Alexis de Tocqueville and Karl Marx both believed that revolutions were inevitable. However, the two did not agree on all aspects of revolution. De Tocqueville found that revolutions couldn't be deterred, but also found that no laws in history determined revolutions. On the other hand, Marx used a logical framework to claim that revolutions were acts of history.
             The focus of de Tocqueville's study on revolutions was the French Revolution. In his book entitled The Old Regime and the French Revolution, de Tocqueville addressed the causes of the revolution and gave clues pertaining to the link between revolutions and the formation of modern states. The problems with the old regime began with the weakness of the king, Louis XVI. Until the revolution France was an Absolute Monarchy; this meant that the monarch had large powers over society. Some of these powers included the national system of justice, the right to tax, the right to put up arms (as leader of the military forces), and heavy influence upon the Catholic Church. All these powers were in need of a strong king to survive, unfortunately that was not the case. According to de Tocqueville, had there been a wiser king the revolution may not have occurred. Another reason attributed to the revolution was the division of classes. The population of France had been divided into three estates, with two being privileged. They consisted of the bourgeoisie, the nobility, and the clergy. The upper two estates, the nobility and the clergy, had many privileges over the bourgeoisie: they were exempt from taxes, although, they were the richest. In addition, they were the only members in society who could hold positions of importance; this caused discontent within the bourgeoisie. The way of taxing society was also a cause for revolution. Before the revolution there was a great need for taxation reform in France. Only the lower classes were being taxed, i.e. the bourgeoisie. This was pro...