Without the efficacious presence of an absolute monarchy only chaos, war and hardships could arise. Multiple nations divided and in misery, different opinions everywhere one went and no definite resolution, some had no intention of following the law, all these conflicts sum up to the state of Europe before the emergence of absolute monarchy. When the ideal government finally surfaced in the 1600s and 1700s religion, fear and repercussions were elements utilized by a ruler to manage a harmonious society which implemented major decisions for the good of the state. In short, humans’ viciousness was a fact which could never be changed, for if one lent the people a hand they would abuse the noble intentions. A democracy did not offer the tight control
…show more content…
The monarch referred to the duties a leader performed. Given this point, the absolute ruler was to assess important problems while being aware of what was convenient for the State. For example, a rational goal of absolute monarchy was centralizing the State, especially during the Enlightenment. war, civil war, feudal rebellion and violent uprisings cause major conflict for Europe in the 1600s and 1700s. Therefore and with wisdom the mighty leader worked for civil peace, exactly what the corrupted people, who in now way could handle the ruling power adequately, caused. The monarchs were capable of separating themselves from what one individual needed to only consider what benefited the majority or the State. When conflicts emerged decisions were quickly made to resolve it, the speed of the decision-making progress only this quick in an absolute monarchy. While Montesquieu believed in “There can be no liberty where the executive, legislative, and judicial powers are united in one person because such concentration was bound to result in despotism” (Montesquieu 1748). The philosopher failed to realize that what he believed to be productive hurt the nation. When the power was divided the decision making process was slow and in certain occasions, like a war situation, not having an immediate resolve hurt the State because someone always disagreed and when the people 's opinions were obtained it was a slow process to take all voices in mind to reach a conclusion. The time situation was definitely an inconvenience in urgent situations in a democracy. Therefore, once again it was proved absolutism was a necessity for any society which hoped to be ruled in tranquility.
Ultimately, Absolute Monarchy
Most importantly this form of government incorporated obedient citizens who felt obliged to be compliant, other than for their own peace,
The monarch referred to the duties a leader performed. Given this point, the absolute ruler was to assess important problems while being aware of what was convenient for the State. For example, a rational goal of absolute monarchy was centralizing the State, especially during the Enlightenment. war, civil war, feudal rebellion and violent uprisings cause major conflict for Europe in the 1600s and 1700s. Therefore and with wisdom the mighty leader worked for civil peace, exactly what the corrupted people, who in now way could handle the ruling power adequately, caused. The monarchs were capable of separating themselves from what one individual needed to only consider what benefited the majority or the State. When conflicts emerged decisions were quickly made to resolve it, the speed of the decision-making progress only this quick in an absolute monarchy. While Montesquieu believed in “There can be no liberty where the executive, legislative, and judicial powers are united in one person because such concentration was bound to result in despotism” (Montesquieu 1748). The philosopher failed to realize that what he believed to be productive hurt the nation. When the power was divided the decision making process was slow and in certain occasions, like a war situation, not having an immediate resolve hurt the State because someone always disagreed and when the people 's opinions were obtained it was a slow process to take all voices in mind to reach a conclusion. The time situation was definitely an inconvenience in urgent situations in a democracy. Therefore, once again it was proved absolutism was a necessity for any society which hoped to be ruled in tranquility.
Ultimately, Absolute Monarchy
Most importantly this form of government incorporated obedient citizens who felt obliged to be compliant, other than for their own peace,