Absolutism and Constitutionalism

What are the merits of Absolutism and what are the merits of Constitutionalism? The word merit is relative, however in this case, it relates to how the people can benefit from either form of government. According to John Locke, Constitutionalism is “…to be directed to no other end but the peace, safety, and public good of the people” (82). Generally speaking, Constitutionalism has a more positive connotation than Absolutism because people associate constitutionalism with the idea of free will. However, there can never be total free will in a collective effort. Locke actually does not approve of the idea of total free will, “…the enjoyment of it is very uncertain…very unsafe, very insecure” (80). Locke addresses the states of Nature and why they are and can be destructive. “…passion and revenge is very apt to carry them too far…negligence and unconcernedness, makes them too remiss in other men’s…They who by an injustice offended will seldom fail where they are able by force to make good their injustice” (80-81). In addition, Locke does not view men coalescing to make a constitutionalist government as giving up one’s rights, but rather the opposite, proclaiming that it indirectly preserves them instead, “…give up equality, liberty, and executive power they had in the state of Nature…the power of the…legislative constituted by them can never be supposed to extend farther than the common good…obliged to secure every one’s property by providing against…mentioned that made the state of Nature so unsafe and uneasy” (82). On the other hand, Absolutism deals with the idea that the people are doing themselves a favor by giving up their rights for the sake of peace. Hobbes recognizes the weakness of man, and has found a solution in which a society may thrive, “So that in the nature of man we find three principal causes of quarrel. First, competition; second, diffidence; thirdly, glory” (82). There may be a misconception that Hobbes means for Absolutism to refer to one person, by him or herself, making every single decision that he/she deems right. However, this is not true, “…every subject is by this institution author of all the action and judgments of the sovereign instituted” (84). Hobbes refers to the sovereign instituted not as a person, but rather as a symbol, symbolic for all of the people. Absolutism and Constitutionalism are in fact very similar in many ways, despite being considered two forms of government on the opposite sides of the spectrum. Hobbes and Locke have instituted them in order to be beneficial towards the people collectively, and both include the factor of pleasing and making compromises according to the people’s wants, attempting to stray away from the evil nature of men.
What do you think gave rise to Constitutionalism given the historical precedent and tradition of European monarchs? Constitutionalism was developed and adopted primarily in England and Holland. Locke’s principles limited the ruler’s power, “John Locke justified the rights of liberty and property as over against government and society” (80). Constitutionalism was especially desirable in England because it essentially gave Parliament even more power. From James I to the reign of Mary and William II, Parliament was always present, just varying in its degree of power. Furthermore, even Cromwell could not fully shake off Parliament’s hold. The Glorious Revolution of 1688 would also contribute to the rise of Constitutionalism, since the Bill of Rights was essentially a direct result from it, giving Parliament more power. Most European monarchs were generally absolutists, however, due to Parliament’s increasing power, Constitutionalism eventually took the place of absolutism in select countries.