Poli ical Science in I aly: Recu en P oblems and
Pe spec i es
Gian anco PASQUINO
Uni e si à di Bologna
Wo king Pape n.26
Ba celona 1990
1. Poli ical analyses a e ine i ably in luenced by cu en hemes, p ocesses,
issues. This has always been he case e en o he dis an ounde s o he discipline
in I aly. The c ea ion o poli ical o de was a he cen e o all specula ions and
sugges ions, his o ical ema ks and p ac ical eachings o mula ed by Nicolo'
Machia elli o his P ince. The Flo en ine's analysis was and emains a mas e ul
example o ealism and o policy science. La e , Gae ano Mosca, Vil edo Pa e o and
Robe o Michels applied hei knowledge o wha was conside ed he mos impo an
p oblem o poli ical sys ems in hei ans o ma ion in o democ a ic egimes. One way
o ano he , i was he p oblem o he uling class (Mosca), o he selec ion and
ci cula ion o eli es and hei eso o poli ical o mulae (Pa e o), o he (im)possibili y
o in a-pa y democ acy e en inside he would-be mos democ a ic pa y o hem all,
he Socialdemoc a ic pa y (Michels), and he e o e he e y impossibili y o
democ acy in he poli ical sys em a la ge. Mosca, Pa e o and Michels we e as
ealis s as Machia elli, only pe haps sligh ly mo e inclined o belie e in he
"pessimism" o he in elligence", as G amsci would ha e pu i . And indeed i was
G amsci who o mula ed he mos comp ehensi e iew o he poli ical de elopmen o
I aly and who p oduced eachings and sugges ions o his own (collec i e) P ince: he
poli ical pa y, namely he Communis Pa y. The las o he ealis ic and pa ly
pessimis ic analyses o he I alian poli ical sys em was s i led by he combina ion o
poli ical (Fascism) and by cul u al ( he o e whelming in luence o C oce's idealism)
ac o s.
2. Sandwiched be ween idealism and o icial communis . ma xism, i sel
in e p e ed in an idealis ein, I alian poli ical science had a di icul esu ec ion a e
he all o Fascism in he new democ a ic clima e. Bu i did esu ec , hanks o
No be o Bobbio and Gio anni Sa o i, showing some o he same cha ac e is ics o
he ounding g and a he s: ealism and pessimism. Though u ilizing di e en me hods
and mixing ealism and pessimism in di e en doses, bo h Bobbio and Sa o i ha e
conside ably con ibu ed o he e-es ablishmen o he discipline and o he
iden i ica ion o i s majo hemes. Closely ela ed o he poli ical de elopmen s in I aly
in he i ies and six ies, hose hemes can be de ined: he na u e o he democ a ic
discou se, he p oblem o he poli ical eli es, he ole o pa ies and he pa y sys em.
This s o y has been equen ly old. Fo ou pu poses he e, i migh su ice
and be use ul jus o highligh h ee majo poin s. Fi s , Bobbio and Sa o i chose o
hei analyses he ho es opics o he ime, opics which we e ob iously ela ed o
he g and adi ion o I alian poli ical science bu also p omised a clea impac on
cu en poli ical de elopmen s. Second, hough belonging o wo di e en "poli ical
amilies" -non-ma xis socialism, Bobbio; mode a e libe alism, Sa o i- hei me hod o
analysis can be de ined as posi i ism, mo e p ecisely posi i is ealism. I migh be
wo hwhile o s ess ha posi i is ealism was no exac ly a popula me hod in a
coun y whe e cul u al hegemony was dispu ed be ween Ca holicism and ma xian
Communism (when in luenced by G amsci also indeb ed o idealism). Thi d, hei
app oach and hei pe spec i e we e, so o speak, sys emic, ne e pa ial, e en when
dealing wi h poli ical eli es and pa ies and pa y sys em.
No doub Bobbio and Sa o i iden i ied he mos impo an objec s o analysis
so much so ha hey we e no only widely ead by he lay public, he non-specialis s.
They we e also widely quo ed ou side he discipline o poli ical science and poli ical
philosophy, abo e all by cons i u ional lawye s and poli ical his o ians. Because o he
choice o hemes and hei analy ical powe , hey a e s ill qui e well known and o en
he deba e ecalls hei con ibu ions. Mo eo e , hey ha e se e y high s anda ds o
s uden s and p ac i ione s o poli ical science, in e ms o schola ship, li e a y
excellence, ci ic commi men . One does no ha e o ag ee wi h hem on all hei
analyses and conclusions. Bu one can always lea n and always ind ood o
hough , no only a me hod bu also s imuli and ideas. The ques ion, hen, becomes:
has I alian poli ical science been ue and ai h ul o i s pos -wa mas e s? I yes, in
which way; i no , why and wi h which sho comings and, possibly, con ibu ions?
3. The c i e ia o be u ilized in o de o e alua e he deg ee o ai h ulness o he
eaching o he mas e s mus be ecalled: he choice o meaning ul hemes, he
me hod o posi i is ealism, he sys emic pe spec i e. As o he choice o hemes,
one can say ha he I alian poli ical science deba e in he six ies and ea ly se en ies
was indeed cen e ed a ound he na u e, cha ac e is ics, and po en iali ies o change
o he I alian pa y sys em. This deba e is well known and need no be summa ized
once mo e (e en hough dis o ions s ill abound in he ecen li e a u e). The mos
impo an pa icipan s we e Sa o i himsel , Gio gio Galli, and he la e Paolo Fa ne i (I
should pe haps also men ion mysel a his poin ). Lea ing aside he schola ly me i s
o he con o e sy -whe he he I alian pa y sys em can de ined as pola ized
plu alism (Sa o i), impe ec wo-pa y sys em (Galli), cen ipe al plu alism (Fa ne i),
he unde lying poli ical issue caugh he a en ion o schola s and poli icians alike. Is a
poli ical al e na i e p ac icable in he I alian poli ical sys em, ha is will I alian
democ acy be capable o "abso bing" a go e nmen o he le , up o ecen imes
domina ed by he Communis pa y? O is I alian democ acy doomed o unc ion a
low le els o pe o mance because he "al e na i e" is no simply di icul , bu a isky
one? Th ough he deba e on he na u e o he pa y sys em, a majo deba e on he
na u e, and possible ans o ma ion, o I alian democ acy was ini ia ed and sus ained.
Fo a long pe iod o ime, his deba e was ocused almos exclusi ely on he pa ies
and hei in e ac ions, on in apa y compe i ion, he well-known issue o pa y
ac ions, on o e s' beha iou and change, on he ies be ween pa ies and g oups
( he issue o clien elism). In he ea ly i ies, in a sha p exchange wi h he Communis
pa y sec e a y Palmi o Toglia i, Bobbio had launched -and has since sus ained and
e i ed- a deba e on he ela ionship be ween poli ics and cul u e. In he
mid-se en ies, Bobbio himsel challenged Ma xism o i s lack o a " heo y o he
S a e" (and o poli ical ins i u ions).
Much less a en ion was de o ed o he in e ac ions o pa ies and ins i u ions
and o ins i u ional cons ain s on pa y beha iou , hough Sa o i himsel had edi ed
and con ibu ed o an excellen esea ch on he I alian Pa liamen . Indeed, in i s
e o s o disen angle i sel om cons i u ional law, oo o en ha e I alian poli ical
scien is s ei he o ally neglec ed o se iously unde es ima ed he ole o ins i u ions in
con empo a y poli ics as well as in I alian poli ics.
The g ea amoun o a en ion de o ed o poli ical pa ies co ec ly e lec s he
impo ance o I alian pa ies in he poli ical sys em. Howe e , some poli ical scien is s
(and poli ical sociologis s, such as Alessand o Pizzo no) ha e co ec ly pe cei ed in
he se en ies ha he balance o powe was in he p ocess o changing. Socie y was
becoming mo e demanding, and he issue o social mo emen s came o he o e
- hough oo o en idealized by some I alian poli ical sociologis s and unde es ima ed
by I alian poli ical scien is s. Ins i u ions we e caugh in he mids o he c isis o
go e nabili y -and, su p isingly, cons i u ional lawye s did no ha e e y much o say
o o w i e in an inno a i e way. The ield became hen open o I alian poli ical
scien is s o analyze he oo s o hei democ acy and once again design possible
u u es.
4. A his poin , he lesson o posi i is ealism allowed and o a la ge ex en
p omo ed some ew good s udies o he oo s o I alian democ acy, especially in
e ms o he na u e, selec ion, p omo ion o poli ical eli es (which was Paolo Fa ne i's
p ojec ). I did no os e and de ini ely did no pu a p emium on he o mula ion o
p oposals o change. Indeed, he policy side o I alian poli ical science, especially
wi h espec o modi ica ions o he Cons i u ion and he S a e ins i u ions, was
e ec i ely discou aged. This was also due o a misplaced eeling o compe i ion wi h
he ield o public and cons i u ional law. As i he s eng h o a discipline could be
measu ed in e ms o i s abili y o deal wi h exclusi e subjec s and no o dealing
mo e con incingly wi h simila subjec s o he same ones! On he o he hand, i could
no be denied ha some cons i u ional lawye s we e indeed e ec i e p ac i ione s o
he me hod o posi i is ealism (in some cases, e en excessi ely so...).
As o he na u e o he pe spec i e, hose poli ical scien is s who ackled he
issue o democ acy, al e na ion o go e ning coali ions, ci cula ion o poli ical eli es,
p oduced sys emic analyses. Howe e , in oo many cases, as un o una ely in oo
much con empo a y poli ical science elsewhe e, mic o-analyses ook he uppe hand.
Subsys emic s udies appea ed, o en wi hou enough solid esea ch behind hem and
no heo e ically well in o med. Mino de ailed pieces o esea ch p oli e a ed,
abandoning he adi ion and be aying he examples se by he mas e s.
As o poli ical science and poli ics in I aly, he eigh ies a e ma ked by majo
de elopmen s. The discipline o poli ical science has eached i s ma u i y bo h in
e ms o he apid expansion o i s p ac i ione s, he ashion o labeling e en poli ical
commen a o s "poli ologi", he p oduc ion o majo s udies. The dynamics o he
poli ical sys em and he poli ical deba e o e an impo an ield o be analyzed,
in e p e ed, pe haps e en o be in luenced. Howe e , he in e ac ion be ween I alian
poli ical science and i s poli ics has become di icul , con o e sial, unsa is ac o y.
5. The g ow h and he ma u i y o he discipline a e es i ied and documen ed by
h ee books. The publica ion o a "Manuale di scienza della poli ica" (1986), al eady
ansla ed in o Spanish, en i ely w i en by I alian schola s, all a one poin o ano he ,
disciples o Bobbio and Sa o i, blending oge he he bes o he I alian-Eu opean
and US schola ship. The publica ion o a collec i e olume on "L'analisi della poli ica.
T adizioni di ice ca, modelli, eo ie" (1989) which p o ides a ho ough in oduc ion o,
deep discussion o , and s imula ing in e p e a ion o all majo app oaches,
pe spec i es, pa adigms used in con empo a y poli ical science ( he only gap is
ep esen ed by he lack o he ins i u ional app oach). All chap e s bu one ha e been
w i en explici ly o his eade by I alian con ibu o s. Finally, a sound and exhaus i e
assessmen o he discipline, bo h in quan i a i e and quali a i e e ms, is p o ided by
"Scienza Poli ica" (1989). The chap e s o his book o e a opic-by- opic
p esen a ion o wha I alian poli ical scien is s ha e w i en so a , whe e he discipline
comes om, whe e is p esumably going o.
Whe e is in ac I alian poli ical science going o? And how much is i capable
o , and willing o in luence he poli ical discou se and poli ical choices in he I alian
poli ical sys em? Poli ical science is no jus a science like he o he s. A e all, i
deals wi h poli ics, ha noble a which shapes ou p esen and u u e o indi iduals
li ing in o ganized collec i i ies. While mos I alian p ac i ione s o poli ical science
ha e, mo e o less consciously, wi hd awn om he idea o been capable o exe cise
some in luence on poli ical choices, a hidden deba e is now aking place bo h on he
possibili y and he desi abili y o ely on poli ical science, o u ilize poli ical science in
o de o sugges , indica e, shape poli ical choices. G an ed ha , no all poli ical
science can, no should become a policy science, how much space does i exis and
can be exploi ed o poli ical science as an applied science? And how much
knowledge do I alian poli ical scien is s ha e which can easonably be applied o
illumina e he dynamics o he sys em and o iden i y he a ailable al e na i es and o
e alua e hei cos s and consequences?
These ques ions ha e become impo an o wo main easons. On he one
hand, he quan i a i e g ow h o he discipline is bound o aise he issue o i s asks,
accomplishmen s, use ulness. And his issue canno be ski ed and he
co esponding answe s canno be pos poned o a long pe iod o ime wi hou se ious
nega i e consequences. The second eason is ha he I alian poli ical sys em is
unde going a phase o ans o ma ion. I has been a p o ac ed, di icul , pain ul, and
unguided ans o ma ion so a . Bu exac ly because o all he di icul ies, he e is a
eeling ha pe haps some con ibu ions migh , and pe haps should come om

poli ical scien is s. This is pa icula ly ue, e en hough no always e iden , when
analyzing he changes which a e aking place in he sys em and he solu ions which
a e being pu o wa d in he ongoing poli ical, and academic, deba e.
6. Majo changes ha e aken place in he I alian poli ical sys em. They ha e no
ye been ansla ed in o hose mos isible and equen ly sc u inized phenomena
ep esen ed by changes in he composi ion o he go e ning coali ions. He e, o ou
pu poses, i will su ice o summa ize some o hem and o highligh hei ac ual and
u u e implica ions. I will hen be necessa y o e alua e whe he I alian poli ical
science is an ac i e and in luen ial pa icipan in he deba e, o no , and why no .
A poli ical sys em and a democ a ic egime ounded on he s eng h and
esilience, on he ep esen a i e capabili ies and go e ning ole o poli ical pa ies,
such as he I alian one, is now acing squa ely he c isis o hose same pa ies which
ha e buil I alian democ acy and made i wo k (admi edly wi h se e al
impe ec ions). The c isis o I alian pa ies is he e o e closely in e wo en wi h he
so-called c isis o go e nabili y. On he one hand, he Ch is ian Democ a s do no
enjoy any longe a cen al posi ion in he pa y alignmen o in he p ocess o
coali ion-building. On he o he , no o he pa y has succeeded in eplacing hem,
no wi hs anding he consis en and epea ed a emp s by he Socialis pa y. On he
one hand, he poli ical and pa y sys ems need some so o ci cula ion o eli es,
pe haps o al e na ion o go e ning coali ions; on he o he , he only iable
al e na i e, he Communis Pa y, is unde going a p ocess o ans o ma ion g owing
ou o he le hal c isis o in e na ional communism, i s own elec o al weakness, i s
pe cei ed inabili y o shape an al e na i e coali ion, o ge he o es o i , o make i
wo k a he na ional le el in a eliable way. In sum, I alian pa ies decline and, in all
likelihood, he pa y sys em has ini ia ed a phase o ealignmen . Bu ew, i any,
poli ical scien is s a e oday s udying hese impo an p ocesses. Con a y o wha
happened in he six ies, no majo deba e has aken place on hese p ocesses and no
signi ican in e p e a ion o hem has been ad anced so a .
On he con a y, he e has been he endency, less p onounced among
poli ical scien is s, o belie e and make belie e ha wha poli ical pa ies canno do
any longe will au oma ically be done by I alian ci il socie y ( o use a e minology
dea , among o he s, o An onio G amsci, hough, o cou se, G amsci would be e y
suspicious o he au onomous capabili ies o I alian ci il socie y in he absence o a
well o ganized poli ical pa y). I alian socie y has, o cou se, changed i sel . In some
a eas, i is ma u e, Wes e n, Eu opean. In o he a eas, hough, i is weak, Sou he n,
La iname ican (as he cu en ja gon would de ine i ). I has g own oge he wi h i s
own pa ies and hei poli ics. I migh ha e ou g own hem all. Ne e heless, i
emains doub ul whe he i will be able o go e n i sel wi hou pa y poli ics. I may
be suscep ible and exposed o a p ocess o agmen a ion and co po a iza ion,
al eady unde way in some a eas and in some sec o s.
Whe e pa ies decline and socie y is no s ong and a icula e enough o
eplace hem, ins i u ions migh ill he acuum. The ole o ep esen a i e and
go e ning ins i u ions has been oo long neglec ed by I alian poli ical scien is s o
expec om hem, wi h e y ew excep ions, a easonable, o iginal, usable
pe spec i e. Howe e , he deba e on he e o m o he ins i u ions has aged now o
almos i een yea s. I has illed he pages o dailies, weeklies, academic jou nals; i
has p oduced e y many books, mos o hem, admi edly, o poo quali y. I has
ound ela i ely li le a en ion among p o essional poli ical scien is s.
Su p ise and disappoin men a e mixed oge he . As a ma e o ac , he
deba e on he e o m o he I alian o m o go e nmen is no simply he mos
impo an poli ical deba e since he Cons i uen Assembly (June 1946 - Decembe
1947). I is bound o become and emain he mos in luen ial poli ical deba e in e ms
o i s consequences o e e y single ins i u ion, o he whole o he I alian
Cons i u ion, o u u e pa y alignmen s, o he c ea ion o go e ning coali ions. In no
o he case is he ela ionship be ween ins i u ions and poli ics so close, so signi ican ,
so clea as in he deba e on he so-called G and Re o m. No doub , e en he des iny
o indi idual poli ical pa ies and o pa y Coali ions is s ic ly ied o he solu ion o
ins i u ional issues.
In he ligh o hei con ibu ions o he analysis o indi idual pa ies and o he
dynamics o he I alian pa y sys em, one would ha e expec ed mo e om I alian
poli ical scien is s. The p oblem is ha Bobbio has openly and epea edly decla ed
ha he belie es in he pe sis en alidi y o he I alian Cons i u ion ha i is s ill wai ing
o be ully implemen ed. Pa adoxically, he aus e e ad oca e and gua dian o he
ules o he game has o en chas ised pa ies and pa y leade s o hei beha iou
wi hou eeling he need o call o sanc ions ounded on s ic e and mo e p ecise
ules. on his pa , om New Yo k, Sa o i has usually e ained om ackling he issue
o ins i u ional and cons i u ional e o ms. His own heme has been ha o he e o m
o he elec o al sys em in he di ec ion o educing i s p opo ionali y and o de ising
mechanisms which oblige pa ies o c ea e and sus ain go e ning coali ions. Wha
Sa o i labeled poli ical enginee ing has no a ac ed ollowe s among I alian poli ical
scien is s ( o he. excep ions, in di e ing deg ees o commi men , con ic ion, and
p oduc ion o Fisichella, Pasquino, and U bani).
7. Pa ies decline, ins i u ions a e in di e need o e isions: how is hen I alian
democ acy ans o ming i sel ? How much space o poli ical and echnical in luence
is open and can be e ec i ely exploi ed? Un o una ely, mos I alian poli ical
scien is s ha e e aded he issue. Some o hem ha e e en come o he (decidedly
unwa an ed) conclusion ha he main p oblem o I alian democ acy is he so-called
"au o i o ma dei pa i i" ( he sel - e o m o pa ies). I is nei he , he e o e, he e o m
o he (obsole e) pa liamen a y o m o go e nmen in he weak I alian a ian , no he
lack o o a ion in he go e nmen o eally compe ing and al e na i e coali ions.
The e is a endency, a e many sha p and in some cases cul u e bound
c i icisms o he I alian poli ical sys em, o e-e alua e he quali y and he
pe o mance o I alian democ acy, o upg ade hem, pa icula ly among o eign
well-in o med and knowledgeable schola s (wi ness LaPalomba a, bu also in a
sligh ly di e en ein Ta ow). This endency has al eady gone oo a , bu I alian
poli ical scien is s ha e p o ed unable o coun e ac i . In he absence o de ailed
monog aphs and o comp ehensi e s udies, i will indeed be di icul o I alian
poli ical scien is s con incingly o explain ha he pe o mance o I alian democ acy
has been consis en ly unde pa , ha he quali y o I alian democ acy emains
ela i ely good bu is se iously, impai ed by he lack o al e na ion, ha he I alian
poli ical sys em is "unde go e ned" (bo h in he meaning o "so ogo e no" and in he
meaning o he inabili y o he go e ning class success ully o mobilize all he
esou ces and o s imula e all he ene gies al eady a ailable in he sys em).
Thus, on he e ge o signi ican changes, on he h eshold o a majo u ning
poin , I alian democ acy and I alian poli ical ac o s seem o ind li le knowledge in he
ield o poli ical science ha is uly applicable, o ob ain li le help om poli ical
scien is s hemsel es, no enough policy science a en ion and in e es .
Too bad. This is de ini ely no he lesson o he dis an ounde s o he
discipline om Machia elli o Mosca, Pa e o, Michels, and G amsci. I is no ei he
he eaching which can be easily gleaned om he many books and a icles as well
as om he ci ic beha iou o he ecen e- ounde s o I alian poli ical science:
Bobbio and Sa o i. The pa adox is ha I alian poli ical science has g own, become
be e o ganized, mo e p esen in he uni e si y sys em, and less inclined o p obably
less capable o playing an ac i e ole in he poli ical discou se o i s coun y. I is my
opinion ha he di o ce o science om poli ics dep i es bo h o ecip ocal s imuli and
knowledge. ( he heo iza ion o ha di o ce is a ecipe o an unheal hy isola ion. I
may loom nega i ely on he u u e o I alian democ acy as well as, and e en mo e so,
on he u u e o I alian poli ical science. Fo una ely, and hope ully, i is no oo la e o
e e se his end.
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES
BOBBIO, No be o:
Poli ica e cul u a. To ino, Einaudi, 1955
Saggi sulla scienza poli ica in I alia. Ba i, La e z'a, 1969
Quale socialismo?. To ino, Einaudi, 1976
Il u u o della democ azia. To ino, Einaudi, 1984
P o ilo ideologico del no ecen o i aliano. To ino, Einaudi, 1986
FARNETI, Paolo:
Il sis ema dei pa i i in I alia 1946-1979. Bologna, Il Mulino, 1983
LAPALOMBARA, Joseph:
Democ acy I alian S yle, London-New Ha en. Yale Uni e si y P ess, 1987
MORLINO, Leona do (ed.):
Scienza Poli ica. To ino, Edizioni della Fondazione Agnelli, 1989
PANEBIANCO, Angelo (ed.):
L'analisi, della poli ica. T adizioni di ice ca. modelli e eo ie. Bologna, Il Mulino, 1989
PASQUINO, Gian anco:
C isi dei pa i i e go e nabili à. Bologna, Il Mulino, 1980
Res i ui e lo sce o al p incipe. P opos e di i o ma is i uzionale. Roma-Ba i, La e za, 1985
(ed.) Manuale di scienza della poli ica. Bologna, Il Mulino, 1986.
Is i uzioni, pa i i, lobbies. Roma-Ba i, La e za, 1988
SARTORI, Gio anni:
Democ azia de inizioni. Bologna, il Mulino, 1957
Pa ies and Pa y Sys ems. New Yo k-London, Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, 1976
Teo ia dei pa i i e caso i aliano. Milan, Suga Co, 1982
Elemen i di eo ia poli ica. Bologna, Il Mulino, 1987
TARROW, Sidney:
Democ acy and Diso de . New Yo k-Ox o d, Ox o d Uni e si y P ess, 1989 (i . ansl. Democ azia
e diso dine. Mo imen i di p o es a e poli ica in I alia. 1965-1975. Roma-Ba i, La e za, 1990).