1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
kenny6666 [7]
2 years ago
9

Political philosophies helped shape the foundations of American government. Many strongly believed that government should be in

the hands of the governed. What is your philosophy? Do you agree with the many who believe that government should be in the hand of the people or do you think having a king or queen is a better choice?
History
2 answers:
Goshia [24]2 years ago
7 0

The question asks, "What is YOUR philosophy?"  I can't really tell you what YOU should think ... but I can present for you the ideas of a couple different political philosophers who took opposing stands on the issue.

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were both English philosophers who wrote during the 17th century.  

Hobbes published a famous work called <em>Leviathan </em>in 1651.  The title "Leviathan" comes from a biblical word for a great and mighty beast.  Hobbes believed government is formed by people for the sake of their personal security and stability in society.  In Hobbes view, once the people put a king (or other leader in power), then that leader needs to have supreme power (like a great and mighty beast).    The people are too divided and too volatile as individuals -- everyone looking out for his own interests.  So for security and stability, authority and the power of the law needs to be in the hands of a powerful ruler like a king or queen.  That was Hobbes' view.

John Locke famously published <em>Two Treatises on Civil Government </em>in 1690.  According to Locke's view, a government's power to govern comes from the consent of the people themselves -- those who are to be governed.  This was a change from the previous ideas of "divine right monarchy" -- that a king ruled because God appointed him to be the ruler.  Locke repudiated the views of divine right monarchy in his <em>First Treatise on Civil Government. </em> In his <em>Second Treatise on Civil Government, </em> Locke argued for the rights of the people to create their own governments according to their own desires and for the sake of protecting their own life, liberty, and property.  Locke always favored the people remaining in charge, and asserted that the people have the power to change their government and remove government leaders if the government is not properly serving the needs and well-being of the people.  

As you write your own answer to this question for your class, you will want to decide, perhaps, if you agree more with Hobbes, that security and stability are most important ... or with Locke, that the authority and liberty of the people are always paramount.

mr_godi [17]2 years ago
3 0
When the declaration of independence was made they basically tried to have philosopher of freedom in it like John Locke. He helped shape the ideas of freedom like he said divine rights ( the power of being a king or queen is given by god) he said that was incorrect that the people gave them the right to be king or queen. He thought that the people can over throw the king if they don't go through parliament and if the government becomes destructive. The government should get overthrown if ithe doesn't help with the people's needs.
You might be interested in
Byzantine Emperor Justinian's MOST significant political accomplishment was
Marianna [84]
<span>A) codifying Roman law. </span>
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
List and explain the six goals of the preamble
AlladinOne [14]
1. form a more perfect Union
2. establish Justice
3. insure domestic Tranquility
4. provide for the common defense
5. promote the general Welfare
<span>6. secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity

i cant explain  very well but  here they are 

</span>
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Imperialism is the building block of colonialism
hram777 [196]
That statement is true

Imperialism is a policy to extend a nation's influence toward another nation, and colonialism is an act to politically control another country so they can exploit its economy.
So we can conclude that in order to achieve imperialism goals, colonialism is needed to be done by that imperialist nation.
8 0
2 years ago
What do you think the importance of how political speech You seen in our system
olya-2409 [2.1K]

Political speech is important in our system because the country (AKA America) runs off of political views and opinions

7 0
3 years ago
The temperance movement warned people of the____.
RUDIKE [14]

Answer:

the answer is : dangers of alcohol

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • How did industrialization and immigration influence of living and working conditions in the urban in royal areas in the late 180
    10·1 answer
  • Why did Japan invade Manchuria in 1931?
    11·1 answer
  • Question 1 of 10
    8·1 answer
  • He Native Americans were friendly with the colonists when they first came. true or false.
    9·2 answers
  • Why were so many workers needed during the industrialization period
    9·2 answers
  • Explaining the Japanese philosophy of life reflected in Architecture? Illustrated through example tools.
    8·1 answer
  • The era of the "cottage industry" was rendered mostly obsolete by
    7·1 answer
  • Uiygugybyugbuygyuguygbiuhhiu<br>dedcdwc<br>qa
    9·1 answer
  • Why were women violated and why do you think women would want to fight against women violation? .
    9·1 answer
  • What is several peoples or nations brought together under one rule
    11·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!