Assignment: In Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong, readChapter 9 (omit Ch. 8) . Write a response, following the Reader Response Guidelines (above). React to and comment upon at least 2 of your classmates responses.
The definition of absolutist is a person who holds absolute principles in political, philosophical, or theological matters. The french president, de Gaulle is very much an absolutist in the way he leads the country. When he was president he changed the constitution to be able to give the president more power. His goal was to break the power of the parliament in order to give a single leader more power. When de Gaulle got to office this constitution was approved by 78%. This constitution would dissolve parliament, let the president chose their prime minister, lead cabinet meetings and appoint representatives for each department. This new constitution made the french state absolutists because not only did it give de Gaulle the absolute principals in political matters but also philosophical and theological matters as well with all the power the president now has. Some might think that this is getting close to a dictatorship but the french government had three checks to not let this happen. These checks are that the President needs to follow the constitution, must be elected by a universal suffrage and must obey the laws of the republic. The french state is also absolutist because the people vote to give the president all of these rights. The french have started to almost mock the US elections by narrowing the vote down to, two candidates for the last voting session. With all the parties the french have, a lot of the times one of the sides end up splitting their vote over a wide variety of parties which automatically lets the other side take office.
this chapter just brings to light the humor in the political scene of what men in power do wither that is America or france. for the price of fame and fortune and who is the better power.
The contrast in the political set up is very evident throughout the chapter and the fact that the people were so willing to give absolute power to the president de Gaulle shows how they lacked faith in their overall governance.A similar sentiment shared inn US politics today.
From this section, it became clear how politics in France deals in absolutes, in power, majorities, and others. While starting a separate section, Barlow & Nadeau review France’s current (in the book’s time) political structures and what qualities it shows. Their main point is by also detailing how Charles de Gaulle changed it. Even while admitting that de Gaulle's story is known all around France, his impact will be felt always. A summary of his policies includes giving the President near total power and the final say in political meetings, and can serve multiple terms. But, they must abide by the Constitution.
This section taught that even before and after de Gaulle's constitution, the French electoral system was formed from the start to produce an absolute majority via a two-round system. While I had an idea of how names differ between political structures, the kinds of scenarios possible was surprising to reflect on. It used to be resolved in a scenario like this: any clear majority would be awarded with the full seats, which showed clear opinions. France's political system was designed to better express the political stances of the French, within reason of course. Meanwhile, this form of democracy is demonstrated this way, different but it seems stable.
Specific examples were used here, one part on the 2002 elections for France seemed interesting. Qualities of one unsuccessful candidate seemed notable: A female, black candidate. It became noteworthy past the fact due to when it was; years before the results of 2008’s election here in the U.S., even when Barlow & Nadeau admit the slow chance of success she had. It helps to show how events can go in unexpected ways. Brandon Aspan
your points leave me thinking about the chapter more on a voter mindset and makes me wonder the impact Gaulle's principles could effect American culture with voting.
The absolutism of the French state is, first and foremost, a product of the reign of prime minster and president Charles De Gaulle. De Gaulle is an iconic, revered French historical figure who refused the armistice with Germany in 1940 and rose to political power in the late 1950s. As is illustrated in this chapter, his legacy lives on throughout French culture even years after his death in 1970. The authors go so far as to even say he is the only man since Napoleon to have such a “strong impact on the French mentality and institutions” (116). Absolutism, by definition, refers to the acceptance of absolute principles in various realms of life. In the political sense, it refers to a centralized government with absolute authority, such as a monarchy or dictatorship. De Gaulle’s installation of an absolutist spirit into the French state began in 1958 when he was elected prime minister. He was then granted absolute power and designed a new French constitution. With this new constitution, De Gaulle aimed to “break the power of Parliament and make it possible for a single leader to exercise power” (117). In essence, De Gaulle effectively created what could be seen as an “elected monarchy” (118). The only thing that De Gaulle did not change was the rules of France’s electoral process (120). So while the French people have the right and ability to elect a president chosen by majority, that president will assume near complete governmental power. The French people have the right to choose who will be given power, but not to dictate how that person will use it; this is the way in which France’s government is, ultimately, one of state absolutism.
Good points all around, especially the last section to show how its absolutist. Even then, built-in moral restraints are present. While this section doesn't give much examples, it seems like since being put in place, this power was abused.. It;s certainly a great display of faith in France's President, and its treated in kind.
Would something be possible elsewhere, or how likely? Brandon Aspan
How is the french state absolutist? Absolutist- meaning the principle or exercise of complete and unrestricted power in government,stated from dictionary.com. that pretty much sums up what the de Gaulle was about in his time as being president of France; he was able to control more positive outcomes of what is passed in the country, compared to the American method of electing and maintaining the president and what powers he has with that title. "Gaulle took the fundamental weakness and turned it into strength. the constitution contained France's extremist reflex while being quintessentially extreme, and therefore suitable to all(Pg.118). compared to American politics there tends to be this strength but we tend to pray on our weakness to tear down the other component. " France's regime is semi-presidential and semi-parliamentarian"(pg.119). compared again to American government who tends to be more focused on the congress power instead of the presidential power. the presidents benefits from legitimacy for democratic head, and in America the president are not elected by the people but by the electoral college. " All electoral systems have a weakness. in the United States, the president can be elected by the Electoral Collage even is he doesn't have the absolute majority of votes.
As Imaan said I really like how you compare America and France on how the government works. I agree with you when you say that France is way more absolutists and the US focus's on core power.
The French state is absolutist because their president is basically a dictator that has a lot of power, more than even the president of the united states. The French president has the power to basically run the whole government. The French president has the power to dissolve the assembly and call a new election of congress members. Furthermore, Frances president is elected by the people of France whereas in the united states we have our president elected by using an electoral college. France has a parliament with different chambers the national assembly and the executive. The national assembly deputes have the power to change laws but must share that power with the prime minister who has the power to make decrees. The executive commands the civil servants and ministries in France. France seems to be kind of a democracy and a monarchy all in one. A president in France can only serve for five years at a time but can be reelected and serve again throughout their life. The French seem to want a little bit of everything, politically speaking. I think they mostly want a king though. I think the French president has way too much power and it could lead to problem for France and its citizens.
On one hand, it seems the changes de Gaulle made are certainly more suited than the previous divided government in legislature, and more suited for how France runs things. It seems in a different way, but it's understandable why you'd be doubtful of what's presented here, Jerelyn. Also what that could mean in the future. But, it seems fine apparently. Brandon Aspan
I agree with you when you say that the French president has way too much power. Yes the national assembly can change laws but the french president mostly runs the whole government.
In chapter nine, we learn that the term absolutist is use to describe a person that show absolute principles and ideals when it comes to everything as far as positions of high power. The philosophy, theology and political thinking is to give all the power to the leader or governor of a body of people. This was shown through de Gaulle, the president of France during the time of this book. He was responsible for reconstructing the French constitution in a way that would give him the freedom and power to do whatever he decided was best for the country without the input of anybody else. He was much liked when he entered office for his presidency, little did they know that de Gaulle was trying to reshape the constitution in a way that would tear down parliament. It was then where things started to change with the selection of pretty much every official held in the hands of de Gaulle. The reason that our country has different branches of power is the be able to create a system where each branch in held accountable. Once a person is given full authority over their state, their decision start to reflect their self-interests instead of what’s best for the state This in result can create division between the people who believe in democracy and the people who support the decision to hand over all power to the president, a combination that never leads to anything good. A direction that our politics are seeming to go down.
I believe your points about the power of absolutist is true. I also think De Gaulle wanted to be in power to change of old France that he would not only give his say so as President but represent the people of France. Traditionally French had a Government in which the leader had all the say so but De Gaulle change power to some people for freedom to choose.David Gibson
Absolutism is defined as the principle or the exercise of complete and unrestricted power in government. Chapter 9 exemplifies this concept within France through its description of General Charles de Gaulle. De Gaulle is known in France as a man who has had a substantial impact on the French mentality and institutions, and someone who has created a tendency in France to posture on the international stage. De Gaulle’s absolutist values are illustrated through his attempt to break the power of the parliament in France and make it possible for a single leader to exercise power. As stated by Barlow and Nadeau, “ De Gaulle created a presidential regime where the president would have the power to dissolve the parliament, appoint the prime minister, preside over cabinet meetings, and appoint representatives in each department,” (pg. 117). This movement clearly depicted the absolutist nature of France, through de Gaulle’s complete control over political policies in France. Due to de Gaulle’s exertion of extreme power in France, many politicians accused him of mounting a legal coup d’état, but he ended up remaining in control. Despite this power held by the president, de Gaulle’s constitution also called for a Parliament and Executive. These limit the president’s power in order to refrain from creating a dictatorship; the president must also follow the constitution and be elected by universal suffrage. This limitation within the president’s power slightly weakens France’s absolute nature, but absolutism in France is constantly reinforced through the persistent and almost routine remembrance of de Gaulle within everyday life.
I agree I read it as if the French Government traditionally was a absolutist state. I believe that De Gaulle was trying to keep the French tradition in Government the same but was also trying to speak for the people because he trusted himself which happens when a career politician is in office. David Gibson
Chapter 9 went into detail about how the French adopted the principle of absolutism through the reign of former president, General Charles de Gaulle. Absolutism can be defined as the acceptance of a belief in absolute principals politically, philosophically, ethically, or ideologically. Gaulle reconstructed the French constitution in a way that gave him the majority of the power over France so that he could make decisions regarding what was ‘best’ for the country, in his opinion. In the beginning of this reconstruction period, he was still well liked by the people, until the citizens became aware that Gaulle was attempting to change the constitution and France as a whole. After this, France’s government set measurements to ensure that different branches of power would create a system of accountability so that no one person could control the country. Now a president in France can only serve for 5 years at a time, but can be re-elected.
Absolute rule or monarchy rule was developing over Europe over the Sixteenth and Seventeenth century. Important politicians such as Richilieu were quite integral to the function. The french President, Gualle, is an absolutist in the way he led the country. When he was in power, he was able to successfully change the constitution to center all power to the president. Gaulle was able to submit all philosophical, theological and governmental power to himself. Some might think of this as absolutist, but the French have rules that keep from dictatorship. The president must obey the law, be voted in by a universal suffrage, and uphold the constitution. The french quite often make fun of American politics, due to it’s overbearing propaganda. Years ago, it was the belief that an absolute rule would benefit the country, both internally and externally. France is a very nationalistic country, and monarchy stood for many of those things. One of the many issues though, is that when you centralize that power into one being, if that being falls, the country could fall into a civil war. Although France has changed exponentially, the spirit of absolutism still exists within them.
Every child in France knows the story of Charles de Gaulle, his cherised dream was to create a new constitution after the war had divided the power and people in France. He had believed that France's old constitution made it hard for anyone to exerciser their power and Gaulle wanted to create a new constitution that would allow a single leader all the power which is the definition of an absolutist. De Gaulle was eleceted president in 1958 but he knew that he had only won due to the electoral college and therefore made him a prisoner of the other politicians. In order to put an end to all of that Gaulle first challenge was to enact that presidents get are elected by universal sufferage wich allows voting rights to all citizens. Gaulle's new constitution, known as the Fith Republic, created an elected Monarch, but technically the president would be similar to a king because they could keep electing the same guy even though it was for a limited term. Their president could even disobey the constitutional law if needed. He can suspended constitutional law because he can decide if changes can be approved through a referendum or by a Joint vote by the Senate. However there are two institutions that work with the president. the Senate and the National Assembly create laws and act as a consultative bod which is known as the Parliament. In order to prevent any form of a dictatorship there are three establishments to help prevent the president. He must follow the constitution, must be elected by universal sufferage, and must obey the law of the republic.
The Question is being asked how is the French state absolutist? The French who once had Kings rule over them. Will probably not ever leave from that type of absolutist power. Charles De Gualle effort to change the French Government was successful and should be respected for his fight. According to chpt 9 De Gaulle new Constitution,known as the Fifth Republic manage to be victorious in gaining French Democracy. De Gaulle brought a freedom to choose to the people. The people get to choose their elected president. Where in America where you have to get so many electoral votes gain by congress through the people to be elected. The President in France when elected can stay in office for as long as he is elected.That can bring absolutism to Government. The French President has much say so over the Government without the voice of the people. He has power to appoint the prime minister, presides over cabinet meetings. He has the last say over budget to defense to immigration. He can decide on constitutional changes. De Gaulle did not change France basic electoral rules .French have been strong legitimistes(Meaning much their electoral system is geared toward producing clear majorities).He made the constitution a way that guaranteeing the eventual winner an absolute majority.There are three built-in checks keep the French president from being a dictator he must follow the Constitution, he must be elected by universal suffrage and he must obey the laws of the Republic. The French President could be called a absolutist because he is unimpeachable.The French tradition of power I believe makes them absolutist state, but the efforts of Charles de Gaulle is respected by the French people for the fight for Democracy.
The definition of absolutist is a person who holds absolute principles in political, philosophical, or theological matters. The french president, de Gaulle is very much an absolutist in the way he leads the country. When he was president he changed the constitution to be able to give the president more power. His goal was to break the power of the parliament in order to give a single leader more power. When de Gaulle got to office this constitution was approved by 78%. This constitution would dissolve parliament, let the president chose their prime minister, lead cabinet meetings and appoint representatives for each department. This new constitution made the french state absolutists because not only did it give de Gaulle the absolute principals in political matters but also philosophical and theological matters as well with all the power the president now has. Some might think that this is getting close to a dictatorship but the french government had three checks to not let this happen. These checks are that the President needs to follow the constitution, must be elected by a universal suffrage and must obey the laws of the republic. The french state is also absolutist because the people vote to give the president all of these rights. The french have started to almost mock the US elections by narrowing the vote down to, two candidates for the last voting session. With all the parties the french have, a lot of the times one of the sides end up splitting their vote over a wide variety of parties which automatically lets the other side take office.
ReplyDeletethis chapter just brings to light the humor in the political scene of what men in power do wither that is America or france. for the price of fame and fortune and who is the better power.
DeleteThe contrast in the political set up is very evident throughout the chapter and the fact that the people were so willing to give absolute power to the president de Gaulle shows how they lacked faith in their overall governance.A similar sentiment shared inn US politics today.
DeleteWell considering what France went through, like Germany, were susceptible to the influence of corrupt rule. Hope, and looking for it are quite strong.
DeleteFrom this section, it became clear how politics in France deals in absolutes, in power, majorities, and others. While starting a separate section, Barlow & Nadeau review France’s current (in the book’s time) political structures and what qualities it shows. Their main point is by also detailing how Charles de Gaulle changed it. Even while admitting that de Gaulle's story is known all around France, his impact will be felt always.
ReplyDeleteA summary of his policies includes giving the President near total power and the final say in political meetings, and can serve multiple terms. But, they must abide by the Constitution.
This section taught that even before and after de Gaulle's constitution, the French electoral system was formed from the start to produce an absolute majority via a two-round system. While I had an idea of how names differ between political structures, the kinds of scenarios possible was surprising to reflect on.
It used to be resolved in a scenario like this: any clear majority would be awarded with the full seats, which showed clear opinions.
France's political system was designed to better express the political stances of the French, within reason of course. Meanwhile, this form of democracy is demonstrated this way, different but it seems stable.
Specific examples were used here, one part on the 2002 elections for France seemed interesting. Qualities of one unsuccessful candidate seemed notable: A female, black candidate. It became noteworthy past the fact
due to when it was; years before the results of 2008’s election here in the U.S., even when Barlow & Nadeau admit the slow chance of success she had. It helps to show how events can go in unexpected ways.
Brandon Aspan
your points leave me thinking about the chapter more on a voter mindset and makes me wonder the impact Gaulle's principles could effect American culture with voting.
DeleteI agree it would be very different if we lived in France or if America changed the government to be like frances government.
DeleteThe specific examples were great. I think providing a definition of absolutism would have also helped.
DeleteGreat write up! I really enjoyed it.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRachel Marie D'Andrea
ReplyDeleteThe absolutism of the French state is, first and foremost, a product of the reign of prime minster and president Charles De Gaulle. De Gaulle is an iconic, revered French historical figure who refused the armistice with Germany in 1940 and rose to political power in the late 1950s. As is illustrated in this chapter, his legacy lives on throughout French culture even years after his death in 1970. The authors go so far as to even say he is the only man since Napoleon to have such a “strong impact on the French mentality and institutions” (116). Absolutism, by definition, refers to the acceptance of absolute principles in various realms of life. In the political sense, it refers to a centralized government with absolute authority, such as a monarchy or dictatorship. De Gaulle’s installation of an absolutist spirit into the French state began in 1958 when he was elected prime minister. He was then granted absolute power and designed a new French constitution. With this new constitution, De Gaulle aimed to “break the power of Parliament and make it possible for a single leader to exercise power” (117). In essence, De Gaulle effectively created what could be seen as an “elected monarchy” (118). The only thing that De Gaulle did not change was the rules of France’s electoral process (120). So while the French people have the right and ability to elect a president chosen by majority, that president will assume near complete governmental power. The French people have the right to choose who will be given power, but not to dictate how that person will use it; this is the way in which France’s government is, ultimately, one of state absolutism.
Good points all around, especially the last section to show how its absolutist. Even then, built-in moral restraints are present. While this section doesn't give much examples, it seems like since being put in place, this power was abused.. It;s certainly a great display of faith in France's President, and its treated in kind.
DeleteWould something be possible elsewhere, or how likely?
Brandon Aspan
How is the french state absolutist?
ReplyDeleteAbsolutist- meaning the principle or exercise of complete and unrestricted power in government,stated from dictionary.com. that pretty much sums up what the de Gaulle was about in his time as being president of France; he was able to control more positive outcomes of what is passed in the country, compared to the American method of electing and maintaining the president and what powers he has with that title. "Gaulle took the fundamental weakness and turned it into strength. the constitution contained France's extremist reflex while being quintessentially extreme, and therefore suitable to all(Pg.118).
compared to American politics there tends to be this strength but we tend to pray on our weakness to tear down the other component. " France's regime is semi-presidential and semi-parliamentarian"(pg.119). compared again to American government who tends to be more focused on the congress power instead of the presidential power. the presidents benefits from legitimacy for democratic head, and in America the president are not elected by the people but by the electoral college. " All electoral systems have a weakness. in the United States, the president can be elected by the Electoral Collage even is he doesn't have the absolute majority of votes.
I like how you made a comparison to how politicians gain power in America- it was an interesting example
DeleteAs Imaan said I really like how you compare America and France on how the government works. I agree with you when you say that France is way more absolutists and the US focus's on core power.
DeleteThe French state is absolutist because their president is basically a dictator that has a lot of power, more than even the president of the united states. The French president has the power to basically run the whole government. The French president has the power to dissolve the assembly and call a new election of congress members. Furthermore, Frances president is elected by the people of France whereas in the united states we have our president elected by using an electoral college. France has a parliament with different chambers the national assembly and the executive. The national assembly deputes have the power to change laws but must share that power with the prime minister who has the power to make decrees. The executive commands the civil servants and ministries in France. France seems to be kind of a democracy and a monarchy all in one. A president in France can only serve for five years at a time but can be reelected and serve again throughout their life. The French seem to want a little bit of everything, politically speaking. I think they mostly want a king though. I think the French president has way too much power and it could lead to problem for France and its citizens.
ReplyDeleteOn one hand, it seems the changes de Gaulle made are certainly more suited than the previous divided government in legislature, and more suited for how France runs things.
DeleteIt seems in a different way, but it's understandable why you'd be doubtful of what's presented here, Jerelyn.
Also what that could mean in the future.
But, it seems fine apparently. Brandon Aspan
I agree with you when you say that the French president has way too much power. Yes the national assembly can change laws but the french president mostly runs the whole government.
DeleteIn chapter nine, we learn that the term absolutist is use to describe a person that show absolute principles and ideals when it comes to everything as far as positions of high power. The philosophy, theology and political thinking is to give all the power to the leader or governor of a body of people. This was shown through de Gaulle, the president of France during the time of this book. He was responsible for reconstructing the French constitution in a way that would give him the freedom and power to do whatever he decided was best for the country without the input of anybody else. He was much liked when he entered office for his presidency, little did they know that de Gaulle was trying to reshape the constitution in a way that would tear down parliament. It was then where things started to change with the selection of pretty much every official held in the hands of de Gaulle. The reason that our country has different branches of power is the be able to create a system where each branch in held accountable. Once a person is given full authority over their state, their decision start to reflect their self-interests instead of what’s best for the state This in result can create division between the people who believe in democracy and the people who support the decision to hand over all power to the president, a combination that never leads to anything good. A direction that our politics are seeming to go down.
ReplyDeleteI like how you talked about in the US, each branch is held accountable- it was a good comparison to what the text said about France.
DeleteYou provided a good definition and good connections to the U.S., which made the concept easier to understand.
DeleteI believe your points about the power of absolutist is true. I also think De Gaulle wanted to be in power to change of old France that he would not only give his say so as President but represent the people of France. Traditionally French had a Government in which the leader had all the say so but De Gaulle change power to some people for freedom to choose.David Gibson
DeleteAbsolutism is defined as the principle or the exercise of complete and unrestricted power in government. Chapter 9 exemplifies this concept within France through its description of General Charles de Gaulle. De Gaulle is known in France as a man who has had a substantial impact on the French mentality and institutions, and someone who has created a tendency in France to posture on the international stage. De Gaulle’s absolutist values are illustrated through his attempt to break the power of the parliament in France and make it possible for a single leader to exercise power. As stated by Barlow and Nadeau, “ De Gaulle created a presidential regime where the president would have the power to dissolve the parliament, appoint the prime minister, preside over cabinet meetings, and appoint representatives in each department,” (pg. 117). This movement clearly depicted the absolutist nature of France, through de Gaulle’s complete control over political policies in France. Due to de Gaulle’s exertion of extreme power in France, many politicians accused him of mounting a legal coup d’état, but he ended up remaining in control. Despite this power held by the president, de Gaulle’s constitution also called for a Parliament and Executive. These limit the president’s power in order to refrain from creating a dictatorship; the president must also follow the constitution and be elected by universal suffrage. This limitation within the president’s power slightly weakens France’s absolute nature, but absolutism in France is constantly reinforced through the persistent and almost routine remembrance of de Gaulle within everyday life.
ReplyDeleteI agree I read it as if the French Government traditionally was a absolutist state. I believe that De Gaulle was trying to keep the French tradition in Government the same but was also trying to speak for the people because he trusted himself which happens when a career politician is in office. David Gibson
DeleteChapter 9 went into detail about how the French adopted the principle of absolutism through the reign of former president, General Charles de Gaulle. Absolutism can be defined as the acceptance of a belief in absolute principals politically, philosophically, ethically, or ideologically. Gaulle reconstructed the French constitution in a way that gave him the majority of the power over France so that he could make decisions regarding what was ‘best’ for the country, in his opinion. In the beginning of this reconstruction period, he was still well liked by the people, until the citizens became aware that Gaulle was attempting to change the constitution and France as a whole. After this, France’s government set measurements to ensure that different branches of power would create a system of accountability so that no one person could control the country. Now a president in France can only serve for 5 years at a time, but can be re-elected.
ReplyDeleteIs it ethical for a single person to have that much political power over a group or country?
DeleteMathew Dumay
ReplyDeleteFRN 101
10/31/16
Reader Response #8
Absolute rule or monarchy rule was developing over Europe over the Sixteenth and Seventeenth century. Important politicians such as Richilieu were quite integral to the function. The french President, Gualle, is an absolutist in the way he led the country. When he was in power, he was able to successfully change the constitution to center all power to the president. Gaulle was able to submit all philosophical, theological and governmental power to himself. Some might think of this as absolutist, but the French have rules that keep from dictatorship. The president must obey the law, be voted in by a universal suffrage, and uphold the constitution. The french quite often make fun of American politics, due to it’s overbearing propaganda. Years ago, it was the belief that an absolute rule would benefit the country, both internally and externally. France is a very nationalistic country, and monarchy stood for many of those things. One of the many issues though, is that when you centralize that power into one being, if that being falls, the country could fall into a civil war. Although France has changed exponentially, the spirit of absolutism still exists within them.
Do you believe if Donald Trump were to be elected then he might run the country as a absolutist?
DeleteEvery child in France knows the story of Charles de Gaulle, his cherised dream was to create a new constitution after the war had divided the power and people in France. He had believed that France's old constitution made it hard for anyone to exerciser their power and Gaulle wanted to create a new constitution that would allow a single leader all the power which is the definition of an absolutist. De Gaulle was eleceted president in 1958 but he knew that he had only won due to the electoral college and therefore made him a prisoner of the other politicians. In order to put an end to all of that Gaulle first challenge was to enact that presidents get are elected by universal sufferage wich allows voting rights to all citizens. Gaulle's new constitution, known as the Fith Republic, created an elected Monarch, but technically the president would be similar to a king because they could keep electing the same guy even though it was for a limited term. Their president could even disobey the constitutional law if needed. He can suspended constitutional law because he can decide if changes can be approved through a referendum or by a Joint vote by the Senate. However there are two institutions that work with the president. the Senate and the National Assembly create laws and act as a consultative bod which is known as the Parliament. In order to prevent any form of a dictatorship there are three establishments to help prevent the president. He must follow the constitution, must be elected by universal sufferage, and must obey the law of the republic.
ReplyDeleteDavid Gibson French 101
ReplyDeleteThe Question is being asked how is the French state absolutist? The French who once had Kings rule over them. Will probably not ever leave from that type of absolutist power. Charles De Gualle effort to change the French Government was successful and should be respected for his fight. According to chpt 9 De Gaulle new Constitution,known as the Fifth Republic manage to be victorious in gaining French Democracy. De Gaulle brought a freedom to choose to the people. The people get to choose their elected president. Where in America where you have to get so many electoral votes gain by congress through the people to be elected. The President in France when elected can stay in office for as long as he is elected.That can bring absolutism to Government. The French President has much say so over the Government without the voice of the people. He has power to appoint the prime minister, presides over cabinet meetings. He has the last say over budget to defense to immigration. He can decide on constitutional changes. De Gaulle did not change France basic electoral rules .French have been strong legitimistes(Meaning much their electoral system is geared toward producing clear majorities).He made the constitution a way that guaranteeing the eventual winner an absolute majority.There are three built-in checks keep the French president from being a dictator he must follow the Constitution, he must be elected by universal suffrage and he must obey the laws of the Republic. The French President could be called a absolutist because he is unimpeachable.The French tradition of power I believe makes them absolutist state, but the efforts of Charles de Gaulle is respected by the French people for the fight for Democracy.