Forms of Government and Political Systems: An Introduction
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Political System and Its Elements
1. The Political System and Its Study
Forms of political expression refer to the diverse ways humans have organized their political lives throughout history. These forms of political organization, comparable (with reservations) to the political system, encompass a broad spectrum of structures and processes.
Political science, as a modern discipline with its own sphere, object, specific methods, and differentiation, emerged in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It adopted an inductive approach based on observation and measurement, focusing on new themes such as power relations, political behavior of citizens and elites, attitudes, opinions, and political processes.
Over time, political science has undergone various shifts and turns, influencing how it approaches its elusive and polysemous (multiple meanings) object of knowledge.
The notion of a political system originates from systems theory, developed in sociology through the work of Talcott Parsons. In the 1950s, David Easton introduced this paradigm to political science, moving away from the Parsonian conception that viewed the political arena as a subsystem of society. Easton (1973) proposed a conceptual orientation grounded in an integrated set of categories, allowing for the empirical interpretation of political life as a system of conduct. The aim was to study how a system persists within its given political environment and reacts to influences and tensions.
A political system endures if it fulfills two basic functions: assigning values within a society and ensuring that most members accept these allocations as binding, at least most of the time.
The political system exists within a real environment (total ambient) crucial for its survival. This environment facilitates reciprocal interactions and exchanges, subjecting the political system to various influences, tensions, and disturbances. These influences, according to Easton’s analysis, take the form of inputs (support for the political system and its authorities, if positive, and demands, if negative). The system reacts to these influences and plans its response to the environment in the form of outputs – binding decisions and policies that, in turn, affect the environment, causing a response that takes the form of a new set of inputs to the political system.
In this circular process, information about the effects of each decision and reaction, in the form of new inputs, is critical for authorities to respond adequately. This establishes a feedback loop, the study and understanding of which helps explain how the political system copes with stress and reacts with new outputs, maintaining a level of support above the minimum necessary for its survival.
2. Form of Government and Political System
The expression “form of government” has been used in various ways but now denotes the relationship between parliament and government in contemporary democratic regimes. It primarily distinguishes between parliamentary and presidential systems, with the semi-presidential model added as a variant of the latter.
The parliamentary system is characterized by a single institution (the parliament) deriving legitimacy through direct election by citizens. The elected parliament determines the prime minister, who always depends on the confidence of the House. The prime minister can typically dissolve parliament and call new elections, highlighting the close connection between the executive and legislative branches and blurring the separation of powers.
In a parliamentary system, the government and parliament work closely. The government needs parliamentary support for decision-making due to its dependence on the legislature. The parliament, in turn, considers and approves government-proposed laws and proposals from its members. As an expression of this dependence, the parliament controls the government’s actions through various mechanisms, ranging from written questions to the prime minister to executive control in the full House, potentially leading to a vote of no confidence.
Collective cabinet membership is a common feature of parliamentary systems. The prime minister, enjoying the parliament’s confidence, typically appoints ministers to the cabinet, acting as a first among equals. Responsibility is collective, although the prime minister holds a prominent role in authority and political responsibility.
In most parliamentary systems, the Head of State plays a largely symbolic role, with reserved functions of arbitration and mediation between the executive and legislative branches.
Presidential systems feature two powers with direct legitimacy: the parliament (legislative function) and the President (Head of State and executive), elected separately by citizens. There is a clear separation of powers. Consequently, no parliamentary control mechanisms exist for the president, and the president cannot dissolve Congress or call new elections. The president has full authority to appoint government members, who sometimes act as advisors, as only the president is responsible for policy decisions made to the electorate.
The dual source of legitimacy and distinct designation mechanisms in presidential systems can lead to scenarios where the parliamentary majority and the president belong to different political persuasions. This can cause institutional gridlock, often resolved by the parliament’s ability to veto legislative measures.