Blog Discussion Group Two
Please answer one question from the following list. Blog "post" due at 11:55pm on October 1 and "comment" due at 11:55pm on October 4.
Presidentialism & Parliamentarism
1. Which is more democratic: presidentialism or parliamentarism?
2. Should the Unites States change its single member district/plurality system for elections to the House of Representatives to a proportional representation system?
Presidentialism & Parliamentarism
1. Which is more democratic: presidentialism or parliamentarism?
2. Should the Unites States change its single member district/plurality system for elections to the House of Representatives to a proportional representation system?
1. Which is more democratic: Presidentialism or Parliamentary?
ReplyDeleteThis question is difficult to examine since both have similarities and differences. Especially since both were discussed in class. So, if one is better for democracy it is up for debate obviously. The checks and balances seem to be on both sides and both are scrutinized equally under a magnifying glass. According to the text Essentials of Comparative Politics by Patrick H. O’Neil the presidential system is in which the head of government and state are combined in an executive office. Also, the presidential system includes:
• a president can only server a fixed term
• dates of election cannot be changed usually
• presidents can only be removed by malfeasance
Now moving onto the Parliamentary system. This system has attributes that one can deem the better of the two. Since, this system has the head of state and government are assigned to separate offices, but keep a close “eye” on each other So, corruption would be difficult if offices are combined. This system would be a better democratic model which includes:
• prime ministers and their cabinets come out of the legislature
• the legislature is also the instrument that elects and removes the prime minister from office
• overwhelming majority of power resides with the head of government
1. Which is more democratic: Presidentialism or Parliamentary?
ReplyDeleteI believe that a Presidential government is more democratic than a Parliamentary system because most of the power is left to the people in a Presidential government. In a Presidential system, the people are able to elect the Senate and the executive leader. This theoretically should give the people the most power because they are able to elect two separate branches. While in a Parliamentary system, the people elect the Senate, and then the Senate will elect the executive leader and will be able to elect new executive leaders if they feel the current leader is not doing a good enough job. While this question is subjective in my opinion, I believe that the Parliamentary system would not more democratic than a Presidential system strictly because the Presidential system allows the people to have more power.
This is a very good question. According to the reading chapter 5 specifically a democracy is defined as a political power exercised either directly or indirectly by the people through participation, competition and liberty. Lets take it back to the origins, public participation was a concept that came from the Greeks and the Athenians. Public participation allowed the public to participate directly in the affairs of the government, make governing decisions and choose policies. Also, keep in mind that a democracy allows for civil society and consists with executive such as head of state or government, a legislature where natural laws are considered and debated and a judicial review which upholds law while maintaining to the Constitution according to the reading.
ReplyDeleteParlimentarism
They are found in most of the democracies around the world but compose of two basic elements, the prime minister and their cabinets, and the legislature that is responsible for electing and removing the prime minister. They can also inherit office. In this system of Government the public does not directly elect the leader as it is left up to the parties therefore they have no specified time in office. The prime ministers can call elections when its most beneficial to them in spite of the Constitution advising when the elections can take place. The legislatures and the judiciaries take back seat to the prime minister and the idea of checks and balances is subordinated to power therefore guaranteeing greater political autonomy.
Presidential Systems
Make up a small minority of democratic systems around the world. The president is directly elected by the public for a fixed term and has control over the legislature and cabinet. They serve for a fixed term as well. The president in an important national symbol, can draw on any body of popular support, choose a cabinet (not all members of the legislature).
I feel that the presidential system is more of a democracy because of public participation of the people and going back to a democracies original roots the democracy allowed for public participation.
Keely
1. This question is a difficult one due to it's complexity. It is entirely dependent on how you define the word "democratic," and what you believe the aims of government should be. At first glance, Presidential systems may be more traditionally 'democratic,' if you define democracy as direct election. As O'Neil writes in chapter 4, one of the more democratic factors of a presidential system is that voters get the opportunity to select both the head of government and the legislature as opposed to a parliamentary system in which voters would only choose the legislature. However, if you define 'democratic' as best expressing the will of the voters, then parlimentarism would have the advantage. In a parliamentary system, prime ministers must represent the will of the majority party/coalition and in this way are more beholden to the voters. Because parties are more disciplined, voters can trust that the party they vote for will act on the stated values. They can trust that if a Prime Minister strays too far out of line, the parliament will elect a new one. Parlimentarism may also be more democratic because it is rare that the majority party will have a complete majority of parliament. This means that any Prime Minister will have to balance the concerns of different parties and be more restricted in the type of legislation they can pursue. Coalition governments will also be more probable meaning that different parties can commit to the same goals and bipartisan legislation will be more likely to get passed.
ReplyDeleteDepending on who you are one of these systems will seem more democratic than the other but both can be argued to be more democratic. Changing a legislative body to a PM electoral system and not an SMD "winner take all" system, is a good way to make systems more democratic. Under a presidential system the "Ranked Choice" system is the most democratic because it weighs voters preferences and does not lead to an undemocratic two-party system such as the one in the US.
2. The U.S should absolutely change it's single member district member electoral model to a more democratic PR system when it comes to the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives is supposed to be the most tied to the public and it is hard for real ties to be established when almost all representatives are part of two-corporate neoliberal parties. Voters with more specific beliefs and values must essentially choose between the lesser of two evils or risk 'wasting' their vote every election cycle. PR systems would lead to more small parties in Congress and a wider variety of political representation. This would strengthen our representative democracy and most likely increase participation in voting since everybody could find a party that represented them.
I did look at democratic in the multiple perspectives that you did, and this made the question far more complex than it looked at the surface. I enjoyed how you included sources in your response to help provide evidence to support your claim. I also agreed that Presidentialism is more democratic, but was intrigued by your analysis of Parliamentalism.
DeleteCade,
DeleteI did not examine the question in the same way that you did, and it offers an interesting perspective. When looking at parlimentarism and presidentialism in the same was as you did my answer is a little different. I also liked how you introduced the idea of changing the current system to make it more democratic, this is an interesting thought.
1. Which is more democratic: presidentialism or parliamentarism?
ReplyDeletePresidentialism and Parlimentarism hold similar interest. Both are forms of representative government that are elected by the citizens of the nation. Both political views has one leader that is the head of government. I believe that Presidentialism is more democratic than parliamentarism. This is because in a presidential government the people get to vote for senate and executive leaders. Meanwhile, parliamentary government only the legislature is directly elected by the people. With the lack of voice from the citizens under a parliamentary system the presidential system will have more democracy due to the voice citizens have.
Tevin,
DeleteI agree with you that they are similar in that they hold elections, but don't you think parliamentarism is more democratic since more people are represented by government? The possibility for more political parties represents more people and of that, more people can vote.
^Ethan commented
Delete1. Which is more democratic: presidentialism or parliamentarism?
ReplyDeletePresidentialism represents a majority rule. A winner takes all election system. By contrast, a parlimentariasm is based on participation or party politics. Elections are based on proportionalism. By these standards I think parliamentarianism would be more democratic because it would mean that more voters are represented.
I agree that parliamentarism is better but it may not be necessarily more democratic since voters do not choose the executive. Some parliaments may still be determined by winner-take-all single member districts such as in Britain. Also some presidential systems could be made more democratic by methods like ranked-choice voting. I would wonder what your thoughts are on checks-and-balances under parliament systems and if you believe checks and balances to be necessary for democracy?
Delete1. Which is more democratic: presidentialism or parliamentarism?
ReplyDeletePresidentialism enforces majoritarian rule in government and requires election by people. If for example only 42% of people vote for a candidate that wins, then only 42% of the population is then represented politically. The participation in government for all people and by the people is then only 42%. This discourages participation and representation for ALL people. On top of this, all people are required to “endure” the president that they now have a contract with, for a full term barring an exceptional circumstance like impeachment. This is the way the United States operates as a democracy and is why we are branded now as a failed or “flawed” democracy.
Harriet Agerholm. 2018. “America Is Not a 'Full' Democracy, Report Finds.” The Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/america-democracy-rated-donald-trump-not-fully-democratic-us-president-report-the-economist-a8195121.html (October 1, 2019).
Parliamentarism is most democratic as compared to presidentialism because it encourages political and economic participation allowing for the most involvement of the people. Through a multiple party system, there is proportionate representation in a parliamentary system meaning there is a higher turnout for voting and control of the government changes based on the number of seats a party has. Because more people are represented, more is done for all of the citizens within this form of government. Lastly, there is the ability to change the leader of the government through a vote of confidence. This can end the contract with the elected leader at anytime confidence is lost, thereby ensuring a certain level of accountability between the people and their prime minister.
Ethan Wickliff ^
DeleteThe more democratic system would have to be presidentialism. Presidentialism is more democratic because the president and legislature serve for fixed terms. These terms are then directly elected by the people. If you take a look at parlimentary systems, the prime minister is the head of the government. This person is not simply elected by the people and directly put in office, the individual must come up through the ranks of the respective party. The House of Representatives should change its way of elections to the proportional representation system for smaller parties in Congress to have a more narrow beliefs' set to nourish the views on democracy.
ReplyDeleteHi Ellis!
DeleteI agree that Presidentialism is more Democratic than parliamentary systems because the head of office is elected through the people. Presidentialism allows the people's voices and opinions to be considered unlike the Parliamentary who's head is chosen by the currently elected officials and whose head can only be elected and removed by other elected officials. The system works for the elected officials that are in office and not the people.
Keely
1. Which is more democratic: presidentialism or parliamentarism?
ReplyDeleteThis question has many different aspects and ways that "democratic" can be defined. I think that write off the bat presidentialism can be defined as more democratic than parlimentarism. Presidentialism requires a direct election by the people which can be considered more democratic. Another aspect that makes presidentialism more democratic is the separation of powers and checks and balances. The separation of powers and checks and balances make it so that the elected leaser does not have all of the power, each branch of the government has power and the ability to 'check' the other branches. The separation of powers means that power is divided so that neither group can govern alone, and ideally they should govern together. Parlimentarism is the type of government when the legislature elects one person to be the leader. This system could be considered less democratic because the leader is appointed and not elected by the people, so the leader may not have the same values of the majority of the population. Therefore I think that presidentialism is more democratic because there are systems in which the leader can be checked and not hold all of the power and the leader is directly elected by the majority vote.
I agree that democratic can be defined in numerous of ways and that presidentialism can be defined as more democratic than parlimentarism. The power that the people get under a presidentialism government it's evident that presidentialism is more democratic.
Delete