Absolutism And The American Revolution
The 18th and 19th century is characterised by political thought derived from the Enlightenment Era, popularised by the likes of John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. It is during this period that the American, French and Haitian Revolutions occurred, all taking inspiration from the context of the time. Whilst, these revolutions all found commonality in the Enlightenment Era, the American Revolution undoubtedly acted as a muse for French and Haitian revolutionary political thinkers as they all followed the foundational principles of the American Revolution. The blueprint exists when regarding reoccurring themes of Republicanism as a replacement for monarchism as a means to ensure the rule of law, natural rights and the importance of constitutionalism.
…show more content…
In this work, he emphasised the irreconcilable differences between monarchism and the rule of law, stating that “in America, the law is king. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law is king; and there ought to be no other.” In the presence of a monarchy, it would be impossible to ensure utmost respect for the law as there will always be individuals – fuelled by hereditary succession, that operate above it. In the name of fairness and equality, the American Revolution took place in 1775. Such anti-monarchist sentiments were also reflected in the political thought of French revolutionaries like Emmanuel-Joseph Sieyès who argued in his 1789 ‘What is the Third Estate?’ that under King Louis XVI, the rule of law could not be established. This was the case because what he called the ‘First and Second Estates’, comprised of clergymen and the nobility, enjoyed heightened political privileges despite doing little to contribute to the productivity of French society. This posed the issue of an imbalance of power. He pointed out that that law in France was present to penalise the commoners (majority) and to protect the clergymen and nobility (minority). Thomas Paine – in his 1791 ‘Rights of Man’ holds that the French Revolution was moral in its removal of the monarch as “monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of the sins of the Jews, for which a curse in reserve is denounced against them.” This shows commonality between the issues discussed by American and French political thinkers, although presented with different social groups with respect to the variation in these
In this work, he emphasised the irreconcilable differences between monarchism and the rule of law, stating that “in America, the law is king. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law is king; and there ought to be no other.” In the presence of a monarchy, it would be impossible to ensure utmost respect for the law as there will always be individuals – fuelled by hereditary succession, that operate above it. In the name of fairness and equality, the American Revolution took place in 1775. Such anti-monarchist sentiments were also reflected in the political thought of French revolutionaries like Emmanuel-Joseph Sieyès who argued in his 1789 ‘What is the Third Estate?’ that under King Louis XVI, the rule of law could not be established. This was the case because what he called the ‘First and Second Estates’, comprised of clergymen and the nobility, enjoyed heightened political privileges despite doing little to contribute to the productivity of French society. This posed the issue of an imbalance of power. He pointed out that that law in France was present to penalise the commoners (majority) and to protect the clergymen and nobility (minority). Thomas Paine – in his 1791 ‘Rights of Man’ holds that the French Revolution was moral in its removal of the monarch as “monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of the sins of the Jews, for which a curse in reserve is denounced against them.” This shows commonality between the issues discussed by American and French political thinkers, although presented with different social groups with respect to the variation in these