# Is a Parliamentary system better than a Presidential system? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 6, 2017, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297 "2017-06-06T19:42:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 11:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/41 "2017-06-08T11:13:14Z")
You’re making a point, support it with examples. ---
**Author:** ![Malden\_Capell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/malden_capell/32/5274_2.png) [@Malden\_Capell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malden_Capell)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/42 "2017-06-08T11:19:56Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > You’re making a point, support it with examples. Human Rights Act, for example. I’m sure there’s plenty in the US who would love to abolish the First Amendment. On the other hand, it’s frustrating that the US Second Amendment is so stuck. ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/43 "2017-06-08T11:27:05Z")
What about it? ---
**Author:** ![Malden\_Capell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/malden_capell/32/5274_2.png) [@Malden\_Capell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malden_Capell)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/44 "2017-06-08T11:40:26Z")
Um, the fact that it could be abolished with a simple majority, which would not happen so easily in the US? Are you actually reading my posts? Look, I’m just pointing out that there’s positives and negatives to both systems. ---
**Author:** ![Mk\_VII](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Mk\_VII](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mk_VII)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/45 "2017-06-08T21:12:36Z")
> [@Malden\_Capell](#): > > You need an example for how a Government may seek to use a simple majority to sweep away impediments to its power? > > I’m a huge fan of the UK Constitution for its flexibility that you describe, but we shouldn’t lose sight of the risks in such a model all the same. Right to silence. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/46 "2017-06-08T21:31:22Z")
I think the one thing we can all agree on is that any system like the one in that show _House of Cards_ is clearly broken. Look at how that guy just swept himself into power. I know it was fiction, but I’m casting my vote for whatever the other system is. ---
**Author:** ![Mk\_VII](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Mk\_VII](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mk_VII)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/47 "2017-06-08T21:39:05Z")
_House of Cards_ was, of course written around the British Westminster system, and subsequently reworked to fit the U.S. constitutional framework. (Presumably the OP meant ‘the US presidential system’. There are plenty of countries where the President has very little power other than being Head of State.) ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/48 "2017-06-08T21:40:29Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > Yep, so much better no other country has touched the US experimental model with a barge pole in 240 years. Except, apparently, Rwanda. France has something close. Yes, they have a Prime Minister in a parliamentary legislature, but the true executive power is held in their directly elected President. ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/49 "2017-06-08T21:43:45Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > Can you give me some examples of authoritarian parliamentary governments? Turkey right now is a fantastic example of this. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/50 "2017-06-08T22:15:03Z")
> [@Mk\_VII](#): > > _House of Cards_ was, of course written around the British Westminster system, and subsequently reworked to fit the U.S. constitutional framework. (Presumably the OP meant ‘the US presidential system’. There are plenty of countries where the President has very little power other than being Head of State.) Thanks. Be sure to let me know if you have any jokes you want someone to explain when you tell them. ---
**Author:** ![SanVito](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sanvito/32/2805_2.png) [@SanVito](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SanVito)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2017, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/51 "2017-06-09T12:09:55Z")
> [@Mk\_VII](#): > > _House of Cards_ was, of course written around the British Westminster system, and subsequently reworked to fit the U.S. constitutional framework. (Presumably the OP meant ‘the US presidential system’. There are plenty of countries where the President has very little power other than being Head of State.) Thinking about it, that’s the one thing about the US remake which makes it feel far-fetched - the backstage scheming of a career politician making it to the White House without having to face the votes of the general public for the post. As it was written for the original, a senior politician scheming his way into number 10 without a general election is entirely plausible (watch out for Boris!) ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2017, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/52 "2017-06-09T15:56:12Z")
Hell, that’s how May did it. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2017, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/53 "2017-06-09T16:35:30Z")
> [@SanVito](#): > > Thinking about it, that’s the one thing about the US remake which makes it feel far-fetched - the backstage scheming of a career politician making it to the White House without having to face the votes of the general public for the post. Gerald Ford, of course, became President without even being voted in as either President or Vice President, just as Frank Underwood was. The difference is that Ford didn’t scheme himself into that position out of spite. But I suppose one could. ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2017, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/54 "2017-06-09T17:08:59Z")
> [@ISiddiqui](#): > > Hell, that’s how May did it. She just had to bide her time and wait for the usual suspects to cancel each other out. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2017, 10:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/55 "2017-06-13T10:49:31Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > I realize that no system if foolproof, but it still seems to me that one system can be better than another. Can you give me some examples of authoritarian parliamentary governments? > [@RickJay](#): > > The Soviet Union. Not really. The hallmarks of parliamentary systems are that the parliament is multi-party, and the executive is responsible to it. That’s not how it worked in the Soviet Union. Yes, there was the Supreme Soviet, which selected the Council of Ministers, which looks sort of like a parliamentary system. However, the Supreme Soviet was a uni-party body, controlled by the Soviet Communist Party. Indeed, the role of the Communist Party was enshrined in the Constitution: [QUOTE=Constitution of the Soviet Union, 1977] \*\*Article 6. \*\* The leading and guiding force of the Soviet society and the nucleus of its political system, of all state organisations and public organisations, is the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The CPSU exists for the people and serves the people. ``` The Communist Party, armed with Marxism-Leninism, determines the general perspectives of the development of society and the course of the home and foreign policy of the USSR, directs the great constructive work of the Soviet people, and imparts a planned, systematic and theoretically substantiated character to their struggle for the victory of communism. All party organisations shall function within the framework of the Constitution of the USSR. ``` [/QUOTE] The highest decision-making body in the Soviet Union wasn’t the Council of Ministers, which was the _de jure_ head of the Soviet state. Rather, it was the Politburo of the Communist Party which had the _de facto_ control. The decisions of the Politburo, a party organization, were implemented by the Council of Ministers and other organs of the Soviet state. That power of one party to determine the policy of the state in all aspects, with the formal institutions of the state rubber-stamping the decisions of the party, is completely contrary to parliamentarian systems of governments. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2017, 10:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/56 "2017-06-13T10:52:43Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > I realize that no system if foolproof, but it still seems to me that one system can be better than another. Can you give me some examples of authoritarian parliamentary governments? > [@ISiddiqui](#): > > Turkey right now is a fantastic example of this. This is the better answer. But note that Turkey is in the process of changing to a presidential system, precisely because a presidential system allows for greater concentration of power in the hands of the president, as opposed to a prime minister and cabinet. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2017, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/57 "2017-06-13T14:11:44Z")
\ Well I’d certainly love to see Prime Minister’s Questions with Trump at the despatch box. There’d be an _A Few Good Men_ meltdown every week. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2017, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/58 "2017-06-13T19:57:04Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Not really. The hallmarks of parliamentary systems are that the parliament is multi-party, and the executive is responsible to it. Those are the hallmarks of one that’s working well, yes. A hallmark of a presidential system is that the President is subject to the rule of law and held to account accordingly. If he’s not, the system will fail, but I wouldn’t no-true-Scotsman that into “well, it’s not a presidential system if it fails.” The point of the OP is being missed if you handwave away every system that doesn’t work out. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2017, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/59 "2017-06-13T20:04:34Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > You can turn every single argument around and argue the opposite case. Every one. I can’t think of a best Executive system for this reason. Elected high-power president? Potential for going rogue. Ceremonial president? Why even elect them then? Semi-ceremonial president? Always itching for more power than simply to form a government and declare “emergencies”. Monarchy? Fine until you get a bad one. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2017, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297/60 "2017-06-13T20:29:37Z")
> [@Alan\_Smithee](#): > > There’s not much need to speculate on the kinds of leaders we’d have in a parliamentary system. The role of Prime Minister is directly analogous to that of Speaker of the House. One role of the Prime Minister is analogous to that of the Speaker of the House. But the PM wears two hats: (s)he is the head of the legislature and the chief executive, and the latter role is directly analogous to that of a President. > [@RickJay](#): > > A hallmark of a presidential system is that the President is subject to the rule of law and held to account accordingly. If he’s not, the system will fail, but I wouldn’t no-true-Scotsman that into “well, it’s not a presidential system if it fails.” The point of the OP is being missed if you handwave away every system that doesn’t work out. But did the Soviet Union ever actually have free elections? It’s one thing to say that a parliamentary system which has democratic elections and winds up an authoritarian dictatorship is “authoritarian,” but you can’t really say that if it was never democratic in the first place. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-parliamentary-system-better-than-a-presidential-system/788297.md?page=4)