Right off the bat the topic of Territorial
arrangement of political systems seemed interesting to me. Being a History
major with a focus on United States History, this is one topic that I at least
know the basics about. Today, because the power has already been split thanks
to our founding fathers, the idea of territorial arrangement seems like there
is a simple solution. However, if one looks into American History, even the
founding fathers were pretty evenly split on how to approach this tough
arrangement and had many quarrels. This is proved through historical documents
such as the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers. Although they reached a
decision and split the government between state to state and national system,
it didn’t end there.
Even today in the United States, which is a
country that many other countries look to when searching for democracy or
leadership, is still trying to figure out where the national government ends
and the state governments begin. And if a well-established Democracy such as
America still cannot quite get it right, this proves how difficult it could be
to other countries trying to obtain what we have, rich or poor, such as
Ethiopia, according to John T. Ishiyama. (page 209) I have the opinion of many,
and that is that whatever the combinations and distribution of power, each has
its pros and cons. This has proven to be true in my own country, and I am sure
it can be said of other countries as well. Ishiyama points out that there are
Three major systems, and they are Unitary, Federal, and Confederal. Each is
striking and works in its own way, but each can also lead to problems such as a
thirst for power, or a failure to get anything done.
Unitary System is the most popular choice among
countries. One of these countries is China. Pros and cons quickly come to mind
when China's name gets dropped. A major pro is that laws are passed more
quickly, more effectively, and everyone gets treated rather than it differing
territory to territory. Because there is less time for debating, there could be
advantages such as a stable economy. However, individuality can be lost. A
thought that comes to mind is the famous photo of one man standing in front of
a tank before he gets trampled. Whether or not this is the direct effect of a
Unitarian philosophy, it is a great analogy of how individual voices are all
but lost. I can see how a unitary system could be effective for other
countries, but I think it could never work for America for the simple reason of
size. Countries with a unitary system such as France and China are not nearly
as big as the United States, and due to the fact that America is split into 50
states alone proves how difficult the task could be. This problem especially
rings true for problems such as the court system in America. Although in many
countries with unitary systems still have smaller governments, their power is
still given by the main government, which can lead to sticky situations,
inequality, and questionable leadership.
A system that hits closer to home is, of
course, the Federal System. This is the system that America has chosen to
adopt, and it too, just as the unitary system, has proven to be effective and
ineffective in different areas. The point I made before on size of the country
being a factor in a certain system can be backed up by the mere fact that both
America and Russia, two of the largest countries in the world, are Federal. A
major problem with a federal system is the problem of overlapping. Because this
is considered a blog essay, my opinion is pivotal to get my thought across. My
thoughts when it comes to overlapping is simple, I agree that it is a problem.
Though I think problems in this Country do get solved, I find overlapping to be
extremely confusing. An example that comes to mind is gay marriage. Right now
state governments are treating the problem differently, but like many large
issues from the past, it is only a matter of time before it goes to the Supreme
Court. This begs the question of who has more power, and if states should be
able to differ on key issues. This same issue, however, proves how the Federal
system is effective.
Homosexuals can be compared to other struggling
minorities from the past. They are fighting for, in their words, “equal rights”. The reason I put that phrase in
quotation marks is because a major battle that has and is continuing to break
out is the definition of rights. Some do not see the rights of homosexuals the
same way they see the rights of men and women, different races, or even
different age groups. The LGBT community, however, sees this problem as a basic
problem of their human rights not being met. The reason freedom of speech and
groups such as the LGBT community can have a voice as loud as they do is in
part, because of the Federal System the United States adopted. Quick
responsiveness is due to Federal System, for it does not take as long for a
voice to be heard if the government is split into smaller groups.
The third system is a Confederal System, which
to be honest, is the system I know the least about. The farthest my knowledge
goes is the Civil War, when the South called itself the Confederacy. Three of
the four examples Ishiyama gave when naming Confederal Systems are no longer
the systems used today, and the fourth is the European Union, which is not that
old. The major con I have gathered from reading the textbook is how weak they
are. It is much harder for a smaller government within a larger one to have its
voice heard. Confederal systems, in my opinion, seem, at best, to have only one
pro, and that is to annoy the larger government and be part of the veto system
in order for a problem to be looked at. The problem with this, is, depending on
the Confederal systems size and problem, they can be put to a halting stop,
such as in the Civil War.
Territorial Arrangements of Government is
fascinating for the simple reason that no two are the same, but often times,
they have worked for hundreds of years. This is important to look at when
comparing governments, because it can give insight to how governments work and
operate. Personally, im a fan of the Federal system, but then again, I am
extremely biased. I don’t think a Unitarian System is horrible either, for it
is proven to be effective. I am just glad the confederal system in America did
not succeed after they succeeded.
No comments:
Post a Comment