The social contract should be based on democratic systems that share n equal bond with the people, given that a country ruled with oppression Is condemned to fall. Many of the men recognized In the enlightenment were selfish rulers who only acted for their own good, rather than the goods of the other people. As an absolute ruler, King James I said, “Monarchy is the Supremes thing upon earth: for kings are gods lieutenants upon earth, and sit upon god’s throne, but even by god himself are called gods. ” As a king, James I referred to rulers as gods lieutenants upon earth, because he searched for supreme respect from those who he ruled.

He refers to himself as a person who can give life and also take it. He made this his right. He states that he rules for his own consent. However King Frederick of Prussia believes the opposite of James. Frederick states “Rulers should always remind themselves that they are men like the least of their subjects… He should perform care… The king is guilty if he wastes the money of the people, the taxes which they have paid, in luxury, pomp and debauchery. He who should improve the morals of the people, be the guardian of the law, and improve their education should not revert them by his bad example. He states that a ruler who acts for his people rather than for himself is the ideal ruler. He who acts for his own self-interest is a ruler who is obnoxiously selfish. This is a ruler that is in need of immediate displacement. It is predictable that a monarch would propose monarchy as best form of government because as a king he would want to retain his power. However King Frederick proves this statement wrong when he stated his thoughts on the Ideal ruler. He speaks selflessly, hardly speaking about something that would benefit himself. The ideal ruler is one who thinks on his people rather than his own self- Interest.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Therefore, a democracy Is the most Ideal and self-efficient type of social contract. Absolute rulers focus on their own self-interest. They do not think on the rights of humans. While some dedicated their life to oppress people, and talk about how they were selfish and arrogant, some focused In the beauty of humanity. John Locke dedicated his life to take a stand for the rights of humans. Locke was the one who founded the law of natural rights. He believed that humans have the right to life, liberty, and property. On one of his writings Locke states that, “men being… Y nature all free, equal, and independent… When the legislators try to destroy or take away the property of the people, or try to reduce them to slavery, they put themselves in to a state AT war Walt n ten people won can teen retest to eye laws. ” Locke says Tanat ten ideal government is the “government that consents the governed”. This means that the ruler, or the government needs to be considerate of his or their people. If this does not happen anyhow, the people have the right to execute any actions that will get rid of this system. King Louis XIV denied the people of his country this right.

He states, “The head alone has the right to deliberate and decide all functions. Members consist only in carrying out the commands given to them… The more you grant, the more it claims. The interest of the state comes first. However bad a prince may be, it is always a heinous crime for his subjects to rebel against him. I am the State. ” Louis XIV shows a new level of absolutism. As a king, he says that the people should never rebel, because he wants to stay in power as long as he can. He is denying the people the right to act against the social contract.

This again proves that aristocratic systems are not efficient when it comes to the happiness and the rights of the people. Any system that consists of an oppressor or a monarch is condemned to fail. This explains why most or if not all modern day countries are ruled by democratic or republican systems. This causes the impression that monarchs are Just ornaments on modern day countries. The queen of Spain and the queen of England, are Just ornamental symbols. They do not have a voice in decision-making; the prime minister manages this. In conclusion, monarchies are powerless.