Ideology:
Freedom vs. Equality in the French Revolution
Freedom vs. Equality: Be clear on the
difference between liberal ideology and socialist ideology.
Liberals emphasize freedom. They believe that a just society protects
the individual’s rights. Socialists emphasize equality. They believe
that eliminating poverty is more important than protecting individual
rights. The Liberal Revolution: The liberals adopted a constitutional monarchy. A legislative assembly, elected by property-owners, possessed sovereignty: the powers to legislate and tax. The King’s job was to execute the laws of the assembly. The judiciary’s responsibility was to protect the laws. This liberal
government formally ended feudalism and dedicated itself to protecting
the individual’s natural rights: the rights to life, liberty and
property, equality before the law, and civil liberties like free speech and
freedom of religion, Why did the liberal government
collapse? What needs to happen in situations like the emergency of 1792 to prevent the
disintegration of liberal government? Why did Rousseau’s ideas fail
(even though the Radical phase produced some amazing accomplishments? What
is the best solution? The Radical Revolution: Rousseau’s model of government looked back to the ancient Greek city-state, an example in his mind of a functioning direct democracy in which all citizens gathered and made decisions for the good of the community. But in practice, Rousseau’s government turns into a convention dominated by a charismatic leader who possesses all power. During the emergency of summer 1792, the
radical leaders of the Convention mobilized the general will of the
people to save the Revolution from civil war and invasion. In doing so,
the radicals successfully mobilized the power of all classes, including
the bourgeoisie, the workers, and the peasants. They effectively established the
sovereignty of the government in a way that neither Louis XVI or the
liberals had been able to accomplish. They stabilized the economy and
turned its power to the creation of a massive army. This army was
inspired by the belief that they possessed the force of social justice,
and this motivation made them an effective fighting force.
Unfortunately, to accomplish this goal, the radicals used terror
indiscriminately. They wound up lopping off the heads of thousands. The government passed a new
constitution which gave the vote to all men regardless of background.
However, they never did hold any elections, AND they chopped the heads
off peasants who suggested that it might be a good idea to get rid of
private property and let the poor folk help themselves to the wealth of
the country. After the Terror, would the
philosophers have concluded that an authoritarian form of government
was necessary to prevent chaos, or would they have blamed the unlimited
powers taken by the central government for the abuses? Napoleon: Napoleon took control of this army
and established its independence from the government in wars of
conquest. Eventually, Napoleon was invited to lead an authoritarian
government which concentrated all power in the hands of the military.
To placate the liberals, Napoleon implemented the Napoleonic Code that
over hauled the judiciary and made everyone equal in the eyes of the
law. Also, promotions within his government were made according to the
merit of the worker, not because of his class or bloodline. Napoleon exported these
rights to the rest of Europe in his wars of conquest. However, he soon
declared himself Emperor in an effort to make this concentration of
power hereditary. He used his power to enrich his family and to create
a dynasty. What is
the problem with a government which concentrates too much power in one
person’s hands?
|