Democracy in 17th and 18th Century Europe

After winning the French and Indian war, Great Britain’s economy entered economic downturn, causing great strain on the ruling power.

In 1645 Oliver Cromwell and Sir Thomas Fair Fax, built the new model army, and in the same year parliament won the battle of Naseby, while the royalist’s armies were still indiscipline. The King had rich supporters, but they also ran out of money, when it came to the battle of Naseby, so the king’s soldiers were in a bad state compared to the parliament’s new model army. After this battle he could have had another chance, but because King Charles was short of money, and unable to build a new discipline army like the Parliament’s. King Charles suffered from his immature army. In many times soldiers forgot to change sashes they wore when fighting, so their new allies shot them.

The King in his right mind has total control and power of the colonies and can do whatever he deems necessary to control them. With that said, The king of that time, not thinking about the peoples feelings went ahead and instead of making the people happy did whatever he could to make the government better. Which in the long run was to make money. Well every time the king mad a law to make up for another law that the people didn’t like, it

To begin, the Seven Years War, fought by the French along side the Indians versus the American colonies along side the British, carried a considerable cost for everyone involved. The American colonies and Britain ended up coming out on top, however, due to the sacrifice of the British jumping in to help. The only downfall was that “the royal ministries believed that the colonists should pay for their share of the costs of Britain’s (and their own) glory”. (txtbook) However, the radical new view of Americanized government believed that if new taxes were to be imposed that they should be able to have a part in their creation. This new belief was “no taxation without representation” and challenged King

world. As K.E. Carr points out in his article “Government in Ancient Greece”, it was Aristotle who first

The people that the monarch's were governing believed by their actions that their rulers believed themselves to be equal with God. This caused a

“…the revenue arising is very small and inconsiderable… and is not sufficient” (Doc F). The hard-won victory in the French and Indian War cost the British millions of pounds and created an enormous war debt. England’s burden of debt nearly doubled since 1754, from 73 million pounds to 137 million pounds. After considering their hardships, England felt it only right

Unlike Absolutist governments, which allowed for Kings like Louis XIV to spend on their own lavish lifestyles and palaces, constitutionalism ensured the no one leader in government was too powerful. In his The Spirit of Laws, Montesquieu advocated for a government where “the executive, legislative, and judicial powers” were separated from one another (Document 6). This idea, which is one of the building blocks of constitutionalism, ensured the interest of all citizens were being represented. In the English Revolution, the once Absolutist government gained a greater separation of powers. Parliament was given sovereignty over annual taxation, in addition to the implementation of national elections every two years. Unlike absolutist governments in France and Russia, This new distribution of responsibilities helped to keep the English Monarch from making decisions that didn’t best serve the interest of his people. Ultimately, in a societally imbalanced Europe, constitutionalism ensured a separation of powers in government that prevented corruption and ensured that citizens had greater representation within their

President Jefferson and President Jackson were two complete different people. Though each one had their flaws, they also had some good intentions throughout their presidency. The government was different under each president because each one had their own ideas for America. There is a chain of causes that made America the way it was under each president. Jefferson was a good person but was not the best president because he always thought about himself and never what everyone else wanted. Jackson was not a good person but he was a good president because he got things done as a president. He did thing that were good not only for him but for America 's future.

The trend of challenge to Royal policies and authority in Early Stuart England (1603-49) was significant because it resulted in the Civil War and the overthrow of monarchical government.

For over 5,000 years of human civilization, there has always been a need for societal structure and stability. People developed governments in order to guarantee that structure and stability are present within the region. While there are various forms of government, some are more effective than others. Yet the effectiveness of that form of government is mostly dictated by the time period it is being used in. Even though democracy is widely regarded as the best form of government in the 21st century, the same cannot be said for the 17th and 18th centuries. The most effective form of government for the 17th and 18th centuries in Europe is absolutism because of the power of religious unity, the importance of fear, and the focus of the overall well-being of the state.

Democracy in the United States became prominent in the early to mid 19th century. Andrew Jackson, the 7th president of the United States, was inaugurated in 1829 and was best known as the person who mainstreamed democracy in America. Because he came from a humble background, he was the “genuine common man.” (Foner, pg. 303) He claimed he recognized the needs of the people and spoke on behalf of the majority [farmers, laborers]. However, critics of Jackson and democracy called him “King Andrew I” because of his apparent abuse of presidential power [vetoing]. These critics believed he favored the majority so much that it violated the U.S. constitution, and they stated he was straying too far away from the plan originally set for the

they were attached to the centre of power, because they influenced the king more than

By trying to arrest the 5 MP’s in January 1642 in the House of Common with an army of 400 soldiers, the King rose suspicion that he was trying to dismiss the Parliament once again. As the Parliament feared that it will happen, they tried to limit the King’s power by taking the control over the royal army and by voting to throw the bishops out of the House of Lords. Some moderate MP’s were beginning to become worried about the fact and went to support Charles with the belief of possible chaos if they do not do this. The Parliament took over the army to fight against the Irish without consulting Charles as they feared he would turn against

Churchill’s claim that “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried” is deliberately provocative and intended to challenge the reader’s simplistic ideal that democracy is without faults. There are an estimated 114 democracies in the world today (Wong, Oct 3rd lecture). A figure that has increased rapidly in the last century not necessarily because democracy is the best form of government, but primarily for reason that in practice, under stable social, economic and political conditions, it has the least limitations in comparison to other forms of government. Be it the transparency of a democratic government or the prevalence of majority rule, all subdivisions of democracy benefit and hinder its