European History class 3

Marxist Interpretation of FR

class competition (bourgeoisie against nobility)

The victory of the Enlightenment

popular sovereignty, reason + rights

Linking social and ideational theories

changing income and wealth patterns and strategies/rates of upward mobility:

reshape dominant beliefs about power + governance/who gets to rule

Marxist Interpretation of FR main idea

FR was a class struggle (like any revolution) of a class struggle between the bourgeoisie and the nobility.

○ The industrial proletariat (working class) were pushing the bourgeoisie to more “left wing positions”

■ There is a continuous + defining characteristics of these social struggles and social structure which is the conflict based group

■ The system of production affects societal structure + dominant beliefs/ideologies

○ A constant struggle/conflict between classes and class systems = this conflict is essential to change + revolution

○ The conflict is a result of class consciousness (bc people know about the differences between the wealthy/poor and the powerful/powerless) which is a catalyst for evolution!

○ Bourgeoisie dominance = a capitalist society, plurality of conflicts replaced now by a duality struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat

● BUT invalidated by historical evidence:

False distinction between the “feudal aristocracy” and the “capitalist bourgeoisie” and forgetting that there could be overlap

■ The Feudal system is already very weak in France!!

○ SO many noble privileges that the aristocracy, feudal bourgeoisie had were weakened (noble titles for sale by getting land/office)

● → SO not really separate economic classes, more of an overlap

○ Bourgeois were “budding capitalists”; they were more traders, land owners,

public officials (also took part in the economy!)

○ Aristocracy invested heavily in trade + proto-industry

■ Revolution slowed down the process of industrialization (older methods)

Bourgeois lacked class consciousness

○ Bc of provinces and regional ties from the ancien regime, the people were prevented from forming a generalized/uniform class conscious: instead there was lot of variance across local cultures

■ Different laws, different values, no uniform structure of organization to help class consciousness develop/spread

■ Bourgeoisie more closely related to the nobles back then

○ SO class consciousness (bc lacking uniformity in ideas, norms, values) was actually NOT a catalyst for FR

Bourgeoisie didn’t actually really have revolutionary aspirations

● Rather they wanted to become like the nobility: buy noble titles or by climbing social ladder another way

■ Didn’t necessarily want to end the social hierarchy: they were in a pretty good position compared to the workers

○ Wanted to maintain the estates-system to allow them to show their upward social mobility + individual progress (preserve rank and order)

Furet: FR

was much more a conflict over the meaning + application of norms and ideas, about the new social contract and new forms of organization

■ Explains the radicalism of the 2nd stage though the idea of popular sovereignt.

○ “Popular will” presumes a uniformity: cast suspicion, distrust on all potential differences/dissent/anyone who disagrees.

○ Impact of Rousseau, Social Contract

■ The general will = “one and indivisible” has to be created ■ The general will = has to be executed not represented ● If we get rid of anyone who disagrees/dissents then we will have a general will of everyone left who agrees :)

Late 18th C: three competing discourses/discussions that led to FR (Baker)

● Justice: social contract (constitution) as a form of protection against state

domination(through taxes) or arbitrary(divine power) rule

● Equality: reasons/account giving by the gov (gov challenging divine right to rule

● Popular will: the people (not God) as the source of legitimate rule :)

a result of the rise of the “popular will” ideal in summer of

1789

■ Revolutionaries were the ones who executed/understood the popular will +

communicated it to the higher classes/the king

■ Dissent could’t be tolerated bc it would expose the fragility of the power

base + undermine “popular” will