Abstract: Gibbon’s History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire captures autocracy proper. It reiterates an era when physical might superseded the intellectual. During this era, government was assumed by the individual. Paine on the other hand, rejected utterly Accordingly the individual as government. He argues that the collective is the essence of government, one that is brought about by the Constitution. In building his arguments, Paine expounded that though the Magna Carter set out certain principles, it was not intrinsically a Constitution. He saw it as granting rights to a few, as opposed to the collective. Though ancient Roman emperors were above all tyrannical, it is vital to bear in mind that tyranny resulted from the moral deficit of the despot as opposed to the ill structure of government. Specifically, they had in place a system of balance and checks., modern democracy derived from these same arrangements, one that has by large guaranteed the Rights Of Man. Progress was brought about by rejecting inherited authority. In rejecting all forms of inherited authority, Paine emphasized that inherited authority elevates the incompetent over those who truly possess the capacity to govern. The order, technological advancements, medicine, improved agriculture, greater understanding of our planet would not have transpired if man had not the right to act on his dispositions. Thus, autocracy is not only incompatible with the rights of man, it is inherently incompatible with the nature of mankind.
Keywords: Autocracy versus Democracy, Roman Empire, Thomas Paine, Balance and Checks, Absolutism, Democracy, Constitution, Magna Carta.
Title: On the Progression of Democratic Governments and the Universal Rejection of Autocracy
Author: Robert Sobulo
International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research
ISSN 2348-3156 (Print), ISSN 2348-3164 (online)
Research Publish Journals
