Due to the increasing presidential style of recent prime ministers and the party loyalty of the executive one can consider Parliament’s control of executive power minimal. However, due to the development of independent bodies surrounding Select Committees and the delaying of legislation by the House of Lords it can still be argued to be effective. The government usually has an overall majority. This is due to our voting system of FPTP which gives preference to the two main parties, normally giving them majorities (and increasingly large ones) as opposed to coalitions and minority governments which are produced through other voting systems such as AV in Scotland and Wales. Although we are currently in a coalition the government still has a majority through the combination of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.
Although both Han China and Imperial Rome had a centralized imperial government with an administrative bureaucracy, Han China implemented Confucian ideas and teachings into their administration, while Imperial Rome administered mainly with force. Han China and Imperial Rome were both large empires, so to maintain efficient rule over its people, they had a centralized imperial government. To further maintain efficient rule, they imposed an administrative bureaucracy. While both the Roman and the Han Empire had a bureaucracy, the Han’s bureaucracy was far more influential and active in society than that of the Romans. Emperors of both Imperial Rome and Han China gave local leaders the power to rule their distant lands.
The placement and use of the Mandate of Heaven has been a political constant during this time period of classical China. The Mandate of Heaven is the basic idea that a divine ruler gave certain people the right to rule. However, if the Mandate is removed, the dynasty is no longer in charge. This “explained” China’s many overthrown dynasties. Government structure is also a big political continuity in China during 100 C.E.
The Han Empire stretched from the Pacific Ocean to the oases of Central Asia. They were the largest empires the world had yet seen, extending over a greater diversity of lands and peoples than the Assyrian and Persian Empires in the Middle East and the Mauryan Empire in India. Yet they were able to centralize control to a greater degree than the earlier empires, their cultural impact on the lands and people they dominated was more pervasive and they were remarkably stable and lasted for many centuries. Thousands of miles separated the empires of Rome and Han China; neither one influenced the other. Rome’s Creation of a Mediterranean Empire, 753 B.C.E.
Although the Qin Dynasty was short there were many significant achievements that the first emperor left behind. The Qin Dynasty increased the country's trade, military security, and improved agriculture. This all resulted because of the abolition of landowning lords (nobility) creating more job opportunities for the people of China. There were many new technological innovations during the Qin dynasty. The most notable was in Ancient China's military security.
It is surprising that the Aztecs ruled a less amount of time than the Incas because the Aztecs were the ones with the wealth and influence. Another difference between these two empires is their political structure. Even though they were both centralized governments, they still differed in many ways. Both societies started out in clan-based systems, but changed over time. The Aztecs formed into an aristocracy with a supreme ruler.
It was also a place of ruthless absolute monarchy. Louis’s whole reign was based on the king having literally all the power. The French cleric Jacques Bossuet
Firstly, he was successful in managing the royal finances by innovatively using the Royal Chamber to efficiently manage the royal income. Unlike any of the previous monarchs, Ed began using the Royal Chamber increasing whereas before him all reliance had been upon the Exchequer. Now though, with this new scheme the revenue and expenditure was much more systematic and consequently the income rose significantly. Furthermore as he got older his experience increased, however even when he started he did a better job than his predecessor, Henry VII. Previous kings had only used the Chamber erratically in times of war however Edward decided to make it more systematic, which in turn siphoned in much more money.
Explain why the opponents of the Tsars from 1855 to 1917 were more successful than those who opposed the Communist regime from 1917 to 1964. The opponents of the Tsars were more successful – as they achieved vastly more change – than those of the Communists for a number of reasons, not least because of the legal status of opposition, the strength of the regime, the nature of the opposition, the repression imposed by the leader of the day, and the unity and organisation of the opposition. Indeed, this question is being asked simply because the Romanov dynasty was ousted in February 1917; the Communists, on the other hand, were not. However, this question is slightly misleading: not all of the opponents of the Tsars were in fact successful – the Poles, the Peoples Will and the Narodniks all failed when attempting to attain change in Russia; indeed, it can be seen that, in reality, the only regime in which opposition was truly successful was that of Nicholas II. One reason why the opponents of the Tsars were more successful than those of the Communists was the fact that, under the Tsars, opposition attained a legal status.
That meant that they had a more professional administration. Qin was the westernmost of the Zhou states. At the time the Qin government was somewhat unstable. Criticism of the government was highly frowned upon by the First Emperor,