Can absolutism save France?

Will absolutism stabilize France? Let’s find out. 

First we must ask what is absolutism? and How is it different from what the medieval kings were doing?

Medieval Kings were ruled by the grace of God. This means the law was given by God, kings discovered the law, and they are the mediators between God and the people. 

Absolutist kings ruled by divine right. This means the king made the law; the king was the state; and the king was responsible to God alone. 

As a result absolutist kings were stronger than medieval kings.

If you don't understand this reference 1. Why 2. The good looking guy believes he has divine power but he still has to answer to the big guy. 

Despite the differences, being stronger, absolutist kings still had the same issue: nobles

“Absolute kings also secured the cooperation of the one class that historically had posed the greatest threat to monarchy, the nobility” The nobles were a lot like teenagers. They wanted more power, but the power resides on the adult/king. They tried to sneak around the parent, sometimes it worked sometimes it didn't. Ultimately, they had to answer to the king. 

Did the absolutists have complete control?

No. Kat and Becky are totalitarian but the absolutists lacked the tools (money and technology) to be a completely totalitarian regime. 

They're smiling because they know and we don't. 

What were the foundations that French absolutism were built upon?

French absolutists decided to lay their regime on top of sand. However, they did not see that no matter how much they suppress it, the sand will slip and move when a storm comes. The people are the sand. A government must rely on its people in order for the state to function. However, the french were constantly rebelling. Peasants were taxed instead of the nobles and so they refused to pay taxes. Now the government has no support and no money.

I'm so punny 

People who tried to make it work.

Sully and Henry IV:

Henry IV was a byproduct of the French civil war, which caused a lot of disorder. Henry IV and his administrator Sully tried to stabilize the chaos. Sully followed the mercantilist policy of exporting more than you import. As a result, trade was revived and there was less need for taxes. Henry IV issued the Edict of Nantes, which he intended to be a stabilizing factor. It allowed specific regions to have a certain religion. As a result, regions of France were divided by religion, rather than religion being intermixed. Louis XIII then revoked the Edict of Nantes because it created “states within a state.” So despite trying, Henry IV failed at stabilizing and uniting France, instead, he drew the lines to where it was divided. 

Richelieu:

Richelieu believed in total subordination of all groups to the French monarchy. Intendents, or local governments, were given the power of carrying out the king’s wishes. Intendents could not be natives to the districts where they held authority to avoid bias and to ensure the laws of the king were carried out. Did people listen to these men? Of course not. If you make the monarch a distant power, the people will believe they can revolt. 

They did not make it work. Tim is disappointed. 

What all these people needed to realize was that absolutism cannot work if it involves the suppression of people’s power and freedom. Like Kat aka Hitler aka Kat Tweed said, you have to make the people believe they have power, but you can’t give them too much of real power or they will overthrow you.There needs to be a balance. Every force has an opposite and equal reaction. If a government pushes down its people, they will push and revolt right back. 

I'd like to take this time to celebrate this blog's 100th post. WOOOOOO