In the following article, the author cogitates about several aspects of different political structures, trying to understand and analyze their peculiarities. He considers such structures to be a system that consists of different interacting unit sets. The author states the fact that the structure concept is based on the idea that the main units and their aspects are combined in different ways. In his mind, it is the reason why different structures are organized. Everything is subordinated to the strict order. The author says that domestic politics are hierarchically ordered, and its structural components are in relations of super subordination. The author outlines the hierarchy which exists in the USA and shows connecting relations between different authorities. He says that the more developed a country is, the more complicated these relations are.
This work states the fact that political structures reflect political processes taking place in the country. Political processes are the main components of these structures, and that is why the fact that they determine crucial peculiarities of the political structures is quite clear. The author compares the political structures of different countries, such as the USA and UK, in order to see all the unique peculiarities of these processes better.
The author states that both countries have two major parties, who determine the countrys further development as they can choose the leader of the state and give him the plenitude of power. In Britain, representatives of one party select their leader who will become the Prime Minister of the country if they win the elections. It resembles the USA system. President elections depend on a leading party, whose head the President is. Both the President and the Prime minister can count on the support of their leaders in case of emergency. The Prime Minister has to preserve his partys unity as it is the only guaranty that his power will be saved. The author states the fact that usually, the Prime minister is an awful national leader; though he is a wonderful party manager, he has great skills in leading the party and solves some inner problems.
However, the roles of the USA President and the Prime Minister are not the same. The USA President is usually identified with the whole state, and that is why he has to be a good national leader who will be able to lead the whole nation.
The author continues cogitations about the role of the Prime Minister and the President. He says that appearance is often deceptive, and the Prime Minister is often taken as a very strong personality only because he is so ineffectively opposed in public. Moreover, he is usually blamed in case of some country’s economic failure. That is why there are two different approaches to the idea of leadership in the USA and the UK. In America, it is taken like a strong man performing the duties of the President. However, in Britain, it means that the word of the Prime Minister becomes the law for the whole land. These differences can be explained by historical differences in the political structures of these countries.
The author also describes some international political systems, their structure, and main peculiarities. He outlines that such structures emerge from the coexistence of the different states. Prosperity and the functioning of these systems depend on different states efforts. The author describes the character of different units and cogitates about their main peculiarities. At the end of the work, he is talking about the capabilities distribution between different elements of political structure and parts of the hierarchic system. He underlines the fact that the distribution of capabilities is a system-wide concept.