Revolution for Change
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 attribut
Even the rules of war, last resort of the will to violence, had been humanized. The differences between de Tocqueville and Marx were as follows: de Tocqueville believed that feudalism and capitalism did not clash at the same moment in history, he saw that feudalism was an already dying institution. The thinkers also challenged the right of absolute rule; they had ideas of equal rights and the abolition of the class systems. The bourgeoisie profited during this time and became more wealthy and powerful. In addition, the growth of new ideas among the bourgeoisie reflected their high education levels. Not only did France lose money by participating in unsuccessful wars, but they also lost men and supplies. The oppressed, those unhappy with the current situation, will be in favor of progression; while those reaping the benefits of the time will be in favor of stagnation. 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. Therefore, the bourgeoisie preferred a uniform tax system. This was further enhanced by the age of enlightenment that was occurring in France at the time. This was proving to be very inefficient, as the bourgeoisie did not have the means to supply these large sums of money that were fixed each year. The bourgeoisie, in a position of social inferiority to the nobility, despised the aristocracy and the absolute monarchy. Karl Marx used the logical framework, the dialectic, to claim that revolutions were acts of history.
Common topics in this essay:
French Revolution,
Karl Marx,
De Tocqueville,
Catholic Church,
Louis XIV,
Tocqueville Expanding,
Tocqueville Marx,
Louis XV,
France Thinkers,
America British,
de tocqueville,
french revolution,
regime french,
revolution de tocqueville,
regime french revolution,
revolution de,
according de tocqueville,
karl marx,
according de,
french revolution de,
tax reform,
liberal society,
de tocqueville found,
change revolution,
change results,
|
Acceptance Essays
