ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

The Presidency in France and the United States: A Comparison of their Creation

Updated on May 29, 2014
In both France and the United States military generals played an important role in the creation of that nation's presidency. In the U.S., George Washington (above) was the "indispensable man" while in France, it was Charles de Gaulle (below).
In both France and the United States military generals played an important role in the creation of that nation's presidency. In the U.S., George Washington (above) was the "indispensable man" while in France, it was Charles de Gaulle (below). | Source


In ancient times, political executives were known by such titles as king, “pharaoh,” or “Caesar.” In modern times, most of these executives have gone the way of the dinosaur and have been replaced with positions like that of “president.” In fact, nations with presidents are some of the most influential nations in the world. Nations such as Russia, Mexico, and Germany have a president as their head of state. This is also true of France and the United States. In order to help you understand more about the presidential form of government, this essay will compare the creation of these two presidencies.

In the Beginning

In both the United States and France, the office of the modern president was birthed in a period of government instability that was characterized by weak executive power. In America, the period following the American Revolution and leading up to the Constitution was referred to by historian John Fiske as the “Critical Period of American History.” It was regarded by many as a period of great instability, especially in the economy. Some of Founding Fathers blamed the lack of a single executive for the lack of "energy" in the government. Those of the period that fancied themselves as “Republicans” flirted with the idea that a single executive was not necessary. In fact, some of these republicans felt that it might be possible for the legislature to act as the executive. However, this was not the sentiment of men such as New Yorker Alexander Hamilton who wanted to see a stronger national government and a strong, single executive to accompany it.

Once the Constitutional Convention convened in May, 1787, it became apparent that other men also desired a strong single executive, with men such as Gouverneur Morris and James Wilson joining Hamilton in advancing a new government under a written constitution with a single national executive imbued with powers far in excess of those given to most state governors. Suffice it to say here that the executive president was the creation of that Constitutional Convention which convened in Philadelphia in 1787. Prior to that time, a “president” was one that chaired a meeting. The word “president” comes from the Latin which implies to “preside over.”

As for France, they had presidential positions reaching back to their first president, Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte (Napoleon III) of 1848. However, their modern presidency was born during a time of instability, much like the American presidency. After World War II, France had trouble creating a stable government following a period of legislative dominance, extremist politics (like that provided by the Communist Party), and the crisis in Algeria.

In both France and the United States, prominent military generals played in important role in the formation of their presidencies during their periods of instability. George Washington, the first president to occupy the American presidency, was close at hand with the creation of the American presidency, but his influence over its creation was much different than that of de Gaulle's. While de Gaulle had a vital hand in the creating of the office that he would later occupy, Washington did little to craft the actual office. There is no record that he was a major figure in any resolution put forward on the executive position. He was present when the national executive position was being crafted (he was the “President of the Convention”). So, even though Washington presided over the creation of the Constitution, other men at the Convention created the presidency, keeping in mind that Washington would probably be the man that would first occupy the office.

As for de Gaulle, he had a more direct hand in the creation of the modern French presidency. After WWII, the French nation had a difficult time sustaining a ruling majority for any length of time. With the Fourth Republic producing 24 governments across 12 years (1946-1958), de Gaulle felt that the reason for France’s decline as a world power had been because of unstable majorities resulting in unstable governments. De Gaulle had retired from politics, having served as president of the provisional government at the end of WWII. He reentered government in 1957 as prime minister and minister of defense. During the Algerian War, de Gaulle spoke up and called for France to revise its government with a stronger presidency which he felt would stabilize the government. De Gaulle proposed a president that would govern under a seven-year term and would govern with a prime minister that he would appoint. The new constitution resulted in a strengthened president and a weakened parliament. By referendum, French voters overwhelmingly accepted the de Gaulle constitution.

In short, we can say that there are some similarities and differences in the creation of the presidency in these two countries. In both countries, the nation called upon a national hero which resulted in the creation of a new government. However, George Washington appears to have been the reluctant warrior. At age 55, he was content to live out the remainder of his days at Mount Vernon. For de Gaulle, it appears that he was eager to offer himself once again for his nation and certainly on his terms. As for their actual influence in the creation of the presidency, Washington appears to have had little direct hand in its creation.

In the case of both the French presidency and the American presidency, both were created because of a belief that a stronger executive was needed. In the case of the United States, the nation lacked a single executive under the Articles of Confederation. The American framers created a single, powerful, but constitutional executive with powers such as veto, pardon and commander-in-chief. In France, the nation suffered from legislative-dominant governments following WWII, which facilitated instability in government.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Bibowen profile image

      Bibowen 2 years ago

      Thank you HSchneider. Glad it was a help.

    • profile image

      Howard Schneider 2 years ago from Parsippany, New Jersey

      Excellent analysis and comparison, Bibowen. I never realized before all the similarities between the creation of our Presidency and France's Presidency.

    Click to Rate This Article