The Absolutist System

Abryl Navarro DBQ Essay During the 1500s and 1600s, Western Europe experienced a period of governments ruled by ab-solute monarchs. Absolute monarchies are forms of government in which the monarch has abso-lute power over the people. The absolutism was caused by religious and territorial conflicts which was crated fear and uncertainty. Rulers/ Kings abused their power of absolutism over their sub-jects.

To begin with, criminal justice is a system that is designed to maintain social control, which means it is a necessary aspect of every society since “Laws are the conditions under which independent and isolated men united to form a society” (Beccaria, 1764: 16). In order words, crime control deals with the methods that are taken by a society to reduce its crime. As a matter of fact, there are various crime control strategies from community policing to risk assessments. In addition to the different tactics for controlling crime, there are several theories that not only attempt to explain the causes of crime, but also outline different ways to handle offenders; for example, deterrence, rehabilitation, and even retribution.

The “get tough approach” to crime control has been prevalent since the 1960s. This approach takes the stance to a more firm and no tolerance policy against crime, hence the term “tough” in the actual title. “"Tough" crime control normally denotes more emphasis on police resources, faster apprehension of criminals, quick trials, and more severe sentences for guilty offenders” (Skoler 1971:29). The “get tough approach” emphasizes the need to arrest and punish criminals over rehabilitation and addressing the social factors that underlie criminal behavior (Barkan and Bryjak 2011). Deterrence of other criminals through severe punishments is the primary focus. The “get tough approach” of criminal justice institutions has been under scrutiny due to the outcomes that we will discuss further on. The purpose of this paper is to simply present the pros and cons that have resulted from the “get tough approach” on crime. The paper will try and remain completely unbiased to the “get tough approach” and solely focus on results that have come from said approach. We will begin by discussing the background and history of the “get tough approach” and what led to its development. We will then discuss things such as incarceration rates (US Department of Justice), crime rates (Dilulio 1995) juveniles in prison (Hinton 2015), policies that have been implemented (Shephard 2002), correctional costs, and destabilized urban neighborhoods (Barkan & Bryjak 2011; Black 2007; Mauer 2006) that result

Reiman and Leighton comprehensively begin the discussion of crime by outlining their main objectives, establishing the immediate problems surrounding crime control in America, and setting the groundwork for their premises. In recent years, the crime rate in the United States has declined. This decline is generally attributed to ‘tough on crime’ and mass incarceration policies, but the authors are quick to assert that other variables--economic, social-- are greater contributors to this decrease, with the ‘imprisonment binge’ only actually contributing a small amount to the decline. These strict crime enforcement policies might have a small impact on crime prevention, but criminologists are concerned with the potential effect such policies might have on criminal justice procedures--promoting profit rather than safety-- and endangering citizens’ rights (particularly those considered minorities).

After the Renaissance, there were many factors that gave way and led to chaos, and then the choice between an absolutist government, or a constitutional one. These factors included the decline of the previous social order of Feudalism, the Protestant Reformation, new logical and scientific ideas from famed Renaissance thinkers, and riots/revolts from unhappy citizens of numerous classes. Some states like France, Russia, and Prussia, resulted in all the power gathered under the monarch’s personal control, which happened due to comparable actions by the ruler. In the 1600s and 1700s, Absolute monarchs like Louis XIV, Peter the Great, and the Soldier King of Prussia, had similar methods to strengthen bureaucracy and control the nobles, develop

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries absolutism became highly prevalent. Absolutism was a type of national monarchy in which the monarch had great power. Many absolute monarchs kept their countries embroiled in war, which led to a feeling of instability and uncertainty that led to a dependence on one strong central power. Monarchs also justified their immense power by referencing the concept of the Divine Right to Rule, which was the belief that God created the monarchy; the monarch was his representative on Earth and thus was only answerable to God himself. The belief that the monarch was appointed by God, the need for a sense of security during a time of uncertainty, and the efficiency that resulted from an absolute monarchy were all factors that led some to believe that absolute monarchies during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were

The 1600s and 1700s were times of change. The Reformation of the previous century had shaken the foundations of society in Europe, while the Age of Exploration had introduced Europe to lands, peoples, and resources that brought new wealth to individuals and countries. Building off of this wealth, monarchs in Europe began to centralize their power using methods of taxation and claims of divine right. These monarchs, including Louis XIV of France, Peter the Great of Russia, and James I of England, eventually created a governmental system, known as absolutism, that revolved entirely around themselves and their desires. Because of their claims to such extreme power, absolutism had wide reaching effects on many parts of their countries. The effects of absolutism were the Nobles got treated like servants, the king's power increased a lot, and the military improved.

Being the two most prevalent governments during the 17th and 18th century, absolutism and constitutionalism were similar because in both governments the people gave up their sovereignty to a person or group of people, and both governments were made to protect the people; however, they are different because the power distribution between the people and government, the limits on said power, and the right for people to revolt were completely different.

During 1650-1750, a new political system known as absolutism emerged and became popular amongst many countries in central and Eastern Europe. Absolutism is a political system in which a divine-right monarch enjoys absolute power over all affairs of state. Supposedly, the “divine-right monarch” receives his power directly from God, meaning that he is only responsible to God and that no one can question his authority. In the 1600’s, taxes and famine began to rise in many European states, which resulted in dangerous and uncontrolled riots. Many countries began to adopt absolutism as a political system that could be a solution to these issues. As absolutism became a solution to these issues and gained popularity in France, Prussia, and Russia,

During the era of the late 16th and 17th centuries, a new idea of political thought was sweeping France: the idea of centralization of power and Absolutism. These ideas gave the vast majority of, if not all, of the political power and authority of government to the reigning monarch of France. Absolutism was brought to fruition by the likes of monarchs and noblemen such as Louis XIV and was backed by the idea of the right to rule by divine intervention. The theoretical basis for the idea of absolute royal authority in France was the idea of the right to rule by divine intervention.

Absolutism started in the seventeenth century. The absolute monarchs main goal was to control every aspect of society. Usually the absolute monarchs ruled without any limitations to their authority. The most effective form of government in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries is absolutism because men are selfish, the kings and princes were chosen by god, and the king has certain rights that no other person has.

Mass incarceration is the inhumane process by which people are cornered into the criminal “justice” system and recognized as criminals and felons. Criminals in the United States tend to receive longer sentences than those in other countries, even when they commit the same crimes. Furthermore, once these individuals are released

The challenge of crime policy is that crime is not evenly distributed across the socio-economic population. There are a multitude of reasons why this is a fact, but what is important to know, is that it greatly impacts crime policy. Criminal justice policies have vastly changed, especially in the last fifty years, in an effort to respond to citizens’ needs because of the uneven distribution of crime. Therefore, this means it is a reactionary response. It is imperative to remember that crime tends to effect the poor, the young, and particular ethnic groups more, when examining criminal justice policies. Policies that are of the criminal justice persuasion in their nature, in the extent of the policies, and in their impact directly effects the liberties of a governments’ citizens are always in flux.

Since the early 1970's, there has been a significant increase in the incarcerating system. Today, study shows that 1 in 100 adult Americans are behind the bars (B.J.S.). On the other hand, the increase in the use of imprisoning system does not mean that there is an increase in crime. From the research of B.J.S., it signifies that in early 1970's population were around 300,000, while the population in 2006 was over 2.3 million. In the United States of America, each state has their diverse policy to deter the crime rate. On the

We emerged into a large meeting room that was brightly lit. There were a few people sitting near the head of the large table in the middle of the room. The second we stepped into the room, they stopped their discussion and stared at us with piercing gazes. They started walking towards us with stony faces and tense postures. The man leading the group stopped a few meters in front of us and inspected us. Then in a booming voice, he called for reinforcements. Three men entered the room casually. They looked around the room and tensed up when they saw us. They started moving towards us at an alarmingly fast pace. We were frozen on the spot and couldn’t do anything except look at each other. The men grabbed our hands and handcuffed them together before dragging us to the group of people and dropping us at their feet. We