Belgium and the Netherlands
Around the world, there are various types of political systems. Some countries may be federalist, monarchist, or unitary. Countries geographically close to each other can have different political systems. Belgium was once a colony of the Netherlands before becoming independent in 1830. Although both countries continue to have a presence of a constitutional monarchy, Belgium has a different political system from the Netherlands. One can find differences in the formal institutions of Belgium and the Netherlands by observing their political institutions, voting methods, and government makeup.
Open list proportional representation is used in Belgium, and allows coalition governments to form because of the large number of parties. As voting is compulsory in Belgium, there are 5 options to choose from: invalid vote, alternate choice, vote for the list as a whole, preference for someone not on the list, or selecting someone not on the list. The Coalition governments can form due to no one able to achieve a majority, and parties colliding together. In the 2010 election, the top 3 leads were the New-Flemish Alliance, Socialist Party, and the Christian Democrat and Flemish Party. Using proportional representation to establish coalition governments can be good because it allows more diversity, but bad at the same time because smaller parties will promote ideas unknowingly not important to the public.
The voting regulations of the two countries are an important difference. Though they are different, both countries use proportional representation leading to multi-party systems. The legal age to vote in the two countries is 18 or older but Belgium has compulsory voting. Compulsory voting in Belgium states that...
... middle of paper ...
...eral Cabinet are appointed by the King, and the Ministers head of executive departments within the government. With a huge divided population, ministers are limited to 15 and divided among ministers who are Dutch-speaking and French-speaking. The government is administered by the Prime Ministers and the ministers of the government. The cabinet are a reflection of the presence of political parties of the Chamber.
Although Belgium and the Netherlands are geographically close and Belgium was once a colony of the Netherlands, their internal intuitions vary. Coalition governments from multi-party systems and presence of a constitutional monarchy are a few characterizes to what each country shows. Countries close in certain areas, can also be very far apart ideologically.
Works Cited
Rachlis, E. (1963). The Low Countries. New York: New York TIme Press.
There are many similarities between the two countries, these are the most important similarities between the two. The first similarity is branches of government. Both Belgium and The USA have an executive branch, judicial branch, and also a legislative
Every colonies in the world have their similarities and differences, but colonies of themselves have main issues such as religion, economies, and labor systems; wealth and status plays a huge role in the colonies’ advancement and success. Virginia and New England colonies were very influential although they went through many struggles with each other to get through where they are now. The similarity between Virginia and New England was mainly ethnicity, but the demographics of the two areas are different.
Though the events of the past certainly have a direct influence on the world today. The ardent relationship that lies between Canada and the Netherlands can be referenced to the pretentious days nearing the end of the Second World War. Where Canada had played a significant role as liberators in Holland during this misfortunate time. Canada had provided the Dutch Royal Family with a safe haven. Canadians fought battles through France, Belgium, the Scheldt, and Germany before being sent back to the Netherlands.
The United States and the Netherlands are run by two different types of governments. While the United States is a republic, the Netherlands is a constitutional monarchy. But there is a big difference between a republic and a constitutional monarchy. In a republic, the people of the country elect a chief of state, which is commonly called the president. The people of the republic also elect representatives to help govern the nation (Merriam 627). On the other hand, in a constitutional monarchy with a parliament, as the Netherlands does, the monarch, whether it be a king or queen, is the head of state, but not the head of government. The head of government is placed in the hands of the prime minister. As in many cases, a constitutional monarchy may also have houses or chambers to help with legislation (“Background”). According to Richard Tames in Monarchy, a constitutional monarchy is a:
The Dutch Republic was very successful economically and militarily around the 1650s. The Dutch were a well-respected nation in Europe due to the power they held over trade routes during the middle of the 17th century. Later, the Dutch Republic began to decline because of wars initiated by power-hungry competitor nations, mounting internal issues, and deteriorating trade in the later part of the 17th century.
...ited States of America has a presidential system, the United Kingdom has a parliament system, and Russia has a semipresidential system. For the presidential system, as mentioned before, the main feature is the establishment of the separation of powers. In the Parliamentary system, legislative and executive powers are fused together; same people-same institution. The conflict of lack of clarity among the prime minister and president in the semipresidential system has in occasions created opportunities for more judicial scope (O’Neil, 2007). The United States of America, the United Kingdom, and Russia have systems that make their political aspects different. However the similarities make it easier to understand the institutions and their duties. This analysis in using compare and contrast is necessary in being able to understand political structures among the nations.
Within 1650 to 1713 the Dutch Republic underwent a formidable transformation, which changed its status as a major influence in Europe. The Dutch Republic was a political union of seven provinces that was not only an impressive banking and commercial capital, but the Dutch also had a great navy as well. Additionally, the center of flourishment in the Dutch Republic was Amsterdam, which was the foremost trading and banking center in all of Europe. The changing environment of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries forced the Dutch Republic into a position of conflict and unbalance, which proved detrimental to their country as a whole. One of the first challenges to the Dutch Republic dealt with military and how countries, such as the English, wanted to snatch the Dutch’s profitable sea trade routes for themselves. As a result of military conflicts, the Dutch Republic’s economy decreased as a whole due to the fact that wars burdened the previously flourishing trade routes and wealthy cities. Another challenge to the Dutch Republic was unity and how Dutch cities began to doubt other provinces of loyalty to one another, which destroyed most efforts of unification for retaliation against the countries attacking the Dutch. Overall, the major decline of the Dutch Republic was a great example of when one part of a nation goes down, the rest of the nation followed suit.
The way that a country is controlled by the government depends on the relationship between the legislative and executive authority. Most democratic nations, today, generally use one of two governmental systems, either a parliamentary system or a presidential system. Today most of Europe prefers to use a parliamentary system, whereas the presidential form of government is preferred in places such as South Korea, South America and the United States. The differences between these two governmental systems are not obvious at first, but there are some key differences. However, neither one of them is necessarily superior to the other.
Generally speaking, the French political system is special in two ways. First, It is neither a parliamentary system like the British one, where the executive emerges from Parliament, nor a system of separation of powers like the American one, where the President must take account of Congress. The French Fifth Republic is a hybrid system characterized by a Presidency that is oversized in the absence of adequate counterweights. Second, France also differs from most major modern democracies in using two-round single-winner voting rather than one-round (United States, United Kingdom) or proportional representation (continental Europe), which encourages a large number of parties (in the first round) and two major electoral coalitions (in the second), left and right. However, there have been many changes to the French sys tem since the foundation of the Fifth Republic: institutions and politics have continually evolved to achieve their present shape.
The power structure of Norway is probably one of the few areas that are quite different from that of most other free countries. Norway is a constitutional monarchy. The king has limited authority, except as head of the military and as a symbol of continuity and stability. Executive power is vested in the prime minister, who presides over the dominant party in the country’s parliament (Storting). The 165 members of parliament are elected every four years. The Storting has an Upper Chamber (Lagting) and a Lower Chamber (Odelsting). The Labor, Center, and Conservative parties are the largest in parliament, but no party has a majority. Another similar note is that all citizens may vote at age 18. Norway also has 19 provinces (fylker). Norway enjoys a strong economy, and has one of the highest standards of living in the world.
Belgium became a nation around the start of the 19th Century because it was the first time that they struggled together to be free of people who did not have the same beliefs and history as them. They might not speak the same language, French and Flemish, but they had the feeling that they belonged together and as the Belgian motto says: l'Union fait la Force (Unity makes Strength).
The concept of parliamentary political system was rooted in 1707 of Great Britain; the word derives from ‘parley’, a discussion. It was used to describe meetings between Henry III and noblemen in the Great Council (Szilagyi, 2009). It was originated in British political system and is often known as the Westminster model as it was used in the Palace of Westminster. It became influential throughout many European nations later in the 18th century (Smith, 2010). Countries with parliamentary systems are either constitutional monarchies such as the United Kingdom, Denmark, Australia, and Canada or parliamentary republics such as Greece, India, Ireland and Italy (McTeer, 1995). The parliamentary type of government is known for its three distinctive features; first, executive is divided into the head of state and the head of government, they are independently elected forming a dual executive; second, the fusion of ...
The sub-cabinet does not have a legal existence, but for the majority of the time since a cabinet was allowed to be formed, the sub-cabinet, a collection of the top bureaucrats from each ministry (generally the Vice Ministers) and the Chief Cabinet Secretary has existed in some form. It comes together to set policy for their respective ministries in addition to forming a layer which allowed for greater coordination and exchange of information between the bureaucracies and politicians in the Cabinet.
In representative government, parties are often found. Perhaps the most prevalent danger in a party system is a party split, which paralyzes government just as much as a divergence of executive, legislative, and judicial powers in government.
...control of government separately or in union. A multi-party system prevents the leadership of a single party from controlling a single legislative chamber without challenge. Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Finland, France, Germany, India, Israel, Indonesia, Japan, Ireland, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Taiwan, Spain and Sweden are examples of nations that have used a multi-party system effectively in their democracies. An advantage of a multi-party system is that voters have a wider choice of candidates and ideas while a disadvantage is that a multi-party system nation is usually unstable. This is because so many parties have different interests that they are competing for. Another disadvantage is that it can encourage the development of political parties based on clan, ethnicity or region, which can favor one area of people but not the other.