[oblio]

> TBH the nonsensical nature of monarchy works out for Australia, as it costs essentially nothing and sort of acts as a ground strap to make the idea of “head of state” rather irrelevant. Just compare to countries like France or USA where the Head of State gets capital letters and is a person with actual power.

> Next best would be a president like in Germany who is basically a nonentity with less power than a GG.

Meh, you're just moving the position 1 rank down. The German Chancellor (in other countries, the Prime Minister) wields all the power instead.

Plus, you know, they're only presidents. After 4-5-6-7 (x2 in some cases) years they go away.

[gottorf]

The concept under description is effectively Bagehot's "dignified" vs. "efficient" parts of government. The head of state being the "dignified", the personification of the nation, and the head of government being the "efficient", the wielder of political power.

I generally favor the American-style presidential system over the British-style parliamentary system, but I think one flaw of the American one is that it combines the roles of the dignified and the efficient, often conflicting with each other, into one office.

The French semi-presidential system is a little weird, with technically the prime minister being the head of government, but the president still wields most of the executive power.

[gumby]

The 5e's constitution was designed for De Gaulle, so de facto, the French Président wields all the power, even quite a bit during "cohabitation". The PM is mainly there is be blamed for things and to manage the legislature for the president.

[gumby]

> Meh, you're just moving the position 1 rank down.

Indeed, that is the point. But the PM can be replaced more easily than, and doesn't have the same focus of attention of, the head of state. Best is when the two are muddled, as in the German case.

I've lived in Australia, USA, France and Germany so have some idea of the spectrum of options.