Democracy

commonwealth was the most effective for the seventeenth and 18th century. The province chose who the leader was, and they had match rights. They had a lot much liberty than Absolutism. Absolutism had atomic number 53 ruler that had rules on exactly what you voltaic pile and cannot do. You were basically told what to do your whole life.             Absolutism didnt fend for themselves, they were scared and didnt know what to do. The people were feared of their king and didnt indispensability to disobey him. The king was the only one who had render in what went on, and everyone listened to his command. The king also thought that God told him what to do. They had no rights and no freedom, if they didnt listen to the king, then they would be executed.              land defended each other and protected all their rights. They were free, equal, and independent. All the governances were together, retributory now they separated into three branches , Executive, Legislative, and Judicial.

They are way more unionised and actually know what they are doing. This is why I would look with commonwealth, because they are a better form of government than despotism. Who would you involve as your government, one that will kill you if you striket do exactly what you are told to do? unity that doesnt defend you and keep you safe? Or one that gives you equal rights and freedom? Many people might gradient with absolutism and others will side with democracy, but in my tone democracy was the most effective in the seventeenth and eighteenth century.If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay