SOUTH EAST ASIAN INSTITUTE OF

TECHNOLOGY, INC.
National Highway, Crossing Rubber, Tupi, South
Cotabato

COLLEGE OF TEACHER EDUCATION

LEARNING MODULE FOR SSE 115 COMPARATIVE GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

COURSE OUTLINE

Course Code:

Course Title: Comparative Government and Politics

Target Population: 2nd year BSED SOCIAL STUDIES

Instructor: KENNY FRITZ E. PAEZ

OVERVIEW

The course enables the students to demonstrate an understanding in comparing

countries, regional blocks, and the state system in terms of their current politico-economic
conditions as shaped by socio-cultural and historical factors.

Course Learning Outcomes

At the end of the course, the pre service instructor should be able to:

A. demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the politico-economic conditions of the

different countries, regional blocks and the state system; and

B. demonstrate an understanding of the politico-economic conditions of the Philippines as

compared to other countries by conducting a symposium/forum.

The following are the topics to be discussed

Week 1 and 2- Nature and Scope of Comparative Government and Politics

Week 3 – Forms of Government and Comparisons of Systems
Week 4 – Institutions
Week 5 – Personalities

Instruction to the Learners

The module is focused on a major lesson according to Comparative Government and Politics
as your subject this semester. Comparative Government and Politics comprises of concepts and
data which you can relate to the country’s event, discover new learnings and develop your
rational thinking you might use in the future.
The units are characterized by continuity, and are arranged in such a manner that the
present unit is related to the next unit. For this reason, you are advised to read this module. After
each unit, there are exercises to be given. Submission of task given will be during your
scheduled class hour.
 WEEK 1 and 2

VISION

A premier institution that provides quality education and globally

empowered individuals

MISSION

To produce competent, community-oriented and globally competitive

individuals through holistic education

CORE VALUES
Service
Excellence
Accountability
Innovation
Teamwork

CASSROOM POLICIES

1. Awareness of intended audience

(e.g., classes are meant for students currently enrolled in the
course and you must not enter or sharelass meeting with someone)
2. General
(e.g., mute microphones when not speaking, raised hand virtually to
ask question, turn off the
camera if you’re stepping away)
3. Discussion
(e.g., you can disagree with others but should do respectfully and
constructively)
4. Privacy
(e.g., students should consult with the instructor to receive
permission to)
5. Communicate instances of disruptive behaviors to the proper
instructor, faculty member or escalate the complaint when
necessary
 Nature and Scope of Comparative Government and Politics

Introduction

Though Comparative Government and Comparative Politics are two different subjects, yet the
modern scientists have laid emphasis on the combined study of both because both are closely
related to one another and the results drawn by separating both shall not be trustworthy. Apart
from this, comparative method has been used for the study of both the subjects. Aristotle, who
is also known as the father of Political Science, made use of ‘Comparative method’ to
understand and comprehend the political problem of his time. His book ‘Politics’ was the result
of the comparative study of the constitutional system of 158 city states.

Birth and Development

Harry H. Eckstein traces the history of the field of comparative politics back to Aristotle, and
sees a string of thinkers from Machiavelli and Montesquieu, to Gaetano Mosca and Max
Weber, Vilfredo Pareto and Robert Michels, on to James Bryce - with his Modern
Democracies (1921) - and Carl Joachim Friedrich - with his Constitutional Government and
Democracy (1937) - contributing to its history.
Two traditions reaching back to Aristotle and Plato
Philippe C. Schmitter argues that the "family tree" of comparative politics has two main
traditions: one, invented by Aristotle, that he calls "sociological constitutionalism"; a second that
he traced back to Plato, that he calls "legal constitutionalism"".
Schmitter places various scholars under each tradition:

1. Sociological constitutionalism: Some classic scholars in this tradition are:

"Polybius, Machiavelli, Montesquieu, Benjamin Constant, Alexis de Tocqueville, Lorenz von
Stein, Karl Marx, Moisei Ostrogorski, Max Weber, Emile Durkheim, Roberto Michels, Gaetano
Mosca, Vilfredo Pareto, and Herbert Tingsten." Schmitter argues that, in the twentieth century,
this tradition was known by the label of "historical political sociology" and included scholars such
as "Stein Rokkan, T.H. Marshall, Reinhard Bendix, Otto Kirchheimer, Seymour Martin
Lipset, Juan Linz, Hans Daalder, Mattei Dogan, S.N. Eisenstadt, Harry Eckstein, and Dankwart
Rustow."

2. Legal constitutionalism: Some classic scholars in this tradition are: "Léon Duguit, Georges
Burdeau, James Bryce, A. Lawrence Lowell, and Woodrow Wilson." Schmitter argues that in the
twentieth century this tradition was continued by: "Maurice Duverger, Herman Finer, Samuel
Finer, Giovanni Sartori, Carl J. Friedrich, Samuel Beer, Jean Blondel, F.A. Hermens, and Klaus
von Beyme."

Periodization as a field of political science

Gerardo L. Munck offers the following periodization for the evolution of modern comparative
politics, as a field of political science - understood as an academic discipline - in the United
States
1. The Constitution of Political Science as a Discipline, 1880–1920
2. The Behavioral Revolution, 1921–66
3. The Post-Behavioral Period, 1967–88
4. The Second Scientific Revolution 1989–2005

Contemporary patterns, 2000-present

Since the turn of the century, several trends in the field can be detected.
End of the pretense of rational choice theory to hegemonize the field
Lack of a unifying metatheory
Greater attention to causal inference, and increased use of experimental methods.
Continued use of observation methods, including qualitative methods.
New concern with a "hegemony of methods" as theorizing is not given as much attention.

Meaning of Comparative Government

Comparative Government includes the theoretical study of the subjects like the various forms of
government, organs of government, their organization and function etc. But no attention is to
paid towards the study of formal and informal factors which influence the working of the
government. Neither the study of the political behavior nor of political processes etc. is made the
subject matter of comparative Government.

Meaning of Comparative Politics

Comparative Politics is not concerned only with the formal institutions rather it is also concerned
with the non-formal institutions and political activities such as elections, electoral behavior,
processions etc. and nongovernmental factors such as caste groups, tribes, language and
religious organizations etc. and their impact on politics.

Meaning and Definitions of Comparative Government and Politics

Generally it is seen that various scholars use the concepts of ‘Comparative Politics’,
Comparative Government, Comparative Constitutions, Comparative Political Systems etc.
interchangeably whereas these concepts are vastly different from each other.
Acc. to Edward Freeman, “Comparative Politics is the comparative analysis of the various forms
of governments and diverse political institutions”.
Acc. to Michael Curtis, “Comparative Politics is concerned with significant regularities,
similarities and differences in the working of Political institutions and in political behavior.”

Characteristics of Comparative Government and Politics

1. Analytical and Empirical investigation.
2. Comparative study of the formal and informal structures
3. Study of infra-structures
4. Emphasis on the study of Developing Societies
5. Emphasis on the Inter-disciplinary method of study
6. Value-free study
7. Quest of theory building
8. Horizontal and vertical comparison

Scope of Comparative Government and Politics

1. Comparative study of Political systems
2. Study of constitutional systems
3. Study of Political culture
4. Study of political Socialization
5. Study of political Ideologies
6. Study of political Participation
7. Study of political groups
8. Study of power, Influence and authority
9. Study of Political Elites, Political Violence and Political Corruption.
10. Study of Political Processes
11. Study of the balance of power between Competing States.
12. Study of Problems of modernization and urbanization
13. Study of the role of the Bureaucracy
14. Study of the political Activities
15. Study of many Whys

Utility of Comparative Government and Politics

1. It enables us to understand similarities and difference between Political systems
2. Knowledge regarding contextual elements of different political Systems
3. Close inter-relations of different countries call for comparative study.
4. Scientific and systematic Study.
5. Study of Developing Countries
6. Emphasis on inter-disciplinary Study.
7. Theory generalization is possible in comparative Politics.
8. Revalidification of Existing Theories
9. It is value- free Study
10. Widen the scope of the Study.
Problems and Limitations of Comparative Politics
1. Lack of common terminology
2. Problems of fact-finding
3. Wide range of variables.
4. Gap between Constitutional Forms and Political Realities
5. Problem of inter-connection between values behavior.
6. Fickle nature of Man
8. Problem of defining of the boundaries
9. Universally acceptable results are not possible

State, Nation, Government and Sovereignty

The State is the most universal and most powerful of all social institutions. The State is a natural
institution. Aristotle said ‘Man (Human) is a social animal and by nature s/he is a political being.
To him, to live in the State and to be a man were identical. The modern term ‘state’ is derived
from the word ‘status’. It was Niccolo Machiavelli (1469 – 1527) who first used the term ‘State’
in his writings. The state is necessary because it comes into existence out of the basic needs of
life. It continues to remain for the sake of good life. The aims, desires, and aspirations of human
beings are translated into action through the State. Though the State is a necessary institution,
no two writers agree on its definition. This disagreement makes the study of the State more
creative and interesting. For instance, we have social Contract theory in political science. The
three main thinkers associated with social contract theory are Thomas
Hobbes, John Locke and Jean Jack Rousseau. The three thinkers collectively agree that
humans need to be controlled by the State. At the same time, they disagree on to what extent
the control can be exercised by the State on humans.

Definition of State

To Woodrow Wilson, “State is people organized for law within a definite territory.”
Aristotle defined the State as a “union of families and villages having for its end a perfect and
self – sufficing life by which it meant a happy and honorable life”.

To Holland, the State is “a numerous assemblage of human beings generally occupying a

certain territory amongst whom the will of the majority or class is made to prevail against any of
their number who oppose it.”

Burgess defines the State as “a particular portion of mankind viewed as an organised unit.”
According to Sidgwick. “State is a combination or association of persons in the form of
government and governed and united together into a politically organised people of a definite
territory.”

According to Garner, “State is a community of people occupying a definite form of territory free
of external control and possessing an organised government to which people show habitual
obedience.”

Professor Laski defines “State as a territorial society divided into government and subjects
whose relationships are determined by the exercise of supreme coercive power.”
Elements of State:

A State stands identified with its four absolutely essential elements:

1. Population:

State is a community of persons. It is a human political institution. Without a population

there can be no State. Population can be more or less but it has to be there. There are States
with very small populations like Switzerland, Canada and others, and there are States like
China, India and others, with very large populations.
The people living in the State are the citizens of the State. They enjoy rights and
freedom as citizens as well as perform several duties towards the State. When citizens of
another State are living in the territory of the State, they are called aliens. All the persons,
citizens as well as aliens, who are living in the territory of the State are duty bound to obey the
state laws and policies. The State exercises supreme authority over them through its
government.
There is no definite limit for the size of population essential for a State. However, it is
recognized that the population should be neither too large nor very small. It has to be within a
reasonable limit. It should be determined on the basis of the size of the territory of the State, the
available resources, the standard of living expected and needs of defense, production of goods
and supplies. India has a very large and fast growing population and there is every need to
check population growth. It is essential for enhancing the ability of India to register a high level
of sustainable development.

2. Territory:
Territory is the second essential element of the State. State is a territorial unit. Definite
territory is its essential component. A State cannot exist in the air or at sea. It is essentially a
territorial State. The size of the territory of a State can be big or small; nevertheless it has to be
a definite, well-marked portion of territory.
States like Russia, Canada, U.S.A., India, China, Brazil and some others are large sized
states whereas Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Switzerland, Togo, Brundi and many others
are States with small territories. The whole territory of the state is under the sovereignty or
supreme power of the State. All persons, organizations, associations, institutions and places
located within its territory are under the sovereign jurisdiction of the State.
Further, it must be noted that the territory of the state includes not only the land but also, rivers,
lakes, canals inland seas if any, a portion of coastal sea—territorial waters or maritime belt,
continental shelf, mountains, hills and all other land features along with the air space above the
territory.
The territory of the state can also include some islands located in the sea. For example
Anadaman & Nicobar and Daman and Diu are parts of India. State exercises sovereignty over
all parts of its territory. Ships of the State are its floating parts and Aero-planes are its flying
parts. Even a States can lease out its territory to another State e.g. India has given on lease the
Teen Bigha corridor to Bangladesh.

3. Government:
Government is the organization or machinery or agency or magistracy of the State which
makes, implements, enforces and adjudicates the laws of the state. Government is the third
essential element of the State. The state exercises its sovereign power through its government.
This sometimes creates the impression that there is no difference between the State and
Government. However it must be clearly noted that government is just one element of the State.
It is the agent or the working agency of the State. Sovereignty belongs to the State; the
government only uses it on behalf of the State.

Each government has three organs:

(1) Legislature—which formulates the will of State i.e. performs law-making functions;

(2) Executive— enforces and implements the laws i.e. performs the law-application functions;

(3) Judiciary—which applies the laws to specific cases and settles the disputes i.e. performs
adjudication functions.
Government as a whole is the instrument through which the sovereign power of the State gets
used.
In ancient times, the King used to perform all functions of the government and all powers
of governance stood centralized in his hands. Gradually, however, the powers of King got
decentralized and these came to be exercised by these three organs of the government:
Legislature, Executive and Judiciary.
Each of these three organs of the government carries out its assigned functions.
Independence of Judiciary is also a settled rule. The relationship between the Legislature and
Executive is defined by law and it corresponds to the adopted form of government. In a
Parliamentary form of government, like the one which is working in India and Britain, the
legislature and executive are closely related and the latter is collectively responsible before the
former.
In the Presidential form, as is in operation in the U.S.A., the legislature and executive are two
independent and separate organs with stable and fixed tenures, and the executive is not
responsible to legislature. It is directly responsible to the people.
Government is an essential element of State. However it keeps on changing after
regular intervals. Further, Government can be of any form—Monarchy or Aristocracy or
Dictatorship or Democracy. It can be either Parliamentary or Presidential or both. It can be
Unitary or Federal or of mixture of these two in its organization and working. In contemporary
times every civilized State has a democratic representative, responsible transparent and
accountable government.

4. Sovereignty:

Sovereignty is the most exclusive element of State. State alone possess sovereignty. Without
sovereignty no state can exit. Some institutions can have the first three elements (Population
Territory and Government) but not sovereignty.
State has the exclusive title and prerogative to exercise supreme power over all its people and
territory. In fact, Sovereignty is the basis on which the State regulates all aspects of the life of
the people living in its territory.

As the supreme power of the State, Sovereignty has two dimensions:

Internal Sovereignty and External Sovereignty.
(i) Internal Sovereignty:
It means the power of the State to order and regulate the activities of all the people, groups and
institutions which are at work within its territory. All these institutions always act in accordance
with the laws of the State. The State can punish them for every violation of any of its laws.
(ii) External Sovereignty:
It means complete independence of the State from external control. It also means the full
freedom of the State to participate in the activities of the community of nations. Each state has
the sovereign power to formulate and act on the basis of its independent foreign policy.

We can define external sovereignty of the State as its sovereign equality with every other state.
State voluntarily accepts rules of international law. These cannot be forced upon the State. India
is free to sign or not to sign any treaty with any other state. No state can force it to do so.
No State can really become a State without sovereignty. India became a State in 1947 when it
got independence and sovereignty. After her independence, India got the power to exercise
both internal and external Sovereignty. Sovereignty permanently, exclusively and absolutely
belongs to the State. End of sovereignty means end of the State. That is why sovereignty is
accepted as the exclusive property and hallmark of the State.
These are the four essential elements of a State. A State comes to be a state only when it has
all these elements. Out of these four elements, Sovereignty stands accepted as the most
important and exclusive element of the State.
No other organization or institution can claim sovereignty. An institution can have population,
territory and government but not sovereignty. Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Orissa, Punjab,
Sikkim, in fact all states of the Indian Union have their populations, territories and governments.
These are also loosely called states. Yet these are not really states. These are integral
parts of the Indian State. Sovereignty belongs to India. Sikkim was a state before it joined India
in 1975. Now it is one of the 28 states of India. UNO is not a state and so is the case of the
Commonwealth of Nations, because these do not possess sovereignty. SAARC is not a state. It
is only a regional association of sovereign states of South Asia.
India, China, U.S.A., U.K., France, Germany, Japan, Australia, Egypt, South Africa,
Brazil, Argentina and others such countries are States because each of these possesses all the
four essential elements of state. The presence of all these four elements alone vests a State
with real statehood.

Inherent Power of State

Inherent
As being inherent, it means that as long as the state exists, this power can never be taken
away.

1. Power of Taxation – An inherent power of the state exercised through legislature, to impose
burdens upon subjects and objects within its jurisdiction, for the purpose of raising revenues to
carry out the legitimate objects of the government.
An inherent power of the state exercised through the legislature.

Scope
to impose burdens upon subjects and objects within its jurisdiction.

Purpose
for raising revenue to carry out the legitimate objects of the government

Revenue Objective – To build a just and human society and the establishment of a government
under certain ideals and aspirations.

Sumptuary Objective – An implement of the police power of the state for regulatory purposes.
In this case, it is used in furtherance of any government objective either as an incentive or
deterrence. As an implement, the generation of revenue is merely incidental or in furtherance
thereof. (Lutz v. Araneta, 98 Phil 148).

Compensatory Objective – For social justice purposes or other purposes or other legitimate
objectives of the State, with a view to realize social justice, equitable distribution of wealth,
economic progress and other similar objectives (Southern Cross Cement Corp. v. Cement
Manufacturers Assoc. of the Phi GR 158540)

2. Police Power – This is the power vested in the Legislature by the Constitution to make,
ordain, and establish all manner of wholesome and reasonable laws, statutes and ordinances,
either with penalties or without, not repugnant to the Constitution, for the good and welfare of
the State and its subjects.

Basis
this power is based on the legal maxim “salus populi est suprema lex” (the voice of the people is
the supreme law). Every citizen of every community, in a civilized society must bear certain
burdens imposed for the good of all.

Note
No right is absolute in the face of the common good.

Nature
Police power is an attribute of sovereignty and founded on the obligation of the State to provide
protection for its citizens and the safety and good order of society.

Scope
Police power is founded on which our social system rests and has for its object the improvement
of social and economic conditions affecting the community. It depends on the security of the
social order, life and health of citizens, comfort and existence in a thickly populated community,
enjoyment of social life, and beneficial use of property.
Requisites
1. Interest of the public is general, not that of pa particular class
2. Means used are reasonably necessary for the purpose, and not unduly oppressive upon
individuals

3. Power of Eminent – This is the right of the State to acquire private property for public use
upon payment of just compensation and observance of due process.

Basis
it is based on genuine necessity and that necessity must be of public character. It must be
reasonable and practicable such that it would greatly benefit the public with the least
inconvenience and expense to the condemning party ad property owner consistent with such
benefit.

Requisites
1. There must be taking of public property
2. It must be for public use
3. There must be just compensation
4. Due process of law must be observed in taking of the of property

Distinction:

Police Power Eminent Domain Taxation

To regulate the activities To raise Revenue

for welfare/Property is To take Property for and support of the
As to Purpose
taken for public use public use government
Public purpose Constitution and

As to Exercising Government /
Government Government
Authority Private Entities

The owner is paid

As to the Amount of Sufficient to cover the the fair market value
No Limit
Imposition costs of regulation of the property
expropriated

None. Compensation Compensation is

here refers to the the protection and
Just Compensation
intangible, public
– the full and fair
As to Compensation altruistic feeling improvements
equivalent of the
that the individual has instituted by the
property taken.
contributed to government for the
the public good taxes paid

liberty and Property

As to property rights
property Community or
Object/Persons Owner of the
Community or class of
affected property
class of individuals individuals

As to the Non- Superior to the Superior and may Inferior to the

Impairment “Non-Impairment override the “Non- “Non- Impairment
Clause/Relationship Clause” of the Impairment Clause” Clause” of
with the Constitution Constitution of the Constitution the Constitution

Similarities:
1. They are indispensable to the existence of a state.
2. They are inherent rights which means that they can exist without the constitution.
3. They are the means by which the state interferes with private rights and properties.
4. These powers are generally exercised by the legislature.
5. They contemplate an equivalent compensation or benefit.

Nation

The world is constantly changing, from prehistoric times to the present, but it was not until a
few hundred years ago that the concept of Nation emerged, a concept full of its own
characteristics and elements that call for a sense of belonging. What is a nation? What
elements compose it? What are the differences between a nation, a government and a
state? Nation definition political science
What is a nation?

A nation can be defined as a set of people identified by a territory, a race, a language and
some customs in common, generally they constitute a town or country. This word has its
origin from the Latin natio, which in turn is derived from nascor, which means to be born, so it
could be taken as meaning “birth” with respect to a people, species or class.
What characterizes a nation is the cultural, historical, social and political identity of a group of
people. Following the same sense, it can be said that the feeling of a nation is the shared
thought of a group of people who are united by cultural ties.
Elements of a Nation political science
In order to consider a territory as a nation, three elements are necessary, which will be
mentioned below:

Territory: this is the geographic space where the group of people is established.

Population: is the group of people who are in the geographic space and make up the nation.

National consciousness: this is the unit resulting from the elements that the group of people
have in common, such as: customs, religion, race, language, among other elements that make
them share the same goals and ideals.
 WEEK 1 and 2 ACTIVITY

GENERAL INSTRUCTION: Provide what is being asked. Attach your activity to the multimedia
outlet (google classroom/messenger/Facebook classroom) being required by the instructor on
or before the deadline.

TASK 1
ANSWER THE FOLLOWING

1. Can a state survive without a government? (Explain your answer, minimum of 300 words)
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

2. Sovereignty consider as the exclusive element of state. Why does sovereignty matter? Cite
an example of a possible threat or an actual threat to Philippine Sovereignty at present time and
explain why it is important to address it.
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

3. Using a Venn diagram, give the similarities and differences of Nation and State.
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
___________________________END OF WEEK 1 and
2_______________________________

SOUTH EAST ASIAN INSTITUTE OF

TECHNOLOGY, INC.
National Highway, Crossing Rubber, Tupi, South
Cotabato

COLLEGE OF TEACHER EDUCATION

LEARNING MODULE FOR COMPARATIVE GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

 WEEK 3

FORMS OF GOVERNMENT and COMPARISONS OF SYSTEM

While there are numerous political philosophies and systems, there are specific
types of government that are most common around the world. Most forms of
government are some variation of one of the following.

Authoritarian- In an authoritarian regime, the government has total control.

Authoritarian regimes have typically earned this control by forceful means. While
this seems pretty cut and dried, it is anything but. Authoritarian regimes aren’t
always easy to recognize. They might still hold elections and have branches of
government, but only a small group holds the power. Authoritarian regimes can be
monarchies or various forms of government including communism, fascism and
socialism

Saudi Arabia under Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman, is an authoritarian state
as well as an absolute monarchy. All the power rests in the hands of the ruling
family, the House of Saud, and the majority of the kingdom’s most important
positions are filled by members of the royal family or report directly to the royal
family

During the 20th century, Argentina become authoritarian under President Juan
Perón. Perón imposed mass censorship by closing down over 100 publications
between 1943 and 1946 and having opposition members imprisoned and even
tortured. After Perón went into exile in 1955, the following administrations also
employed authoritarian tactics.

When Hugo Chávez became president of Venezuela in 1999, the country

implemented democratic socialism and a presidential government. However, it also
become increasingly authoritarian under Chávez and later Nicolás Maduro

Democracy- A popular form of government in the modern era is democracy, which

is an example of a limited government. In direct contrast to an authoritarian
government, a democracy exists when the people hold the power. Different types of
democracy include direct and representative. Most democracies around the world
are representative democracies, but there are many types of democracy.

The United States is often cited as an example of representative democracy, or a

democratic republic. More specifically, the U. S. is a federal republic with a
democratic government and a capitalistic economy. There are several other
examples and types of democracy in the world, including, but certainly not limited
to:

 Parliamentary democracy - In a parliamentary democracy, the head of

state is different from the head of government. In the United Kingdom, the
head of state is the monarch, who serves a primarily ceremonial role, and the
head of government is the prime minister. Executive power is exercised by
the House of Commons and House of Commons on behalf of the monarch to
represent the people. The people vote for members of parliament in
elections, and the party with the most representatives appoints the prime
minister
  Presidential democracy- The United States is an example of a presidential
democracy. There are three branches of government: executive, legislative
and judicial. The president is the head of the executive branch of government
and the head of state. The people elect the president as well as the
representatives in the Senate and House of Representatives, which make up
the legislative branch. Only the judicial branch is not elected by the people;
instead, they are chosen by the president.

 Direct democracy - Switzerland is a unique example of direct democracy in

practice and has been since 1846. Unlike other democracies, in a direct
democracy electorates may determine policy without legislative
representatives, as opposed to electing representatives as proxies. For
example, any citizen can challenge a law passed by parliament or propose an
amendment to the constitution, and a referendum is mandatory to make
changes to the constitution.

Monarchy- Monarchy is not as common as democracy now, but it was historically

one of the most common forms of government. In a monarchy, one family rules, and
their title is passed down through the generations. However, much like a
democracy, who is in charge isn’t totally cut and dried. In an absolute monarchy,
the king or ruler is in control of all the government. The more common
constitutional monarchy has a royal family, but they serve mostly as ceremonial
figures. Examples of monarchies that exist today include:

 Constitutional monarchy- In the United Kingdom, Queen Elizabeth is

the figurehead monarch, but parliament has most government control.

 Absolute monarchy -Vatican City is not only its own country, it's also a
monarchy where one figure, the pope, rules as sovereign.

Oligarchy- Similar to a monarchy, an oligarchy places power with a few people or

families, typically a country’s wealthy elite. Unlike aristocracy, oligarchy is not
necessarily dependent on noble birth, but on wealth or those who are deemed most
“capable” of ruling. The term is derived from the Greek words for "few" oligon and
"rule" arkho.

There are multiple types of oligarchies, including autocracy (one dictator rules over
everything), plutocracy (rule by the wealthy), stratocracy (rule by the military), and
theocracy (rule by religion). Some historical and current examples of oligarchies
include:

 Autocracy – Russia has had an oligarchy for centuries beginning in the 15th century
and continuing to the modern day. The wealthy elite have long wielded
undue influence in government. In particular, the Russian czars positioned
themselves as autocrats and later on after the revelation and rise of the
Soviet Union, dictators like Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin also took on
autocratic roles.
 Plutocracy- City-states like Athens and Sparta in Ancient Greece were ruled
by wealthy men who shared king-like power, which they used to enrich
themselves at the expense of the common people.

 Stratocracy- Following numerous wars and gradual expansion, a stratocratic

system developed over time in Ancient Rome. After the Marian reforms in
107 B.C., the military became the de facto political power as loyalty
transferred from the Senate to the generals.
  Theocracy- Modern Iran has a mixed theocratic government where there is a
supreme leader, president and several councils, but the laws of the
constitution and justice in the state are based on Islamic law.

Totalitarian- When you think of a totalitarian government, it takes absolute power

to the extreme. These leaders control not only the government but also the
personal lives of their people. Citizens have no say in government, and the
totalitarian regime is 100% in charge. This type of government is forceful and
extreme and can come in the form of fascism, socialism or communism.
 Nazi Germany, Adolf Hitler used totalitarian tactics to achieve control over
Germany with the goal of extending his power across Europe. He used this for
control over the people as well as to justify the genocide of millions.
 Leaders of the Soviet Union like Vladimir Lenin and especially Joseph Stalin silenced
opposition to the state, going so far as to have political enemies imprisoned
and even killed. His actions resulted in the deaths of millions.
 Benito Mussolini used secret police to silence opposition to his regime in
Fascist Italy.
 Chairman Mao Zedong of the People’s Republic of China led the country in
the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, which resulted in the
collapse of the Chinese economy and the deaths of up to 45 million people.
 In modern times, North Korea is a prime example of a totalitarian
government because it is a one-party communist dictatorship where only one
family, the Kims, hold the power.
Anarchy- isn’t a type of government; it’s actually the absence of one. In an
anarchist society, a central governing body doesn’t exist. Many times, anarchy will
take center stage when a government collapses. There are currently no true
anarchist country. The closest example in recent history was Somalia, which had no
government from 1991 to 2006, but today it is a federal parliamentary republic.
While anarchy has not been implemented on a large scale in the modern world,
there are communities such as Freetown Christiana in Copenhagen, Denmark,
which is one of the few anarchist communities that is still functioning.

Aristocracy- In an aristocracy, the wealthy or noble hold the power. These

privileged few leaders make up the ruling class or elite. Historically, Ancient Greece
had an aristocratic government. A modern example is the royal family in the U.K.,
which has an aristocracy known as the peerage as well as a monarchy.

Meritocracy - Is a social system in which success and status in life depend primarily on
individual talents, abilities, and effort. It is a social system in which people advance on the basis
of their merits.
A meritocratic system contrasts with aristocracy, for which people advance on the basis of the
status and titles of family and other relations.
From the days of Aristotle, who coined the term "ethos," the idea of awarding positions of power
to those most capable have been a part of political discussion not only for governments but for
business endeavors as well.
Many Western societies--the United States chief among them--are commonly
considered to be meritocracies, meaning these societies are built on the belief that anyone can
make it with hard work and dedication. Social scientists often refer to this as the "bootstrap
ideology," evoking the popular notion of "pulling" oneself "up by the bootstraps."
However, many challenge the validity of the position that Western societies are meritocracies,
perhaps rightfully so. Widespread evidence exists, to varying degrees, within each of these
societies of structural inequalities and systems of oppression designed and developed
specifically to limit opportunities based on class, gender, race, ethnicity, ability, sexuality, and
other social markers.

Dictatorship- Typically, a dictatorship goes hand-in-hand with an authoritarian and

totalitarian government. In this government form, a dictator rules. They typically
assert their authority using military power, which is called a military dictatorship.
There have been many dictatorships throughout history. Famous example include
Joseph Stalin’s rule of the Soviet Union, Saddam Hussein’s rule of Iraq and North
Korea.

Federalism- is all about dividing power. Not only does the government have
central power, but local states or regions also have their own specific powers. For
example, in the U.S. the federal government is the central power, but the individual
states all have their own regional and state governing laws. This means state laws
might be different in California than they are in Tennessee.

Republicanism - Many times, you see ‘’Republic of” this or that country. When
something is a true republic as in republicanism, it means the citizens have the
power. They have the voting power and the power to make changes in their
government. Now, republicanism can get quite confusing because it typically goes
hand-in-hand with federalism and theocracy. Some countries have a parliamentary
system and thus a parliamentary republic and countries with presidents are
presidential republics. Germany is a notable example of a republic, as it is
specifically a federal, democratic, constitutional republic. Some examples of
republics include Austria, Chile, the Czech Republic, Israel, Mexico, the Philippines,
Uganda, and more.

Tribalism- Indigenous tribes around the globe use a form of government called
tribalism. In this form of government, you follow the dictates and rules of your tribe,
which is made of specific people groups or those with the same ideals. There can be
a council of elders making decisions, but not always. Each tribe is unique. While
tribalism is becoming less and less common, tribes in Africa still use this form of
government.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Parliamentary Systems

Like other systems of government, cabinet system is practiced by many countries of the world
because of its numerous advantages that fits the system. However, that does not also mean
that the system lacks its own disadvantages anyway. Like Johan Cruyff said “Every
advantage has its disadvantage”.

Conversely, today I will be sharing with you the advantages and disadvantages of parliament
system of government. Coupled with that, I am going to explain briefly what parliamentary
system of government is all about.

What is a parliamentary or cabinet system of government?

Simply put, a parliamentary or cabinet system of government is a system where the head of
state is different from the head of government. In this system of government, the head of state
who exercises only ceremonial functions may be a monarch, or a president, who is the figure
head, symbol of the state and the father or mother of the Nation

Advantages of Parliament system of government

Below are the advantages of merits of a parliamentary or cabinet system of government:

1. It reduces friction, creates friendship and promotes co-operation between the two
arms of government:
Parliamentary system of government is advantageous because it create a friendly relationship
between the executive and legislative arm of the government. This is so because, the two arms
of the government are not separated.

In light of that, Instead of creating a situation where all the organs of the government will be
separated, and given the power to check and question the activities of each other, as postulated
in the principle of separation of powers; It helps free flow of information between the two arms of
the government and bridges grasp that may lead to misunderstanding.
 2. Faster and quicker decision making:
When the legislative and executive arms of the government in a parliamentary system of
government are joint together, it is usually faster and quicker for decisions to be made.

The fusion of powers makes parliamentary approval of the policies and programs of government
fast, thereby helping quick decision and implementation of government policies and programs.

3. It requires less personnel and less cost:

Unlike a presidential system where all the arms of government are separated and occupied by
different set of people, the fusion of the legislature and the executive in a parliamentary system
of government means that less personnel and cost are required to run a cabinet system of
government.

Conversely, it is right to say that parliamentary system of government is less expensive than a
presidential system.

4. It promotes good governance:

Parliamentary system of government also promote good governance because the individual and
collective responsibility of the executive to the parliament will make all members of the cabinet
to work hard for the successful administration of the country. It also ensures accountability and
transparency.

Disadvantages of parliamentary system of government

1. Members of the parliament will become too powerful, arrogant and likely to abuse
power:
While parliamentary system may seem to always promote good governance, it will also make
members of the parliament to become too powerful, arrogant and this might also lead to the
abuse of political powers.

In other words, members of the parliament in a parliamentary system of government are

Supreme and unquestionable.

2. The Prime Minister is loyal to his party:

In a parliamentary system of government, the prime minister is usually loyal to his party and not
the people because he is directly elected as he becomes Prime Minister by virtue of being the
leader of his party. Thus, he will tend to be loyal to his party and not his people.

3. Uncertainty and instability in government:

No doubt, in a parliamentary system of government, there is always uncertainty of the tenure of
office of the prime minister as the parliament can give a “vote of no confidence” to dismiss
him at any time.

This may lead to crisis, segregation or instability in governance.

4. Overload of the functions of the cabinet:

The fusion of the legislative and executive functions in the members of the cabinet may
overburden the members of the cabinet with double functions and some ministers may not cope
well.

It can also lead to the ineffectiveness of the government because the fusion of powers and
functions of the legislative and executive arms of government will be too much for only the
cabinet to handle.

5 Lack of specialization leading to inefficiency:

Lastly, while it is true that parliamentary system requires less personnel to handle both
legislative and executive functions, it is important to note that a minister may lack specialization
in the art of governance in one arm of government, thus leading to inefficiency in such regard.

Wrapping up:
By way of conclusion, it is worthwhile to note that parliamentary system of government has been
criticized by many political scientists over the years. One of the major criticisms of this system of
government is the fact that; there is always uncertainty of the tenure of office of the prime
minister.

This is so because the parliament, by a vote of “no confidence” can dismiss the cabinet and
elect a new party leader as Prime Minister to form a new cabinet. This is also one of the
disadvantages of the system which I have already explained above.

Presidential System
is a form of government where there is a separation of functions between the executive organ
and legislative organ of government. In this system, all the three arms of government are
independent of one another. Every arm of government performs its official functions or
statutory responsibilities without any interference by the other organ(s).

Meanwhile the chief executive officer of the state is the president at federal
level of government and in the regional levels, we have Governor and Chairman for state and
local governments respectively.

Advantages of Presidential System of Government

The presidential system of government has the following advantages:

1. The system allows a strong president to achieve all his objectives.

2. The operation of the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances allows
branches of government to act as checks on another thereby preventing abuse of power.
3. It leads to stability of government. The absence of any official opposition reduces the
possibility of cleavages and tension in the political system.

 Cleavages — political cleavages are internal divisions that structure society and may be
based on class, ethnicity, religion, and/or territory.

4. It gives the president a lot of discretion to appoint into government people who are best able
to contribute to the development of the country. The president acts as a catalyst for coalition
among interests that would otherwise be at loggerheads; it is a political innovation which has
kept a very heterogeneous society like the United States for over 200 years. Thus, the
presidential system is most suitable for complex societies that may be ethnically divided.
5. It facilitates quick decision-making especially in times of emergency. The president can, for
instance declare a state of emergency in a state where law and order is threatened and seek
retrospective approval of the legislature later.
6. A minister can easily be removed or dismissed for non-performance without any threat to
political stability.
7. The system facilitates the mobilization of people for development.
8. The presidential system is not encumbered by party pressure. In this system, the president
is the father of the nation and he is supposed to be above partisan politics.
9. The presidential system is, to a large extent, in tune with the traditional African concept of
leadership whereby power is concentrated in the hands of the ruler.

Disadvantages of Presidential System of Government

The major disadvantages of Presidential System include the following:

1. The system confers a lot of power on the president and this may lead to abuse of power and
dictatorship. For example, the first major decision of the newly elected president
of Liberia, Mrs. Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, in January 2006 was to sack all the staff of
the Ministry of Finance ostensibly to check corruption. Although she later reversed the
decision following widespread criticism, the fact remains that presidential power can be
abused by incumbents.
2. Where in a presidential system there is both a president and a prime minister (as in France),
it may create conflicts between the two leaders which may threaten security and political
stability. For example, both President – Joseph Kasavubu and the Prime Minister – Patrice
Lumumba of the former Congo Kinshasha were constantly at loggerheads and the conflicts
between them eventually led to the assassination of Patrice Lumumba in 1960, just a few
months after assuming power.
3. The presidential system is very expensive to operate. The 1999 Constitution of Nigeria, for
example, stipulates that the president shall appoint at least one minister from each state of
the federation (36). So at any given time, Nigeria must have at least 36 or 37 ministers if the
FCT Abuja is counted as a state. Britain has only 20 cabinet ministers. Besides, the
president has several presidential advisers and other presidential aides. The same system is
replicated at the state level. Moreover, some institutions are specifically created to serve the
presidency.
4. Because of the huge resources at his disposal, the president may “seek to control the
legislature and thereby influence the law-making process. This may create conflicts between
the two branches of government. On the other hand, a weak president may allow power to
fall into the hand of the legislature.
5. It is difficult, if not impossible, to remove a president from office through impeachment. In the
political history of the United States of America, only one president had been so removed
from office.
6. There is always the danger of arbitrary dismissal of ministers who are, in the first place ‘hand
-picked’ by the president.
7. The loyalty of the ministers is to the president instead of the legislature which is the true
representative of the people.
8. Lobbying, as a feature of the presidential system of government, may lead to corruption and
nepotism.
9. Where the legislature and the executive are controlled by different political parties, a
stalemate may occur.
10. The principle of strict separation of powers often inhibits the smooth running of government
as the checks and balances of the system are not always genuinely used except when they
are employed to extract concessions from the chief executive and his team.
11. The President may not be responsive to public opinion, and the electorate may therefore be
saddled with an ineffective president for four or more years.

Bicameralism VS Unicameralism

What Is a Bicameral System?

A bicameral system describes a government that has a two-house legislative system, such as
the House of Representatives and the Senate that make up the U.S. Congress. The word
bicameral is derived from the Latin: "bi" (meaning two) and "camera" (meaning chamber). The
British Parliament, a bicameral system, has been the model for most parliamentary systems
around the world.

In the Philippines, this complexity is made complicated through a system of bicameralism.

Bicameral comes from the Middle English word bi- meaning two and the Latin word camera or
room. Our legislature, the Philippine Congress, is bicameral since it has two chambers, the
Philippine Senate as the upper House and the House of Representatives as the lower House.
  A bicameral system is a government style with two separate divisions within the
legislative branch of government.
 The U.S. bicameral system is divided into the House of Representatives and the
Senate.
 The majority of international governments use the unicameral system—with a roughly
60/40 split between unicameral and bicameral.
 Each house of the legislative branch has differing powers to ensure there are checks
and balances within the system.
 The more populous House of Representatives branch has less stringent requirements
for members when it comes to age and citizenship length compared to the Senate.

Unicameral System
What Is a Unicameral System?
A unicameral system is a government with one legislative house or chamber. Unicameral is the
Latin word that describes a single-house legislative system. Countries with unicameral
governments include Armenia, Bulgaria, Denmark, Hungary, Monaco, Ukraine, Serbia, Turkey,
and Sweden. Unicameral systems became more popular during the 20th century and some
countries, including Greece, New Zealand, and Peru, switched from a bicameral to a
unicameral system.

Smaller countries with long-established democracies tend to have unicameral systems while
larger countries may have either a unicameral or bicameral system.

 A unicameral system is a government with one legislative house or chamber.

 Armenia, Bulgaria, Denmark, Hungary, Monaco, Ukraine, Serbia, Turkey, and Sweden
have unicameral systems.
 Smaller countries with long-established democracies tend to have unicameral systems.
 Advantages of a unicameral system are that laws may be passed more efficiently and
they can be less costly.
Understanding a Unicameral System
To understand how a unicameral system works, consider the national government of Sweden.
Sweden has a parliamentary system with a king as the formal head of the country and the
prime minister serving as the seat of executive power. There are 349 seats in the Parliament
and any political party that receives at least 4% of the vote during the national vote is granted
seats. The number of seats each party receives is based on the number of votes received and
proportional representation by electoral district. In 2020, nine parties had seats in Parliament,
led by the Social Democrats with 100 seats, or 28.7%, and closely followed by the Moderates,
with 70 seats, or about 20.1%. The Green Party and the Independents had the smallest share
at 4.6% and 0.6% seats, respectively.

Parliament votes on legislative bills, which are proposed by Members of Parliament (MPs) or
by government. All bills except the budget and changes to the Constitution are approved by a
simple majority vote of the Parliament. Parliament also approves the prime minister. The
Parliament meets annually and elections are held every four years. Neither the prime minister
nor MPs have term limits.

Advantages of a Unicameral vs. Bicameral System

While the major advantage of a bicameral system is that it can provide for checks and
balances and prevent potential abuses of power, it can also lead to gridlock that makes the
passage of laws difficult. A major advantage of a unicameral system is that laws can be passed
more efficiently. A unicameral system may be able to pass legislation too easily, however, and
a proposed law that the ruling class supports may be passed even if the majority of citizens do
not support it. Special interest groups may influence a unicameral legislature more easily than
a bicameral one, and group think may be more likely to occur. Because unicameral systems
require fewer legislators than bicameral systems, however, they may require less money to
operate. These systems may also introduce fewer bills and have shorter legislative sessions.

A unicameral system for the U.S. government was proposed by the Articles of Confederation in
1781, but the delegates to the Constitutional Convention in 1787 created a plan for a bicameral
system that was modeled on the English system. America’s founders could not agree on
whether the states should each have the same number of representatives or whether the
number of representatives should be based on population. The founders decided to do both in
an agreement known as the Great Compromise, establishing the bicameral system of the
Senate and the House that we still use today.

The U.S. federal government and all the states except Nebraska use a bicameral system while
U.S. cities, counties, and school districts commonly use the unicameral system, as do all the
Canadian provinces. Initially, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Vermont had unicameral legislatures
based on the idea that a true democracy should not have two houses representing an upper
class and a common class. Instead, a democracy should have single house representing all
people. Each of these states turned to a bicameral system: Georgia in 1789, Pennsylvania in
1790, and Vermont in 1836. Similar to the United States, Australia also has just one state with
a unicameral system: Queensland.

A Republican named George Norris successfully campaigned to change Nebraska’s legislature

from a bicameral to a unicameral system in 1937. Norris claimed that the bicameral system
was outdated, inefficient, and unnecessary. Norris said a unicameral system could maintain a
system of checks and balances by relying on the power of citizens to vote and petition and by
relying on the Supreme Court and the governor on matters that required another opinion.
Further, a bill may only contain one subject and may not pass until five days after its
introduction. Most Nebraska bills also receive a public hearing and each bill must be voted on
separately three times.

Some countries with unicameral systems have always held such a system while others have
changed at some point by merging two houses or abolishing one. New Zealand abolished its
upper house in the early 1950s when the Opposition party took control from the Labor party
and voted to do away with the upper house.

Bicameralism vs. Unicameralism

Worldwide, about 41% of governments are bicameral and about 59% are unicameral. Other
countries that have a bicameral system include Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, the
U.K., Ireland, the Netherlands, Russia, Spain, and the Czech Republic.

The size, term of office, and method of election (directly elected, indirectly elected, appointed,
or other) for each chamber of a bicameral system will vary by country. Unicameral systems
became more popular during the 20th century, and some countries, including Greece, New
Zealand, and Peru, switched systems from bicameral to unicameral.
 WEEK 3 ACTIVITY

GENERAL INSTRUCTION: Provide what is being asked. Attach your activity to the multimedia
outlet (google classroom/messenger/Facebook classroom) being required by the instructor on
or before the deadline.

TASK 1
ANSWER THE FOLLOWING (CHOOSE 1 QUESTION)

1. Writing Exposition, write an article

A. Which among the forms of government is best suited in the Philippines?

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

2. Which among the countries in the world exercise the best form of system?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
___________________________ END OF WEEK 3 __________________________

SOUTH EAST ASIAN INSTITUTE OF

TECHNOLOGY, INC.
National Highway, Crossing Rubber, Tupi, South
Cotabato

COLLEGE OF TEACHER EDUCATION

LEARNING MODULE FOR COMPARATIVE GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

 WEEK 4

POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS

Political Institutions- are the organizations in a government that create, enforce, and apply
laws. They often mediate conflict, make (governmental) policy on the economy and social
systems, and otherwise provide representation for the population.

Political Institutions, in Brief

Political institutions and systems have a direct impact on the business environment and
activities of a country. For example, a political system that is straightforward and evolving when
it comes to the political participation of the people and laser-focused on the well-being of its
citizens contributes to positive economic growth in its region.

Every society must have a type of political system so that it may allocate resources and ongoing
procedures appropriately. A political institution sets the rules in which an orderly society obeys
and ultimately decides and administers the laws for those that do not obey.
Constitution

The fundamental law, written or unwritten, that establishes the character of a government by
Defining the basic principles to which a society must conform; by describing the organization
of
The government and regulation, distribution, and limitations on the functions of different gove
rnment departments; and by prescribing the extent and manner of the exercise of its soverei
gn powers.

May be defined as an organization of offices in a state, by which the method of their distribution
is fixed,the sovereign authority is determined, and the nature of the end to be pursued by the as
sociation and all its members is prescribed. Laws, as distinct from the frame of the constitution,
are the rules by which the magistrates should exercise their powers, and should watch and chec
k transgressors.

Electoral System
Is an essential component of any legal framework because such a system defines the
integration of elected public offices and the relation between the political parties in a country,
in a State, or in a group of countries. Among other things, the legal framework should clearly
establish the type of electoral system and the regular scheduling of elections.

Broadly speaking, an electoral system can be defined as the regulation of the election of
public officials. In a more constrained definition, an electoral system can be seen as the
regulation of the relation between voting and the elected officials. Therefore, an electoral
system is the way in which votes can be translated into elected representatives, and so their
political content is rather clear. Such regulations result in the enactment of very important
legislative decisions.

The design of an electoral system, seen in a more restricted way, refers not only to practices
of parliamentary systems, but also to practices of both presidential systems and constitutional
monarchies. In respect to the election of public officials, the selection of the electoral system
is important. If the electoral system follows the majority principle, then the candidates who
have more votes than their opponents are declared the winning ones. On the contrary, if the
winner is elected in a second round out of the winner of the first round and the runner-up, or if
the winner is elected in an indirect way (as it happens in the United States), the results can be
quite different.
Electoral systems have to be based on Constitutional Law and other Legislation. As we have
said, the design of electoral systems determines the ways in which votes are turned into
public offices. In other words, such a design determines how voting affects political
representation. That’s why an electoral system’s regulation begins at the constitutional level,
and continues at the legislative one.

A couple of characteristics distinguish the fundamental components of an electoral system (on

the one hand, they affect the way in which votes are turned into political representation; they
can be distinguished from others according to the political decisions which outline each one of
them). Bearing this in mind, the fundamental components of an electoral system which have
to be included in electoral legislation can be listed as follows:
The regional division for electoral purposes, which refers to the geographic territory used to
turn votes into congressional seats.

The electoral system (which can either recognize relative majorities–which can be simple,
absolute or qualified—or proportional representation).
The mathematical procedure that has to be applied to turn votes into congressional seats.
Electoral thresholds, which have to be seen as the minimum percentage of votes which have
to be obtained by candidates in order to be included in the distribution of congressional seats
distribution.

The way in which the election is carried out (directly or indirectly), which refers both to the
voter’s ability and to the political parties’ ability to determine who are going to occupy public
Offices.
The selection of an electoral system is a very relevant decision from an institutional point of
view. Such a decision is very important to a satisfactory performance of any democracy.
Electoral systems can help out not only to build up specific results, but also to promote the
cooperation and conciliation of divided societies.

The selection process of an electoral system supports the electoral legal framework. The
application of a specific electoral system in each country can have a relevant impact in the
electoral performances of political contenders. The evaluation of a country’s electoral system
can be based on the results rendered by previous elections. Doing so can shed some light on
important issues such as what benefits, if any, are received by the political party in power if
compared to other political parties. Some light can also be shed upon the system’s
components which can be seen as distorting international regulations or the election’s results.

Plurality-majority systems are usually used for elections where one candidate will be elected
to a single seat in an electoral district; the winning candidate must either win the largest
number (i.e., the plurality) of votes (known as the simple majority), or win more than half (i.e.,
the majority) of the votes cast (known as the absolute majority).
Proportional systems are usually used for elections where there is more than one seat in an
electoral district. Mandates are allocated using formulate that distribute seats so that they
represent the proportion of the vote won by candidates or parties
Mixed systems use a combination of plurality majority and proportional systems.

Legislative, Executive and Judiciary

The Philippines is a republic with a presidential form of government wherein power is equally
divided among its three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. The government seeks to
act in the best interests of its citizens through this system of check and balance. One basic
corollary in a presidential system of government is the principle of separation of powers wherein
legislation belongs to Congress, execution to the Executive, and settlement of legal
controversies to the Judiciary.

Legislative
The Legislative branch is authorized to make laws, alter, and repeal them through the power
vested in the Philippine Congress. This institution is divided into the Senate and the House of
Representatives.
The Legislative Branch enacts legislation, confirms or rejects Presidential appointments, and
has the authority to declare war. This branch includes Congress (the Senate and House of
Representatives) and several agencies that provide support services to Congress.
The Senate is composed of 24 Senators who are elected at large by the qualified voters of the
Philippines. The House of Representatives is composed of about 250 members elected from
legislative districts in the provinces, cities, and municipalities, and representatives elected
through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.
The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per cent of the total number of
representatives including those under the party list. For three consecutive terms after the
ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list representatives shall
be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from the labor, peasant, urban poor,
indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may be provided by
law, except the religious sector.

Executive branch

Is composed of the President and the Vice President who are elected by direct popular vote and
serve a term of six years. The Constitution grants the President authority to appoint his Cabinet.
These departments form a large portion of the country’s bureaucracy.
The executive branch carries out and enforces laws. It includes the President, Vice President,
the Cabinet, executive departments, independent agencies, boards, commissions, and
committees.
The President leads the country. He or she is the head of state, leader of the national
government, and Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines. The President
serves a six-year term and cannot be re-elected.
The Vice President supports the President. If the President is unable to serve, the Vice
President becomes President. He or she also serves a six-year term.
Cabinet members serve as advisors to the President. They include the Vice President and the
heads of executive departments. Cabinet members are nominated by the President and must
be confirmed by the Commission of Appointments.

Judiciary

Scale of justice, holds the power to settle controversies involving rights that are legally
demandable and enforceable. This branch determines whether or not there has been a grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part and instrumentality of
the government. It is made up of a Supreme Court and lower courts.
The judicial branch interprets the meaning of laws, applies laws to individual cases, and decides
if laws violate the Constitution. The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in
such lower courts as may be established by law.
Each branch of government can change acts of the other branches as follows:
The President can veto laws passed by Congress.
Congress confirms or rejects the President's appointments and can remove the President from
office in exceptional circumstances.
The Justices of the Supreme Court, who can overturn unconstitutional laws, are appointed by
the President.
The Constitution expressly grants the Supreme Court the power of Judicial Review as the power
to declare a treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation,
order, instruction, ordinance or regulation unconstitutional.

Bureaucracy

What Is a Bureaucracy?
The term bureaucracy refers to a complex organization that has multilayered systems and
processes. The systems and processes that are put in place effectively make decision-making
slow. They are designed to maintain uniformity and control within the organization. A
bureaucracy describes the methods that are commonly established in governments and large
organizations, such as corporations. A bureaucracy is pivotal in the administration of the
entity's rules and regulations.
Origins of the Word Bureaucracy
The concept of bureaucracy is fairly old, going back to the Han dynasty in China. But the
modern interpretation of the idea dates back to 18th century France.

The term bureaucracy is a hybrid word whose roots go back to French and Greek. It's made up
of the French word bureau, which means desk or office, and the Greek term kratein, which
means to rule. The use of these two words together combine to loosely mean ruling by or from
a desk or office. The word was first officially in France used after the French Revolution. From
there, the word and concept spread throughout the rest of the world.

German sociologist Max Weber was one of the first scholars to use the term and expand its
influence. He described the concept in a positive sense and considered the ideal bureaucracy
to be both efficient and rational. He believed that bureaucracy clearly defined the roles of the
individuals involved and helped narrow the focus of administrative goals.

How a Bureaucracy Works

The bureaucratic process lends itself to criticism and is synonymous with redundancy,
arbitrariness, and inefficiency. People often use terms like bureaucrat, bureaucratic, and
bureaucracy in a negative context. For instance, calling someone a bureaucrat implies they're
a government official while the term bureaucratic implies that procedures are more important
than efficiency. One common use of the word bureaucracy is the ability to make impossibilities
a reality.

But there is a more balanced way to look at a bureaucracy. From a structural standpoint, it
stems from the effort to lead organizations through closed systems. These systems are meant
to be formal and rigid in order to maintain order. Perhaps the single most identifiable
characteristic of a bureaucracy is the use of hierarchical procedures to simplify or replace
autonomous decisions.

A bureaucrat makes implicit assumptions about an organization and how it operates. One
assumption is that the entity cannot rely on an open system of operations, which is either too
complex or too uncertain to survive. Instead, a closed and rationally reviewed system should
be implemented and followed.

What’s good about a Bureaucracy?

Bureaucracies can help organizations run smoothly and efficiently. This allows large
organizations to streamline processes and bring order to systems and procedures.
Management becomes easier and processes become less chaotic. Bureaucracies tend to
include a division of labor with clearly defined roles. They also ensure that everyone is treated
equally and fairly, which means there is no bias toward any one entity. For instance, the
government makes everyone fill out the same (often cumbersome) paperwork for benefits like
student loans.

What’s bad about a Bureaucracy?

Bureaucracies are often looked down upon because people view them as valuing procedures
over efficiency. Many people feel that rules and paperwork can pile up under bureaucracies.
This is often referred to as the red tape people and companies need to overcome in order to
achieve certain goals like establishing a business. Rules and regulations can often be difficult
to navigate and may even favor some people over others, such as the wealthy.

What Are the Most Common Characteristics of a Bureaucracy?

Some of the most common characteristics of a bureaucracy include a hierarchy, rules and
regulations, and specialization. The hierarchy establishes scales of power—those with the
most power are at the top while individuals who have the least fall at the bottom. Rules and
regulations are typically formal and indicate how processes and functions are to be conducted.
Specialization entails the use of training to allow people to do their jobs properly under the
structure.

The Bottom Line

Bureaucracies are all around us from the companies for which we work to the governments
that rule our world's countries. They are in place to ensure that things run efficiently and by the
book—that is, that people follow the rules, whether that's to conduct health and safety checks
while on the job, to get a permit for a building project, or to access government benefits.

As much as they're supposed to help keep everyone on track, bureaucracies are often
criticized for being cumbersome and for putting the emphasis on procedure and policy rather
than efficiency. Regardless of how you feel about them—whether it's positive or negative—
bureaucracies aren't going away. They are, in fact, a part of the structure of many
organizations.

Federalism

A principle of government that defines the relationship between the central government at the
national level and its constituent units at the regional, state, or local levels. Under this principle
of government, power and authority is allocated between the national
and local governmental units, such that each unit is delegated a sphere of power and authority
only it can exercise, while other powers must be shared.
The term federalism is derived from the Latin root foedus, which means "formal agreement or co
venant." It includes the interrelationships between the states as well as between the states and t
he federal government. Governance in the United States takes place at various levels and branc
hes of government, which all take part in the decision-making process. From the U.S. Supreme
Court to the smallest local government, a distribution
of power allows all the entities of the system to work separately while still working together as a
nation. Supreme Court justice HUGO L. BLACK wrote that federalism meant

Unitary

A unitary system is one of the most common structures of a state. Hence, it is a form of
government that defines how power is structured. In other words, the relationship between
certain levels of government.
Possible synonyms for unitary can be “uncut” or “undivided.” Hence, the idea of the system is
apparent. Unlike a federation or confederation, it consists of only one state. In summary, it is a
contrast to the other two systems.
The central government has a dominant position. That does not mean that there are no
autonomous zones. Thus, the state can still be relatively decentralized. However, it has greater
control over these zones. Besides, they often do not have the same powers. For example,
Scotland and Wales are both parts of the United Kingdom. Yet, Scotland has more authority
than Wales.
The central government has full authority over both domestic and foreign issues. Hence, it sets
all taxes, controls the army, diplomacy and so on. However, it still delegates some of its powers
to smaller units. The main reason is effectivity. Regarding management, it is helpful for them to
do so. Either way, it still has authority over the smaller units.

These smaller units – local government, can lay some rules in their area. They manage the
towns or counties. For example, they control the roads in the area. They set speed limits and
are responsible for the repairs.

The unitary system can sometimes be stiff. A change is harder to achieve. On the other hand,
the structure is more economical. That is thanks to how small it can be in comparison to a
federal government.

Today, it is the most common system. A total of 166 states use are unitary. Among these are
the UK, China, Israel, Italy, France, and more.
 WEEK 4 ACTIVITY

GENERAL INSTRUCTION: Provide what is being asked. Attach your activity to the multimedia
outlet (google classroom/messenger/Facebook classroom) being required by the instructor on
or before the deadline.

TASK 1
ANSWER THE FOLLOWING (CHOOSE 1 QUESTION)

1. Make a reaction paper about Institutions that fundamentally affected the different forms of
government in the world.
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

2. We know that Philippines is an archipelagic state. Do you think it is better to shift unitary to
federal in the Philippines? (Explain your answer, minimum of 300 words)
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
 SOUTH EAST ASIAN INSTITUTE OF
TECHNOLOGY, INC.
National Highway, Crossing Rubber, Tupi, South
Cotabato

COLLEGE OF TEACHER EDUCATION

LEARNING MODULE FOR COMPARATIVE GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

 Week 5

Personalities (Political Behaviors)

Political Party System

Had been defined both normatively, with respect to the preferences of the analyst, and
descriptively, with respect to the activities in which parties actually engage. Normative
definitions tend to focus on the representative or educational functions of parties. Parties
translate citizens' preferences into policy and also shape citizens' preferences. Parties are
characterized as "policy seeking." Thus, Lawson (1980) defines parties in terms of their role in
linking levels of government to levels of society. She states, "Parties are seen, both by their
members and by others, as agencies for forging links between citizens and policy-makers." Von
Beyme (1985, p. 13) lists four "functions" that political parties generally fulfill: (1) the
identification of goals (ideology and program); (2) the articulation and aggregation of social
interests; (3) the mobilization and socialization of the general public within the system,
particularly at elections; and (4) elite recruitment and government formation.

Descriptive definitions usually stay closer to Max Weber's observation that parties are
organizations that attempt to gain power for their members, regardless of constituent wishes or
policy considerations. Parties are characterized as "office seeking." "Parties reside in the sphere
of power. Their action is oriented toward the acquisition of social power . . . no matter what its
content may be" (Weber 1968, p. 938). Schumpeter ([1950] 1975) applies this type of definition
to a democratic setting. He argues that parties are organizations of elites who compete in
elections for the right to rule for a period. Or as Sartori (1976, p. 63) puts it, "a party is any
political group identified by an official label that presents at elections, and is capable of placing
through elections (free or no free), candidates for public office."

Interest Groups

Interest group, also called special interest group, advocacy group, or pressure group, any
association of individuals or organizations, usually formally organized, that, on the basis of one
or more shared concerns, attempts to influence public policy in its favor. All interest groups
share a desire to affect government policy to benefit themselves or their causes. Their goal
could be a policy that exclusively benefits group members or one segment of society (e.g.,
government subsidies for farmers) or a policy that advances a broader public purpose (e.g.,
improving air quality). They attempt to achieve their goals by lobbying—that is, by attempting to
bring pressure to bear on policy makers to gain policy outcomes in their favor.

Interest groups are a natural outgrowth of the communities of interest that exist in all societies,
from narrow groups such as the Japan Eraser Manufacturers Association to broad groups such
as the American Federation of Labor–Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL–CIO) and to
even broader organizations such as the military. Politics and interests are inseparable. Interests
are a prevalent, permanent, and essential aspect of all political systems—
democratic, authoritarian, and totalitarian regimes alike. Furthermore, interest groups exist at all
levels of government—national, state, provincial, and local—and increasingly they have
occupied an important role in international affairs.

The common goals and sources of interest groups obscure, however, the fact that they vary
widely in their form and lobbying strategies both within and across political systems. This article
provides a broad overview that explains these differences and the role that interest groups play
in society.

Social Movements

A loosely organized but sustained campaign in support of a social goal, typically either the
implementation or the prevention of a change in society’s structure or values. Although social
movements differ in size, they are all essentially collective. That is, they result from the more or
less spontaneous coming together of people whose relationships are not defined by rules and
procedures but who merely share a common outlook on society.

Types of social movements

There is no single, standard typology of social movements. As various scholars focus on

different aspects of movements, different schemes of classification emerge. Hence any social
movement may be described in terms of several dimensions.

Many attempts at categorization direct attention to the objective of the movement. The social
institution in or through which social change is to be brought about provides one basis for
categorizing social movements as political, religious, economic, educational, and the like. It may
be argued that all movements tend to be either political or religious in character, depending
upon whether their strategy aims at changing political structures or the moral values of
individuals.

A commonly used but highly subjective distinction is that between “reform” and “revolutionary”
movements. Such a distinction implies that a reform movement advocates a change that will
preserve the existing values but will provide improved means of implementing them.
The revolutionary movement, on the other hand, is regarded as advocating replacement of
existing values. Almost invariably, however, the members of a so-called revolutionary
movement insist that it is they who cherish the true values of the society and that it is the
opponents who define the movement as revolutionary and subversive of basic, traditional
values.

Some attempts to characterize movements involve the direction and the rate of change
advocated. Adjectives such as radical, reactionary, moderate, liberal, and conservative are often
used for such purposes. In this context the designations “revolutionary” and “reform” are often
employed in a somewhat different sense than that described above, with the implication that a
revolutionary movement advocates rapid, precipitous change while a reform movement works
for slow, evolutionary change.

Political Culture

In political science, a set of shared views and normative judgments held by a population
regarding its political system. The notion of political culture does not refer to attitudes toward
specific actors, such as a president or prime minister, but rather denotes how people view the
political system as a whole and their belief in its legitimacy. American political scientist Lucian
Pye defined political culture as the composite of basic values, feelings, and knowledge that
underlie the political process. Hence, the building blocks of political culture are the beliefs,
opinions, and emotions of the citizens toward their form of government.

Political culture has been studied most intensively in the context of established
Western democracies. The classic study of political culture is The Civic Culture (1963) by
American political scientists Gabriel Almond and Sydney Verba. Based on surveys conducted in
the United States, Britain, West Germany, Italy, and Mexico, this landmark investigation sought
to identify the political culture within which a liberal democracy is most likely to develop and
consolidate. Almond and Verba’s argument is based on a distinction between three pure types
of political culture: parochial, subject, and participant. In a parochial political culture, citizens are
only indistinctly aware of the existence of central government. In a subject political culture,
citizens see themselves not as participants in the political process but as subjects of the
government. In a participant political culture, citizens believe both that they can contribute to the
system and that they are affected by it. Almond and Verba’s work attracted the attention of
generations of scholars who replicated the findings, criticized the conceptualizations, and
refined the theory.

Political Activism

Consists of efforts to promote, impede, direct or intervene

in social, political, economic or environmental reform with the desire to make changes in
society toward a perceived greater good. Forms of activism range from mandate building in the
community (including writing letters to newspapers) petitioning elected officials, running or
contributing to a political campaign, preferential patronage (or boycott) of businesses, and
demonstrative forms of activism like rallies, street marches, strikes, sit-ins, or hunger strikes.
Activism may be performed on a day-to-day basis in a wide variety of ways, including through
the creation of art (artivism), computer hacking (hacktivism), or simply in how one chooses to
spend their money (economic activism). For example, the refusal to buy clothes or other
merchandise from a company as a protest against the exploitation of workers by that company
could be considered an expression of activism. However, the most highly visible and impactful
activism often comes in the form of collective action, in which numerous individuals coordinate
an act of protest together in order to make a bigger impact. [Collective action that is purposeful,
organized, and sustained over a period of time becomes known as a social movement.

Historically, activists have used literature, including pamphlets, tracts, and books to disseminate
or propagate their messages and attempt to persuade their readers of the justice of their cause.
Research has now begun to explore how contemporary activist groups use social media to
facilitate civic engagement and collective action combining politics with technology. Left-wing
and right-wing online activists often use different tactics, such as hashtag activism, and
offline protest, which are more common on the left, and strategic disinformation, conspiracy
theories, and attacks on mainstream media, which available evidence suggests may be more
common on the right. In addition, the perception of increased left-wing activism in science and
academia may decrease conservative trust in science and motivate some forms of conservative
activism, including on college campuses. Some scholars have also shown how the influence of
very wealthy Americans is a form of activism.
The Politics of Social Cleavages
• Most societies are split along one or more lines. Often these splits, or “cleavages,” become
the society’s fault lines along which political attitudes form. Here are some of the more politically
relevant social cleavages.
• Social Class: Karl Marx thought social class determined everything, that it was the only
important social cleavage. Whether one was bourgeois or proletarian determined most political
orientations. Experience however, makes it hard to accept such a black-and-white view. Still,
class does matter. Class by itself though is seldom a sufficient explanation for political
orientation. Other ingredients are usually present. The question really is, “class plus what?”
• Geographic Region: Most countries have regional differences, and often they are politically
important. Once a region gets set in its politics, it can stay that way for generations. Often the
attitude is a remembrance of past conquests and injustices. We should inquire about the
regions of the US, what their politics are, and how they got to be that way.
• Religion: As a predictor of political behavior, this factor has been central in US history but only
during certain periods and generally in certain regions. In general though, religion accounts for
the formation of and identification with more political parties around the world than does social
class.
• Urban-Rural: City people are usually different politically from country people in terms of living
conditions, education, and social and economic priorities.
• Other relevant social cleavages: In some situations gender matters, as in the US where
women vote more Democrat than men. Occupation as distinct from social class and age can be
important factors. Almost any social cleavage or category can become politically relevant. You
can become sensitive to these cleavages and categories by asking yourself from where you got
the political views you hold: Is it your age? Did you get them from your family? And why does
your family hold these views? Is it their religion? Their ethnic group? Their regional tradition
Political Communication
Exchange of ideas and opinions between citizens, public officials, political institutions, and
related entities, such as the media. It includes discourse throughout the political process in
local, state, national, and international political systems, as well as how information and rhetoric
can be leveraged for political gain or to achieve political goals.

At its most basic, political communication is the dialogue between political organizations (e.g.
political parties), political actors (e.g. elected officials), the media, and private citizens. It is an
interdisciplinary field that blends the social sciences, strategic communication, and media
studies with politics and government. Political communication techniques and strategies allow
policy advocates, public relations officers, speechwriters, campaign executives, political
consultants, political marketers, elected officials, and other political professionals to create,
shape, and distribute messages that can influence the political process. Political messaging can
take many forms, including speechwriting, social and online media, television and radio, written
laws and regulations, policy proposals, policy studies, interpersonal communication between
candidates and prospective voters, press releases, and more.

ACTIVITY 5

GENERAL INSTRUCTION: Provide what is being asked. Attach your activity to the multimedia
outlet (google classroom/messenger/Facebook classroom) being required by the instructor on
or before the deadline.

TASK 1
ANSWER THE FOLLOWING

Web based research

1. Look on Political Party system in the Philippines and explain the positive and negative effects
in the Society or in the government to be particular.
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

2. Enumerate the Pros and Cons of Political Activism using a Venn diagram.
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________ END OF WEEK 5______________________________