Compare and contrast political systems in USA and Russia

Student:
Professor:
Course title:
Date:
Compare and contrast political systems in USA and Russia.
Introduction
As part of the most powerful countries in the world, natural expectations are such that they have similar political systems. However, as it would emerge, there are stark contrasts that set aside the types of political systems of Russia and America. The different systems of politics in each county have had a direct influence in the manner in which each country runs its affairs. This discussion takes a look at some of the similarities and differences that define the Russian and American political systems.
Capitalism and Communism
Perhaps one of the most peculiar differences in form of governance between America and Russia is that the former has embraced capitalism while the latter has embraced communism. Although these systems are bent much towards the economic systems, they have a ripple effect on the political system of each country. Capitalism on one hand advocates for free markets, creation of wealth and to great extent individualism (Reissinger, p. 82). People think about their interests first. Communism on the other hand embraces a tendency of together. There is principle in communism that a society cannot grow unless it is the entire society growing. Therefore, if there are a few people who are doing well and the majority is suffering, then such is not considered to be societal growth.
The Constitution
Over and above the communism and capitalism, there are other fundamental issues that set apart The Russian political system from the American one. To begin with, the American political system is by and large guided by the constitution. The constitution was adopted immediately after the country gained independence. Despite several amendments, the constitution of America has remained the principal law which laws spelled the nature of the political system. For example, it is the constitution that sets out the nature of presidency in America. This has seen America enjoy a pretty much stable presidency that is not subject to autocratic rules or dictatorship. The constitution of America requires that rights of citizens and their safety are respected. This makes it impossible for any presidency to carry out a dictatorial form of leadership (Waller, p.110). Much a political leader including a president in America may wish to further their own agenda; they are restricted by the provisions of the constitution. On the other hand, Russia has not had a tangible form of legislation that outlines the manner in which political offices are to run. There has also been a repeated attempt to have liberal form of governance. The lack of stable foundations and strict parameters such as a constitution has seen crops of dictatorial leaders become characteristic in Russia (Sivachev, p. 29). The argument is that due to their complex history part of which stems from their culture, it is inevitable that Russia should have strong leadership. Even that notwithstanding, the lack of guidelines in terms of law has always seen the executive powers in Russia a lot of unchecked excesses in power. This has often led to autocratic leadership that has had the tendency of creating a messed leadership (Reissinger, p. 82).
Political power in Russia is considered almost absolute. It is unquestionable and does not port to any other organ. It is also not checked by any other organ leaving a loophole for those in power to abuse it. Lack of proper legal framework creates loopholes that make the Russian political leadership one that often gets out of control. In America, the political system is in such a way that a leader can be removed from office through impeachment (Reissinger, p. 82). Impeachment in this case means ejecting leader from a political office for failure to meet a certain threshold. There are various conditions that must exist for leader to be taken through the process of impeachment. This is inclusive of the president. This means that even though indirectly, political leaders in America must be responsible because the law allows for a mechanism for their removal from office. This is not so with Russia as political leaders in office have absolute mandate.
Military Power
Russian presidents have full control over the use of the military. They are free to make deployment of the military to any part of the world as they deem fit. Such deployment is not subject to consultation with any other party. As a result, the actions of the military are not considered to have any effect in terms responsible actions. In America, however, deployment of the military by the president requires the consent of the congress (Reissinger, p. 82). The congress directly controls the funds that are used by the military. Further, approval from the congress must...