During every crisis of representative democracy there is a surge of demands for more direct forms of participation. Whether it is the populist movement at the end of the 19th century in the US or the 5 Star Movement in current-day Italy — discontent with the representative system increases demands for alternative institutions. But what explains the position of the main actor in the formulation of these demands? We ask why political parties call and/or support direct democracy. We provide three major motivations: strategy, ideology, and opportunity. Based on Party Manifesto Data and additional newly collected data we show how strategic motivations seem to account for most changes in party positions towards direct democracy. These results contribute to the literature on institutional origins as well as it helps to better understand whether direct democracy is endogenous with certain outcomes or not.