How Does Edmund Burke Reflect On The French Revolution

DBQ Practice The French Revolution was caused by many problems within France. During the 18th century, France participated in wars such as the American Revolution and the 7 years war. With France participating in those 2 wars, they became bankrupt. France had to somehow make money so they decided to start heavily taxing the 3rd estate and made them work harder for their own food and wealth.

The identity of a society is verified through the rights which are given to the citizens. The rights of man have been at many different standards throughout time. Often being very one sided, and at times striving for a median between the two sides. In Edmund Burke's essay Reflections on the Revolution in France Burke states that a king is in one sense a servant but in everyday situations they are above every individual. All persons under him owe him a legal agreement to serve his hopes. This essay will demonstrate why Thomas Paine's essay The Rights of Man is more convincing than Edmund Burke's through examination of a heredity government, the nature of rights and the uselessness of the monarchy.

The ideas of Enlightenment philosophers rippled throughout the globe, however, they seemed to have the most interesting effect on France. Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a major contributor to Frances political and social structure post-French revolution. These ideas weren’t the only triggers for the French Revolution. A combination of strangling taxes, economic disparity, and an impotent ruler led to the development of an intense need for reform in France. “France spent an enormous amount of money during the American war which put them on the verge of bankruptcy” (McKay et al., pg. 662). To make up for this immense national debt, taxes were raised which put more pressure on the already struggling working class in France. The privileged classes

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

The French Revolution was a time of great social, political and economic tumult in the closing years of the Eighteenth Century. The motivators pushing French citizenry toward revolution are varied in scope and origin. They range from immediate economic woes to an antiquarian class structure. Modern historians still debate the value of the changes that the revolution brought to modern society. The middle class made gains that would never be rescinded, but do revolutions always end in tyranny? In the years before the revolution citizens were rigidly constrained by the estates of the realm. These social strata had been in place since the medieval ages. The people were divided into three groups; clergy, nobility and everyone else. The clergy

Edmund Burke and Thomas Paine were two of the several strongly-opinionated individuals writing back-and-forth in response to what the others were saying about the French Revolution. Burke, a critic, writes first. Paine, a supporter, responds.

Both John Locke and Edmund Burke support political rebellion under specific circumstances. What differentiates these two political theorists in their discussions of revolution? Please make reference to both Second Treatise of Government and Reflections on the Revolution in France when answering this question. Cite the texts and be specific.

After the French Revolution, the nation of France wanted to take on a different type of governing. There were those who wanted to go back to the feudal system that was in place before and those who wanted a limited monarchy with a constitution. Edmund Burke and Emmanuel Sieyés were writers who had strong opinions on the both sides of the scale. Sieyés believed in the Third Estate, and believed that they could run a better nation, where as Burke said that the nobility or the Second Estate was the only people that could do that job. But as we can see Sieyés view was the one that thrived in the end.

Paine being an egalitarian disagreed with Burke once again, because he saw social contract as consent between the people rather than government and emphasised on non-educated not necessarily stupid as Burke saw them. They have views and being educated will help them do better. Paine believed in ordinary people being given a chance to play political role in society. In addition he believed in the Rights of Man for everybody and everyone have should have the right

The French Revolution (1789-1814) was a period that affected the outcome of world history tremendously. This is considered a major turning point in European history which has led to dramatic changes in France and other regions of the world. Various social and political issues led to the start of the revolution. Politically, France suffered under the rule of Louis XVI, who ruled by absolute monarchy. Many people had their natural rights renounced and weren’t able to have a political voice. Socially, France had divided its population within 3 estates (classes). French citizens took it upon themselves to remodel their country 's’ political structure. The French Revolution had encountered both positive and negative effects. However, many Europeans viewed the Revolution as much more than just a bloody massacre. The French Revolution was used to demonstrate new ideology that would emphasize the principles of liberty and equality throughout Europe.

Burke, Edmund Burke is an Anglo-Irish politician and a writer. He wrote a controversial book based on his reaction about the French revolution in England. Burke supported conservation that everyone should have a leader (monarchy) and continue to have right given upon you by the king.

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.

With this being said it is not the midpoint between these positions; Przywara uses Lateran IV’s formula “for every similarity there is an ever greater dissimilarity.” Burkean conservatism, similarly, is almost a spanning of other political philosophies. Take two other political philosophers Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, specifically regarding the nature of the state. Hobbes seems to take the univocal position; the state is the unification of the people, the body, and the king as the head, forming the Leviathan. With this being said the position flips into equivocity, because the king is seen as the “greater dissimilarity.” The problem Hobbes runs into is his absolutism; if the king becomes a tyrant, all the citizens can do is to wait for a new king. (Duncan) On the other hand Rousseau seems to take the equivocal position, believing the formal nature of the state is almost unnatural. Rousseau however falls into the same dialectical flipping, switching to a univocal position, specifically his notion of the social contract. Since all men are created equally, it becomes the duty of the citizenry to depose of tyrannical ruler. (Bertram) These two ideologies lack the “rhythm” of analogy, leading to the ideological collapse. Przywara explains this collapse as the “either-or abrupt change” cause by the dialectic (Przywara 206). Burke, however, does not seem to make the same

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

Edmund Burke was one of the leading voices and supporters of the conservatism philosophy in late 18th century Europe. An English Wig and Parliamentary, he was the author of Reflections on the Revolution in France. A document in which he vocalized his conservatism ideology, expressing his disapproval for the french revolution, which he argues was against tradition and popular authority. The individual behind burkean conservatism, Burke was anti-enlightenment and anti-rationalist, instead supporting traditional ideals. He claimed that ultimate wisdom and insight is found by looking back on the lessons our ancestors have to teach us. Conservatism was a widely adopted philosophy following the french revolution and in the middle of the industrial revolution. It was was supported most often by those in power, who strived to maintain the status quo, and by the religious community, as conservatism was paired with religion.