800 Words Essay
General causes common to all the revolutions:
The French Revolution had general causes common to all the revolutions of the West at the end of the 18th century and particular causes that explain why it was by far the most violent and the most universally significant of these revolutions. It was a distinctively bourgeois revolution, in the sense that it was carried out by men with a considerable amount of private property in land.
It was also different in the sense that it introduced in the West the principle of liberty as opposed to security and an idea of the future into which the working classes had been forced to transform themselves by their own efforts. It was an attempt to solve the modern dilemma of poverty and overpopulation in a way that the old order of noblesse oblige and mercantilism had failed to do. It was a bourgeois revolution in the sense that it sought to achieve this solution within the framework of bourgeois liberalism as opposed to classical liberalism.
Economic foundations for the revolution:
It is hard to know which of the two main currents of bourgeois thought prevailed, the more conventional or the more radical, in France at the end of the 18th century. One thing is certain, the bourgeois revolution carried out by Robespierre was not able to create modern economic foundations, because it was unable to achieve a solution to the problem of poverty. Robespierre thought it could be done by a return to the principles of the nobility, which means a return to feudalism. However, this is impossible since bourgeois liberalism has always excluded the possibility of restoring feudalism.
Economic foundations Maintained as a Permanent alternative to feudalism:
It is true that Rob Gillespie tried to achieve a bourgeois order in the sense of bourgeois liberty, but he did not really believe it could be done in a lasting manner. It is true that he failed to conceive of an economic order that could be maintained as a permanent alternative to feudalism. Rob Gillespie's failure to provide economic foundations for the revolution and his failure to imagine an order that could be an alternative to feudalism were his two main failures. The final result was a failure of bourgeois revolution, bourgeois liberty and the bourgeois order, which had been successfully carried out in France in 1789.
Permanent alternative to the absolutist:
For the bourgeoisie, Rob Gillespie's bourgeois liberty and bourgeois order was a permanent alternative to the absolutist and regnant order. For Rob Gillespie, the establishment and absolutism were permanent alternatives to bourgeois order. Therefore, in the minds of Rob Gillespie's disciples, an absolutist order was permanent, a regnant order was temporary and bourgeois order was transitory. Rob Gillespie's failure to provide economic foundations for a permanent alternative to absolutism and his failure to conceive an order that could be an alternative to regnantism, was his two main failures. Rob Gillespie's followers believed bourgeois order was temporary and the republicans believed bourgeois order was transitory.
The Bourgeois Order And The Regnant Order
It is true that Rob Gillespie's ideas had been formulated by Adam Smith in the days of the bourgeoisie republic. Rob Gillespie's attempt to provide economic foundations for a republican order was a temporary solution for the problems created by absolutist rule. The absolutist order was temporary, but Rob Gillespie's economic foundation, namely the price mechanism was not, and the problem became permanent.
Rob Gillespie's attempt:
The price mechanism was not, however, enough to prevent Rob Gillespie's attempt to give economic foundations to a bourgeois society. Rob Gillespie's attempt was flawed in that it failed to take into account that a bourgeois society was not a free market society, but rather a market society. The failure of Rob Gillespie's attempt to provide economic foundations for a bourgeois society had been solved by Bastiat's "The Principle of Law in General and in Specific Forms", published in 1803. Bastiat's book had laid the ground work for the next 250 years of the struggle between laissez faire economists and protectionists.
Protectionism was a way to secure American prosperity
Bastiat's The Principle of Law in General and in Specific Forms showed the way for protectionists, who were eventually able to convince a majority of the American public that protectionism was a way to secure American prosperity. Rob Gillespie's price-fixing, "bargaining" was an economic scam and his attempt to reconcile himself to the economic laws of a bourgeois society could not and did not succeed. The attempt to reconcile himself to economic laws did not work, and "Rob's" economic foundations had been proven to be inadequate. The economists would never be able to give a detailed economic account of any state, no matter how broken, and economic instability is a recipe for failure.
The Bourdieusian Approach
The Bourdieusian approach is a scientific method for thinking about problems, and is not a political or ethical evaluation of those problems.
It is thus an impartial scientific approach, and thus must be free from moral judgement of those who believe differently, a subject we will return to.
It's scientific neutrality was confirmed by the scientific work of Newton and Einstein, and again by the work of Lavoisier. The economists had relied upon by Bourdieu's students remained scientifically neutral, and were thus neutral to both moral and political issues, and also neutral to the specific economic problems of that era.
The Economics of the Bourdieusian Approach
To understand the economics of the Bourdieusian approach, we have to look at how those trying to reconcile French bourgeois society with the laws of Newtonian physics responded to the economic instability, and to the problems of feeding a rapidly industrializing society. For the French aristocracy, "robbery" was a way of frugally meeting the costs of keeping the country running, a frugality rooted in a concern for the laws of nature. The use of the word "robbery" was "phrasal" (not "epi-phrasal", as is sometimes thought) and it applied to the systematic plundering of France by the ruling families of France. Robbery was not, as some misunderstanding has it, a word used to mean "excessively frugal spending", but instead the systematic plundering. This, then, provides the context for understanding the Economics of the Bourdieusian approach, namely an attempt to reconcile the scientific laws of nature with the social and economic systems of a bourgeois nation.
You may also like this video:
The 2nd view of French Revolution:
What were the 5 causes of the French Revolution?
Let's start by talking about what caused the French Revolution. In June 1789 a man, who would later be known as Robespierre, and a group of men who came to be known as the Jacobins formed the Club of Rome (Revolucin de los Rodillos, or Revolution of the Wheel) and began organizing the opposition to the established political power, particularly the monarchy, the Parliaments of France and Britain and the Catholic Church. With the formation of the club, the people were no longer governed by the king and parliament and were organized on the basis of the revolutions. Many believed that the club had discovered the key to success and all was right with the world. The club had gained popularity by creating new ideas and providing accurate information on political systems, economics and technology.
The club was originally a secret society.
Members had to show great personal courage in order to join. To assure the secrecy, the members used red envelopes and signatures were affixed with an iron pen. The iron pen was placed in the envelope when the envelope was opened. The signatures would be on the outside of the envelope. When the club was formed, some members held positions in the King's court or were members of the nobility. All the members signed the declaration of independence. The declaration of independence was the first national declaration of the people of France. Later, a second declaration was written by the other members of the club. In the very beginning, Robillard and his companions were quite upset that the government would not recognize their declaration. Robillard and his comrades wrote a second declaration to convince the King that they were the legitimate representatives of the people. The second declaration was the Constitution of the Republic of Liberty. Robillard was a close friend of the Marquis de Sade who held a position in the court of Louis the Sixteenth.
The Constitution of the Republic of Liberty
The Constitution of the Republic of Liberty was a very revolutionary document. It was written under duress by Robillard and Sade. The document called for the abolition of the monarchy, the creation of a republic and the election of a prime minister. The constitution was sent to Louis the Sixteenth and after his death it was placed into the hands of the Council of State who eventually gave it to Louis the Eighteenth. The Constitution of the Republic of Liberty was used in the future as the constitution of the French Republic.
Principles have been adopted by over fifty nations:
The Constitution of the Republic of Liberty has influenced other nations. Its principles have been adopted by Russia, Prussia, Austria, Spain, the Ottoman Empire and the American Republic. The Constitution of the Republic of Liberty has been the basic law of Egypt, Tunis, Tunis, Monaco, Monaco and Monaco. Its principles have been adopted by over fifty nations, a handful of nations have rejected it.
The rights of the people:
This document was a step forward in protecting the rights of the people. Robillard and his comrades believed that the people should have the power to determine the laws which should be applied. This document stated that the people should be given the freedom of assembly and the right to petition the government. The Constitution of the Republic of Liberty also protected the rights of women and children. These rights were not accorded in those nations to whom the Constitution was sent. The document also stated that the rights of the poor and the defence of the rights of the poor were also to be respected.
The Constitution made the people aware of the benefits
The Constitution of the Republic of Liberty not only imposed the principles of freedom but also made it effective. It made the people aware of the benefits of freedom. These benefits included the right to life and liberty, the right to adequate housing, the opportunity to participate in economic activities and access to social protection programmes. There were others. One such was the right to change one's religion. It also provided the freedoms of assembly and association. The Constitution of the Republic of Liberty created the framework of a representative democracy. However, it was criticised for not involving women in decision making.
