Presidential systems

Presidential systems
2017-04-20
A- A+
Donia Al watan

Mhammad Aljundi

US constitution was issued of the 1787 convention. Governor Morris, delegate of Pennsylvania, has written the final wording of its draft. The session that ratified it was only forty members from fifty-six. It considers the slaves as part of possession like the livestock and the Amerindians (red Indians) as inexistent. Its age now is 231 years. Later amendments did not make it enough modern. Till now discrimination is practiced against black and Hispanic people.

The constitution gives the president large competences. It edifies what is named presidential system where the president is alone an executive authority.

Of course, US alone are responsible for their constitution and their regime. But the presidential system moved to many countries in the world. France, mother of parliamentary democracy, its fifth republic is built on presidential system. The coups in third world countries have generally produced presidential systems. Now Turkish poll was for moving to a presidential system.

Democracy that is used for overthrowing regimes is of presidential system. So, changing regime in third world countries does not bring mostly a better one, in best chances, it brings one of the same structure and in worst chances, it brings subversion of all kinds. The change of Allende of Chile has brought the bloody Pinochet regime. The same was the change of Sukarno with the bloody Suharto. The change in Eastern Europe has brought misery to millions and in the Middle-East has brought subversion and fragmentation everywhere.

The French revolution of 1789 was a historical change of authority from that of nobles and clergy to the middle-class people. Montesquieu and others wanted it imitation of English regime (royal with two-house parliament) but the French people wanted it different. The second French revolution of 1792 has built a republic regime and adopted an equalitarian and true democratic constitution. In addition, it has built an army that has stood against the European invasion, which has arrived to Paris outskirts. The reaction has betrayed the revolution, executed the leaders without trial and run in disorder till Napoleon I has come and brought France down in adventures that wasted the French army and ended with the rout of waterloo that has led to restoring royal regime.

Presidential system is “democracy” for elites and not for people and US hegemony makes democracy a void word. On the word level, true democracy requires that members of the UN be equals in the assembly and in the UNSC and that UN charter be applied correctly on international problems. Hegemony is negation to any democracy. Any country can’t be of democratic regime if it were under the influence of a super power. Faked voting and bought election can’t make democracy. The world today is under a barbaric order that on the top of which, financial giants sit.

French democracy has resolved the problem of despotic rule of the nobility and the hegemony of the clergy. In return, the presidential system has built individual despotism and restored the hegemony of clergy.

The world today needs resolving first the problem of aggressiveness that has become of international dimensions, then the problem of political and dollar hegemony, then the imbalance of the UN. Maybe if aggressiveness and hegemony were ended, other problems would be gradually resolved, on top are the regional and civil conflicts, then the society problems: economic and political development, sectarianism and obscurantism, penury, lack of services etc.

A hope is to solve the actual problems of societies and peoples but it can’t come to light as long as the aggressiveness and hegemony are there. Under democracy, society and people are sure better but not under presidential systems or sectarian conflicts

Comments