Which statement best captures the Enlightenment critique of monarchy and the source of political legitimacy?

Which statement best captures the Enlightenment critique of monarchy and the source of political legitimacy?

• A. Divine right legitimizes rule
• B. Power comes from the people and protection of rights
• C. The state should be sovereign without rights
• D. Authority rests in the church

Answer: (B)

The main idea being tested is that Enlightenment thinkers challenged divine or hereditary claims to authority and argued that legitimate political power comes from the consent of the governed and the protection of natural rights. This is why the statement that “power comes from the people and protection of rights” best captures their critique. Thinkers like John Locke argued that governments exist to secure life, liberty, and property, and their authority depends on the consent of those governed. If rulers violate those rights or refuse to protect them, people have grounds to resist or change the government. Rousseau’s idea of the general will also ties legitimacy to the collective will of the people rather than to divine sanction or church sanction. In contrast, divine right asserts that God authorizes rulers, a view the Enlightenment actively challenged; the notion that the state should be sovereign without rights denies the protective purpose and limits that rights imply; and placing authority in the church ties political power to religious institutions rather than to popular consent and rational justification.

The main idea being tested is that Enlightenment thinkers challenged divine or hereditary claims to authority and argued that legitimate political power comes from the consent of the governed and the protection of natural rights. This is why the statement that “power comes from the people and protection of rights” best captures their critique. Thinkers like John Locke argued that governments exist to secure life, liberty, and property, and their authority depends on the consent of those governed. If rulers violate those rights or refuse to protect them, people have grounds to resist or change the government. Rousseau’s idea of the general will also ties legitimacy to the collective will of the people rather than to divine sanction or church sanction.

In contrast, divine right asserts that God authorizes rulers, a view the Enlightenment actively challenged; the notion that the state should be sovereign without rights denies the protective purpose and limits that rights imply; and placing authority in the church ties political power to religious institutions rather than to popular consent and rational justification.