Which statement expresses the Enlightenment belief that governments exist to protect citizens' rights?

Which statement expresses the Enlightenment belief that governments exist to protect citizens' rights?

• A. Danger of government justifies absolute rule
• B. Governments exist to protect rights
• C. Social order requires no limits on government
• D. People grant no rights to government

Answer: (C)

The main idea being tested is that government’s purpose is to safeguard citizens’ natural rights, with authority limited by that protection. The statement that governments exist to protect rights embodies this belief by explicitly tying political power to the defense of inherent freedoms such as life, liberty, and property. It reflects the Enlightenment view that legitimacy comes from serving the people and upholding their rights, and that rulers should be constrained by that purpose. If a government fails to protect rights, or if its power is exercised without consent, it challenges its rightful authority, and people have grounds to resist or change it. The other statements clash with this view. Saying danger justifies absolute rule denies the limit-and-accountability framework central to Enlightenment thought. Claiming social order requires no limits on government envisions unchecked power, which contradicts the idea of protecting rights. And asserting that people grant no rights to government contradicts the notion that government authority derives from—yet must be limited by—the rights it protects.

The main idea being tested is that government’s purpose is to safeguard citizens’ natural rights, with authority limited by that protection. The statement that governments exist to protect rights embodies this belief by explicitly tying political power to the defense of inherent freedoms such as life, liberty, and property. It reflects the Enlightenment view that legitimacy comes from serving the people and upholding their rights, and that rulers should be constrained by that purpose. If a government fails to protect rights, or if its power is exercised without consent, it challenges its rightful authority, and people have grounds to resist or change it.

The other statements clash with this view. Saying danger justifies absolute rule denies the limit-and-accountability framework central to Enlightenment thought. Claiming social order requires no limits on government envisions unchecked power, which contradicts the idea of protecting rights. And asserting that people grant no rights to government contradicts the notion that government authority derives from—yet must be limited by—the rights it protects.