Lecture 8 Presidentialism

Question 1

How does presidentialism compare to parliamentary systems in terms of chief executive structure?

Answer 1

Presidential: Single person (president)
Parliamentary: Team (PM + cabinet)

Question 2

How are the chief executives selected in presidential and parliamentary systems?

Answer 2

Presidential: Selected by citizens
Parliamentary: Selected by parliament

Question 3

Is the chief executive accountable to the parliament in presidential and parliamentary systems?

Answer 3

Presidential: No
Parliamentary: Yes

Question 4

Does the chief executive serve as head of state in presidential and parliamentary systems?

Answer 4

Presidential: Yes
Parliamentary: No

Question 5

Do chief executives have fixed terms in presidential and parliamentary systems?

Answer 5

Presidential: Yes
Parliamentary: No

Question 6

What is the problem of dual legitimacy in presidential systems?

Answer 6

The president and parliament both have separate mandates from voters, leading to potential gridlock and reduced accountability.

Question 7

What characterizes semi-presidential elections?

Answer 7

Both a popularly elected president and a parliamentary prime minister, with varying degrees of presidential power depending on party alignment.

Question 8

What are the three types of power for the chief executive?

Answer 8

Constitutional power (de jure power)
Party strength and cohesion (de facto power)
Electoral legitimacy (de facto power)

Question 9

What is executive dominance and its significance?

Answer 9

The relative power of the executive vis-a-vis the legislature, more important for power-sharing than whether a system is presidential or parliamentary.

Question 10

Why is fixed term a problem in presidential systems?

Answer 10

It is difficult to remove a poorly performing or undemocratic president due to fixed terms.

Question 11

How does personalism affect presidential systems?

Answer 11

The election of a single official allows for personalism, enabling the president to erode democracy.

Question 12

Why is rigidity a problem in presidential systems?

Answer 12

The system’s inflexibility can hinder crisis resolution without overthrowing the regime, overlapping with the problem of fixed terms.

Question 13

What are the seven problems for democracy with presidentialism according to Linz?

Answer 13

Dual legitimacy
Fixed terms
Incompatible dual role of the president
Personalism
Rigidity of the system
Zero-sum game/winner takes all
Time pressure

Question 14

What is the only advantage of presidentialism identified by Linz?

Answer 14

The system is more stable, but surface instability avoids deeper regime crises.

Question 15

What is Horowitz’s criticism of Linz’s analysis?

Answer 15

Linz based his analysis on South America, whereas instability mainly occurs in parliamentary systems in Africa and Asia. Horowitz argues that the problem is the electoral system, not presidentialism itself.

Question 16

What additional points does Lipset add to the objections by Horowitz?

Answer 16

Parliamentary regimes broke down in interwar Europe due to power concentration.
Presidential systems have umbrella parties with loosely coupled interests, whereas parliamentary systems have coherent sets of interests leading to more fragmentation.
Religion and political culture are more important for democratisation than institutions.

Question 17

What are the three negative effects of presidentialism empirically observed?

Answer 17

Authoritarian creep (e.g., Turkey)
Dual legitimacy and deadlock (e.g., US)
Zero-sum competition for power

Question 18

What are the potential negative effects of parliamentarism?

Answer 18

Indecisiveness due to fragmentation (e.g., Belgium)
Instability due to frequent cabinet turnover and elections (e.g., Italy)
Backstage politics without electoral legitimation (e.g., UK)

Question 19

What are the four key takeaways about presidential and parliamentary systems?

Answer 19

• The difference between presidential and parliamentary systems is often overstated; concentration of power is what really matters.
• De facto executive concentration of power is more important than de jure concentration.
• Concentration of power can sometimes be sought for good reasons but may lead to authoritarianism.
• Presidentialism is a robust predictor of lower probability of democratic consolidation and higher probability of democratic backsliding.