Political ScienceEssay Preview: Political ScienceReport this essayWho was Montesquieu ?Montesquieu was born on January 18th, 1689 in La Brède. Montesquieu is a political thinker and a moralist, a precursor of the sociology, a philosopher and a French writer during the enlighment periods. When he was a young man, he was fascinated by the sciences. In 1721, Montesquieu publishes anonymously in the book Persian Letters a short story which talks about the French society seen by exotic Persians. He travels then in Europe and stays one year in England where he observes the constitutional and parliamentary monarchy which replaced the autocratic monarchy. When he returned in his castle of La Brède in the South of Bordeaux, he dedicates itself to his important works which associate story and political philosophy. Moreover, He is famous for his articulation of the theory of separation of powers, taken for granted in modern discussions of government and implemented in many constitutions throughout the world. Montesquieu is considered amongst the precursors of anthropology, like Herodotus and Tacitus, to be among the first to extend comparative methods of classification to the political forms in human societies. Montesquieus most influential and important work was to divide French society into three classes as the monarchy, the aristocracy, and the commons. In 1728, Montesquieu has been elected to the French academy. When he returned to France in 1732, he published Considerations on the causes of the greatness of Roman and their decline, where he tells the history of Roman Empire. Montesquieu died in 1755 in Paris, affected by the yellow fever.
What is The Enlightenment and what happen? The Enlightenment is the period in Western philosophy and intellectual, scientific and cultural life, during the eighteenth century, in which reason was encouraged as the primary source for legitimacy and authority. Developing at the same time in France, Great Britain, Netherlands, Italy, Portugal, and Spain. Most of Europe was caught up, including the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Russia, and Scandinavia, along with Latin America in influencing the Haitian Revolution. The authors of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, the American Declaration of Independence, the United States Bill of Rights, were motivated by Enlightenment principles. The Enlightenment was less a set of ideas than it was a set of values. At its centre was a critical questioning of traditional institutions, morals,
s, and ideals, and their application to human life.
Praetorian philosopher and Enlightenment scholar Ézard Saint-Jacques saw a world in which reason was to be accepted, but not condemned, to authority, authority was the result of social action. He was the principal thinker and critic of the French Enlightenment.
There is more to the French Revolution than what we see in the films about it. There is a lot that comes from it. For the most part the revolutionary and reactionary movements in France and Europe have been peaceful and without violent ideologies and politics; the revolutions of other European nations have not.
It is necessary that we look at how the Revolutionary Government has been led by popular leaders and that these leaders were not a product of a privileged or corrupt political tradition, but of a man or a politician. No amount of reform in the new order is enough as that is what ultimately led to the revolution, a new order that was based around rational, democratic and democratic practices, and values that, at the time of its creation, did not seem to be consistent with any of them. For example, the revolution took place in Paris where the king, the duke of Parma, the king of Castile and the chief of the military staff refused to recognize the monarchy in their respective states with a proposal he did not consider fair. The King of Castile and, for some reason, the duke of Castile were not able to agree to such demands.
France was divided. The people saw their state is the crown over all others. The new government was in a situation to be governed by the people and the new government was to be supported only by the king’s men. The new government was based on the assumption that the people had no right to take action and that only they would have the power to govern their own state as well as through their state’s internal lawmaking and laws. This attitude did not work, in essence. The people thought that the monarch was not acting in the people’s interest. Rather, it was a necessary condition for their political power and the king had to impose his authority upon the King himself. The people also thought that it was an economic and political mistake and a social or spiritual error to have made these political demands.
The French Revolution and the state were not simply economic in nature; they were very much like revolutions. The Revolution did not mean the fall of the French Empire. It was a reaction against an economic, political, religious world in which social and economic powers of the people would dominate one another, especially in the fields of economics, education and the military and the arts, leading to a rise in inequality and conflict. The Revolution was aimed at creating a situation in which the wealthy and powerful wanted to control and consolidate their power. While it did not eliminate any of these conflicts, it did help to lead to increased competition. In the course of this process there was an overall increase in the income of the elite, which led to the rise of the working class. In the hands of these elite there also were some of the most ruthless warlords on earth.
There were numerous people who fought valiantly in the first five years of the Revolution, and who were in the last few years fighting the great revolutionary forces on both sides. A lot of these people had very weak positions that were a deterrent to many of those people fighting in vain, and who only used their positions to make them stronger and less