Skool Masters
Info Mation
Amusement Vault
Whats happenin and who makes it happen
ESSAY ON FLEURY & WALPOLE Thesis: Cardinal Fleury and Robert Walpole came to power under different conditions, allowing Walpole to centralize the nation through his control of parliament, leading to England's economic and political dominance, whereas Fleury was unable to unify France under his political leadership. Fleury's inheritance of a situation of social and economic turmoil after the bursting of the Mississippi Bubble, combined with the readiness of the nobility to reassert themselves after Louis XIV's absolutist rule proved too great a challenge to reassert absolutism. The power given to the nobility by his predecessor, The Duke of Orleans, and his inability to act with the power of a monarch, only being a regent, were the death nails of his efforts to unify France under monarchial rule. His handling of the aftermath of the Mississippi Bubble bursting, however, managed to reduce the national debt and provide France with economic growth despite the decentralization of power. In contrast to Fleury's failed centralization of power was Robert Walpole's use of Machiavellian tactics to bring about the unification of parliament under his leadership. Walpole's competence in foreseeing the rising bubble in the South Sea Company made him a viable leader for a country in need of economic stability and political unification. After the bubble burst, his tactics included keeping taxes low, which kept trade stable in a fragile economy, and honoring the national debt. His use of patronage not only brought money to the economy but also increased the centralization of power under his leadership, which also suppresed opposing views, keeping unification of parliament. With the economic stability and political unity, England was able to rise above political conflict and the economic bubble crises to become the dominant nation of Europe during the 18th century.