Liberal Democracy in Russia, France - Essay Example

?REFERRING TO AT LEAST THREE OF THE CASE STUDY COUNTRIES,’ LIBERAL DEMOCRACY IS AN IDEAL WHICH MANY COUNTRIES BELIEVE IN BUT SELDOM ACHIEVE’ name Course title Institution’s name: Date of submission: Liberal democracy is presumed to be the actual delivery of liberal democratic values as opposed to government efficacy and regime longevity. Liberal democracy is evaluated by examining the level in which liberal democratic governments acquire the values and practices endorsed by liberal democracy principles (Moore, 2009, p. 79). In the procedural and minimal fashion, liberal democratic government entails a political system involving political parties which compete for the management and control of the government through free and fair elections. Liberal democratic execution and performance incorporates the practices of the existing liberal governments. Moreover, there are some international standards that any government must fulfill to qualify as a liberal democratic government. However, differences experienced in liberal democracies globally are brought about by variations in the implementation of liberal democratic principles. The comparison between liberal democracies in the world governments is exceedingly complicated by the existing differences in the definition of the term in diverse political, social, and economical settings. However, liberal democracy principles are universally based on the three main principles, the regime longevity or endurance, liberal democratic value delivery and government efficacy (Skinner 1998, p. 89). Various countries have a strong acuity on the liberal democracy principles, its standards and importance in political, social and economic development. However, a good number of countries that value liberal democracy ideas have a setback in achieving its intended objectives. The essay will entail a case study expounding on the manner in which different countries implement the liberal democracy ideologies and principles. There are some countries that have made significant steps towards achieving liberal democracy. However, others are reasonably far from achieving the objectives set by liberal democracy. Liberal Democracy in the United States of America The United States of America has made significant progress towards the realization of liberal democracy principles in their governance systems. To begin with, the United States of America has federal political institutions comprising of 50 states and the District of Columbia. In a federal government structure like that of the United States, the power of the executive is separated from the judicial functions in line with liberal democracy principles. The constituents have executive self-government powers, which lead to economic inequality among different states in the United States of America (Graham, Farkas and Grady 2007, p. 345). The United States of America president is elected after every four years with a two term limit. Although millions of people participate in the election, the president is not elected directly by the country’s citizens but by 538 highly regarded members of an Electoral College. This is slightly in contrast to the basic tenets of a liberal democracy whereby the general public should have the mandate of electing their leaders including the president as it is the case in Russia and France. In the United States, the Congress which is the country’s legislature is made up of 435 house of representative members and 100 hundred senate members. Each state is represented by two senators for a term of six years. Members in the House of Representatives serve for a period of two years and are elected from single member constituencies. Members of the Congress who are the representatives of the general public have the power to approve the government’s financial outlays as well as legislations. In developing countries, the president has the absolute power of appointing all government officials. In the United States, the president can veto legislations but with the support of two third majority vote in the two chambers of the house. Additionally, to benefit from the fruits of liberal democracy, the United States government system has instituted a very transparent method of appointing high court judges. The judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the president but approval of the Senate. The court also has the mandate of solving all legal and constitutional matters without interference from other powers. It is also under the judicial jurisdiction and mandate to invalidate any action that may conflict with the country’s constitution. In summary, the United States judiciary is fully independent and in full concurrence with the principles of liberal democracy. American politics are based on two major parties, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party as opposed to others countries such as Russia and France that have several political parties. The ideologies of the two parties are based on their origin and underlying principles that have transcended the US political system for generations. The two parties embrace views from all its members and enjoy varying support across the diverse American electorate. However, the country’s constitution does not allow for the formation of more political parties, which is to some extent against the basic values of liberal democracy. Generally, by comparing with other countries such as France and Russia, the United States of America has made remarkable steps toward realizing the ideals of liberal democracy. Liberal Democracy in Russia Despite making notable strides towards the realization of liberal democracy, Russia is still far from achieving authentic liberal democracy. The December 1993 general elections in Russia formed the basis for the current level of liberal democracy in the country. The political transformation of October 1993 did a lot to help liberal politicians to gain decisive victory in the fight for liberal democracy in the country. However, the method applied by Russian politicians was relatively different from the approach employed by the United States of America politicians. The United State of America used systematic approach while Russian politicians relied on radical political transformation. Despite the above notable progress in the Russian democracy, the fundamental changes expected in a liberal democratic government are yet to be achieved in Russia as is the cases in United States of America and France. Some of the authoritarian ideologies and values demonstrated by organizations such as liberal democratic parties, the communist parties of the Russian federation and the Russian communist workers parties are still strong and relevant. In general elections, the authoritarian parties receive majority members in parliament, which perpetuates authoritarian tendencies in the growing democracy. As a result, Russian politics have continued to exhibit more authoritarian ideologies than liberal democracy ideologies. This means that, the Russian politics are yet to achieve total liberal democracy (Vanhanen 2007, p. 91). Conversely, the 1993, success of liberal democracy created radical anti-liberal. A good number of the most influential parties such as Agrarian Party and Communist Party of the Russian Federation and their allies are still against liberal democracy thus delaying full execution of liberal ideologies in the country. Moreover, charismatic leadership in Russia has more influence on the country’s governance than liberal democracy ideologies. This is different from the countries that have adopted liberal democracy such as United States of America and France. The United States populace is more concerned with ideologies rather than charismatic nature of their leaders. The success of liberal Democratic Party in Russia is in most cases brought about by its charismatic leaders like Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Charismatic leaders rely on their political demagogy and emotional appeals at the expense of liberal democracy ideologies. Currently, liberal democrats in Russia are utilizing Yeltsin’s personal charisma and presidential status. However, Yeltsin’s popularity has greatly plummeted due to his stance on economic issues. From the current political developments in Russia, dependence on individual leaders’ personality has severely endangered the Russian liberal democratic reforms. This is due to the fact that, most of the liberal leaders lack the required charisma. Moreover, their organizations are too weak to dominate Russian political sphere (Przeworski, Alvarez, Cheibub and Limongi, 2006, p. 235). Liberal Democracy in France The French liberal democratic history and development is based on warring faction and conquering nation. The beginning of France democratic radical reforms was brought about by the 1789 French revolution. The first French government was introduced during the 1789 revolution but was later overthrown by Napoleon Bonaparte. Three other governments also faced similar fate until 1958. However, it took more than thirty before the realization of liberal democracy in the country. However, the country is yet to enjoy the benefit of a liberal democratic government compared to United States of America. Currently, the French economy is diminishing compared to other liberal democratic countries such as the United States of America, Germany, and Great Britain. France’s annual economic growth has in the recent past faced severe decline compared to other liberal democracies such as Russia and the United States of America. The annual unemployment rate is also rising at an alarming rate. Lack of proper implementation of the liberal democratic ideologies is also reported to have reduced the country’s labor force at a very alarming rate compared to other developed countries such as the United States of America and Russia. Additionally, political liberty in France is negatively affected by some external and internal threats. Pressures from socialist reformists and Muslim factions have significantly hindered liberal democratic development in the country. The terrorist attacks at the World Trade Center are one of the core external factors that have rippled the country democratic development. Since most of the terrorists linked to the attack were suspected to come from Europe, France and United States of America tightened their immigration regulations, interfering with people freedom of movement. The country also introduced a law that restricted Muslims from rioting in the country (Fetzer 2000, p. 121). These laws were however termed as discriminatory regulations that were against the spirit of liberal democracy by the United States of America. Countries with total liberal democracy are always against discriminatory regulations. The current French government-Muslim conflict against the full-body veils bans is also reported to have interfered with the country liberal democracy. Unlike the United States of America and Russia, France has more than twenty one major political parties and other eight minor political parties. Among them, social political parties have in the recent past gained considerable political and legislative powers through grouping together. Socialist parties have demonstrated their commitment towards modernizing and liberalizing the entire French society through French administration and state decentralization. The socialist parties are also in the process of introducing social democracy in the country. This process requires huge amount of resources that may threaten the country’s economic development. The introduction of social democracy has so far posed a big threat to the country’s liberal democratic development. The European Union pressures are also documented as a major threat to France’s political liberty. Despite bringing peace in the European continent, the introduction of European Union has threatened the liberty of some countries in expense of others. Instead of benefiting from the introduction of the European Union as is the case with other member countries, the European Union completely altered the liberal democracy that was enjoyed by French citizens. The regulations governing the operations and activities of the European Union reversed drastically the regulations and policies laid down by French government in their commitment toward realizing total liberal democracy. While politics is to some extent the best method of expanding democratic space, liberal democracy is highly credible for a successful government. In most cases, democracy which lacks constitutional liberalism have very severe consequences including ethic division, abuse of power as well as erosion of civil liberties. In the right of the above discussion, it is clear that, despite the introduction of liberal democracy in global countries, very few countries enjoy full benefit of the initiative. The introduction of liberal democracy in global society has reported a very significant impact in the general development. Developed countries such as the United States of America have reported considerable progress in their commitment towards the implementation of liberal democracy ideologies and principles. However, other developed countries such as France are still fighting to realize full benefits of liberal democracy. To ensure total realization of liberal democracy in global politics ought to come together to eliminate all barriers that interferes with full execution of liberal democracy. References Fetzer, J 2000, Public attitudes toward immigration in the United States, France, and Germany. New York:  Cambridge UP. Graham, L., Farkas, R and Grady, R 2007, The Politics Of Governing: A Comparative Introduction, Washington, DC: CQ Press. Moore, S 2009, The limits of liberal democracy: Politics and religion at the end of modernity, Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press. Przeworski, A., Alvarez, M., Cheibub, J. A. and Limongi, F 2006, ‘What makes democracies endure?’ Journal of Democracy, 7, 38–51. Skinner, Q 1998, “Liberty before Liberalism”, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vanhanen, T 2007, “Prospects for Democracy: a Study of 172 Countries”, London and New York: Routledge. Read More