Page 1 of 1 [ 3 posts ] 

GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

28 Mar 2015, 1:37 pm

I think it's pretty interesting--both revolutions occurred at nearly the same time and they were both fueled by the same ideology. One produced a prosperous, relatively stable functional republic. The other went from absolutist monarchy to rule by political terror and back to absolutist monarchy.

Those educated in the 'great man' school of history might say it was because the American revolution produced a Cincinnatus (George Washington), while the French revolution produced a Caesar (Napoleon Bonaparte).

However, I think most of us can agree, the truth is a bit more complex...

So, why do you think these two revolutions, so similar in cause, were so different in effect?


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

28 Mar 2015, 1:50 pm

Well the American Revolution was a war of independence and self determination that involved wealthy landowners and leaders in the colonies with fairly specific grievances rebelling against an authority from across the sea whereas the French Revolution originated from the poorest people and looked to overthrow the monarchy and an existing aristocracy with in their own country. The American Revolution was more about independence from Great Britain than it was ambitious societal changes within the colonies, America benefited from essentially being able to start from scratch whereas there was a hereditary ruling class and monarchy that claimed their authority from God in France.



GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

28 Mar 2015, 2:27 pm

^^^ So, just to push back a bit, geographical considerations aside, both revolutions rebelled against a monarchy, and both did so for similarly stated reasons...

Here's the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789):

Quote:
Article I - Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions can be founded only on the common good.

Article II - The goal of any political association is the conservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man. These rights are liberty, property, safety and resistance against oppression.

Article III - The principle of any sovereignty resides essentially in the Nation. No body, no individual can exert authority which does not emanate expressly from it.

Article IV - Liberty consists of doing anything which does not harm others: thus, the exercise of the natural rights of each man has only those borders which assure other members of the society the enjoyment of these same rights. These borders can be determined only by the law.

Article V - The law has the right to forbid only actions harmful to society. Anything which is not forbidden by the law cannot be impeded, and no one can be constrained to do what it does not order.

Article VI - The law is the expression of the general will. All the citizens have the right of contributing personally or through their representatives to its formation. It must be the same for all, either that it protects, or that it punishes. All the citizens, being equal in its eyes, are equally admissible to all public dignities, places and employments, according to their capacity and without distinction other than that of their virtues and of their talents.

Article VII - No man can be accused, arrested nor detained but in the cases determined by the law, and according to the forms which it has prescribed. Those who solicit, dispatch, carry out or cause to be carried out arbitrary orders, must be punished; but any citizen called or seized under the terms of the law must obey at once; he renders himself culpable by resistance.

Article VIII - The law should establish only penalties that are strictly and evidently necessary, and no one can be punished but under a law established and promulgated before the offense and legally applied.

Article IX - Any man being presumed innocent until he is declared culpable, if it is judged indispensible to arrest him, any rigor which would not be necessary for the securing of his person must be severely reprimanded by the law.

Article X - No one may be disturbed for his opinions, even religious ones, provided that their manifestation does not trouble the public order established by the law.

Article XI - The free communication of thoughts and of opinions is one of the most precious rights of man: any citizen thus may speak, write, print freely, except to respond to the abuse of this liberty, in the cases determined by the law.

Article XII - The guarantee of the rights of man and of the citizen necessitates a public force: this force is thus instituted for the advantage of all and not for the particular utility of those in whom it is trusted.

Article XIII - For the maintenance of the public force and for the expenditures of administration, a common contribution is indispensable; it must be equally distributed between all the citizens, according to their ability to pay.

Article XIV - Each citizen has the right to ascertain, by himself or through his representatives, the need for a public tax, to consent to it freely, to know the uses to which it is put, and of determining the proportion, basis, collection, and duration.

Article XV - The society has the right of requesting account from any public agent of its administration.

Article XVI - Any society in which the guarantee of rights is not assured, nor the separation of powers determined, has no Constitution.

Article XVII - Property being an inviolable and sacred right, no one can be deprived of private usage, if it is not when the public necessity, legally noted, evidently requires it, and under the condition of a just and prior indemnity.


If some of those ideas seem familiar, there's good reason...
Quote:
The inspiration and content of the document emerged largely from the ideals of the American Revolution.[4] The key drafts were prepared by Lafayette, working at times with his close friend Thomas Jefferson,[5][6] who drew heavily upon The Virginia Declaration of Rights, drafted in May 1776 by George Mason (which was based in part on the English Bill of Rights 1689), as well as Jefferson's own drafts for the American Declaration of Independence. In August 1789, Honoré Mirabeau played a central role in conceptualizing and drafting the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen.[7]


So, it seems that both sets of revolutionaries did, at least, pay lip service to the idea of changing society in similar ways and for similar reasons....

Also, the French did a great job of running off or killing most of the nobles, so I don't see the 'hereditary ruling class' as being a significant obstacle in and of itself...

To be clear, I'm not disagreeing with you so much as asking you to clarify and defend your points...

I think you're on the right track.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus