Electoral behaviour in the Czech Republic and support of Communist Party of Bohemia and

Moravia in parliamentary election in 1990 – 2006

Michal Pink

Faculty of Social Studies

Institute for Comparative Political Research

Masaryk University Brno Czech Republic

e-mail: pink@fss.muni.cz

                        

   

I. Introduction

• KSČ (1921 – 1990)

• KSČM (1991 – 2006)

• Communist parties

• Election results

• Geographical area

• Electoral map

II. Methodological background

• Method of detection so-called area of electoral support • Simple calculation - Election results of particular political party are

arranged according to percentage gain from the highest to the lowest. Then we find half and in this line we divide individual districts, possibly municipalities, into halves and we get areas which comprise 50% concentration of electoral support out of total number of votes in given elections.

• The basic data file is made by results of Chamber of Deputies elections (Poslanecká sněmovna - ChD)

• To find out the mutual cohesion and stability of electoral support will be used the basic statistical method, Pearson correlation coefficient.

III. Communist Party and its position in party system • The party system of Czech regions has settled during last 16 years and is

relatively easy classable. Nowadays is possible to consider four main basic streams as established and stabilised players of party political spectrum.

• There are two main political parties, i.e. Civic Democratic Party with its liberally-conservative orientation and Czech Social Democratic Party which

belongs to group of social democratic political parties. • The other two stabilised subjects are The Christian and Democratic Union –

Czechoslovak People’s Party which shapes as centre formation and Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSČM) as the main principal heir of Communist Party of Czechoslovakia.

• KSČM is the subject of exclusion and its coalition potential is zero. Nowadays it is the party which does not represent fundamental opposition to the system itself but regarding its ideology there is an exclusion agreement applied. KSČM takes regularly part in electoral competition, gains representation in legislature but it is still not available in executive.

Map Czech republic – Districts

IV. Support in 1990 – 2006

• Map No.1. Areas of electoral support in 1990

IV. Support in 1990 – 2006

• Map No.2. Areas of electoral support in 1992

IV. Support in 1990 – 2006

• Map No.3. Areas of electoral support in 1996

IV. Support in 1990 – 2006

• Map No. 4. Areas of electoral support in 1998

IV. Support in 1990 – 2006

• Map No.5. Areas of electoral support in 2002

IV. Support in 1990 – 2006

• Map No. 6. Areas of electoral support in 2006

Support in 1990 – 2006

• Map No 7. Districts which are parts of areas of electoral support in

the long terms (1990–2006)

KSČM top 5

Stability of region differences of KSČM electoral support

(Pearson correlation coefficient)

10,9530,8850,8250,6680,722KSČM 06

0,953 10,8820,8110,6770,727KSČM 02

0,885 0,882 10,9520,6410,754KSČM 98

0,825 0,811 0,952 10,6710,825KSČM 96

0,668 0,677 0,641 0,671 10,783 KSČM 92

0,722 0,727 0,7540,8250,7831KSČ 90

KSČM 06KSČM 02KSČM 98KSČM 96KSČM 92KSČ 90

Districts of area of electoral support of KSČM (data in %)

12,8118,5111,0310,3314,0513,24CZ

17,5224,6514,1213,5619,0818,63Rakovník

16,1324,714,9512,6916,3515,43Chomutov

16,2723,6814,7914,2320,8619,86Kladno

16,422,914,5812,9917,7116,7Rokycany

15,3321,0312,6712,1915,415,29Plzeň – north

16,3623,8712,8711,9826,0814,49Cheb

15,5120,7613,8713,1216,3816,51Domažlice

18,3527,8714,8412,1918,4115,1Bruntál

16,6523,5415,2913,5918,4815,93Vyškov

15,6422,1114,5413,817,4915,16Blansko

19,8229,1818,1814,9617,3515,97Znojmo

20,8631,0218,3718,1220,6819,08Tachov

17,527,4115,7714,9719,1917,92Most

19,7129,0717,116,0219,1818,73Louny

16,7424,715,3814,8318,6918,04Litoměřice

ChD 2006ChD 2002ChD 1998ChD 1996CNC 1992CNC1990

Source: www.volby.cz

Table No. 5. Selected districts and data (data in %, gross wage is nominal)

15,8174607,931,9560,34CZ

15,5191955,714,464,3Rakovník

15,81746914,215,774,8Chomutov

15,2174767,815,667,6Kladno

15,8176485,117,762,9Rokycany

16,6155415,017,860,5Plzeń – sever

19,0147286,721,972,8Cheb

17,4149025,433,552,1Domažlice

17,41490213,627,474,4Bruntál

12,0149897,442,449,8Vyškov

12,8154746,549,852,0Blansko

21,01487712,041,153,0Znojmo

14,8157947,619,568,1Tachov

21,01966220,412,485Most

15,41496211,4019,366,4Louny

12,91823710,1018,162,2Litoměřice

Rate of suicideGross wagesRate of unemployent

Total of worshipperDivorce rate ./100 marriageDistrict

Source: Czech Statistical Office, http://www.czso.cz/

Electoral maps in wider context

-0,076 -0,075 0,190 -0,079 0,441 KSČM 06

Wages Religionism Rate of divorce

Suicides Unemployment

Interdependence of rate - Pearson correlation coefficient

Map No 8. Electoral map of KSČM in 2006

Unemployment

• Map No.9. Rate of unemployment as at 31.5. 2006

Conclusion • On the basis of mutual comparing electoral maps of communist party were found

districts which are characterised by the higher long-term electoral support. • With the help of comparing maps of areas of electoral support were the the following

districts: Blansko, Bruntál, Domažlice, Cheb, Chomutov, Kladno, Louny, Litoměřice, Most, Plzeň – north, Rakovník, Rokycany, Tachov, Vyškov, Znojmo integrated into defined areas.

• Districts Most, Litoměřice, Louny and Tachov even have been regularly placed among first ten successful districts because of the best parliamentary election results since 1990.

• In the mentioned districts were subsequently compared selected socioeconomic indicators which could explain social conditionality of electoral behaviour. However, on the basis of simple comparison was not proved any clear connection. By the subsequent testing and finding connections with the help of statistical method, Pearson correlation coefficient was the rate of significance found only in correlation of support of KSČM and district rate of unemployment

• On the basis of established facts we can assert that support of Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia in the Czech Republic background has been relatively stable since 1990 and is more conditioned by a long term influence which is regionally conditioned and is not based only on socioeconomic features.

Sources • Balík, Stanislav. 2006. Kontinuita či diskontinuita voličských vzorců? Volební

podpora KSČ a KSČM v prostoru dnešního Olomouckého kraje v období 1929 – 1935 a 1996 – 2002. In: Evropská volební studia. Leden 1/2006, 38 – 60 (http://ispo.fss.muni.cz/kontinuita-diskontinuita).

• Jehlička, Petr - Sýkora, Luděk. 1991. „Stabilita regionální podpory tradičních politických stran v českých zemích (1920 – 1990)“ In: Sborník ČGS 96 (2): 81 – 95.

• Kostelecký, Tomáš. 2001a. „Vzestup nebo pád politického regionalismu?“. Praha: Sociologický ústav AV ČR, Working papers 2001 (9).

• Kostelecký, Tomáš. 2001b. Political parties after communism. The Johns Hopkins University Press.

• Sartori, Giovanni. 1976. Parties and Party Systems. A Framework for Analysis, I., Cambridge University Press.

• www.volby.cz• www.czso.cz

Thank you for attention

• pink@fss.muni.cz

• http://ispo.fss.muni.cz