When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no lib
erty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner. –Baron de Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws, 1748 According to Montesquieu, what would happen in an absolute monarchy? Laws could not be enacted. Citizens could lose their freedom. Tyranny would be avoided. Powers would be limited.
The correct answer is B. Citizens could lose their freedom
Explanation:
Absolute monarchy implies the monarch has unlimited or unrestricted power, which often leads to citizens' oppression and tyranny because there are no organizations or branches of government that can protect citizens. This idea is explained by Montesquieu as he states united powers exerted by the same person lead to apprehensions and lack of liberty "there can be no liberty; because apprehensions may arise". Moreover, Montesquieu explains an absolute monarch would create and enact tyrannical laws according to his interests "should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner." In this context, one of the consequences of this government is the loss of freedom (option B).
i'm not well rehearsed in the boxer rebellion but im pretty sure it showed to the european powers that china was to big to be simply colonized and if they do decide to colonize china it would fall pretty fast im not entirely sure but this is what i think :)
