|
Urban workers, too, found an opportunity to express their discontent,
through elections to the Estates-General. Elections were held in the form
of neighborhood gatherings, at which participants collectively designated
a representative and compiled cahiers de doléance (lists of grievances)
to present to the King, who would communicate them to guide the representatives.
Many of these petitions expressed opposition to the privileges of nobles
and officeholders. The National Assembly decrees of August 1789 against
privilegewhich had been the centerpiece of the French social orderwere
no doubt cheered by the populace.
For all its momentousness, however, the elimination of privilege did not
bring an end to the social conflicts underlying the Revolution. Instead,
it marked the beginning of another system of social distinctions, set
forth in a new constitution introduced by the National Assembly. The most
notable of these was the distinction between "active" citizens,
who were granted full rights to vote and hold office, and "passive"
citizens, who were subject to the same laws but could not vote or hold
office. Membership in one class or the other was determined by one's income
level, gender, race, religion, and profession. With the Le Chapelier Law
of 1791, the National Assembly further differentiated workers from property
owners and banned worker associations as being harmful to national unity.
The National Assembly seemed unwilling to grant workers full political
and social participation in the new society. One reason for this reluctance
was the widespread fear of further unrest. Another was the strong belief
among spokespersons for the Enlightenment that only those with a propertied
stake in society could be trusted to exercise reason, or to think for
themselves. Furthermore, many reform-minded revolutionaries argued that
economic-based "combinations" formed by workers too closely
resembled corporate guilds and would impinge on the freedom of the individual.
Whatever the assembly's motives, its actions were met with strong opposition.
Workers were not untrustworthy or retrograde traditionalists, they retorted,
but hard-working, uncomplicated, and honest citizens, unlike the effete
and "feminized" rich. Calling themselves sans-culottes to indicate
that they wore pants, not knee breeches (a symbol of luxury), they glorified
direct action, strength, candor, and patriotism, ideals that radical journalists
associated with artisanal work and found lacking in property ownership
alone. The fact that such radicals as Elisée Loustallot, Jacques
Roux, and Jacques-Réné Hébert were educated men who
did not exactly work with their hands for a living led some to question
whether their discussions of sans-culottes expressed ideas held by workers
themselves. Moreover, one may wonder whether the views associated with
the sans-culottes extended much beyond Paris. All the same, the sans-culotte
concept took on increasing political significance, because those in authority
saw reflected in it the genuine working man. Thus the use of the sans-culotte
in radical rhetoric led contemporaries to believe that rich and poor were
in conflict throughout the Revolution. How this perception influenced
the course of revolutionary events may be seen in the case of Gracchus
Babeuf. Before the Revolution, Babeuf had been an agent for seigneurial
lords, but after 1789, he became increasingly attracted to the idea of
social and political egalitarianism. By 1795, he was leading a conspiracy,
although his goals and plans remained vague. Nevertheless, the political
authorities worried about class war; they considered him a dangerous egalitarian
revolutionary and arrested him. At his trial, Babeuf delivered an inspiring
attack on private property and endorsed a system of property sharing that
many see as a forerunner of socialism.
In rural areas, social cleavages were as deeply rooted as in the cities.
Peasants, in their lists of grievances of 1789, expressed hostility to
noble landlords; and, as noted earlier, this hostility intensified after
Bastille Day. From July through September 1789, word of the National Assembly's
decisions and of the popular revolts in Paris and other cities spread
across the French countryside. It was also rumored that frightened nobles
were sending groups of armed "brigands" to burn fields, steal
crops, and attack villages in order to keep down the peasantry in this
moment of crisis. Propelled by what became known as "the great fear,"
peasants in various regions of France took matters into their own hands,
forming armed groups to defend their fields and their villages. The 4
August decrees, largely a response to this upheaval, initially quieted
the countryside and soon cemented the peasants to the revolutionary cause.
|
|