class struggle in the first french republic, daniel guerin

(1): not just a bourgeois revolution, but contained within it the modern form of the class struggle

(1): first modern revolution to have involved the broad mass of people

(2): key-- this doesn't mean that the bourgeoisie didn't play a leading role--but it did mean that they were unable to put an end to absolutism without the help of the bras nus. 14 July 1789, 5 October 1789, 4 August 1789, 10 August 1792 all examples of critical importance of the mass movement.

(2): one finds the bourgeoisie equivocating (timorous b/c they knew that each step forward was a blow to the sanctity of private property --pg. 3), and each time it is the bras nus that pushes the bourgeois revolution forward

(3): bourgeoisie was only "very partially" an oppressed class -- they did share in the profits, also, with nobility and church

(4): split between bourgeoisie and bras nus was most pronounced in the cities

(4): thus French Revolution is example of Trotsky's law of combined development, too

(7): the bras nus' attitude to the war was entirely dictated by their class interests--didn't support it as a war of expansion, had to defend it when revolution was in danger

(10): Robespierre and Danton re: Brtain

(11): after Thermidor, you got rid of the revolutionary militia and inducgted a new generation of professional officers (the wars, of course, would rage till 1815)

(12): Edmund Burke, whipped up war feeling in Britain

(22): key--modern bourgeoisie had to argue that power resided with the people, but it simultaneously could not allow them to recognize it (this is where the institution of the Parliament is historically important--progressive, but also reactionary).

(25): Robespierre's Constitution of 1793 was the most democratic, but it didn't escape the logic of the revolutionary bourgeoisie--indeed, it demonstrated it at its "absolute limit" (he remained hostile to direct democracy)

(26): Malouet's warning, to the effect that the bourgeoisie could not contain the principle it was unleashing on the world

(28): the Paris Commune, in the French Revolution

(29-32): dual power, as it existed at different times throughout the revolution (Aug 1792, March 1793, Nov-Dec 1793, Feb-March 1794)

(34): from December 1793, the bourgeoisie strengthened the central power, in order to smash all chances of a federation ('revolutionary federalism', Guerin's arguing, will inspire Prodhoun, Bakunin, Marx, etc.)

(35): argument that the population was 'not ready' to build a different, democratic society

(36): Guerin arguing that a distinction should be made between the uncontrolled 'barbaric' terror and the 'terror' demanded by the popular vanguard that would be used specifically against saboteurs.

(37): again, claim about objective conditions.

(37-39, 43): important, religion--an integral part of the assault on the church. the bourgeoisie was torn, since it appreciated the role it played in maintaining social order, while also resenting the neo-feudal world it enshrined. Guerin also making the argument that the poor had little truck for the materialists/deists, and saw their popular morality through god ("they set to work to separate God from the priests)

(40): Rousseau and 'heavenly joy'

(43): extraordinary quotes from Napoleon on religion--''no society without inequality of wealth, and inequality of wealth can't exist without religion."

(45): the book is really about 1793-1795, which is where the modern class struggle makes its appearance -- when the bourgeoisie and bras nus come into conflict

(46): reviewing the nature of the initial war, which he's suggesting we understand as not much more than the latest bout in a longstanding rivalry between France and England (not a clash of ideologies--p. 53, but a clash of rivals)

(50): War was seen by the bourgeoisie in France as a solution to the economic crisis

(55): War was funded through inflation, and thus by the poor

(56): argument--1792 and especially 1793 saw the first signs of the antagonism between bras nus and bourgeoisie, as a result of the way that the War was waged.

(57): in this, at first, the Girondists and Montagnards found common ground

(62): members of the bras nus have trouble framing the demands (Tiger) -- but they have educated spokespeople in the enrages (Jacques Roux, Theophile Leclerc, Jean Varlet, and Gracchus Babeuf)

(64): "Three hours spent at a bakery door would do more to make a legislator than four years in the Convention" -- Leclerc

(64): enrages attacked the bourgeoisie directly

(65): but there were limits to their opposition--couldn't put forth a consistent programme

(66-68): in sum--they were "mirrors" (spokespeople of an ideal), rather than leaders of a revolutionary movement.

(72): critical--things reached a point where, in March-June 1793, for things to go forward it was going to be necessary for Robespierre to break with the Girondists. the revolution could not go forward without relieving public poverty--and the Girondists were unwilling to do this, because of their own hidebound interests.

(74-75): key--Girondists and Montagnards as different "class fractions". the former suffering under the impact of revolutoinary crisis, the other one profiting--therefore the first is unwilling to grant concessions, but the second is.

(79): sum--an important section of the bourgeoisie betrayed the bourgeois revolution by putting their own interests first.

(81, 87): Robespierre's tact was required to perform this surgery

(91): enrages were also pushed back

- - - -

[1] abiding question of bras nus viz-a-viz orthodox proletariat. what can be gained from this line of inquiry? re: 1848, too?