Political doctrine
Written By:
The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica
Divine right of kings, political doctrine in defense of monarchical absolutism, which asserted that kings derived their authority from God and could not therefore be held accountable for their actions by any earthly authority such as a parliament. Originating in Europe, the divine-right theory can be traced to the medievalconception of God’s award of temporal power to the political ruler, paralleling the award of spiritual power to the church. By the 16th and 17th centuries, however, the new national monarchs were asserting their authority in matters of both church and state. King James I of England (reigned 1603–25) was the foremost exponent of the divine right of kings, but the doctrine virtually disappeared from English politics after the Glorious Revolution (1688–89). In the late 17th and the 18th centuries, kings such as Louis XIV (1643–1715) of France continued to profit from the divine-right theory, even though many of them no longer had any truly religious belief in it. The American Revolution (1775–83), the French Revolution (1789), and the Napoleonic wars deprived the doctrine of most of its remaining credibility.
The bishop Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet (1627–1704), one of the principal French theorists of divine right, asserted that the king’s person and authority were sacred; that his power was modeled on that of a father’s and was absolute, deriving from God; and that he was governed by reason (i.e., custom and precedent). In the middle of the 17th century, the English Royalist squire Sir Robert Filmer likewise held that the state was a family and that the king was a father, but he claimed, in an interpretation of Scripture, that Adam was the first king and that Charles I (reigned 1625–49) ruled England as Adam’s eldest heir. The antiabsolutist philosopher John Locke (1632–1704) wrote his First Treatise of Civil Government (1689) in order to refute such arguments.
The doctrine of divine right can be dangerous for both church and state. For the state it suggests that secular authority is conferred, and can therefore be removed, by the church, and for the church it implies that kings have a direct relationship to God and may therefore dictate to ecclesiastical rulers.
Evolutionary Theory:
The evolutionary theory offers a generally correct explanation of the origin of society. According to it society is not a make but a growth. It is the result of a gradual evolution. It is continuous development from unorganised to organised, from less perfect to more perfect and various factors helped in its development from time to time. Kinship and family were the earliest bonds uniting man with man.
“Kinship creates society.”says Malvern. Patriarchal society was organised on the basis of Kinship through males. Religion was another factor to help in the creation of social consciousness. As a matter of fact as Gettell observes, “Kinship and religion were simply two aspects of the same thing.”
They were so closely inter-twined that the patriarch, who later became the tribal chief, was also the high priest. After this man gave up his wandering habits, settled in villages and cities, and took to the pastoral and agricultural life.
The population began to multiply. Wealth was accumulated. The idea of property took root. The economic life advanced. All this necessitated changes in the forms of social relations and man arrived at such advanced forms of social organisations as the nation state.
Thus, society did not come into being by virtue of a pact or special provision; it emerged spontaneously and followed its own line of development. It passed through several stages of evolution before reaching its modern complex form.
According to Comte, ‘the society has passed through three stages—the theological, ‘the metaphysical and the positive’. In his view society came into being as a result of a need for association, a felt need of human beings which evolved in accordance with definite laws. Existing societies are on different stages of development.
Progress, according to him, is inevitable, although it is gradual, slow and uneven. Herbert Spencer also subscribed to the theory of social evolution. According to him, society is subject to the same laws of evolution to which all organic and inorganic matter is.. To him also evolution meant progress.
Human society has advanced from a savage state to a civilized state. He marked out these stages, the primitive, the militant and the industrial in the course of social evolution.
Force Theory
By David White
How to Define Force Theory--
Think about where you live -- the country, the state, the province or county. What do you know about where it came from? There are several different ways that countries and states can take their shape and define their borders. Sometimes this is done peacefully or naturally when a group of people decide to work together to make a society function. More often, though, it is done through the use of force when one group becomes dominant over the others.
This process of establishing a new state or government through the use of force is what's known as force theory, which is also sometimes referred to as conquest theory. Force theory occurs when a person or a group of people take control of an area, such as a state, and make everyone in that area follow their rules and beliefs. For example, if you were to successfully invade Canada and make everyone in the country abandon their old ways and adopt my new rules, it would be a demonstration of force theory.
Although force theory is the way that most western countries have been formed, it is not the only way. An alternative to force theory is what is known as social contract theory, which is when a group of people living in the same area agree to follow certain rules and expectations in order for their society to remain stable.
Elements of Force Theory
While the two theories mentioned above are generally how states and countries take shape, they often unfold in different ways and can be identified by the presence of certain elements.
One important element of force theory is occupation by a foreign military or government. For example, when the German Army invaded France in 1940, they took control of the people and government through military occupation. This occupation was done with the intention of bringing France under Nazi governmental rule, but was overthrown by Allied forces in 1944.
Modern example:
How ISIS Pulled Off A Rapid Takeover In Iraq By Philip Ross@ThisIsPRo On 06/12/14 AT 3:23 PM
… 800 insurgents approached Iraq's second-biggest city on Wednesday, they were able to strike such fear in residents that two divisions of 30,000 Iraqi soldiers fled in panic, dropping their uniforms and weapons. The militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, roamed the streets of Mosul freely, grabbing weapons from the main army base, freeing hundreds of prisoners from the city's jails and even stealing $480 million from banks. Since then, these fighters have overtaken several other cities in northwestern Iraq, including Saddam Hussein’s hometown of Tikrit.
How could such a small force of fighters overwhelm a trained military force wielding the most sophisticated weapons in the world? Here are some of the reasons:
Many ISIS members are highly trained ex-military: Several former military personnel who served under Saddam Hussein joined the Sunni insurgency after the U.S.-led invasion of Baghdad in 2003.
The military was dissolved, leaving hundreds of thousands of troops suddenly unemployed. The military’s highest-ranking members were reprimanded and barred from working for the new Iraqi government, fueling plenty of discontent.
That’s when “hundreds, if not thousands” of highly-skilled former Hussein officers with tactical knowledge of Iraq’s terrain joined ISIS, according to CNN.
Social Contract Theory and Government
Political philosophers throughout history have had differing views on how governments rule over people. Sixteenth century philosopher, John Locke, believed that, when men transfer their rights to a government, a social contract is entered into. In subjecting themselves to a sovereign ruler, or other form of government, the people gain security.
Locke expressed a belief that people had certain basic rights that must be supplied by the government, as a result of its contract with the people. These include the right to life, liberty, and property. He also put forth the concepts of a separation of powers, and majority rule. John Locke’s political philosophies had great influence in the American Revolution, as the Founding Fathers penned these beliefs into the nation’s Constitution.
Holding to his belief that all humans have the same feelings and experiences – than none are inherently better or worth more than others – Locke put his ideas of human equality into the organization of politics, saying that governments gain their power or authority from the people. In opposition to Hobbes’ belief that people need a government to keep them from falling into chaos and violence, Locke believed that government exists to help and serve the people.
While both Hobbes and Locke believed that a social contract is entered into when people give over some of their rights to a government, they disagreed in how that would work. Hobbes supported the rule of kings, which held absolute power over the people, as they would be able to keep men from reverting to their natural states. Locke, on the other hand, favored government by representation.
Consent of the Governed
The most fundamental concept of a democratic government is that the government exists only to secure the rights of the people. Men join a society, submitting to its government, by explicit consent in order to gain three things not given them by natural law:
- Laws
- Executive power to enforce the laws
- Judges to arbitrate and settle conflicts in law
While under the laws of nature, it is theorized that man had an absolute right to protect himself, and to punish those who disobeyed those laws. Once a social contract has been entered into, by organizing under a government body, each person largely transfers his power to protect himself, and to personally punish those who do wrong, to that government.
Example:
As an example of social contract theory in practice, consider if William accuses Adam of stealing $1,000 from him. Adam denies having done it. In a natural law state, the men might settle the matter by fighting – or perhaps William would break into Adam’s home and attempt to take the money back. Once a social contract has been entered into by forming a cohesive society, governed by law, the men must put their faith in the legal system.
In the United States, the people have elected representatives to run the government, which consists of three separate branches, each keeping the others in check. Each member of society has given up his right to take matters into his own hands, expecting that everyone else will do the same. One of the benefits, in this example of the social contract theory, is that no one is free to get revenge on people they think have wronged them.