French Enlightenment the Failure of Enlightened Absolutism

French Enlightenment

The Failure of Enlightened Absolutism in France: An Analysis of the Economic and Political Situation of the Country during the Enlightenment Period

The dawn of the 18th century saw the emergence of a period that eventually determined the future of modern society -- that is, the Age of Enlightenment. Under the Age of Enlightenment, the prevalent ideology is that it is possible for people to formulate and enforce reform and changes in the society. Social reform is especially applicable in the European experience, wherein the rigid and conservative influence of Christianity has led to the development of a society that is characteristically theocentric.

The Enlightenment is characterized by a shift of society's concern to the natural and social sciences through scientific observation, which necessitates objectivism and rational thinking. These changes in the character of European society are brought about by the rise of modernization, where agricultural-traditional society with its norms, rituals, and traditions, is replaced by industrial capitalism, where division of labor and social structures and systems are clearly defined.

Despite the widespread popularity and subsistence of European society to the Enlightenment, it was in France where it flourished most. In France, the enlightenment was characterized by a group of theorists called the "philosophes," individuals "who were committed to political change in France and they saw themselves as a new class in alliance with the rising bourgeoisie ... they adopted an educative role to aid progress ... applying the new experimental method to the sphere of the social ... [t]hey focused on economic and social history and constructed universal histories of the process of the rise of civilization ... " (Preston, 1997:35).

Two philosophes became significant to the progress and development of the enlightenment in France: Montesquieu and Jean Jacques Rousseau.

Montesquieu's seminal work, "The Spirit of the Laws," which was written in 1748, discusses in detail the reforms that Montesquieu feels are much needed in France during that period. These proposed reforms include the thinking that the pursuit for material progress and liberal democracy shall determine the successful future of France. He takes into account that different countries have different material resources, that is why the route to success, he says, is to identify the "variables" that will make a country politically and economically successful -- that is, looking at the socio-demographic, geographic, cultural, and economic structures of a particular country. Analyzing these factors will allow the state to become more efficient, thereby ensuring material progress, and eventually, social progress (36).

Rousseau, meanwhile, has proposed how liberal democracy can be achieved in French society, discussed elaborately in his philosophical work entitled, "The Social Contract." In this treatise, Rousseau discusses the how rationalization of the society happens when every individuals gives up part of his rights in order to create the "general will." The general will is the collective rights of the civil society bestowed upon by an individual, who is to represent the citizenry in the decision-making process of ensuring peace and order in the society. In effect, the social contract becomes a vehicle through which the state and its citizenship are formed, where there is a new avenue for social reforms to be proposed and enacted by the society (Kagan, 1995:665-6).

It is evident that from the works of Montesquieu and Rousseau are rooted the basic principles that have guided modern society throughout the years: the concepts of liberal democracy and rationalization of the society. Their works reflect the political ideologies that are to become what democracy is today, and all these enlightenment ideologies had been born in France. Looking at the country's history of the enlightenment, an observer can say that French society embodied the new, modern society, a model that should have been the picture of an industrialized society.

However, society tells us that the opposite scenario happened in the case of France: while England and the rest of Europe began modernizing and industrializing their societies, France remained far behind, unable to recover from the political and economic downfall that came with the emergence of the French Revolution.

The French Revolution is the result of the enlightenment's philosophies and ideologies, a demonstration of the power of the French society to induce social reform in their country. However, there have been mixed reactions and opinions across Europe regarding this French political event of the time. Liberals have expressed praise for France and its people to enforce the power of the masses, the true evidence that indeed, democracy is under operation when the French Revolution happened. But there have also been negative reactions, criticisms among conservatives who consider the revolution as an inappropriate, even radical, act that left France politically and economically crippled.

Edmund Burke's criticism of the French Revolution, debunking the principles of the enlightenment in effect, illustrated how the practice of liberal democracy in 19th century France is not compatible with the country's social structure: "To give freedom is still more easy ... But to form a free government; that is, to temper together these opposite elements of liberty and restraint in one consistent work, requires much thought, deep reflection, a sagacious, powerful, and combining mind ... " (715).

Indeed, Barrington Moore's (1966) analysis of the French enlightenment and revolution revealed that social progress did not happen to France in the same way it did for Britain because of the differences in the social and economic conditions of the two countries. Britain had experienced a truly agricultural-traditional society, where social classes and class stratification (dominance of the elite class) are clearly defined. France, on the other hand, had an altogether different eco-political structure at the time, wherein, according to Moore, "[b]y the time of the Revolution, peasants possessed close to de facto property rights" (42).