Absolutism

Absolutism

Absolutism Definition

Political system in which total power is vested in a single individual or a group of rulers.

Background

Today the term is usually associated with the government of a dictator. It is considered the opposite of constitutional government such as that found in the United States. Absolutism is distinguished from democracy by the unlimited power claimed for absolute rulers as contrasted with the constitutional limitations placed on heads of state in democratic governments.

The development of modern absolutism began with the emergence of European nation-states toward the end of the 15th century and flourished for more than 200 years. It is, perhaps, best exemplified by the reign (1643-1715) of King Louis XIV of France. His declaration L’Etat, c’est moi (“I am the state”) sums up the concept neatly (Divine Right of Kings). A series of revolutions, beginning with the Glorious Revolution in England (1688), gradually forced the monarchs of Europe to yield their power to parliamentary governments.

Absolutism in the 20th Century

Other forms of absolutism arose in the 20th century, most notably National Socialism in Germany and the Stalinist dictatorship in the USSR. Today absolute rulers are found in many countries, including some of the remaining Communist nations and various Latin American, Middle Eastern, and African countries.

Source: “Absolutisme”Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia

The Legal History of Absolutism

Resources

See Also

  • History of Law

Aristocracy
Government Censorship
Natural Law
Public Law Contents
Oligarchy
Political Machines
divine right; Hobbes, Thomas; tyranny of the majority

Further Reading


Posted

in

, ,

by

Comments

3 responses to “Absolutism”

  1. international

    A system of rule was the absolutism, in which there are no legal or authoritative limits on the reach of the ruler. The ruler may be an individual or the holder of an office – as is the case in an absolute monarchy. An absolute power will be practically limited, but not limited by rival institutions or agencies which claim political authority. This looks this way. Again, an absolute authority may choose not to intervene in wide areas of social life, but faces no legal obstacles if it does so choose to intervene (and in this way, a totalitarian government – which does intervene in all aspects of social life – can be seen as a subset of absolutist rule).

  2. international

    Main advocates of absolutism include Jean Bodin and Thomas Hobbes, as well as those such as Filmer who believed that monarchs ruled by divine right. They were quire popular in that period. The arguments for absolutism varied accordingly, as always. For divine right theorists, God’s agent on earth ought not to be hampered by merely man-made laws; for Hobbes, however, division and limitation of state power was too conducive to a strife that would unravel back to the state of nature to be countenanced.

  3. international

    Monarchical absolutism has been on the wane for centuries, but arguments over the nature and justification of limits on popular sovereignty are still live in some cases. Ought popular sovereignty to override the public/private divide, and what limits ought there to be on how a state can act in respect of minorities? What role is there for judicial review of government decisions? In each of these cases, an argument arises for restrictions on the power of the state in international and domestic law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *