi Kuo — Summary

Leitura de 37 min

The Great Retreat, by Didi Kuo — Summary

Synopsis

Didi Kuo argues that the crisis of democracy is, at its core, a crisis of political parties as intermediary institutions. Parties have not merely failed electorally or lost popularity — they have retreated from the work of connecting citizens to the state: aggregating demands, building civic ties, and translating social conflict into governable programs. Without strong parties in this intermediary sense, democratic representation hollows out and citizens become vulnerable to populist and antidemocratic appeals. The “great retreat” of the title is this withdrawal from representative functions, not merely an electoral defeat or an image crisis.

The argument is built through historical-comparative analysis — the United States, Britain, continental Europe, and cases from the Global South — that isolates distinct mechanisms of party hollowing. Chapter 3 traces the abandonment of local organization and mass membership. Chapter 4 diagnoses the ideological convergence produced by the Third Way. Chapter 5 shows how marketing replaced membership as the mode of relating to citizens. Chapter 6 locates parties within a globalized economy that constrains what governments can offer and diverts representation toward elites and capital. The conclusion (Ch. 7) synthesizes a reform agenda that rejects both technocratic anti-party solutions and vague centrism.

The book is directly relevant to the Nova República project and to the vault’s broader inquiry into how democratic institutions lose their capacity to incorporate citizens. Kuo’s intermediary framework provides analytical vocabulary for what Samuels and Zucco identify as anti-partyism in Brazil — the enormous proportion of voters with no partisan identification — and for why Brazilian parties increasingly function as service providers to individual politicians rather than as organs of popular will. Her critique of neoliberal convergence maps onto the PSDB/PT trajectory. And her argument that party weakness opens space for populists offering symbolic recognition connects directly to thymos and the vault’s analysis of why the exhausted center lacks organizational infrastructure.

Chapter 1 — Introduction

The opening chapter frames the book around a blunt question: do political parties still serve democracy, or have they become one of the forces hollowing it out? Kuo starts from the classical democratic understanding of parties as indispensable institutions. They organize legislative conflict, connect citizens to public power, formulate policy agendas, and give elections meaning by offering competing visions of government. In that ideal account, parties do far more than seek office. They embody values, aggregate interests, and provide the mechanism through which citizens can choose rulers and later hold them accountable.

The problem, however, is that this classical picture no longer matches how many citizens experience politics. Kuo emphasizes the depth of public cynicism toward parties across democratic societies. Parties are widely viewed as self-serving, captured by donors, lobbyists, and economic elites, and more concerned with tactical advantage than with the public good. This hostility is not confined to the United States. In Europe, Asia, and Africa, confidence in parties has also declined, party membership has withered, and resentment toward ruling elites has given openings to far-right and extremist actors. Antiparty feeling, in her argument, is one expression of a broader decay of faith in liberal democracy itself.

A major conceptual move in the chapter is to link the crisis of parties to the crisis in the relationship between democracy and capitalism. Kuo argues that for much of the twentieth century, especially in the postwar period, parties helped stabilize democratic capitalism. Strong class-based parties mediated among workers, businesses, and the state, producing a system in which capitalism could coexist with mass democracy. Social democratic parties defended workers and social protection; conservative parties contained the radical right; and party competition helped channel social conflict into durable institutions. In that settlement, parties were the institutions through which democracy managed the inequalities and tensions generated by capitalism.

That settlement, in Kuo’s telling, has broken down under the pressures of deregulation, globalization, neoliberal orthodoxy, and the shrinking of the state. Parties of the left moved toward the center and accepted a more limited role for government, while parties in general became less able or less willing to shape economic life on behalf of broad publics. The result was not only policy convergence but also the erosion of citizens’ sense that government could materially improve their lives. Into that vacuum came polarization, democratic backsliding, misinformation, nativist reactions to migration, regional decline, and the political fury produced by inequality. The chapter ties these developments together as symptoms of weakened party mediation rather than as separate crises.

The chapter closes by establishing the book’s larger argument and roadmap. Kuo does not romanticize an old golden age of clean and inclusive parties; she explicitly acknowledges their histories of corruption, exclusion, racism, and machine politics. But she argues that the answer to today’s democratic crisis is not to bypass parties or further weaken them. A more inclusive and equitable democracy will require rebuilding parties as representative institutions capable of reconnecting citizens to government and of reasserting democratic control over political economy. The remaining chapters, she explains, will trace how parties once performed these tasks, how neoliberalism and party professionalization hollowed them out, and why reforms that seem anti-party may actually deepen the problem.

Chapter 2 — What Are Parties For?

Chapter 2 begins with a vivid historical scene: Tammany Hall in New York and the daily routine of George Washington Plunkitt. Kuo uses this example not to celebrate machine politics, but to show what it meant for a party to be embedded in social life. The ward boss found jobs, paid fines, helped families after fires, attended funerals, solved petty legal problems, and constantly interacted with constituents. Patronage systems were corrupt and coercive, but they reveal something essential that has since been lost: parties once maintained dense, regular, face-to-face ties with ordinary people. They were not abstractions on a ballot. They were organizational presences in neighborhoods, churches, workplaces, and associations.

From there, Kuo reconstructs how parties developed historically as democracy expanded. In the United States, figures such as Martin Van Buren recognized that party organization could channel conflict, discipline personal ambition, and stabilize presidential selection. More broadly, parties evolved from elite legislative factions into mass organizations as suffrage widened and industrial society generated new interests that demanded representation. Industrialization, urbanization, and national market integration forced governments to confront labor conflict, social dislocation, and demands for new forms of regulation and redistribution. Parties became the institutions that translated those pressures into programs, coalitions, and state action.

Kuo insists that this history should be understood comparatively, not as a uniquely American story. The United States has peculiar institutional features, but the broad trajectory is shared across many democracies: early parliamentary blocs, expansion of suffrage, use of civic associations as organizational foundations, and eventually the rise of mass parties. These parties recruited members, collected dues, published newspapers, coordinated volunteers, and created durable links between civil society and the state. That is why Kuo defines parties in modern democracies primarily as intermediaries. Unlike advocacy groups or social movements, parties both seek office and can be held accountable for governing. Their distinctiveness lies in combining representation with responsibility.

The chapter then turns to the high point of this intermediary role: the era of the mass party. Kuo describes mass parties not simply as electorally large parties but as organizationally dense ones, rooted in broad social segments, especially class constituencies. These parties helped make democracy materially meaningful. As the franchise widened, parties developed social contracts that connected voting to concrete public goods, welfare provision, and reforms in education, health, infrastructure, and labor protection. Kuo uses examples such as women’s suffrage alliances, the New Deal, and later voting-rights reforms to show that better democratic outcomes did not arise automatically from elections. They were brokered through parties that could mobilize constituencies and translate their demands into governing commitments.

The next major shift comes with the mid-twentieth-century move toward the center. Drawing on Anthony Downs and Otto Kirchheimer, Kuo explains how scholars and practitioners began to imagine parties less as class-representative organizations and more as catch-all electoral machines competing for median voters. This helped normalize a politics of vague centrism, broad coalitions, and strategic ambiguity. Professionalization accelerated the process. Television, polling, consultants, media specialists, and public-relations logic transformed parties into what Angelo Panebianco called “electoral-professional” organizations. In that world, leaders and experts displaced members, messaging displaced ideology, and campaign technique displaced the slow work of building durable ties with citizens.

Kuo’s point is not that electoral capacity became unimportant, but that it came to dominate everything else. Contemporary parties are highly focused on fundraising, branding, voter targeting, and winning elections, yet that focus obscures a deeper weakness. Parties may still command large vote shares and enforce partisan discipline in legislatures, but that does not mean they remain strong in the fuller democratic sense. Strong partisanship can coexist with weak parties. Leaders often have less control over candidate selection and less leverage over the broader political agenda, while the party itself becomes little more than a label under which donors, activists, interest groups, consultants, and media actors compete for influence.

To clarify what has been lost, Kuo develops the idea of organizational density. A party is strong not only when it wins, but when it sustains enduring structures that reach citizens between elections. Patronage parties once did this through personal exchange; programmatic parties can do it through ideology, local branches, membership, and associational ties. The crucial point is that parties need a lived presence. A serious ground game cannot be improvised every two or four years. Parties that maintain local offices, recruit members, and sustain dialogue can learn what their constituents need and can also socialize citizens into a wider political project. Polls and data may help refine messages, but they are not substitutes for reciprocal relationships.

The second half of the chapter broadens this argument into what Kuo calls the political economy of representation. Parties do not merely mirror preexisting interests; they help define which interests count, which issues become salient, and how economic conflicts are interpreted politically. Historically, parties organized durable cleavages around class, territory, religion, and the role of the state in managing markets. In the neoliberal era, that representative structure has fractured. Parties of left and right often converged around deregulation, privatization, free trade, and austerity, making it harder for voters to distinguish economic alternatives. At the same time, the state contracted, reducing parties’ ability to provide public goods and sustain programmatic ties. The result is a vacuum: parties still compete electorally, but they no longer clearly articulate how democracy should discipline capital or how the state should protect citizens from market dislocation.

Kuo closes the chapter by extending the argument beyond the West. In newer democracies, the building of strong parties was once seen as essential to consolidation, stability, and economic development. Yet democratization often unfolded under neoliberal conditions that undercut party-building from the start. New communication technologies allowed candidates to bypass party structures, ideological convergence blurred distinctions among parties, and weakened states had fewer resources with which to build durable voter ties. The broader conclusion is severe: when markets are elevated and states are hollowed out, parties stop functioning as democratic intermediaries and become thinner electoral shells. They can still win votes, but they struggle to represent broad publics, to justify the state, or to sustain the social contract. That failure, Kuo argues, is one of the core reasons democracy now feels unresponsive and unconvincing to so many citizens.

Chapter 3 — Building the Party

Chapter 3 opens by contrasting an increasingly rare form of politics with the dominant habits of modern campaigning. Didi Kuo uses Michelle Wu’s 2021 Boston mayoral victory to illustrate what old-fashioned party work once looked like: detailed neighborhood knowledge, face-to-face contact, and a campaign rooted in local relationships rather than in consultants and media strategy. That example matters because it highlights how far most democratic parties have moved away from retail politics. Over the last half century, television, polling, and later digital media made it easier for parties to speak at voters from a distance. National parties therefore shifted money and attention toward professional campaign services, while their local and state organizations lost importance. Yet politics itself never stopped being local, and the weakening of local party structures did not eliminate local mobilization; it merely changed who could exploit it.

Kuo’s larger argument is that parties were not originally just electoral brands competing for loosely attached voters. They were mass organizations built around membership, routine participation, and durable forms of belonging. Historically, parties connected society to the state by enrolling people into a common structure, giving them reasons to meet, deliberate, canvass, recruit candidates, and help shape a political identity. Membership was organizational, social, and pedagogical all at once. It gave parties territorial reach through local offices and neighborhood officials, and it made politics a regular activity rather than a sporadic act of choosing among campaign messages. The chapter asks readers to compare that older conception of party life with the present one, in which citizens are treated less as members of a collective project than as voters to be segmented, targeted, and persuaded.

The chapter then turns to Europe to show how mass parties grew out of a wider nineteenth-century associational world. Religious guilds, leisure clubs, friendly societies, cooperatives, and trade unions all helped create the habits and infrastructure that parties later absorbed. Parties of the right, especially religious and conservative ones, and parties of the left, especially liberal, labor, and social democratic ones, emerged as vehicles of constituency representation before they became machines for electoral competition. Their first obligation was fidelity to a social base and its values, not tactical flexibility in pursuit of the median voter. As suffrage expanded, parties built formal memberships, elected leaders, collected dues, printed statutes, and spread through local branches. In that sense, the rise of the party was inseparable from the rise of organized civic life.

Kuo illustrates this development with concrete cases. Conservative parties in Britain created federated associations, voter-registration systems, and huge auxiliary networks such as the Primrose League, whose social events and neighborhood canvassing fused culture, loyalty, and electoral work. Liberal parties built municipal ward structures with dues-paying members and clearly defined local obligations. Labor and socialist parties often developed their social and educational networks before they achieved full electoral access, particularly where unions and socialist activity were repressed. The German SPD became the emblematic case: it built a dense world of newspapers, insurance institutions, workers’ organizations, and fee-paying members long before it became an ordinary governing party. What matters in all these examples is that party strength rested on embeddedness. Parties were strong when they could subordinate narrower interests to a broader organization and root their authority in real communities.

The United States followed a different path but arrived at a comparable organizational logic. American parties never became membership parties in the European sense, yet they still built expansive local structures through patronage, clubs, conventions, ward organizations, and state committees. Urban machines distributed jobs, welfare assistance, and favors, and in return expected canvassing, turnout work, and loyalty. Local party committees met regularly, tracked neighborhood sentiment, nominated candidates, distributed campaign literature, and sustained ties with unions, business groups, churches, and civic associations. Kuo emphasizes that these organizations were not merely corrupt spoils systems, though they could be that too; they were also mechanisms of socialization and mediation. They created a durable interface between ordinary people and government, allowing parties to gather information about grievances and convert them into political action.

National party committees in the United States were initially thin and episodic, designed mainly to coordinate presidential campaigns across the states. Over time, especially from the 1920s through the postwar decades, the RNC and DNC became permanent organizations with salaried chairs, regional staff, training divisions, research operations, fundraising systems, and candidate-support services. Even then, the relationship between national and local structures remained consultative: national leaders still assumed that state and local officials possessed indispensable knowledge about the electorate. The break came later, when new technology and new fundraising methods allowed the national party to bypass those local intermediaries. Direct mail, professionalized finance operations, voter files, candidate services, and later data-driven campaigning made the party increasingly national, permanent, and vertically integrated, but less dependent on the local branches that had once been its backbone.

That organizational change had major consequences for internal democracy and for representation. Primaries were introduced to curb the abuses of party bosses and later expanded dramatically after the McGovern-Fraser reforms, which opened presidential nominations to broader voter participation. Kuo does not deny the democratic intent behind those reforms, but she argues that primaries weakened the party’s gatekeeping capacity. In systems without strong party membership or internal vetting, candidates increasingly win nomination through low-turnout contests dominated by highly motivated activists rather than through the judgment of party leaders who must think about long-term party viability. This, in her account, helps explain how parties became more vulnerable to insurgents and extremists. The 2016 primaries serve as a vivid example: Democrats wrestled with accusations of elite manipulation, while Republicans proved unable to stop Donald Trump once he dominated a fragmented primary electorate.

The chapter ends by connecting party decline to a broader erosion of civic life. As unions, fraternal organizations, churches, and other membership-based associations weakened, parties lost the social ecosystems that once supplied activists, leaders, and a shared democratic vocabulary. At the same time, an “advocacy revolution” produced national, professionally managed issue groups that relied on mail, money, and Washington strategy rather than on local chapters and active members. Organized labor, once a vital bridge between working-class life and parties of the left, shrank sharply, especially in the United States, undermining both party mobilization and class-based representation. By the late twentieth century, party membership had collapsed across advanced democracies, state subsidies and regulation had pushed parties toward cartel-like insulation, and mainstream parties had become more bureaucratic, professional, and elite-driven. Kuo’s conclusion is stark: when parties cease to be socially embedded organizations and become campaign machines, they leave behind not just weaker representation but dangerous vacuums that extremists can fill.

Chapter 4 — Parties and the Third Way

Chapter 4 examines what happened when parties of the left stopped merely reorganizing themselves and also remade their economic worldview. Kuo begins with the late-1990s alliance among Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, and later Gerhard Schröder, who tried to formulate a “Third Way” capable of modernizing social democracy for a new age. Their project promised to combine progressive social commitments with market-friendly economics, fiscal restraint, labor-market flexibility, and a reduced faith in direct state action. Rather than defending older left traditions centered on redistribution, class conflict, and public ownership, these leaders celebrated individual effort, entrepreneurship, and practical problem-solving. The point was not simply rhetorical repositioning. It was an attempt to redefine the left so that it could govern successfully in an era shaped by globalization, post-Cold War triumphalism, and the political prestige of markets.

Kuo insists that this turn should not be understood as an automatic response to impersonal global forces. The end of the Cold War, the spread of free-trade regimes, European integration, and the opening of world markets did help create a new environment, but parties actively chose how to interpret and manage that environment. The 1990s accelerated neoliberalism because major parties across advanced democracies converged on a common view: markets should allocate more, states should promise less, and economic management should be disciplined by credibility, openness, and restraint. In Kuo’s telling, centrism was therefore less a real social location than a strategic construction. It had no clear constituency of its own. Its appeal lay in seeming flexible and modern, but that very flexibility encouraged parties to sacrifice long-term representational commitments for short-term electoral gain.

The American story begins with the collapse of postwar liberal confidence. In the 1970s, Democrats still officially defended redistribution, job security, and public responsibility for social welfare, but stagflation weakened Keynesian assumptions and discredited expansive government in the eyes of many elites. Conservative forces organized effectively around a different diagnosis: democracy had become hard to govern because states had promised too much. The Trilateral Commission’s language of governability crystallized this anxiety, while Reaganite politics translated it into tax cuts, deregulation, privatization, welfare retrenchment, and an ethic of personal responsibility. By the time Democrats started looking for a route back to national majorities, they were doing so on terrain already reshaped by conservative victories. The old liberal program was not simply losing elections; it was losing legitimacy.

Kuo presents the Democratic Leadership Council as the key vehicle of the Democratic Party’s transformation. The DLC arose out of repeated defeats and explicitly criticized the party’s attachment to labor, minorities, and New Deal-style politics. What made the organization significant was not just that it moved the party rightward, but that it did so in an anti-party way. It treated representation as secondary to electability and substituted donors, policy entrepreneurs, strategists, and think-tank professionals for sustained engagement with party constituencies. Through the Progressive Policy Institute and related projects, the DLC promoted a neoliberal synthesis: civil-rights liberalism and social inclusion on one side, suspicion of big government and interest-group politics on the other. It advocated market-based routes to liberal ends, emphasizing opportunity, responsibility, growth, and crime control rather than redistribution or collective bargaining.

The Clinton presidency translated this outlook into policy. Guided by triangulation, Clinton adopted parts of the Republican agenda and rebranded them as responsible Democratic governance. The administration embraced budget discipline, signed NAFTA despite fierce labor opposition, restructured welfare around work requirements, relied on enterprise zones and other market incentives, and accepted deep constraints on the state’s ability to pursue expansive social policy. It also strengthened the authority of nonelected institutions over economic life, especially through deference to the Federal Reserve, and contributed to financial liberalization through the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Kuo’s point is not that Clinton abandoned every progressive concern, but that the party’s role changed. Democrats increasingly defined good government as prudent management within market limits rather than as active mediation among competing social interests.

The same pattern unfolded across Europe. In Britain, Blair’s New Labour accepted much of Thatcher’s settlement, kept to fiscal and monetary restraint, delegated authority to the Bank of England, expanded privatization through private finance initiatives, and reframed poverty policy around work and activation rather than around a more generous welfare state. Internally, Labour also centralized policymaking through expert-led procedures that reduced the role of conference debate and party activists. In Germany, Schröder’s SPD adopted a similar “new center” politics, despite sharp resistance from more traditional social democrats such as Oskar Lafontaine. The later Agenda 2010 and Hartz reforms cut benefits, expanded precarious employment, and helped weaken the SPD’s relationship with unions and blue-collar supporters. Across these cases, left parties modernized by narrowing their own representative base.

Kuo then places the Third Way in its transnational setting. Blair, Clinton, Schröder, and their advisers treated party reform as a coordinated international project, one closely aligned with European integration and the wider globalization of trade, finance, and production. As markets opened and supranational institutions gained authority, economic policymaking became more constrained and more similar across countries. The European Union is a particularly strong example because its rules on deficits, inflation, monetary policy, and market openness limited how much domestic parties could meaningfully diverge on economic questions. When mainstream parties no longer competed over distribution, employment, or state intervention, they increasingly differentiated themselves on symbolic or cultural issues instead. Convergence at the center thus did not end conflict; it displaced conflict.

The chapter broadens the argument through Latin America, where market liberalization often produced an even more dramatic collapse of party credibility. Kuo describes how structural adjustment and the Washington Consensus blurred left-right distinctions when leaders elected on interventionist or labor-backed platforms implemented austerity, privatization, and trade liberalization once in office. In Argentina, Carlos Menem campaigned like a Peronist traditionalist and governed like a neoliberal reformer. In Venezuela, Carlos Andrés Pérez made a comparable turn, helping destroy faith in the established parties and opening the way for Hugo Chávez. These cases matter because they show the systemic danger of what Kuo calls “brand dilution.” When parties no longer signal reliably what they stand for, voters do not just punish one government; they begin to distrust the party system itself.

The chapter closes by tracing the social and political consequences of Third Way success. Parties of the left won elections in the 1990s partly because the electorates they targeted had changed: manufacturing workers were fewer, educated professionals were more numerous, and younger voters cared more about recognition, inclusion, and postmaterial values. But that success came at a cost. Social democratic parties loosened their alliance with organized labor, became more dependent on professional and managerial voters, and recruited leaders from increasingly elite backgrounds. Economic differences between left and right narrowed, while values conflicts over identity, immigration, religion, and cosmopolitanism grew sharper. Kuo’s final judgment is severe. Centrist politics reduced meaningful contestation, hollowed out programmatic ties between parties and citizens, and left parties more open to money than to mass participation. By surrendering tools of economic intervention and distancing themselves from their former constituencies, mainstream parties helped produce the very alienation and backlash from which anti-system forces now profit.

Chapter 5 — Selling the Party

Chapter 5 begins with the 2000 U.S. presidential election to show how far party politics had moved from older forms of party organization. George W. Bush and Al Gore were presented as distinct candidates, but in many ways they embodied a similar centrist political moment: both were establishment figures, both came from prominent political families, and both operated within the ideological boundaries created by the Third Way era. The chapter’s point is that the election was not only a contest over policy but also a demonstration of how parties had become marketing operations. The important shift is that parties were no longer primarily institutions that organized citizens into durable political communities. They were increasingly machines for branding, targeting, and selling candidates.

Kuo argues that this transformation was tied to the rise of a professional politics industry. Campaign consultants, pollsters, public relations specialists, and media strategists gradually displaced the local party activists and organizers who had once formed the connective tissue between party leaders and ordinary citizens. These professionals borrowed heavily from commercial advertising and corporate marketing, treating voters as audiences to be segmented and persuaded rather than members to be cultivated and represented. The growth of consulting firms also changed incentives. Consultants were paid for services, not for building long-term party strength, so money and attention flowed toward campaigning itself rather than toward sustaining organizations that could anchor parties in civic life.

The chapter then draws an important distinction between party membership and party affiliation. Membership historically meant practical involvement: giving time, attending meetings, helping choose candidates, and participating in a political world larger than any one election. Affiliation, by contrast, is mostly psychological. It can mean sympathy, identity, or even fandom, but it does not necessarily involve any meaningful role in shaping what the party does. Kuo’s broader claim is that parties have become top-heavy. They still communicate with voters constantly, but they do so mainly through one-way outreach, leaving citizens as respondents to messages instead of participants in party life.

To explain how that happened, the chapter reconstructs the history of modern campaign marketing. The Eisenhower campaign’s embrace of television advertising marked an early turning point, especially when compared with Adlai Stevenson’s resistance to what he saw as the cheapening of politics. From there, political consulting became increasingly institutionalized. Firms such as Campaigns, Inc. and later networks of pollsters and strategists built a professional field devoted to message discipline, image management, and electoral targeting. Over time, this style of politics normalized the idea that the core work of parties was not organizing collective interests but crafting persuasive appeals for different slices of the electorate.

Kuo shows that technological change accelerated the process. Local precinct captains and party volunteers, who once learned about voters through face-to-face contact and neighborhood networks, were gradually replaced by databases, modeling, and direct marketing. National party databases such as the Republican Voter Vault and Democratic Datamart assembled voting histories, census records, and consumer information to identify likely supporters and donors. Direct mail first allowed parties to find and cultivate specific types of voters cheaply and repeatedly. Email and digital advertising then made political outreach faster, cheaper, and far more personalized, while also making it easier for campaigns to ignore people who fell outside their preferred target profiles.

The chapter pays special attention to how microtargeting reshaped the meaning of political communication. By the 2000s and 2010s, campaigns were increasingly able to tailor messages not just to broad demographic groups but to extremely narrow behavioral profiles. The Cambridge Analytica episode is presented less as a bizarre exception than as an extreme expression of a wider logic already embedded in contemporary campaigning. The issue is not simply whether psychographic targeting works perfectly. It is that the campaign now knows enormous amounts about voters while the public often knows very little about what the candidate actually believes in any stable, general sense. Politics becomes an exercise in customized persuasion rather than public argument.

Kuo extends this analysis beyond elections to the wider privatization of political advocacy. Professional advocacy firms, lobbying operations, and public-affairs consultants help create what she calls a subsidized public: temporary and managed forms of citizen activity organized on behalf of elite interests. These practices can mimic democratic participation while actually deepening inequality, because the people most likely to be mobilized are those with education, resources, and prior political engagement. Instead of broadening representation, the privatized politics industry often amplifies the already powerful. The older problem that civic participation had an upper-class bias does not disappear; it becomes more technologically sophisticated and more deeply embedded in party strategy.

Campaign finance is the chapter’s other major pillar. Kuo traces how reforms meant to curb corruption frequently weakened parties as organizations while strengthening actors outside them. FECA introduced disclosure and contribution limits, BCRA curtailed soft money, and Citizens United opened the way for massive independent expenditures by super PACs and related organizations. The result was not less money in politics but a redistribution of money away from parties and toward outside groups. Those groups increasingly behave like shadow parties: they recruit, finance, and discipline candidates, but they do not have the same incentive to aggregate interests, compromise, or sustain a broad governing coalition.

The final movement of the chapter links these structural changes to contemporary polarization. Kuo is careful to say that some degree of polarization is necessary for meaningful democratic choice, and she notes that mid-century scholars actually wanted more coherent and differentiated parties. But the current condition is different. Today’s polarization is driven less by strong, representative parties than by weak parties operating in a high-cost, permanent campaign environment dominated by consultants, ideological donors, media ecosystems, and outside organizations. Citizens receive divisive messaging but have fewer ways to participate constructively in party life. The result is a paradox: parties have become more ideological as brands while becoming less representative as institutions. Many people now dislike both parties, identify as independents, and regard politics as corrupt or hollow, which is exactly the kind of vacuum in which nonparty actors flourish.

Chapter 6 — Parties in a Global Economy

Chapter 6 shifts from party organization to political economy. Kuo’s central argument is that the crisis of democratic representation cannot be understood only through campaign strategy, institutional reform, or party decline in the abstract. It must also be understood through the neoliberal reordering of capitalism from the late twentieth century onward. As parties of the left and right converged around globalization, market liberalization, and reduced state intervention, they became harder to distinguish on core economic questions. That convergence weakened their ability to respond to citizens and fed the perception that mainstream politics served economic elites first.

The chapter situates this transformation in the post–Cold War moment, when liberalization of markets and liberalization of politics often advanced together. International institutions, Western governments, economists, and democracy-promotion networks all pushed versions of reform that emphasized privatization, austerity, fiscal restraint, and electoral competition. There was real optimism behind this project: the hope was that capitalism would create growth while democracy would create accountability. But Kuo argues that these reform tracks did not truly reinforce one another. Economic policy was often designed by technocrats with limited democratic input, while democratic reform focused more on procedures and institutions than on the political capacity to channel material demands into governing agendas.

One of the chapter’s most important claims is that globalization was largely a cross-partisan project. By the 1990s, major parties in advanced democracies disagreed on many things, but not much on whether deeper economic integration, freer movement of capital, and lower barriers to trade were broadly desirable. Even parties of the left increasingly accepted the basic pro-market framework. This did not mean left and right became identical, but it did mean that on the most fundamental questions of economic governance they moved closer together. Kuo uses that narrowing of choice to explain why voters could increasingly feel that elections mattered less than they once had.

The chapter makes this point sharply through the language of responsiveness. In theory, parties exist to organize citizen demands, translate them into policy, and then be held accountable for what they do. But in affluent democracies there is growing evidence that governments respond disproportionately to wealthy individuals, organized business, and those positioned close to capital. Kuo treats this as a democratic problem, not merely a distributive one. If ordinary voters cannot get their preferences enacted while affluent groups reliably can, then elections begin to lose substance. Formal democracy remains, but majorities experience it as thin, constrained, or performative.

Kuo then turns to the right, arguing that the most serious contemporary backlash has not primarily come from a rejuvenated left but from the fracturing of conservative politics. Historically, moderate conservative parties were often essential to democratic stability because they contained antidemocratic forces while accepting democratic competition. In the United States, however, the Republican Party became increasingly tied to business interests, deregulatory ideas, conservative think tanks, and donor networks. The Tea Party signaled a deeper revolt against the establishment, and the party’s own post-2012 diagnosis of its weaknesses was quickly overtaken by Donald Trump’s nomination. In Europe, parallel developments took the form of challenger and far-right parties that mobilized resentment against elites, globalization, immigration, and multiculturalism.

A key insight here is that class discontent did not automatically return voters to the left. Deindustrialization, weaker unions, precarious work, and the decline of the old industrial working class loosened traditional partisan loyalties. In that environment, working-class and lower-middle-class voters became more electorally available. Populists were able to appeal to them not primarily through redistributive programs but through grievance, nationalism, anti-immigration politics, law-and-order themes, and hostility toward established elites. The result is that the main axis of conflict in many democracies shifted away from straightforward economic redistribution and toward identity, sovereignty, and belonging.

The chapter also stresses that new political entrepreneurs can exploit these conditions without building real parties. Figures such as Silvio Berlusconi, Geert Wilders, and the organizers of Italy’s Five Star movement illustrate how celebrity, media control, or digital platforms can substitute for durable party organization. This matters because it reinforces one of the book’s broader themes: where parties are weak, personalistic and anti-system actors can reach citizens directly while avoiding the obligations that come with building a representative intermediary institution. Technology lowers the organizational threshold for political entry, but it does not solve the problem of representation. In many cases it worsens it.

From there Kuo widens the lens to capitalism itself. Neoliberal capitalism, she argues, not only increased inequality but also shifted power away from workers and toward sectors such as finance, technology, and advanced services. Productivity rose while wages stagnated for many workers, employment became more precarious, and corporate profits concentrated at the top. Financialization intensified these trends, producing an economy in which profits could increasingly be extracted from debt, speculation, and complex instruments largely opaque to the broader public. The 2008 financial crisis exposed both the instability of this model and the inability of democratic governments to regulate it effectively, deepening the impression that parties were unable or unwilling to confront capital.

Kuo’s answer is not romantic populism or faith in benevolent billionaires. She explicitly warns against the privatization of representation, in which corporations, philanthropists, and foundations step in to solve problems that parties and states no longer address effectively. The examples from the pandemic are telling: businesses enforcing public-health rules, philanthropic money supporting public response, financial elites consulted in crisis management, and private fortunes underwriting election administration. These actions may produce useful results, but they are not democratically accountable. Corporate social responsibility and large-scale philanthropy can mitigate harms, yet they also normalize the idea that public problems should be solved by private actors.

The chapter closes by arguing that democratic renewal requires reclaiming the state. Parties once proved their worth by using government to build enduring social protections and create visible links between citizens and public power. Privatization, outsourcing, hidden social policy, and political disdain for government have eroded those links. As parties on both left and right distanced themselves from the public sector, they also weakened their own ability to claim credit, build loyalty, and counterbalance capital. Kuo’s conclusion is blunt: citizens can protest and organize, but only parties and governments can systematically redress the structural imbalance that favors wealth. Without strong representative institutions capable of governing in the public interest, democracy remains exposed to both oligarchic drift and anti-system backlash.

Chapter 7 — Conclusion

The conclusion restates the book’s core claim with unusual clarity: a durable democratic future requires strong political parties, but not parties understood merely as machines for winning and holding office. Didi Kuo argues instead that parties must function as intermediary institutions that connect citizens to the state, aggregate demands, negotiate internal disagreements, and translate social conflict into workable political programs. The crisis of democracy, in her view, is not just a crisis of trust or polarization in the abstract. It is a crisis produced in large part by the weakening of these representative intermediaries. When parties stop doing the work of mediation, citizens become more susceptible to alienation, resentment, and antidemocratic appeals.

From that diagnosis, the chapter turns to reconstruction. Kuo argues that parties need organizational depth, not just branding or campaign technique. They must rebuild ties to communities, strengthen local and state-level party structures, centralize enough authority to reduce dependence on ideologically extreme donors, and create ongoing relationships with supporters outside election season. She points to practical mechanisms such as multilevel memberships, formal roles for dues-paying members, cheaper entry points for supporters, digital participation tools, and more inclusive procedures for writing party platforms. The purpose of all this is not nostalgia for a vanished era of mass parties, but a modern version of party-building that can make parties more representative, more rooted, and more capable of channeling interests other than those of capital.

A major section of the chapter places this argument in the broader context of democratic backsliding. Kuo reviews the global decline in democratic quality since the mid-2000s and stresses that democracy is now being eroded from within, often by elected leaders and mainstream parties that fail to defend democratic norms forcefully enough. She notes that there is no adequate playbook for consolidated democracies sliding backward, unlike the better-developed framework that once existed for democratic transition after the Cold War. Examples such as the United States after the 2020 election, Bolsonaro’s rhetoric in Brazil, and Orbán’s place within Europe’s center-right alliances show how fragile democratic commitments can become when parties refuse to police their own boundaries. For Kuo, the first task of renewal is therefore basic but nonnegotiable: parties must commit themselves to free and fair elections, civil liberties, and the peaceful transfer of power.

The chapter then argues that democratic renewal cannot rely on institutional principle alone; parties also need to reconnect with the forms of civic energy that have emerged outside them. Protests, social movements, and issue-based activism are treated not as substitutes for parties but as signals of what happens when institutions fail to absorb and respond to popular demands. Kuo suggests that parties should rebuild by engaging these civic networks and helping renew civil society at the local level. Yet she is equally clear that symbolic alliances are not enough. If parties want to regain legitimacy, they must show that government can still act on behalf of ordinary people. That means reclaiming the use of state power, articulating a new social contract for twenty-first-century capitalism, and building more coherent ideological alternatives to the exhausted neoliberal consensus. Whether on the center-right or the progressive left, parties need a clearer language of solidarity, protection, and public purpose.

The final movement of the chapter turns to political reform, especially in the United States, and it takes a skeptical view of anti-party solutions marketed as cures for democratic dysfunction. Kuo does not dismiss reform altogether, but she warns that many proposals are driven by frustration with partisanship rather than by a serious account of representation. She is particularly critical of the appeal of nonpartisan primaries and of recurring fantasies about a centrist third party that would somehow rise above ordinary partisan conflict. In her account, primaries were originally designed to choose party standard-bearers, but they have become increasingly vulnerable to outside money, low-turnout distortions, and incentives that weaken party responsibility. Nonpartisan variants may not solve extremism at all. Likewise, a vague call for moderation is not the same thing as building a party with a real social base, an organized membership, and a substantive governing project.

Kuo closes by rejecting the hope that democracy can be repaired by transcending conflict. Conflict is intrinsic to democratic politics because societies are segmented, plural, and structured by real differences in interest and value. The question is not how to abolish conflict, but how to organize it productively. Political parties remain the institution best suited to that task. For that reason, the conclusion insists that parties are neither obsolete nor inherently hostile to democracy. They are imperfect, often unpopular, and badly weakened — but still indispensable. The path forward is not to bypass them in search of technocratic, nonpartisan, or purely movement-based alternatives. It is to improve them, modernize them, and make them once again capable of giving democratic citizens a credible route from grievance to representation and from representation to governing power.

See also

  • schattschneider — Schattschneider is the theoretical foundation of Kuo’s thesis: “organization is the instrument of conflict”; what Kuo diagnoses as decline is precisely the loss of what Schattschneider saw as essential to parties.
  • wolf_crisis_of_democratic_capitalism — Wolf and Kuo diagnose the same crisis from different angles — Wolf through capitalism that corrupted democracy, Kuo through parties that stopped mediating that tension; the two books complement each other.
  • thymos — The populist backlash Kuo describes is unintelligible without a theory of recognition: thymos explains why economic insecurity turns into political fury and why parties that stop incorporating citizens create space for leaders who offer symbolic belonging.
  • Samuels-Zucco — Partidários, Antipartidários e Não-Partidários — Empirically tests in Brazil what Kuo theorizes comparatively: high Brazilian anti-partyism is the local product of the same intermediary hollowing she describes.
  • fukuyama_political_order_decay_resumo — Fukuyama’s framework of institutional decay (repatrimonialization, veto players, short-termism) is compatible with Kuo’s and offers vocabulary for naming why parties cannot reform themselves even when they know they must.
  • Partidos Brasileiros e o Realinhamento Global — Conexões no Vault — Direct bridge between Kuo’s argument and Brazilian party politics in the Nova República: how the “great retreat” manifests in coalitional presidentialism and the crisis of programmatic parties in Brazil.

Visão de gráfico