Essay PreviewMore ↓
The concept of human rights has evolved through the years. It has grown into the focus of many governments and nations. Democracies have made rights of its citizens their primary concern in governing. There have always been rights and laws written into codes of government documents. There have also been other governments, which did not grant these rights to the individual. When monarchies formed in Europe after the fall of Rome, there came philosophies called divine rights and absolutism. This form of government is similar to a dictatorship. The rebellion against this form of government produced a new way of thinking. This new way of thinking developed a new form of government called democracies, which granted individual freedoms and rights to the civilian population. These proclaimed inalienable rights of man. In 1822, Thomas Jefferson wrote that “nothing… is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man.” (Kamenka vii, 1).
Early Laws and Rights
Before getting into the rights of kings and Nature Law, we must first look at the history of rights throughout man’s existence. It is not possible to explain every step in man’s existence pertaining to rights. Almost all civilizations had written laws or codes guiding its citizens in everyday life. One instance was the Code of Hammurabi. It is not viewed as humane today, but in its time, concepts of law and justice were established and it was an enlightened document. From its teachings we gather, “The strong shall not oppress the weak.” From this and other civilizations, the story of human rights begins and laws or codes protecting rights began to be established.
How to Cite this Page
"Absolutism vs Human Rights." 123HelpMe.com. 25 Mar 2019
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- During the Age of Absolutism, views of how government should have been run were drastically different that the views of Enlightenment thinkers. The fundamental difference between these two views of government – absolutism and Enlightenment – was that, in an absolute view of government, it stated that it should be run by a monarch – such as a king or a queen – and that he or she should have complete and unquestionable authority over everything, whereas the Enlightenment resulted in the development of new ideas, many of which criticized absolute monarchies, such as the idea that the fundamental function of government was to protect it's people's rights.... [tags: Age of Absolutism, government, ]
732 words (2.1 pages)
- During the late 17th and early 18th century, many European nations such as France and Russia were absolute monarchies. Even countries such as England had kings who at least attempted to implement absolutism. Indeed the concept of absolutism, where the monarch is the unquestionably highest authority and absolute ruler of every element in the realm, is certainly appealing to any sovereign. However, this unrestricted power was abused, and by the end of the 18th century, absolutism was gone. Absolutism failed because the monarchs' mistreatment of the population caused the people to revolt against their rule and policies.... [tags: Europe, history, monarchies, government, ]
812 words (2.3 pages)
- Is Abortion Wrong. One of the most cherished beliefs of conservatives is that morals are absolute. If an act such as abortion is wrong, they believe, it is wrong for all time; there are no exceptions. Usually, this absolutism arises from the belief that the law of God cannot be broken under any circumstances. Yet, not even the Bible considers an act to be wrong in and of itself -- the scriptures are loaded with exceptions and qualifications to the law. To those who believe that the only exceptions to the law should be those that the Judeo-Christian God gives us, then there are three places to find those exceptions: the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the writings of Christian leader... [tags: Argumentative Persuasive Topics]
1843 words (5.3 pages)
- Absolutism, a single word that has passed through a large history, has made people bigger and with enormous power. This essay is going to explain what is absolutism and how has it been developed through history, including some personal comments about the belief of the acts done during this time. According to the Oxford Reference Online in the Digital Library, absolutism is "the government with unlimited power vested in one individual group. It is used primarily to describe the 18-th century European monarchies that claimed divine hereditary right to rule." I consider that it defines briefly, on what consist this type of government.... [tags: European History]
983 words (2.8 pages)
- Although the base of equity, liberty and peace in the world is constituted on the recognition of the importance of the decorum and dignity that all the members of human race have. Although is fundamental for all the human beings to feel free to expose their opinion, thoughts and points of views in an opportune way without the terror of their own fellow citizens well as the government and jurisdictions themselves. Although the non observance and the indifference for human rights in a recent enough past collapsed in atrocious acts which compromised the integrity of mankind's freedom in a century in which humans should be respected as such and although the very first article of Universal Declar... [tags: liberty, china, human rights]
1024 words (2.9 pages)
- Thomas Hobbes was an English philosopher who lived from 1588-1679. During the age of absolutism, he was a key figure in political philosophy. He had a negative view on people; he believed that all humans were opportunist, and they would do anything to make their position higher in society. He also believed that people could not be trusted to make decisions on their own, and leadership that could run the country skillfully was essential. Therefore, Hobbes believed in an absolute monarchy. He also justified the political actions of King Charles l of England.... [tags: phylosophy, absolutism]
946 words (2.7 pages)
- Ethical relativism is a doctrine which states that there are no absolute truths in the field of ethics, and that what is either morally right or wrong is different from one person to another. The Greek historian Herodotus advanced this view during the 5th century, as he noticed how different societies had different customs, and that each individual thinks their own society 's customs are better than others (Moral Relativism, 2008). However, Herodotus said that no set of social customs are superior or inferior to any other.... [tags: Morality, Ethics, Moral absolutism]
1517 words (4.3 pages)
- ... Under the theory of the Divine Right, kings could not be questioned and had to be obeyed. However, during the era where the human ability to reason was glorified, many people began to question God as the creator of the universe and developed and distributed ideas of autonomy and progress that threaten the traditional systems. By the seventeenth century, the British and French monarchies were facing challenges due to the cognizance of people who began to protest against the injustices of royal absolutism.... [tags: traditional system, absolutism]
1740 words (5 pages)
- With great ideas, comes and follows great change. Niccolo Machiavelli, John Locke and Karl Marx are renowned philosophers who paved way to the most prominent forms of government in the world. Through their literature they have created a huge wave of revolutionary ideas that exist in the several forms of government to this day. On one hand, Machiavelli advocates political absolutism. It is a form of government in which the governed accept the powers granted to a single ruler usually vested in a king or an emperor by divine manifestation.... [tags: power, absolutism, government]
893 words (2.6 pages)
- When moral reasoning is used to take action on an issue, we use our values, ethics, and morals to come up with a solution. Our environment and upbringing play large roles in how we reason and how we value different things. We place different sets of values on different things or actions, and those actions always have consequences. According to Moore and Parker (2012) consequentialism is when we believe that the consequences of our action verifies or decides the moral value (p. 446). When the results of something we did is better received or produced better results, then we believe our action was the best choice, in that moment.... [tags: Morality, Ethics, Moral absolutism]
1183 words (3.4 pages)
There were literally hundreds of kings on the British Isles before a single monarchy emerged. Maybe this is where a single monarchy entity emerged. Feudalism and kings produced a single head of state of the British Isle. Since its departure from Rome, Britain has always been headed by a monarchy. After the Magna Carta, kings issued their own set of liberties and rights. Rebellion from a king was seen as blasphemous and ungodly. Divine Rights became a way of life. Religious life and political life became intertwined. Divine Rights had a long history, it was central to the Egyptian civilization and there were also the Hebrew kings, who ruled under the notion of divine appointment. There was even the notion that some of these kings had supernatural healing powers. The kings were not only granted divine powers, but were themselves revered as Gods. Divine Rights and absolutism was rebuked by John Locke and others during the Age of Reason or the Enlightenment. Revolutions ensued and the world was changed from an existing world ruled by monarchies, to a world of democracies (Cannon 39, v, 125, 356, 415).
The practice of absolutism grew throughout Western Europe. These grew in protestant and catholic monarchies alike. With the rise of Protestantism came martin Luther and Calvinism. Then there came a protestant attack on absolutism. This was also a time of the protestants breaking away from the catholic church, with Henry the eighth forming his own Church of England. King James I was a prominent promoter of Divine Right. Kings, he said, “are breathing images of God upon earth.”(Sabine 362, 358, 375, 396)
Absolutism had a traditional social order, dominated by a class of wealthy landowners. In France it was characterized by the Old Regime. There was somewhat of a parliamentary system and individual rights already with the Estate system, but many laws and privileges only pertained to those in the upper class. These rights were not a free democracy and did not include all men, such as those in a modern state. The world’s first democracies came after the overthrow of these monarchies, who ruled by Divine Right. Absolutism became a system dominated by the privileged class and wealthy land owners. A system evolving from feudalism and religion (Beik 31, 117, 335)
The age of absolutism came to an end in the late 1700’s and a new age of democracies came. The period of 1660-1815 is called the “Age of Absolutism.” Napoleon played a role in the end of absolutism and an end to the monarchy’s dynasty of rule. He conquered much of Europe which included his own home of France. This put an end to many monarchies of Europe, including Spain. When the new governments were formed they included much of the rights that the Americans and French Revolution had included in their documents. The monarchies no longer had absolute control and documents like the Constitution and Declaration of rights of Man and Citizen gave rights to the population. The new forms of government gave power to other branches within the government (Beloff 19, 177, 178)
Through Divine Rights, kings acted as Gods representative. King James I once stated that kings are, “the supremest thing upon earth: for the kings are not only God’s lieutenants upon earth and sit upon God’s throne, but even by God himself, they are called Gods.” James expanded on this idea at every opportunity he had, in court and in parliament. From every pulpit, the priest preached Divine Right and duty to the king. After the revolutions in Europe, Divine Right had been abolished. Declarations of rights had been signed. Divine Right had been destroyed as a political concept. Parliaments made the laws of the land and had power over the crown (Fraser 315, 329-330, 384).
John Locke was the champion of both Natural Rights and the questioning of Divine Right of the King. He professed his philosophies on both these concepts in his writing Two Treatises of Government and An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. The concept of rights had been around for a while, but Hobbes and Locke were the first to come up with the concept of Natural Law and Natural Rights. Locke then came up with the philosophy of Nature Rights. Hobbes was generally regarded as a supporter of Divine Rights. It was John Locke who pushed the concept of rights further. Thomas Paine then restated the idea in his writing The Rights of Man. These ideals were certainly influential in the revolutionaries of America and France. These concepts influenced democracies all around the world and even today’s concepts of rights and governments. What are now called Human Rights and Rights of Man were once called Natural Rights (Laqueur 6-10, 17).
There was already a bill of rights established after the Glorious Revolution in England. When the Americans gained independence, the rights stated in the English laws were restated in the Constitution. The French Declaration of Rights of Man and Citizen, which came right about the same time, restated these rights as well. With the U.N. in later years, Human Rights became a global issue. Human Rights became campaign issues in foreign policy, from John Kennedy to Jimmy Carter. Over the last few decades, Human Rights have developed in international law. There is now an International Bill of Rights established in 1947 with the United Nations. The Magna Carta from King John in 1215 marked the beginning of these rights concepts. It embodied such concepts as trial by peers, no confiscation of property without compensation and especially equality of all under the law. After the Glorious Revolution in England, there was the introduction of a limited monarchy. (Laqueur 23, 25, 41, 45, 101).
Thomas Hobbes was a philosopher from the Enlightenment who was rather on the side of the crown and Locke’s opponent. In 1665, Thomas Hobbes published his magnum opus: the Leviathan. He was forced to “Fly to England for Refuge” after it had been printed. In 1666, parliament threatened action against Leviathan. In Leviathan, Hobbes argues that the sovern must have absolute control of the society in order to control the people and to protect the society. He uses the commonwealth of Britain as an example, as the sovern the head of the body and the people its body. He argues that the state of nature of man is a state of chaos and violence and man must make a social contract. The people must submit themselves to the authority and give up some of their freedoms. This in turn would be essential because of man’s state of nature (Adler 42, 84).
Locke in the Second Treatise of Government also refers to a state of nature. His rendition is a state of liberty and in this state , one may come into power over another. To understand political power we must first understand the state of man in nature. The concept of Natural Rights came from Locke as well; these are the citizen’s right to freedoms and personal property. That these rights exist in nature and these rights helped shape the constitution and Americans. The concept of rebelling from these monarchies originated with Locke and the Second Treatise of Government. “Revolt is the right of the people” - John Locke. “When the government is dissolved, the people are at liberty to provide for themselves by erecting a new legislative” (Gough 4-6, 109)
When Locke entered into Oxford, Oliver Cromwell and the puritans were in control of Britain. There was a movement towards conservatism. This occurred in the Americas as well. There at Oxford, Locke became interested in political philosophies. In A Letter Concerning Toleration, he promoted religious toleration of christians in profession of different beliefs in those conservative times. Again showing influence on the Americas and freedom of religion and religious toleration. Locke retired in 1691, but continued to work. He not only influenced the founding fathers of the Americas with some of his earlier writings, but also helped draft some state constitutions. He died in 1704 at his home while writing a fourth Letter on Toleration (Hutchins ix).
Hobbes says that in the State of Nature, “The notions of Right and Wrong, Justice and Injustice have there no place.” A person must lay down his natural right to all things for his preservation. Man must therefore leave this state of nature, enter society and submit themselves to the governing. The difference thus, between Hobbes and Locke, is that Hobbes argues more that the person is obligated to submit to the authority to escape the state of nature. Locke argued for the right of the people to rebel against tyranny and form a new government. The two laws are not to be confused. Hobbes’s state of nature is a state in which man exists in nature that is corrupt and must submit to authority, because man is evil in this view, in the natural state. Locke’s Natural Rights are inalienable rights that man has. These are similar to the bill of rights of the constitution, but are rights that exist in nature or in man’s thinking. It is the reasoning of rights of man through empirical reasoning. Locke denies the legitimacy of absolute monarchies in his First Treatise of Government. He out right rejected an absolute monarchy as a civil government, comparing them to aristocracy and had a hand in some of the constitutions of the individual states in the Americas (Lemos 22, 25, 31, 69, 116, 117).
The Americans became champions of rights of citizens. Each figure promoted liberty and rights in their constitution. One of these was Thomas Paine. In Rights of Man, Paine says that it is a just cause for citizens to rebel on its government when it does not protect or uphold these Natural Rights. This was a response to the French Revolution. Both these revolutions had impact on the world and promoted democracies and philosophies which promoted rights of citizens. His pamphlet Common Sense was one of the most popular publications of the American Revolution. It rallied the Americans around the revolution and he became a prominent figure in early American history. With the Americans becoming a super power, the issue of rights and democracies became a global phenomenon. The writings of these philosophers became studied, as well. (Collins 12, 46)
The struggle for Human Rights has been present throughout the history of mankind. It is the relationship between man and his society. In what is known as the Social Contract, man has duties, responsibilities and rights of both the individual and society. These rights have evolved and are now included and guaranteed in documents. The allied powers after World War II took this human rights issue one step further with the United Nations, by making human rights issues international issues. (Hines vii, 2, 5)
Natural Rights came from John Locke. This in turn influenced the Americans and the French revolution in their democracies. Hobbes was Locke’s opponent and believed people must submit themselves to absolutism, because of what he called Natural Law. It is a state in which man exists without authority and resorts to violence. From these philosophers and revolutions, came these universal and natural rights. It is binding to all men. This law can only be followed if men are endowed with rights. The laws of community, which teach men to conduct themselves and become good members of societies. This would include “all men are created equal.” That these are “truths” stated in the constitution. This does not coincide with absolutism and divine rights. It is clear that they drew some inspiration from the previous revolutions and had impact on the future (Harding 14, 30, 32)
Adler, Mortimer J. 1990. Niicolo Machiavelli: The Prince/ Thomas Hobbes: Leviathan. Chicago: The University of Chicago.
Beik, William. 1985. Absolutism and Society in Seventeenth Century France. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beloff, Max. 1966. The Age of Absolutism: 1660-1815. London: Hutchinson University Library.
Blitzer, Charles. 1967. Age of Kings. New York: Time Incorporated.
Cannon, John and Ralph Griffiths. 1988. The Oxford Illustrated History of the British Monarchy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Collins, Henry. 1969. Thomas Paine: The Rights of Man. Baltimore: Penguin Books.
“Divine right”. (2007). In Political philosophy A-Z. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.marshall.edu:2048/login?url=http://ezproxy.marshall.edu:3589/content/entry/edinburghppaz/divine_right/0 (accessed 2/29/14)
Fraser, Rebecca. 2003. The Story of Britain: From the Romans to the Present a Narrative History. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Figgis, John Neville.1965. The Divine Rights of Kings. New York: Harper Torch Books.
Gaus, Gerald F. 2000. Political Concepts and Political Theories. Boulder, Colorado: West View Press.
Gough, J. W. 1966. The Second Treatise of Government and Letter Concerning Toleration: By John Locke. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Harding, Arthur L. 1955. Natural Law and Natural Rights. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press.
Hatton, Ragnhild. 1976. Louis XIV and Absolutism. London: Ohio State University Press.
Hines, Paul D. and Leslie Wood. 1969. A Guide to Human Rights Education. Washington D. C.: National Council for the Social Studies.
Hutchins, Robert Maynard. 1952. Great Books of the Western World: Locke, Berkley, Hume. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica.
Hood, F. C. 1964. The Divine Politics of Hobbes: An Interpretation of Leviathan. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.
Hunt, Lynn. 2007. Inventing Human Rights. New York, London: W. W. Norton & Company.
Kamenka, Eugene and Alice Erh-Soon Tay. 1978. Human Rights. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Krieger, Leonard. 1970. Kings and Philosophers: 1689-1789. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Laquer, Walter and Barry Rubin. 1979. The Human Rights Reader. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Leffler, Phyllis K. 1985. “French Historians and the Challenge to Louis XIV’s Absolutism.” French Historical Studies 14 (spring) 1
Lemos, Ramon M.1978. Hobbes and Locke: Power and Consent. Athens: The University of Georgia Press.
Lossky, Andrew. 1984. “The Absolutism of Louis XIV: Reality or Myth?” Canadian Journal of History 19 (April) 1
Major, J. Russell. 1994. From Renaissance to Absolute Monarchy: French Kings, Nobles, and Estates. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University.
Maritain, Jacques. 1973. Human Rights: Comments and Interpretations. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, Publishers.
Moyn, Samuel. 2010. “Human Rights in History” Nation 291 (August) 31-38
Nadon, Christopher. 2006. “Absolutism and the Separation of Church and State in Locke’s Letter Concerning Toleration.” Perspectives on Political Science 35 (spring) 84-102
Parker, David. 2003. “Absolutism, Feudalism and Property Rights in the France of Louis XIV.” Past and Present 179 (May) 60
Raphael, D.D. 1967. Political Theory and the Rights of Man. Bloomberg & London: Indiana University.
Sabine, George H. 1961. A History of Political Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehar t and Winston.
Windolph, F. Lyman. 1951. Leviathon and Natural Law. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.