The Problem in Defining Federalism
by Although, the federal system seems to be widely employed, arguably there are considerable difficulties that might prevent the achievement of one precise definition.
The origin and the chronological development of the federal idea for example, is one possible element. The diversity of applying such model on different political and social backgrounds can create as well as reduce obscurity. Finally, the vast ranges of
contributions which have been made by scholars in this field have produced varying concepts and methods in identifying federalism. Another point to be made is that, some experts in the field attempted to distinguish between federalism and federation.
Nevertheless it is very frequent to refer to the U.S federation as the first modern application of federalism but the theory behind such systems is in fact much older. That is to say, it did exist in reality before The American experience. The main conceptual and methodological difficulties of federalism studies are more likely to be obvious in the late eighteen century between 1781 and 1789, when the argument among the Americans had taken place for shifting from confederation to federation’.
Indeed for several years there was much to say in identifying federalism as a term, the debate at that time appeared to be unlimited between the scholars’. According to Burgess (Comparative federalism: 2006) the most primitive intellectual debate about modern federalism was made by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James 2.
Hamilton (Democracy in America: 1835) believed in federation as a result of township and social variety, at the same time these factors can be fundamental for maintaining the stability of the American federation over the long term. Moreover, he suggested that the sovereignty of the people is considered as a critical element in the predicted transformation to federalism. What is more, the new unification seemed to be founded upon this crucial component. In short, his analysis was basically constructed upon what he called ‘social condition’.
Similarly to Alexander, John (1861) believed as well in the social condition. He supposed that, some common social constituents should be existed in order to ensure the success for federation. He proposed that, race, language, religion and common interests can effectively participate in the creation of the new unity. Finally, his view was as follows:
‘… Federation was generally the natural result of the political conditions of a large country rather than a small one’.
With regard to the differences between any two countries, it could be argued that, federation does not necessarily considered as a natural choice for large country rather than the small one because some small countries like the United Arab Emirates applied such system in it is constitution.
In 1863 another contribution in analyzing federalism has been made by Freeman. He recommended that, the birth of the federal idea was a neutral solution between monarchies, aristocracies and democracies. Federalism – in his view – was essential to compromise between the main political powers which existed at that period 5.
Liked it
