Leviathan: The Efficiency of Absolute Monarchy

887 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Is absolutism good democracy

A sea monster. That’s what a Leviathan is. But not in this context. A Leviathan is absolute monarchy. Absolute monarchy, or absolutism, is a better form of government than representative democracy because decisions are made quickly and efficiently, it is a stable government, and when under a representative democracy the passing of laws and making of decisions are time consuming or never happen.

When under an absolute monarchy decisions are made quickly and efficiently. An example of this would be Maria Theresa of Austria. She had the ability to make many positive reforms in her country. Since she had absolute power she made a decision to limit the amount of labor the lords could give peasants because she cared about her people. She also …show more content…

For example, Ivan the Terrible made an elite police force who murdered and plundered the russian countryside(Witherbee). He also had entire towns and villages wiped out by torturing and killing people who lived there(Witherbee). But because he was an absolute monarch nobody could anything about it. Ivan also enjoyed torturing boyars and any citizens with different and multiple methods. He killed many boyars and exiled them. He put certain lands into a reign of terror as he was tyrannical and would act rash when he got angry(“Ivan IV”). Even though he was a terrible ruler, he could do whatever he wanted to his citizens because he was an absolute …show more content…

While democracy takes a while to get things done, a monarch can make decisions for the welfare of the people in seconds without obstacles or other people’s ideas being in the way.They don't have to wait for representatives to vote on it which is a benefit or pro in an absolute monarchy.

Even though having the citizens in the government is a good thing, this idea is not valid because too much freedom or liberty in a government given to the people means that there is more opinions that have to be considered which can lead to indecisiveness. This can lead to laws and important decisions for the citizens either not being passed or not being put into effect which needs to be for the welfare of the people.

In conclusion, absolutism is a better form of government than representative democracy because decisions are made quickly and efficiently, it is a stable government, and when under a representative democracy the passing of laws and making of decisions are time consuming or never happen. So, the Leviathan, or absolutism, is the best government to have. What do you

Show More
Related

  • Comparing Government In Republic By Plato And Leviathan

    966 Words  | 2 Pages

    There is a diverse amount of themes that could be compared in Republic by Plato and Leviathan by Hobbes. Through these books the two authors each construct a system in which their ideal state can thrive. Both writers agree that government is necessary for the good of the people, however what that government entails drastically differs. Their images of a utopian society are largely based on their perception of human beings. Seeing as how their views on human nature are quite opposite from the other’s, it is understandable that their political theories have many dissimilarities.

    Read More

  • The Most Successful Absolute Monarch in Europe was Louis XIV of France

    1549 Words  | 4 Pages

    According to the text book, an absolute monarch is a king or queen who has unlimited power and seeks to control all aspects of society (McDougall little, 1045). In more simple terms, it is a ruler who can do just about anything without having to get permission from anyone, or having to worry about the repercussions. This was a trend that started in the 1600’s by European leaders who were rich, and didn’t like to be told what to do. These conflicts arose with the States-General in France, or Parliament in England who had substantial control. The first countries to have absolute rulers were the traditionally strong countries, such as England, Spain, and of course Louis XIV’s France.

    Read More

  • Was absolute monarch the foundation of Democracy?

    909 Words  | 2 Pages

    During the fifteenth to nineteenth century, there were several leaders from different countries, who abused their powers as absolute monarchs. The misuse of their powers led to downfall of their country. An example of an absolute monarch who abused their powers is Louis XIV. He is a very important figure in history because he would make decisions and everyone would be under his power and control. For example, he controlled all the taxations, military power and justice. Furthermore, he did not set a list of defined rules. What this meant was that whatever he wanted to do at the time became the law and he could change it anytime. Louis built the Palace of Versailles which demonstrated the wealth and power of the monarch. The expenses for building the palace ended up with peasants unable to pay the increased tax. The country was enraged, countless suffered from poverty and famine. The proposition of a revolution was spread and Louis divine rights were being stripped away. The inevitable failure of absolute monarchy led to the uprising of the Reign of Terror and Napoleon Bonaparte. After the beheading of the King and Queen, France ...

    Read More

  • Hobbes’ Leviathan: A Principality? A Republic? Or Something New?

    931 Words  | 2 Pages

    All citizens apart of the Leviathan yield their right to the sovereign. This resembles a principality because the authority of the sovereign is ruled by one person. Hobbes believes that "A kingdom divided in itself cannot stand" (Hobbes, 136). Therefore, the authority of the government must not be divided and there can only be one sovereign in control.... ...

    Read More

  • Boussuet And John Locke: A Comparative Analysis

    345 Words  | 1 Pages

    Boussuet says, “Without the absolute authority the king could neither do good nor repress evil. It is necessary that his power be such that no one can hope to escape him, and finally, the only protection of individuals against the public authority should be their innocence” (400). He also focuses

    Read More

  • Roots of American Democracy

    2370 Words  | 5 Pages

    The idea of a government representative of the people is rooted in the Athenian democracy dating back to the fifth century BC. Thomas Jefferson states in the Declaration of Independence, “it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” The Declaration of Independence reflects the importance of the public intervention, showing that the actions of the government deeply affect the lives of the people, and therefore they should have a say in government. This concept is very similar to the ideology of Cleisthenes, an Athenian statesman and reformer who was an aristocrat exiled from Athens under tyrant rule.

    Read More

  • Free Antigone Essays: Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely

    1624 Words  | 4 Pages

    "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely," said Lord Acton generations ago. In the Greek tragedy Antigone, written by Sophocles, there was a character named Kreon, the antagonist, who was the king of Thebes. Thebes was an autocratic state where Kreon had absolute power. Throughout the course of the play, Kreon abused his privilege of absolute power; and this caused him to suffer greatly, even though he was warned by a few people of his bad deeds. What Sophocles commented on absolute power was that one should not abuse it. If it was abused, he or she had to expect bad consequences. This was indicated by what happened to Kreon when he abused his power.

    Read More

  • The American Democratic Republic

    1382 Words  | 3 Pages

    It would only make sense to create a government for the people, by the people. But in order to limit the government and protect the rights of citizens, the new government would have to consist of a checks and balances type of system. This is the reason for the three separate branches of government: executive, judiciary and legislative.... ... middle of paper ... ...

    Read More

  • The Absolute Monarchy Of France In The 17th Century

    731 Words  | 2 Pages

    In this context, an absolute monarch would be revolve around a single leader (usually a king) that would make decisions without the assistance of the aristocracy, such as a the nobility, the parliament, or other organizations that include the interest of wealthy families or government officials. In this case, the king would act alone in deciding the political, economic, and military decisions of the people, which would illustrate the absolute power that is wielded by the individual making the decisions. This governmental interpretation of the term “absolute” defines how a king would rule without the interference or inhibitions of an aristocracy or democratic form of government. Of course, the realization of this type o government can be better explained through the context of the absolute monarchy in France, which was founded in the leadership of king Louis

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan and John Locke's Second Treatise of Government

    3013 Words  | 7 Pages

    Hobbes’ Leviathan and Locke’s Second Treatise of Government comprise critical works in the lexicon of political science theory. Both works expound on the origins and purpose of civil society and government. Hobbes’ and Locke’s writings center on the definition of the “state of nature” and the best means by which a society develops a systemic format from this beginning. The authors hold opposing views as to how man fits into the state of nature and the means by which a government should be formed and what type of government constitutes the best. This difference arises from different conceptions about human nature and “the state of nature”, a condition in which the human race finds itself prior to uniting into civil society. Hobbes’ Leviathan goes on to propose a system of power that rests with an absolute or omnipotent sovereign, while Locke, in his Treatise, provides for a government responsible to its citizenry with limitations on the ruler’s powers.

    Read More

  • Bossuet's Justification Of Absolutism

    614 Words  | 2 Pages

    The King must rule in an Absolute state to have a country ruled the way that God wants it. Absolutism is also a good way to rule if it is not religious based. This is because a King has a paternal instinct toward his subjects in Absolutism. A King also has an instinct to do what is right for his subjects and country, according to Filmer. An Absolute State is an ideal way to rule because it benefits the monarch.

    Read More

  • Government is Best which Governs Least

    9422 Words  | 19 Pages

    It is a sort of wooden gun to the people themselves. But it is not the least necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government which they have. Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed upon, even imposed upon themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all agree. Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way.

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill's Considerations On Representative Government

    557 Words  | 2 Pages

    And because it is not necessary for them to voice their opinions, the public becomes uninterested and uninformed on the matters of government. This leaves people with stunted mental capacities. A good despotism is a government with no positive oppression by officers of state, but where all the interests of the public are managed for them. Mill asserts that despotism that consents not to be despotism could, in fact, be good. However, it depends on the despot. If the despot would refrain from exercising absolute power and instead, appoint a council chosen by the people, the despot could get rid of the evil elements of despotism. Mill continues to shed light on this despotic monarchy which is, in actuality, a representative government, when public opinion is allowed. Public opinion will either be for or against the despot. If it is against him, he can either put down opposition or defer to the nation. The former would cause animosity between the despot and the people; the latter would indicate a constitutional king rather than a monarch. Mill concludes by saying that the principle element behind a good government is the improvement of the

    Read More

  • Hobbes and Absolute Sovereignty

    3652 Words  | 8 Pages

    A state is sovereign when its magistrate owes allegiance to no superior power, and he or she is supreme within the legal order of the state. It may be assumed that in every human society where there is a system of law there is also to be found, latent beneath the variety of political forms, in a democracy as much as in a absolute monarchy, a simple relationship between subjects rendering habitual obedience, and a sovereign who renders obedience to none. This vertical structure, of sovereign and subjects, according to this theory, is analogous to the backbone of a man. The structure constitutes an essential part of any human society which possesses a system of law, as the backbone comprises an essential part of the man.

    Read More

  • Does British Monarchy Have Too Much Power?

    981 Words  | 2 Pages

    Surely, with unrestrained power, the monarch would likely rule without accountability and therefore only in their self-interest? However, I don't think this poses a problem. To address accountability, the monarch would still have to answer to the people – after all, who pays their wages? A country in shambles would have the monarch to blame, and they may be faced with dissent. After all, what happened to Marie Antoinette, or even King John himself?

    Read More

More about Leviathan: The Efficiency of Absolute Monarchy

Open Document