13 Pressure Groups

Suraj Thapa

PRESSURE GROUPS

Introduction

Every liberal democratic political system provides certain rights to its people like rights of political association and freedom of expression through which citizens as well as social groups have some way to express their needs and demands to the government. For instance, here is a story, possibly true that the New Zealand Prime Minister Sid Holland was woken by a phone call from an irate woman who could not find a plumber willing to come out in the middle of the night to fix a leak. A plumber soon arrived on her doorstep thanks to Holland’s direct intervention (Du Fresne, 1989). Another story, undeniably true, is that, in 1989, the major cities of Eastern Europe filled with people expressing their profound dissatisfaction with communist rule, demonstration that accelerated the collapse of communism in Europe (Hague, et.al., 1992). Both examples show people acting in their interests whether these are individual complaints or broad concerns about the legitimacy of government. In other words, people do not only engage in politics through voting and by joining political parties, they can also become politically active through their membership of groups, organizations and associations of various kinds. Moreover, collective action by groups of citizens has become an essential part of the articulation process or sometimes seen as the informal face of politics. Therefore, in larger political systems, the individuals who work together as a formal interest group is a prime tool in promoting political interests. This group of collective action is known as a pressure group/ interest group. In this way politics and interests are inseparable, however, whereas politics is about decision and interests are involved whenever any actor stands to gain or lose from a decision.

Development of Pressure Groups

It may be mentioned here that one of the consequences of modernization is a widespread belief that the conditions of life can be altered through human action. It normally involves education, urbanization rapid growth in the public communication and in most cases improvement in the physical conditions of life. These changes are closely related to increases in political awareness, participation and feelings of political competence. Such participant attitudes encourage more diverse and citizen based interest articulation (ibid, p77). At the same time the interdependence of modern life, the exposure provided by mass communication, and wide ranging role of government further multiply political interest. Due to such factors, the patterns of political interaction were transformed in the in the early 19th century by the growing prominence of organized groups or group politics i.e. Pressure Groups/Interest Groups. They usually staked out a more distinct and clear cut position, in accordance with the particular aspirations or values of the people they represented1. Therefore by the end of the nineteenth century, powerful farming and business groups operated in most of the industrial societies, along with the growing trade union movement (Haywood, 1997, p 252).

It has been witnessed that the period of 1950s and 1960s was considered as the high point of enthusiasm about group politics, particularly in western democracies, because this period was stimulated both by social change (as industrialization) and by the expansion of sates activity (such as public welfare)2. Further, due to such developments, on the one hand groups started raising awkward questions about the distribution of power in democracies. Apart from it, consultation between government and pressure groups was constant and intimate, and groups provide government with the information and technical advice needed to make sensible policy. On the other hand, in exchange, favored groups were acquired ‘insider’ status and thus the potential to influence decisions at an early stage (ibid). For example:

In France, in 1960s the government nearly collapsed as the result of protest that began when university students were not allowed to have members of the opposite sex visits their dorm rooms. Soon other disenchanted French men and women joined the student’s protest….. And this time protest was an almost a national political sport in France with the information (Almond, et.al., p66).

Therefore, it is said that all the modern societies like Canada, Britain, New Zealand and USA also witnessed a large number of pressure groups like labor business, Professional, labour unions and environmentalists etc. These groups compete among themselves for membership and influence, and all simultaneously press their demands on policy makers and the bureaucrats and became fundamental to the politics of the respective country. For example, in the USA a number of pressure groups came into existence from 19th to 20th century. The following table 1.1 describes about the pressure group’s formation during that time.

Table 1.1 -Waves of Pressure Group Formation in the United Nations

Source: (Hague, et.al., 1992, p 114).

Similarly in UK or Britain, the number of pressure groups runs into thousands whereas the number of political parties is very small, as the membership of political parties has fallen, that of pressure groups has increased3. For example, a pressure group can be a huge organization like the CBI (Confederation of British Industry), which represents 150,000 businesses, and it can also be a single-issue locally based organization like CLARA (Central Area Leamington Resident’s Association), which represents less than 300 households campaigning to preserve and improve the town of Leamington Spa. The definition also does not distinguish between the most extreme pressure groups such as the Animal Liberation Front, whose campaigns include the illegal activities such as planting bombs, and the pressure groups such as the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), which has links to the Labour government and regular contact with cabinet ministers. Over the years, these groups were looked upon as children of a new age of representative government and came into existence to articulate the increasingly complex divisions and cleavages of an emerging modern/industrial society and constitute one of the major linkages between government and the governed. In addition, pressure groups started participate within the political process, serving on government advisory bodies and testifying at parliamentary hearing and moreover, they were growing as agents of mobilization and representation.

Here it may be mentioned that pressure groups vary in structure, style and support base, and these differences may influence a nation’s politics, its economics and its social life and it is difficult to identify the earliest such groups because still there is a disagreement about agreed terminology amongst political scientists active in this field. For instance, whereas the term ‘Interest Group’ is used in the USA and elsewhere to describe all organized groups, it tends to be used in the UK to refer only to those groups that advance of defending the interest of their members. The term ‘Pressure Group’ is therefore usually preferred in the UK, ‘Interest Group’ tending to be used as a sub-category of the broader meaning.

Definition of Pressure Groups

The term pressure group is a very wide definition that does not clearly distinguish between the groups that fall under the term. They can also be described as ‘interest groups’, ‘lobby groups’ or ‘protest groups’. Some people avoid using the term ‘pressure group’ as it can inadvertently be interpreted as meaning the groups use actual pressure to achieve their aims, which does not necessarily happen. Generally it is said that a pressure group is an organized association, or a more institutionalized form of interest articulation occurs through the activities of the social or political groups that represent the interest of their constituents, and does not put up candidates for election, but seeks influence government policy or legislation. In this regard, David Truemen said that individuals belong to several different group loyalties reflecting different aspects of their interests and personalities: this gave rise to Trueman’s idea of ‘overlapping group affiliations’. According to him,

Pressure groups/ interest group” refers to any group that, on the basis of one or more shared attitudes, makes certain claims upon other groups in the society for the establishment, maintenance, or enhancement of forms of behavior that are implied by shared attitudes (Mehler, 2008, p150).

As we have earlier mentioned that there is no consensus among scientist about terminology in this field. As a result, many political scientists use the term ‘interest group’ or’ pressure group’ interchangeably. Others however make a distinction between the two terms, and whether or not the student chooses to make this distinction, he or she should be aware of the distinctions that are drawn. Moreover, they believe that pressure groups are to be a subset of interest groups that are organized exclusively for the purpose of political lobbying. In this way therefore it is said that all pressure groups are interest groups but not all interest groups are pressure groups (ibid, p153).

Apart from it, some of the scholars also make a distinction between pressure groups and political parties. In this context one scientist defines:

Pressure groups are an organization which has some autonomy from government or political parties and …. try to influence public policy (Wilson, 1990). Pressure

groups seek to influence government but, unlike political parties they do not aspire to control it (Hague, 1992, p113).

From the above statement, it can infer that each political system may contain some political structures to ensure popular representation in the government policy making process, most notably the legislature. Of these, there two additional structures are available to supplement the formal representation in a particular regime i.e. both the ‘pressure group’ and ‘political party’. Both are also quite effective and play a significant role in assisting formal legal structures in the process of political demands and the communications of public beliefs, attitudes and values. Although pressure groups and political parties have a number of characteristics and functions in common but one should be very careful to distinguish between the two types of structures. They are really different.

Differences between Pressure Group and Political Party

Many scholars argue that both pressure groups and political parties4 are quite different and a number of distinctions can be pointed out between both. Firstly, in terms of ‘permanence’ which mean political parties tend to be more permanent and institutionalized than are pressure groups. Moreover, the parties are also invariably concerned with a large number of issue concerns, broader programmic or ideological features that are associated with it, while pressure groups usually focus upon a specific cause or interest of a particular group. Secondly, pressure groups differ from political parties in that they seek to exert influence from outside rather than to win or exercise government power. In other words, the goal of the pressure group is to satisfy its members, either through the organization itself5, or through political pressure resulting in a specific policy outcome6. However, groups and parties are very different beasts. Table 1.2 shows the distinction between both as follows.

Table 1.2-Differences between Pressure Group and Political Party

Pressure Group	Political Party
Seek to exert influence	Seek to win election
Narrow issues focus	Broad issue focus
Shared interests/ common causes	Shared preferences

Types of Pressure Groups

A pressure group appear in such a variety of shapes and sizes, it often unhelpful to treat them as a ‘job lot’. What categories do pressure groups fall into? How do pressure groups differ from each others? Although they can be distinguished in a variety of ways but for the purpose of comparative politics, the most useful system of classification of pressure groups has propounded by Almond and Coleman, who divides these groups into four categories These categories are Non- associational, Institutional, Associational and Anomic. See following table 1.3.

Table 1.3-Almond’s Classification of Interest Groups

7

Categories	Examples
Non-associational	Born into, Inherit membership
Institutional	By virtue of occupation
Associational	Voluntary Choice
Anomic	Spontaneous, Temporary
Source: Calvert, 1993, p115.

Non-associational or Communal Groups

These are groups which are not created for specific purposes but are simply part of a the social fabric in the sense that its membership is based on birth, rather than recruitment. For example, such groups are families, tribes, based on region, religion, kinship, castes, and ethnic groups etc. These groups are founded on the basis of a shared heritage as well as and the traditional bonds and loyalties and they fall at the communal end of the spectrum. These groups have become an important part of politics in the advanced countries and exerting influence in the states.7 For example, in the Western world, Protestants against Catholics in Northern Ireland and Italy of a particularly violent conflict between customary groups. Other instances are the divisions between settlers and indigenous peoples in the Americas, Australia and New Zealand.

Institutional Groups

Institutional groups are groups that are part of the machinery of the government and attempt to exert influence in and through that machinery. They include bodies like the armed forces, business corporations, legislature, bureaucracies, police, teachers and other occupational groups. Such groups express their own interests or represent the interest of other groups in the society and have also direct access to the policy making process. For example, in the USA there is a doctor Institutional group called the American Medical Association (AMA) or in the UK, the British Medical Association (BMA). Each of both groups speaks for the views of doctors whether the doctors like it or not, since all doctors have to belong to them.

Apart from it, generally in industrial democracies, institutional groups like bureaucratic and corporate oftenly use their resources and special information to affect policy. For Intense, in the USA, the military-industrial complex consists of the combination of personnel in the Defense Department and defense industries who join in support of military expenditures. Moreover, in authoritarian systems, where independent pressure groups are outlawed or controlled, institutional groups within the government may still be able to express their opinion before decisions are made. Even so, they can still contribute to communication between society and the state. For instance, the army may articulate the concerns of one specific ethnic group or class (Almond, et.al., 2007, p67).

Associational Groups/ Protective Groups

These groups are formed explicitly to represent the interest of a particular group. This includes trade unions, chambers of commerce, manufacturers associations and religious associations. Sometimes they are also called sectional of functional groups which exist to protect the material interest of their members from physician to labour. They always seek selective benefits for their members and insider status with relevant government departments which make them often most influential among all pressure groups. For example, the National Farmers’ union in Britain or the France Wine Growers’ Association, consist of people who are actively engaged in a trade or profession whose interests they seek to defend. Similarly, in recurring debates about health care in the USA, there is an enormous mobilization of pressure groups from representatives of doctors and health insurance organization to consumer groups and the like- in efforts to influence legislation. Apart from it, labor unions also fall in this category because they are often considered central political actors because they represent the mass of the working class: in the same way, a business group speaks for the corporate interests of the nation (Ibid, p68).

Anomic Groups

Anomic groups are generally spontaneous groups that form suddenly when many individuals respond similarly to frustration, disappointment, or that strong emotion. Without previous organization or planning, frustrated individuals may suddenly take to the streets to vent their anger, as news of a government action touches deep emotions or as a rumor of new injustice sweeps the community and their action may lead to violence. Many developed countries in the world including USA, France, Italy and Britain have been reporting a high frequency of violent and spontaneous anomic behavior. For instance, in 1992 there were riots and looting by some residents in minority neighborhoods of Los angles following the acquittal of police officers accused of excessive violence in the beating of an American- African suspect. In other words, anomic group activity is generally regarded as an ‘indicator’ of widespread alienation from the existing system and so of serious structural problems in a society which could in turn lead to significant political change.

Role and Functions of Pressure Groups

Pluralists argue that pressure group politics is a very important stuff for democracy because these groups play different kind of roles and functions which helped in advancing the idea of pluralist democracy. In this regard, a pluralist, Robert Dahl believes that democracy is based on the notion of one person one vote with the emphasis on the role of the individual, is that in modern society there are so many individuals, each of them has carried one will which also would no weight as such. Therefore, in this situation, the only way that the individual can successfully articulate interests is in conjunction with others. He further argues that pressure group is the only way through which an individual interests can make themselves felt and all possible interests of its members are again and again represented in the political system. Therefore, according to pluralists, pressure groups do play many roles, so that balance of democracy can restore, like Representation, Education, Political participation, Policy Formation and Policy Implementation etc.

Representation

In the pluralist model of democracy, pressure groups play an essential role because it is believed that political parties cannot provide adequate representation for the full range of diverse interests and opinions in a modern democracy because their key function is to aggregate interests into a coherent political entity capable of governing the country. While pressure groups enable particular interests and causes to be heard and to exert influence in public decision and decision-making. Yet it is precisely the representation of specialist interests and of single issues which may give cause for concern, both in terms of the methods used to achieve objectives and of the undue power and influence which particular lobbies can exert. Some have even argued that pressure groups provide an alternative to the formal representative process through what has been called functional representation8.

Political Participation

Pluralists also believe that democracy is a system of government where decisions are arrived at by majoritarian principles with representatives elected at periodic elections or where political equality and political freedom allow the voter an effective choice between competing candidates in a secret ballot. In this regard, that pressure groups overcome the democratic deficit that builds up as most people’s political participation is to cast a vote after a period of time, thus leading to people having little or no influence over decisions made between elections. Pressure groups increase participation and access to the political system, thereby enhancing the quality of democracy. They complement and supplement electoral democracy in two main ways: first, by providing an important mechanism by which citizens can influence government between elections; and second by enabling opinions to be weighed as well as counted. For instance, pressure groups have become increasingly an effective agent of political participation in recent time. In Britain near about 40-50 percent people of the of the total population belong to at least one voluntary association, and a large majority about 20 percent belong to two or more. These groups usually seek to exert influence precisely by mobilizing popular support through activities such as petitions, marches and demonstrations. Such forms of political participation have been attracting many people.

Education

It is also said that pressure groups promote debates, discussion and argument in a democracy. In doing so, they create a better informed and more educated electorate. In other words, many pressure groups, indeed, operate largely through their ability to communicate with the public and raise political consciousness among them. They therefore often devote significant resources to carrying out research, maintaining websites, commenting on government policy and using high-profile academics, scientists and even celebrities express their views across whereas also challenge well established views and conventional wisdom. Moreover, they also offer alternative viewpoints and widen the information available to the public, especially through their access to the mass media and the use of ‘new’ communications technology such as the Internet and raise the quality of political debate by introducing specialist knowledge and greater expertise. In this way pressure groups are therefore prepared to ‘speak truth to power’.

Policy Formulation

Although pressure groups, by definition, are not policy-makers, this does not prevent many of them from participating in the policy-making process. It is well known that particularly, pressure groups are a vital source of information. This information would be regularly consulted by the government during the process of policy formulation which is developed through policy networks9. In this way pressure groups improve the quality of government works. In other words, it makes government more efficient by enhancing the quality of the decision making process – the information and advice provided by groups helps to improve the quality of government policy and legislation.

In this context, pluralists argue that pressure groups are a product of freedom of association, which is a fundamental principle of liberal democracy. Freely operating pressure groups are essential to the effective functioning of a liberal democracy in three main ways: they serve as vital intermediary institutions between government and society; they assist in the dispersal of political power; and they provide important counterweights to balance the concentration of power and enable new concerns and issues to reach the political agenda, thereby facilitating social progress and preventing social stagnation. For example, the women’s and environmentalist movements in across the world.

Policy Implementation

Some pluralist scholars believe that the role of some pressure groups extends beyond trying to shape the content of public policy to playing a role in putting policy into practice. The best example of this is the National Farmers’ Union (NFU), which works with the Department for Rural Affairs (DEFRA) in implementing policies related to farm subsidies, disease control and animal welfare etc. Not only do such links further blur the distinction between groups and government, but they also give the groups in question clear leverage when it comes to influencing the content of policy.

Maintain stability

It is also said that pressure groups help in providing a channel of communication between citizens and government and help to uphold political stability by ensuring that the government responds to popular demands and concerns. Pressure groups therefore function as a kind of safety valve in the political system. Moreover, these also groups check government power and, in the process, defend the rights and freedom of the members concerned. In this way, groups thus ensure that the state is balanced against a vigorous and healthy civil society.

How do Pressure Groups Exert Influence?

In the following, we will discuss about different channels through which pressures groups exert influence on the government as well as express the interests or demands of their members to same. Here it may be mentioned that every political system varies in many ways like its nature, size and structure etc. Due to such factors, it is almost unthinkable that a group should confine itself to a single strategy or one channel to influence the government. So in this way, pressure groups try to use such methods in accordance with a number of factors. First, how effective is a particular strategy likely to be? Second, given the group’s aims and resources, which strategies are available? For instance, in the UK, since most policies relating to civil liberties and political rights are developed by the Home Office, group such as Liberty is compelled to seek ‘insider’ status which it does by emphasizing its specialist knowledge and political respectability (Haywood, 1992, p262). Therefore, there are many ways through which pressure groups can exert influence and some of the principal common channels are: the bureaucracy, parliament, political parties, public opinion, direct action, the mass media and ministers and civil servants etc.

The Bureaucracy

First of all, in liberal democracies, the bureaucracy is the main pressure point because it is a key institution in the process of policy making. This channel is largely used by the major economic and functional groups, such as large corporations, employers’ associations, trade unions, farming groups and key professions. In this regards a scholar comments:

The bureaucracy’s significance is reinforced by its policy making and policy implementing roles. Many routine, technical and ‘less important’ decisions, which are nonetheless of vital concern to pressure groups, are actually made by a public servant ( Hague, et.al.,1992, p217).

Therefore, it is said that contacts with the bureaucratic agencies are important groups can easily present its members’ interests in order to formulate policies. Moreover, sometime a bureaucrat sympathetic to a group may also try to respond to its demands without leaving bureaucratic channels, by expressing administrative discretion. For instance, a study of access channels used by groups in England, showed that on broad issues involving class, ethnic or consumer groups tended to work through political parties. On narrow issues, involving few others or less political conflict, the groups tended to turn to the appropriate administrative department (Almond, et.al., 2004, p73).

The Parliament/ The Assembly/ The Legislature

Influence exerted through the assembly, Parliament and Legislature, often called lobbying, are another important form of pressure group activities. Standard lobbying tactics include appearances before legislative committees, providing information to individual legislature and similar activity. Lobbyists seek to make contact with sympathetic or well-placed Members of Parliament (MPs) and peers, providing them with an expensively produced briefing and information packs. The postbags of MPs and peers are full of correspondence from groups of many kinds and concerned with all sorts of issues. It is said that during the 1980s, Parliamentary lobbying10 has become increasingly sophisticated with the development, of a multimillion pound professional consultancy Industry. Therefore it has grown in importance in recent years. For example, in the USA over 11000 professional lobbyists were registered in Washington DC in 1990. Similarly, in Britain and France the strong party discipline in the legislature lessens the importance of individual members of parliament as access channels for pressure groups (Ibid).

Political Parties

Political parties are another important legitimate channel to exert influence on government. In a democracy, political parties often rely on pressure groups for financial aid and voter support and serve as institutional representatives of these interests within government. The best-known example of a link between a pressure group and a political party has traditionally been the relationship between the trade unions and the Labour Party in the UK. These affiliated trade unions not only provided the bulk of Labour’s funding but also controlled most of the votes at the party’s conference. The major two parties ( the Labor party and the Conservative party) now both rely on businesses and wealthy individuals for their main source of funding. Similarly in Germany, the various components of the party organization, particularly parliamentary committees, are important channels for transmitting group’s demands to the cabinet and the party in power.

The Mass Media/ Public Opinion

The mass media like television, radio, newspapers, and magazines are another important tactics for pressure groups in democratic countries. The mass media mobilizes support for pressure group efforts, leading to donations of time and money, as well as stimulating similar demands from sympathizers. Thus, in modern time, the media is a central focus for pressure groups seeking to steer public opinion. The purpose of such strategies is to influence government indirectly by pushing issues up the political agenda and demonstrating both the strength of commitment and the level of public support for a particular cause, with hope is that the government will pay attention for fear of suffering electoral consequences. It is believed that when a cause receives national media attention, the message to policy makers carries added weight because they know that millions of voters have been sensitized to the issues. Therefore, public-opinion campaigning is largely geared to attracting media attention and thereby gaining wider influence.

Direct Action/Protest

Direct action refers to a political strategy, is also another method through which pressure groups directly exert influence on government without any mediators. Direct action includes, protest demonstrations, strikes, blockades, boycotts and march etc. which might be regarded as legitimate or illegitimate tactics, depending upon the nature of the political system. This action is most often is resorted by the customary groups who denied formal access to government. For example, at least until the 19th century, the masses were excluded from recognized channels of political influences. As a result of it, Outbreaks of violence was, may still be, the only way of expressing grievances of the people who have lost hope in the government. People started doing demonstrations in order to mobilize popular support for the group’s cause. For example, in 1980’s, a massive popular protest signaled the end of communism in Eastern Europe. Moreover, due to protest, international terrorism centered on the Middle East, has proved to be an effective way of using the media to attract global attention to a group’s cause. In recent times, the gay rights and environmental demonstrations in the USA are such activities (Hague, et.al.,1992 p119).

It is also observed that sometimes pressures groups tend to turn to use of violent of an illegitimate method if they do believe it is justified and it will lead to success. Moreover, if they think that the government is illegitimate and that the cause of their discontent is justified. In this situation, they will more readily turn to political violence if there are no other means of bringing about change (Almond, et.al., 2004, p74). For instance, a massive truckers strike helped bring down the government in Chile in 1972, and 1973. Similarly in 2001, a violent protest in Seattle and Genoa against the World Trade Organization and Globalization involved highly organized activities among some of the more radical groups participating in the protest (ibid).11

Summing Up

Despite all the fact the existence of pressure groups are now indispensable and helpful elements of democratic setup. It is an organized group which has one of its principal purposes exercising influence on government in order to secure decisions favorable to the interests of the group’s represents or to discourage decisions from being taken which would be unfavorable to those interests. These groups also promote national and particular interests constitute a link of communication between citizen and the government. They provide all necessary information and keep the nation politically alive.

No doubt, these groups carry out a range of functions/ roles in the democratic states i.e. provides representation, creating opportunities for political participation, educating the electorate, contribute to the formulation of policy and, in some circumstances help to implement government policy. Moreover in order to present their demands to the government, they also exert influence in a variety of ways which include, contacts with ministers and senior civil servants, lobbying Parliament, developing links with political parties, public-opinion or media campaigns, and the use of direct action. Apart from it, while describing the importance of pressure groups, some commentators argue that today the society has become highly complexand individual cannot pursue their interest on their own, they need a pressure group for this. In this regard, a scholar Tom Driberge said you have only two options with pressure group in a democratic country, if you agreed with it then accept it and embrace it and if you are not agreed then ignore it. Thus, pressure groups are so vital that they are not confined to need of developed or developing nation or any form of government.

Endnotes

• 1 For example, the Abolition Society which was founded in Britain in 1787 to oppose the slave trade. The Anti-Corn Law League established in 1839, was set up with a purposes of exerting pressure on government. Similarly in USA, by 1830s, Alexis de Tocqueville reported that what he called association had already become a ‘powerful instrument of action’ and in France in 1866, the Society for Women’s Rights was founded which stimulated the formation of a worldwide women’s suffrage movement (Haywood, 1997, p252).
• 2 It was widely asserted that business groups, trade unions, form lobbies, parties and single issue protest groups taking up causes ranging from consumer protection to animal rights and form sexual equality to environment protection, were a product of the explosion in pressure and protest politics that has occurred since the 1960s (ibid).
• 3 For instance, British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection – campaigning to halt the breeding and use of animals in experiments; British Roads Federation– aiming to focus attention for a higher standard of service from the UK road network; Earth First– campaigning against the destruction of the environment; Liberty– campaigning to defend and extend human rights and civil liberties; Unison– Trade Union for Public Sector Workers; National Union of Students (NUS); National Union of Teachers (NUT); National Farmer’s Union (NFU); British Medical Association (BMA); Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR); Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA); National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC).
• 4 Political parties are permanent organizations which contest elections; usually they seek to occupy the decisive positions of atuprity within the state. In weber’s phrase, parties live ‘in a house of power’ (Hague, et.al., 1992, p131)
• 5 For example, a Michagan Fountain pen collectors club is an interest group that meets once a week to have fountain pen shows competition, gives prizes and awards ribbions and discuses articles in the widely read publication pen world. This group is obviously a nonpolitical in nature (Mehler, 2008, p153).
• 6 In America, there is was an association known as The American Automobile Association (AAA) provides its members with a numbers of benefits like maps, car insurance, tow services etc. Few years later, on occasions, The AAA has become a politically active when the American government was considering an extra tax on gasoline. Therefore, the AAA Started acting on behalf of its members, lobbied effectively against such a tax (ibid, p154)

7Communal groups also become important to politics, especially in the post communist world where ethnic and religious identities provide major focus. For example, a conflict between Muslims and Christians in former Yugoslavia ( Hague, et.al., 1992, p115).

8 Functional representation means the representation of groups based on their function within the economy or society, i.e. includes industries, professionals, workers and so on.

References

• Almond, Gabrial A., et.al. (2007), Comparative Politics: A world View, (Eight Edition), Pearson Publication, New Delhi.
• Almond, Gabriel A. (1958), ‘Research Note: A Comparative Study of Interest Groups and the Political Process’, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 52, No. 1, March, pp 270-282 at http://www.jstor.org/stable/1953045 accessed on 31/08/2013.
• Calvert, Peter (1993), An Introduction to Comparative Politics, Harvester Wheatsheaf, new York.
• Hague, R., Harrop M. and Shaun Breslin (1992), Comparative Government and Politics: An Introduction, Sixth Edition, Macmillan Publishers Limited, New York.
• ——————(2004), Comparative Government and Politics: An Introduction, Sixth Edition, Macmillan Publishers Limited, New York.
• Haywood, Andrew (2005), Key Concepts in Politics, Palgrave Macmillan Publishers, New York, America.
• Haywood, Andrew (1997), Politics, Palgrave Macmillan Publishers,  London.
• Mehler, Gregory S. (2008), Comparative Politics: An Institutional and Cross-National Approach, (Fifth Edition), Pearson Publication, New Delhi.
• Richard W. Gable (1958), ‘Interest Groups as Policy Shapers’ Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 319, Unofficial Government: Pressure Groups and Lobbies, September, pp 84-93 at http://www.jstor.org/stable/1032439 accessed on 31/08/2013.