Since the lifting of the ban of political parties in Uganda there are 33 registered parties. Six of these; NRM, DP, Justice Forum, UPC, CP and FDC have representatives in parliament. They can, therefore, be termed as active parties.

A political party is the major organising principle of modern politics. Parties are so fundamental to the operation of politics as we know it today that their role and significance is often taken for granted.

Yet, as political machines organissed to win elections and power, political parties are a new phenomenon. They only came up in the early 19th century. They appeared first in the US and then in France in conjunction with the democratic revolutions of 1776 and 1789 respectively.

Giovanni Sartori defines a political party as "any political group that present at elections and is capable of placing through elections, candidates for public office."

All parties need members. Political parties in Uganda, even the older ones are out recruiting new membership having spent 20 years in limbo. The exercise has varied from aggressive (public and widely covered by the press) like the case of FDC, to penetrative (quiet and targeted) like in the case of Justice Forum. While each method has its own merits and demerits, the goal is the same: to grow membership.

Things are getting a bit fluid. Days after a few Lango big-wigs, formerly UPC and now disgruntled, pledged their support to FDC, 160 youths in Bunyoro crossed from FDC to the ruling NRM.

But as each of the 33 political parties approach you for membership, you may wish to know the type of party that you are joining, or if you are already a member of a party, to understand its nature and classification. This is important because party membership has implications.

Duverger (1963) classifies parties by organization. He notes that most modern, competitive parties can be classified as a cadre, mass or devotee, depending on how they are organised.

The term 'cadre' as used today denotes trained and professional party members who are expected to exhibit a high level of political commitment and doctrinal discipline. The early NRM had the character of a cadre party. Today it is more of a mass party than a cadre party.

Mass parties are the opposite of cadre parties. Often from a narrow and well defined ideological base, they appeal to "everybody", workers, peasant, religious groups etc. Instead of relying on a parliamentary caucus or party notables for organisation, they develop an active and involved hierarchy with "grassroots" branches throughout the country. To avoid relying on "notables" for financial assistance, party membership is formalised and members pay regular dues (Jackson, 1997). Uganda's FDC is a typical mass party.

In the devotee party, a charismatic leader, along with ruling elite, directs and controls the party. Rather than having open membership like mass parties, devote parties are more selective in recruitment, providing a probationary period to test the prospective member's loyalty and ideological orthoxy.

And rather than develop branches throughout the electorate and direct them from the centre, they build up a pyramidal structure with a wide base of cells extending up to the highest leadership. In Uganda, JEEMA is the closet to a devotee party but instead of "charismatic leader" it uses "knowledgeable leader" at the top of the hierarchy.

JEEMA seems to be suspicious of charisma per se as it can often breed demagoguery. Another way to categorise parties in by their ideological basis.

Otto (1996) distinguishes the "catch all" party from those with high degree of ideology. Catch all parties do not hold any strong ideological prescriptions. They focus on maximising votes- their platform becomes like large vessels filled with a many popular ideas as possible.

The Republican and Democratic parties of the United States are typical catch all parties. In Uganda, the NRM, FDC, CP and DP can be described as catch all parties.

Ideological parties tend to have specific interests and voter appeal. In Uganda two parties come very close but do not entirely fit this model: UPC and JEEMA.

In conclusion, there is no single type of party that is inherently superior to the other, parties are designed to capture power. How they organise themselves should be a matter of choice. Some parties can even swing from one model to another, depending on circumstances.