| Monday, May 18, 2009 - 09:29 pm |
Having seen my fair share of historical debate, I felt it was time to implement something a little bit more fun that the facts.
This is a game. Over the next few weeks I'll create a series of threads open to debate. The topic; What if History had unfolded differently?
I'll pick a major event from the last 1,000 years, and add an alternate twist. I'd then like to see opinions and discussion about how this would've affected the unfolding of history.
Lets see where we end up.
Nothing that follows is inteneded as a dig at any group/nation/people/etc. This is just for fun, and purely hypothetical.
I think it'll be interesting to see what happens.
So let's start;
The Magna Carta had never been written?
Historical Significance: The Magna Carta is generally regarded as the birthplace for modern Human Rights. Magna Carta was arguably the most significant early influence on the extensive historical process that led to the rule of constitutional law today in the English speaking world. Magna Carta influenced the development of the common law and many constitutional documents, including the United States Constitution.
| Monday, May 18, 2009 - 10:27 pm |
as i understand it, the Magna Carta gave rights to the noblemen and not the common man. this only came later. assuming the MC had not been enacted, i would say that English governance would have followed much in the same style as the Hapsburgs or the Russian monarchy which continued in a more or less autocratic form until the early twentieth century. even then, some of those countries followed parts of the English form including France from its revolution in the 18th century. my guess is that much of European and American governance would have been more subject to revolution similar to France and Russia, even though possibly with a different form of governance. it could be argued that much of the European warring of the 15th century through WWI was a result of monarhical infighting that might have been avoided with a more open, quasi democratic form of government.
| Tuesday, May 19, 2009 - 01:09 am |
It's all a matter of progression. Magna Carta was one of the the first concessions. Almost every age made a further concession - 1832 Parliamentary Reform Act being one of the major ones.
Centuries later, the lowest class (women) got the vote
So there are one of two answers, Klarina.
Either ... democracy would not have progressed and the power would still be in the hands of the King and his sycophants / jailors.
Or ... in the absence of a response to demand, something else would have happened instead ... in which case we may or may not have been a few decades/centuries behind/ahead of where we are now.
Hugs and respect
| Tuesday, May 19, 2009 - 01:18 am |
The driving force was pressure for restrictions of (or overthrow of) the monarchy. That pressure would have been there regardless of the text. Creating the magna carta, and the series of watered down versions that followed, diffused the political tension. Without the Magna Carta revolutionary pressure might have forced human rights into law centuries earlier.
In 1215 someone (or some people) had the balls to suggest storming London and forcing the king to submit to demands. The magna carta was the document that undermined that effort. The king negotiated with the nobles but it was most likely not the nobility that actually used muscle to smash the gates. The Magna Carta has just enough content to convince an uneducated militia that a revolution had succeeded and that they could go home and farm as free people. The barons had no interest in undermining their own status and so they played both sides.
| Tuesday, May 19, 2009 - 05:29 am |
Klar!!!!!!!! Missed you!!!!!
| Tuesday, May 19, 2009 - 09:22 am |
no Daconia she's been around we miss you!
| Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - 04:00 pm |
All the revolutionaries aside....
The document was not about human rights as much as it was for placing the King under the rule of law. Laying the groundwork for a Constitutional Monarchy and vacating the Right of Kings as was practiced before 1215. It is the basis for English Common Law and all other documents drawing from this original source.
Without it being written I would imagine the Queen would be running around London having peoples heads chopped off willy nilly. Fun for her not so much fun for the rest of you.
| Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - 09:37 pm |
The implications go much further than that. American law is based upon English Common Law, which in turn is based mostly upon the rule of common sense and precedent. International law, based largely upon a combination of English Common Law principles - amongst others, of course - would be exceedingly different.
Without the Magna Carta, is it possible that Western style democracy would not be what it is?
| Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - 09:42 pm |
OFF with his head! cool
| Wednesday, February 18, 2015 - 06:57 am |