THE PARLIAMENT

Parliament, Politics, and Power:

The Rule of Law, the Monroe Doctrine, and Populism in Comparative Perspective

Introduction

Politics is the organized process through which societies make collective decisions, allocate power, and resolve conflicts. At the heart of modern political systems lie institutions and ideas that shape how authority is exercised and justified. Among the most important of these institutions is parliament, a representative body designed to debate, legislate, and oversee government action. Alongside institutional frameworks, political thought is guided by doctrines and principles that influence both domestic governance and international relations. Three such concepts—the rule of law, the Monroe Doctrine, and populism—represent profoundly different approaches to power, legitimacy, and authority.

The rule of law is a foundational principle of democratic governance, emphasizing legal equality, institutional restraint, and accountability. The Monroe Doctrine, by contrast, is a foreign policy doctrine rooted in power politics and national interest, shaping international relations rather than domestic governance. Populism occupies a different space altogether: it is a political style or ideology that claims to represent “the people” against perceived elites, often challenging institutional constraints such as parliaments, courts, and legal norms.

This essay examines parliament as a political institution and situates it within broader political systems. It then explores the rule of law, the Monroe Doctrine, and populism as distinct yet sometimes overlapping forces that influence political behavior and governance. By comparing these concepts, the essay highlights fundamental differences in how power is exercised, justified, and constrained in both democratic and non-democratic contexts.

1. Parliament as a Central Political Institution

1.1 The Historical Origins of Parliament

Parliamentary institutions have their roots in medieval Europe, particularly in England, where advisory councils to the monarch gradually evolved into representative assemblies. The English Parliament emerged as a forum where nobles, clergy, and later commoners could consent to taxation and influence legislation. Over time, parliamentary authority expanded, especially following landmark events such as the Magna Carta (1215), the English Civil War (1642–1651), and the Glorious Revolution (1688).

These developments established the principle that political power should not reside solely in the hands of a monarch but should be subject to collective deliberation and legal constraints. This historical evolution laid the groundwork for modern representative democracy.

1.2 Functions of Parliament in Modern Politics

In contemporary political systems, parliament serves several essential functions:

1. Legislation – Drafting, debating, and passing laws that govern society.

2. Representation – Acting as a voice for citizens and social groups.

3. Oversight – Monitoring the executive branch to prevent abuse of power.

4. Deliberation – Providing a forum for political debate and compromise.

In parliamentary democracies, such as the United Kingdom, Germany, or India, parliament is often the supreme legislative authority. Even in presidential systems, like the United States, legislatures play a crucial role in shaping policy and checking executive power.

1.3 Parliament and Democratic Legitimacy

Parliament derives its legitimacy from popular elections and adherence to constitutional rules. It embodies the idea that political authority flows from the people rather than from divine right or coercive force. However, the effectiveness of parliament depends on broader political conditions, including respect for the rule of law, political pluralism, and freedom of expression.

2. Politics and the Nature of Power

2.1 Defining Politics

Politics can be broadly defined as the process by which power is distributed and exercised within a society. It encompasses formal institutions such as governments and parliaments, as well as informal practices, ideologies, and social movements. Political systems differ widely, ranging from liberal democracies to authoritarian regimes.

At its core, politics involves questions of authority, legitimacy, justice, and collective decision-making. Different political doctrines offer competing answers to these questions.

2.2 Institutions versus Ideologies

Political life is shaped by both institutions (such as parliaments and courts) and ideologies (such as liberalism, nationalism, or populism). Institutions provide structure and stability, while ideologies offer meaning and direction. Tensions often arise when ideological movements seek to bypass or weaken institutional constraints.

This tension is particularly visible in the relationship between populism and parliamentary democracy, as well as in debates over legal constraints on political power.

3. The Rule of Law

3.1 Definition and Core Principles

The rule of law is a political and legal principle asserting that all individuals and institutions, including the government, are subject to the law. It stands in opposition to arbitrary rule, where power is exercised based on personal will rather than established norms.

Key principles of the rule of law include:

• Legal equality – No one is above the law.

• Legal certainty – Laws are clear, stable, and predictable.

• Due process – Individuals have the right to fair procedures.

• Independent judiciary – Courts operate free from political interference.

• Accountability – Government actions can be legally challenged.

3.2 Rule of Law and Parliament

Parliament plays a central role in upholding the rule of law by enacting legislation through transparent and accountable processes. At the same time, parliament itself is bound by constitutional limits and judicial review in many systems.

In strong democracies, the rule of law acts as a safeguard against the concentration of power, ensuring that even popularly elected leaders cannot govern arbitrarily.

3.3 Rule of Law as a Democratic Ideal

The rule of law is widely regarded as a cornerstone of liberal democracy. It protects minority rights, limits executive authority, and fosters public trust in political institutions. Without the rule of law, elections alone are insufficient to guarantee freedom or justice.

4. The Monroe Doctrine

4.1 Historical Context and Origins

The Monroe Doctrine was articulated in 1823 by U.S. President James Monroe in his annual address to Congress. It declared that the Western Hemisphere was no longer open to European colonization and that any interference by European powers would be viewed as a threat to U.S. interests.

At the time, the doctrine was framed as a defensive measure, aimed at protecting newly independent Latin American states from imperial domination.

4.2 Principles and Objectives

The Monroe Doctrine rests on several core ideas:

• Spheres of influence – The Americas as a U.S.-dominated region.

• Non-intervention – Opposition to European involvement in the hemisphere.

• Strategic dominance – Assertion of U.S. geopolitical authority.

Unlike the rule of law, the Monroe Doctrine is not a legal principle but a foreign policy doctrine grounded in power and national interest.

4.3 Evolution and Criticism

Over time, the Monroe Doctrine evolved from a defensive statement into a justification for U.S. intervention in Latin America. Critics argue that it facilitated imperialism, undermined sovereignty, and contradicted principles of international law.

The doctrine highlights how power politics can operate independently of legal norms, emphasizing strength and strategic advantage rather than universal rules.

5. Populism

5.1 Defining Populism

Populism is a political approach that portrays society as divided between “the pure people” and “the corrupt elite.” Populist leaders claim exclusive moral authority to represent the will of the people, often dismissing institutional checks and balances as illegitimate obstacles.

Populism can be found across the ideological spectrum, including left-wing, right-wing, and nationalist movements.

5.2 Populism and Parliamentary Democracy

Populism has an ambivalent relationship with parliament. While populists often gain power through elections, they may undermine parliamentary procedures once in office by:

• Weakening legislative oversight

• Attacking judicial independence

• Concentrating power in the executive

• Discrediting opposition parties

In this sense, populism can hollow out democratic institutions while maintaining a façade of electoral legitimacy.

5.3 Populism versus the Rule of Law

One of the most significant tensions in contemporary politics lies between populism and the rule of law. Populist leaders often argue that legal constraints obstruct the will of the majority. As a result, they may attempt to bypass courts, rewrite constitutions, or politicize law enforcement.

This dynamic poses a direct challenge to liberal democracy, which relies on the rule of law to balance majority rule with minority rights.

6. Comparing the Rule of Law, the Monroe Doctrine, and Populism

6.1 Nature and Scope

Concept	Nature	Scope
Rule of Law	Legal-political principle	Domestic governance
Monroe Doctrine	Foreign policy doctrine	International relations
Populism	Political ideology/style	Domestic and international

The rule of law is normative and institutional, emphasizing universal rules. The Monroe Doctrine is strategic and geopolitical, focused on national interest. Populism is ideological and rhetorical, centered on identity and power struggles.

6.2 Power and Legitimacy

• Rule of law derives legitimacy from legal equality and institutional restraint.

• Monroe Doctrine derives legitimacy from power and strategic necessity.

• Populism derives legitimacy from popular support and emotional appeal.

These differences reveal contrasting views of authority: law-based, power-based, and people-based.

6.3 Relationship to Parliament

• The rule of law strengthens parliament by embedding it in a constitutional framework.

• The Monroe Doctrine bypasses parliament domestically, operating primarily through executive power.

• Populism often weakens parliament by portraying it as elitist or obstructive.

7. Contemporary Relevance

In the 21st century, debates over democracy increasingly revolve around the balance between popular will, legal constraints, and geopolitical power. The rise of populism has tested the resilience of parliamentary institutions and the rule of law in many countries. Meanwhile, doctrines resembling the Monroe Doctrine continue to shape global politics through spheres of influence and strategic competition.

Understanding these concepts is essential for evaluating the health of democratic systems and the legitimacy of political authority.

Conclusion

Parliament, politics, and power are inseparable elements of modern governance. Parliament represents the institutional embodiment of democratic deliberation, while politics provides the arena in which competing visions of authority and legitimacy clash. The rule of law, the Monroe Doctrine, and populism illustrate three fundamentally different approaches to power: one grounded in legal norms, one rooted in geopolitical strategy, and one driven by mass mobilization.

The rule of law seeks to restrain power through universal rules and institutions, reinforcing parliamentary democracy and protecting individual rights. The Monroe Doctrine reflects a realist tradition in international politics, prioritizing national interest over legal equality. Populism challenges both institutional constraints and elite authority, often placing democratic stability at risk.

By comparing these concepts, it becomes clear that the future of democracy depends not only on elections but on the strength of institutions, respect for law, and the ability of political systems to balance popular sovereignty with accountability and restraint.