1

[Name of Student]
[Subject]
[Date]
 2

Table of Contents
Introduction to Comparative Politics ............................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Elitist Theory of State .................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Marxist Theory of State ............................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Electoral Systems ....................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Majoritarian Electoral System .................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Proportional Electoral System ................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Presidential Executives ............................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Parliamentary Executives ............................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Un-Codified Constitutions ........................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Codified Constitution ................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Conclusion .................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
References ................................................................................................................................ 3
 3

Introduction
Comparative politics is a subject of political science group. It is the study of domestic
politics and political institutions while highlighting the arguments and conflicts between
various countries. Comparative politics is likely to provide the comparison between
countries and the way they are governed and further analyze the similarities and
differences for further improvements to a particular country's political engagements
(Abadie, et al. 2015). It is often criticized that comparative politics only focuses on what
are the primary focus areas highlighted within a political system and does not
apprehend the outcome of the approach being used. However, the analysis is equally
important as the comparative politics itself defines the term as comparing different
political approaches to a detailed analysis to make arrangements for better efficiency
and effectiveness for the future (O'neil, 2015). Comparative politics itself is a vast topic
of study, which also introduces the audience towards the concept of provisional
governments where the government reforms and practices of different countries are
analyzed, considered and compared, and, the similar foreign policy as it is witnessed
through emerging trade which enables profitable international business. Knowledge of
foreign policy and a thorough comparison for improvements is a common practice under
comparative politics approach.

1. Elitist Theory of State

In the language of political sciences and corporate politics, the elitist theory of the state
is an approach, which tends to evaluate and describe the level of powers assigned to
those responsible politically. This theory says the members of the political, economic
process and the powers assigned to them, which are granted through the free selection
within the economy. Those allocated to the powers are given permission to exert their
powers upon the collective decisions made regarding the regulation of political activities
within the country (Parkinson and Mansbridge, 2012). The elite group of individuals
have a power of all sorts within decision making and regarding the financials. The elites
are commonly under high interest as compared to non-elites, probably due to the fact of
their background from political links and relations and having the significant amount of
 4

designated powers. However, the elitist theory is opposed to the fact of pluralism, where
it is argued that everyone should be given equal rights and powers over the decision-
making and the division of responsibilities (Ho, 2011). No discrimination of race, skills,
religion, norms, etc. should exist, and, the negotiation between the elites and non-elites
within the political context is rather a major problem. The majority of the elites are also
reported as being against the view of democracy as they refer it as a traditional act,
where, it is preceded by the theory of capitalism; the group with more power is to have
all rights to the decision for the regarded political activities.

The behviours of elites face criticism as critics pointed out that the causal behaviour of
elites impact the sate negatively. A voluntaristic argument suggested by these critics to
counteract the causal behaviour that resulted in overlooking structure. Moreover, there
is no objective boundary provided in Elite theory to differentiate the non-powerful
movements or institutions from powerful ones. This unlimited and non differentiated
system pose serious limitations of Elite theory and reinforce criticisms. Nevertheless,
Higley and Burton (2006) supported that this limitation lies in other theories as well,
such as Marxist theory. Marxist theory of the state is perhaps the clearest theory that
could explain the political birth and growth in detail. Marx and his co-believers viewed
the arguments in a different perspective where it was concluded that the political
approaches are a creation through the actions of a man (Mouffe, 2014). The actions of
a man are termed as influencing the economic conditions, which further infiltrate the
political action within an economy. Not just Britain, France was in like the way an
industrialist nation and the states of specialists in that nation were all the more terrible
by any techniques. Finally, one of the real benefits of Elite theory pointed out by critics
like Higley and Pakulski (2012)) as compared to other political theories is the
application as a macro theory on small groups and individual situations. The theory is
operating well as a macro theory on the conceptualization of small groups and
individuals. In conclusion, the treatment of Elite theory to the State is concern of the
whole state without worries reifying the affairs of the state.
 5

2. Comparison of Electoral Systems

The electoral system is a set of formal regulations, which outlines the right and legal
way for carrying out elections, and the methodology for analyzing the results of the
elections conducted (Farrell, 2011). The elections are categorized as being political and
non-political, were, the political is organized and held by the government while elections
within private bodies such as businesses, firms, and not-for profit organizations are
referred to as non-political elections. The electoral system explains in detail all the
required fundamentals of an election process; when the elections are to be placed,
which individuals are legalized to give the vote, the candidates to stand in elections, etc.
The electoral system is further explained categorizing it into two types; majoritarian and
proportional electoral systems (Carey and Hix, 2011).

Majoritarian Electoral System

Within the context of the electoral systems, there existed the very first type of electoral
system in history, which was the majoritarian electoral system. The system constituted
through giving the right to the representatives of an economy to the majority of the
electors while the ones with minority voters were not given a chance to stand as a
candidate (Dow, 2011). As mentioned earlier, this was the very first type of electoral
system which was however discontinued as it was not considered fair under the terms
of being democratic.

Proportional Electoral System

Another type of electoral system is the proportional electoral system within which the
electorate divisions are reflected proportionately. The percentage of the supporters of a
particular candidate is the basis of estimate through which electorate would take the
majority of the votes. With a couple of social affairs, there is more choice, and voters will
presumably find a get-together that speaks to their main political sentiments than would
be possible in a two-party structure (Bormann and Golder, 2013).

Supporters of a relatively smaller party are most likely going to be addressed by no

short of what one individual from parliament set up in their general vicinity and sharing
their political points of view and emotions. Thus, the measure of body’s electorate is
 6

more noteworthy, and there are less potential results to control their edges. The
electorates are settled by chronicled thoughts (regions, government states, locale, etc.).
As a couple of seats are apportioned to parties moderately to votes even inside a voting
statistic, the edges of a voting open are not as material to the election result as in a
larger election system.

With an extended number of representative parties for a single social event ends up
being less conceivable. In case the law-making body must be established on an over
the top number of little social events they may contrast when new issues arise. This
action may transform into a hazard to political soundness and cause expected races
fascinating the thought of administrators. In case instability gets renowned in a country,
the express, all things considered, will just not have the ability to play out the endeavors
it should.

Little social occasions may in like manner abuse their position to reinforce for
extraordinary interests (for representations sponsorship's for establishments related to
the get-together) as a by-product of assistance for the organization technique.

In numerous countries with relating choices, the electors pick who will address them in
Parliament. There may be a refinement between the social occasion levels of leadership
settling on the best places on the get-together's rundown of candidates and the voters'
slants.

In a couple of countries, there are additional chooses to guarantee that voters may have
some effect which contenders will address them. An example of this kind has been set
up in Switzerland where Voters may supplant hopefuls on a social occasion list by
various candidates, and favorite contenders may show up twice on a once-over. For the
people who think this is unreasonably bewildered for them, there is constantly the
probability of using an unaltered assembling list. Thus, an imperative burden of the
comparing race system is executed while protecting the verifiable purposes of
enthusiasm of relative depiction.
 7

Given comparison of both electoral systems, it is thus justified for the government to opt
for a proportional electoral system where a fair result can be obtained, and equality can
be maintained. The criticism can be minimized, and better initiatives can be taken by the
chosen party that can prove to be beneficial representatives.

3. Comparison of Presidential and Parliamentary Executives

Within the political system boundaries, another important highlighted role is of the
administrative officials. A presidential system is a democratic approach where an
individual is termed as the head of an executive governmental branch and is
responsible for leading it accordingly (Lewis, 2010).

Presidential Executives
In presidential nations, the expert is picked and is not cautious to the regulating body,
which in standard conditions is not possible to be removed. Such expulsion is
conceivable, regardless, in critical cases, often through the indictment. The title
"president" had held tight from a period when such individual indeed planned the
coordinating body, as with the President of the Continental Congress in the early United
States, going before as far as possible being part of a substitute branch of government.
A regulatory structure rises out of a legislative framework, where the head of state is
controlled through the legitimate. There is an individual middle structure called semi-
presidential.

Nations that section a presidential or semi-presidential strategy of government are not

the specific clients of the title of president. Heads of the condition of parliamentary
republics, generally adjusted in light of current circumstances, are called directors.
Despots or pioneers of one-party states ordinarily picked or not are additionally regularly
called presidents.

Parliamentary Executives
A legislative framework is a strategy of popularity based on the association of a state
where the executive branch derives its democratic legitimacy from its ability to
command the confidence of the legislature, customarily a parliament, and is also seen
 8

as reliable to that house. In a parliamentary framework, the head of state is customarily

a substitute individual from the head of government (Marat, 2012). This is rather than a
presidential structure, where the head of state routinely is in like the way the head of
government, or all the more all, the official branch does not get its lion's offer run validity
from the chamber.

Nations with parliamentary frameworks might be beneficial governments, where a ruler

is the head of state while the head of government is frequently a man from parliament,
(for example, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Sweden and Japan). Also, parliamentary
republics, where an all-around formal president is the head of state while the head of
government is regularly from the party, (for example, Ireland, Germany, India and Italy).
In a few parliamentary republics, for example, Botswana, South Africa, and Suriname,
among some others, the head of government is additionally head of state, however, is
picked by and is tried and true to Parliament. In bicameral parliaments, the head of
government is for the most part, however not generally, a man from the lower house.

4. Comparison of Codified and Un-Codified Constitutions

Un-Codified Constitutions
An un-codified Constitution is for the most part called an unwritten constitution which
proposes there are no formal records that chart government powers and reasons for
constraints. This sort of constitution contains the laws of a nation that are asked for after
some time and combined with the political point of view highlight. Likewise, it is
comparatively adored in the parliamentary system making a structure through which the
representing body works. While these standards cannot be planned into a single law,
experts, and the courts still review them as conclusive upon the committee and obliging
forces. An uncodified constitution has the benefits of flexibility, versatility, and strength.
A huge detriment, in any case, is that discussions may emerge because of various
understandings of the uses and traditions which shape the necessary arrangements of
the Constitution.
 9

Codified Constitution
A codified constitution is one with formal record that depicts the secured framework,
rules addressing a political structure, advantages of nationals and the forces of the
board. Many different countries have requested codified constitution since it controls
unbridled specialist qualities.

Most constitutions are, however not completely systematized. For example in the
Australian constitution, most by a wide margin of the critical headings and principals
identified with the relationship between government branches and concerning the
individual and government are systematized into one single document which is the
Commonwealth Constitution of Australia (Murkens, 2017).

There are three fundamental standards of a requested constitution.

1. Authoritative - A constitution can be viewed as a higher law than official approval.

It sets out the control by which the political foundations, including the general population
who make the approval

2. Entrenched - A codified constitution is recommended as settled in, which suggests

it is staggeringly hard to change or discredit.

3. Judicial - As the constitution has a place in higher law, it enables appropriate

legislation to be judged against it, in the matter of paying little personality to whether
they are justifiable or not. This farthest point is performed by the legal.

Additionally with any association appear there are clear motivations behind interest and
hindrances. With a gathered constitution the reasons for interest are;

1. Restricted Government – The rules for government are set up, so it portrays
being clear when government outperforms the regarded duties.

2. Assurances of rights – Basic rights are aligned in the Constitution, for example,
the benefit to talk openly.
 10

3. Clear benchmarks for political technique – Unlike the UK systems, a codified

constitution considers the expulsion of a point of view as a sort of methodology.

Regardless, there are few drawbacks identified in codified constitutions including;

1. Immovability – Codified laws are comprehensively hard to correct. The US

Constitution has as of late had 27 corrections since 1787.

2. Legitimate mishandle – A codified constitution is deciphered by the legal and in

that ultimate reality can exhibit that judges can 'control from the seat.

Through the discussion provided above, it is rather beneficial to opt for a codified
constitution as each element is properly organized along with the proper division of
responsibilities to cater to the general needs of the maximum population within an
economy.

Conclusion
Concluding the findings of the report discussed as above, the political reforms of each
economy/country differs vastly. However, referring to our discussion topic, comparative
politics, is a highly recommended action for the responsible parties to constitute a
different analysis of the regarded comparison of reforms and approaches of various
political economies to learn from existing drawbacks and further strengthen the areas of
high command.
 11

References
Abadie, A., Diamond, A., & Hainmueller, J. (2015). Comparative politics and the
synthetic control method. American Journal of Political Science, 59(2), pp.495-
510.
Bormann, N. C., and Golder, M. (2013). Democratic electoral systems around the world,
1946–2011. Electoral Studies, 32(2), pp.360-369.
Carey, J. M., and Hix, S. (2011). The Electoral Sweet Spot: Low‐Magnitude Proportional
Electoral Systems. American Journal of Political Science, 55(2), pp.383-397.
Dolez, B., and Laurent, A. (2010). Strategic voting in a semi-presidential system with a
two-ballot electoral system. The 2007 French legislative election. French
Politics, 8(1), pp.1-20.
Dow, J. K. (2011). Party-system extremism in majoritarian and proportional electoral
systems. British Journal of Political Science, 41(2), pp.341-361.
Farrell, D. M. (2011). Electoral systems: A comparative introduction. Palgrave
macmillan. US
Higley J and Burton M (2006) Elite Foundations of Liberal Democracy. Lanham, MD:
Rowman and Littlefield.
 12

Higley J and Pakulski J (2012) Pareto’s theory of elite cycles: A reconsideration and
application. In: Femina J (ed.) Vilfredo Pareto: Beyond Disciplinary Boundaries.
Farmham: Ashgate, pp. 111–31.
Ho, E. L. E. (2011). ‘Claiming’the diaspora: Elite mobility, sending state strategies and
the spatialities of citizenship. Progress in Human Geography, 35(6), pp.757-772.
Lewis, D. E. (2010). The politics of presidential appointments: Political control and
bureaucratic performance. Princeton University Press.
Marat, E. (2012). Kyrgyzstan: a parliamentary system based on inter-elite
consensus. Demokratizatsiya, 20(4), pp.325
Mouffe, C. (2014). Gramsci and Marxist Theory (RLE: Gramsci). Routledge. UK
Murkens, J. E. K. (2017). Mixed Messages in Bottles: the European Union, Devolution,
and the Future of the Constitution. The Modern Law Review, 80(4), pp.685-696.
O'neil, P. H. (2015). Essentials of Comparative Politics: Fifth International Student
Edition. WW Norton & Company. UK
Parkinson, J., & Mansbridge, J. (2012). Deliberative systems: deliberative democracy at
the large scale. Cambridge University Press. UK
Passoth, J. H., and Rowland, N. J. (2010). Actor-network state: Integrating actor-
network theory and state theory. International Sociology, 25(6), pp.818-841.