Types of Governments

Governments can be classified into several types. Some of the more common types of governments are: 1. Democracy The word "democracy" literally means "rule by the people." In a democracy, the people govern. 2. Republic A literal democracy is impossible in a political system containing more than a few people. All "democracies" are really republics. In a republic, the people elect representatives to make and enforce laws. 3. Monarchy A monarchy consists of rule by a king or queen. Sometimes a king is called an "emperor," especially if there is a large empire, such as China before 1911. There are no large monarchies today. The United Kingdom, which has a queen, is really a republic because the queen has virtually no political power. 4. Aristocracy An aristocracy is rule by the aristocrats. Aristocrats are typically wealthy, educated people. Many monarchies have really been ruled by aristocrats. Today, typically, the term "aristocracy" is used negatively to accuse a republic of being dominated by rich people, such as saying, "The United States has become an aristocracy." 5. Dictatorship A dictatorship consists of rule by one person or a group of people. Very few dictators admit they are dictators; they almost always claim to be leaders of democracies. The dictator may be one person, such as Castro in Cuba or Hitler in Germany, or a group of people, such as the Communist Party in China. 6. Democratic Republic Usually, a "democratic republic" is not democratic and is not a republic. A government that officially calls itself a "democratic republic" is usually a dictatorship. Communist dictatorships have been especially prone to use this term. For example, the official name of North Vietnam was "The Democratic Republic of Vietnam." China uses a variant, "The People's Republic of China."

A federation (Latin: foedus, foederis, 'covenant'), also known as a federal state, is a political entity characterized by a union of partially self-governing states or regions united by a central (federal) government. In a federation, the self-governing status of the component states, as well as the division of power between them and the central government, are typically constitutionally entrenched and may not be altered by a unilateral decision of the latter[1]. The governmental or constitutional structure found in a federation is known as federalism. It can be considered the opposite of another system, theunitary state. Germany with sixteen Lnder is an example of a federation, whereas neighboring Austria and its Bundeslnder was a unitary state withadministrative divisions that became federated, and neighboring France by contrast has always been unitary. Federations may be multi-ethnic and cover a large area of territory (eg.India), although neither is necessarily the case. The initial agreements create a stability that encourages other common interests, brings the disparate territories closer, and gives them all even more common ground. At some time this is recognized and a movement is organized to merge more closely. Other times, especially when common cultural factors are at play such as ethnicity and language, some of these steps in this pattern are expedited and compressed. The international council for federal countries, the Forum of Federations,[2]is based in Ottawa, Ontario. It helps share best practices among countries with federal systems of government, and currently includes nine countries as partner governments.
Contents
[hide]

o o o

1 History 2 Federations and other forms of state 2.1 Federations 2.2 Unitary states 2.3 Other forms of governance

o o

2.3.1 Confederation 2.3.2 Empire 2.4 Comparison with other systems of autonomy 2.4.1 Federacy 2.4.2 Devolution 2.4.3 Associated States 2.4.4 Crown dependencies 2.4.5 Overseas territories 2.5 Alleged de facto federations 2.5.1 Spain

 o o

2.5.2 People's Republic of China 2.5.3 European Union 2.5.4 Russian Federation 2.5.5 South Africa

3 Internal controversy and conflict 4 Federal governments 4.1 Contemporary 4.1.1 Long form titles 4.2 Defunct 5 See also 6 Footnotes and references

[edit]History Several ancient chiefdoms and kingdoms, such as The 4th century BC League of Corinth, Noricum in Central Europe, and the Iroquois in pre-Columbian North America, could be described as federations orconfederations. The Old Swiss Confederacy was an early example of formal non-unitary statehood. Several colonies and dominions in the New World consisted of autonomous provinces, transformed to federal states upon independence (see Spanish American wars of independence). The oldest continuous federation, and a role model for many subsequent federations, is the United States of America. Some of the New World federations failed; the Federal Republic of Central America broke up into independent states 20 years after its founding. Others, such as Argentina and Mexico, have shifted between federal, confederal and unitary systems, before settling as federations. Brazil became a federation only after fall of the monarchy (see States of Brazil), and Venezuela became a federation after the Federal War. Germany is another nation-state that has switched between confederal, federal and unitary rule, since the German Confederation was founded in 1815. The North German Confederation and the Weimar Republic were federations. Founded in 1922, the Soviet Union was formally a federation of Soviet Republics, Autonomous republics of the Soviet Union and other federal subjects, though in practice highly centralized under theGovernment of the Soviet Union. The Russian Federation has inherited a similar system. Several dominons of the British Empire, independent during the years past World War II, became federations: Nigeria, Pakistan, India and Malaysia. Australia and Canada are independent federations, yet Commonwealth realms. The Forum of Federations was established in 1999. In some recent cases, federations have been a measure to handle with ethnic conflict within a state, such as Bosnia and Hercegovina and Iraq since 2005.

[edit]Federations

and other forms of state

A map of the United States of America showing its fifty constituent states and the Federal District

A map of the United Mexican States (Mexico), showing its thirty-one constituent states and the Federal District

[edit]Federations In a federation the component states are in some sense sovereign, insofar as certain powers are reserved to them that may not be exercised by the central government. However, a federation is more than a mere loose alliance of independent states. The component states of a federation usually possess no powers in relation to foreign policy, and so they enjoy no independent status under international law. However, German Lander do have this power,[3] which is beginning to be exercised on a European level. Some federations are called asymmetric because some states have more autonomy than others. An example of such a federation is Malaysia, in which Sarawak andSabah entered the federation on different terms and conditions from the states of Peninsular Malaysia. A federation often emerges from an initial agreement between a number of separate states. The purpose can be the will to solve mutual problems and to provide for mutual defense, or to create a nation state for an ethnicity spread over several states. The former was the case with the United States and Switzerland, the latter with Germany.[clarification needed] However, as the histories of countries and nations vary, the federalist system of a state can be quite different from these models. Australia, for instance, is unique in that it came into existence as a nation by the democratic vote of the citizens of each state, who voted "yes" in referendums to adopt the Australian Constitution. Brazil, on the other hand, has experienced both the federal and the unitary state through its history. Some present day states of the Brazilian federation retain borders set during the Portuguese colonization (i.e. previous to the very existence of Brazilian state), whereas the latest state, Tocantins, was created by the 1988 Constitution for chiefly administrative reasons.

Seven of the top ten largest countries by area are governed as federations. [edit]Unitary

states

A unitary state is sometimes one with only a single, centralised, national tier of government. However, unitary states often also include one or more self-governing regions. The difference between a federation and this kind of unitary state is that in a unitary state the autonomous status of self-governing regions exists by the sufferance of the central government, and may be unilaterally revoked. While it is common for a federation to be brought into being by agreement between a number of formally independent states, in a unitary state self-governing regions are often created through a process of devolution, where a formerly centralised state agrees to grant autonomy to a region that was previously entirely subordinate. Thus federations are often established voluntarily from 'below' whereas devolution grants self-government from 'above'. It is often part of the philosophy of a unitary state that, regardless of the actual status of any of its parts, its entire territory constitutes a single sovereign entity or nation-state[citation needed], and that by virtue of this the central government exercises sovereignty over the whole territory as of right. In a federation, on the other hand, sovereignty is often regarded as residing notionally in the component states, or as being shared between these states and the central government.[citation needed] [edit]Other

forms of governance

The Swiss Confederation and its 26 cantons

[edit]Confederation A confederation, in modern political terms, is usually limited to a permanent union of sovereign states for common action in relation to other states.[4] In Belgium, however, the opposite movement is under way.[5] Belgium was founded as a centralised state, after the French model, but has gradually been reformed into a federal state by consecutive constitutional reforms since the 1970s. Moreover, although nominally called a federal state, the country's structure already has a number of confederational traits (ex. competences are exclusive for either the federal or the state level, the treaty-making power of the Federating units without almost any possible veto of the Federal Government). At present, there is a growing movement to transform the existing federal state into a looser confederation with two or three constitutive states and/or two special regions.[6] By definition, the difference between a confederation and a federation is that the membership of themember states in a confederation is voluntary, while the membership in a federation is not. A

confederation is most likely to feature these differences over a federation: (1) No real direct powers: many confederal decisions are externalised by member-state legislation. (2) Decisions on day-today-matters are not taken by simple majority but by special majorities or even by consensus or unanimity (veto for every member). (3) Changes of the constitution, usually a treaty, require unanimity. Over time these terms acquired distinct connotations leading to the present difference in definition. An example of this is the United States under the Articles of Confederation. The Articles established a national government under what today would be defined as a federal system (albeit with a comparatively weaker federal government). However, Canadians, designed with a stronger central government than the U.S. in the wake of the Civil War of the latter, use the term "Confederation" to refer to the formation or joining, not the structure, of Canada. Legal reforms, court rulings, and political compromises have somewhat decentralised Canada in practice since its formation in 1867. [edit]Empire An empire is a multi-ethnic state or group of nations with a central government established usually through coercion (on the model of the Roman Empire). An empire often includes self-governing regions, but these will possess autonomy only at the sufferance of the central government. On the other hand, a political entity that is an empire in name, may in practice consist of multiple autonomous kingdoms organised together in a federation, with a high king designated as an emperor. One example of this was Imperial Germany. [edit]Comparison [edit]Federacy A federacy is essentially an extreme case of an asymmetric federation, either due to large differences in the level of autonomy, or the rigidity of the constitutional arrangements. The term federacy is more often used for the relation between the sovereign state and its autonomous areas. [edit]Devolution A federation differs from a devolved state, such as the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Spain, because, in a devolved state, the central government can revoke the independence of the subunits (Scottish Parliament, Welsh National Assembly, Northern Ireland Assembly in the case of the UK) without changing the constitution. [edit]Associated States A federation also differs from an associated state, such as the Federated States of Micronesia (in free association with the United States) and Cook Islands and Niue (which form part of the Realm of New Zealand). There are two kinds of associated states: in case of Micronesia, association is concluded by treaty between two sovereign states; in case of Cook Islands and Niue, association is concluded by domestic legal arrangements. [edit]Crown dependencies The relation between the Crown dependencies of the Isle of Man and the bailiwicks of Guernsey andJersey in the Channel Islands and the United Kingdom is very similar to a federate

with other systems of autonomy

relation: the Islands enjoy independence from the United Kingdom, which, via The Crown, takes care of their foreign relations and defence although the UK Parliament does have overall power to legislate for the dependencies. However, the islands are neither an incorporated part of the United Kingdom, nor are they considered to be independent or associated states. The Isle of Man does not have a monarch,per se; rather, the British Monarch is, ex officio, Lord of Mann (irrespective of the incumbent's sex). [edit]Overseas territories Overseas territories, such as the British overseas territories, are vested with varying degrees of power; some enjoy considerable independence from the sovereign state, which only takes care of their foreign relations and defence. However, they are neither considered to be part of it, nor recognised as sovereign or associated states. [edit]Alleged

de facto federations

The distinction between a federation and a unitary state is often quite ambiguous. A unitary state may closely resemble a federation in structure and, while a central government may possess the theoretical right to revoke the autonomy of a self-governing region, it may be politically difficult for it to do so in practice. The self-governing regions of some unitary states also often enjoy greater autonomy than those of some federations. For these reasons, it is sometimes argued[by whom?] that some modern unitary states are de facto federations. [edit]Spain

Autonomous communities of Spain

Spain is suggested as one possible de facto federation as it grants more self-government to its autonomous communities[7][8] than most federations allow their constituent parts[citation needed]. For the Spanish parliament to revoke the autonomy of regions such asGalicia, Catalonia or the Basque Country would be a political near-impossibility, though nothing bars it legally. Additionally, some regions such as Navarre or the Basque Country have full control over taxation and spending, transferring a small payment to the central government for the common services (army, foreign relations, macroeconomic policy). For example, one scholar discusses the "federal nature of Spain's government (a trend that almost no one denies)."[9]Each autonomous community is governed by a Statute of Autonomy (Estatuto de Autonoma) under the Spanish Constitution of 1978. [edit]People's Republic of China

In the People's Republic of China, a form of de facto federation has evolved without formal legislation. This has occurred as largely informal grants of power to the provinces, to handle economic affairs and implement national policies. This has resulted in a system some have termed "de facto federalism with Chinese characteristics" (in reference to Deng Xiaoping's policy of socialism with Chinese characteristics).[10] Constitutionally, the power vested in the special administrative regions of the People's Republic is granted from the Central People's Government, through decision by the National People's Congress. A Federal Republic of China, in effect the third Chinese Republic, has been proposed as a future replacement for the PRC. [edit]European Union Parts of this article (those related to the three pillars) areoutdated. Please update this section to reflect recent events or newly available information. (June 2011) The European Union (EU) is a type of political union or quasi Federation. Robert Schuman, the initiator of the European Community system, wrote that a supranational Community like the Europe's foundingEuropean Coal and Steel Community lay midway between an association of States where they retained complete independence and a federation leading to a fusion of States in a super-state.[11] TheEuropean Founding Fathers made a Europe Declaration at the time of the signing of the Treaty of Paris on 18 April 1951 saying that Europe should be organized on a supranational foundation. They envisaged a structure quite different from a federation called the European Political Community.[citation needed] The EU is a three pillar structure of the original supranational European Economic Community and the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, Euratom, plus two largely intergovernmental pillars dealing with External Affairs and Justice and Home Affairs. The EU is therefore not a de jure federation, although some academic observers conclude that after 50 years of institutional evolution since the Treaties of Rome it is becoming one.[12] The European Union possesses attributes of a federal state. However, its central government is far weaker than that of most federations and the individual members aresovereign states under international law, so it is usually characterized as an unprecedented form of supra-national union. The EU has responsibility for important areas such as trade, monetary union, agriculture, fisheries. Nonetheless, EU member states retain the right to act independently in matters of foreign policy and defense, and also enjoy a near monopoly over other major policy areas such as criminal justice and taxation. Since the Treaty of Lisbon, Member States' right to leave the Union is codified, and the Union operates with more qualified majority voting (rather than unanimity) in many areas.[citation needed]
By the signature of this Treaty, the participating Parties give proof of their determination to create the first supranational institution and that thus they are laying the true foundation of an organized Europe. This Europe remains open to all nations. We profoundly hope that other nations will join us in our common endeavour. Europe Declaration signed by Konrad Adenauer (West Germany), Paul van Zeeland, Joseph Meurice (Belgium) Robert Schuman (France) Count Sforza (Italy) Joseph Bech (Luxembourg) and Dirk Stikker, J. R. M. van den Brink (The Netherlands).[13]

Europe has charted its own brand of constitutional federalism.[citation needed] Joseph H. H. Weiler Those uncomfortable using the "F" word in the EU context should feel free to refer to it as a quasi-federal or federal-like system. Nevertheless, for the purposes of the analysis here, the EU has the necessary attributes of a federal system. It is striking that while many scholars of the EU continue to resist analyzing it as a federation, most contemporary students of federalism view the EU as a federal system.[citation needed]

(See for instance, Bednar, Filippov et al., McKay, Kelemen, Defigueido and Weingast) R. Daniel Kelemen

A more nuanced view has been given by the German Constitutional Court. Here the EU is defined as 'an association of sovereign national states (Staatenverbund)'.[14] With this view, the European Union resembles more of a confederation. [edit]Russian Federation The Russian Federation has inherited its structure from the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR) that was one of the 15 republics of the Soviet Union and itself was considered a federation of national territories. The RSFSR consisted of autonomous republics, which had a certain degree of autonomy, at least de jure, and of other types of administrative units (oblasts and krais), whose status was the same as that of oblasts in other mostly unitary Soviet Socialist Republics. Today's Russia is defined as a federation in its Constitution (Article 5),[15] and Russia's federal subjects, i.e., the constituent republics, oblasts, krais, the federal-level cities of Moscow and Saint Petersburg, as well as one autonomous oblast and four autonomous (national) okrugs, are equal in legal terms, save for some symbolic features allowed to republics (constitution, president, national language). Some regions (Yakutia[16][17]) have concluded agreements with the Federation so as to modify the degree of their autonomy.[citation needed] According to an amendment passed in December 2004, governors and presidents of Russia's constituent regions, who were previously elected by popular vote, are now proposed by the President of Russia for the approval of the local parliament[18] Local parliaments theoretically have the authority to reject the candidate, but if this occurs three times, the parliament may be dissolved by the President and new parliamentary elections held. [edit]South Africa At the end of apartheid, the former four provinces (Cape, Natal, Orange Free State and Transvaal) and the Bantustans were converted into nine provinces. Each province has a government constituted by aunicameral assembly and an executive branch with a premier and executive council.[19] The powers of provinces are circumscribed by the national constitution which limits them to certain listed "functional areas". In certain cases there is a concurrence between national and provincial levels, while in others there are exclusive competences for each one. This system is known as "cooperative government".

This system would be considered as a "de facto" federation, because actually the power of provinces was given by the national government to the provincial level. Moreover, the creation of a "provincial constitution" is optional, if the province government does not want do it rules additionally the national constitution. Ultimately, unlike the majority of federal systems, South Africa has a single national court system, and the administration of justice is the responsibility of the national government. [edit]Internal

controversy and conflict

The United Provinces of Central America was short-lived

Certain forms of political and constitutional dispute are common to federations. One issue is that the exact division of power and responsibility between federal and regional governments is often a source of controversy. Often, as is the case with the United States, such conflicts are resolved through the judicial system, which delimits the powers of federal and local governments. The relationship between federal and local courts varies from nation to nation and can be a controversial and complex issue in itself. Another common issue in federal systems is the conflict between regional and national interests, or between the interests and aspirations of different ethnic groups. In some federations the entire jurisdiction is relatively homogeneous and each constituent state resembles a miniature version of the whole; this is known as 'congruent federalism'. On the other hand,incongruent federalism exists where different states or regions possess distinct ethnic groups. The ability of a federal government to create national institutions that can mediate differences that arise because of linguistic, ethnic, religious, or other regional differences is an important challenge. The inability to meet this challenge may lead to the secession of parts of a federation or to civil war, as occurred in United States and Switzerland. In the case of Malaysia, Singapore was expelled from the federation because of rising racial tension. In some cases internal conflict may lead a federation to collapse entirely, as occurred in Nigeria, the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, the United Provinces of Central America and the West Indies Federation.

[edit]Federal

governments

The federal government is the common or national government of a federation. A federal governmentmay have distinct powers at various levels authorized or delegated to it by its member states. The structure of federal governments vary. Based on a broad definition of a basic federalism, there are two or more levels of government that exist within an established territory and govern through commoninstitutions with overlapping or shared powers as prescribed by a constitution. Federal government is the government at the level of the sovereign state. Usual responsibilities of this level of government are maintaining national security and exercising international diplomacy, including the right to sign binding treaties. Basically, a modern federal government, within the limits defined by its constitution, has the power to make laws for the whole country, unlike local governments. TheUnited States Constitution was created to limit the federal government from exerting power over the states, but certain amendments gave the federal government considerable authority over states. Federal government within this structure are the government ministries and departments and agencies to which the ministers of government are assigned. For a detailed list of federated units, see Federated state#List of constituents by federation. There are 28 federations as of August 2012.[20][21] [edit]Contemporary Year est. 1853 Federation Federating units Provinces of Argentina States and territories of Australia States of Austria Divisions of Belgium Major federating units Minor federating units 1 autonomous city

Argentina

23 provinces

1901

Australia

6 states

2 territories

Austria Belgium Bosnia and Herzegovina

9 Lnder or Bundeslnder 3 Communities, 3 Regions

2 entities (out of which one is Divisions of Bosnia itself a federation, consisting of and Herzegovina 10 cantons) 26 states (Previously provinces during the monarchical period between 1822 and 1889) 10 provinces

1 district

1825

Brazil

States of Brazil

1 federal district and 5,561 municipalities 3 territories

1867

Canada

Provinces and

territories of Canada Comoros Ethiopia 1949 Regions of Ethiopia 3 islands 9 regions 2 chartered cities

Germany States of Germany 16 Lnder or Bundeslnder States and territories of India Governorates of Iraq States of Malaysia States of Mexico Administrative divisions of the Federated States of Micronesia Zones of Nepal States of Nigeria Provinces and territories of Pakistan 7 Union Territories, including a National Capital Territory

1950

India

28 States

Iraq Malaysia 1821 Mexico Federate d States of Micronesia Nepal Nigeria

18 provinces, including the subregion of Iraqi Kurdistan. 13 states 31 states 3 federal territories 1 federal district

4 states

14 zones 36 states

75 districts 1 territory 4 federal territories including a federal capital territory

Pakistan

4 provinces

1992

Russian Federation

21 republics, 46 oblasts, 9krais, Federal subjects of 1 autonomous oblast, 4 Russia autonomous okrugs, 2 federallevel cities[22] Islands/parishes of Saint Kitts and 2 islands/14 parishes Nevis Provinces of South 9 provinces Africa States of South Sudan 10 states

Saint Kitts and Nevis 1910 South Africa South Sudan

2011

2012

Somalia

Federal Member States of Somalia Autonomous communities of Spain States of Sudan Cantons of Switzerland Emirates of the UAE

3 states[21][23]

Spain

17 autonomous communities

2 autonomous cities

Sudan Switzerla nd United 1971 Arab Emirates

17 states 20 cantons, 6 sous-cantons

7 emirates

United 1787 States of America

States of the United States

50 states

1 federal district; 2 Commonwealths; 1 incorporated territory, 11 unincorporated territories 1 federal district, 1 federal dependency

Venezuel States of Venezuela

23 states

A federal republic is a federation of states with a republican form of government. Usage of the term republic is inconsistent but, as a minimum, it means a state or federation of states that does not have a monarch. In a federal republic, there is a division of powers between the national ("federal") government, and the government of the individual subdivisions. While each federal republic manages this division of powers differently, national security and defense, monetary policy, and other issues of a "national" scope are handled at the "federal" level while more local issues such as road and infrastructure maintenance and education policy are handled at the local level. In other words, while the federal government has ultimate sovereignty, there is a limited sovereignty granted to the subdivisions, where the federal government does not have jurisdiction. This is in contrast to a unitary republic whereby the national government has complete sovereignty over all aspects of political life, with purely administrative subdivisions, and a confederation whereby the constituent states retain ultimate sovereignty. The federal republic is a form of government used by many countries around the world.

A federal parliamentary republic refers to a federation of states with arepublican form of government that is, more or less, dependent upon the confidence of parliaments at both the national and subnational levels. It is a combination of the federal republic and the parliamentary republic.

Such republics usually possess a bicameral legislature at the federal level out of necessity, so as to allow for a set, often equal number of representatives of the subnational entities to sit in the upper house; however, the government, headed by a head of government, will be dependent upon the lower house of parliament for its stability or legitimacy.

Government consists of the legislators, administrators, and arbitrators in the administrative bureaucracy who control a state at a given time, and the system by which they are organized.[1][2] Government is the means by which state policy is enforced, as well as the mechanism for determining the policy of the state. A form of government, or form of state governance, refers to the set of political institutions by which a government of a state is organized. Synonyms include "regime type" and "system of government". States are served by a continuous succession of different governments.[3]Each successive government is composed of a body of individuals who control and exercise control over political decision-making. Their function is to make and enforce laws and arbitrate conflicts. In some societies, this group is often a self-perpetuating or hereditary class. In other societies, such as democracies, the political roles remain, but there is frequent turnover of the people actually filling the positions.[4] In parliamentary systems, the word "government" is used to refer to what in presidential systems would be the executive branch and to thegoverning party. In parliamentary systems, the government is composed of the prime minister and the cabinet. In other cases, "government" refers to executive, legislative, judicial, bureaucratic, and possibly also devolved powers. Public disapproval of a particular government (expressed, for example, by not re-electing an incumbent) does not necessarily represent disapproval of the state itself (i.e. of the particular framework of government). In fact, leaders often attempt to deliberately blur the lines between the two, in order to conflate their interests with those of the polity.[5]
Contents
[hide]

1 Forms of government 1.1 By elements of where power is held

1.1.1 Autocratic attributes 1.1.2 Democratic attributes 1.1.3 Monarchic attributes 1.1.4 Oligarchic attributes 1.1.5 Other characteristic attributes 1.1.5.1 Pejorative attributes 1.1.5.2 Speculative attributes

1.2 By significant attributes

1.3 By approach to regional autonomy 2 Classifying governments 3 Etymology 4 Maps 5 See also 6 References 7 Further reading 8 External links

[edit]Forms

of government

This section requires expansion. (August 2012)

[edit]By

elements of where power is held

[edit]Autocratic attributes This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it. Term Definition

Rule by an authoritarian governments are characterized by an emphasis on the Authoritarian authority of the state in a republic or union. It is a political system controlled by unelected rulers who usually permit some degree of individual freedom.

Autocracy

Rule by one person, whose decisions are subject to neither external legal restraints nor regularized mechanisms of popular control (except perhaps for the implicit threat). Autocrat needs servants while despot needs slaves.

Despotism

Rule by a single entity with absolute power. That entity may be an individual, as in an autocracy, or it may be a group,[1] as in an oligarchy. The word despotism means to "rule in the fashion of a despot" and does not necessarily require a singular "despot", an individual. Despot needs slaves while Autocrat needs servants.

Dictatorship Rule by an individual who has full power over the country. The term may refer to a system where the dictator came to power, and holds it, purely by force, but it also

includes systems where the dictator first came to power legitimately but then was able to amend the constitution so as to, in effect, gather all power for themselves. [6] See also Autocracy and Stratocracy.

Totalitarian

Rule by a totalitarian government that regulates nearly every aspect of public and private life.

[edit]Democratic attributes This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it. Term Definition

Democracy

Rule by a government chosen by election where most of the populace are enfranchised. The key distinction between a democracy and other forms of constitutional government is usually taken to be that the right to vote is not limited by a person's wealth or race (the main qualification for enfranchisement is usually having reached a certain age). A Democratic government is, therefore, one supported (at least at the time of the election) by a majority of the populace (provided the election was held fairly). A "majority" may be defined in different ways. There are many "power-sharing" (usually in countries where people mainly identify themselves by race or religion) or "electoral-college" or "constituency" systems where the government is not chosen by a simple one-vote-perperson headcount.

Direct democracy

Representative democracy [edit]Monarchic attributes T Term Definition

Absolute

Rule by a government in which a monarch exercises ultimate

monarchy

governing authority ashead of state and head of government.

Constitutional monarchy

Rule by a government that has a monarch, but one whose powers are limited by law or by a formal constitution, such as the United Kingdom[7][8]

Elective monarchy

Rule by a government that has an elected monarch, in contrast to a hereditary monarchy in which the office is automatically passed down as a family inheritance. The manner of election, the nature of candidate qualifications, and the electors vary from case to case.

Monarchy

Rule by an individual who has inherited the role and expects to bequeath it to their heir.[9]

Oligarchic attributes

Term

Definition

Aristocracy

Communism Rule by workers.

Meritocracy

Rule by a system of governance where groups are selected on the basis of people's ability, knowledge in a given area, and contributions to society.

Oligarchy

Rule by a small group of people who share similar interests or family relations.[10]

Plutocracy

Rule by a system of governance composed of the wealthy class. Any of the forms of government listed here can be plutocracy. For instance, if all of the voted representatives in a republic are wealthy, then it is a republic and a plutocracy.

Kritarchy

Rule by a government ruled by judges.

Stratocracy

Rule by a system of governance composed of military government in which the state and the military are traditionally the same thing. (Not to be confused with "military junta" or "military dictatorship".)

Rule by a system of governance where people who are skilled or proficient govern in Technocracy their respective areas of expertise (i.e. doctors, engineers, scientists, professionals and other technical experts).

Timocracy

Rule by a system of governance ruled by honorable citizens and property owners.

Theocracy

Rule by a religious elite; a system of governance composed of religious institutions in which the state and the church are traditionally the same thing.[11]

Other characteristic attributes

Term

Definition

Adhocracy

Rule by a government based on type of organization that operates in opposite fashion to a bureaucracy.

Anarchism

Sometimes said to be non-governance; it is a structure which strives for nonhierarchical voluntary associations among agents.

Band Society

Rule by a government based on small (usually family) unit with a semi-informal hierarchy, with strongest (either physical strength or strength of character) as leader. Very much like a pack seen in other animals, such as wolves.

Chiefdom(Tribal)

Rule by a government based on small complex society of varying degrees of centralization that is led by an individual known as a chief.

Constitutional republic

Rule by a government whose powers are limited by law or a formal constitution, and chosen by a vote amongst at least some sections of the populace (Ancient Sparta was in its own terms a republic, though most inhabitants were disenfranchised. The United States is a federal republic). Republics which exclude sections of the populace from participation will typically claim to represent all citizens (by defining people without the vote as "non-citizens").

Cybersynacy

Ruled by a data fed group of secluded individuals that regulates aspects of public and private life using data feeds and technology having no interactivity with the citizens but using "facts only" to decide direction.

Emirate

Similar to a monarchy or sultanate, but a government in which the supreme power is in the hands of an emir (the ruler of a Muslim state); the emir may be an absolute overlord or a sovereign with constitutionally limited authority.[12]

Geniocracy

Rule by a government ruled by creativity, innovation, intelligence and wisdom.

Kratocracy

Rule by a government ruled by those strong enough to seize power through physical force, social manuvering or political cunning.

Nomocracy

Rule by a government under the sovereignty of rational laws and civic right as opposed to one under theocratic systems of government. In a nomocracy, ultimate and final authority (sovereignty) exists in the law.

Rule by a form of government in which the people, or some significant portion of them, have supreme control over the government and where offices of state are elected or chosen by elected people.[13][14] In modern times, a common simplified

Pejorative attributes
Term Definition

Corporatocracy

Rule by a government where an economic and political system is controlled by corporations or corporate interests.[18] Its use is generally pejorative.

Nepotism

Rule by a system of governance in which importance is given to the relatives of those already in power, like a nephew (where the word comes from). In such governments even if the relatives aren't qualified they are given positions of authority just because they know someone who already has authority.

Kakistocracy

Rule by a government ruled by the worst or least-qualified citizens.

Kleptocracy

Rule by a government where its officials and the ruling class in general pursue personal wealth and political power at the expense of the wider population. In strict terms kleptocracy is not a form of government but a characteristic of a government engaged in such behavior.

]Speculative attributes
Term Definition

Rule by a government ruled by the highest and main authority being either a magician, Magocracy sage, sorcerer, wizard or witch. This is often similar to a theocratic structured regime and is largely portrayed in fiction and fantasy genre categories.

Ruled by a singularity of all human minds connected via some form of technical or non technical telepathy acting as a form of super computer to make decisions based on shared patterned experiences to deliver fair and accurate decisions to problems as they Uniocracy arrive. Also known as the hive mind principle, differs from voting in that each person would make a decision while in the "hive" the synapses of all minds work together following a longer path of memories to make "one" decision.

By significant attributes

Certain major characteristics are defining of certain types; others are historically associated with certain types of government. Rule according to higher law Separation of church and state Civilian control of the military Totalitarianism/Authoritarianism vs. liberty Police state Economic system (e.g. capitalism, socialism, welfare state, feudalism) Patriarchy or matriarchy - dominance of a particular gender

By approach to regional autonomy

This list focuses on differing approaches that political systems take to the distribution of sovereignty, and the autonomy of regions within the state. Sovereignty located exclusively at the center of political jurisdiction. Empire Unitary state Sovereignty located at the centre and in peripheral areas. Hegemony Federation and Federal republic Confederation Diverging degrees of sovereignty. Asymmetrical federalism Federacy Associated state

Devolved state - sovereignty can be abolished without changing the constitution.

Classifying governments
In political science, it has long been a goal to create a typology or taxonomy of polities, as typologies of political systems are not obvious.[19] It is especially important in the political science fields ofcomparative politics and international relations. On the surface, identifying a form of government appears to be easy, as all governments have an official form. The United States is a federal republic, while the former Soviet Union was a socialist republic. However self-identification is not objective, and as Kopstein and Lichbach argue, defining regimes can be tricky.[20] For example, elections are a defining characteristic of a democracy, but in practice elections in the former Soviet Union were not "free and fair" and took place in a single party state. Thus in many practical classifications it would not be considered democratic. Another complication is that a large number of political systems originate as socio-economic movements and are then carried into governments by specific parties naming themselves after those movements. Experience with those movements in power, and the strong ties they may have to particular forms of government, can cause them to be considered as forms of government in themselves.

Etymology
From Middle English government,[citation needed] from Old French government[citation needed] (French gouvernement), from Latin gubernatio ("management, government"), from Ancient Greek (kubernismos), (kubernsis, "steering, pilotage, guiding"), from (kuberna, "I steer, drive, guide, pilot") + -ment. Federalism is a proposed system of administration for the Philippines and a revision of the current1987 constitution. Under Joint Resolution No. 10, proposed by senator Aquilino Pimentel, Jr., the creation of eleven autonomous regions out of the Philippine Republic which would establish centers of finance and development in the archipelago.[1]
Contents
[hide]

o o

1 Joint Resolution No. 10 1.1 Senate Majority 2 Eleven States 3 Federal Administrative Region 4 Senators Based on states 5 House Concurrent Resolution No. 15 5.1 Presidential Visit of Couchepin and Arroyo's backing

6 References 7 External links

[edit]Joint

Resolution No. 10

The resolution would have required the revision of 14 of the 18 Articles of the 1987 Philippine Constitution and the addition of two new articles. It sought to adopt a federal presidential bicameralform of government. [edit]Senate

Majority

This proposed bill was backed by the 13 senators of the Philippines: Senate Minority Floor Leader Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. filed Senate Resolution No. 10 Senate President Manuel Villar, Jr. Sen. Edgardo Angara Sen. Pia Cayetano Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile Sen. Francis Escudero Sen. Jinggoy Estrada Sen. Gregorio Honansan II Sen. Panfilo Lacson Sen. Francis Pangilinan Sen. Ramon Revilla, Jr. Sen. Rodolfo Biazon Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri[2]

[edit]Eleven

States

The proposed states would have been Northern Luzon, Central Luzon, Southern Tagalog, Bicol, Minparom (Mindoro, Palawan, and Romblon), Eastern Visayas, Central Visayas, Western Visayas,Northern Mindanao, Southern Mindanao and Bangsamoro.[3] These would be similar to the US 50 states or German 16 States. [edit]Federal

Administrative Region

Metro Manila would have been patterned to the US Washington, D.C., and will be the seat of the Federal government.[3] [edit]Senators

Based on states

Other major proposals: the election of senators based on states; the election of senators representing overseas voters; the election of the state governor and the vice-governor as a team; the abolition of the Judicial and Bar Council which screens nominees to the judiciary etc.[4] [edit]House

Concurrent Resolution No. 15

Rep. Monico O. Puentevella on May 7, 2008, filed House Concurrent Resolution No. 15 which supported Senate Resolution No. 10 backed by 16 senators. Unlike the Nene Pimentel Senate Resolution, Puentevella included the option of holding a constitutional convention, but excluded thePeople's Initiative mode.[5] Prospero Nograles, a self-proclaimed advocate of federalism, on May 1, 2008, announced: "This federal system of government is close to my heart as a Mindanaoan leader and I'm sure most of the leaders in Mindanao will agree that we have long clamored for it. Senate Resolution 10 is a pleasant surprise because the Senate has a long history of opposing any move to amend the Constitution."[6] The joint Senate resolution called for the creation of 11 federal states in the country, by convening of Congress into a constituent assembly for the purpose of revising the Constitution to establish a federal system of government. [edit]Presidential

Visit of Couchepin and Arroyo's backing

Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo stated to visiting Swiss President Pascal Couchepin: We advocate federalism as a way to ensure long-lasting peace in Mindanao.[7] Press Secretary Jesus Dureza, on August 12, 2008, stated: Its all systems go for Charter change. We are supporting Senate Joint Resolution No. 10. Naughty insinuations that she [Arroyo] was going for Cha-cha [Charter change] because she wants to extend her term in office prompted the President to make her position clear. She is calling for a constitutional amendment... in order to bring about the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity. An opportunity should be given to the whole country to avail of the reform effects of federalism. The sentiment of many people there is to give local officials more authority in order to perform better. And the federal set-up is the way forward to this. The President has approved the way forward and theres no question about it. If she has the political will to do it she has to muster political will in spite of all these noises.[8] Meanwhile, La Union Representative Victor Ortega of La Union, chairman of the House committee on constitutional amendments said, the results of his survey showed that 115 (94.26%) of the 123 solons were in favor of amending the Constitution. However, opposition and leftist lawmakers questioned the results and intent of Ortegas survey, and called Arroyos proposal a ploy for her perpetuation in power and the removal of protectionist provisions in the Charter. Ortegas survey showed 62 respondents favor Charter change through a constitutional assembly, and 89 respondents were in favor of shifting to a parliamentary form of government compared to 56 who voted for federalism, while 70 respondents preferred to amend the Constitution after the 2010 presidential elections. Members of the committee on constitutional amendments would vote by the end August on whether to amend the Constitution or not.[9]

A parliament is a legislature whose power and function are similar to those dictated by theWestminster system of the United Kingdom. More generally, "parliament" may simply refer to ademocratic government's legislature. The term is derived from the French parlement, the action of parler(to speak): a parlement is a discussion. The term came to mean a meeting at which such a discussion took place.[when?] It acquired its modern meaning as it came to be used for the body of people (in an institutional sense) who would meet to discuss matters of state.[1] Generally, a parliament has three functions: representation, legislation and parliamentary control (i.e., hearings, inquiries).

Origins
The Spanish Parliament of the Kingdom of Len (1188) was the first example in the history of Europe.[2][3][4][5] The use of the term 'parliament' first occurred in 1236 in England. Previously, this group of the kings closest advisors had been called the council. After agreeing to the principle of common consent in the Magna Carta, King John had to increase the size of this group of advisors and include more commoners. He then had to submit his requests for increased taxation to this newly expanded group. Two distinct groups emerged among the commoners: the landed gentry, and the rich merchants and lawyers. The word parliament comes from the French parler, which means to talk or to discuss. English parliamentary procedure, such as Jeffersons Manual of Parliamentary Procedure, developed not to facilitate talk, but to facilitate decision-making. Although the British model of parliament, known as the Westminster Model, is held up as the Mother of all Parliaments, it is unique in that it developed over time from tradition, as opposed to being democratically enacted by way of a constitution.[6] [edit]Parliament

government

Nations with bicameral legislatures. Nations with unicameral legislatures. No legislature.

Legislatures called parliaments operate under a parliamentary system of government in which theexecutive is constitutionally answerable to the parliament. Parliaments usually consist ofchambers or houses, and are usually either bicameral orunicameral although more complex models exist, or have existed (seeTricameralism). A nation's prime minister ("P.M") is almost always the leader of the majority party in the lower house of parliament, but only holds his or her office as long as the "confidence of the house" is maintained. If members of the lower house lose faith in the leader for whatever reason, they can call a vote of no confidence and force the PM to resign. This can be particularly dangerous to a government when the distribution of seats among different parties is relatively even, in which case a new election is often called shortly thereafter. However, in

case of general discontent with the head of government, his replacement can be made very smoothly without all the complications that it represents in the case of a presidential system. The Parliamentary system can be contrasted with a presidential system, on the model of the United States' congressional system, which operate under a stricter separation of powers whereby the executive does not form part of, nor is appointed by, the parliamentary or legislative body. In such a system, congresses do not select or dismiss heads of governments, and governments cannot request an early dissolution as may be the case for parliaments. Some states have a semipresidential system which falls between parliamentary and congressional systems, and combines a powerful president with an executive responsible to parliament.

Antonio C. Abaya wrote in Manila Standard his critique Pimentels resolution: a) it is a Trojan horse to re-introduce a twice-defeated (in 2006-07) maneuver to shift to a parliamentary system, to enable President Arroyo to remain in power beyond 2010, as prime minister, similar to the maneuver of Vladimir Putin in Russia; b) the resolutions stated objective, to spur economic growth, is a no-brainer since, as I pointed out in my article, the Philippines failure to develop as fast as its neighbors in the past 50 years can be traced to poor, even stupid, economic policies and strategies, not to its being a unitary state; c) most of the successful countries in our part of the worldJapan, China, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailandall achieved economic success as unitary states; only one Malaysiaas a federal union; so there is nothing wrong with being a unitary state as long as the correct economic strategies and policies are pursued; on the other hand, a federal union with wrong economic strategies and policies would stagnate, e.g. Myanmar. d) archipelagic countriesJapan, Indonesia, the Philippinesare unitary states also for pragmatic reasons: being made up of islands, they are vulnerable to centrifugal forces that would encourage secession and disunity. e) Senator Pimentel is challenged to name even only one example of a country that shifted from unitary to federalor from federal to unitaryand thus achieved prosperity as a result of that shift. He has not obliged. I share this for us to discuss.
May 7, 2008 at 2:01 am

federalpinoy

Thanks for the inputs. I too have read the article by Mr. Abaya and, although I deem not myself as an esteemed writer as he is, offer the following response, on a per-item basis: a) while it is true that the previous attempts have been dubious and a majority of Filipinos have viewed this as an attempt to remain in power by the present administration, the argument does not legitimately address the concern on whether a shift to federalism is a viable option, as such, the replies to the following items are related. b) the economic growth objective of the resolution is not the end-all-and-be-all of the resolution. It also aims to distribute power from the capital to the prospective states, fueling greater participation from the populace to govern themselves.

I have seen a lot of posts from different discussion boards that most of those from the Visayas think of Manila as imperial manila, meaning that they feel stifled by a government that seems too far away. I do however have concerns on where we will get the budget to implement this shift. That may be for another discussion point. c) This is related to the item above, and I would prefer to argue that economics can be supported by the political system, but the political system itself will not be the determinant of whether economic success can be gained. As pointed out, I agree that correct economic planning and policies are the main factors that will drive economic growth and prosperity. d) This is true if we refer to East Timor and Aceh of Indonesia, where secessionists have either gained or are in the process of gaining independence. But Indonesia is a unitary state, what prevented this from happening? In the case of the Philippines, we are capable of devolving from a unitary state to a federal state since there is no extreme sense of independence from its would-be member states. This is in exception to the Bangsamoro people who have felt left out of the governments care in the past. But one can also argue that this will eventually erupt into nationalism. This is where I concur with other opinion that there can be no clause in the constitution providing for secession of a member state, precisely because we have a unique opportunity to claim that we came from a unitary state, where everyone is a citizen of the Federation first, then a citizen of their State second. It hasnt been done yet, but whos to say that it cant be done? (to be continued; have to change venues)
May 7, 2008 at 4:54 am

federalpinoy

to continue, e) Even if there are no other state or nation has done it before, this does not mean it can not be a success. The Philippines have a lot of firsts first republic in Asia, People Power. All these point to a vibrant populace ready, willing, and able to be pioneers in the political arena. As I indicated in d), take for example the USA. They are first, Americans, and then from the State of there are little centrifugal forces that would tear our country apart, partly because 300 years of colonization have largely homogenized us as a people. But this does not deny the regionality permeating in our culture, which needs a decent and valid form of expression in FEDERALISM. 1. 11:49 AM Parliament - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org 2. 11:49 AM Parliament - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia www.google.com.ph 3. 11:48 AM Spotlight: A Federal Republic of the Philippines Republikang Federal ng Filipinas federalpinoy.wordpress.com 4. 11:48 AM http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=federal%20republic%20of%20the %20philippines&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDcQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F %2Ffederalpinoy.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F04%2F29%2Fspotlight-a-federal-republic-of-the-philippines %2F&ei=fptWUJCOLs7RmAXg3oGYCA&usg=AFQjCNG8YJTB1zXqBgBxvzeVMXmqaNbunQ www.google.com.ph 5. 11:40 AM

Federalism in the Philippines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org 6. 11:40 AM http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=federal%20republic%20of%20the %20philippines&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCQQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org %2Fwiki %2FFederalism_in_the_Philippines&ei=fptWUJCOLs7RmAXg3oGYCA&usg=AFQjCNGCPIUCG1zw6KPtqcy8ie98X Mx9ug www.google.com.ph 7. 11:39 AM federal republic of the philippines - Hanapin sa Google www.google.com.ph 8. 11:36 AM tonyumlas - Yahoo! Mail us.mg5.mail.yahoo.com 9. 11:34 AM Sign in to Yahoo! login.yahoo.com 10. 11:34 AM http://ph.yahoo.com/?p=us&r0=1347852868 ph.yahoo.com 11. 11:34 AM Yahoo! Philippines ph.yahoo.com 12. 11:34 AM http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=types%20of %20government&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fclassroom.jcschools.net%2FSS-units%2Fpresentations%2Fgovtypes.ppt&ei=1pZWUN_dIKLNmAXSzYCgAQ&usg=AFQjCNGIMqPlA78azOMbiPPM-cYzwf9f4g www.google.com.ph 13. 11:32 AM Yahoo! Mail: The best web-based email! login.yahoo.com 14. 11:21 AM Government - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org 15. 11:21 AM http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=types%20of %20government&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org %2Fwiki%2FGovernment&ei=1pZWUN_dIKLNmAXSzYCgAQ&usg=AFQjCNF5sRBdo9gB_YsM82hw1XecVed0vw www.google.com.ph 16. 11:20 AM Types of Government depts.alverno.edu 17. 11:20 AM http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=types%20of %20government&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CCgQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdepts.alverno.edu %2Fdgp%2FGEC%2FTypes%2520of %2520Government.html&ei=1pZWUN_dIKLNmAXSzYCgAQ&usg=AFQjCNF1QP6hrYilhtgu1d6pCtCBu3kIbg www.google.com.ph 18. 11:20 AM Yahoo! GeoCities: Get a web site with easy-to-use site building tools. www.geocities.com 19. 11:19 AM Types of Government stutzfamily.com 20. 11:19 AM http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=types%20of %20government&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fstutzfamily.com

%2Fmrstutz%2FWorldAffairs %2Ftypesofgovt.html&ei=1pZWUN_dIKLNmAXSzYCgAQ&usg=AFQjCNExE076q0HIA6RRun0sig0715UFXA www.google.com.ph 21. 11:19 AM types of government - Hanapin sa Google www.google.com.ph 22. 11:19 AM Federal parliamentary republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org 23. 11:19 AM http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=federal%20parliamentary %20republic&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org %2Fwiki%2FFederal_parliamentary_republic&ei=pZZWUJ35LsImQWQoYCAAg&usg=AFQjCNGXiJUBl0LSz5Rz7HCcq64HnFCfww www.google.com.ph 24. 11:19 AM federal parliamentary republic - Hanapin sa Google www.google.com.ph 25. 11:17 AM Federal republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org 26. 11:17 AM http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=federal %20republic&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org %2Fwiki %2FFederal_republic&ei=MpZWUIX0Ns2gmQX8z4GQBQ&usg=AFQjCNFwCIfR6iWVnJMv7K9ehJlMfY_RwA www.google.com.ph 27. 11:17 AM federal republic - Hanapin sa Google www.google.com.ph 28. 11:16 AM Federation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org 29. 11:16 AM http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=federal %20government&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CC4QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org %2Fwiki%2FFederation&ei=9ZVWUKSTHersmAX-ooDQBQ&usg=AFQjCNHoFvoxDoS2ggMNWdK-HnftqkQ5Uw www.google.com.ph 30.