Enlightened despotism: what it is and what political changes it promoted.

A summary of this political and social system that emerged in the last stages of the Ancien Régime.

Europe, considered a fiefdom of democracy, was not always so. For a long time it was organized in absolutist monarchies, in which the king held all the power and paid no attention to the situation of his people.

But this changed in the 17th century, with the emergence of the Enlightenment which, in the following century, would foster changes in the European political system, giving rise to enlightened despotism. Next we will see more in depth what it consists of, and what changes it implied for the time.

• Related article, "What is Political Psychology?"

What was enlightened despotism?

Enlightened despotism, also known as benevolent despotism or enlightened absolutism, is a political concept that refers to the style of government that many European countries adopted during the second half of the 18th century, in a world where the Ancien Régime was still present.in a world where the Ancien Régime was still present. This type of government combined aspects of classical absolutism with philosophical ideas of the French Enlightenment.

The emergence of enlightened despotism was a timid change with respect to the traditional absolutist system, in which the figure of the monarch was all-powerful. In this despotism, the monarch continues to hold absolute power, but acquires a more sensitive vision with respect to his people, initiating reforms with the intention ofIn this despotism, the monarch continues to have absolute power, but acquires a more sensitive vision with respect to his people, initiating reforms with the intention of improving their welfare, although always in a very moderate way and without abandoning a paternalistic perspective.

The changes in the treatment of his citizens, granting them greater freedoms, were not synonymous with a loss of privileges for the aristocracy, nor a reduction of the gap between the social classes. Of course, the idea that the absolutist monarchy would eventually be replaced by a democratic republic was unthinkable and totally contrary to the established order. Enlightened despotism did not intend to take away the powers of the monarchy, but simply to promote some reforms.

The phrase that best sums up the mentality of this system of government is that of. "everything for the people, but without the people" ("Tout pour le peuple, mais sans le peuple"). ("Tout pour le peuple, rien par le peuple" in French). This would mean that reforms should be carried out to increase the satisfaction of the people, to promote knowledge, culture and wealth, but without any involvement of the plebs in the new measures, a class seen as chronically immature and mentally underage.

On absolutism and the Enlightenment

Before going into more depth on the origin and consequences of enlightened despotism, it is necessary to explain, briefly, what absolutism is in its most classical aspect, and what the Enlightenment is.

Absolutism

Absolutism is the modern name assigned to the types of government typical of the European Ancien Régime.

In the vast majority of the countries of that time, the sovereigns held the total power of the state.. There was no public control of what the king did, and he himself decided how his kingdom functioned.

This idea is well summed up in a phrase spoken by Louis XIV, King of France, who is considered the ultimate exponent of the prototypical absolutist monarchy: "The state is me" ("L'État, c'est moi").

The Enlightenment

The Enlightenment was a philosophical, artistic and scientific movement that emerged in Europe after the Renaissance.. In this cultural movement, its thinkers firmly believed in human reason and in the progress of society.

This thought emerged in France in the 17th century, although it did not remain only in the Gallic country. It had an enormous repercussion in other European countries and even crossed the Atlantic, settling in the European colonies.

How did this system of government originate?

This form of government, typical of the end of the ancien régime, originated in the second half of the 18th century. Its appearance was not due to a voluntary proposal coming from the European monarchs, who were practically all-powerful. The reason for these kings and emperors to initiate reforms in their respective states were the criticisms received from enlightened philosophers, who were critical of the traditional functioning of classical absolutismwhich fostered inequalities and injustices.

It is not that these philosophers, or, at least, most of them, wanted the advent of republics. They simply considered that no sovereign should allow the people to suffer hardship. It was a humanist view, so to speak. These thinkers were in favor of a gradual change in governmental structures, in order to prosper towards a more modern and rational society, but without renouncing the figure of the monarch.

The change had to come from above, so that it would be peaceful and controllable.. A popular revolution, from the point of view of the philosophers of the time, would imply a change that would be too profound and unexpected for society as a whole, and dangerous. It was necessary for the monarchs to be the ones to initiate reforms to keep society as a whole satisfied, and thus guarantee that the change, which had always been feared, would be beneficial.

For this reason, whether it was the empathetic argument of not wishing the plebs any harm, or the argument of fear, that they would revolt, the monarchs listened to the philosophers. It was much better to keep the subjects happy, and improve their lives a little, than to give them the feeling that the sovereign cared little for their situation, and wait for them to rebel against him. This is when enlightened despotism proper arose.

Enlightened despotism would never have been achieved had it not been for an unwritten pact between two social classes, apparently antagonistic, whichThe nobility, being the highest representative of the nobility. The nobility, its highest representative being the monarch, had held power for centuries. But they faced the problem that, despite having noble titles, these were not as important as money, something that the bourgeois did have in large quantities, and that was becoming the pillar of what would end up being the capitalist society.

Main enlightened monarchs

Among the main enlightened monarchs we find several European sovereigns, such as Charles III of Spain, Joseph I of Portugal, Joseph II of Austria, Maria Theresa I of Austria, Gustav III of Sweden, Louis XIV of France, Frederick II of Prussia and, surely the most remarkable, Catherine II of Russia, great patron of Imperial Russia.

Some of these monarchs did not work alone. In fact, not a few enlightened philosophers or other thinkers are found working as the right hand of a sovereign.The case of the Marquis of Pombal in Portugal, Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos in Spain or Bernardo Tanucci in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies.

Limitations of enlightened despotism

As one might have thought, especially due to the fact that in Europe today most countries are republics or constitutional monarchies, enlightened despotism, enlightened despotism did not last forever, and that was due to its limitations.

The most notable was the fact that of failing to structure society in a more democratic and egalitarian way, since privileges were not removedThe most notable limitation was the fact that it did not succeed in structuring society in a more democratic and egalitarian way, since no privileges were not taken away from the nobility and the people, despite some modest improvements, continued to suffer. However, there were notable successes in areas such as administration, economy and education.

The monarchy was willing to yield in several areas, but not at all to break with the traditional caste system of the Ancien Régime. The nobility was the nobility, the clergy was the clergy and the plebs were the plebs.So it had been and so it should be. No matter how many reforms were made, taking privileges away from the nobility or giving them to the people was unthinkable, unnatural.

That is why, although within the plebs there would always be someone happy with the new reforms, others saw how the monarchy did not really want their welfare or, if it wanted it, it was rather seeing them as little children who should be cared for, and who would never mature. And the people grew tired, and as a consequence, the more radical acts that we expose below began.

Consequences

Clearly, the change of mentality that occurred during the Enlightenment, generating the change from classical absolutism to enlightened despotism, had great benefits for the European sciences and artsThe monarchs who acted as great patrons, allowing great technological and cultural advances, were not few in number.

Many rights were won, such as greater ideological and religious freedom, as well as greater freedom of expression. Scientists could experiment without fearing that their new discoveries would be censored by religious organizations, while philosophers could experiment without fearing that they would be censored by religious organizations.while philosophers could think and express what they had concluded. Indeed, Western civilization was advancing by leaps and bounds. And it was those leaps and bounds that would end the system itself.

Giving scientists, artists and, especially, philosophers greater freedoms to research, think and express themselves, was, ironically, the beginning of the end of many absolutist monarchies. Many thinkers saw that they could aspire to more and that, although there was more freedom than before, many of the changes were not as beneficial as might be expected.

The nobles would continue to have many privilegesThe nobles would continue to have many privileges, which would make them think, especially the bourgeoisie, of the need for more radical changes. It was this thinking that would sow the seeds of the French Revolution of 1789, with events as unthinkable decades earlier as the storming of the Bastille, the proclamation of the French Republic and the execution of the French kings, Louis XVI and his wife Marie Antoinette.

Bibliographical references:

• León Sanz, V. (1989). La Europa ilustrada, pp. 49-52, 138. Ediciones AKAL.
• Delgado de Cantú, G. M. (2005). El mundo moderno y contemporáneo, p. 253. Pearson Educación.
• Martínez Ruiz, E; Giménez, E. (1994). Introducción a la historia moderna, pp. 545-569. Ediciones AKAL.