The Majority Model of Democracy: the Aim of Political Party in Power - Essay Example

Order 418724 Topic: Comparative Politics Midterm Essay Introduction: All countries, big or small, have their systems of governance. A system is not static; it is always in the process of evolution. The best of the constitutions are amended from time to time, depending on the demands of the situations, social and economic developments in a country. Political Science is concerned with the study of such systems of governance. As Mark Kesselman and other authors observe, “....political science is particularly concerned with the study of power: how it is gained, lost, used, abused, organized, distributed, and contested.”(5) What is "majoritarian" about the Majoritarian model? The answer to this question is simple and straightforward. This is the most popular pattern of democracy, practical from the functional point of view of the government in power. In a democracy, the political party that wins the election, turns to be the powerful chair and the party/parties those are defeated turn to be chair-less powers! Elucidating this issue further Arend Lijphart writes, “The majoritarianism-consensus contrast arises from the most basic and literal definition of democracy-government by the people or, in representative democracy, government by the representative of the people—and President Abraham Lincolns famous further stipulation that democracy means government not only by but also for the people—that is government in accordance with the peoples preferences.”(1) From the technical point of view, and going the by the rule book of democracy, the issue is clear. The party in majority, rules the country and its decisions are final and legally binding on the people. What is "consensual" about the "Consensus" model? The Consensus Model is to accommodate for the viewpoints of the other party /parties, even though they have lost the election are obliged to sit in the opposition benches. In this model, there is always room for the others. They believe, two heads are better than one. Lijphart throws more light of the functioning of such democracies and he comments, “The alternative answer to the dilemma is: as many as possible. This is the crux of the consensus model. It does not differ from the majoritartian model on accepting that majority rule is better than minority rule, but it accepts majority only as a minimum requirement: instead of being satisfied with narrow decision-making majorities, it seeks to maximize the size of these majorities.”(2) Working as per the guidelines of this model, the majority party does not believe that whatever it decides is correct; rather it is willing to believe and implement, whatever correct is there, belongs to all. Various aspects of the French Constitution and Political system: The French system of government is a semi-presidential system. It greatly values freedom for citizens and at the same time sets the importance on the separation of powers. It is ruled by the Constitution of 1958.The French Constitution does not include a Bill of Rights. But the “Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen” written in 1789, is stated in the Constitution. This declaration was the ignition point of the French Revolution. The motto of the French system of government is liberte, egalite, fraternite, which translates as “liberty, equality, brotherhood.” (What is….) The functioning of the French Government fits into the Consensual Model. Multiple political parties function together. This is done in the form of cooperative coalitions as they would not be in a position to function individually and achieve something tangible, which is good for the people. The parties in power and the parties in opposition, both form coalitions. Any one such group controls the government at a given time. This arrangement of functioning, and the recurring consultation process on the important issues, gives scope to progressive legislation and reform, as many heads and think-tanks of the parties with different ideologies work together for the good of the people and the Nation. As all citizens above the age of 18, are eligible to vote, the youth participation in the electoral process is marked with a competitive edge. In a nutshell, the political system of France is as under: Political system: Unitary republic. Semi presidential system; popularly elected President, popularly elected parliament, and Prime Minister and government appointed by President and responsible to National Assembly. (as well as informally responsible to President.) Regime History: Frequent regime changes since the French Revolution of 1789. Most recently, a dictorial regime based on Vicky collaborated with the Nazis during World War II; the Fourth Republic existed from 1946-1958; and the Fifth Republic, originating in 1958, has become universally accepted. Administrative structure: Unitary, with 22 regions and 100 departments. Executive: Dual Executive: President (five-year term) Prime Minister appointed by President, generally leader of majority coalition in National Assembly, and responsible to National Assembly (as well as informally responsible to President.) Legislature: Bicameral. Senate (upper house) has power to delay legislation passed by lower house and to veto proposed constitutional amendments. National Assembly (lower house) can pass legislation and force government to resign by passing a certain motion. Judiciary: A system of administrative, criminal and civil courts. At the top, a nine-member independent constitutional council named for nonrenewable nine-year terms; President of republic names three members, President of each house of parliament names three. The constitutional council exercises right of judicial review. Party system: Multiparty. (Kesselman, 2008,p.102) Various aspects of the German Constitution and Political system: The Chancellor is the strongman in the German System. His election to the post is through a difficult process, but once he is there, the Chancellor cannot be dismissed by a vote of no confidence. This is the essential difference between the French and German system of governments. But the Chancellor is elected upon the proposal of the President. After the national elections, the newly elected members of the Bundestag elect the Chancellor by a majority vote. Not on the basis of the majority of the members present, but a majority of all elected members needs to be achieved. In six decades, Germany had only 8 Chancellors, which indicates the stability of this procedure of election. In a nutshell, the political system Germany is as under: Political System: Parliamentary democracy. Regime History: After the Third Reich’s defeat, Germany was partitioned and occupied by Allies in 1945. In 1949 the Federal Republic of Germany (FGR) was established in the West, and the German Democratic Republic (GDR) was established in the east. The two German states unified in 1990. Administrative Structure: Federal with 16 states. Germany does not have sharp separation between levels of government. Executive: Ceremonial President is the head of the state, elected for a five year term (with a two-term limit) by the Federal convention. Chancellor is head of government and is a member of the Bundestag and a leader of the majority party or coalition. Legislature: Bicameral. Bundestag (614 members at 2005 federal election) elected via dual-ballot system combining single-member districts and proportional representation. Upper house (Bundesrat) comprised 69 members who are elected and appointed officials from the 16 states. Judiciary: Autonomous and independent. The legal system has three levels: Federal High Court, which is the criminal-civil system; Special constitutional court, dealing with matters affecting basic law; and administrative court, consisting of labor, social security, and finance courts. Party System: Multiparty.(Kesselman, 2008,p.160) Like any democratic political system, the German has its strengths and weaknesses. Its decision-making process is consensual. The system, it can be argued, makes the decision-making process cumbersome. This gives scope for backroom political maneuverings. Small groups carry the day with pressure tactics, and impose their viewpoints on the decisions of the big parties etc. But such compulsions of are there in every system in politics. Social scientists have been working on various alternatives for the last many decades to arrive at appropriate results as for describing political variations. In 1950,Leonard W. Ferguson made an analysis of political values in which he used ten scales measuring attitudes toward: Birth control Capital punishment Censorship Communism Evolution Law Patriotism Theism Treatment of criminals War There has been recurring changes/additions in the spectrum of political models, in the light of the economic developments, changing ideologies, the industrial and internet revolution etc. The scale and the methods of measuring them have undergone changes in the light of such developments. Some of the additional axes include: Focus of political concern: Communitarianism vs. Individualism. Role of the church: Clericalism vs. Anti-clericalism. Urban vs. rural: Foreign policy: interventionism vs. non-interventionism Multilateralism vs. isolationism and unilateralism Political violence: pacifism vs. militancy Foreign trade: globalization vs. autarky. Also called Free trade vs. Protectionism. Trade freedom vs. trade equity. Diversity: multiculturalism vs. assimilationism or nationalism Participation: Democracy vs. Aristocracy vs. Tyranny Freedom: Positive liberty vs. Negative liberty Social power: Totalitarianism vs. Anarchism (Control vs. No Control) Change: radicals vs. conservatives vs. reactionaries Origin of state authority: popular sovereignty vs. various forms of absolutism and organic state philosophy. International action: Multilateralism vs. Unilateralism Levels of sovereignty: unionism vs. federalism vs. separatism; or centralism vs. regionalism. European Integration (in Europe): Euroscepticism vs. European federalism. nation state vs. multi-national state. Comparison between France and German Political systems: In the light of the above information provided, it is difficult to bracket the German and French political systems as Majoriotarian Model or the Consensual Model. They draw from both the systems. Political governance is not for the purpose of conforming to any model. Every deviation is possible, depending upon the compulsion of the circumstances. A politician loves power and chair. To secure his position, one makes appropriate adjustments as per the demand of the situation. However, not all politicians do the unprincipled approach for the sake of retaining power. But realignments, resignations in case of major disagreements amongst the coalition partners, are part of the democratic governance, which both the countries adhere to. France is governed by a Presidential republic with a centralized national government. It has the same constitutional regime since 1958, with the introduction of the Fifth Republic as introduced by President Charles De gaulle. The constitutional amendments increased the powers of the President and decreased the control of the parliament. Under the French-Hybrid System, the President elected separately, chooses a Cabinet and the Prime Minister. The President cannot be removed by the legislature. But it can dissolve parliament by removing the Prime Minister and the cabinet .The President can dissolve the lower house. The supremacy of the Executive is evident in the system. The recommendations on drafting of legislation are made by Executive, both the Houses, Appointed bodies like the Economic and Social Commission. MPs have no powers to introduce any bill involving finances, that which involve raising or reducing expenditures. Executive-sponsored bills take precedence over member bills. In German-semi-parliamentary system, the legislature can dissolve parliament, remove the Chancellor and cabinet, if in a position to select a new Chancellor simultaneously. Majority of the bills passed are introduced by Executive. The President has the power to issue “Decrees” which are equivalent to law, without the consent of the legislature. According to Wilson, among others, France and Germany “are also the countries that are most often used in introductory courses in comparative politics because of their international stature or the particular political features that they illustrate. The countries offer a range of political experience that allows comparisons of issues such as historical impact on contemporary politics, development, change, legitimacy, democratization, and political performance.”(Introduction) Conclusion: As Lijphart points out, “A closely related difference is that the majoritan model of democracy is exclusive, competitive, and adversial, whereas the consensus model is characterized by inclusiveness, bargaining, and compromise; for this reason, consensus democracy could also be termed “negotiation democracy.”(2) Whether France of Germany, the aim of political party in power is to stay in power. At all times, and occasionally at all costs! Turn the pages of history of both these countries. One will get ample examples to prove this point! Works Cited: Kesselman, Mark(Author), Krieger, Joel(Author), Joseph, William A(Author), Abrahamian, Ervand(Author), Basu, Amrita(Author).Introduction to Comparative Politics, Brief Edition; Wadsworth Publishing; 1 edition, March 18, 2008. Lijphart, Arend. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries; Yale University Press, July 11, 1999. What is the French System of Government? Retrieved on March 4, 2010 Wilson, Frank L. Concepts and Issues in Comparative Politics: An Introduction to Comparative Analysis; Prentice Hall; 2 edition, November 4, 2001. Read More