Student Paper SP001-06
Spring 2000, Section I
Reviewer Comments

Human Progress

 

The 17^th century through the 18^th century England and France struggled to find suitable forms of government. During this time period many changes were made between the common man and the hierarchy. The change in human progress in these two counties began because of the increasing industry and the influential philosophies on the way of life and government.

 

In England and France the industry increased steadily, which increased the wealth of the common man. Both countries having family royalty as the political institutions meant benefits to the monarchy. The monarchy had all the power over the people in these countries. The monarchy had the power to tax, the power of property, and the power to establish the religion at the time. The increasing industry brought in more money to the country, which meant more money to the king. The social hierarchy sought their privileges and local interest. Most of the money was spent on foolish parties or wanted goods for royalty. The citizens were deprived of much of the money and the status of the country was not developing. The population at the beginning of this time period was mostly very poor. The selfishness portrayed by the monarchy resulted in distrustment and the loss of respect from the people of these counties. The increasing industry and increasing wealth of the people effected changes in the political way of life that would acknowledge more rights to the people.

 

Human progress was greatly influenced by philosophers at this time. In England, the philosopher John Locke proposed his ideals on how he thought the structure of government should be. His view was targeted on the nature of man. The document explains the state of perfect freedom and equality. People having equal powers and advantages. John's explains in sect. 6 "The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions." My interpretation is of equal people making laws together as a group and if there is fault in the decisions made than there is a result in compromise. Stating no harm to others also ensures the peoples trust and equality. You cannot make everyone happy in a society, yet compromising ideals is better than doing harm to others. John's document stresses peaceful relations of all mankind. If the people respect each other than they will respect each others decisions and ideals for the rights of the people. The people will then see who can come in power over another for protection of crimes. The laws that are founded cannot be violated and if they are violated it is a crime. John's theory explains that if a wrongful crime is done, than the person it is done to has the right to give the criminal the same damage that was done. Every man has the right to punish for a crime, which can help prevent it from happening again. John's state of nature addresses the rights of the people in England. He believes that if everyone is equal in society, their rights are protected, and peace with others; in return will form unity. This way there is not such a large separation between rights of the monarchy and the people. This document provided thoughts of peacefulness, equality, and togetherness for the people in England, which during this time had no realization of these ideals until John Locke presented them in the State of Nature document.

 

On the other hand in France the philosopher Jean Rousseau stated in The Nature of Man his ideals on the social contract of the people in France. Rousseaus, like Locke thought that togetherness would corporate as one. He believes that the state controls all the goods, but if you take goods from the members of society then you cannot take that good away from them. Roousseau explains if you disobey the social contract there are penalties. The people need a social commitment and if there are people that do not commit than they are to be banished. The people are banished for disobeying the laws and not providing duty for the country, and he who states a disagreement will deserve the death penalty. Religion is in the hands of the people, they can have their own views. He decides that religion is not determined by the State and the people can practice the religion of their choice. Roousseau thinks that the government should be divided into small powers a legislative, executive, and judicial groups. "They make sovereign a being of fancy, composed of separate pieces, which would be like putting a man together from several bodies." Each groups doing their jobs separately but for the same goal to make the country better as a whole. These people in power work like the peoples agents, they work to compromise between the common good and for the good of France. If the country is to go to war with another country the state needs a defense group. He explains that if you are giving money to the state they can use the money to supply troops with needs and supply weapons for combat. In doing this, the people are not obligated to fight in war if one occurs, yet if demanded need they must defend. In other words the people are paying to have a war fought for them. This is good that the people have the decision to fight in a war and the supply of money will help the country grow a better defense. The social contract shows Roousseau's ideas on how the community should be governed and how the community should change the way of life for the better.

 

Both the growth in industry and the influences of the philosophies on social contract effected a change in human progress. People began to make more money because of the growth in the industry. Changes brought rights to the people and more freedom. The monarchy did not have all the power in decision-making. The thoughts of the people changed. They began to respect each other's rights and religion, which started to form a sense of togetherness as a country. These effects increased the progression of the countries in ways of developing human togetherness and rightful ways of government.

 

 

 

Locke, John. Two Treaties Of Government, Modem History Sourcebook..

Hanvover: 1690.

 

Rousseau, Jean. The Social Contract, Modem History Sourcebook.. 1763.