Monarchy vs. Democracy
The new idea about how government should be and is looked up to is democracy. It is the ideal government in today’s world because it is effective, balanced, and fair. In the medieval world, this was a novel concept and almost barely used. The ideal government in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries was the monarchy. In a monarchy, all power was put into the hands of central leader, or monarch, who had absolute or all political control of his monarchy. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy) The monarchy was the most popular and preferred government compared to today’s democracy, but which is more effective? The democracy is preferred today for its well structured system and balance between branches of the government where all parties have their opinions considered, and that is why democracy is more effective than monarchy.

The Constitution of the United States is the primary example of democracy. The power of the U.S. government is spread out within three branches: The Executive Branch, Legislative Branch, and the Judicial Branch. These three branches are governed by checks and balances so no branch can become too powerful. Article II Section I of the United States Constitution explains the way senators, the president, and vice president are governed:
“The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.” (http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html)
In Article II Section II the role of the President in explain in more detail regarding the appointment of other officials:
“The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.” (http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html)
The idea of a central leader stayed constant from monarchy to democracy, but in democracy the central leader’s power is kept in balance through the other branches of government and that is why it is the preferred and most balanced way of government today. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy)
The medieval monarchies were very different. All or most power was put into the hands of a single ruler until death. Unlike in democracy where the leaders are elected by the public, the monarch was hereditary, passed on from generation to generation. The king had the power to do whatever he wanted without the permit of the public or other leaders. The monarch had full control and these monarchs had no checks to their power. Many of these monarchs abused their power instating laws that would never be allowed in the world today. The Treasons Act was written in 1571 protecting Queen Elizabeth I from criticism, which does not allow people to speak freely about how they feel. This act states, “An act whereby certaine offences be made treason....Be it enacted, declared, and established...that, if any person or persons whatsoever, at any time after the last day of June next coming during the natural life of our most gracious sovereign lady, Queen Elizabeth..., shall, within the realm or without, compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend the death or destruction, or any bodily harm tending to death, destruction, maim, or wounding of the royal person of the same our sovereign lady, Queen Elizabeth.” (http://www.gunpowder-plot.org/archives/eliz2.htm). This Act would never be allowed in today’s world because of the freedom of speech given to everyone.
The problem with monarchies is not that they did not accomplish anything, but that it was unfair to the people which caused people to revolt and fight against the government. This friction and inequality between the people and government would have slowed down everything in the monarchy, making it less effective. Democracy is not without its own problems, but as compared to the medieval monarchs it is more effective because of the balance involved because every class of citizen is considered, from working class to senator.
Works Cited
"Democracy." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 14 May 2010.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy.
"Elizabeth I - Treasons Act, 1571." The Gunpowder Plot Society. Web. 14 May 2010.
http://www.gunpowder-plot.org/archives/eliz2.htm.
"Monarchy." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 14 May 2010.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy.
"Transcript of the Constitution of the United States - Official." National Archives and Records Administration. Web. 14 May 2010.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html.
Image:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Constitution_Pg1of4_AC.jpg