In 3-5 sentences, compare the cause and effects of constitutional monarchy in England with the causes and effects of absolute monarchy in Russia.
The cause of the constitutional monarchy in England was rooted in the Glorious Revolution of 1688, where power was transferred from the monarch to Parliament. This resulted in the establishment of a constitutional framework that limited the authority of the monarch and upheld the rights and privileges of the people. In contrast, the cause of absolute monarchy in Russia was the consolidation of power by tsars like Peter the Great, who centralized authority and suppressed opposition, leading to a highly autocratic rule.
The effects of the constitutional monarchy in England included the development of a system of checks and balances, where the monarch's powers were curtailed by Parliament and the rule of law. This fostered stability, gradual democratization, and the protection of individual rights and freedoms. On the other hand, the effects of absolute monarchy in Russia were characterized by a lack of political rights and freedoms for the majority of the population, widespread oppression, and limited social and economic progress.
In summary, the causes of constitutional monarchy in England and absolute monarchy in Russia arose from different historical contexts, resulting in contrasting effects. The constitutional monarchy in England led to greater political stability, democratic institutions, and the protection of individual rights. In contrast, absolute monarchy in Russia resulted in autocratic rule, limited freedoms, and a slower pace of social and economic development.