The decline of ethnic voting patterns in plural societies: Evidence from Suriname
| Author | Ruben Gowricharn |
| Date | 01 November 2019 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0263395718782388 |
| Published date | 01 November 2019 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/0263395718782388
Politics
2019, Vol. 39(4) 395 –410
© The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0263395718782388
journals.sagepub.com/home/pol
The decline of ethnic voting
patterns in plural societies:
Evidence from Suriname
Ruben Gowricharn
VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Abstract
This article addresses the largely neglected issue of the decline of ethnic cleavages in plural
societies as expressed in voting behaviour. It argues that theoretically, Creolization, a specific form
of acculturation, accounts for the erosion of ethnic bonding but finds that the application of the
concept is limited. Hence, the article combines the current concept of Creolization with that of
political hegemony, while broadening Creolization to comprise the acculturation of several ethnic
groups. However, the paper considers that actual voting patterns may be countervailed by party
characteristics and election campaigns. Using multiple fieldwork methods, the erosion of ethnic
voting loyalties is analysed in a case study of Suriname, a Caribbean society that is representative
of a class of plural societies. The paper centres on the conceptual apparatus to analyse the erosion
of ethnic voting loyalties rather than making comparisons. It claims that its argument is applicable
to plural societies that are characterized by the erosion of voting loyalties and decline of ethnic
cleavages, notably Trinidad and to a lesser degree in Mauritius and Fiji, and increasingly in Suriname
and Guyana.
Keywords
creolization, ethnic politics, hegemony, plural societies, voting
Received: 8th October 2017; Revised version received: 27th April 2018; Accepted: 1st May 2018
Many theories in comparative political science are founded on the assumption of demar-
cated ethnic groups that are represented by ethnic political parties. These theories include
ethnic competition (Despres, 1975), democratic stability and power-sharing (Roeder and
Rothschild, 2005), and increasing ethnicization (Posner, 2004). In ethnically plural socie-
ties, the distribution of public goods – especially scholarships, jobs, housing, licences,
and land – are largely driven by ethnic group loyalties. This feature is widely acknowl-
edged as intrinsic to the conceptual makeup of plural societies (Dew, 1978; Horowitz,
1985). The case of Suriname demonstrates that political science theories equating plural
societies with ethnic voting do not hold.
Corresponding author:
Ruben Gowricharn, Angstel 5, 3068 Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Email: rgow@xs4all.nl
782388POL0010.1177/0263395718782388PoliticsGowricharn
research-article2018
Article
396 Politics 39(4)
The classic account of ethnic bonding stems from Geertz (1971), who argued that civic
bonds in plural societies originate from primordial loyalties regarding region, caste, race,
tribe, family, language, and religion. These communal attachments originate from sociali-
zation in the ethnic community (Geertz 1971; Hale, 2004). These attachments are not
static since they may change. For example, primordial attachments may be affected by
modernization, political rivalry or demographic growth (Hale, 2004; Hoben and Heffner,
1991; Horowitz, 1985). That said, this line of thinking regarding primordial attachments
has been discredited owing to its alleged ethnic essentialism by constructionist scholars
who emphasize the malleability and instrumentality of ethnicity (Chandra, 2012). From
either perspective, however, ethnic loyalty and voting appear to remain pivotal in
politics.
Plural societies are characterized by racial, religious, regional, linguistic, regional, cul-
tural divisions, called ethnic cleavages, that are reflected in political support (Lijphart,
1977). In some Caribbean plural societies notably Trinidad, Guyana, and Suriname,
where the major ethnic communities are represented by ethnic political parties, ethnic
voting patterns have declined due to an erosion of the ethnic loyalty. In Western plural
societies such as Ireland, Belgium, Switzerland, and Canada, ethnic loyalties and related
cleavages have largely disappeared, although new ethnic bonding has emerged such as
regionalism and nationalism, as the cases of Catalonia, the Netherlands, and the United
Kingdom illustrate.
Despite the major implications for political party support of the decline of ethnic
cleavages in plural societies, the phenomenon has hardly been addressed in political sci-
ence. The neglect of the decline voting patterns represents a serious theoretical limitation,
as it signals a political meltdown of the ethnic group as a political actor, though the ethnic
group may persist socially (Horowitz, 1985). The erosion of ethnic loyalty is reflected in
several forms of crossovers, particularly voting on different ethnic political parties.
Theoretically, without ethnic loyalty there are no ethnic political parties and no empirical
foundation for political theories of ethnicity. Empirically, however, diminishing electoral
support or shifts in voting patterns away from ethnic parties is rarely absolute since these
parties still exist. Nevertheless, the decline of ethnic cleavages calls for reflection on cur-
rent concepts in political science that presupposes ethnic actors consisting of neatly
demarcated ethnic groups.
Ethnic cleavages in Western plural societies were unidimensionally based on religion,
ideology, class or region and are largely dissolved (Franklin et al., 1992; cf. Johnston,
2006; Van Dam, 2015). These cleavages differed from those in developing plural socie-
ties that are characterized by multidimensional differences, comprising simultaneously
race, language, religion, and ethnic life (Banton, 2008). The breakdown of ethnic cleav-
ages in Western Europe occurred after World War II (WWII) as a result of increased
education, social and spatial mobility and individualization (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim,
2001; Van der Eijck and Franklin, 2009). While socially the ethnic boundaries have been
blurred, the cleavages often persist politically since the segments are still organized in
religious and ideological based political parties. However, in the same period the
Caribbean societies mentioned above also witnessed an increase in educational level and
income, but ethnic groupings were consolidated and ethnic politics thrived rather than
declined (Bissessar and La Guerre, 2013; Dew, 1978). This calls for a different explana-
tion of the erosion of ethnic group bonding in plural societies than the current account
from mobility and individualization so typical of Western societies.
To continue reading
Request your trial