Hello, students of history and political science! I’m Mr. Tesch, and welcome to Global Chat, where we explore the ins and outs of the field of study known as “Comparative Politics.”

In this video, we’re going to learn about democracy, an idea that first took hold two and a half thousand years ago. The word democracy goes back to Ancient Greece. Demos means the people, and kratia power. And with just this one word, we have the idea that made the Athenians famous: for the first time, political power was to reside with the people. Political scientists call this “popular sovereignty.”

Our history teachers are correct to teach us that democracy first began with the Ancient Greeks, but we also need to give credit to the Romans. Today, many people live in democratic countries, but that does not mean that they make all decisions on behalf of the state directly; instead, people elect representatives to make such decisions for them. This idea of representation of the state by elected officials is called republicanism, and is an idea that began with the Romans. Now at this point, you might say, “ this is all well and good, but then who gets to make laws? Who is responsible for enforcing those laws? How do states make sure laws are applied fairly? How much say do citizens get in choosing who is responsible for these kinds of important decisions?” 

As it turns out, there are as many different answers to these kinds of questions as there are systems of government in the world today. We can compare states on the different models of government that they create. But first, we need to understand some common state institutions of democratic regimes. 

The first state institution we should look at is the legislature, which is the branch of government that creates law. Legislatures are deliberative bodies, which means they are made up of many people called legislators who represent different groups of people in a state. Their primary role is to deliberate and create laws, but they are often also responsible for reining in the power of executives and determining how much tax revenue the state takes in and spends.

Legislatures can be unicameral, which means that they have one chamber, but most liberal democracies have bicameral legislatures, which means they are made up of two chambers. In our course, only China and Iran have unicameral legislatures. The United Kingdom, Russia, Mexico, and Nigeria all have bicameral legislatures. The point of having two chambers is that each chamber represents a different group of people in society. The idea of a bicameral legislature originated in England, where upper class noblemen called lords had different interests than the so-called “common people,” who were represented through a lower house called the House of Commons. The idea was that the upper house would serve as a check over the lower house, which reflected a fear that the lower house was too close to the people’s mood and would make rash decisions.

There are differences in the balance of power between chambers of bicameral legislatures in different countries. In both the United Kingdom and Russia, for example, the lower house has quite a bit more power than the upper house. There are also differences in the balance of power between the legislature and the executive. In the United Kingdom, the lower house chooses the executive, and thus has a lot of power over them. In contrast, Vladimir Putin of Russia has been granted many new powers through constitutional changes made by a legislature that largely supports him. Because of these kinds of changes, Russia is a good example of why a lack of independence among different branches of government can cause a country to move toward authoritarianism. Putin’s large influence over the legislative branch means he controls significantly more governmental power than other presidents. 

This brings us to the next state institution that we need to examine: the executive. There are two types of executives: head of state, and head of government. A head of state symbolizes and represents the state nationally and internationally, embodying and articulating the goals of the regime. Heads of state are responsible for waging war and conducting foreign policy. 

The other type of executive is a head of government, who deals with the tasks of running the state. Heads of government formulate and execute domestic policy, alongside a cabinet of ministers who are charged with specific policy areas. The difference between these two types of executives is that the head of government is directly responsible for policy management while the head of state serves more of a symbolic function. 

In some states, these two distinct roles are filled by separate individuals. In the United Kingdom, the Queen acts as a head of state, and formally appoints a Prime Minister to act as head of government. In countries like Mexico and Nigeria, though, the two roles are combined, and a president acts as both head of state and head of government. 

All liberal democracies today have established what we call rule of law, or the sovereignty of law over the people and government officials. This principle means that states are governed by laws and not by decisions made by government officials. Making sure this happens is ultimately the role of a branch of government that we call the judiciary. A judiciary is a system of courts that interprets and applies laws in the name of the state. By ensuring that the law is applied equally to all citizens, whether or not they are state officials, judges ensure the promotion of the rule of law. Since the 1950s, most liberal democracies have also established constitutional courts with the power of judicial review, which means that they can annul laws that they find to be incompatible with a higher norm, such as a constitution or international law. 

In order for judiciaries to be accepted by citizens as unbiased, it is important that judges are legal scholars who are able to exercise fidelity to justice. Because of this, most democratic countries carefully protect the independence of the judiciary from other branches of government. One way to evaluate the independence of the judiciary is to consider whether courts are able to overturn the actions of the executive and legislative branches. 

In 2018, for example, Mexico’s legislative and executive branches tried to expand the presence of the Mexican military in order to try and “increase internal security.” This was supposed to be an effort to get some of the gang violence associated with the illegal drug trade under control, but as it turns out, it goes against Mexico’s constitution to use the military like this. In November of 2018, during the last weeks of Peña Nieto’s presidency, the Supreme Court ruled the effort unconstitutional. This is a great example of how an independent judiciary can act as a “check” on governmental power.

In Russia, on the other hand, courts are often suspected of being subject to influence by the executive branch. This was the case with defense attorney Mikhail Benyash, who was arrested and beaten in prison in 2018, according to a report by the organization Human Rights Watch. When Benyash complained about his mistreatment, he was charged with “disobeying the police” and supposedly “injuring himself” while in custody.  Reports of prosecutors bringing charges against people like Benyash who are involved in politically sensitive cases are very common in Russia, and illustrate the importance of maintaining a separation of powers between the executive and judicial branches.

Now that we’ve looked at the different institutions that democratic states have in common, we should also compare their different models of government. We will be talking about three different models: parliamentary, presidential, and semi presidential or hybrid models of government. 

In a parliamentary system of government, voters elect legislators or lawmakers. Voters choose these legislators based on the political parties that they support. In order to implement an agenda, political parties compete in elections to win the most seats. A party that wins over half of the seats in a parliament can pass laws, but also gets to choose a leader to serve as the head of government. This leader is called the “prime minister.” Because of this, the executive and legislature have a tight connection, and we sometimes say that the two are “fused.” When no party wins a majority of the seats in parliament, different parties are forced to come together to form what is called a “coalition government.” Often, important cabinet positions are offered to members of other parties in order to gain sufficient votes for the new head of government. 

In a presidential system of government, presidents are directly elected by the public for a fixed term. This is very different from parliamentary systems in a number of ways. Unlike a Prime Minister, presidents are able to choose a cabinet that is not made up of members of the legislature. Because they are directly elected and not chosen by members of Parliament, presidents are not beholden to the legislature. A Prime Minister can be removed from his or her position at any time by a vote of no confidence by the same legislators who elected him or her to that position in the first place. Presidents, on the other hand, can usually only be removed by a more difficult process called impeachment, which usually requires that some kind of crime or corrupt act has occurred. In short, impeachment is rather rare — not just in the United States, but anywhere. Votes of no confidence, on the other hand, are much more common in parliamentary governments.

Because Prime ministers and their cabinets are selected from the majority party or parties in parliament, they can expect to be the drivers of legislation and policy. This is different from presidential systems, where a directly elected president can be from a different party than the one elected to the legislature. When this occurs in a presidential system, the result is often gridlock: it becomes difficult to pass laws that would satisfy the needs of the people, because the president has the power to veto laws passed by a party or parties that he or she opposes. 

So if we think about it, parliamentary systems have a distinct advantage over presidential systems: they can pass laws more efficiently. On the other hand, presidents can claim that they have a stronger national mandate than Prime Ministers because they are directly elected by the public and not selected by members of the legislature. 

There is another form of government we haven’t discussed yet that sort of combines the best elements of the other two: it’s called a “semi-presidential” system. Because it is a hybrid between parliamentary and presidential systems, it is sometimes also called a “hybrid system.” There are several countries in the world that use a semi-presidential form of government, including Turkey, Austria, Poland, and of course Russia. In these countries, voters elect both a president and legislators. Legislators then work with the president to choose a Prime Minister to serve as the head of government. 

There are primarily two benefits to this sort of arrangement. First, the head of state can claim to have a national mandate because he or she is popularly elected, reinforcing the administration’s legitimacy. Second, the selection of a prime minister by the majority party or by a coalition of parties means that legislation and policy is more likely to be enacted, sidestepping the gridlock that plagues presidential systems. 

At this point, it is worth mentioning that in the real world, the three models of government that I’ve described here can end up looking very different from country to country. When we go on to study Mexico, for example, we will find that the presidential democracy that they have established differs from the one established in Nigeria. Our models will serve as useful starting points for us as we set out to learn how these systems function in the real world.

In this video, we’ve defined democracy, explained the major institutions common to democratic governments, and compared the most common systems of government. Along the way, we’ve talked about the importance of checks and balances and the independence of different branches of government. You may have noticed, though, that we did not talk about how officials are elected. That will be the topic of our next video, where we will explore the different ways in which democratic societies count their votes. For more information and additional resources, please check in the description below this video. And remember to subscribe to catch more of our videos. Thank you for watching, and see you next time!