Pros And Cons Of Absolutism

615 Words2 Pages

Absolutism is arguably a great or terrible system. According to Merriam Webster absolutism is “government by an absolute ruler or authority”. This power held within one supreme/absolute ruler is so great that there are many consequences and positives (according to defenders of absolutism). Merriam Webster also states that constitutionalism is “regulated by or ruling according to a constitution”. This is far different from an absolutist government, but it has its similarities. Through the comparing and contrasting of views by defenders of absolutism and those of John Locke, it will allow for a greater understanding of the purpose and the very nature of each system of government. The views of absolutism by defenders and views of constitutionalism by John Locke are different because their natures are …show more content…

They both have limitation and a certain amount of power given to the leader. The nature of constitutionalism is based on limitations, and absolutism has minor similarities. Defenders of Absolutism such as Louis XIV, the divine ruler, had supreme power of the absolutist government, but was still limited on the restraint and fear of God based on his rule. With constitutionalism, limitations are there to keep leaders “in line” and can only be in power with the consent of the people. John locke shows us what “counts” and what doesn’t in the second treatise which gives us the limited government. The purpose is also similar because the purpose is still to keep a centralized government however one is just much more limited than the other based on rules and not morals. The biggest similarity is that the leader still has power. Even if it’s a longer process in a constitution, the leaders still have executive power to a certain extent. The purpose is even more similar in the fact that absolutism and constitutionalism are both used to maximize effectiveness, but in different

Open Document