Adam Przeworski, Capitalism and Social Democracy (1984), Chapter 3.

Main Argument: The salience of class as a determinant of voting behaviour is a cumulative consequence of strategies pursued by political parties of the left, hence it is both the political and economic system that encourage parties to formulate strategies. Political parties are not simply reflection of the class structure; they are relatively autonomous from both the social structure and state institutions.
Method: A theory-building piece<br/>
== Notes ==
Chapter 1 “Social Democracy as a Historical Phenomenon”
– Social democracy was a choice faced by socialists: enter electoral politics and work for social change within the system, or create a society within a society, separate from capitalism
– Workers do not have any rights to the products of their labor as workers
– As citizens, however, they can collectively make claims to products –> in order to gain benefits of democracy, workers had to organize as participants
– Worker mobilization (strikes) taught socialists that state repression was inevitable if workers did not infiltrate the state apparatuses
– Universal suffrage meant masses could have effects without being organized
– However, if workers did not organizers voters as workers, they would vote based on other identities<br/>
Effects of the structure of the bourgeois state:
– Wage-earners are organized into smaller, often competitive organizations such as trade unions and political parties
– System doesn’t differentiate between workers and capitalists, but as undifferentiated citizens
– Once political parties enter into electoral politics, they are constrained by the necessity to form coalitions with the petit bourgeoisie, to appear ‘responsible’ and committed to the system
– This means that social democratic parties lose their ability to mobilize in extra-parliamentary forums for change
– Socialists thought they would win elections because of their numerical strength after universal suffrage, if not immediately, then in the near future as a consequence of capitalism increasing the numbers of workers
– This led to socialist acceptance of electoral defeat, as their eventual success was the result of the historical development of capitalism
– Confirmed expectations reflected in increasing electoral victories in western Europe before WWI
Explanations for relationship between socialist parties and working class:
– Capitalism is a system in which workers compete with one another unless organized into a class
– Necessity of emphasizing distinct interests of class in order to prevent workers from being integrated into bourgeoisie (move towards ‘universalism’)
– Electoral dilemma resulted with number of workers did not reach a majority… minority status made it necessary either accept perpetual defeat but keep a homogenous class base, or dilute the class base in order to make electoral success possible
– As soon as prospect of electoral success became evident, socialist parties began searching for allies
– “The search for allies is inherent in electoralism” [26]
– Keynesian economics offered a universal justification to pursue the interests of workers through the state… shift from ‘nationalization’ of means of production to modifying the effects of market forces through the development of the welfare state
Electoral Dilemma: Class parties can’t win elections because they don’t have numerical majority.  Yet, when appeal to broader base, they can’t win elections because they are no longer organizing workers to vote as workers.
Chapter 3: Party Strategy, Class Organisation and Individual Voting
Looks at the class struggle in democracies and formation of parties along class lines
– The organisation of politics in terms of class can be attempted by only one specific class –> workers [101]
– Class is important in society to the extent  that workers organise as a party
– Leaders of the party must choose between a homogenous class appeal or increased electoral success and diluting its class orientation
Timing Matters: socialists enters into the electoral competition at the time when workers were separated form the rest of society not only economically but also socially and politically [103]
Electoral Trade-off: Because workers were never the majority of the population, parties either had to expand their appeal or be relegated to losing
Why we should expect the party to hold the workers vote even if a trade-off happens:
a) Class stops being the exclusive way to divide society
b) It stops competition between workers and other groups
Hypothesis: Socialist parties did not win a majority of the vote because their efforts to extend their electoral appeal diminished the salience of class as a determinant of the political behaviour of workers [106]
The trade-off may not be evident for long periods because the pool of workers available for socialist recruitment may be large in relation to the negative effects of the multi-class strategy upon them
Trade-off is steeper in those countries in which parties propounding particular ideologies have competed for the loyalty of workers
Where there are other salient cleavages (linguistic, ethnic, etc…), left-wing parties also face a sharp trade-off
Trade-off is weaker in corporatist systems
Trade-off is weaker in systems where unions are numerically weak or divided
– The strategy that a party adopts depends upon the degree to which party leaders are concerned with the class composition of their electorate
– Workers are less likely to vote socialist when parties turn for electoral support to other groups
– Socialist leaders are willing to pursue supra-class strategies only if they enjoy sufficient support among workers
Empirical Examples: Looks at  Denmark, Norway, Sweden Finland, Belgium , Germany and France
– Class-only strategies turnout to have been electorally superior for the Belgian, French, and German Left as well as for the Finnish, French and German SDs
– Supra-class strategies are superior for the major socialist parties and for the Left in Denmark, Norway and Sweden
– The importance of class voting varies historically and strategies of political parties sand other organisation have cumulative consequences for the way people vote [126]
– The existence of tradeoffs implies that the distribution of electoral support must tend to become stable, even in the face of profound social and economic transition
– The error of early socialist parties was to have thought that tone could precipitate radical social transformation though the electoral process [129]