Comparison Of Jules Ferry And Georges Clemenceau

In the books The Quartet and Thomas Jefferson, Joseph Ellis and Joyce Appleby discuss their thoughts on two important moments in American history and how they believe them to be revolutionary. The Quartet describes the political situation of the United States immediately following the American Revolution and how it made the transformation from a confederation into a republic. To do this, it follows the actions of four prominent men – George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison – as they work toward their goal of bringing about a new national government and discusses nationalism, issues such as economics and expansion, and arguments about personal, state, and federal powers. He argues that the debate over the Constitution was between “nationalists” and “confederationists”, that the second Revolution was a by-product of the first in that it took the systems of the newly-independent states and reworked them into a coherent national collective, and that without this change, the United States couldn’t have become a modern model of government.

It can me asserted that the Enlightenment thinker’s ideas had the desired effect on France as France became more stable with the emergence of new bodies of power which would enforce just laws, the separation of church and state which would maintain stability within the stat, and the rise of Napoleon who came to save the disembodied France from ruin. The rise of the Jacobin Club and the Reign of Terror was a necessary evil as it revealed the need for a new body of power that wouldn’t allow for such an extremist group to rise and wreak havoc on society. “In addition, the middle-class members of the National Convention wrote a new constitution restricting eligibility to serve as a deputy to men of substantial means. Real power lay with a new five-man executive body, called the Directory. France’s new rulers continued to support military expansion abroad, but war was no longer so much a

← Doyle, William. The French Revolution: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. 2001

France stood as the center for the Enlightenment because it was in a constant dichotomy between “the desire to censor dissident ideas and the desire to appear open to modernity and progress” (Hunt, 4098). Parliament hindered the monarchy’s reform efforts by using their own words of Enlightenment influence against them. This was a paradox that showed how the Enlightenment affected all levels of French life, but was applied to achieve different results. While the American Revolution and the resulting new republic was regarded as a successful application of the Enlightenment, the unstable, failed attempts at change and reformation in France led to early signs of revolution as revolts “in the name of liberty” from 1787-1789.

The Federalists were opposed to supporting the French, and this belief is backed up by the author’s rash description of the current state of France. France had an opportunity had freedom, but in the eyes of the author, they have squandered that chance. In the event of the violence spreading to the United States the author is optimistic that the people will band together in defense of the government, and all that the country stands for.

The film France is An Empire serves a form of propaganda to perpetuate the civilizing mission of France’s Office of the Colonies. Jules Ferry, France’s prime minister from 1880-1885, believed that it was their duty as a classified superior race to civilize the demeaned lower races. The civilizing mission was believed to be sharing the European generosity and compassion to those uncivilized people practicing, and living in uncultured conditions. The documentary details the advances that France brought to its colonies such as medicine, education, science, and military practices, but never shows nor allows native opinion. Through the use of evidentiary editing, the viewer listens to all the wonderful opportunities France brought its colonies, and proceeds to see the colonists enjoying the fruit of France’s labour. In addition, the use of diegetic sound furthers idea that the native practices were strange, and needed French influence. Jules Ferry’s civilizing mission, of superior races having a duty to refine the lower race, is justified in France is an Empire through the use of evidentiary editing and diegetic sound.

The French Revolution was based on an assortment of Enlightenment ideals. French philosophers, including Voltaire and Rousseau led the revolution leading up to the revolution, so to speak, coming up with progressive ideals as to government, social structure, and the nature of people. Indeed, the ideals which the revolution was fought in the name of progressed throughout France and, eventually, Europe. Though the revolution took wrong turns along the way, the ideals which it was based on never wavered. Even during the heart of his Reign of Terror, Robespierre spoke of a state where each citizen wants to do good by his country. This shows Robespierre with an unwavering commitment to the state, an ideal which came out of the Enlightenment. Though he may have carried out his beliefs in a gruesome and perhaps wrong way, his ideals were the same as the Enlightenment philosophers: make the state better for all to live in.

Citizens were not permitted to vote as individuals. Instead one vote was given to each of the three estates, the clergy (first), aristocrats (second), and everyone else excluded from the first two, who were most commonly peasants and the working class (third) (Roberts et al. 646). Unsurprisingly, the Third Estate was outvoted and citizens within became furious. They, “…insisted that those who worked [for low wages] and pay taxes were the nation…” (Roberts et al. 646) Shortly afterward, the National Assembly was born and was determined to take France’s future into its own (Belloc, 93).

The Framer’s notion of a republic, or democratic republic form of government, rested on the necessity to limit the formation and success of factions. Yet, as Dahl argued, the irony of Madison’s aversions to factions is that, not long after the ratification of the

A glint of good news came to the now-impoverished family when the merchant heard that a ship containing his merchandise had just arrived in port. The merchant was overjoyed and went to claim his wealth, only to find that there had been a legal ordeal and he had, indeed, lost it all. Here, the author tries to illustrate the French government’s inadequacy in meeting the needs of the people. In the 1850s, great minds, including the Swiss/French political philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, were writing that the authority to rule came from the people themselves. Furthermore, philosophers argued that the government’s duty was not to serve their own decadence but rather to serve the people. The French government, being an absolute monarchy, was ruled by only the word of Louis XV, and the royal Bourbon family had a history of ruling to meet their own selfish desires. The French monarchy did not uphold the intrinsic promise and duty of any government to protect, feed, and serve its people. De Beaumont symbolizes this by failing to deliver the goods to the impoverished former merchant. In other words, just like the merchant’s undelivered goods, the

1.) Why does the United States come out its revolution with a republic instead of a monarchy? Why do the French wind up with an Emperor Napoleon but the United States does not have a King George of the House of Washington?

The Royal Family of France’s attempted escape on June 20th, 1791 made many people very unhappy with the King. The mob, ever ready to exercise the uncontrolled Rights of Men, made a mock parade of the King’s Arms in the market places, and, dashing them and the figure of a crown to the ground, they trampled upon them, crying out, “Since the King has abandoned what he owed to his high situation, let us trample upon the ensigns of royalty” (Ascherson 48)! The Royal Family not only lost many of its followers through their attempted escape, but also because King Louis XVI kept making bad decisions, ones that had no benefit to France or its people. The people wanted someone who would lead them into a revolution and change France for the better, not because they wanted the power, but because they believed in France and wanted it to become a great nation. That man was Robespierre, who after the flight of the King followed the Jacobin club in its move toward republicanism. He called for universal male suffrage and the end of property qualifications for voting and office holding (Blumberg 290). Robespierre wanted to make France a republic, a government for the people and by the people, a country where everyone had the freedoms and rights they deserved. In January of 1793, Robespierre voted on whether or not he thought that King Louis should be executed for his actions. At the Convention on the trial

The modern French government is a unique political entity like no other in history. In my research paper I aim to show that while France's system of government appears democratic it is in actuality not. I plan to demonstrate it is more of an oligarchy than a polyarchy, polyarchy being fundamentally necessary for democracy. Drawing on research from conflict theorists I plan to show that France is not truly democratic. I plan to first draw a parallel between research on France as a pluralist state and Robert Dahl's New Haven study by showing that France like New Haven appears to be a pluralist democracy. I then plan to show just as G. William Domhoff did with Dahl's original study, that the same inequality in power exists in France as in New

Liberté, égalité, fraternité was the cry of freedom that countless people used to propel them through, and to the end of the French Revolution. This long period of social, political and economic change in France lasted 10 years, starting in 1798 and ended with Napoleon Bonaparte. The French Revolution greatly affected all of Europe at the time and continues to represent the embodiment of revolution to this day. This constant struggle between the heavily taxed, burdened, and unrepresented third estate and those higher created an environment of monumental change for everyone. In the years leading up to the French Revolution, new beliefs and ideas were reaching every corner of Europe creating the thought that men should live free of oppression. However, in France the leader Louis XVI lead like a tyrant leaving the people impoverish and angry. Through the analysation of numerous circumstance present during the Ancien Régime, such as an inferior fiscal leadership, massive debt, and the forthcoming of new ideas during the Enlightened period, it can be concluded that the means for this revolution were justified as it is in our essence to revolt for a change.

The French Revolution began as an expression of rebellion against centuries of absolute rule in France. After an interim of experimental liberalism under the rule of Jacobins and Girondins and then the infamous reign of terror, the people of French were drawn to a man who promised them a return to stability, and  honor through the expansion of empire. France and it’s people had long yearned for this sens eof honour, it had seemed, and could finally sens eit in a lasting rpesence under the rule of their prodigious, unbeatable general, Napoleon Bonaparte. He would soon take the reigns of civil government as well and become yet another Absolutist ruler, yet this