The aim of this tentative article is to bring some further empirical evidence in order to validate Stein Rokkan's "Conceptual Map of Europe". Therefore a set of variables are suggested: territorial-cultural and territorial-economic.Some indicators are proposed to provide some measurement of the variables, such as Beaufays Federalism scale or a new Mediatie centralization scale.

This article is concerned with the epistemological and methodological problems related to the taxonomy of political parties whett based on noorganizational criteria.The study of parties represents a starting point for modern Political Science : i.e. the seminal researches of Bryce, Ostrogorski and Michels. However this important field of knowledge hasn't known that much progress since the classical Duverger's Political Parties. Why?Two kind of approaches are used in order to classify parties: individualistic versus holistic. «Individualistic classifications» often suffer from a lack (...) of theoretical background. Same of them use a spurious criterium like party names : i.e. Radical means extreme-left in the USA and conservatism in Switzerland, secularist activism in Italy and evangelical left in the Netherlands etc.Some classifications are based on political platforms which is a meaningless criterium: «A general election campaign is about a choice between organizations, not ideas.» The third criterium is far better: policies really implemented by political parties. However when properly used it gives a typology of countries, not parties.«Holistic classifications» either functionnalist or marxist opposed each other : the first stressed on equilibrium, the latter on class warfare. One suggests Rokkan's four cleavages paradigm to classify parties : each side of a cleavage should correspond to a definite «Political Family».Which items to use in order to assess a party to a permanent cleavage line? The historical function performed by the party at its creation. The sociological structure of the party's : electorate, membership and inner group; The linkage structure between the party and a given network of pressure groups, movements and associations. (shrink)

The first aim of the article is to present the lineage of party organizations integrating several "classical" approaches. Therefore a second aim is to set up a structural model able to catch the evolution of any typeof modern party organization.One assumes that Party Structure is an invariable element which subsumes several organizational translations. Same are protopartisan translations : leagues, armed and unarmed f actions, parliamentary groups. Some are partisan translations : modern party organizations. This assumptions means a corollary: organizations tend (...) to adapt to the kind of party competition they have to afford in order to have accessto governmental power. The model combines the assumptions in a two dimensional matrix.The first dimension is concerned with the organization's major historical goal. It takes three values : a) to elect of MP's ; b) to promote a Weltanschauung; c) to elect the President.The second deals with mobilization and takes three values : adapted 1 ° to the age of «Registration Societies» ; 2° the age of «One man, one vote system» ; 3° the post McLuhan age of electronic media.The combination of the dimensions gives three lineages: Cadre Parties including Notability Parties, Voters Parties and Indirect Parties; Mass Parties including Activist Parties and Social Integration Parties; MachineParties. (shrink)