Comparative Politics : Concept and Model

C
omparative politics is the study and appraisal of domestic politics
across countries. Comparative politics has a long and very eminent
history dating back just before the origin of systematic political studies
in ancient Greece and Rome. Even ancient people, compared their situations
with those of other people's with whom they came in contact. The Bible is
possibly one of the first written statements of comparative politics. The ancient
Greeks performed the earliest systematic comparisons of a more modern and
secular.

Comparative politics is key area in political science, pigeonholed by an

empirical approach based on the comparative method. To put it in another way,
comparative politics is the study of the domestic politics, political institutions,
and conflicts of countries. It often encompasses comparisons among countries
and through time within single countries, emphasizing major patterns of
similarity and difference. Many political theorists like Arend Lijphart argued
that comparative politics does not have a functional focus in itself, instead a
methodological one (Lijphart, Arend,1971). In simple form, comparative
politics is not defined by the object of its study, but by the method it applies to
study political phenomena.

Comparative Politics is pigeonholed by numerous

features. These are mentioned below:
1.Analytical and empirical research
2.Objective study of politics- A value free empirical study-It rejects
normative descriptive methods of comparative government.

3.Study of the infra-structure of politics-Comparative Politics, now

analyses the actual behaviour of individuals; groups structures, sub-systems and
systems in relation to environment. It studies the actual behaviour of all
institutions.

4.Inter-disciplinary focus: Comparative Politics focusses interdisciplinary

approach. It studies politics with the help of other social science like
psychology, sociology, anthropology and economics.
5.It studies political processes in both developed and developing countries. The
biased and parochial nature of traditional studies stands replaced and the study
of political systems of Asia, Africa, and Latin America enjoys equal importance
with the study of African and European political systems.

6.Theory building as the objective: The objective of Comparative

politics study is scientific theory building.

In the field of Comparative politics, the term politics has three connotation such
as political activities, political process and political power. Political activity
consists of the efforts by which the conditions of conflicts are created and
resolved in a way pertaining to the interest of people as far as possible who play
in their part in struggle for power. Political process is an extension of political
activity. Political power is the major topic in comparative politics.

Comparative government studies were used by political researchers to get

correct and valid conclusions regarding the nature and organisation of state and
government. Their major objective was to discover the historical and legal
similarities and dissimilarities among the various governments and their
political institutions. A comparative- normative-prescriptive study of
constitutions was conducted. It was an attempt to recognise the best political
institutions.

When applied to particular fields of study, comparative politics denotes by other

names, such as comparative government (the comparative study of forms of
government) or comparative foreign policy (comparing the foreign policies of
different States in order to establish general empirical connections between the
characteristics of the State and the characteristics of its foreign policy).

Many theorists articulated that "Comparative political science" as a general term

for an area of study, as opposed to a methodology of study, can be seen as
redundant. The political only shows as political when either an overt or tacit
comparison is being made. A study of a single political entity, whether a
society, subculture or period, would demonstrate the political as simple brute
reality without comparison with another society, subculture, or period.

Nature of comparative politics:

Nature and scope of comparative politics is fathomable only when one

understands the main characteristics and significance of comparative
government. Although the two terms 'Comparative Politics' and 'Comparative
Governments' are used lightly and interchangeably, there is distinction between
them. Conventionally, the comparative study of politics stands entitled as
'comparative government'. Comparative government includes the study of
features and legal powers of political institutions existing in various states. It is
the study of state and other political institutions in terms of their legal powers,
functions, and positions on a comparative basis.

Key characteristics of comparative government are mentioned

below:

 Stress upon the study of political institutions of various

countries.
 Focus on the study of major constitutions of the world.
 Emphasis upon the study of powers and functions of
various political institutions working in different
countries.
 Formal study of the organisation and powers, description
of the features of the constitutions and political
institutions, and legal powers of political institutions
form the basic contents of comparative government
study.
 To devise a theory of ideal political institutions has been
the objective.
These traits make comparative government popular area of study during the
beginning of 20th century. Subsequently, Majority of political scientists greatly
displeased with its narrow scope, intuitive methodology, and formal legalistic-
institutional and normative approach. These researchers then adopt
comprehensiveness, realism, precision and scientific study of the processes of
politics as their new goal. Their efforts came to be labelled as comparative
politics.

Basically, the study of comparative politics involves mindful comparisons in

studying; political experiences, institutions, behaviour and processes of major
systems of government. It comprises of the study of even extra constitutional
agencies along with the study of formal governmental organs. It is concerned
with important regularities, similarities and differences in the working of
political behaviour. Consequently, comparative Politics can be defined as the
subject that compare the political systems in various parts of the globe, with a
view to comprehend and define the nature of politics and to devise a scientific
theory of politics.

Traditional approaches:
The traditional approaches to Political Science was broadly predominant till the
occurrence of the Second World War. These approaches were mainly associated
with the traditional outlook of politics which underlined the study of the state
and government. Consequently, traditional approaches are principally
concerned with the study of the organization and activities of the state and
principles and the ideas which motivate political organizations and activities.
These approaches were normative and principled. The political philosophers
supporting these approaches and raised questions such 'what should be an ideal
state?' According to them, the study of Political Science should be limited to the
formal structures of the government, laws, rules and regulations. Therefore, the
supporters of the traditional approaches stress various norms such as what
'ought to be' or 'should be' rather than 'what is'.

Characteristics of Traditional approaches:

 Traditional approaches are mostly normative and stresses on the values of
politics.
 Prominence is on the study of different political structures.
 Traditional approaches made very little attempt to relate theory and
research.
 These approaches consider that since facts and values are closely
interlinked, studies in Political Science can never be scientific.

There are many types of traditional approaches.

1. Historical approach:
This approach states that political theory can be only understood when the
historical factors are taken into consideration. It highlights on the study of
history of every political reality to analyse any situation. Political theorists like
Machiavelli, Sabine and Dunning believed that politics and history are strongly
inter-related, and therefore, the study of politics always should have a historical
viewpoint. Sabine considered that Political Science should include all those
subjects which have been discussed in the writings of different political thinkers
since Plato. History defines about the past as well as links it with the present
events. Without studying the past political events, institutions and political
environment, the analysis of the present would remain largely imperfect.

It is to be prominent that the events must have political revealing or they must
be politically significant. These events provide the best materials upon which
theory and principles of political science are built. History communicates
researchers how government, political parties and many other institutions
worked, their successes and failures and from these, they receive lessons which
guide them in determining the future course of action.

Evaluation of Historical Approach: The historical approach to the study of

politics has numerous challenges from several quarters. One of the main
fulcrums of the challenges is that history has two faces. One is documentation
of facts which is quite naive and the other is construal of facts and phenomena.
The accretion of evidences is to be judged from a proper perspective.

The implication is that adequate care should be taken while evaluating evidence
and facts and such a caution is not always strictly followed and, as a result, the
historical facts do not serve the purpose of those who use it. This is the main
complaint against the historical approach to the study of politics.

2. Institutional approach:
There is a strong belief that philosophy, history and law have bestowed to the
study of politics and it is in the field of institutional approaches. Institutional
approaches are ancient and important approach to the study of Political Science.
These approaches mainly deals with the formal aspects of government and
politics. Institutional approach is concerned with the study of the formal
political structures like legislature, executive, and judiciary. It focused on the
rules of the political system, the powers of the various institutions, the
legislative bodies, and how the constitution worked. Main drawback of this
approach was its narrow focus on formal structures and arrangements. In far-
reaching terms, an institution can be described as 'any persistent system of
activities in any pattern of group behaviour. More concretely, an institution has
been regarded as 'offices and agencies arranged in a hierarchy, each agency
having certain functions and powers.

The new institutionalism body can be divided into three analytical approaches:

1.Historical institutionalism
2.Rational choice institutionalism
3.Sociological institutionalism
These three theoretical approaches developed autonomously from each other.

3. Legal approach:
In the realm of traditional approaches, there is a legal or juridical approach. This
approach considers the state as the central organization for the creation and
enforcement of laws. Therefore, this approach is associated with the legal
process, legal bodies or institutions, and judiciary. In this approach, the study of
politics is mixed with legal processes and institutions. Theme of law and justice
are treated as not mere affairs of jurisprudence rather politics scientists look at
state as the maintainer of an effective and equitable system of law and order.
Matters relating to the organizations, jurisdiction and independence of judicial
institutions become and essential concern of political scientists. This approach
treats the state primarily as an organization for creation and enforcement of law
.

Modern approaches:
The political philosophers later on realized the need to study politics from a new
viewpoint. Thus, to overcome the paucities of the traditional approaches,
various new approaches have been promoted by the new political intellectuals.
These new approaches are considered as the "modern approaches" to the study
of Political Science. Many theorists regard these approaches as a reaction
against the traditional approaches. These approaches are mainly concerned with
scientific study of politics. The first innovation in this regard comes with the
advent of the behavioural revolution in Political Science.

Characteristics of Modern Approaches:

 These approaches draw conclusion from empirical data.

  These approaches go beyond the study of political structures and
its historical analysis.
 Modern Approaches believe in inter-disciplinary study.
 They stress scientific methods of study and attempt to draw
scientific conclusions in Political Science.

1. Sociological approach:
Political science and sociology both are social sciences and in several places
they overlay. The fields of sociological studies are human behaviour including
the political behaviour, group behaviour and attitude of group, culture, society.
All these fall within the study area of political science. Sociological approach of
politics is very popular.

2. Psychological approach:
There is a strong link between politics and psychology. Psychologists usually
study the political behaviour of individuals and factors leading to such
behaviour. They also study why certain individuals behave in a certain way. In
simple form, psychology studies the behaviour, attitude of the voter and after
studying various aspects, the researchers draw conclusions which very often
serve the purpose of political leaders. It is not an overstatement to hold that the
foundation of behaviouralism is psychology of the individuals. Presently,
political scientists are eager to know how motives and emotions work in the
field of political activity. Sometimes, the psychologists focus upon the group
behaviour.

3. Economic approach:
Economics and politics are vital arenas of social science and in several respects
they are closely related. In the prospectus of universities of India and many
other countries a few decades ago, economics and political science established a
single subject which suggests the close relationship between the two. This
signifies that in the study of politics, economics has great importance.

When evaluating the economic approaches, it is established that the policy

formulations of economic nature and determination of the principles of planning
which has recently become a part of the governmental activity are done by the
government. In majority of the countries, public issues are economic issues and
sometimes the only actors are the personnel of the government such as the
prime minister, president and other ministers. This obvious relationship between
the two subjects has placed the economic approach in a suitable position.

4. System approach:-
This approach falls in the category of modern approach. The notion of Systems
Theory was emerged from ancient time, dates back to 1920s. Ludwig Von
Bertallanfy is considered as the earliest advocate of the general systems theory.
He utilized this theory for the study of Biology. It is only after the Second
World War, the social scientists claimed for the amalgamation of sciences for
which they took the help of the systems theory. However, when the general
systems theory in its abstract form traced back to natural sciences like Biology,
in its operational form, they are found in Anthropology. Then it was embraced
in Sociology and Psychology. In the decade of sixties, the systems theory
became an important tool to evaluate and investigate key factors in Political
Science. Among political scientists, David Easton has been the first to apply this
theory to political analysis.

5. Communication Theory Approach:-

This approach examines how one segment of a system affects another by
sending messages or information. Robert Weiner first defined this approach.
Later on, Karl Deutsch developed it and applied it in Political Science. Deutsch
believes that the political system is a system of communication channels and it
is self-regulative. He further stated that the government is responsible for
overseeing different communication channels. This approach treats the
government as the decision making system. According to Deutsch, the four
factors of analysis in communication theory are; lead, lag, gain and load.

Structural Functional Approach:-

In political studies, it is observed that there is no single approach that effectively
describe every phenomenon or issue. Each of these approaches have their
strength and weaknesses. A wide-ranging approach is more desirable as
researchers embark on description or analysis of political events and issues.

According to this approach, the society is a single inter-related system where

each part of the system has a definite and distinct role to play. The structural-
functional approach may be considered as an offshoot of the system analysis.
These approaches accentuate the structures and functions. Gabriel Almond was
an advocate of this approach. He described political systems as a special system
of interaction that exists in all societies performing certain functions. According
to him, the main attributes of a political system are comprehensiveness, inter-
dependence and existence of boundaries. Like Easton, Almond also believes
that all political systems perform input and output functions. The Input
functions of political systems are political socialization and recruitment,
interest-articulation, interest-aggression and political communication. Almond
makes three-fold classifications of governmental output functions relating to
policy making and implementation. These output functions are rule making, rule
application and rule adjudication. Therefore, Almond believes that a stable and
efficient political system converts inputs into outputs.

Importance of political participation in active

democracy:-
Political participation includes a broad range of activities through which
people develop and express their opinions on the world and how it is
governed, and try to take part in and shape the decisions that affect their lives.

“A healthy, resilient democracy is based on inclusiveness, which political

parties and representative institutions are in a key position to safeguard. Yet
parties are finding it harder to sustain an atmosphere of inclusiveness,
particularly as women and youth are largely excluded from representative
institutions. Younger generations are insufficiently represented in party
membership, leadership and legislatures. Their marginalization from, and
decreasing trust in, traditional party politics is of particular concern, as young
people can make or break future models of representation.”

In many countries, the relationship between youth and political parties is

strained. Many young people do not trust political parties, while party leaders
often complain that the youth are unwilling to get involved.
It is not enough to work only on setting up democratic institutions and
processes. These institutions and processes must be put to work creating
opportunities for citizens to lead healthy and productive lives. Ensuring that
government actually works for the public good requires informed, organized,
active and peaceful citizen participation. Citizens must, therefore, understand
ideas about citizenship, politics and government. They need knowledge to
make decisions about policy choices and the proper use of authority, along
with the skills to voice their concerns, act collectively and hold public officials
(i.e., elected representatives, civil servants, and appointed leaders)
accountable.
The term citizen has an inherently political meaning that implies a certain type
of relationship between the people and government. Citizens have a set of
rights and responsibilities, including the right to participate in decisions that
affect public welfare. In addition to the intrinsic democratic value,
participation is an instrumental driver of democratic and socio-economic
change, and a fundamental way to empower citizens. Emphasizing locally-led,
issue-driven approaches, NDI programs focus on citizens organizing around
their interests and taking actions throughout the political cycle to open, access
and occupy political space. We recognize that citizen-centered activism –
driven by real community needs and desires – is a powerful transformative
force.
The more people who participate in a democracy, the more
democratic it becomes.
For political systems to be representative, all parts of society must be included.
When people are disenfranchised or disengaged from political processes, a
significant portion of the population has little or no voice or influence in
decisions that affect group members‘ lives. A key consequence is the
undermining of political systems‘ representativeness.
To make a difference in the longer term, it is essential that people are engaged
in formal political processes and have a say in formulating today‘s and
tomorrow‘s politics. Inclusive political participation is not only a fundamental
political and democratic right but also is crucial to building stable and peaceful
societies and developing policies that respond to the specific needs of younger
generations. For people to be adequately represented in political institutions,
processes, and decision-making, and in particular in elections, they must know
their rights and be given the necessary knowledge and capacity to participate
in a meaningful way at all levels.

Parliamentary and presidential form of

democracy
A parliamentary system or parliamentary democracy is a system of democratic
governance of a state (or subordinate entity) where the executive derives its
democratic legitimacy from its ability to command the support ("confidence")
of the legislature, typically a parliament, and is also held accountable to that
parliament. In a parliamentary system, the head of state is usually a person
distinct from the head of government. This is in contrast to a presidential
system, where the head of state often is also the head of government and, most
importantly, where the executive does not derive its democratic legitimacy
from the legislature.

Countries with parliamentary democracies may be constitutional monarchies,

where a monarch is the head of state while the head of government is almost
always a member of parliament (such as Denmark, Norway, Japan, Malaysia,
Sweden and the United Kingdom), or parliamentary republics, where a mostly
ceremonial president is the head of state while the head of government is
regularly from the legislature (such as Ireland, Germany, India, Italy, Pakistan
and Singapore). In a few parliamentary republics, such as Botswana, Kiribati
and South Africa, among some others, the head of government is also head of
state, but is elected by and is answerable to parliament. In bicameral
parliaments, the head of government is generally, though not always, a
member of the lower house.

Parliamentarianism is the dominant form of government in Europe, with 32 of

its 50 sovereign states being parliamentarian. It is also common in the
Caribbean, being the form of government of 10 of its 13 island states, and in
Oceania. Elsewhere in the world, parliamentary countries are less common,
but they are distributed through all continents, most often in former colonies of
the British Empire that subscribe to a particular brand of parliamentarianism
known as the Westminster system.

Election of the head of government

Implementations of the parliamentary system can also differ as to how the

prime minister and government are appointed and whether the government
needs the explicit approval of the parliament, rather than just the absence of its
disapproval. Some countries such as India also require the prime minister to be
a member of the legislature, though in other countries this only exists as a
convention.
The head of state appoints a prime minister who will likely have majority
support in parliament. While in practice most prime ministers under the
Westminster system (including Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand and the
United Kingdom) are the leaders of the largest party in parliament, technically
the appointment of the prime minister is a prerogative exercised by the
monarch, the governor-general, or the president.

The head of state appoints a prime minister who must gain a vote of
confidence within a set time. Examples: Italy, Thailand.

The head of state appoints the leader of the political party holding a plurality
of seats in parliament as prime minister. For example, in Greece, if no party
has a majority, the leader of the party with a plurality of seats is given an
exploratory mandate to receive the confidence of the parliament within three
days. If this is not possible, then the leader of the party with the second highest
seat number is given the exploratory mandate. If this fails, then the leader of
the third largest party is given it and so on.

The head of state nominates a candidate for prime minister who is then
submitted to parliament for approval before appointment. Example: Spain,
where the King sends a proposal to the Congress of Deputies for approval.
Also, Germany where under the German Basic Law (constitution) the
Bundestag votes on a candidate nominated by the federal president. In these
cases,[citation needed] parliament can choose another candidate who then
would be appointed by the head of state.

Parliament nominates a candidate whom the head of state is constitutionally

obliged to appoint as prime minister. Example: Japan, where the Emperor
appoints the Prime Minister on the nomination of the National Diet. Also,
Ireland where the President of Ireland appoints the Taoiseach on the
nomination of Dáil Éireann.

A public officeholder (other than the head of state or their representative)

nominates a candidate, who, if approved by parliament, is appointed as prime
minister. Example: Under the Swedish Instrument of Government (1974), the
power to appoint someone to form a government has been moved from the
monarch to the Speaker of Parliament and the parliament itself. The speaker
nominates a candidate, who is then elected to prime minister (statsminister) by
the parliament if an absolute majority of the members of parliament does not
vote no (i.e. they can be elected even if more members of parliament vote No
than Yes).

Direct election by popular vote. Example: Israel, 1996–2001, where the prime
minister was elected in a general election, with no regard to political
affiliation, and whose procedure can also be described as of a semi-
parliamentary system.

Presidential system

A presidential system, or single executive system, is a form of government

in which a head of government (president) leads an executive branch that is
separate from the legislative branch in systems that use separation of powers.
This head of government is in most cases also the head of state.

In presidential countries, the head of government is elected and is not

responsible to the legislature, which cannot (usually) in normal circumstances
dismiss it. Such dismissal is possible, however, in uncommon cases, often
through impeachment.

The title "president" has persisted from a time when such person personally
presided over the governing body, as with the President of the Continental
Congress in the early United States, prior to the executive function being split
into a separate branch of government.

A presidential system contrasts with a parliamentary system, where the head of

government comes to power by gaining the confidence of an elected
legislature. There are also hybrid systems such as the semi-presidential system,
used in the former Weimar Republic and in France.

Countries that feature a presidential or semi-presidential system of government

are not the exclusive users of the title of president. Heads of state of
parliamentary republics, largely ceremonial in most cases, are called
presidents. Dictators or leaders of one-party states, whether popularly elected
or not, are also often called presidents.
Presidentialism is the dominant form of government in the mainland Americas,
with 19 of its 22 sovereign states being presidential republics, the exceptions
being Canada, Belize, and Suriname. It is also prevalent in Central and
southern West Africa and in Central Asia.
 Powers of US Congress
Powers of House of Representative

1.Revenue Bills must originate in the House of Representatives. Although this

power is still honoured today, it tends to have blurred over the years. Often
budget bills are considered simultaneously in both houses. For example,
current discussions of possible tax cuts are taking place not only in both
houses but in the executive branch as well.

2.Impeachment power, the authority to charge the President and other ―civil
officers‖ with wrongdoing, is given to the House. A simple majority vote can
impeach an elected official.

Powers of Senate

1.Treaties with other nations

entered into by the
President must be approved
by a two-thirds vote by the
Senate. This provision is an
illustration of checks and balances, and it has served as a very important
restriction to the foreign policy powers of the President.

2.An Impeachment Trials occurs in the Senate. If the House of

Representatives votes to impeach an elected official, the accused party gets a
hearing in the Senate. A two-thirds majority can convict the individual and
remove him or her from office.

Limitation

The Constitution lists powers that are denied to Congress (Article I, Section
9). The Bill of Rights prohibits Congress from making laws that limit
individual liberties. Under the system of checks and balances, the president
can veto a law passed by Congress, or the Supreme Court can declare a law
unconstitutional. Voters can ignore unpopular laws and press for their repeal,
as happened with the Eighteenth Amendment establishing Prohibition.

Functions of the Congress

One of the important functions of the Congress is making of law. If there were
one principle the Founders wanted to make clearly understood in their new
system of government it was that the function to make law would no longer
belong to a king or dictator or a group of government workers, but would
actually belong to those whom the people themselves have elected to office for
that very purpose.

They also made clear that once the people assign this function to the elected
officials, those elected officials could not delegate such power to anyone,
especially to those who were unelected. It remained with the elected officials
until the people took it back.

As if to emphasize this point, the Founders made this the subject of the very
first sentence in Article One of the Constitution, which says:-

“All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the

United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

Conclusion
We may conclude it by stating the American Congress has more power than
any legislature among the world‘s modern democracies. The parliaments of
Europe are often ―arena‖ legislatures that provide a forum for debate on
policies proposed by a powerful prime minister or president. Only the
American democracy enables its legislature with the critical role of setting the
lawmaking agenda. As the powers and functions are clearly mentioned under
the US constitution, there are limitations imposed to control the power of the
US Congress.
The reason for empowering huge powers for US Constitution is because they
are elected by the people of the country and responsible for the welfare of the
people at large. And the reason for imposing limitations on the powers and
functions of Congress is to hold the Separation of powers between legislative,
executive and Judiciary.

SENATE AS THE MOST POWERFUL SECOND CHAMBER

IN THE WORLD

In most of the countries, upper house is given less powers as

compared to the lower house. Upper house merely plays the role of a
delaying chamber. Upper Houses in England and India can be cited
as an examples. Some countries like Soviet Union, Switzerland,
Canada etc, upper houses have been given equal powers with the
lower house. The situation in America is quite different and this can
be assessed from the following views.
1. In Legislative field – In America, ordinary bill can be introduced first
in any house. However, it can be sent for the signature of the President
only after the passage of the bill by both the houses. If differences crop
up between the two houses regarding the passage of the bill, then a Joint
Conference Committee of both houses is set up to resolve their
differences. If even this committee fails to resolve the differences, then
the bill lapses.
As compared to this, the legislative powers of the Rajya Sabha in India,
House of Lords in England, Senate in Canada and House of Councilors in
Japan etc are much less powerful than American Senate. In England, the
House of Lords can delay ordinary bill for a maximum period of one
year.

2. In Financial Field – Money bill is first introduced in the lower house

but the Senate can make changes in the money bill except the change of
the title. As against this, upper houses in countries like India, England
have very limited financial powers. In England the house of Lords has
delaying power of 30 days and in India Rajya Sabha has delaying power
of 14 days over money bill.
 3. In Executive Field – In America, Senate is partner in the exercise of
executive powers of the President. For instance American President has
to take the approval of the Senate over the treaties concluded with other
countries and higher appointments. These are the special powers of the
Senate which no other upper house in the world enjoys.
4. In the Judicial Field – The Judicial powers of American Senate are
also much more than the upper houses of other countries of the world. For
example (i) American Senate decide the disputes regarding the elections
and qualifications of its members and debar any elected member from
assuming his seat in the house. No other upper houses enjoy this power.
(ii) The power to impeach the President, Vice President and high civilian
officials are frame by the House of Representatives, Senate sits as highest
court to investigate the charges and if 2/3 majority of the members of the
Senate approves these charges, then the concerned official is removed
from office.
Here it must be remember that in England, when the House of Lords sits
as highest court only law Lords participate in the meeting.
Besides the above fields, the powers of the Senate in constitutional
amendment and holding administrative investigations are also in no way
less than the House of Representatives and upper houses of other
countries of the world. Senate is really the most powerful second chamber
in the world.

CHARACTERSTICS OF FRENCH
POLITICAL SYSTEM
“The French party system”, write Blondel and Godfrey, “is unique in the
western world and probably in the world as well”.

Its salient features are as under:

1. Multi-Party System:
Like India, in France also a multi- party system is in operation. There are as
many as six major political parties and a number of small political parties. All
these parties contest elections and play a significant role in the political life of
France. The French are emotional by nature and their allegiance to their
respective parties is very deep. As one writer has beautifully remarked: ―Politics
for the Englishmen and the Americans is a game white it is a battle for the
French.‖

2. Constitutional Recognition of the Role of the Parties:

Unlike the American Constitution which is totally silent about the role of
political parties, the French Constitution accepts the role of parties and political
groups. Art. 4. reads: ―Parties and political groups play a part in the exercise of
the right to vote. The right to form parties and their freedom of action are
unrestricted. They must respect the principles of national sovereignty and of
democracy.‖

3. The Practice of Parliamentary Groups:

Another feature of the French Party System is that after the elections, the
members of the Parliament combine together to form parliamentary groups. In
each parliamentary group there are a number of members belonging to different
political parties. Frequently, the members defect from one parliamentary group
to another.

That is why Ogg and Zink call these

groups ever-shifting parliamentary
groups bearing little or no relation to the
divisions among the voters. In the
commissions of the Parliament,
representation is given to these
parliamentary groups.
4. Existence of Regional Parties:
Like our own country, in France also there are present a number of regional
political parties. They have no national organisation and these work only in
their respective regions.

5. Political Defections and Frequent Changes:

In another way, the French Party- System is similar to the Indian party system.
In France also the evil practice of political defections prevails. Frequently, the
members of one political party defect to another or other political parties. A
number of political parties of France have similar ideologies and that is why the
members of one political party do not hesitate to defect to another political
party. In the words of Dorothy Pickles, ―French parties come and go in
bewildering numbers, sometimes within a very short time.‖

6. Leftist and Rightist Parties:

Almost all the French political parties can be categorized under two heads:
(i) Leftist Parties, and

(ii) Rightist Parties.

The Leftist Parties have socialist leanings. They favour state control over
industry and state intervention in the interest of planned economy. The Rightist
Parties are opposed to both these measures. However, many rightist parties
support state action for assisting small and uneconomic producers. The
Communist Party and the Socialist Party belong to the first group and the
Conservative Party and the Central Democratic Group belong to the second
category.

7. Organisational Diversity:
The organisation and policies of different political parties exhibit great
diversities. The parties cover a very large range extending from commission on
the left to anti-parliamentary and even fascist groups on the extreme right. Some
of the parties attach great importance to political principles and doctrines while
others have no agreed principles or even coherent policies.

Some of the parties are very well organised parties, while others have loose
organisations. The leftist parties are highly organised while the right wing
parties have no permanent organisations outside the Assembly.

The organised leftist parties are well disciplined parties and these formulate
their policies at the national level party congresses attended by delegates
representing local federations and in the meetings of parliamentary groups. The
right wing parties are continuously changing parties. Their ideology and
principles are not definite. Their parliamentary groups take every decision.

8. Domination of the Party Leader:

Another unique feature of the French Party System is that most of the parties
revolve round the personalities of their respective leaders. For popular support,
the members of the party depend upon the personality of their leader or some
leaders. The leader is the source of party unity. The members are united because
of common allegiance to a particular leader.

The French Party System has been working with all these features. The working
of the Fourth Republic west seriously limited and strained due to the defects of
the multi-party system. It acts as a primary factor responsible for the political
instability that came to dominate the French Political System under the Fourth
Republic.

As a result of such a bitter experience, the framers of the Constitution of the

Fifth Republic decided to reduce the role of the political parties in the French
political system. Consequently, the scheme of a semi-Presidential system was
chalked out in which the parliament and the cabinet were assigned a decreased
role in the functioning of the government. Correspondingly, there came to be a
decrease in the role of the political parties.

The French multi-party system was freed from its harmful fangs. It was now
made to play a relatively low profile-role in the political system-a role limited to
the sphere of law-making and deliberations in the Parliament. However, the
French Party System has been a rapidly changing party system and the legacy of
lack of political continuity in the past continues to be a source of fluidity in the
French party politics.

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF CHINESE

POLITICAL SYSTEM
Before 1911, China was still characterized as a feudalistic economy run by the
Qing authorities. Even by 1949, China was primarily an agricultural economy.
However, colonial capitalism did have a long and significant impact in some
coastal cities, Shanghai and Guangzhou in particular.

The general economic condition of the nation was terribly bad because of the
World War II and continuous civil wars. A crucial reason why Jiang Jieshi did
not defeat Mao Zedong was that the capitalist economy was just forming and
the industrial power was still very weak in most parts of China.

From 1949 – 1978, China, for the first time, systematically built its industrial
base and transformed itself from an agricultural economy to an industrial one.
The period between 1949 and 1956 was recognized as the golden period of
Chinese industrialization, as the country established its primary industries
including steel, automobile, textile, chemical, and defense. The GDP grew at the
rate of over 20% per year.

Because of over-optimism, Mao made his first huge mistake by summoning his
nation to speed up the industrialization. This was the ―Great Leap‖, which
resulted in the significant economic recession in 1958 and 1959 and also the
disaster in early 1960s.
The economy recovered, however, under the leadership of Liu Shaoqi in the
early 1960s. As Liu accumulated much power in the communist party, Mao felt
a threat from him and made his second huge mistake by starting the famous
―Cultural Revolution‖ to suppress Liu and his followers, including Deng
Xiaoping.

Nevertheless, it was during this period when China as a nation, rather than in a
few cities, started its industrialization, though a lot of ups and downs. China
created its college system and built hundreds of national labs throughout the
country, and developed its most advanced technology under Mao‘s dictation,
such as nuclear weapons, satellites and rocket science, and super computers.
Under his dictation, the most talented Chinese students chose science and
engineering majors instead of law or economics, which Mao saw as trouble-
making majors. This, maybe unintentionally, prepared today‘s China with many
talented scientists and engineers, many of whom became the technocrats in the
government.

If Mao was the person who led the Chinese to the entrance of the industrial
highway, Deng was the one who led the Chinese to drive on the highway.
During this period, China has grown at a rate of over 10% per year. It is a
common mistake that many Americans believe the rapid growth in China only
happened in recent years. Jiang basically continued Deng‘s philosophy, and
harvested the fruits of the economic reform started by his predecessors.

During this period, China started to migrate from the economy of import-
substituting to export-led. Jiang, originally from the Shanghai area, also did a
lot of favors to his home city, and helped it overshadow the rapid development
of Guangdong Province, where Deng first tested his pro-capitalism economic
policy and has been open to the West since 1979.

Like Japan and the US, the power of China was not built overnight, but was a
cumulative growth over the past 50 years. Though China has experienced rapid
economic growth for over 25 years, most western countries paid attention to it
only after its entry into WTO and the hosting of the 2008 Olympics.

Further, the CIA World Fact Book confirms the impact of these changes on the
economy and its growth. Specifically, they note that:

The restructuring of the economy and resulting efficiency gains have

contributed to a more than tenfold increase in GDP since 1978. Measured on a
purchasing power parity (PPP) basis, China in 2005 stood as the second-largest
economy in the world after the US, although in per capita terms the country is
still lower middle-income and 150 million Chinese fall below international
poverty lines.

Economic development has generally been more rapid in coastal provinces than
in the interior, and there are large disparities in per capita income between
regions. The government has struggled to: (a) sustain adequate job growth for
tens of millions of workers laid off from state-owned enterprises, migrants, and
new entrants to the work force; (b) reduce corruption and other economic
crimes; and© contain environmental damage and social strife related to the
economy‘s rapid transformation.

From 100 to 150 million surplus rural workers are adrift between the villages
and the cities, many subsisting through part-time, low-paying jobs. One
demographic consequence of the ―one child‖ policy is that China is now one of
the most rapidly aging countries in the world.
Another long-term threat to growth is the deterioration in the environment –
notably air pollution, soil erosion, and the steady fall of the water table,
especially in the north. China continues to lose arable land because of erosion
and economic development. China has benefited from a huge expansion in
computer Internet use, with more than 100 million users at the end of 2005.
Foreign investment remains a strong element in China‘s remarkable expansion
in world trade and has been an important factor in the growth of urban jobs.

In July 2005, China revalued its currency by 2.1% against the US dollar and
moved to an exchange rate system that references a basket of currencies.
Reports of shortages of electric power in the summer of 2005 in southern China
receded by September-October and did not have a substantial impact on China‘s
economy. More power generating capacity is scheduled to come on line in 2006
as large scale investments are completed. Thirteen years in construction at a
cost of $24 billion, the immense Three Gorges Dam across the Yangtze River
will be essentially completed in 2006 and will revolutionize electrification and
flood control in the area.

The Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party in October 2005

approved the draft 11th Five-Year Plan and the National People‘s Congress is
expected to give final approval in March 2006. The plan calls for a 20%
reduction in energy consumption per unit of GDP by 2010 and an estimated
45% increase in GDP by 2010. The plan states that conserving resources and
protecting the environment are basic goals, but it lacks details on the policies
and reforms necessary to achieve these goals.
 IMPORTANCE OF
COMMUNIST
PARTY OF CHINA
IN CHINESE
POLITICAL
SYSTEM
China's political system has
several distinctive features which
are rarely known and often
puzzled many outsiders. While
dealing China there has often
been a gap between rhetoric and reality—between what we know or perceived
and what is real; between what is officially claimed and what is actual; between
how the story is told and things that occurred. Therefore, we should not merely
look into what is perceived or appears to be, but carefully observe the actual
structures, functions, processes and institutional mechanisms of the Chinese
political.

The CPC is a highly integrated party characterised by centralized power

,hierarchy and subordination. In line with this, CPC has several organs spread
across three broad levels—central, local, and primary organisations. The role
and functions of these organs are all distinct yet mutually interconnected
following.

1. Organisational Structure of the Communist Party:

The Communist Party of China is a tightly organised party. It stands

organised on the basis of the principle of Democratic Centralism.

Cell or Primary Party Organisations (PPOs):

At the lowest level of party organisation are Cells or Primary Party

Organisations which are located in factories, offices, schools, streets or bazaars.
A cell generally consists of 20 members. The PPOs work for cementing the ties
of the workers and peasants with the party and its leading bodies.

Role of Communist Party of China:

(A) Role in the Making of Revolution:
Originating in 1921 as a very small group of just thirteen members who held
their first meeting in Shanghai, the Communist Party of China registered a
spectacular rise, particularly after 1935 when Mao emerged its leader. From
1921 to 1935, the Party had to live with a weak structure and a limited role. In
1927, it received a big setback when the Soviet representative Borodin was
expelled from China and Chiang-Kai-Shek decided to control firmly the
growing ‗Communist menace‘ in China.

However, the march of events resulting from the Japanese threat to the
sovereignty, independence and integrity of China, and the outbreak of the
Second World War created conditions in which Chinag‘s Kuomintang accepted
‗Cooperation with the Communists‘ for safeguarding Chinese national interests
and integrity.

Further, the emergence of Mao-Tse- Tung as the undisputed and dynamic leader
of the Communist Party, helped the party not only to revitalize its organisational
network but also to capture the attention and support of the Chinese people,
particularly the peasants working in the rural areas. Mao‘s strategy of first
spreading ‗Communism‘ in the rural areas and then surrounding the cities
through guerilla tactics paid rich dividends. The whole-hearted support that the
(erstwhile) Soviet Union gave to the Communist Party enabled Mao to be in a
position to challenge Chiang‘s regime.

By the time the Second World War ended, Mao was successful in bringing
China to the verge of socialist revolution through a war of people‘s liberation
which finally broke out in 1945. Within four years, the ‗liberation‘ was
achieved. Chiang-Kai-Sheik, along with his followers was forced to flee to
Formosa.

The mainland China came under the Communists and on October 1, 1949,
China came to be the People‘s Republic of China. A People‘s Democratic
Dictatorship was established by the Communist Party under the leadership of
chairman Mao Tse-tung. Thus, within fourteen years of his leadership, Mao was
successful both in revitalizing the Communist Party as well as in staging
through it a successful socialist revolution in China.

(B) Role of the Communist Party of China After the Revolution (1949-
1954):

After 1949, the Communist Party of China, acting as the highest form of class
organisation, started playing a core role in every aspect of country‘s life. Its
leadership of the people as the vanguard for securing the gains of the revolution
in the post-1949 period, was acknowledged by one and all.
On the one hand, the Communist Party started acting as the defender of the
revolution, the leader and guide of the people, the supreme educator and the
body responsible for initiating the process of nation-building in China.

On the other hand, it began exercising all power and authority on the basis of a
common programme and the organic law as formulated by the party under the
supreme guidance and direction of Mao.

Between 1949-54, China was governed by a provisional government with one

organ-the Chinese People‘s Political Consultative Conference. This body
consisted of 662 delegates who represented all the political parties including the
Communist Party, several mass organisations, the People‘s Liberation Army
and the overseas Chinese.

It was, however, dominated by the Communist party and it worked on the basis
of the Organic Law for realising the ‗Common Programme‘ as conceived and
formulated by Mao Tse-tung.

1. Role of the Communist Party under the 1954 Constitution:

The organisation and role of the Communist Party of China in the post-
1954 period can be discussed either by dividing it in two parts—

(i) Role and organisation in the Mao period, and

(2) Role and organisation in the Post-Mao period or by analysing its positions
under different constitutions.

For the sake of an in-depth study, we shall follow the latter course and discuss
in detail these two aspects under all constitutions of India.

In 1953, a committee headed by Mao Tse-Tung was constituted for drafting a

constitution for the People‘s Republic of China. The Communist Party played a
key role in drafting the constitution. This Constitution came into force in 1954.

The Constitution of 1954 did not give constitutional recognition to the

Communist Party. Nevertheless, its role was clearly recognized in the
deliberations held in connection with the drafting of the constitution.

Liu Shah-Chi clearly stated in his report before the drafting committee that the
leadership of the Communist Party was essential not only for the Chinese
people‘s democratic revolution, but also for the realization of socialism.

Its leadership and core role in the Chinese political system was accepted by one
and all. Its ideology-Marxism- Leninism as defined and supplemented by
Maoism was adopted as the ideology of China. The Communist party continued
to work as an extra-constitutional supreme decision-making and directing body.

Its success in overthrowing the Chiang-regime and in securing a socialist

revolution provided it with a huge credibility.

Its success enabled it to work as ―the highest form of class organisation

committed to play a disciplined, dedicated and core leadership role in the
Chinese political system.‖ All governmental institutions, all constituent party
organs, all other organisations obeyed the commands of the Communist Party.

2. Role of the Communist Party under the 1975 Constitution (1975-78)-

Communist Party as the only Constitutionally Recognized Party of China:

The 1975 Constitution accepted the supreme reality of the Chinese political
system by giving constitutions‘ recognition to the Communist Party. It
declared: ―The Communist Party of China is the core of the leadership of
the whole Chinese people‖, and ―The working class exercises leadership over
the state through the vanguard of the Communist Party of China‖.

Even the highest organ of state power-the National People‘s Congress (Chinese
National Parliament) was placed under the leadership of the Party. All key
power holders of the state were nominated by the Central Committee of the
Communist Party and the state power merely legalized the appointments thus
made.

The control over the Chinese Armed Forces – the People‘s Liberation Army
was also exercised by the party.

The Preamble of the 1975 constitution narrated the achievements of the

Communist Party during the past 20 years and committed the People‘s Republic
of China to ‗the continuing revolution‘ under the direction of the party. It was
reaffirmed that China was committed to eliminate all enemies at home and
abroad through national efforts as organised, guided, directed and controlled by
the Communist Party of China.

3. The Communist Party under the 1978 Constitution and Role of the
Communist Party in the Post-Mao Years:

In 1978, China adopted a new constitution and this new constitution did not
make any change in the status and role of the Communist Party in the Chinese
political system. It maintained the constitutional status of the party. Its Preamble
recounted ―the heroic struggle of the Chinese people led by the Communist
Party and headed by our great leader and teacher, Chairman Mao Tse-Tung.‖
The party was again given credit for ushering China into an era of prosperity
and all-round development. It called upon the people of China to support whole
heartedly the Communist Party and its policies.

Article 2 of this constitution once again described the Communist Party as ―the
core of the leadership of the whole Chinese people and that the working
class exercised leadership over the state – through the Communist Party of
China at its vanguard.‖

Under this constitution, the state authority was exercised in accordance with the
decisions and recommendations made by the Central Committee of the
Communist Party.

4. The Communist Party under the 1982 Constitution or the Communist

Party in the Contemporary times:

After Mao‘s death, a review of the working of the Communist Party was
undertaken and it was found that under Mao, the party organisation had come to
be a centralized organisation in which a small group of Mao loyalists-‗the
Proletariat headquarters‘-had become all powerful.

The Cultural Revolution of the 1960s and the post- cultural revolution changes
created a situation in which revolutionary committees were given all powers
and the former party organs, central and local commissions were abolished. The
Eleventh Party Congress held in September 1977, which met for the first time
without Mao and Chou, decided to overhaul the party and restore the traditional
organisational set up of the party.

It led to the revival of the central and local commissions. It involved a qualified
rejection of some principles and policies of Mao. The power struggle between
the Maoist conservatives arid the liberal factions of the Communist Party
became a reality. The new need for socio- economic development in all spheres
gave rise to a demand for liberalisation.

The 1982 Constitution, while accepting the importance and utility of ‗the
thoughts of Mao‘, introduced several subtle changes. The Preamble, while
upholding Marxism-Leninsm and Mao Tse-Tungs thought, also talked of
‗upholding truth, correcting error and overcoming numerous difficulties and
hardships‘.

This Constitution secured a separation between the Communist Party and the
government and did not make any mention of or gave any constitutional
recognition to the Communist Party. Article I of the Constitution says: ―The
People‘s Republic of China is now a socialist state under the people‘s
democratic dictatorship led by the working class and based on the alliance of
workers and peasants‖.

Article 2 of the 1978 constitution which gave constitutional recognition to the

Communist Party got dropped. Further, the provision for the control of the party
over the Armed forces was also abolished. The Chinese Premier was now not to
be nominated by the Central Committee of the Communist Party.

He was to be chosen by the National People‘s Congress on the basis of the

nomination made by the President of the Republic. The party constitution now
recorded that the party is to work in accordance with the Constitution and the
Law.

However, despite this separation and scaling down of the status, the Communist

Party still continues to be the leader of the people and their vanguard in the
march towards the national goals. The Communist Party continues to be the
ruling party, and all decisions of the government are designed to carry out the
commands of the party.

The role of the Communist Party in the Chinese Political System has been,
continues to be, and is destined to continue in future as a formidable role as
the core of leadership and vanguard of the people in their struggle to
develop further in accordance with the socialist objectives that stand
accepted by the principle of collective leadership in the Post-Mao period.

It continues to be a monolith-a single all dominant party (other parties can exist
only as its satellites), whose members accept Marxism- Leninism-Maoism as
interpreted and applied by its leaders.

It is the governor and the guide, the preacher and the teacher and the decision-
maker, the pleader and the executor of all decisions. The power struggle within
the Communist Party in the Post-Mao period has not materially changed or nor
can it change its dominant position.

The Communist Party continues to lead the Chinese in their march towards
securing of their development objectives and the unity, integrity and strength of
the country. It provides top leadership to the country. It governs both directly
and indirectly- directly by capturing power in the state and indirectly by
maintaining its popularity as the party of all the people and workers.

Even while demanding democracy and decentralization, the people do not

question or challenge the role and status of the Communist Party as the maker
of modern China and as the vanguard of the people in their march towards
progress even in this 21st century.
China continues to be a single party system. However, under the leadership of
Deng Xiaoping (1978- 97), the party underwent several changes in respect of its
economic policies, and these even continue today.