Separation of powers
The separation of powers is a model for the governance of a state. Under this model, a state's government is divided into branches, each with separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility so that the powers of one branch are not in conflict with the powers associated with the other branches; the typical division is into three branches: a legislature, an executive, a judiciary, the trias politica model. It can be contrasted with the fusion of powers in some parliamentary systems where the executive and legislative branches overlap. Separation of powers, refers to the division of responsibilities into distinct branches to limit any one branch from exercising the core functions of another; the intent of separation of powers is to prevent the concentration of unchecked power by providing for "checks" and "balances" to avoid autocracy, over-reaching by one branch over another, the attending efficiency of governing by one actor without need for negotiation and compromise with any other.
The separation of powers model is imprecisely and metonymically used interchangeably with the trias politica principle. While the trias politica is a common type of model, there are governments which utilize bipartite, rather than tripartite, systems as mentioned in the article. Aristotle first mentioned the idea of a "mixed government" or hybrid government in his work Politics where he drew upon many of the constitutional forms in the city-states of Ancient Greece. In the Roman Republic, the Roman Senate and the Assemblies showed an example of a mixed government according to Polybius. John Calvin favoured a system of government that divided political power between democracy and aristocracy. Calvin appreciated the advantages of democracy, stating: "It is an invaluable gift if God allows a people to elect its own government and magistrates." In order to reduce the danger of misuse of political power, Calvin suggested setting up several political institutions which should complement and control each other in a system of checks and balances.
In this way and his followers resisted political absolutism and furthered the growth of democracy. Calvin aimed to protect the well-being of ordinary people. In 1620, a group of English separatist Congregationalists and Anglicans founded Plymouth Colony in North America. Enjoying self-rule, they established a bipartite democratic system of government; the "freemen" elected the General Court, which functioned as legislature and judiciary and which in turn elected a governor, who together with his seven "assistants" served in the functional role of providing executive power. Massachusetts Bay Colony, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania had similar constitutions – they all separated political powers. Books like William Bradford's History of Plymoth Plantation were read in England. So the form of government in the colonies was well known in the mother country, including to the philosopher John Locke, he deduced from a study of the English constitutional system the advantages of dividing political power into the legislative, on the one hand, the executive and federative power, responsible for the protection of the country and prerogative of the monarch, on the other hand.
The term "tripartite system" is ascribed to French Enlightenment political philosopher Baron de Montesquieu, although he did not use such a term. In reality he referred to "distribution" of powers. In The Spirit of the Laws, Montesquieu described the various forms of distribution of political power among a legislature, an executive, a judiciary. Montesquieu's approach was to present and defend a form of government, not excessively centralized in all its powers to a single monarch or similar ruler, form of government known as "aristocracy", he based this model on the Constitution of the British constitutional system. Montesquieu took the view that the Roman Republic had powers separated so that no one could usurp complete power. In the British constitutional system, Montesquieu discerned a separation of powers among the monarch and the courts of law. In every government there are three sorts of power: the legislative. By virtue of the first, the prince or magistrate enacts temporary or perpetual laws, amends or abrogates those that have been enacted.
By the second, he makes peace or war, sends or receives embassies, establishes the public security, provides against invasions. By the third, he determines the disputes that arise between individuals; the latter we shall call the judiciary power, the other the executive power of the state. Montesquieu argues that each Power should only exercise its own functions, it was quite explicit here: When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty. Again, there is no liberty if the judiciary power be not separated from the legislative and executive. Were it joined with the legisla
Ideology
An ideology is a collection of normative beliefs and values that an individual or group holds for other than purely epistemic reasons. The term is used to describe a system of ideas and ideals which forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy. In political science it is used in a descriptive sense to refer to political belief systems. In social science there are many political ideologies; the term was coined by Antoine Destutt de Tracy, a French Enlightenment aristocrat and philosopher, who conceived it in 1796 as the "science of ideas" during the French Reign of Terror by trying to develop a rational system of ideas to oppose the irrational impulses of the mob. However, in contemporary philosophy it is narrower in scope than that original concept, or the ideas expressed in broad concepts such as worldview, The Imaginary and in ontology. In the sense defined by French Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser, ideology is "the imagined existence of things as it relates to the real conditions of existence".
The term "ideology" was born during the Reign of Terror of French Revolution, acquired several other meanings thereafter. The word, the system of ideas associated with it, was coined by Antoine Destutt de Tracy in 1796, while he was in prison pending trial during the Terror; the word was created by assembling the words idea, from Greek ἰδέα and -logy, from -λογία. He devised the term for a "science of ideas" he hoped would form a secure foundation for the moral and political sciences, he based the word on two things: 1) sensations people experience as they interact with the material world. He conceived "Ideology" as a liberal philosophy that would defend individual liberty, free markets, constitutional limits on state power, he argues that among these aspects ideology is the most generic term, because the science of ideas contains the study of their expression and deduction. The coup that overthrew Maximilien Robespierre allowed Tracy to pursue his work. Tracy reacted to the terroristic phase of the revolution by trying to work out a rational system of ideas to oppose the irrational mob impulses that had nearly destroyed him.
Napoleon Bonaparte came to view'Ideology' a term of abuse, which he hurled against his liberal foes in Tracy's Institut National. According to Karl Mannheim's historical reconstruction of the shifts in the meaning of ideology, the modern meaning of the word was born when Napoleon used it to describe his opponents as "the ideologues". Karl Marx used it in his writings. Tracy's major book, The Elements of Ideology, was soon translated into the major languages of Europe, in the next generation, when post-Napoleonic governments adopted a reactionary stance, influenced the Italian and Russian thinkers who had begun to describe themselves as "liberals" and who attempted to reignite revolutionary activity in the early 1820s. In the century after Tracy, the term ideology moved back and forth between positive and negative connotations; the term "ideology" has dropped some of its pejorative sting, has become a neutral term in the analysis of differing political opinions and views of social groups. While Karl Marx situated the term within class struggle and domination, others believed it was a necessary part of institutional functioning and social integration.
During considerable analysis of different ideological patterns, some have described the analysis as meta-ideology. Recent analysis tends to posit that ideology is a coherent system of ideas that rely on a few basic assumptions about reality that may or may not have any factual basis. Through this system, ideas become coherent repeated patterns through the subjective ongoing choices that people make; these ideas serve as the seed. Believers in ideology range from passive acceptance through fervent advocacy to true belief. According to most recent analysis, ideologies are neither right nor wrong. Definitions, such as by Manfred Steger and Paul James emphasize both the issue of patterning and contingent claims to truth: Ideologies are patterned clusters of normatively imbued ideas and concepts, including particular representations of power relations; these conceptual maps help people navigate the complexity of their political universe and carry claims to social truth. The works of George Walford and Harold Walsby, done under the heading of systematic ideology, are attempts to explore the relationships between ideology and social systems.
Charles Blattberg offers an account that distinguishes political ideologies from political philosophies. David W. Minar describes six different ways the word "ideology" has been used: As a collection of certain ideas with certain kinds of content norma
Separatism
A common definition of separatism is that it is the advocacy of a state of cultural, tribal, racial, governmental or gender separation from the larger group. While it refers to full political secession, separatist groups may seek nothing more than greater autonomy. While some critics may equate separatism with religious segregation, racist segregation, or sexist segregation, most separatists argue that separation by choice may serve useful purposes and is not the same as government-enforced segregation. There is some academic debate about this definition, in particular how it relates to secessionism, as has been discussed online. Separatist groups practice a form of identity politics, or political activity and theorizing founded in the shared experiences of injustice visited upon members of certain social groups; such groups believe attempts at integration with dominant groups compromise their identity and ability to pursue greater self-determination. However and political factors are critical in creating strong separatist movements as opposed to less ambitious identity movements.
Groups may have one or more motivations for separation, including: Emotional resentment and hatred of rival communities. Protection from genocide and ethnic cleansing. Resistance by victims of oppression, including denigration of their language, culture or religion. Influence and propaganda by those inside and outside the region who hope to gain politically from intergroup conflict and hatred. Economic and political dominance of one group that does not share power and privilege in an egalitarian fashion. Economic motivations: seeking to end economic exploitation by more powerful group or, conversely, to escape economic redistribution from a richer to a poorer group. Preservation of threatened religious, language or other cultural tradition. Destabilization from one separatist movement giving rise to others. Geopolitical power vacuum from breakup of larger states or empires. Continuing fragmentation as more and more states break up. Feeling that the perceived nation was added to the larger state by illegitimate means.
The perception that the state can no longer support one has betrayed their interests. Opposition to political decisions. How far separatist demands will go toward full independence, whether groups pursue constitutional and nonviolent or armed violence, depend on a variety of economic, political and cultural factors, including movement leadership and the government's response. Governments may respond in a number of ways; some include: accede to separatist demands improve the circumstances of disadvantaged minorities, be they religious, territorial, economic or political adopt "asymmetric federalism" where different states have different relations to the central government depending on separatist demands or considerations Allow minorities to win in political disputes about which they feel through parliamentary voting, etc. Settle for a confederation or a commonwealth relationship where there are only limited ties among states; some governments suppress any separatist movement in their own country, but support separatism in other countries.
Ethnic separatism is based more on cultural and linguistic differences than religious or racial differences, which may exist. Ethnic separatist movements include the following: Eurasia The Soviet Union's dissolution into its original ethnic groupings which formed their own nations of Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Lithuania, Russia, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Chechen separatism in the Caucasus the Republic of Chechnya is part of the Russian Federation. Serb separatism in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo. Albanian separatism in Kosovo, North Macedonia, Serbia Greeks separatism in Northern Epirus region of Albania. Turkish separatism in Cyprus. South Ossetian and Abkhazian separatism in Georgia. Armenian separatists of Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan. Azeri separatists in Iran want to unite the provinces of East Azerbaijan, West Azerbaijan and Ardabil with Azerbaijan. Kurdish separatism in Turkey, Syria and Iran. Sorbs separatism in Germany. Silesian separatism in Czech Republic. Basque and Catalan separatism in Spain.
Minor separatist movements in Andalusia, Balearic Islands, Canary Islands, Galicia, León, Navarre and Valencia. "Celtic nations" in the British Isles have created various separatist movements from the United Kingdom described as Scottish independence, Welsh Nationalism, Irish Republicanism and Cornish Nationalism. France's Basque, Corsican, Breton and Savoyan separatists. Italy's separatist movements in Friuli, Sicily, South Tyrol and Veneto. Bavarian separatism in Germany, despite the Bavarian Land being referred to as the Bavarian Free State. Belgium granting Dutch-speaking Flanders and French-speaking Wallonia greater autonomy. In the Netherlands, some Frisians covet an autonomous area. Switzerland's division into cantons along geographical and linguistic lines. Russian separatism in Crimea Separatist movements of Pakistan including Balochistan movement and the Sindhudesh movement. Separatist movements of India Jammu and Kashmir Assam separatist movements Insurgency in Northeast India Sri Lanka's ethnic Tamil minority separatism in Tamil Eelam.
Several ethnic minority groups fighting for separate states in Myanmar, including the Chin, Karen, Rohingya
Anarchy
Anarchy refers to a society, group of people, or a single person that rejects hierarchy. The word meant leaderlessness, but Pierre-Joseph Proudhon adopted the term in his 1840 treatise What Is Property? to refer to anarchism, a new political philosophy which advocates stateless societies based on voluntary associations. In practical terms, anarchy can refer to the curtailment or abolition of traditional forms of government and institutions, it can designate a nation—or anywhere on earth, inhabited—that has no system of government or central rule. Anarchy is advocated by individual anarchists who propose replacing government with voluntary institutions; the word anarchy comes from the ancient Greek ἀναρχία which combines ἀ, "not, without" and ἀρχή, "ruler, authority". Thus, the term refers to the state of a society being without authorities or an authoritative governing body. Anarchism as a political philosophy advocates self-governed societies based on voluntary institutions; these are described as stateless societies, although several authors have defined them more as institutions based on non-hierarchical free associations.
Anarchism holds the state to be unnecessary, or harmful. While anti-statism is central, anarchism entails opposing authority or hierarchical organisation in the conduct of all human relations, including yet not limited to the state system. There are many traditions of anarchism, not all of which are mutually exclusive. Anarchist schools of thought can differ fundamentally, supporting anything from extreme individualism to complete collectivism. Strains of anarchism have been divided into the categories of social and individualist anarchism or similar dual classifications. Anarchism is considered to be a radical left-wing ideology and much of anarchist economics and anarchist legal philosophy reflect anti-statist interpretations of communism, syndicalism, or participatory economics; some individualist anarchists are socialists or communists while some anarcho-communists are individualists or egoists. Anarchism as a social movement has endured fluctuations in popularity; the central tendency of anarchism as a mass social movement has been represented by anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism, with individualist anarchism being a literary phenomenon which did influence the bigger currents and individualists participated in large anarchist organizations.
Some anarchists oppose all forms of aggression and support self-defense or non-violence while others have supported the use of militant measures, including revolution and propaganda of the deed, on the path to an anarchist society. Since the 1890s, the term libertarianism has been used as a synonym for anarchism and was used exclusively in this sense until the 1950s in the United States. At this time, classical liberals in the United States began to describe themselves as libertarians and it has since become necessary to distinguish their individualist and capitalist philosophy from socialist anarchism. Thus, the former is referred to as right-wing libertarianism or right-libertarianism whereas the latter is described by the terms libertarian socialism, socialist libertarianism, left-libertarianism and left-anarchism. Right-libertarians voluntarists. Outside the English-speaking world, libertarianism retains its association with left-wing anarchism; the German philosopher Immanuel Kant treated anarchy in his Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View as consisting of "Law and Freedom without Force".
For Kant, anarchy falls short of being a true civil state because the law is only an "empty recommendation" if force is not included to make this law efficacious. For there to be such a state, force must be included while law and freedom are maintained, a state which Kant calls a republic. Kant identified four kinds of government: Law and freedom without force Law and force without freedom Force without freedom and law Force with freedom and law Although most known societies are characterized by the presence of hierarchy or the state, anthropologists have studied many egalitarian stateless societies, including most nomadic hunter-gatherer societies and horticultural societies such as the Semai and the Piaroa. Many of these societies can be considered to be anarchic in the sense that they explicitly reject the idea of centralized political authority; the egalitarianism typical of human hunter-gatherers is interesting when viewed in an evolutionary context. One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, the chimpanzee, is anything but egalitarian, forming hierarchies that are dominated by alpha males.
So great is the contrast with human hunter-gatherers that it is argued by palaeoanthropologists that resistance to being dominated was a key factor driving the development of human consciousness, language and social organization. In Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology, anarchist anthropologist David Graeber attempts to outline areas of research that intellectuals might explore in creating a cohesive body of anarchist social theory. Graeber posits that anthropology is "particularly well positioned" as an academic discipline that can look at the gamut of human societies and organizations to study and catalog alternative social and economic structures around the world, most present these alternatives to the world. In Society Against the State, Pierre Clastres examines stateless societies where certain cultural practices and attitudes avert the development of hierarchy and the state. He
Monarchy
A monarchy is a form of government in which a single person holds supreme authority in ruling a country performing ceremonial duties and embodying the country's national identity. Although some monarchs are elected, in most cases, the monarch's position is inherited and lasts until death or abdication. In these cases, the royal family or members of the dynasty serve in official capacities as well; the governing power of the monarch may vary from purely symbolic, to partial and restricted, to autocratic. Monarchy was the most common form of government until the 20th century. Forty-five sovereign nations in the world have monarchs acting as heads of state, sixteen of which are Commonwealth realms that recognise Queen Elizabeth II as their head of state. Most modern monarchs are constitutional monarchs, who retain a unique legal and ceremonial role, but exercise limited or no political power under the nation's constitution. In some nations, such as Brunei, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Eswatini, the hereditary monarch has more political influence than any other single source of authority in the nation, either by tradition or by a constitutional mandate.
The word "monarch" comes from the Greek language word μονάρχης, monárkhēs which referred to a single, at least nominally absolute ruler. In current usage the word monarchy refers to a traditional system of hereditary rule, as elective monarchies are quite rare; the form of societal hierarchy known as chiefdom or tribal kingship is prehistoric. The Greek term monarchia is classical, used by Herodotus; the monarch in classical antiquity is identified as "king" or "ruler" or as "queen". From earliest historical times, with the Egyptian and Mesopotamian monarchs, as well as in reconstructed Proto-Indo-European religion, the king held sacral functions directly connected to sacrifice, or was considered by their people to have divine ancestry; the role of the Roman emperor as the protector of Christianity was conflated with the sacral aspects held by the Germanic kings to create the notion of the "divine right of kings" in the Christian Middle Ages. The Chinese and Nepalese monarchs continued to be considered living Gods into the modern period.
Since antiquity, monarchy has contrasted with forms of democracy, where executive power is wielded by assemblies of free citizens. In antiquity, some monarchies were abolished in favour of such assemblies in Rome, Athens. In Germanic antiquity, kingship was a sacral function, the king was directly hereditary for some tribes, while for others he was elected from among eligible members of royal families by the thing; such ancient "parliamentarism" declined during the European Middle Ages, but it survived in forms of regional assemblies, such as the Icelandic Commonwealth, the Swiss Landsgemeinde and Tagsatzung, the High Medieval communal movement linked to the rise of medieval town privileges. The modern resurgence of parliamentarism and anti-monarchism began with the temporary overthrow of the English monarchy by the Parliament of England in 1649, followed by the American Revolution of 1776 and the French Revolution of 1789. One of many opponents of that trend was Elizabeth Dawbarn, whose anonymous Dialogue between Clara Neville and Louisa Mills, on Loyalty features "silly Louisa, who admires liberty, Tom Paine and the USA, lectured by Clara on God's approval of monarchy" and on the influence women can exert on men.
Much of 19th-century politics featured a division between anti-monarchist Radicalism and monarchist Conservativism. Many countries abolished the monarchy in the 20th century and became republics in the wake of either World War I, World War II, the Palestine War, or the Cold War. Advocacy of republics is called republicanism. In the modern era, monarchies are more prevalent in small states than in large ones. Monarchies are associated with political or sociocultural hereditary reign, in which monarchs reign for life and the responsibilities and power of the position pass to their child or another member of their family when they die. Most monarchs, both and in the modern day, have been born and brought up within a royal family, the centre of the royal household and court. Growing up in a royal family, future monarchs are trained for their expected future responsibilities as monarch. Different systems of succession have been used, such as proximity of blood and agnatic seniority. While most monarchs have been male, many female monarchs have reigned in history.
Rule may be hereditary in practice without being considered a monarchy: there have been some family dictatorships, some political families in many democracies. The principal advantage of hereditary monarchy is the immediate continuity of leadership; some monarchies are non-hereditary. In an elective monarchy, monarchs are elected, or appointed by some body for life or a defined period, but once appointed they serve as any other monarch. Four elective monarchies exist today: Cambodia, Malaysia and th
Street-level bureaucracy
Street-level bureaucracy is the subset of a public agency or government institution where the civil servants work who have direct contact with members of the general public. Street-level civil servants carry out and/or enforce the actions required by a government's laws and public policies, in areas ranging from safety and security to education and social services. A few examples include border guards, social workers and public school teachers; these civil servants have direct contact with members of the general public, in contrast with civil servants who do policy analysis or economic analysis, who do not meet the public. Street-level bureaucrats act as liaisons between government policy-makers and citizens and these civil servants implement policy decisions made by senior officials in the public service and/or by elected officials. Street-level bureaucrats communicate with the general public, either in person. Street-level bureaucrats have some degree of discretion on how they enforce the rules and policies which they are assigned to uphold.
For example, a police officer who catches a speeding motorist can decide whether to give the driver a warning or apply a penalty such as a fine or criminal charge. Though front-line bureaucrats have this degree of discretion, they must operate within the rule of law, the system of government regulations and administrative procedural rules; these regulations and rules help to ensure that the street-level bureaucracy operates and ethically, that each citizen is treated fairly. The concept of street-level bureaucracy was first coined by Michael Lipsky in 1969, who argued that "policy implementation in the end comes down to the people who implement it". However, the process of street-level bureaucracy has been around for a much longer period. A "government will be better accepted if its administrators reflect the origins of its people", an ideal which embodies the goals of an effective street-level bureaucracy in America; some of the first street-level bureaucrats in the US were post office administrators.
The presidency of Woodrow Wilson helped to spur a large growth in public administration and government policy-making, which in turn led to larger-sized and better-funded street-level bureaucracies. However it was not until the 1950s with the baby boom that street level bureaucracy became as strong as a presence in society as it is in the 2000s. Lipsky describes street level bureaucrats as the "human face" of policy, since these individuals interact directly with citizens; the history of street-level bureaucracy follows the history of policy development and the scope of government in America, with areas with larger populations and more government policies employing more public servants. Due to street-level bureaucrats' close interactions with citizens, day-to-day application of discretion in their assessment of people's cases and issues, their role as policy interpreters, Lipsky claims that "in a sense the street-level bureaucrats implicitly mediate aspects of the constitutional relationship of citizens to the state.
In short, they hold the keys to a dimension of citizenship." The interpretation of the duties and responsibilities of street-level bureaucrats are still debated in the 2000s, with ongoing discussion on the roles of discretion, lack of resources, technology and concerns raised about the risks of corruption. Where there is population growth, there is growth in demand for these occupations, because there are more citizens who need public services; the demand for these occupations will vary by region but the job outlook in these careers is on the rise in many countries and/or regions where there is an increase in population. In the United States' education sector there is a strong demand for teachers in numerous regions across the country. There are fifty-one "hot spots" with a demand for educators in these regions. Amongst these fifty-one hot spots, five of the regions are with an incredible need for educators in both the primary and secondary education sector; the areas of desperate need include: Las Vegas, Nevada.
The demand for police officers is another occupation that will experience growth over the next ten years. Because urbanized and metropolitan regions are amongst the fastest growing in the United States, where the demand for the
Federalism
Federalism is the mixed or compound mode of government, combining a general government with regional governments in a single political system. Its distinctive feature, exemplified in the founding example of modern federalism by the United States under the Constitution of 1787, is a relationship of parity between the two levels of government established, it can thus be defined as a form of government in which there is a division of powers between two levels of government of equal status. Federalism differs from confederalism, in which the general level of government is subordinate to the regional level, from devolution within a unitary state, in which the regional level of government is subordinate to the general level, it represents the central form in the pathway of regional integration or separation, bounded on the less integrated side by confederalism and on the more integrated side by devolution within a unitary state. Leading examples of the federation or federal state include India, the United States, Mexico, Germany, Switzerland and Australia.
Some today characterize the European Union as the pioneering example of federalism in a multi-state setting, in a concept termed the federal union of states. The terms'federalism' and'confederalism' both have a root in the Latin word foedus, meaning "treaty, pact or covenant." Their common meaning until the late eighteenth century was a simple league or inter-governmental relationship among sovereign states based upon a treaty. They were therefore synonyms, it was in this sense that James Madison in Federalist 39 had referred to the new US Constitution as'neither a national nor a federal Constitution, but a composition of both'. In the course of the nineteenth century the meaning of federalism would come to shift, strengthening to refer uniquely to the novel compound political form established, while the meaning of confederalism would remain at a league of states. Thus, this article relates to the modern usage of the word'federalism'. Modern federalism is a system based upon democratic rules and institutions in which the power to govern is shared between national and provincial/state governments.
The term federalist describes several political beliefs around the world depending on context. Federalism is sometimes viewed as in the context of international negotiation as "the best system for integrating diverse nations, ethnic groups, or combatant parties, all of whom may have cause to fear control by an overly powerful center." However, in some countries, those skeptical of federal prescriptions believe that increased regional autonomy is to lead to secession or dissolution of the nation. In Syria, federalization proposals have failed in part because "Syrians fear that these borders could turn out to be the same as the ones that the fighting parties have carved out."Federations such as Yugoslavia or Czechoslovakia collapsed as soon as it was possible to put the model to the test. According to Daniel Ziblatt's Structuring the State, there are four competing theoretical explanations in the academic literature for the adoption of federal systems: Ideational theories, which hold that a greater degree of ideological commitment to decentralist ideas in society makes federalism more to be adopted.
Cultural-historical theories, which hold that federal institutions are more to be adopted in societies with culturally or ethnically fragmented populations. "Social contract" theories, which hold that federalism emerges as a bargain between a center and a periphery where the center is not powerful enough to dominate the periphery and the periphery is not powerful enough to secede from the center. "Infrastructural power" theories, which hold that federalism is to emerge when the subunits of a potential federation have developed infrastructures. Immanuel Kant was an advocate of federalism, noting that "the problem of setting up a state can be solved by a nation of devils" so long as they possess an appropriate constitution which pits opposing factions against each other with a system of checks and balances. In particular individual states required a federation as a safeguard against the possibility of war. On the 1st of January 1901 the nation-state of Australia came into existence as a federation.
The Australian continent was colonised by the United Kingdom in 1788, which subsequently established six self-governing, colonies there. In the 1890s the governments of these colonies all held referendums on becoming the unified, self-governing "Commonwealth of Australia" within the British Empire; when all the colonies voted in favour of federation, the Federation of Australia commenced, resulting in the establishment of the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901. The model of Australian federalism adheres to the original model of the United States of America, although it does so through a parliamentary Westminster system rather than a presidential system. In Brazil, the fall of the monarchy in 1889 by a military coup d'état led to the rise of the presidential system, headed by Deodoro da Fonseca. Aided by well-known jurist Ruy Barbosa, Fonseca established federalism in Brazil by decree, but this system of government would be confirmed by every Brazilian constitution since 1891, although some of them would distort some of the federalist principles.
The 1937 federal government had the authority to appoint State Governors at will, thus centralizing power in the hands of P
.svg)
![[icon]](/wiki/File:Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg){kind=small}
Definitions from Wiktionary
Media from Wikimedia Commons
News from Wikinews
Quotations from Wikiquote
Texts from Wikisource
Textbooks from Wikibooks
Resources from Wikiversity
