The Ideals of the French Revolution

Burke’s argument against the revolution relied heavily on creating sympathy for the royal family.    However, Williams, Wollstonecraft, and Paine, supporters of the revolution were clear that the royal family was not the target.  “The Monarch and the Monarchy were distinct and separate things; and it was against the established despotism of the latter, and not against the person or the principles of the former, that the revolution commenced, and the Revolution has been carried,” (p. 66) wrote Thomas Paine.  The revolution is not just a power shift, it is a philosophical and spiritual revolution as well.  English support stemmed from a love of principles like equality, liberty, and human rights.  So strong was this love, that even when Williams was disillusioned and saddened by the bloody turn taken by the revolution she still supported the principles, writing that, "the foundation [for the revolution] was laid in wisdom." (p. 46)  

The tone of Helen Maria Williams’s first letter is filled with joy and hope in response to the French revolution.  She refers to it as, “the most sublime spectacle” (p. 37) The Bastille becomes a symbol of the tyranny of the old system that had no respect for humanity.  The shackles represent restricted freedom.  The ceilings are too low in some rooms.  Humans literally do not fit there.  Additionally, the Bastille is described as being so dark, that in the middle of the day Williams and her companions needed a candle, and that they had difficulty maintaining the flame.  This is contrasted heavily with her hope that, “the beams of liberty, like the beams of day, shed their benign influence on the cottage of the peasant, as well as on the palace of the monarch.”  Thus, the Revolution is portrayed as an enlightened movement that celebrates humanity.  This is echoed in Mary Wollstonecraft’s arguments concerning human rights.  She states rights are inherited at birth, by virtue of the fact that humans are, “rational creatures, who were raised above the brute creation by their improvable faculties.”  (p. 58)  Furthermore, these rights are given by God, and God alone.  Paine echoes this when critiquing the ranks of the aristocracy.  He references Genesis, pointing out that other than distinguishing the sexes, no other distinction is made between human beings.  

It was easy for me to align myself with the supporters of the revolution.  Maybe that's due to the fact that  taught to be proud of the Red, White and Blue, to marvel at the Statue of liberty, and love Democracy.  All men are created equal with certain unalienable rights.  It's something they teach in grade school.  The principles so loved by Williams, Wollstonecraft, and Paine are very much the same principles that our own revolution was fought for.  Sidenote, it is ironic to note that Louis the 16th, the king deposed during the French Revolution, helped fund us during the American Revolution.  This said, I think that underneath all the melodrama and frilly language,  Burke raises a valid point.  He insists that men, "have a right to the fruits of their industry." (p. 52)  You reap what you sow.  Wealth is earned.  So why then shouldn't the upper class be able to invest, bequeath, etc. as they like?  To put it in a more modern light, why shouldn't CEOs raise prices and fire employees to keep their nice fat salaries?  I would venture to bring out another quote from Burke.  "Whatever each man can separately do, without trespassing on others, he has a right to do for himself."  Does the aristocracy (or a CEO, for that matter) have the right to keep so much money to the detriment of the economy and the working class?  

I know that there was a pretty big tone shift there.  I'm kind of just trying a few things out.  Feedback on both style and content are appreciated!