Absolutism And Conservatism

The further development of industrialisation led to social and economic inequality. This led to a revision of classical liberal ideas to prevent the spread of ignorance and poverty. It is suggested that modern liberals have betrayed classical liberal ideas as they embrace collectivism and diverge from classical liberalism on issues such as freedom. However, it can be argued that modern liberals have simply built on classical liberal ideas such as its commitment to the individual.

Of all the rulers in Europe that successfully used absolutism to create one of the strongest monarchy would be Louis XIV also known as "The Sun King" of France. He controlled France’s money and had various ways to get it, as well as keep his power, and he also knew how to delegate jobs to intelligent and loyal people. One of the ruler that was not successful in creating a strong and united monarchy using absolutism was the father and son of the Stuart dynasty who was James I and Charles I. These two never got along with the english parliament and always did things to upset their citizens and so they never were really popular nor respected amongst their people. The reason why absolute monarchy floundered in England but flourished in France was due mainly to the capability of ruler, the present political situations, and the economic stability of each country when the idea of absolute rule was introduced.

Typically, liberalism is categorised into two separate components; classical liberalism, which was fashioned during the 19th century as a result of the industrial revolution, and the more recent Modern Liberalism which emerged as industrialisation continued within the UK. Although both divisions of Liberalism unavoidably overlap in attitudes and approaches regarding the theory behind the ideology, I believe, fundamentally, that clear tensions between these aspects of Liberalism are more evident when analysing this ideology.

Typically Liberalism can be categorized into two different strands, Classical and Modern (yet some thinkers advocate a third strand that is referred to as Neo-Liberalism), each characterized by their differing and to some extent unavoidably overlapping attitudes regarding the theory behind the ideology and how it should be put into practice. Prior to examining how these relate to one another and before making any comparisons, it is important to give a definition, as best as possible, of Liberalism as a concept.

The idea of socialism challenged the way thinkers saw labor by wanting more equally distributed labor. The idea that workers were trained as a whole equally, there would be an increase in the quality of labor. The socialistic idea is that instead of individuals being most important, society as a whole should be top priority. The government training workers and providing employment is what socialists were striving for and they believed it “is easily practicable” (Document 1). If the government would spare the money, time and effort in training and providing workers with jobs, an

Classical liberalism allow an individual to use primary social value of liberty in the political culture that extent until liberties of the others disturbed. Classical liberal ideas often form the basis for opposition to the use of government to attain social and personal objectives. They stress reliance on private the free market to determine the best outcomes rather than the private initiatives [1].

While we have been busy feuding between the two parties we have not even noticed the transition our country has taken. Today we are so far from the Constitution and we are now skirting the edge of tyranny. Throughout the years, political scientist and philosophers have expanded on a wide array ideologies, or types of governments that can be organized. These types of government are for the most part, equally limited. Therefore, a state being governed under the principles of liberalism does not usually practice socialism. These political ideologies have played an essential role in

The creation of an absolutist government requires specific tactics and systems that can ensure the countries leader will maintain continued and total control over their country’s affairs and citizens. In order to make that happen, absolutist governments consist of:[1]

In his discussions of capitalism in The German Ideology he frequently accuses existing social structures for alienating man from his production. “Each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape” (Marx, Page 160) as a result of the division of labour in capitalist societies. This division of labour exists because there is higher priority placed in communal interest than individual interest. As such, there is an inequality here – communal interest is taken to be of greater importance than individual

Liberals trust that the world has a balanced structure, and this can be revealed through the activity of human reason and by basic enquiry. This grades them to put their confidence in the capacity of people to make insightful judgements. Hobbes, interestingly, sets out his hypothesis of human nature unequivocally in the initial eleven sections of Leviathan. Hobbes' thoughts gives a barrier to absolutist government. In any case, the early liberal John Locke has different views compared to Hobbes. In his Second Treatise Locke contends that power dwells with the general population, not with the ruler. Like the various liberals, Locke assaults absolutism and rather advocates an arrangement of restricted government to give insurance to regular rights.

Liberalism embraced legal equality, at least among adult male citizens, concerning issues such as religious toleration, freedom of speech, and freedom of press. Citizens were more capable to practice their religion compared to a nationally established and practiced religion, as well as think and convey their ideas, thoughts, and religions to fellow citizens. Socialism, on the other hand, was stricter on religious tolerance, freedom of speech, and freedom of press to better conserve an ideal community. These restrictions could be seen as ways to protect citizens from argument and quarrels among fellow citizens. It was also esteemed to live in environments that were nurturing to improved character, whereas higher levels of happiness and self-discovery and spirituality may be found in a more religious tolerant liberal

There was once a time when the societies of the world were nothing more than a ruling class and a class that was ruled. In these feudal societies classes were set. There was little chance for a member of the ruling bourgeoisie class to cross over to the oppressed proletariat class or from the proletariat class to the bourgeoisie class. Every individual within each class had the routine for each day set out for him or her. There was little change in the lives of individuals of these societies. There was monotony in their work and their work did little more for them than keeping them alive. In those societies,

According to Marxism, there is a struggle or conflict between individual rights and social rights. In many regards, Marxism places more emphasis on societal rights than it does on individual rights. In fact, some critics even state that Marxism ignores the rights of the individual altogether. As can be observed when Marxism is implemented under the umbrella of communism. However, Marxism takes into account the inequality and unfairness that exists in society. The inevitable truth is that contrasting groups in society will always conflict with one another and will be unable to agree on the way in which resources should be distributed. Furthermore, there is also a difference between genders, specifically in terms of the equity of how the roles

The terms ‘socialism’ and liberalism’ are used a lot nowadays, and many people often mistake one for the other. In order to differentiate between these two terms, one must keep in mind the clear-cut differences by defining the prevailing ideology of each term. The tenets of socialism assert that the state should wield total economic power by manipulating prices of goods and wages of workers.

Liberalism is a political philosophy that is founded on the ideas of liberty and equality and controls how a society functions. Since liberalism is expressed as a political ideology, it helps dictate how a nation can achieve its national security, its stable economy and the extent of control a government should possess. The perspective of the source illustrates how government intervention is needed during the threat of national security. Although, during times that national security is not being threatened, the collective society should have the freedom to break from the unnecessary government control. A philosopher such as Rousseau would have agreed with the position of the source as it gave an option of security to the people - but also gave them the choice to break the contract if they believed their rights were being violated. While a philosopher such as Hobbes would have disagreed with the source on the terms that he believed in a monarchy and believed that people needed government control at all times. Furthermore, as liberalism provides people their freedoms but also allows a certain extent of government control, the source should be taken to an full extent on the grounds that government control should only be emplaced considering national security, government control, and economic stability - which is shown through the internment of Japanese-Canadians, the New Deal, and the Patriotic Act.