More handpicked essays just for you.
Totalitarianism brave new world
Totalitarian government essay introduction
A totalitarian government quizlet
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Between the 1500’s and 1600’s absolute monarchs had a great power over their kingdoms. Absolute monarch means one monarch who has unlimited power over a kingdom. During this time absolute monarchs believed that they had the “divine right” to rule over a kingdom, because they were chosen from God to be on the throne. Absolute monarchs did not share power with moves, parliaments, or the church. The absolute monarchs of the 1500’s and 1600’s showed that they held a great deal of power over their kingdoms.
For instance, Charles II of England brought back the Anglican Church to re-establish his monarchy in England. Third, arts usually flourished during those absolute monarchs’ reigns -- lots of the absolute monarchs built exquisite architectures to symbolize his/her power and his/her leadership of the state. Louis
Monarchs believed that the power, that was appointed to them, was a gift from God Himself. Since their power was considered “Godly”, it was only a matter of time until they would abuse it. Kings and Queens could order to kill whoever opposes them, raise taxes for their own greed, and simply have control over the lives of thousands of people. A person who rules with all this power is considered to be a tyrant. The birth of this new nation was the result of the founders of this country trying to escape the grasp of a tyrant.
The absolute monarchs of the 1600s and 1700s all increased their power by decreasing the power the nobles had. When Louis XIV was king of France he decreased the power of the nobles by creating the palace of Versailles. In the palace of
“For all men being originally equals, no ONE by BIRTH could have a right to set up his own family in perpetual preference to all others for ever, and though himself might deserve SOME decent degree of honours of his contemporaries, yet his descendants might be far too unworthy to inherit them” (Paine). The descendent of the throne may be a fool and have no idea how government works leaving the inhabitants defenseless and at a disadvantage as rival empires or nation can attack and usurp the throne and lead to turmoil or anarchy. It also goes against the concept of “all men are created equal,” being royal by birth is a straight contradiction and creates further unnecessary division. “Another evil which attends hereditary succession is, that the throne is subject to be possessed by a minor at any age; all which time the regency, acting under the cover of a king, have every opportunity and inducement to betray their trust” (Paine). A minor as the ruling king may have no grasp onto what they’re doing and maybe swayed against doing well for society.
As one studies history, one may encounter absolute monarchs that abused their power and oppressed their people. However, there is another group of absolute monarchs that is completely different, using their ideas and power in order to improve the lives of their people. Monarchs like Frederick II and Maria Theresa had created new laws and legislations that helped improve life for their people and helped organize, modernize, and
In Domat’s “Social Order And Absolute Monarchy” the argument is that monarchs should stay in power and that is their divine right to rule that would keep society together, monarchs are natural and necessary form of government that society should follow. Jean is of the mindset that monarchies are one of the most effective and natural forms of government, however he mistaken to believe this. “The first distinction that subjects people to others is the one created by birth between parents and children. And this distinction leads to a first kind of government in families, where children owe obedience to their parents who head the family. The second distinction among persons arises from the diversity of employment required by society” (Domat 28).
The monarch could obtain what they wanted by building an army. All of the soldiers were loyal to the king, and the king only giving him all the power of his army. The soldiers all got uniforms and rankings which made the army go from 100 000 men to 400 000. Majority of the citizens were religious, so when their king claimed to be sent down by god; he gained even more power and authority.
To answer the question of why did communism fail, you first have to understand what communism is and how it formed and used throughout history. Communist ideals were used sparsely throughout history, ranging from paleolithic times up through 18th century Europe. In these cases it was very unorganized and not used by large groups of people. In the 1840’s Karl Marx began publishing books pertaining to his idea of communism which is now called Marxism. The difference between communism and marxism is that marxism is only the idea or framework, and communism is the practical application of that idea.
Based on the paragraphs provided a communist government is the worst idea I have ever heard of. When people don't have basic rights like the ones provided in the Bill of Rights there is no unity between government and people.
As a matter of fact, Napoleon showed us a monarchy type of government when he took over Manor Farm. A monarchy is when one person reigns until death. This can be related to Joseph Stalin the dictator of the Union of Soviet Social Republics (USSR) because he was seen to be a cruel leader who eliminated anybody who got in his way. By way of example, Napoleon used this same tactic to overrule the farm and the animals with his nine frightening dogs. The animals went along with all the things he said but disagreed at times until Squealer manipulated their minds into thinking Napoleon was a good leader.
This religious aspect to these absolute monarchs caused the people to have respect for their rulers. People thought “Fear God, Honor the King.” (Document 5) It meant that people should have faith in their Kings and fear the course that God has set for them. They believed that monarchs were sent to do the good deeds of god and that using their power for evil was a horrible sin.
ruled by the few, it seems inevitable that the aristocrats severed the people into factions. As an elitist city-state, such laws that were passed did not abide by the wishes of the poor but by the wishes of the rich (“The Rise of Democracy,” n.d.). If the people did not obey, then “they used the army to force people to obey them” (“The Rise of Democracy,” n.d.). Of course, this means there was a distinct socioeconomic inequality, and so the oligarchy, or the aristocracy, was deemed oppressive. Eventually, this encourages rebellious attitudes leading to tyranny.
The opinion of the Communist Party (CCP) and their assertion of democracy is a different one than the western perspective. According to the CCP democracy and stability are two variables contradicting each other. For those in power, stability appears to be more essential than democracy, leading the focus on this aspect. Stability, in this case, signifies a powerful state with sometimes-harsh sanctions. In case of any disturbance of this stability disciplinary actions are taken and one can be accused of “undermining the state authority”.
To many, monarchs were God 's form on earth. King James I of England said that "The state of monarchy is the supreme thing upon earth; for kings are not only God’s lieutenants on earth, and sit upon God’s throne, but even by God Himself they are called gods..." (Document 2). Like King James I, people believed monarchs were needed because they had power like God. Kings and Queens were essential and brought goodness to the land.
