17th And 18th Century Dbq

Battles and wars slaughter civilians as each individual continues the strife with their monarch in attempt to obtain their own rights and freedoms. Throughout the 17th and 18th centuries, an absolute monarchy had always been the primary form of government. However, trying to limit the royal power, a new type of government was introduced known as a democracy. In a democracy, every citizen would contribute to the decisions that affect their country. The two governments vastly differ, causing tension to arise between them, in terms of effectiveness. The 17th and 18th centuries included controversy between people, deciding which form of government was more superior than the other. With the effectiveness of having freedom of speech, protecting

Stated within Voltaire’s writings, “I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it…”(Doc 4). A lot of people in the 17th and 18th centuries believed that their right to speak was a top priority. Voltaire wanted to highlight that the right to freely speak comes from a democratic government. He emphasized that everyone’s idea does not have to be agreed with, but it should at least be respected. Conveying this, Voltaire claimed that the freedom of speech should be defended even if someone has to sacrifice their life. Thus, demonstrating how critical the right to speak is for commoners, who have a great amount of opinions in their mind that they are not allowed to say in an absolute monarchy. Voltaire’s statement played a large role in the democratic government of the 17th and 18th centuries due to how the freedom of speech was one of the most vital aspects in a democracy. The provision to speak one’s mind from a democratic government not only strengthens society and prevents revolts from the civilians, but it will also increase and spread of culture and ideas throughout the country. For example, Martin Luther’s decision to publicize his thoughts about

A single monarch ruling is not the most effective way to control the country due to how “There will be no liberty where the executive, legislative, and judicial powers are united in one person or body of persons.”(Doc 6). The primary benefit an absolute monarchy has is how it stabilizes a country, but it is not a government form that will aid the country for an extended period of time, especially with how a single person makes all the decisions in society. A democracy allows different groups of people to negotiate and decide what occurs in the branches of government, making the decision and compromise more reasonable than when a single person executes a sudden idea. With everyone compromising the best solution, the result will satisfy everyone’s interests. In an absolute monarchy, the monarch does not have anyone to criticize his decisions, leaving him with all the power to change anything in his country, which increases the chances of the nation meeting its downfall from one bad choice. In addition to uses of power, Montesquieu wrote in his work, “The Spirit of the Laws”, “...a such concentration is bound to result in arbitrary despotism…”(Doc 6). Not only does an absolute monarch increase the chances of a nation crumbling, but it could also damage the citizens with the monarch’s executions of