In the West we have discovered that power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
To solve this problem of power we invented liberal democracy.
And the raison d'être of liberal democracy is the limitation of power.
So we limit the power of our Prime Minister by not even mentioning them in the Constitution, by never letting them become Head of State and never letting them become Commander-in-Chief.
On the other hand our neighbour makes their political leader their Head of State and Commander-in-Chief.
And we limit the power of Parliament by having two different Parties, with different histories and values, compete for our votes.
Whereas our neighbour has two Parties of Business alternating in power. And the whole purpose of business is to maximise profits and so maximise power.
And we limit the power of the unelected Judiciary by not allowing them to adjudicate on Rights. We leave that to the democratically elected Parliament.
But our neighbour gives their unelected Judiciary the power to adjudicate on Rights.
We limit the power of the individual by limiting their ownership of guns.
While our neighbour is armed to the teeth against each other.
We have never had a violent Revolution or a violent Civil War. While our neighbour celebrates both. And exports both to peasant and tribal countries.
Our neighbour seeks to maximise power while we seek to limit power.
And tragically our neighbour not only wants to maximise power, they want to be loved as well.
Of course maximising power is natural and intuitive, while limiting power is counter-intuitive.
And maximising power is natural for those who believe in an all powerful God.
While limiting power is the only moral choice for the sons and daughters of the Enlightenment.