Le autores del constitution american includeva diverse
personas qui habeva studiate le philosophos politic
ancian (includente, Platone, Aristoteles, Cicerone,
e Seneca) e philosophos plus recente (includente
John Locke, Montesquieu, e Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

Personas como Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, e James
Madison voleva determinar si le nove pais que illes
formava ex le dece-tres colonias britannic debeva
esser un republica o un monarchia; si un ex le populo
mesme, o un selection de personas inter illo, debeva
governar le pais.

Post lor experientia con le monarchia britannic,
omne illes opponeva le idea de un monarchia.  Ma
essente assatis ric, illes anque opponeva le idea
de un democratia directe.  Eventualmente, post un
serie de compromissos, illes formava un constitution
semidemocratic que protegeva lor interesses economic
del depredationes del population povre del Statos
Unite.

E le franceses e le americanos sapeva que un monarcha
poteva arrivar a decisiones disastrose.  Post que
Richelieu habeva inricchite Francia, pro exemplo,
Louis XIV perdeva quasi omne iste moneta in guerras
que compliva nihil.  (Il pare que le Statos Unite,
con su invasiones de Afghanistan e Iraq, nunc seque
iste tradition.)  Francia nunquam se recoperava
de iste desastre historic, que eventualmente culminava
in le revolution francese.

In le prime parte de iste revolution, le franceses
essayava limitar le potentia de lor monarcha, qui
non voleva acceptar iste limitationes, e le franceses
finalmente le occideva.  Tunc illes decideva que
le membros elegite de lor Assemblea National debeva
governar lor pais.

Le assemblea national francese, perdite in debattos
politic perpetue, esseva troppo grande pro governar
omne le pais, e le franceses postea decideva que
un subgruppo de iste assemblea debeva regnar.  Iste
decision culminava in le regno de terror, le fin
del governamento revolutionari, e finalmente le regime
del imperator Napoleon.

Intertanto, le conditiones generalmente pacific
que prevaleva in le Statos Unite permitteva que
nostre philosophos politic ponderava le pensamentos
de personas como John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, e
Benedicto
de Spinosa.

Locke habeva advocate que un governamento debe esser
basate sur le consentimento del gente gobernate.
Thomas Hobbes, al contario credeva que sin un
governamento forte, il haberea un stato constante
de conflicto o anarchia in un societate.  Omne
persona,
ille asseverava, vole posseder omne lo que ille
o illa pote sasir.  Tal conditiones provoca un guerras
continue de omnes contra omnes.  Tal guerras termina
solmente quando un persona o un parve gruppo de
personas sasi assatis poter pro dominar omne le
alteres.

Un societate, ille continua, ha besonio de pace
e tranquillitate.  Ma un tal stato es possibile
solmente sub le controlo stricte de un soverano
potente, qui tunc pote facer omne le decisiones
del governamento.  Le altere personas formante le
societate tunc pote viver in pace, ma illes anque
perde omne controlo sur lor vitas.

Pro Hobbes il esseva licite que le soverno face
omne le decisiones de un societate, includente le
religion que le populo debeva acceptar, le scientia
que illo debeva acceptar, le instruction permittite
a su membros, etc.

---

The authors of the American constitution included
various persons who had studied the ancient political
philosophers (including Plato, Aristotle, Cicero,
and Seneca) and more recent philosophers (including
John Locke, Montesquieu, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau).

People like Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and James
Madison wanted to determine whether the new country
they were forming out of the thirteen British colonies
should be a republic or a monarchy; if one out of
the population itself, or a selection of people
within it, should govern the country.

After their experience with British kings, all of
them opposed the idea of a monarchy.  But since
they were rather rich, they opposed the idea of
a direct democracy.  Eventually, after a series
of compromises, they formed a semidemocratic
constitution that protected their economic interests
from the deprations of the impoverished population
of the United States.

Both the French and the Americans knew that a monarch
could arrive at disastrous decisions.  After Richelieu
had enriched France, for example, Louis XIV lost
almost all this money in wars that accomplished
nothing.  (The United States, it seems, is now
following this political tadition.)  France never
recovered from this historical disaster, which
eventually culminated in the French Revolution.

In the first part of this revolution, the French
tried to limit the power of their king, who didn't
want to accept these limitations, and the French
finally killed him.  Then they decided that the
elected members of their National Assembly should
govern the country.

The French National Assembly, lost in perpetual
political debates, was too large to govern the entire
country, so the French decided that a subgroup of
this assembly should reign.  This decision culminated
in the Reign of Terror and finally the regime of the
emperor Napoleon.

In the meantime, the generally peaceful conditions
prevailing in the United States allowed our own
political philosophers to think carefully about
the thought of people like John Locke, Thomas Hobbes,
and Benedicto de Spinosa.

Locke had advocated that a government should be
based on the consent of the people being governed.
Thomas Hobbes, on the other hand, believed that
without a strong government, there would be a constant
state of conflict or anarchy in a society.  Everyone,
he says, wants to possess everything he can grab.
Such conditions provoke continuing warfare of everyone
against everyone else.  Such wars end only when
a one person or a small group of people seize the
power needed to dominate everyone else.

A society, he goes on to say, needs peace and
tranquillity.  But such a state is possible only
under the strict control of a powerful sovereign,
who then can make all the decisions of the government.

Other people forming the society then can live in
peace, but they also lose all control over their
lives.

For Hobbes, it is legitimate for the sovereign to
make all the decisions of a society, including the
religion the people must accept, the science that
they must accept, the education its members are
allowed to have, and so forth.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree