This is primarily a consequence of the fact that every single nation is different from the other and requires different forms of governments. This paper shall look at four countries- the United States of America, the United Kingdom, India and Sri Lanka. These countries represent different social and political landscapes and also different forms of government. While the United States of America follows a presidential form of governance, India and the United Kingdom are followers of the parliamentary form of government. Sri Lanka has been included in this discussion for a specific purpose- it follows a semi-presidential form of governance which shall enable a student to look at the positives and negatives of either form of government. The fact that the landscapes of these countries are very different in terms of their demographic structures shall also help in a fruitful analysis of difference as a necessity.One of the major problems of a presidential setup is the fact that the personal charisma of the presidential candidate acquires more importance than it needs to. This can be seen in the amount of money that is spent on sprucing up the image of the presidential candidate. It is precisely because of this that the image of the president as a family man and a common man assumes great importance. Issues of development become secondary to the populist appeal that the president has. In such a setup that is meant to not only take a contemptuous view of the intelligence of the masses but also to perpetuate forms of oppression, a lot of money is spent and also, the person’s real abilities may get drowned and unnoticed. As a result of this tremendous need for money, the amount of lobbying in the United States of America has gone up and a lot of money is spent on a less productive activity (Fife 2010).One of the most important differences between the two systems (parliamentary and presidential) is that in the presidential system, the executive, that is the president and his cabinet are elected separately and are not a part of the legislature that forms the laws (Williams 1998, 91). Thus, in presidential systems, there are problems that arise when the president and the party which has the majority in the legislature are not from the same side. One would argue in the light of this statement that parliamentary systems which have a relative unity as a result of the executive being members of the legislature as well work better. But, if one is to
Munroe, Trevor. 1985. An introduction to politics: Lectures for first-year students. Jamaica: Canoe. Print. 53.
Gunlicks, Arthur B. 2011. Comparing Liberal Democracies. Bloomington: iUniverse. Print.
Deogaonkar, S.G. 1997. Parliamentary System in India. New Delhi: Concept. Print. 1.
Fife, Brian L. 2010. Reforming the Electoral Process in America. California: Praegar. Print.
Foucault, Michel. 2006. Power. New York: Penguin. Print.
Linz, Juan J. 1994. Presidential or parliamentary democracy: Does it make a difference? The Failure of Presidential Democracy. Ed. Juan J. Linz and Arturo Valenzuela. Maryland: The John Hopkins University Press. Print.
Williams, Andy. 1998. UK Government and Politics. Oxford: Heinemann. Print. 98.
Ghosh, Amitav. 2000. The Shadow Lines. New York: Penguin. Print.
Hobsbawm, Eric J. 2004. The Age of Revolution. New York: Hachette. Print.
Tharu, Susie. 2009. The Impossible Subject. Caste and gender. Ed. Anupama Rao. New Delhi: Kali. Print. 263.
Singh, Narain. 2004. Married to Separateness. Translating caste. Ed. Tapan Basu. New Delhi: Katha. Print. 98-110.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples