Montesquieu's Greatest Mark on Philosophy Essay

Baron de Montesquieu, a early French philosophe, rejected absolutism in favor of Britain's limited monarchy. He admired the British in that they protected themselves from tyranny by dividing themselves into three branches. He felt that separation of powers and checks and

Baron de Montesquieu sees the people as sovereign exclusively in a democracy and act through elected bodies or ministers. Since the people have the sole power to enact laws, the rules of suffrage are vital to a successful democracy. Following closely is the need for a fixed amount of active citizens in an assembly. As such, the essence of his democracy revolves around the need for love of the laws and of the country. (Montesquieu Bk. 4 Pt. 5) Likewise, frugality is important because it allows all of society to share a similar level of enjoyment and advantages that a democracy brings. When the populace look to frugality, enhanced public services are made available. Consequently, there is a law of

1. The problems that Thomas Paine sees with the British monarchy involve its straying from ideal government, the unjust placement of one individual above all others, and its hereditary aspect. The problems that Thomas Paine sees with King George III in particular are his personal transgressions against liberty. Thomas Paine, firstly views government as “but a necessary evil” (15), and therefore it should be both as limited as possible and also tied to the more positive society. The ideal form of government, thus according to Paine, is a simple republic where the elected are forced to be accountable to their electors (16). The British monarchy fails in all accounts; not only does the prescence of a monarchy at all eliminate the accountability of a republic, but the complicatedness of the British monarchy system makes it worse in this aspect than even other monarchies. Although absolute monarchies are horrid in that they give no power to the people, they are still simpler than the British monarchy; this makes issues much more difficult to handle in the British monarchy (17). The other problems that Paine has with the British monarchy apply to monarchies at large. Paine argues that the placement of one person above all others is an unnatural divide; there is no explanation for the division of people into “KINGS and SUBJECTS” (22) such as there are in other forms of division that humans live with. If it does not make sense to place one individual above all others, then such should most certainly not be law; therefore, from this logic, monarchy, which is entirely based on the principle of placing one person (and their relatives) above all others, is an invalid and unnatural form of government. Of course, some people could, arguably, have earned the admiration and respect of their peers through important action, and thus be deserving of a leadership position. In a republic, by listening to their electors, the elected earn their right to lead. However, the hereditary monarchy removes this earning of the right to lead, and Paine takes issue with that. There is no guarantee that the descendants of a good leader will also be good leaders, and therefore the government of a country should never be left to heredity (29).

Through the whole of the Letters, and the tale of the Troglodytes, Montesquieu is, in addition to philosophical questions, stumbling upon a question made clear by the theme of this week's readings: Why Government?

Montesquieu believed that everything was made up of laws or rules that never changed. He wrote the book The Spirit of the Laws, which greatly covers the importance of separation of power in balancing the control of the

Following on from the preceding discussion, then, it is possible to explore the types of constitution in existence. From the aforementioned distinction, we can observe correct – rule with a view to the common good – and deviated – rule with a view to the private advantage – constitutional arrangements. Within each of these are three types of constitution. The three correct types of constitution comprise a kingship, an aristocracy, and a polity; the three deviated types of constitution consist of a tyranny,

The Enlightenment era was a new intellectual movement that stressed reason and thought and the power of individuals to solve problems. Even though different philosophers approached their goal differently, they achieved it none the less. They all approached their goal differently due to their different upbringings, their different backgrounds, and most importantly their different environments. A few among the many enlightened thinkers were Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Baron Do Montesquieu, and Jean Jacques Rousseau. While some of their idea’s are not used in modern society, they were all instrumental to the modern society we live in today.

As Montesquieu and Rousseau both bind the idea that sovereignty should be the mindset that is grasped upon when you’re born and you should use it to your highest potential. It is expressed in their own different way but in result, it is involved in the same quest that Voltaire contributes of the common good in the novel. The type of contribution that is discussed in the abuses of power in Candide. Voltaire depicts power being abused from scenes of the novel as they’re reinforced in many views from potential change, human rights, and other Enlightenment values that are portrayed in the book of Candide.

With all the glory and the splendour that some countries may have experienced, never has history seen how only only one man, Napoleon, brought up his country France from its most tormented status, to the very pinnacle of its height in just a few years time. He was a military hero who won splendid land-based battles, which allowed him to dominate most of the European continent. He was a man with ambition, great self-control and calculation, a great strategist, a genius; whatever it was, he was simply the best. But, even though how great this person was, something about how he governed France still floats among people 's minds. Did he abuse his power? Did Napoleon defeat the purpose of the ideals of the French Revolution? After all of his success in his military campaigns, did he gratify the people 's needs regarding their ideals on the French Revolution? This is one of the many controversies that we have to deal with when studying Napoleon and the French Revolution. In this essay, I will discuss my opinion on whether or not was he a destroyer of the ideals of the French Revolution.

A glint of good news came to the now-impoverished family when the merchant heard that a ship containing his merchandise had just arrived in port. The merchant was overjoyed and went to claim his wealth, only to find that there had been a legal ordeal and he had, indeed, lost it all. Here, the author tries to illustrate the French government’s inadequacy in meeting the needs of the people. In the 1850s, great minds, including the Swiss/French political philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, were writing that the authority to rule came from the people themselves. Furthermore, philosophers argued that the government’s duty was not to serve their own decadence but rather to serve the people. The French government, being an absolute monarchy, was ruled by only the word of Louis XV, and the royal Bourbon family had a history of ruling to meet their own selfish desires. The French monarchy did not uphold the intrinsic promise and duty of any government to protect, feed, and serve its people. De Beaumont symbolizes this by failing to deliver the goods to the impoverished former merchant. In other words, just like the merchant’s undelivered goods, the

Around the same time, Americans were also influenced by the works of Charles, the Baron de Montesquieu, a French political thinker. He believed that there were three types of governments; a monarchy (ruled by a king or queen), a republic (ruled by an elected leader) and a despotism (ruled by a dictator). In his book, The Spirit of Laws ,

French minister Richelieu symbolized absolutism in many ways. With his policy of total subordination of all groups and institutions to the French monarchy, Richelieu worked to break the power of nobility. This is because French nobility’s selfish and independent ways went against the the crown’s goal to centralize the state. To break it Richelieu leveled castles, which were a symbol of feudal independence. He also destroyed aristocratic conspires, with speedy executions. In addition to this Richelieu’s genius is best reflected in the administrative system he established. Extending the use of royal commissioners, known as intendants giving them responsibility for justice, police, and finances in each of Frances 32 generalities or districts.

Government is built on the premises of the established ideas of former politicians and then the new outlooks of recent politicians. All ideas on government are based on the structure and laws of former civilizations. Thus, many politicians can have similar viewpoints on government due to basing their ideas on the same former structures. But, in contrast new government structures include a variety of variations. Therefore, Jean Domat, Montesquieu and Jean Jacques Rousseau have major differences in their outlooks on government, but they do share similar aspects.

Montesquieu was a French philosopher who was very important in the American constitutional thought. He was a man who was referred to more that any other theoretical writer and wrote, "The Spirit of the Laws." Some of Montesquie's theories or views were that the Republic form of government was only

Thomas More, Niccolo Machiavelli, and Thomas Hobbes offer models for the relationship between the sovereign and the people in their works Utopia, The Discourses, and The Leviathan. Each argues that ensuring the common good of the people should be the primary goal of the sovereign. However, they differ in the specifics of their descriptions of this relationship and in their explanations of the sovereign’s motivation for valuing the prosperity of the people. An examination of the specified passages in each of these works will clarify the comparison of their models for this relationship.