Compare And Contrast Absolutism And Constitutionalism

Comparisons and Contrasts of Absolutism and Constitutionalism
Absolutism and constitutionalism can both describe types of governments. Neither are government forms themselves, but describe a government form such as a Monarchy. Absolutism, like the name suggests, refers to the absolute belief in political, philosophical, ethical, or theological matters. So, an absolute monarch would be free of any restraints or opposition to do whatever they want. Constitutionalism, on the other hand limits the powers of a ruler, even a monarch, by a multitude of ideas customs and laws which serves as a restriction for what the ruler can do and what rights the people of that nation have.
Government types in each nation differ from one another throughout time

and change based on circumstance. Liberalism and Humanist thought drive the different ways of governing even if it is the same form of government, the demand for more rights in several areas cause problems for rulers, and different ways of governing and different governments form because of this. The end of Feudalism marks the beginning of new governments, government forms, and very different ways to keep power.
Constitutionalism gives more power to the people of a nation to force a ruler to do what they want, while absolutism gives more power to the ruler to force the people to do what they want.

Both are formed over time based on circumstance and both have advantages and disadvantages. Absolutism will take away the rights of the people, which in western culture especially with a rising middle class tends to create unrest. Despite this, with undefined power to a ruler, it means they can do things quicker than if there was opposition and a constitution to bypass, which means in a way it can be flexible, however it really all depends on the type of government, and the ruler. If the ruler is ignorant or arrogant, it may become extremely less flexible to changing circumstances, which is where the advantages of constitutionalism are shown. Constitutionalism will generally be more stable than absolutism with a few exceptions. The stability is caused by the increased power to the people rather than a ruler and the ruler has defined power and cannot easily defy what the people of the nation want depending on the constitution. Which means the people of that nation will be less likely to revolt against the current ruler if he follows the constitution. However, it can go both ways since if the ruler tries to exceed the power given by the constitution the people would probably be more likely to revolt. Despite this, it is still ends up being more stable most of the

time.
Economically, constitutionalism has an advantage since the ruler cannot intervene as much.

A state running an economy especially with trade will generally fall behind due to the lack of flexibility to changing prices. Constitutionalism generally will restrict intervention enough so that it is not state-controlled, although it is still possible it will be regardless. With absolutism, a ruler could choose to intervene as much or little as they want, which can be dangerous and means any ruler could choose to take over that aspect, and the result will usually end badly. Stability will always help economically and constitutionalism is more stable in contrast to

absolutism.
A lot of this will depend on the government form itself. The same monarchy could be over time both absolute and constitutional with different results than another monarchy with a similar government type. Republics and democracies are different as by its very nature give more power to people rather than a ruler, and because of this leans towards constitutionalism. Although a monarchy or theocracy will generally lean towards absolutism more, there is generally more resistance which pushes it towards constitutionalism, which is how a dictatorship might form, or a parliament based monarchy. Absolutism and constitutionalism are similar being a description of a type of government, and both are complex, but the way they affect the government are very different. Both however are responses to dealing with the people of a nation, the difference is whether it is to control them or be controlled, and to what extent.