Was The French Revolution Worth Its Human Cost

343 Words2 Pages
Topic: “Was the French Revolution Worth its Human Cost?” The French Revolution was a time in history that changed Europe forever. The people of France mainly the bourgeoisie did not want to be ruled by the absolute monarchy. The bourgeoisie were the middle class in which the majority of France consisted of. Under the absolute monarchy, these groups of people were the least to benefit from. The middle class had no political power whatsoever. During this period people began to have ideas of enlightment. The bourgeoisie rebelled against the king, the clergies and the nobles. They became very violent in terms of getting what they deserved, equality throughout the social groups and individual rights. In 1789 France abolished all privileges and came up with the Declaration of Rights of Man 1789. These events led to the debate “Was the French Revolution Worth its Human?” which is being argued by Peter Kropotkin and Simon Schama. In this debate Peter Kropotkin argues yes and Simon Schama argues no. Reviewing the debate from Kropotkins point of view the author of the article “The Great French Revolution 1789-1793”, the French Revolution was indeed worth its human cost. Although many deaths occurred, France did change tremendously. Two great completions from the French Revolution were the destruction of feudalism and the withdrawal of the absolute power, where individual rights and personal liberties have been brought upon the laborers of the king. These accomplishments also brought the growth of the capitalist regime as well as the middle classes.(25)According to Kropotkins the French Revolution was worth its human cost because France did as it promised to do by developing the middle class giving them rights and political views as well as a capitalist government. Viewing the debate from Schama’s view, the author of “The French Revolution: Bliss was it in That Dawn?” The
Open Document