The parliament of England felt threatened that king James II had a catholic son with his catholic wife, and eventually England would be ruled by catholics, so they negotiated with William of Orange, who was a Protestant known all over the continent for his containment of catholic France. He accepted the offer of becoming king of England and came to rule England alongside his Protestant wife (James II's catholic daughter Mary). James II fled to France, which was a bloodless victory for William. This is called the Glorious revolution. Because William was invited by the Parliament, they had some authority over William and the Parliament remained a governing body in England.
British parliamentary government at the time of the American revolution was headed by Lord North. His real name was Frederick North.
a sollution i think
Absolutism and revolution represent contrasting political ideologies and practices. Absolutism is characterized by centralized power in a single ruler or authority, often justified by divine right, while revolution involves the overthrow of that authority, typically in pursuit of liberty, equality, or democratic governance. Both can lead to significant social change; however, absolutism seeks to maintain order and control, whereas revolution aims to disrupt the status quo and establish new systems of governance. Ultimately, while absolutism consolidates power, revolution challenges and seeks to redistribute it.
Robespierre most often gets that ranking in the French Revolution.
I'm a Napoleon supporter so I have more good to say about him than bad ha. However, Napoleon in many ways went against the ideals of the Revolution. Firstly, the French Revolution fought for democracy but Napoleon was a dictator. Secondly, one other ideal of the French Revolution is to have checks and balances within the government but Napoleon made almost all the political decisions on his own. Overall, Napoleon's style of government was closer to absolutism which was a big no-no of the French Revolution.
British parliamentary government at the time of the American revolution was headed by Lord North. His real name was Frederick North.
In a way it was a revolution against absolutism, which a type of government in which a king or queen have total rule over the country.
The affirming of Parliamentary government, and the banning of religious persecution.
The French Revolution ended the age of absolutism.
Prior to the 1905 revolution there was an absolute monarchy. Afterwards, a parliamentary body was created... and was disbanded not much later.
a sollution i think
No. It is a republic. It has a president, not a monarch. They got rid of the monarch in 1789, when the French Revolution happened.
The government of Jamaca is a parliamentary democracy. Wait for the next elections and vote them out. If, however, youare asking how to change the system of government, it would need a revolution and they are rarely quiet nor peaceful.
Robespierre most often gets that ranking in the French Revolution.
I'm a Napoleon supporter so I have more good to say about him than bad ha. However, Napoleon in many ways went against the ideals of the Revolution. Firstly, the French Revolution fought for democracy but Napoleon was a dictator. Secondly, one other ideal of the French Revolution is to have checks and balances within the government but Napoleon made almost all the political decisions on his own. Overall, Napoleon's style of government was closer to absolutism which was a big no-no of the French Revolution.
The Communist (Stalin's) revolution led from an absolute Monarchy to a dictatorship run by Joseph Stalin. The American revolution Led from administration by a parliamentary Monarchy to a Democracy.
It at least began Modern Parliamentary Democracy.