Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Ubiquitous episodes of military rule in some 33 presidentialist regimes modeled on that of the United States suggest that it may not be the context but rather faults in this type of constitution that predispose it to breakdowns. If this premise is correct then we need to explain why, despite its fragility, the American Constitution has survived for 200 years. Separating systemic from contextual factors, we look for "para- constitutional" practices, i.e. those that are a prerequisite to system survival, even if they are not included in the written Constitution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fred W. Ríggs (1988) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: