Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès talks about in his famous pamphlet, What Is the Third Estate, relates to common people. During history, we talked about how the people serve the king based on God’s authority. However, it limits people from speaking out on their individual issues or needs. What Sieyès suggests is that without the nobility or the citizens, they cannot function. It takes both the nobility and citizens to create the foundation for their “new” government.
For Sieyès, he argues that the question about what creates a nation. Before he answers the question, he condemns the noble order for alienating the people since they had “civil and political privileges” (32). It is similar to how people argue about their leaders; since the leaders have responsibilities and rights, they wonder about their rights as well. Another example is how Catholic Church have one Bible where the congregation would agree until they had the printing press to state their own ideas. The analogy from Sieyès’ perspective is the idea that citizens think it is “unfair” for the kings or leaders to have such power that it would use its power for personal gain rather for the sake of the citizens and government.
This is not to say that Sieyès hates the nobility, but the injustice against citizens is that the privileged, or nobility, laughs at the citizens because they [the citizens] can
…show more content…
This goes back to his question about what creates a nation. His answer is that it contains both the nobles and citizens who live according to the common law and represent the government as a whole. In short terms, the Third Estate contains everything. Sieyès wakes people up that even though the leaders have different responsibilities, it does not exclude them from certain laws or put them above the laws. For a nation to function, all people must serve for the government and obey the laws no matter what position they serve in their
The high taxes, high prices on goods, and unequal distribution of wealth in France were reasons why the French Revolution started. There were three estates in France; the first estate was the clergy, the second estate were the nobles, and the third estate was made up of of three groups; average French workers, Bourgeoisie, and peasants. The French Revolution led to many wars; Louis XVI was a very weak leader, and he was executed. Napoleon Bonaparte became emperor, and the revolution came to an end. The main causes of the French Revolution were the difficult life of the peasants; the issues between the three estates; and the unfairness of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen.
Finally, I will argue against Montesquieu’s limitations on inheritance and propose a progressive tax instead. In total, I will prove that Locke’s understanding of government provides a fuller picture of liberty within a republic because of the inalienable rights guaranteed within a republic and his views on private ownership of land. Montesquieu's notion that a republic is more perfect when sumptuary laws limit luxury directly minimizes a citizen's liberty within a republic to express their wants and desires within the law. I contend that Montesquieu is correct in assuming that a republic will be more perfect when instituting sumptuary laws and limiting luxuries citizens can enjoy because in doing so government authority and control over society is increased leading to greater internal stability.
Thomas Paine’s pamphlet “Common Sense,” Paine lists reasons as to why the colonies should unite and separate from England. Paine argues strongly the point of “Monarchy and Hereditary Succession” really well by explaining the state of inequality of man and the inadequacy of hereditary succession. In this section, Thomas Paine argues the ignorance of having a monarch and the biblical beliefs against it as it creates an unequal society and transgressions.
Like it can be seen in the cartoon in document 2, the people in the Third Estate were burdened by the privileges of the First and Second Estate. For example, members of the Third Estate had to pay many taxes and fees and had no privileges or exemptions unlike people in the other estates. As a result, it difficult for the Third Estate to have any power or voice in their society because they had to pay taxes that were controlled by people from a higher estate and they had the power to “..exempt, change, add, or diminish [the taxes] at pleasure.” (Document 1). As a result of the injustices many people in the Third Estate had to deal with they decided to rebel and demand their
In a diagram from 1789, it shows that the First and Second Estates made up only a small percentage of the population, yet they owned ten times that amount in land, and paid no taxes. Meanwhile, the majority of the population, made up by the Third Estate, were taxed profusely and owned little land in comparison (Doc 2). The inequality between the estates and the extent to which the Third Estate was abused because of their social status was clear . This is portrayed in an illustration where the Third Estate was trampled by the taxes forced upon them by their social superiors (Doc 7). They were in no state to pay taxes or tithes to the church, and this mandatory tariff left little money for their own needs.
A saying for a king to understand is “Furthermore, since each part is ordered to the whole as imperfect to perfect, and since each single man is a part of the perfect community, law necessarily concerns itself particularly with communal happiness” (Aquinas). Kings unfortunately lost power and this caused confusion and ruckus in the part of leadership in the Middle
In 1789, when the revolt began, statistics about the three classes in France were taken (Document 2). The data showed that the third estate had the highest percentage of total population, total land owned, and income paid in taxes. The third estate consisted of 97% of France, yet they were not given any voice in the government. In Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution, Comte D’Antraigues stated that the people are the foundation of the state and power should lie in it’s citizens (Document 6). Therefore, this signified that since the last social group made up almost all of the country, they should be given more control and input in how the government should be run.
Sieyes believed that “if the privileged order were abolished, the nation would not be something less but something more,” meaning his ideal society is one where the nation would benefit from the Third estate coming into power (Envisioning 22.2). The author trusts that the Third Estate, made up of merchants and farmers, are more equipped than priests and aristocrats, to run the government and make political decisions. Therefore, his goal during the French Revolution was for everyone to be under the same common law and representation. The French Revolution was fought so that the privileged stopped using their status as an advantage in society, without taking into account the needs of the people that they claimed were below
After already obtaining an uneven distribution of wealth in the nation among the three estates, the debt from the American Revolution took a toll on France’s financial stability, practically bankrupting them. Struggling from the large gap between the wealthy and the poor, it was suggested by Sieyes that the third estate, commoners (97%), were the people who made up the nation of France and that they needed to take a stand, which they did. The third estate followed Rosseau, who’s ideas were developed from Locke, on his ideas of “general will” of the nation, and that they should form a national assembly of their own since they were the nation (SMW 76). The French Revolution unfolded into three phases of constitutional monarchy, radical republicanism, and military consolidation, resulting in the issue of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, among other accomplishments. Also following the American Revolution, and the Declaration of Independence, the French used Locke’s ideas in his Second Treatise of Government as a guideline to their new constitution.
The Three Estate System was the splitting of the citizens based on their class in society. There was the Clergy (church), the Nobility (nobles) who make up the first and second estate, and the commoners as the third estate. It was unfair that the Clergy and Nobility had only made up 2% of the country’s population but, had 35% of the land; special privileges were given by King Louis XVI gave special privileges to them. These privileges were that the Clergy and Nobility didn’t pay taxes and got to wear special clothing in public. The Third Estate, especially the Bourgeoisie, made up 98% of the French population were irritated with King Louis XVI because they had no special privileges, they paid 50% income tax, and had only 65% of land for 98% of the population.
Within Book III, the question of how to choose their rulers is brought to the attention of both Socrates and our interlocutor – Glaucon. They discuss the best methods for this selection and what a good ruler should and should not be. This dialogue opens the discussion of finding a falsehood that can persuade even rulers and possibly create a better city, leading to the usage of the Myth of Metals – the Noble Lie. Glaucon at first immediately agrees with Socrates’ point that guardians must believe they will always have to do and discern what is good for the city and never try to do the opposite.
Aristotle’s forms of government include three ‘true’ forms following deviations to each form. The first type of constitution is kingship; the rule of one aiming at the good of all. The second is aristocracy; the rule of the elite aiming at the good of all. The third is polity “politea”; rule exercised by the populous aiming at the good of all 116. Kingship, aristocracy, and polity are considered the ‘just’ forms because their focus is on the common good.
“Qu 'est-ce que le tiers état”/ “What Is the Third Estate” by Emmanuel-Joseph Sieyes was one of the French Revolution’s most momentous and prominent political texts, shaping the course of events in 1789. It is a pamphlet structured around three hypothetical questions and Sieyes responses. These questions are: What is the third estate? Everything.
The Third Estate, which accounted for 97% of citizens, received little say in political matters (Beck et. al, 652). Individuals recognized the disproportionate system France’s government arranged to solve these issues, and they sought a shift from a monarchy to a more democratic government. The Bourgeoisie rebelled against its government after concluding that it wanted a change in
Social obligation to safeguard public order and social harmony Mill considered utility with respect to the nature of human “as a progressive being” (95). Yet, selfishness causes people unwillingness to do anything for the sake of public good. For those who come, it is hard to know his or her sincerity. The operation of monarchy is to build a social order to work for public good. There would be an authority to lead the public so as to achieve certain common goals, such as prosperity, food, stable life.