Freedom: Critical Thinkers of the French Revolution

The French Revolution is one of the most known revolutions in the Earth’s history. Its progression from a bourgeoisie - led conflict to a proletariat civil war has induced many arguments about it and its core principles of liberty and an end to feudalism. However, it wasn’t merely French thinkers that saw this either as a disaster or as a chance to make their world better, British politicians and philosophers also saw this revolution as an echo of the English Civil War in 1688 and when the fighting in France began to be more bloodthirsty and embroiled in the lower classes, the Peasant’s Revolt. The French Revolution saw the birth of many ideas and ways of being such as radicalism, feminism and anarchy. The roots of socialism and even the first recognised works of terrorism were found here. In this essay, I will look at some of the key thinkers in Britain at that period: Edmund Burke, Thomas Paine, Mary Wollstonecraft and William Godwin as well as those who opposed them. In particular, I will look at their most famous pamphlets and articles that were written with specific intent to be French Revolution propaganda. In particular, I will look at those who work for and against the aristocracy as much of the aristocratic dominance of the past was falling from grace in the public view like never before and many, in particular Paine and Godwin showed their contempt for this class of people.

Edmund Burke was originally, like much of the country, saw the revolution as a noble gesture and the beginning of democracy that had put the British on a higher standing than the rest of the world. However, as the Revolution descended into a more violent and ‘indiscriminate’ plain, he damned France and its slaughter. After Rev. Richard Price’s sermon promoting a French Revolution style attack upon the British monarchy, Burke summoned these feelings into an essay called Reflections on the Revolution in France. It was a pamphlet in defence of aristocracy but almost merely on a superficial level. It was commended to all sorts of greatness by many - which reflected the sales which extended into several thousand in the first week - but for some, in particular his almost poetic description of Marie Antoinette was “...pure foppery”.

His argument was built upon a wish to outcast France as an uncivilised and anarchic country that had no basis for trade or communication with the rest of civilisation. However, it follows a simple pattern of four central themes: a damning reply towards Richard Price; a scathing attack upon the personalities and ideologies of the revolutionaries; a rejection of a set of abstract or 'natural' rights of humanity and a defence of the British political and class system and related rights of men. He damned the leaders of the ‘Third Estate’ as mere social climbers and power hungry individuals who claim a revolution in a way that seems they are fighting for the people but they are fighting for their own greed and vanity. Although, Burke did concede there was some forms of innate rights of humanity such as a right to justice and to aid their offspring with any means in the right side of the law.

However, he dismissed the ideas of the right of equality and to own equal things. He consistently puts forward the idea that any 'natural rights' that man had before a civilised world would have them discarded or altered in the course of progress. To go back to such a society would be insanity - to live on the land was of the past and we needed aristocracy to lead on into the future. Evidently, much of Burke's opinion is concentrated in the common ideologies of the time: a general pessimistic and suspicious outlook upon human nature and a celebration of etiquette and manners as the epitome of human behaviour. He concludes that the aristocratic wrongdoings were considerably small compared to the atrocious behavior of the revolutionaries.

Typically cast as the archetype nemesis of Burke, Thomas Paine took a more radical approach to the Revolution. Already well known as an American Revolution instigator with his famous pamphlet: Common Sense Paine celebrated the fact of America was a seemingly classless society without the usual social qualms and segregation of Britain. It was a natural progression for him to therefore support the Revolution in France. His Rights of Man was the main opponent to Burke's Reflections. It was written over the course of two pieces and two years. It was immensely popular, selling roughly 500,000 in the first year but was heavily contested, even until 1839. Those who agreed with it called Paine "the greatest political reasoner that has ever existed". Those who disagreed claimed Paine was a leveler and a Jacobin supporter. Paine's works inspired John Thewall who would take up the reigns of 'radicalism' when Paine fled for France in 1792 after being charged with libel.

The core basis of Paine's argument was the innate rights of man and that the existing social orders like those in France or even in Britain were tyrannical. He drew attention that tyranny did not just occur in the King's court but in all forms of social order such as aristocracy, feudalism, parliament and religion. Paine decides that it is not merely the question of if innate rights of humanity exist, the debate lies within the origin of these. To a point, he plainly says that humans started out as equal as part of a Divine Will so to deny these rights would almost be against it, i.e. futile and morally wrong. He also said that upon these rights, new civil rights should be built upon them. It is clear here he is advertising the American system of politics as highly more civilised form.

He promoted America as the new centre of all progressive thought as was Greece was for the ancients. He also took a long time to condemn any form of monarchy and on another level, aristocracy as he claimed that: "All hereditary government is in its nature tyranny." As for the various, growing empires around the world, he damned them as inhibiting progress as well as any warfare. His most controversial idea was that of ‘leveling’ with such components of that like classless society and wealth redistribution. He also outlined what we would now call the welfare state, calling for education for all and a basic pension for those over 55. Conclusively, in modern times we can see this latter part of his Rights of Man as what is now known as 'socialist'.

Burke and Paine had their very strong differences. Burke had been asked how he identified the opponents of his own political party (He was a prominent member of the Whigs) and he said that those who wanted to get "...the principles of Paine, Priestly, Price...magnified and extolled, and in a sort of obscure and undefined manner to be adopted as the Creed of their party”. Paine himself used much of his Rights of Man to mock Burke as he "pities the plumage, but forgets the dying bird." The main difference in their opinions stem from the differing interpretation of the English Civil war in 1688. The succession of William over James II was the topic of much controversy. Burke saw it as merely inheriting the throne as James forfeited it but participating in 'Catholic' activities.

Paine saw it as the succession of a 'democratic' action: the people wanted William, not James, therefore showing that the throne can be given over to others if one is unsuitable. This gives their arguments strength if others have this interpretation too. This shows their opponent ship over the issue of aristocracy as it is an inherited position of power: Burke could only see the social side of their etiquette and fancifulness whereas Paine could only see them as miniature tyrants of land that caused inequality with other people on so many levels.

The voice of the women was symbolised in the works of Mary Wollstonecraft. Her two pamphlets The Vindication of Men and then The Vindication of Women were no wholly written as an attack on Burke although it is true that she was the first respondent to Reflections. Wollstonecraft was an associate of Richard Price and The Vindication of Men was in his defence. The more famous, later article Vindication of Women was more related to manners than to rights. She asked for education for women in order to companion men as so not to "halt the process of knowledge and virtue."

She still supports child-raising and household work as the main duties of a woman but wants the reintegration of 'spheres' so that women know and understand more 'male' subjects like politics. She also has a similar outlook to Paine with the nature of rights: they are from a divine source. Specifically, she portrays Burke as lovesick on the age of chivalry and aristocracy and we need to take heed of civil liberties and create a new society based on reasoned sensibility and for women to have a more dominant role in the world. She accuses the French of not being properly prepared for a revolution as they had based it on philosophical dabbling than reasoned judgment. It is clear throughout her work that she holds many conflicting ideals which have resulted in her work being mainly looked-over until recent years.

Another prominent voice in the French Revolution debate was William Godwin. Godwin, who later married Wollstonecraft, is now attributed to what is called philosophical anarchism. His childhood growing up with a strict religious family was the initial basis of his famous work Enquiry Concerning Political Justice, based on three principles: 'God' must be wholly reasonable, property should be dealt with full say from the ‘Congregation' and that decisions made by the 'congregation' should only be final if there is a unanimous agreement and reasoned debate.

He would later secularize these ideals into political thought. His Enquiry Concerning Political Justice was based on five sections that had their origins in the previous three: Godwin's Theory of Justice; an argument for a simpler, 'anarchic' society; a critique of the existing society statures; Godwin's theory of property and his theory of eventual human perfection. His pleas to go back to a more subsistence farming society - most importantly, the dissolution of any form of government. One strong undertone that repeats throughout of the article is that of equality which raises the question of 'leveling' or spreading the wealth around that came around in 1688. Indeed, there are undertones of Paine’s work in this but on a more radical level. Despite what could be called 'political treason', William Pit decided not to press charges because it was too expensive to be well-read or it's ideals to be taken on board - despite selling four thousand very quickly.

The effect of the French Revolution in British politics was evidently strong. It polarised one of the main political parties of the day - the Whigs - as well as breeding discontent within spheres of the country such as Ireland but it also raised a loyalist attitude amongst others. It was only a century since the English Civil War where King and Parliament went to war. The Whigs never had any real opinion on the French Revolution in it's origins but had a certain sympathy towards them. But as the Revolution progressed, the party began to fracture. Some took to the side of Burke and even made a coalition party with the Tories in 1794. The others - led by Charles James Fox - then took up a feeble opposition which almost killed the Whig party altogether.

Considering the huge amount of propaganda that was bandied about in this volatile period, its effects have been felt throughout history and deeply felt within the aristocracy. With more than just the contributors that I have discussed in detail, Europe was flooded with ideas and new ways of society and government that they have never considered before - a state without a monarch at the helm and the related aristocratic pawns at his side but one based on democracy and a more liberated populace. However, there was the pressing matter of the new parliament in France, lead by Napoleon.

France had been unstable for many years and Napoleon urged his countrymen to his start a course of conquest and war that tied in Britain with the Battle of Waterloo in 1815. The ideas did not fade away amidst the warfare. The ideals of Burke started to be forgotten by most people but many made a case to why this work was ignored. When T.E. Kebbel's wrote his History of Toryism, he ignored any effect of Burke's work with the Tories. With Paine, his work started to lose credibility in America after the publication of his glorifying secularism article called The Age of Reason. His work was not forgotten by everyone and it was part of the Chartist traditions and many anti-monarch groups. Wollstonecraft had some supporters in the later Suffragette movement but not as much as one would think a many avoided publications that had an aura of 'free love'.

Godwin influenced many of the greatest thinkers of the time like William Wordsworth and Hazlitt. Godwin was also markedly opposed, particularly by Thomas Malthus. He too was used by the extremist anti-monarchists and anti-aristocratic groups.

In conclusion, within the French Revolution debate, we can see the roots of the downfall of aristocracy in the eyes of the law and of the public. It ruptured the wound caused by the English Civil War and brought it to the forefront again. Today, despite having a House of Lords and that aristocracy technically exists; this is seen by some as a mere superficial role as much of the parliamentary roles are undertaken by the House of Commons. Also, with the growth of media and ‘common celebrities’ there is a markedly stark difference to the respect and glory of the aristocracy. If they are caught misbehaving, there is a more critical public who will not turn a blind eye as once before.