0% found this document useful (0 votes)
16 views24 pages

State Institutions and Political Values Analysis

This document discusses different models of government and their implications for national unity and political values. It contrasts unitary and federal states, and examines various executive-legislative arrangements like parliamentary, presidential, and semi-presidential systems. It also analyzes factors that influence ethnic conflict, such as social cleavages, new democracies, and constitutional choices. Lijphart's consociational model recommends power-sharing institutions to manage conflict in divided societies.
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
16 views24 pages

State Institutions and Political Values Analysis

This document discusses different models of government and their implications for national unity and political values. It contrasts unitary and federal states, and examines various executive-legislative arrangements like parliamentary, presidential, and semi-presidential systems. It also analyzes factors that influence ethnic conflict, such as social cleavages, new democracies, and constitutional choices. Lijphart's consociational model recommends power-sharing institutions to manage conflict in divided societies.
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

State Institutions and Political Values

Building National Unity and Understanding Variance within Regime Types

Role of Constitutions
Relationship between the state and its citizens
Define citizenship Political rights & civil liberties

Relationships of power among state institutions


Executive/legislative Judiciary Bureaucracy Military

Does changing a constitution indicate regime change?


Yes: when fundamental changes in the relationship between the state and society are implemented
Example: South Africa, 1996

No: when changes are limited to relationships among state institutions


Example: France, 1958

Degree of Centralized Power: Unitary & Federal States


Unitary state: Central (national) government holds ultimate authority over local administrative units
Federal state: Combines a relatively strong central government with meaningful (autonomous) authority granted to local governments

United States: A Federal State


Article 1, Section 9: Limits on Congressional power
Article 4, Section 1: Recognition of the power and autonomy of states over federal government Amendment 10:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Amendment 14: Limits states on restricting federallymandated individual rights

Uzbekistan: A Unitary State


Article 15:
Mandates the unconditional supremacy of the Constitution and national state

Article 78:
Parliament can abolish any region at any time

Article 102:
Governors of the regions are appointed and dismissed by the President

Institutionalizing Executive Functions


Head of State
Primarily ceremonial office Some (very) limited powers Serves as a symbol of national unity

Head of Government
Chief political officer--sets political agenda Often commands armed forces

Executive-Legislative Arrangements
Parliamentary system
Presidential system Semi-presidential/ hybrid system

Parliamentary Arrangements
United Kingdom
Queen of England (hereditarynot elected) Prime Minister (Queen appoints, Parliament ratifies) No separation of powers

Italy
President (appointed by Parliament) Prime Minister (President appoints, Parliament ratifies) No separation of powers

Presidential Arrangements
United States
US President (elected by Electoral College) Serves as both head of state and head of government Separation of powers employed

Semi-Presidential Arrangements (Dual Executive)


France
French President (directly elected by people) Prime Minister (appointed by President, ratified by parliament) Separation of powers depends on electoral outcomes

Power of the Civil Service


Distance of civil service heads to chief political officers varies among countries
US President: 10,000+ appointments (6,500 directly)

UK Prime Minister appoints fewer than 1,000 offices

Instability in government increases bureaucratic power


Japan under the LDP (1950-93) Argentina under the junta (1966-73)

Size of Bureaucracy as an Indicator of Power


As percentage of labor force
Denmark and Sweden (just over 30%) UK and France (approximately 20%) US and Germany (approximately 15%) Japan (approximately 6%)

When does the military become an active, autonomous actor?


Circumstances:
Weak institutions allowing for personal ambition Severe social divisions present within society

Vehicles:
Active role for the military institutionalized through the constitution Active role based on cultural understandings of traditional authority

Examples: Turkey and Pakistan

Defining a Nation
Political community, imagined as both limited and sovereign (Anderson 1991)
State institutions give our imaginations structure Emotional/ psychological components: past, present, future

Multinational States are the Norm


Japan (99% Japanese)
Russia (79.8% Russian)

Belgium
58% Fleming 31% Walloon 11% Mixed or other

Bosnia-Herzegovina
48% Bosnian/ Muslim 37% Serb/ Orthodox 14% Croat/ Catholic

Three Hypotheses on Ethnic Conflict


The more homogeneous a states citizens, the less likely ethnic conflict will occur
Ethnic conflict is more likely in states with polarized (as opposed to cross-cutting) social cleavage structures

Ethnic conflict is more likely to occur in new democracies rather than in consolidated democracies OR undemocratic regimes

Lijpharts Hypothesis on Divided Societies


Assumption: ethnic conflict can only be overcome through a democratic regime Constitutional choices are causally related to the level of conflict in divided societies

Lijpharts Recommendations
Electoral System
How votes are translated into seats Recommends Proportional Representation

Parliamentary Organization of the Executive Local governing authority (federalism or special autonomy zones) Power-sharing outside Cabinet & Parliament

Political Values & Procedure: Majoritarian Model


Institutions consolidate majority power
strong executive few political parties few restrictions on civil society multiple access points for participation

Compatible with cross-cutting cleavages

Parliamentary Systems may also advance majoritarian values


1. Electoral laws that favor two-party competition (regularly return a majority government)
2. Prime minister independence with appointments 3. Difficult vote of confidence rules

United Kingdom follows (1) and (2) while Germany follows (1) and (3)

Political Values & Procedure: Consociational Model


Institutions designed for power-sharing
divided or weaken executive incentives for multiple parties regulated civil society few access points for participation

Compatible with polarizing cleavages

Presidential Systems may also advance consociational values


1. Electoral laws that favor multi-party systems
2. Special provisions for minority parties/ voices

3. Divided head of government office


Bosnia-Herzegovina follows all three while Switzerland follows (1) and (3)

Presidential-Parliamentary Systems
Allows fluctuation between the two sets of values
IF parliament reflects a majority of presidents party: majoritarian IF parliament reflects a majority not of the presidents party: consociational

IF no majority sits in parliament, political process ensues and determines values

You might also like