17th Century France vs. Britain
Though France and Britain ultimately developed two different governmental structures, they were developed to solve administrative and social problems common to both countries. The country of France had long been an absolutist state. “In an absolutist state, sovereignty is embodied in the person of the ruler”(McKay/Hill/Buckler 531). This statement refers to the philosophy of divine right, in which the ruler is answerable only to god. Kings/Queens were given the right to rule based upon their bloodline. If a child was born into the royal family he/she would eventually rule for life. Since this turn of fate was under the control of no human force, rulers believed they were not answerable to any human. This philosophy left no room for variance or compromise within the political structure. There was no resemblance of the modern idea of “checks and balances”. Rulers made decisions, laws, and policy based upon personal beliefs and desires. As with any system, there are pros and cons. Within an absolutist state, if the ruler is conscientious and effective he will do what is most beneficial for his constituents and the country will prosper. Opposition to the government will be at a minimum and the crown can rule efficiently wi
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
France Britain, England King/Queen, Catholic Church, France England, England France, Act Toleration, Louis XIV, Henry IV, governmental financing, developed governmental structures, idea checks balances, reorganizing central, louis xiv, 17th century, checks balances, government gone, reorganizing central governments, central governments, governmental structures, country france, idea checks,
Approximate Word count = 868
Approximate Pages = 3 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
 |
