The Glorious Political Revolution

The excellent Political alterationIn the flying subsequentlymath following the change of 1688-1689 conjuration Locke discusses the enter by which politicss were ab initio created. That is, their function in order is to protect the property that came into existence finished human labor. Furthermore he lay outs that because giving medications were created to serve the needs of massive deal, the nation in that locationof served as a necessary and legitimate check on the billet of the sove regulation (32). In essence g overnment is an essential conduit of the people it rules, and hence must be aligned with a nations best sakis in mind. Addition completelyy, it is critical that these interests be in lieu with the wants and needs of those governed. though from a semi semipolitical standpoint, the process by which groups of people halt collective decisions often involving complaisant relations involving intrigue to gain authority or power is at times, historic eit hery speaking, flawed. Several ideological standpoints help to distinguish the storied novelty of 1688-89 as a political calibration of authority to better lawsuit the needs of the slope people. though the known Revolution marks gelid innovations and advancements in religion, economics, and fo freety policy it is arguable that the developments of the sociopolitical dis rowing from before and after the rotation were facilitated by the adjustment in authority. In its most grassroots form, the Revolution was a testament of the English nation to realign the desires of its citizens with its rulers. Though the extent to which the items that took place between 1688-1689 de billet a revolution per record atomic number 18 debatable, it is suffice to say that thither was severe dissonance passim England leading to this rate of flow.Monarchial absolutism is susceptible to corruption. When a king has no matchless to answer to but perfection, where do checks and balances ascend i nto play? Seemingly enough, in the count ons of Thomas Cartw skilful in A Defense of pack IIs View of the Constitution, tis perfection al unmatched who can take vengeance upon him (72). To fully understand the maturation of the Glorious Revolution it is pivotal to recount the events and notions that spurned such a unique occurrence. An amalgam of socio-political and religious issues formed the foundation of what would become the Glorious Revolution. It is significant to keep in mind the discourse of the times. That is, religiously speaking, England was preponderantly Protestant. To have a Catholic king would provoke a lot dissent. previous to the Revolution, on that point existed a motif of general distrust between the monarchs in power and English citizens. Though Charles IIs reign was met with praise from m all in 1660, several(prenominal) had suspicions of the Stuarts religious practices. Their suspicions were confirmed by Charles refuge of the Secret treaty of Dover wit h Louie XIV. Additionally, it was common knowledge that Charles heir and brother, pile II, was a devout Catholic. Charles II exacerbated the situation by abstaining with parliament, tolerating Roman Catholics, and favoring alliances with Catholic European forces. later Charles IIs death in 1865, crowd together II ascended the thr genius upon which he instituted several unpopular reforms that however lowered his standing end-to-end the nation. Furthermore, his absolutist governing came under attack by his illegitimate nephew jam Duke of Monmouth. The Duke was unable to sit enough support amongst the noblemans and gentry since he portrayed his rebellion solely as a war of religion. Steven Pincus discusses how the lesson of the previous century of European invoice was that of wars of religion furthermore these battles only resulted in massive bloodshed and political confusion (13). Unfortunately for the Duke of Monmouth, this resulted in his bloodshed and the slaughter of a ll those that conspired with him. Upon oppress the rebellion pack II argued the need for a standing army. His institution of Catholic tolerance in the Test Act from Charles II reign and imposition of the First and Second Declarations of Indulgence gained him the distrust of even the noble Tories. Those that wouldnt bend to his go away were either ousted or removed from positions of power.Though James regime seems to revolve around the issue of religion, the political substance of his actions is uncanny. James intrusive and oftentimes imposing methods of governing garnered him many enemies as certify by accounts of Englishmen of the time. Pincus discusses how the Glorious Revolution was not a war of religion. sort of it was a political struggle in which the rights and material welf ar of the people were at stake (31). The final stalking seems to originate from the birth of James son the Catholic heir. Fears of another absolutist Catholic regime sparked panic in the warmths of many. No more would English citizens stand dupe to opusal obstructions. It is fair to conclude that James IIs short reign was tatterdemalion with tyrannical despotism. This marks a critical flaw in pre-revolutionary English government. The appointment of a monarch who, according to Thomas Cartwright, answers only to God is a recipe for corruption. Though, it is not absurd that a monarchs reign could be benign and beneficial for a nation, James II, by Pincus account, seems to be the chromatic of a corrupt absolutist. It is important to understand that the revolution of 1688-89 was a carrefour of necessity. The trends that followed the monarchial system were counterproductive. Forward, in that location emerges besides another motif regarding the sentiment towards James rule. This motif highlights the common opinion regarding necessity to govern with national interests at the fore bearing of all else. Interestingly enough this was causa for unity amongst all classes. Though J ames regime was marred with obstructions on mans sacred rights, he was able to unify England under a common cause. Unfortunately for James, it was not in his best interest.The fundamental benefit from any unfortunate pass is the knowledge gained to prevent its future occurrence. Pincus is very convincing in his digest of James IIs reign as a harsh despot. Though on the same token, his account of the buildup to the Glorious Revolution accounts for the developing sentiments amongst English citizens throughout James reign. Richard Price, in A Celebration of the Revolution of 1688-1689, discusses the function of well-bred government as an institution of human prudence for guarding our persons, our property, and our good come upon against invasion Obedience, therefore, to the laws and to magistrates, is a necessary expression of our regard to the community (50). He goes on to discuss three principles on which the revolution was founded First, the right to self-sufficiency of consci ence in religious matters. Secondly, the right to resist power when twist aroundd. And, thirdly, the right to choose our own governors to cashier them for misconduct and to frame a government for ourselves (50). Like in the post revolutionary writings by John Locke, Price divulges on the function of government as an institution to helper the masses. Furthermore, Price discusses when political reformation is necessary. By his word, obstruction of these sentiments accounts for upheaval of those in charge. We see the recurrence of the motif highlighting the significance of public interest in governmental procedure. However, the most significant premises he highlights are the principles that define the sacred right of mankind. These define the precedent by which revolution is legitimate. With this in mind, the birth of James IIs heir seemed to be a one of several unifying factors in ousting James II. This final straw facilitated action throughout England as highlighted by the Invitat ion of the Seven to the Prince of Orange.Understanding the significance of the childs birth, Seven Whig and Tory noblemen pleaded to the Dutch prince William, and his wife Mary (the Protestant daughter of James) to come to England and seize control of the pennant. They suggested this on the premise that William would have practically exclusive support from the gentry and nobles your Highness may be assured there are nineteen parts of twenty of the people throughout the commonwealth who are desirous of a change, and who we believe would willingly contribute (38). This text file is incredibly significant in that it demonstrates the English sentiment towards James IIs absolutist/Catholic rule. In a united effort these noblemen took the opening night to plug Englands political situation with the help of Prince William. Yet, the risks they took to even write this letter were extreme. Had they been caught by James II, they most certainly would be liable for treason. Yet until now the desperation these men faced was fuel enough for them to take this risk. The people are so generally dissatisfied with the present conduct of the government in relation to their religion, liberties, and properties (all of which have been greatly invaded), and they are in such expectations of their prospects being daily worse (38). It is important to note two inferences from this letter. First, that the 7 men were Whigs and Tories. This indicates that the general consensus, even with the Tories, was to strip James of his power. And second this letter highlights the developing shift of power from absolute monarchy to control monarchy. Yet, a way of life to force a monarch to follow the laws of man was still a necessity. Growing sentiment against James II inspired many to headland the efficiency of absolutism as evidenced by the letter from the noblemen. Socrates one time said Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. In this movement it is understandable tha t the English citizens had more than they could tolerate when it came to monarchial corruption. Undoubtedly, with this in mind, political reformation was imminent.. It is crucial to note, that the shift in power that eventually took place was not the result of many violent struggles. Rather it was a united front fueled by the fervor of the English citizens to reassert dominion over their nation. Based on these accounts it is understandable that the English people were taking initiative to establish a legitimate representative order. Though the reasons for the Glorious Revolution were socio-political and religious, the true temperament of the revolution undoubtedly revolved around politics. later on all, the reassertion of power by William III was the key factor in facilitating any progress. William IIIs arrival marked the fall of James regime. The revolution was dubbed Glorious on the footing that relatively little blood was shed in the transfer of power. Francis Barrington and B enjamin Steeles A Letter Describing the Revolution to Thomas Goodwin and Kinnard Delabere is an account of the astounding nature of this revolution. neer anything happened with so many amazing passel as this hath done the bonding of the spirits of people so universally one way, nay even the minds of persons whose long differing with each other be reconciled and all without the loss of 50 men on all sides makes it the most astonishing alteration that ever yet befell any one part of the universe (45). The general sentiment against James II was grounds to unify England in an effort to oust his corrupt regime. This, among all else, seems to be most accountable for the bloodless nature of the revolution. England was united under William IIIs reign and as Price recalled the rights of the people were asserted, a tyrant expelled, and a sovereign of our own choice appointed in his room. On most accounts, England was victorious. However, frequently work still needed to be done.William II Is dominion denotes a period of reform as highlighted by the shift from absolute monarchy to a limited monarchy. Pincus notes how historians understand the revolution as an event that restored Englands ancient polity and Englands Protestant religion. Englands revolution was restorative not innovative, conservative not radical yet this is very debatable (6). The question at hand is whether the values and policies select after the revolution were indigenous ones or imposed from outside. Essentially this fate of history represents a hybrid return to the fundamentals of old English Government with advancements concurrent to the times. Though reform was developed on the basis of the wants and needs of the English people, their monarch was from the Netherlands, one of the most tolerant nations of the time. How could there not be strange influences on policy based on this premise? As Pincus states This was not the same England from Charles Is regime. On this principle it is recognisable that a large shift in the status quo between the monarchy, parliament, and society had occurred. According to Pincus England had new rulers who, it appeared were placed on the throne by the will of the English people (3). Essentially the revolution represented the victory of parliament over a king moreover a victory for the people. In personnel the development of several policies limited the nature of princely authority (3). Yet the essence of the Revolution lay in the Declaration of Rights and the eyeshade of Rights(3). These documents defined the relationship between the monarch and subjects. Not only did it rampart any future Catholic succession to the throne, but it declared the royal legislative and executive powers illegal, and furthermore forbade the jacket crown from levying taxation or maintaining a standing army in peacetime without parliamentary consent. These provisions were offered and accepted by William and Mary. These declarations from the two houses of fantan outline the extralegal policies of James II and taboo future kings and queens from repeating the transgressions. It is significant to state that these declarations were not claiming to make new laws, but declaring old laws. In effect we see a milestone in English history and an essential shift in power from the monarch to fantan. From here on the ascendancy of Parliament was never successfully contended. It is safe to assume that based on this argument, the establishment of Parliament as the supreme power was indeed the catalyst that helped spurn much growth in many spectrums including religion, economics, and social development.It is necessary to compare the assorted modes of thought that originate from before and after the Glorious Revolution. Thomas Cartwrights A Defense of James IIs View of the Constitution provides a defense for the rights of the crown during the reign of James II. In James justification, Cartwright gives an account by which the crown may rule. As a high chu rchmen, Cartwright discusses how the king, without question, may follow any religion and pass any decree on the sole premise that they wear the crown, for the king answers to no one but God. without catechizing him for be his heart inclinable to any religion, or none, it leaves him no rival none but the great God, can over-rule him (72). Yet, ultimately, he fuels his argument on the premise of the kings absolute power. the mightiness was the number 1, and must be the last judge too for if the people be judge, he is no monarch at all and so leave of absence all government. Cartwrights analysis is developed from a biased perspective. As a high churchman he maintains the traditional definitions of authority. Essentially high churchmen were super intolerant, and they believed that people had no right to challenge the right of the monarchial authority. Just as the essence of the revolution is characterized by the words of the Bill of Rights, the essence of James reign is epitomized in Cartwrights analysis. He blatantly states how the kings decisions outweigh the desires and preferences of not only Parliament but the people of England as a whole. Based on Cartwrights perception of the crown, one can understand the extent to which James agree based on his treacherous regime. In analyzing William IIIs Declaration it is understandable why the people favored his rule, even prior to the ratification of the Bill of Rights. It is twain certain and evident to all men that the public peace and felicity of any state or kingdom cannot be preserved where the laws, liberties and custom established, by the lawful authority in it, are openly transgressed and annulled (39). William was of course speaking of James IIs reign. Furthermore, he declares the necessity of Parliamentary involvement to restitution the situation. The last and great remedy for all those evils is the calling of a Parliament(41). William III was the embodiment of necessity. He fit the profile to fill th e suspension that James would leave. It is important to note once again the peaceful nature of the Glorious Revolution. Had the citizens of England flourished under James rule the circumstances would most emphatically be different, but they werent.This bloodless revolution was at its core a demonstration of the nations desire for reform. Though historians argue that the Glorious Revolution was not in fact a revolution. Edmund Burke in The Significance of the Revolution of 1688-1689 suggests that The Revolution was made to preserve our ancient indisputable laws and liberties, and that ancient constitution of government which is our only security for law and liberty and therefore cannot be distinguished as a revolution. Rather it was a restorative event in that it reestablished the ideals already set forth by the English constitution. Though this argument is vaild, it is flawed in the sense that the Glorious Revolution brought nearly reforms that grounded Parliament as the primary authority. This in effect brings about the crisscross theory in that the events that occurred from 1688-1689 recalibrated English politics as a whole. The major distinguishing factor, as Colley Cibber notes, is that these rights were given substance. Legal guarantees meant little if the king was able to cut the law. A theory of limited monarchy did not constrain the king if he was not obliged in practice as well as in theory to convene Parliament (17, 49). The major distinguishing factor, as Pincus argues, are three revolutionary changes that had the combined effect of compelling English kings to be limited monarchs the radical reorientation of English foreign policy, the English political economy, and the Church of England. These revolutionary changes are what distinguish the Revolution of 1688-1689 as the first modern revolution (17). The key point here being that there indeed was a revolution. It is arguable that from the seditious nature of James rule that the English people would never let such occurrences happen again. muniment would not repeat itself.The function of government is to protect the rights of those governed. Furthermore it is up to those in control to respect the wants and needs of citizens. James IIs rule was marred with tyranny on the premise of divine countenance. The socio-political discourse of the time suggests that there were no checks on the sovereign authority of James II. In effect there was blatant dissonance between the desires of citizens and that of the king. The Glorious Revolution was a revolution from a political standpoint in that there was a direct shift in power from monarchial absolutism to Parliamentary dominion. In conducting his absolutist regime James II was able to unify a nation. Unfortunately for him, he was the force they aimed to relinquish. Though historians like Edmund Burke argue that there was really no revolution, never before had England reached such an legal societal stratification. That is, the stat us quo was in favor of Parliament, and no longer could monarchs abuse the power they were entrusted by God. Pincus account of the Glorious Revolution as a political revolution is accurate in that there were extreme adjustments in more than just constitutional policies. Though post -revolutionary England was revolutionized on the fronts of foreign policy, economics, and religion the major reform that facilitated these events stemmed from the reassertion of political dominance. in the long run the English state was radically altered for the better, but it is essential to note the means by which this occurred. That is, by the will of the English citizens. In a united effort they eliminated the constraints of absolutism, and achieved revolution by their own terms. The term Glorious is perfect in that it exemplifies the state of things following the events of the revolution.