Absolute Sovereignty vs. Limited Government

Definition

Absolute sovereignty refers to a political system where the authority of the state is unrestricted and the government holds complete power over its citizens, often without any checks and balances. In contrast, limited government emphasizes the restriction of governmental powers, ensuring that authority is divided and regulated by laws, allowing for individual rights and freedoms. These concepts play a crucial role in understanding how different forms of governance shape the social contract between the state and its citizens.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Absolute sovereignty can lead to authoritarian regimes where citizens have little to no power against the state, while limited government promotes democracy and civil liberties.
2. The idea of limited government is rooted in Enlightenment thought, advocating for individual rights and the belief that governments should be accountable to the people.
3. Hobbes argued for absolute sovereignty in his work 'Leviathan', suggesting that a strong central authority was necessary to prevent chaos and ensure order.
4. In contrast, Locke's theories supported limited government, emphasizing natural rights and the idea that government should protect life, liberty, and property.
5. The tension between absolute sovereignty and limited government is evident in modern democracies, where governments are structured to uphold individual freedoms while maintaining order.

Review Questions

• How do absolute sovereignty and limited government differ in terms of citizen rights and governmental authority?
  • Absolute sovereignty grants the government unchecked power over its citizens, often resulting in violations of individual rights and freedoms. In contrast, limited government is designed to protect those rights by establishing laws and structures that restrict governmental authority. This distinction highlights the fundamental nature of how governments interact with their citizens and shapes the social contract in different political systems.
• Discuss how the ideas of Hobbes and Locke reflect the tension between absolute sovereignty and limited government.
  • Hobbes believed that absolute sovereignty was essential for maintaining order in society, as seen in his work 'Leviathan', where he argued for a powerful ruler to prevent chaos. Locke, however, championed limited government, asserting that governments should exist to protect individual rights. This philosophical conflict illustrates how differing views on governance can lead to distinct societal structures and expectations regarding state power and citizen freedoms.
• Evaluate the implications of absolute sovereignty versus limited government on contemporary political systems around the world.
  • Contemporary political systems reflect the ongoing debate between absolute sovereignty and limited government, impacting issues like human rights, democratic governance, and rule of law. Countries with absolute sovereign power often face challenges related to civil liberties, leading to oppression and unrest. Conversely, nations embracing limited government tend to prioritize individual rights and democratic processes but may struggle with ensuring effective governance. This dynamic reveals how foundational concepts about state authority continue to shape political realities globally.

Related terms

Social Contract: A theory that individuals consent, either explicitly or implicitly, to surrender some freedoms to authority in exchange for protection of their remaining rights.

Checks and Balances: A system that ensures that no one branch of government becomes too powerful by providing each branch with certain controls over the others.

Constitutionalism: The principle that the authority of government derives from and is limited by a constitution, ensuring the protection of individual rights.