Political party problems: what can we learn from the jockeying of political factions?

Chief Executive, The, April-May, 2008 by Robert Lawrence Kuhn

Of late, I've been following large organizations in historic flux. Consider, on the one hand, the Democratic and Republican parties of the U.S., and on the other, the Communist Party of the People's Republic of China. The three may seem to be polar opposites but they have much in common. And if my partisan readers are mystified, perhaps angered, by my apparent equation between political parties in America and China, I only ask a few minutes of your valuable time to suggest the sociological similarities. From these similarities we can discern general principles at work, some of which can be applied to the management of corporations.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The Democratic Party: Change vs. Experience

Before Hillary Clinton lost her first caucus or primary, she had already ceded the high ground of political positioning. Her superficially sensible but strategically flawed decision to embrace "experience" as her prime distinguishing characteristic crowned Barack Obama, uncontested, with the shining mantle of "change." The more she stressed Obama's inexperience, the more she solidified herself as the "Status Quo Candidate."

The promise and inspiration of change--something different in the future than what we had in the past--is what energizes the Obama juggernaut. Obama is the novelty, the Hope of the New, while Hillary, by reiterating her impressive but monotonous litany of wonk-founded positions and intricate proposals, seems by comparison downright dull.

There is nothing about change that makes it inherently better than experience; each makes sense in the right conditions. Context is everything, and the context of what Americans want in 2008 is change, not experience. Democrats even more so.

The Republican Party: Ideology vs. Practicality

When Rush Limbaugh, the leader of right-wing talk radio, attacks John McCain, and when Ann Coulter, the outrageously aggressive conservative personality, says she would rather campaign for Hillary Clinton than support McCain, you know something's up in the GOP. Although McCain's positions on certain issues have deviated from conservative orthodoxy, he is unambiguously more conservative than any Democrat running. Why then would any conservative not support him in an axial election that will shape America's future (including the likely appointment of Supreme Court justices)?

Here's how certain right-wing Republicans think: Anyone other than their image of what an orthodox conservative candidate should be is so distasteful, so repugnant, that they would rather lose the election than have their party win with a non-core conservative as its leader. A loss by McCain, they believe, would enable "real conservatives" to take charge thereafter. That such behavior might ensure Republicans remaining the minority party for the next generation is somehow not relevant. When the Romans laid siege to Jerusalem in 70 AD, it was sectarian infighting among the defenders that hastened their collective demise.

The Communist Party: Intra-Party Democracy

I follow the political philosophy of China's senior leaders, and I watch for signs of political reform. Recently, I spoke with Politburo member Li Yuanchao, a long-time associate of President Hu Jintao, on "Intra-Party Democracy," which follows from President Hu's call for greater democracy in society by first strengthening democracy with the Communist Party.

Minister Li regards Intra-Party Democracy as the cornerstone of political reform because it achieves multiple objectives: empowers individual Party members; increases transparency; subjects higher bodies to the supervision of lower bodies; introduces voting to prevent "arbitrary decision-making;" solicits public opinion of candidates; and expands a system of direct elections at local levels. All this would have been unspeakable, unthinkable, until recent years.

I am convinced that on political reform there is now a major shift in how China's leaders think. The process is nuanced and gradual, but leaders are committed to bring about demonstrable change. There is now a real roadmap. Basically, the plan is this: first, to build democracy in the Party and then to expand it into the general populace. By strengthening Intra-Party Democracy, Li says directly, "We pave the way for the people's democracy."

Why would a ruling party seek to enhance democracy? First, it is the right thing to do, and Chinese leaders recognize this. Second, as another minister told me, "If the Party does not serve the people's interest, it will no longer be the ruling party." It used to be that Party leaders dictated what they wanted and the people had to follow. Now the people assert what they need and want, and the Party must provide and deliver it.

Principles of Adaption

So here we have the Democratic and Republican parties of America, and the Communist Party of China, each trying to adapt, as best each can, to their current conditions. Let's try to discern some general principles operating here.

The Past is Past. No matter how strong the organization was in previous times, no matter its triumphs, it is likely different today. Organizations that work by interacting with the broad public are inherently dynamic, and organizations that do not know this ossify. Historians should handle past glories; current leaders should not fight the last war.