The Causes Of Joseph De Maistre And The French Revolution

A revolution, by definition, is the overthrow of one government followed by replacement with another. The American Revolution against the British during 1775 to 1783 and the French Revolution pitting the French people against their own government during 1789 to 1799 were both very important political and social turnovers. This movement towards the establishment of a constitutional government influenced political thought throughout the world. By closely examining three of the main causes of these revolutions, it is clear that although the two revolutions have their differences, the basis of cause for the revolutions have, overall, much stronger similarities.

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

The French revolution which is also referred to as the Revolution of 1789 was a period characterized by both social and political upheaval that span close to a decade in France. It was during this period that the country’s political landscape was redesigned and it involved

In 1789, an event would take place that would shake a nation. This event further altered the country of France’s history and drastically changed its future. This event was known as the Storming of the Bastille, the first violent instance to instigate the French Revolution and the formation of a rebel alliance to overthrow French monarchy. However the motives of the renegades is far and wide. The question must be asked; What were the major reasons for the French Revolution? Many elements of France’s infrastructure were created to suppress the qualms of the people. However, the major influences that caused the French Revolution were the new ideas of the enlightened thinkers, powerlessness of the Third Estate, and famine crises. Without these factors within French society, a governmental collapse may not have occurred.

The development of the French Revolution was greatly influenced by the philosophies of the French Enlightenment period. Interestingly, disparate to the English and American Revolutions, the French Revolution did not evolve in a linear fashion. Instead, it progressed in a series of conflicting phases, each of which could be considered almost as a revolution in itself. Political theorists – such as Montesquieu, Rousseau and Voltaire – were sources of inspiration for key revolutionaries throughout the Revolution’s three major phases. As the revolutionists occupying the leading roles changed, the principles of the Revolution’s former phase were abandoned in favour of another policy, essentially antithetical to the previous one. Ultimately, in shifting between various Enlightenment philosophers, France was able to subject its government to massive structural change - from being an absolute monarchy (prior to the Revolution), to a constitutional monarchy (1791-1792), then a republic (1792-1804), and finally a dictatorship (under Napoleon Bonaparte).

The view that the Enlightenment had directly caused the French Revolution is considered as one of the oldest interpretations. When considering the reliability of this view, one must take into account the possibility that it has been outdated by other historians’ interpretations that have emerged afterwards. Revisionist historians such as William Doyle argue that the Philosophes themselves did not have revolutionary intentions. Doyle questioned the notion that the Enlightenment was the sole cause of the French Revolution by considering that even if the Philosophes had not inputted, the French Revolution might have still happened. (Adcock, 2004, p.27) But before the Enlightenment, inequality had existed under the ancien régime for hundreds of years-the culture of deference was imbedded within law and tradition.

De Maistre, a critic of the French Revolution, argued that revolution and reform would weaken the chains that bind people together and lead to

France’s Old Regime was plagued with problems. During the Enlightenment, these problems were highlighted and highly criticized. Enlightenment thinkers called for people to start thinking for themselves, and to break off the chains of thought that oppressed them. They did not, however, call for revolution, nor were they necessarily pro-democracy. What they were interested in were practical reforms. In a system as broken as the Old Regime was, even the most practical of changes could seem revolutionary. Diderot and Turgot were two Enlightenment thinkers whose works exemplify this. Both men hid their more drastic thoughts behind seemingly less radical ideas and themes. Neither of the men, however, necessarily called for revolution, at least not the kind that France would get. Some of their ideas stemmed from previous writers, such as Loyseau and Bossuet, whether they agreed with them or not. Diderot and Turgot would find many areas of agreement with Loyseau, but they would largely disagree with Bossuet. In terms of authority and nobility, Diderot and Turgot were radical critics of the Old Regime, and the areas of agreement between them and Loyseau demonstrate that the legitimacy of the Old Regime, though not entirely in question during Loyseau’s era, was suspect enough to inspire the seeds of thought that would bring about the Enlightenment.

The author explained how the French Revolution starts and also how choice made by the royal government affect the old regime which moved the country into different conflicts. For example, in chapter 1 “The

Many scholars of French history have looked closely at the failures of the French monarchy and in particular the decisions of Louis XVI when assigning blame for the rise of the French Revolution in the eighteenth century. Clearly there were many complex factors that contributed to the failure of French absolutism and the rise of the Revolution; and many of those problems were exacerbated by poor decisions made by Louis XVI. But how much blame can be placed entirely with Louis XVI? Much of the framework from which Louis XVI governed was largely established by the more centralized model of governance pioneered by Louis XIV. The governing strategies enacted by Louis XIV had a direct effect on his successor’s methods of rule and in this way his

During the eighteenth century there was one central political cause for the French Revolution. King Louis XVI was a weak ruler who endured a lavish lifestyle. He disregarded the people’s needs, leaving much of the French population in discontent. Prior to the revolution the form of government was Absolute monarchy led by Louis XVI. The problem with absolute monarchy was that people were denied basic rights, and a say in government because the divine right theory was abused. The King ruled by the divine right of theory which

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

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.

Revolutions are a common occurrence throughout world history. With the amount of revolutions in history, there are those that get lost and those that are the most remembered or well known. One of the well known revolutions is the French Revolution which occurred in the years 1789 to 1799. Before the French Revolution, France was ruled by an absolute monarchy, this meaning that one ruler had the supreme authority and that said authority was not restricted by any written laws, legislature, or customs, a definition given by wikipedia.com and the feudal system, which was a system that said a peasant or worker would receive a piece of land in return for serving under a king, a definition given by vocabulary.com. Those who opposed the, then

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