Society and the Love of Virtue

The Freedom Principle... it seems that personal virtue is the buffer against despotism.... think about it... if a society goes off the deep end of the value spectrum and all morals become lax or non existent... who steps in? Big Bro!

In his  classification of kinds of political systems, Montesquieu defines three main kinds: republican, monarchical, and despotic. As he classifies them, republican political systems vary depending on how broadly they extend citizenship rights — those that extend citizenship relatively broadly are termed democratic republics, while those that restrict citizenship more narrowly are termed aristocratic republics. The distinction between monarchy and despotism hinges on whether or not "intermediate powers" (such as the nobility, the clergy, etc.) exist that can restrain the authority of the ruler: if so, the regime counts as a monarchy; if not, it counts as a despotism.

Driving each classification of political system, according to Montesquieu, must be what he calls a "principle".

This principle acts as a spring or motor to motivate behavior on the part of the citizens in ways that will tend to support that regime and make it function smoothly. For democracies (and to a somewhat lesser extent - for republics), this spring is the love of virtue  . For monarchies, the spring is the love of honor.  Finally, for despotisms, the spring is the fear of the ruler. A political system cannot last if its appropriate principle is lacking. Montesquieu claims, for example, that the English failed to establish a republic after the Civil War (1642–1651) because the society lacked the (democratic) requisite: the love of virtue.