Absolutism vs Enlightenment

322 Words2 Pages
Cameron Fairchild 2-17-12 There are two ways that the ideas of Enlightenment that would affect an Absolute society. The first way is the idea of consent from the people to make or enact laws. “… I would not have you meddle with such ancient rights of mine as I have received from my predecessors, possessing them more (as ancestral customs): such things I would be sorry should be accounted for grievances.” That shows that absolute rulers did not take the opinion of others into consideration when making decisions. “... No one can be put out of this condition and be subjected to the power of another without his own consent.” The Enlightenment way of thinking states that a man has the right to decide if he may be subjected to a law or not but that contradicts what the absolute rulers are saying and believing. This would impact the absolute society by showing the people that they have the right to have a say in the law making and taxation. That will disrupt the absolute rulers way of ruling. The second way that the ideas of the Enlightenment would affect an Absolute society is that laws should be created for the good of the people. “… Supper was always served on a grand scale, the royal house-hold at table, and a large number of courtiers and ladies present…” The shows that an absolute monarch would rather spend tax dollars on lavish and elaborate meals for himself than spend it for the well being of the people. “… These laws also ought to be designed for no other end ultimately, but for the good of the people.” That explains that what the idea from the enlightenment is that the laws should be made to make the lives of citizens better. This will make the absolute society think a bit defiantly for the reason of laws and will cause some revolts, revolutions, and
Open Document