Search Results

The period of about a year beginning late in 1797 was the high point of the whole decade, and indeed of all European history until 1848, in the matter of international agitation stirred up by the revolutionary-democratic movement. This chapter attempts to recapture this moment of excitement, and to offer an impression of the movement as a whole before following it again in separate countries. Events happened so swiftly, with so little central direction, and yet with so many immediate repercussions over hundreds and thousands of miles, that no plan of exposition can do justice to the reality, which is best seen, though elusively, in any number of chain reactions. For example, in March 1798 the French occupied the Swiss city of Bern and seized its famous “treasure” of some 6,000,000 livres in coin. The money was used to help finance Bonaparte's expedition to Egypt, which in turn was directed in part against the British in India, where the Earl of Mornington was at war with Tipu Sultan who considered himself an ally of the French Republic.

This chapter details events in 1973, when the issue for France and the world was whether revolution or counter-revolution should prevail. In every country where the government was at war with the French Republic in 1793—in Britain and Ireland, in the United Provinces and in Belgium restored to the Emperor, in the Austrian Monarchy, the small German states and the Prussian kingdom, in the Italian kingdom of Sardinia—there were groups of people whose sympathies lay in varying degree with the declared enemy. Wherever the French Revolution had been heard of there were men who wished it not to fail. Their concern was not only for France but for the future of some kind of democratization in their own countries. For those, on the other hand, who hoped to see the whole revolution undone, these first months of 1793 saw a revival of the exciting expectations of a year before. The Republic seemed a sinking ship, crazed, in addition, by mutiny in its own crew.

This chapter provides an overview of the book's main themes. This book deals with Western Civilization as a whole at a critical moment in its history, or with what has sometimes recently been called the Atlantic Civilization, a term probably closer to reality in the eighteenth century than in the twentieth. The book argues that this whole civilization was swept, in the last four decades of the eighteenth century, by a single revolutionary movement, which manifested itself in different ways and with varying success in different countries, yet in all of them showed similar objectives and principles. This forty-year movement was essentially “democratic,” and these years are in fact the Age of the Democratic Revolution. The “democratic revolution” emphasized the delegation of authority and the removability of officials precisely because neither delegation nor removability were much recognized in actual institutions.

This chapter considers the extreme Left of the French Revolution led by an obscure journalist who called himself “Gracchus” Babeuf and his co-worker Philippe Buonarroti, a French citizen of Italian birth, and their Conspiracy of Equals of 1796. The Conspiracy of Equals has always been looked back on with respectful interest by partisans of the modern Left, as the first manifestation of the revolutionary movement of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. How far the Conspiracy was “communistic” remains uncertain. But even the inner leadership had diverse aims, and the whole movement was so secret and so short-lived that the secondary organizers, not to mention the ordinary followers, never knew who the leaders were or what their purposes might be.

This chapter focuses on Germany during the revolutionary decade. The years of political change coincided with the supreme efflorescence of German thought and culture. It was the age of Goethe and Schiller, of Mozart and Beethoven, of Kant, Fichte, Hegel, Herder, Schleiermacher, and the Humboldts. Under the influence of such masters, a new German national consciousness was beginning to take form. An ambivalent attitude to revolution entered into the national outlook. The Germans neither rejected revolution in the abstract, nor accepted it in its actual manifestations. Nothing was more characteristic, in Germany before 1800, than to continue to hail the principles and goals of the French Revolution with enthusiasm, and to believe that in French hands, thanks to French faults, these principles had miscarried.

In 1792, the French Revolution became a thing in itself, an uncontrollable force that might eventually spend itself but which no one could direct or guide. The governments set up in Paris in the following years all faced the problem of holding together against forces more revolutionary than themselves. This chapter distinguishes two such forces for analytical purposes. There was a popular upheaval, an upsurge from below, sans-culottisme, which occurred only in France. Second, there was the “international” revolutionary agitation, which was not international in any strict sense, but only concurrent within the boundaries of various states as then organized. From the French point of view these were the “foreign” revolutionaries or sympathizers. The most radical of the “foreign” revolutionaries were seldom more than advanced political democrats. Repeatedly, however, from 1792 to 1799, these two forces tended to converge into one force in opposition to the French government of the moment.

This chapter focuses on England during the revolutionary decade. It argues that in Britain and Ireland, as in Eastern Europe, it was counter-revolution that prevailed. The net effect of the revolutionary decade was to demonstrate, or to consolidate, the strength of the established order. The very lengths to which the established order went, however, in dealing with disaffection (or what was called “sedition”) offer a measure of the magnitude of the discontents. The men who ruled England were not the sort to be frightened by witches. The British governing class was neither timid, foolish, intolerant, nor especially ruthless when unprovoked. That Englishmen of this class became fearful of unrest at home, intolerant of ideas or organizations suggesting those of the French Revolution, repressive in Britain, and deliberately terroristic in Ireland can be taken as evidence of the reality of something of which, from their own point of view, they had reason to be afraid. In England as elsewhere there was a contest between democrats and aristocrats.

This chapter outlines the course of events from Syria's decision to secede from the United Arab Republic in September 1961 to Egypt's decision to intervene in the incipient civil war in Yemen exactly one year later. Sparked by humiliation at the Syrian secession, the intervention was the culmination of a decade of support for revolutionary movements on the Arabian Peninsula, which ultimately aimed at toppling the Saudi monarchy. The hastily made decision to send military forces to San‘ā’ was taken under the cloud of a power struggle within the Nasser regime, which carried serious consequences for military preparedness in June 1967.

In April 1792, France had declared war on the “King of Hungary and Bohemia,” that is the House of Austria or Hapsburg, which, since it possessed most of Belgium, was the most important of the powers that adjoined the French frontiers. By the following summer the French were also at war with the kingdoms of Prussia and Sardinia, and by 1793 with Great Britain, the Dutch Republic, and the Bourbon Monarchy of Spain. Despite occasional appearances, or stated war aims, the war that began in April 1792 became an ideological conflict between new and old—between “democratic” and “aristocratic” forms of society in the sense explained in the preceding volume. This chapter focuses on this complex story and nations involved. It begins with a tale of two cities, involving ceremonial events in Frankfurt and Paris on July 14, 1792. It was, of course, Bastille Day, but it was also the date of the imperial coronation of Francis II, a young man of twenty-four who proved to be the last Holy Roman Emperor.

The Partisan movement in Bosnia-Hercegovina was the product both of long-term socio-economic developments at home and of the short-term ‘accident’ of foreign invasion and occupation; it involved the merger of a traditional Serb-peasant uprising and a modern urban-revolutionary movement; and it represented both a characteristic chapter and a turning-point in modern Bosnian history. The Axis powers of Germany and Italy, by destroying the Yugoslav kingdom, changed the course of Bosnian history. Their installation in power of the Ustasha regime, and the latter's genocide of the Serb population of Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina, unleashed a resistance movement that would take shape as the Partisans. Yet the Partisans were not simply an armed response to the new order, but a revolutionary movement of a specifically Bosnian kind.

This chapter focuses on events in Europe in the years between 1774 and 1789, or between the beginnings of the American and of the French revolutions. During this period, the stresses and conflicts grew more acute. Events in America aroused the sense of a new era in Europe, encouraged a negative attitude in Europe toward European institutions, and induced a belief in the possibility of change in the directions desired by persons hitherto excluded from political life. The influence of America, and of much indigenous European development, operated in general in a democratic direction. But real events in Europe, as distinguished from the stirring up of ideas, seemed to be going the opposite way. There was a widespread aristocratic resurgence, or perhaps only a “surgence,” a rising bid for power and recognition, or successful offensive against antiaristocratic forces, whether monarchic or democratic, at the very time when other developments, such as the impact of the American Revolution, made a great many people less willing than ever to accept any such drift of affairs.

This chapter explores the ways in which the revolutions of 1848 have been remembered, ways which have been formed around the celebration of key anniversaries. The first myth constructed around the revolution of 1848 was the democratic one. Democratic movements traced their foundation to 1848 and argued that the central achievement of that year was to find a path to democracy between stifling authoritarianism and violent revolution. The socialist view of the 1848 revolutions argued that the democratic rhetoric of fraternity concealed the reality of bourgeois class interests and that democratic revolution against absolutism and feudalism became bourgeois betrayal and bourgeois repression when the working classes started to assert their own interests. The final founding myth of 1848 deals with France, relating to the abolition of slavery in the French colonies by a decree of the Provisional Government on 27 April 1848.

This chapter examines the conflict which developed in France between a reforming monarchy and a resurgent aristocracy, and traces the beginnings of the French Revolution. The French Revolution had points of resemblance to movements of the time in other countries is the central theme of this book. Like them, it arose out of circumstances characteristic of Western Civilization, and it was to merge with them, especially with the war that began in 1792, into a great struggle that no political borders could contain. From the beginning, however, there was much that was unique about the revolution in France. The French Revolution remained primarily political, but in its effects on society and social and moral attitudes it went far beyond the merely political. It changed the very nature and definition of property, and to some extent its distribution; it transformed, or attempted to transform, the church, the army, the educational system, institutions of public relief, the legal system, the market economy, and the relationship of employers and employees.

This chapter examines the contribution of philosopher and political theorist Georges Sorel and critic Charles Maurras on the emergence of secular state corporatism and modern totalitarianism. It suggests that Sorel demonstrated not the slightest self-awareness and thus transferred early Christian anti-heresiology into various 19th- and 20th-century revolutionary movements. He displayed a kind of puritanical spirit, an incipient form of the totalistic spirit that infuses modern revolutionary movements such as communism and fascism. Maurras, like Sorel, was anti-Semitic and he is credited with the emergence of so-called integral nationalism.

This chapter details events following the end of the Terror and the political and emotional crisis of the Year II. The question that a great many Frenchmen put to themselves both in France and in the emigration, and a question to which observers throughout Europe and America awaited the answer, was whether some kind of moderate or constitutional regime would be durably established. The next four years showed that constitutional quietude was still far away. The difficulty was that not everyone agreed on what either moderation or justice should consist in. Justice, for some, required the punishment of all revolutionaries and their sympathizers. For others, it meant a continuing battle against kings, priests, aristocrats, and the comfortable middle classes. Both groups saw in “moderation” a mere tactic of the opposition, and moderates as the dupes of the opposite extreme. Compromise for them meant the surrender of principle. It meant truckling with an enemy that could never be trusted, and had no real intention of compromise.

In the history of Man, women were often pegged to domestic roles wherein their attempt to contribute to the significant events in society were undermined. In the history of Cuba, the contributions of the women to the revolutionary movements tended to be undervalued not to mention the earlier attempts of the women to be involved to this significant change were often undocumented and easily forgotten. This chapter discusses the role of the women in the revolutionary war in Cuba during the 1980s and 1990s wherein women started to joined guerrilla movements in massive numbers. The focus is on the gender-specific roles of female and male fighters in the revolutionary war. This chapter pinpoints the key role played by women in the social and economic reforms wherein they broke the straitjacket of gender inequality imposed by traditional societal norms.

Britain emerged from the First World War with her overall position in the East Asian structure of power diminished, but with the institutions of formal and informal empire in China unharmed. During 1929–30, two of the most profitable public utility companies in Shanghai passed from British into American ownership. Between 1911 and 1913, the Great Powers, acting in relative harmony, had seized the chance of a collapsing ancien régime to humiliate China in unprecedented ways. Until 1926, the British saw no need for a major revision of their China policy. The decentralization or even disappearance of state authority in China jeopardized the foundations of informal empire. Chinese nationalism had no coherent doctrine and no unified political movement. There were reasons to doubt the dogma that British well-being in China depended on extraterritoriality and consular jurisdiction. Britain's Imperial retreat from China went through a number of stages. The temporary rescue of a late Imperial British position in China was mainly a result of the split of the Chinese revolutionary movement in 1927 and of the victory of moderate élite nationalism over radical mass nationalism.

This chapter analyzes Revolutionary Youth Movement (RYM) factions from mid-October 1969 to the great upheaval of May 1970. As the antiwar movement began to peak in November 1969, factions of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) increasingly isolated themselves from this mass movement. Weatherman did so by determining that mass demonstrations were irrelevant and that only violence mattered. RYM IIers, on the other hand, isolated themselves by increasingly ducking behind Marxist dogma: only the united proletariat, black and white, could bring down imperialism. The key task for revolutionaries was not mobilizing masses of new people against the war, but was building the foundations for a revolutionary Marxist-Leninist party of the working class in the United States.