Baron de Montesquieu
Baron de Montesquieu was born Charles Louis de secondat at La Brède, near Bordeaux, France on January 19, 1689 to a wealthy family. His father was a soldier and his mother died when he was seven years old. At the age of eleven he was sent to Oratorian Collège de Juilly, at Meaux. In 1716 he inherited from his uncle the title Baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu and the office of President à Mortier in the Parliament of Bordeaux, which was at the time chiefly a judicial and administrative body. In his five years in Paris he developed an intense dislike for the style of life in the capital (rich and/ or of the church), later expressed in his Persian Letters, which brought him approval of the public and displeasure of the governor. . In 1725 he sold his life interest in his office and resigned from the Parliament. In 1728 he was elected to the Académie Française, despite some religious opposition, and shortly thereafter left France to travel abroad. After visiting Italy, Germany, Austria, and other countries, he went to England, where he lived for two years. He was greatly impressed with the English political system, and drew on his observations of it in his later work. He died in Paris in 1755 of a fever.
Types of government
He believed that there were three types of government: the republican, which can take a democratic or aristocratic form; the monarchical; and despotic government. In a democratic government the people are the sovereign, and may govern through ministers, or being advised by a senate. The people hold the power of choosing the ministers and senators for themselves. “The love of the laws and of our country” is the political virtue of the principle of democracy. He believed that a democracy must educate its citizens to identify their interests with the interests of their country. In an aristocracy, one part of the people governs the rest. An aristocratic government’s principle is moderation. The laws should be designed to instill and protect this spirit of moderation, and in order to do so the laws must do three things. First, the laws must prevent the nobility from abusing the people. Second, the laws should disguise as much as possible the difference between the nobility and the people, so that the people feel their lack of power as little as possible. Finally, the laws should try to ensure equality among the nobles themselves, and among noble families. When they fail to do so, the nobility will lose its spirit of moderation, and the government will be corrupted. In a monarchy, one person governs by fixed and established laws. These laws should be designed to preserve their power. The principle of a monarchy government is honor. In despotic government a single person directs everything by his own will and caprice. There are no laws to ensure his power or preserve that of the people. A despot can do whatever he wants. The despotism principle is fear. Education is not necessary.
Religious toleration
Montesquieu believed that one might readily imagine that conflict between religions is generated by differences between religions — the more differences and the more religions there are, the more conflict we will see. Disagreement, however, is not the same as conflict and warfare. Disagreement does not need to lead to human suffering — individuals are all very different and have their disagreements, but they aren’t all at war with one another. As the Baron de Montesquieu notes, there is an extra ingredient to these conflicts which propels the situation forward into something worse, namely the assumption on the part of one (although also sometimes both) that it should be “in charge” in some fashion. For Montesquieu, the focus of religious wars is not simply disagreement but, rather, intolerance — the inability for one religion to tolerate the fact that not only do other religions exist, but that there are those who have the temerity to actually follow those religions. Every religion teaches that it is right, of course — can you imagine any philosophy or ideology that teaches it is wrong? The problem lies in how strong the assertion is made. Many, if not most, religions go so far as to teach that they are absolutely right and that no other religion is right at all. By making the error of others into a fundamental doctrine, it becomes very difficult to also teach that others deserve to be respected in their beliefs .Even many atheists succumb to the idea that, first, their position is without question correct and, second, that those who disagree with them are therefore somehow less worthy of consideration and respect. Intolerance and disrespect of others is by no means limited to theists or religionists — arrogant attitudes seem to be common in all of humanity. Unfortunately, such arrogance and intolerance readily lead to much worse. It is when one religion (or other ideology) further teaches that only it really deserves to be accorded recognition by the governing powers that internal conflict is inevitable. Adherents of other beliefs won’t sit by and let their rights be trampled upon and the dominant group isn’t going to let the others get away with spreading their errors.
Human Nature
Man in the state of nature is primarily motivated by fear and other passions, but he is no necessarily ruled by them. Moreover, man is cognizant of the laws of nature which are “rooted” in the “constitution” of all human beings. Montesquieu argues that man is capable of grasping four laws of nature through direct, practical experience: first, man desires and seeks nourishment for his bodily preservation; second, man desires peace to sustain his bodily well-being; third, man is drawn instinctively to other people; and fourth, the knowledge derived from interaction with others moves him to desire to live in society. In the establishment of society, and consequently in the establishment of government and law, Montesquieu asserts that no single form government is always and everywhere superior. Instead, those who seek to govern must take into account the geography, economy, character, and existing laws of the people for whom the government is to be established. In such an endeavor, Montesquieu insists, both prudence and moderation are requisite.
Education
Montesquieu believed that the laws of education are the first impressions we receive; anis they prepare us for civil life, every private family ought to be governed by the plan of that great household which comprehends them all. The laws of education will be therefore different in each species of governments: in monarchies they will have honor for their object; in republics, virtue; and in despotic, fear. In a monarchy the principal branch of education is not taught in colleges or academies. It commences at our setting out in the world; for this is the school of what we call honor, that universal preceptor which ought everywhere to be our guide. In a despotic government the aim for education is to debase it. Here it must necessarily be servile; even in power such an education will be an advantage, because every tyrant is at the same time a slave. In a republican government the whole power of education is required. The fear of despotic governments naturally arises of itself amidst threats and punishments; the honor of monarchies is favored by the peasants, and favors them in its turn; but virtue is a self-renunciation, which is ever arduous and painful.

The relationship of government to the individual, and vice versa The relationship of the government is to maintain law and order, political liberty, and the property of the individual. Montesquieu opposed the absolute monarchy of his home country and favored the English system as the best model of government. The relationship of the individual to the government is to elect those who they entrust with the authority to represent them.