Answer:
The answer is detailed in the explanation;
Explanation:
<u><em>
Dear Sir, Jhon Locke;
</em></u>
With my sincere words I do not intend to change his ideals of reform but I do intend to be heard on the basis of the experience of the human being and what characterizes him, it is well known that the man without law is an irrational being incapable of restraining his impulses and actions Likewise, ambition, greed for power causes divisions and doubts to be sown and the fracture of power occurs, that is why an absolute monarchy where absolute power and responsibility falls on only that supreme being already chosen of impartial way to impartially govern all kinds of people without any preference to either side, for me it is and surely being the ideal form of government.
<em><u>Respected Sir; Thomas hobbe
:</u></em>
Considering his arguments, I find a heartfelt contradiction; if the power corrupts the human being who by natural tendency is given to ambition and greed; How can absolute power and responsibility be left to govern and educate an entire people in the hands of one man?
Really, in an absolute monarchy there is no freedom, there is no democracy, we need to work as a team to help each other to balance power, although it is true that two heads think more than one, being in a position of responsibility and knowing that we have that answering for our acts before the laws or branches of power causes us to be more cautious when making decisions that could affect our nation, our actions have consequences and a bad control of absolute power undoubtedly brings total chaos.
B. it gave the people a voice in political decisions.
The answer to this would be C. The other two would not make sense or fit for the time period. Also c is true, just learned this in history too!
The answer is B - they wanted it for trading
