history

European Politics, 1815-1830

Ideology and Revolution

For additional information, read, in the textbook, chapter 24, pp. 690-696

The Political Spectrum

Politics=“a yardstick for lunatics with one point

of view”

—"Incense and Peppermints,” Strawberry

Alarm Clock (1967)

One of the most important effects of the French Revolution and Napoleonic

Era was the creation of a political spectrum. And most of the chief political

events of the 19th (and 20th century) derived from ongoing conflict among

Liberals, radicals, and conservatives

A. The Classic Political Spectrum, especially circa 1815-1848

Left Center Right

Revolutionary* Radicalism Liberalism Conservatism Reactionary

Also, known as ideologies. Ideology=“a body of ideas reflecting the social

needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or culture.”

Revolutionaries are willing to use extreme measures to overthrow prevailing

political, economic, and social institutions—the system.

Radicals want to replace the system with something better.

Liberals want to reform the system.

Conservatives want to preserve the system

Reactionaries want to restore institutions that have been discarded or

replaced.

B. The Classic Political Spectrum, continued

1. Radical and/or revolutionary, liberal, conservative, and reactionary

perspectives

2. Differences between them are based on contrasting

attitudes toward change and toward the problematic

relationship between individual/liberty and the

state/authority

Left Center Right

Revolutionary Radicalism Liberalism Conservatism Reactionary

“What might be” “If it ain’t broke,

don’t fix it”

most idealistic idealism traditionalism most traditional

pragmatism pragmatism

Pragmatism=practical-mindedness

Individual/People in General State

Liberty Authority

In a conflict between the individual/people and state, the classic radical favors

the individual/people and liberty; the classic conservative favors the

state/authority because the worst thing for her or him is anarchy/chaos

(remember Thomas Hobbes?). The classic liberal is in the middle, hoping to

avoid conflict and favoring the use of laws to define as precisely as possible the

respective jurisdictions of the individual/liberty and the state/authority.

I used the word “classic” for a reason. There’s no time now, but I would add

various qualifications based on what has happened in the world since 1815.

Still, for evidence how people are confused about these things, check out the

next three slides.

US Presidential Election of 2012

https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselectio

n2012

US Presidential Election of 2016

https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2016

C. Specific content of different ideological orientations: 1815-1848:

1. conservatism and the reactionary perspective: conventionally

identified with the aristocracy, hierarchies (upper echelons) of

established religions, peasants (most of the time), and part of

the upper middle class, particularly rich businessmen;

2. liberalism with the bulk of the middle class (especially in the

professions);

3. radicalism with intellectuals, university students, and the

working class.

But there were glaring exceptions to this scheme: for example,

Edmund Burke, a conservative in many respects who came from

the middle class;

Alexis de Tocqueville, a famous liberal who was from the nobility;

Karl Marx, a radical born into a middle-class family;

Michael Bakunin, a noble who become a notorious radical (an

anarchist, in fact).

2. Conservatism: was identified with the defense of throne and

altar (monarchy and religion); hostile toward the Enlightenment

and French Revolution traditions; against popular sovereignty and

the idea of rights (which, conservatives claimed, leads to selfish,

materialistic behavior).

Compare this with later conservatives who believe that welfare,

national health care, a higher minimum wage, etc.–a “nanny

state”—will destroy initiative in their recipients. But outlandish tax

cuts for the rich are justified.

Conservatism tended to be Inflexible before 1850 and inclined

toward reaction (in the sense of reactionary).

3. Liberalism:

Was rooted in the Enlightenment, and, on the continent, the French

Revolution and Napoleonic Experience.

Was a rather flexible body of ideas, certainly not as dogmatic (i.e.,

rigid, inflexible, uncompromising) as conservatism.

Concerns of Liberals:

1. sought expansion of individual rights, esp. rights of property and

freedom of speech and freedom of assembly

2. parliamentary or representative government, usually constitutional

monarchy; on continent, campaigned for written constitutions.

3. laissez-faire or economic freedom based on enlightened self-interest

4. separation of church and state and religious toleration. Also, many

liberals were anti-clerical.

Liberal concerns, continued:

5. generally optimistic, promoted the idea of progress:

political, social, and economic.

6. believed in the benefits of spreading literacy and

education.

7. in general, displayed a pronounced reforming bent.

8. in Central and Eastern Europe, identified with nationalism,

esp. the principle of national self-determination of

peoples, i.e., that large ethnic groups deserved their own

nation state.

Liberalism’s limitations (to 1850):

1. in first half of century, liberals were not democrats. They opposed

the idea of universal manhood suffrage; instead, they favored a

franchise based on property qualifications that excluded the vast

majority of the population. Their reasoning: most working people were

unprepared, educationally and financially, for the responsibility of

entering political life; to be useful and responsible in the political arena

required ownership of property, which was also evidence of ability.

Furthermore, many liberals feared the tyranny of the majority, a

hangover from the Jacobin phase of the French Revolution.

2. failed to appreciate the contradiction between their stress on

individual rights and their attitude to the lower classes. This weakened

their political position because conservatives could call them

hypocrites.

3. Also, especially in Britain, where utilitarianism was popular

(based on principle of "the greatest good for the greatest number"),

liberals employed rhetoric that stressed bringing benefits to all

members of society, yet were closely tied to interests of the middle

class, which could be very selfish.

Laissez faire accepted slums, pollution, and the exploitation of

labor. In particular, laissez-faire liberals resisted workers’ demands

for improved working conditions and a greater share of material

wealth.

4. Radicalism: chiefly intellectuals, students, and working class

leaders (eventually, trade unionists)

Less coherent and thus more difficult to define than conservatism

or liberalism. Before the last decades of the 19th century when

Marxism became influential, radicals lacked a commonly accepted

program or body of ideas.

Except, most radicals opposed the principle of monarchy; so they

were republicans; also democrats; accepted principle of

manhood suffrage (but not necessarily universal suffrage);

regarded the existing economic system as "aimless, chaotic, and

outrageously unjust." Thus, they tended to favor some collectivist

reorganization of the economy so that their radicalism shaded into

socialism.

Radicals wanted most of the things liberals did, except for laissez

faire in economic life, since they criticized capitalism and tended to

favor socialism, and they were consistent republicans and showed

a clear preference for democracy.

Radicals were hostile toward the state, which was dominated by

traditional landed elites and supported by established religions;

were committed to maximizing liberty, but how could this be done

without the agency of the state; a conundrum; anarchists favored

doing away with the state altogether; but most radicals came to

believe that a revolutionary government would be needed to

achieve a radical program of social and economic transformation.

In some parts of Europe (i.e., the Austrian Empire, the Italian

peninsula), many radicals embraced nationalism; but others were

internationalists, either highly suspicious of or opposed to

nationalism.

Ideological differences and disputes as well as nationalism provided

the background for the major political events from 1815 to 1848.

For most of the period from 1815 to 1848, conservatives and

reactionaries held the upper hand in European political life—a

conservative reaction gripped Europe during this period, which is

commonly called the Age of Metternich, after the Austrian official

most closely associated with political reaction.

But revolution could not be contained.

1. The successful Greek struggle for independence from the

Ottoman Empire (1821-1832)

Klemens

Metternich,

Austrian Foreign

Minister, 1809-

1848,

Chancellor, 1821-

1848, the leading

exponent of

conservatism during

the period from

1815 to 1848.

Greek War of Independence, 1821-1832

The revolutions of 1830-1831:

A. France: Charles X was a reactionary who had succeeded his

brother, Louis XVIII, in 1824. He was overthrown in late July, 1830.

Louis Philippe, the Duke of Orleans then became king of the

French and what became known as the July monarchy: Louis

became known as the "citizen king."

Louis XVIII of France, 1814-1824 Charles X, 1824-1830

Louis Philippe, 1830-1848,The “Citizen King”

Other revolutions:

B. Belgium: its revolution began about a month after the

French revolution of 1830. Belgium, formerly part of the

Austrian Empire, had been given to Holland at the

Congress of Vienna, which convened in 1814-1815 to

solve problems created by the French Revolution and

Napoleonic Era. But the Catholic (Flemish [north] and

Walloon-French speaking [south]) Belgians found the

Protestant Dutch rule oppressive. This was especially true

for the French-speaking part of the population (Brussels,

which became the capital of Belgium, was in Flemish

territory but had a large number of French speakers). The

Belgians paid higher taxes, had to support Protestant

schools, and were under-represented in the Dutch

Estates-General and the bureaucracy.

The Belgians fought the Dutch and won independence by

mid-fall.

C. Poland:

The Poles had never accepted Russian rule, despite its status as a

separate kingdom, or a protectorate, within the Russian orbit, and

tensions increased during the 1820s.

An uprising occurred in Warsaw in November 1830. After heavy fighting,

the Russians captured Warsaw in the autumn (September) of 1831 and

imposed a harsh peace on the Poles.

Attendance question: what is a reactionary?

Next topic: The Revolutions of 1848 and the unifications of Italy and

Germany.