Absolutism (Political)

The group that favored extreme change and forcefully opposed absolutism were often radical revolutionaries, such as the Jacobins during the French Revolution. They sought to dismantle the existing monarchical structures and implement a more egalitarian society, advocating for popular sovereignty and civic equality. Their approach often involved violent measures, including the use of the guillotine, to eliminate those who resisted their vision of a new political order.

The main advantage of absolute monarchy is order. By concentrating all power in one person, absolute monarchy permits an unprecedented level of order and control over the various regions of the state. Unfortunately, then, the quality of the government is heavily dependent on the quality of the one person ruling it and Louis XVI was not a good politician, nor did he care for politics. The only advantage for Louis XVI, personally, was that he was preserving the old status quo.

P

they are from different countries

http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ht/37.1/wasson.html

monarch

He was a very cruel despotic monarch, and he had crazy methods to rule his country. One of his anecdotes is the following;

Dracula once noticed a man working in the fields while wearing too short a caftan. The prince stopped and asked the man whether or not he had a wife. When the man answered in the affirmative, Dracula had the woman brought before him and asked her how she spent her days. The poor, frightened woman stated that she spent her days washing, baking and sewing. The prince pointed out her husband's short caftan as evidence of her laziness and dishonesty and ordered her impaled despite her husband's objection that he was well satisfied with his wife. Dracula then ordered another woman to marry the peasant but admonished her to work hard or suffer her predecessor's fate.

For further info see the related link.

Yes. Suleiman was not restrained by any constitution or congress. He was an absolute monarch. The only opposition to Suleiman came occasionally from the Janissaries.

Enlightened despots maintained absolute power while implementing reforms aimed at modernizing their states and promoting the welfare of their subjects. They retained control over key aspects of governance, including legislation, military, and economic policies, often centralizing authority to ensure stability and efficiency. Despite their benevolent intentions, these rulers typically suppressed dissent and maintained censorship to protect their rule and prevent challenges to their authority.

In later years of Enlightenment, absolute monarchs in the several European countries adopted some ideas of Enlightenment political philosophers.

1. adverb
2. 1.
3. without exception; completely; wholly; entirely:
4. You are absolutely right.
5. 2.
6. positively; certainly.
7. 3.
8. (of a transitive verb) without an object.
9. interjection
10. 4. (used emphatically to express complete agreement or unqualified assent):
11. Do you think it will work? Absolutely!

People challenged accepted beliefs and authority

There were authors and poets and dramatists writing about Renaissance and their beliefs that a man plays the central role in life. Thus people stopped believing in so many Gods and their statues and beliefs. They started being independent and also started to challenge all the practices and beliefs of the church

Yes

Dogmatic Absolutism is believing the truth is acquired not through reasoning and inquiry but, rather, through some predetermined, nonintellectual faith.

Joseph II, son of Maria Theresa and brother of the infamous Marie Antoinette, queen of France during the French Revolution.

One could also make the case that his mother, Maria Theresa, was also an enlightened despot, but the more common answer is Joseph.

Frederick the Great

examples of Enlightened self-interest

The goals of enlightened despots was to bring political and social change.

Enlightened despots liked hanging out with the French philosophes.

Well you would probably be quite pleased with yourself. It would be no easy task to achieve and if you succeeded you would be the most powerful person on earth. There has never been an absolute monarch of the United States so we cannot compare in this way.

The earliest forms of "absolutism" are not in the minds of our College Professors, but have been since the beginning of time. It's been in the minds of those who think everyone else is stupid and they have the answers. The earliest forms of absolutisms have expressed that they are totally tolerant of all views, with exception of those views who disagree with their own.

Monarchs In Europe believed in the divine right of kings and absolutism.

First of all, that's a very vague question to answer as there has been accounts of the concept, absolutism, all through history, but there were three centuries that scholars narrow their focus and study to, and that is, The Age of Absolutism. The Age of Absolutism is historically considered to be between the 1500-1800s, the height being during the European Renaissance, exemplified by Louis XIV (the most flamboyant, yet progressively artistic despot, arguably) and the low point of absolute authority by a single individual was, in my opinion, when we defeated the British during the Revolutionary War and opened up the eyes of the commoners, who were harvesting a deep resentment of British Absolutism on both sides. Americans wanted to be free, and the British citizens were against the war due to a plethora of reasons, spearheaded by increased senseless taxes to support a more senseless war, as well as an increasingly maddening King, which is never a good thing. Obviously there have been other times in history prior to 1500 where absolutism was the ruling force, but those three centuries are considered the zenith of absolutism. Ultimately, absolutism fell out of favor and lost support amidst the French Revolution, which promoted ideas of sovereignty which became extremely popular becoming known as....well...., Popular Sovereignty.