Prompt: Unit 2: The Modern Revolution: Analyze the successes and failures of one revolution you have studied(either French Revolution or the Industrial Revolution).
Was the French Revolution Successful? People always complain about something; they're never satisfied with what they have and desire for more. And this desire eventually leads to desire to change, which then leads to a revolution. Generally, a revolution doesn't always come with positive consequences, but it still results in positive change or improvement in society. One example of this is French Revolution that took place from 1789 to 1799 in France. It was a revolution that changed a lot of things. Although some could argue that the French Revolution was not so successful due to its failures such as leading to poor relationships with groups who didn't agree with it, it in fact was successful both in terms of political and social aspect. The French Revolution resulted in successes in political aspect. First of all, the absolute monarchy was ended, so was the Bourbon monarch, with the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte. Napoleon was a peasant, and he showed everyone that a peasant like him could achieve such thing. The Parliamentary Democracy system was used, which was a system where representatives who were democratically elected had influence in governance. What the citizens wanted was having their voice be heard, so this was achieved as well. The state was split into three different branches: executive, judicial and legislative, which reduced the power of the king. It was very different from the times of absolute monarchy. Overall, the greatest change in general was that the normal third estate people had more influence to governance and the power between the three estates and the state was sort of balanced out. The French Revolution was successful also in terms of social aspect. The biggest success was that the equality for everyone was achieved. The Napoleonic code, which was the set of laws that forbade privileges based on birth, allowed third estate people to have more rights and it made sure that government jobs go to the most qualified. Jobs were given to people depending on their ability and capability, not by wealth, religion or social rank. The Declaration of rights of man was signed, which granted people freedom of speech, worship and association. Revolutionary ideas that pursued liberty, equality and fraternity also came up. People started to change. They were just quiet citizens who were under the state's control, but now they could speak up and stand for their rights. Overall, more opportunities were given to the third estate people like peasants, merchants and educated people. Some could argue that French Revolution wasn't so successful since it also had failures as outcome. First, it led to poor relationships with people who were against it. It led to the poor relationship between France and other European countries such as Britain, Russia, Prussia and Austria. They were afraid that the revolutionary ideas from France would spread to their countries, so they allied against France. They didn't want their citizens to rebel like the French. However, this could be viewed as a success, because this could mean that the other countries were afraid of France, which means that France proved its power and the power of the people. Second, it also led to poor relationship between the Catholic Church and the state. The Civil Constitution of the Clergy and the nationalization of the church land upset the church, therefore they did not have positive attitude towards the state. But this was an outcome of a fair decision, so there's nothing to blame the state about. The freedom of association that was granted to people might have led to a failure or even more serious problem. Because they had freedom of association, France became a multiparty state; people formed their own party. One of them was the Jacobins led by Robespierre, who were radical and wanted Louis XVI killed. The other was Girondins who were not so radical and didn't want the king killed. Robespierre later guillotined Louis XVI and started the age of the Reign of Terror, which resulted in lots of violence. This could be considered a failure, but it wasn't really a direct consequence of the French Revolution. Like this, a revolution doesn't only come with positive results. But it is important that there has been a change and there have been good consequences. Those are what people have aimed for and the fact that they were achieved should be valued. And this is why the French Revolution should be considered successful. Ms. Defer's comment: Well done Riah. You studied! And thought about the prompt appropriately to make arguments. The monarchy will be restored, but limited as a constitutional monarchy. Also some gains, such as rights for women will be lost later. The biggest lasting impact is the expansion of democratic ideals & the movement away from absolute monarchy in Europe.
0 Comments
The King, Louis XVI, was found guilty of crimes against the state and guillotined on January 21, 1793. This execution was led by Maximilian Robespierre, who was one of the Jacobins. After the king died, the Reign of Terror had started and lasted for 18 months. It was led by Robespierre, and the new government started to execute large number of people who were considered as counter-revolutionaries. So the question is, was the Reign of Terror justified? Was the violence justified? Some people might say that it was not justified because lots of people were executed, even the people who might not have been against the Revolution. However, the Reign of Terror was justified because the level of threat towards the Revolution was really high and the ideals of the revolution had to be maintained.
The fact that the level of threat of the counter-revolutionary movements towards the revolution was really high supports the idea that the Reign of Terror was justified. There were both external and internal threat. In August 1792, an 80,000-man army from Austria and Prussia marched into France. The two countries were monarchies and they were afraid that revolution might spread to their countries. As the two countries were threatening France, France had to fight against them. And in order to fight back, they had to use violence. Or else they were going to lose everything; the revolution, the country, everything. Inside France, counter-revolutionary activities had been increasing for more than a year. One time in the district of Châtillon, there was a counter-revolutionary movement and about 3000 national guardsmen had to establish order. The government had to fight against them, too, in order to maintain the revolution. There was a military draft called Leveé en Masse, who fought against the internal threats. And these pieces of evidence show that the Reign of Terror was justified. The Reign of Terror was justified also because it helped maintain the ideals of the revolution. Robespierre created a committee called the Committee of Public Safety, and its chief task was to protect the revolution from its enemies. Under Robespierre's leadership, the committee often guillotined the enemies. For example, in December 1793, the committee cracked down on rebels. And eventually the counter-revolutionary movements decreased. The use of terror and violence was necessary, and it helped French citizens to remain true to the ideals of the revolution. The French army had three purposes in mind when fighting, and one of them was to spread the revolutionary ideas of liberty, equality and fraternity beyond its borders. And in order to do so, violence had to be used and therefore the Reign of Terror was justified. However, some might say that the Reign of Terror was not justified because lots of people were executed, even the people who might not have been against the revolution. For example, in October 1793, the Revolutionaries decided to make an example of counter-revolutionaries and destroyed 1600 homes and chopped off 12 heads. And it's estimated that between 20,000 and 40,000 people were killed by the guillotine during the Reign of Terror. However, the people who were guillotined were guilty of crime. The revolutionaries weren't killing without any reasons. They had a reason, a reason they can be justified by their sets of laws. The person could have been unable to justify their means of existence, or their relatives or families might have been émigrés, which are people who left the country to settle in another, usually for a political reason. Anyone who satisfied the standards of the law of suspects would be considered as a counter-revolutionary. Although some say that the Reign of Terror was not justified due to its violence, it was justified because of the external and internal threat towards the revolution and the maintenance of the ideals of the revolution. In general, the Reign of Terror gave the French Revolution a negative image to the rest of the European countries and established a fear in French people to have any counter-revolutionary feelings. The initial purpose was achieved, though; due to the fear of anti revolutionary feelings, nationalism was greatly increased. The topic that I chose for the research project was the mass production of automobiles. For the project, we had to create a research question, do researches on the topic, and answer the question by writing a 1300 words essay(research paper). The research project was kind of difficult for me at first, because it was hard for me to choose the topic. But the process after choosing the topic was easier, because this was the second time I’m working on a research project and my experience from last semester helped me a lot. The document below has the research question and justification, action plan, the actual research, and the research paper.
Research Project Document I have actually gotten an 8 for the research paper I've written.:) US History class was a very challenging class for me. I was not familiar with the topics we’ve discussed about. I wasn’t getting good grades at first, but the grades have become better now. I think that I have improved, little by little.
Although I’m doing better than I did at first, I hope I can improve more and do better job when I do summative or any other task and project. Next semester, I should try to participate and share my opinions more than I do now. For Unit 2-Slavery and Civil War, we had to do a research project as summative.
The topic that I chose for this project is Lewis and Clark Expedition. I decided to choose that topic because I wanted to investigate more about the topic, since I didn’t really know about Lewis and Clark expedition. I think that the first two focus questions, Who went on the Lewis and Clark expedition? Who sent the explorers to go on the expedition? could have been improved, because they only involve answers with basic information, which is who and what. They should have been more analytical. My research question was, “How did the Lewis and Clark expedition affect Native Americans’ lives?” I believe that my research question is relevant to the topic and clear, but I think that it should have been more focused and debatable. Like, instead of using the word “affect,” I could have used more specific word. And the questions also could have contained some details, like specific dates. I think that next time when I do research project like this, I should try to be more specific when generating question. Unit 2 Summative – Research question and action plan |
Archives
June 2017
Categories |