During the 17th and 18th centuries in Europe, democracy and absolutism were two incredibly controversial forms of government. However, absolute monarchy is not only more beneficial to the people in that they were not necessarily ready for "real" democracy, both due to conflicts between the great European powers and the general condition European citizens at the time. Furthermore, absolute monarchies have often proven to be very effective forms of government, as in the case of Louis XIV. At the time, the system of absolute monarchy was more necessary to Europeans than democracy. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Democracy or Absolutism In the 17th and 18th centuries, many European powers were still focused on conquering more land and creating more colonies, and they were, e.g. for the most part, very religious countries and empires as well. This gave rise to many wars between them. These wars were fought in hand-to-hand combat, meaning the government often would have had to make military decisions quickly. The military's rapid response could make or break an invasion or battle, and having a democratic government would mean that those military decisions could not have been made as quickly. Thus, invaders could potentially seize a larger area than necessary if the country was a democracy, because citizens or Parliament would have to hold a meeting and then vote on a military decision, wasting valuable time. Having an absolute monarch would not only mean that decisions and laws would be executed much more quickly, but also that citizens would argue much less among themselves over controversial issues, because they do not necessarily blame each other for a military or military decision. of the adoption of a law. this may not be in the best interest of their particular minority. Absolute monarchy would therefore be able to ensure the safety and security of citizens and the territory in certain areas much better than a democracy. Even if the people had the right to vote on what the country would do, many of them would not know what decisions would benefit the country as a whole, or the less educated and illiterate people would be easily bribed or manipulated by people in higher positions of power, such as the Church or nobles. Uneducated citizens would not make good decisions for their country because they are not informed about their country's relationships and history with other countries. If these uneducated citizens were to elect leaders, they would not be able to accurately judge the intentions and abilities of the candidates because they have not seen each candidate's interactions with their country's nobles and elite and other countries, which would have been a deciding factor for many potential leaders of European countries. The democratic majority would not reflect the interests or rights of minorities, especially religious minorities in 17th and 18th century Europe, and would have a negative impact on the benefit of the country as a whole. In the 1600s and 1700s, when wars were so frequent and people knew so little about their government and the world at large that an absolute monarchy was the only way to ensure that the country's decisions would be in the best interests of the people . This is best seen in the reign of the king of.