Discuss the origins of the French Revolution – economically, politically, socially, and ideologically

Résumé du document

"Great revolutions which succeed make the causes which produced them disappear, and thus become incomprehensible because of their own success" (1), wrote Alexis de Tocqueville one hundred and fifty years ago. Yet, we will try all the same to understand what the origins of the French Revolution were: economically, politically, socially and also ideologically. Many historians explain the Revolution by the economic and financial crisis which the Old Regime faced during its last years. Let us remember that, in Louis XVI's time, French economy was based above all on agriculture; more than eighty-one percent of France's global population of twenty-eight million being peasants in 1789. Therefore, it is not surprising at all that an agricultural crisis would have repercussions on every other branch of the whole economy. That's what happens in 1788. A very cold winter, in addition to the archaism of the French agricultural system, provokes a quite bad harvest. So the price of grain reaches heights. Consequences? The peasant class gets poorer, buys less industrial goods and both agriculture and industry becomes the victim of this subsistence crisis, which causes a drop in wages, an increase in prices and general unemployment and leads therefore to popular discontent.

Extraits

[...] Of course, nobody is even thinking of complete democracy and entire abolition of privileges. The feudal society has been built on the very notion of privilege (there are not only privileged groups of people, but also privileged territories, cities like Marseille, towns, provinces), that is to say many particular laws (the word ‘privilege' comes from the Latin ‘privata lex'). In a word: no uniformity. Yet, what is new is the fact abuses of privilege have kept increasing. Inequalities of birth, of social condition, inequalities before tax and justice do not constitute a serious problem in themselves, but the situation has become intolerable for the Third Estate. [...]

[...] There is a conflict between the monarch and the parliaments about reforms of taxation (Calonne's project of a ‘subvension territoriale' is very unpopular among the privileged orders). Ideologically, the influence of the Enlightenment is undoubtedly huge. The main ideas of the philosophers, such as individual liberties, freedom of speech, social equality, separation of powers have to be taken into account. Philosophical concepts, through the medium of newspapers (the ‘gazettes'), ‘salons' (of Mme Geoffrin, Mme du Deffand or Mme Necker) and ‘cafés' have indeed reached a great number of people among the French population. [...]

[...] As mentalities evolve, new revolutionary words appear, such as ‘nation' and ‘patrie'. The idea of nation contains the concept of a participation of the citizens to political life: a popular sovereignty. In pamphlets are written against royal authority. But the practical experiments that took place in England or America are also important enough. The words of the American Insurgents taxation without representation' have certainly influenced the Third Estate in its decision to become a ‘National Assembly', on 17th June 1789. [...]

[...] The bourgeoisie will use the poor classes to help itself rise, taking advantage of the disorder and instability of French administration, which is not unified and subject to important differences according to the regions. Yet, the most important origin of the French Revolution is maybe the social crisis. The feudal system is quite ancient and the principle of inequality among men is generally accepted: indeed, on the eve of the revolution, not a single cahier de doléances speaks of overthrowing the structure of the Old regime. [...]

[...] It is that financial problem which leads to the calling of the Estates General (last time was in 1614), as decided by the king on July 5th 1788. Politically, the crisis is due to a deep contradiction: the group which rules the society economically and culturally, which is becoming the elite of the society on every level, is kept apart from any political life. This contradiction is, above all, a nonsense and the whole destiny of the kingdom would have been different if the privileged orders, and the king, had understood that it was their interest to include the economic elite in the decision-making process. [...]