“Elective dictatorship”

That’s the pejorative critique of parliamentary government (ie, Westminster-style).  Part of the problem is that AFAIK, political parties under that system are themselves elective dictatorships, whether their “Leaders” are voted on by MPs, or more widely by party members nationwide.  The model is Party as Political Machine.  They could use more of a committee-style leadership or shared authority within the party like our Democratic and Republican Parties with their national committees, or House and Senate party caucus leadership teams.  This doesn’t rule out “strong leadership” when needed, as U.S. State and local party machines prove.  Today I can’t see a U.S. party chairman picking-and-choosing primary contestants like parliamentary Leaders do, even in Canada (Stephen Harper, Paul Martin, etc.).  We do sometimes have “party-endorsed” or “committee-endorsed” primary candidates, but that doesn’t prevent challengers from running, or even winning the primary.  But abroad, combine “elective dictatorship” within the party, and strong “party discipline” within Parliament, and you have your little dictators.  Especially if it’s thought the Monarch or President isn’t allowed to decline their “advice.”