3 ms·

I think the french revolution turned republicanism and nationalism from fringe idea into mainstays of european political thought. I'm not sure if those trends l

I think the french revolution turned republicanism and nationalism from fringe idea into mainstays of european political thought. I'm not sure if those trends led to democracy, but they certainly led to a democratization - even with the crackdowns and Metternich, if you count the number of states with e.g. a constitution, europe was more democratic after 1848 than it was before it, not less. The revolutionary wars were devastating, but they also demonstrated the power of a republican state - a sort of power that even reactionaries (e.g. Bismark) wanted to harness.

Tainnor 6y ago
For sure I don't want to diminish the importance of the French Revolution, which is probably the single most important event in the span between 1700-1900. I just question that its influence necessarily was that of establishing democracy. As for after 1848, I don't think that Europe was much more democratic than before 1789 (except for France, and the second republic was kind of DOA anyway). More states did have a constitution (in comparison to 1789, not necessarily to before 1848), so there was maybe a little bit more protection against absolute tyranny, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there was much effective parliamentary participation. Although I will admit that the idea of liberalism was definitely in the air and maybe it wouldn't have been without the French Revolution, but that's hard to say (as said, the USA were always more of a poster child because their republic actually lasted). I'm not sure if the revolutionary wars demonstrated the power of republicanism as much as they demonstrated the power of nationalism to someone like Bismarck, and nationalism is definitely something that was heavily influenced by the French Revolution.
- pasabagi 6y ago
  I think maybe I was thinking of 'the democracy' as a by-word for 'modern european state'. On second thought, this isn't all that reasonable. I think the modern european state is nationalist first, liberal second, and democratic (usually) as a distant third - that is, in order of how likely any characteristic is to break down under pressure. It feels to me if you look at the trajectory from the start of the french revolution to the modern european state, even in periods of reaction, the arrow doesn't really turn much. Reactionaries usually see the advantages of nationalism, bourgeois the advantages of liberalism, and workers the advantages of democracy - and all of the three trends get reversed at points, but if you sum them, then it's a pretty steady gain. For instance, while the dissolution of the Frankfurt parliment was a blow against democracy, I think it probably pushed nationlism forward by putting so much power in Prussian hands. So I'd credit the French Revolution with spawning and intensively testing the triad of political views that have ended up being totally dominant in Europe - you're right that this triad is not identical with democracy, but I think it is identical with what we generally call democracy in Europe today.

Tainnor 6y ago

For sure I don't want to diminish the importance of the French Revolution, which is probably the single most important event in the span between 1700-1900. I just question that its influence necessarily was that of establishing democracy. As for after 1848, I don't think that Europe was much more democratic than before 1789 (except for France, and the second republic was kind of DOA anyway). More states did have a constitution (in comparison to 1789, not necessarily to before 1848), so there was maybe a little bit more protection against absolute tyranny, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there was much effective parliamentary participation. Although I will admit that the idea of liberalism was definitely in the air and maybe it wouldn't have been without the French Revolution, but that's hard to say (as said, the USA were always more of a poster child because their republic actually lasted). I'm not sure if the revolutionary wars demonstrated the power of republicanism as much as they demonstrated the power of nationalism to someone like Bismarck, and nationalism is definitely something that was heavily influenced by the French Revolution.

pasabagi 6y ago
I think maybe I was thinking of 'the democracy' as a by-word for 'modern european state'. On second thought, this isn't all that reasonable. I think the modern european state is nationalist first, liberal second, and democratic (usually) as a distant third - that is, in order of how likely any characteristic is to break down under pressure. It feels to me if you look at the trajectory from the start of the french revolution to the modern european state, even in periods of reaction, the arrow doesn't really turn much. Reactionaries usually see the advantages of nationalism, bourgeois the advantages of liberalism, and workers the advantages of democracy - and all of the three trends get reversed at points, but if you sum them, then it's a pretty steady gain. For instance, while the dissolution of the Frankfurt parliment was a blow against democracy, I think it probably pushed nationlism forward by putting so much power in Prussian hands. So I'd credit the French Revolution with spawning and intensively testing the triad of political views that have ended up being totally dominant in Europe - you're right that this triad is not identical with democracy, but I think it is identical with what we generally call democracy in Europe today.