En su discurso del 10 de mayo de 1793 sobre la Constitución, Robespierre combina una concepción fiduciaria de los representantes públicos con una defensa de las virtudes de la democracia, el único sistema político en el que los gobernantes, al ser parte del pueblo, tienen los mismos intereses que este. Es esta defensa de la soberanía popular, así como de la primacía del poder legislativo, lo que constituye la esencia de su “economía política popular”, una expresión que toma de Rousseau. (...) Para Robespierre, solamente esta clase de economía es compatible con una República cuyo primer objetivo sea la garantía de los derechos naturales del hombre. In his 10th May 1793 speech on the Constitution, Robespierre combines a fiduciary conception of public representatives with a defence of the virtues of democracy, the only political system in which the rulers, being part of the people, have the same interests as the latter. It is this defence of popular sovereignty, as well as of the primacy of the legislative power, what constitutes the essence of his “popular political economy”, an expression he takes from Rousseau. For Robespierre, only this kind of economy is compatible with a Republic whose first objective is to guarantee the natural rights of man. (shrink)

The confession quoted above by way of introduction reveals with tragic sincerity the fatal passion of an overly avid reader, unlimited in curiosity certainly but fully conscious of the demanding finality of the work he had to accomplish: the scientific critique of an international system of social organization, “in which man is a humiliated, enslaved, abandoned and scornful being” (1844). Cultivating poetry and philosophy in a world felt to be unlivable meant becoming an accomplice of those individuals and institutions principally (...) responsible for the barbarity called modern civilization. But to combat this, it was necessary to scour the murky historical horizon issued from a distant past where only great social revolutions marked the stages of a progression seen as ambiguous because realized by means of unspeakable phenomena of regression. Only one revolution took place under the contradictory sign of an emancipation with universal ambitions and of a decline with indelible consequences: the French Revolution. Conclusion as well as beginning, it was studied by Marx as a unique event, both in relation to its antecedents as well as its liberating promises. Although it is true that Marx “never wrote a history of the ancien régime”, a hardly significant remark, it is no less true that he studied and compiled, with the eagerness of a schoolboy enthralled by history, an enormous mass of documentation that can “help understand how (the ancien regime) gave birth to the Revolution”, despite what François Furet might think (Marx et la Révolution française, Paris, 1986, p. 79). Moreover, the author of Das Kapital drew from the revolutionary history of France the inspiration for a “poetry of the future” in which the following vision was designed:“The old bourgeois society, with its classes and its class antagonism, gave way to an association in which the free development of each individual is the condition for the free development of the whole” (1848). (shrink)

Cette édition qui réunit l'ensemble des textes philosophiques écrits par Marx jusqu'en 1848 permettra de redécouvrir sa critique de l'aliénation de la conscience, de la réification du travail, du culte de l'Etat, des abstractions de la philosophie du droit.

Marcuse emphasizes a dialectical relationship between aesthetics and politics. Art promotes liberation through the education of sensibility and critique of reality—the Great Refusal—while still embodying elements of the ideological system of domination. Thus, although art itself cannot change the world, it can move people to social change. In this respect, the Great Refusal serves an important political role in challenging the Establishment. This paper argues for the continued theoretical relevance of the Great Refusal and for its practical possibilities in transforming (...) society. (shrink)

Republicanism is increasingly attracting more attention from political philosophy. However, a mere hermeneutical approach it is usually used, which tends to neglect the political, social and economic circumstances that shaped this tradition of thought. This article addresses the modern conception of republican freedom with the North American and the French case through the work of two of their most representative figures, Thomas Jefferson and Maximilien Robespierre. The article defends that the political, juridical and economic government – the republican political (...) economy– devised by both, keeps important similarities that the current political philosophy cannot ignore. To illustrate this relationship, it is shown that both thinkers received a deep and similar influence of natural law philosophy and of fiduciary theory when thinking and trying to implement their models of government and their idea of ownership. (shrink)

While many scholars have realized that the Enlightenment period was much more religious than previously thought, the deists are still seen as basically secular figures who believed in a distant and inactive deity. This article shows that the hundred and thirteen French Revolutionary deists who wrote prayers and hymns to God believed in a caring, loving, and active deity. They maintained that God wanted people to be free, and so God actively helped the French Revolution by leading the French armies (...) to victory and revealing enemy plots. The majority of these prayers and hymns were said at government-sponsored religious festivals. It is a mistake, however, to dismiss this religious language as being about sacralizing the new nation. Instead, there were places in the festivals where individuals could express their own religious views. Furthermore, most of these prayers and hymns were written while Maximilien Robespierre was pushing his deist civil religion and labelling irreligious people as enemies of the French republic. However, the same views about God were expressed after his death by the Theophilanthropists. Thus, these deists were not merely echoing the party line while Robespierre was alive, but were expressing their true religious feelings. (shrink)

The ArgumentIn the summer of 1783, a trial took place in the French city of Arras. One M. de Vissery, a resident of the nearby village of St. Omer, was appealing a decision by his local aldermen, who required him to remove a lightning rod he had put on his chimney. His young defense lawyer was Maximilien Robespierre, who made a name for himself by winning the case. In preparation, Robespierre and his senior colleague corresponded with natural philosophers and (...) jurisconsultants. Robes- pierre then persuasively resolved the crucial problem, namely, the proper relations of scientific to legal authority. He exploited the empiricist dogma common to contemporary physics and jurisprudence to argue that judges need not defer to scientific experts, but must only consider the facts, which required no expertise. It was a first approximation of an argument Robespierre would make with mounting authority over the next decade. (shrink)

Bu yazıda Fransız Devrimi'nin Eylül 1793’ten Temmuz 1794’e kadar süren Terör Dönemi ve devrimin önderlerinden Robespierre’in bu dönemdeki rolü incelenmektedir. Bu amaçla öncelikle Terör Dönemi’nde neler yaşandığından kısaca söz edilecek, sonrasında ise Robespierre kendini nasıl bu dönemin merkezinde bulduğu araştırılacaktır. Son olarak Robepierre’in terör tartışmalarında gündeme getirdiği “erdemli terör” kavramının ne anlama geldiği tartışılacaktır.

El objetivo de este trabajo es analizar y problematizar la influencia de Rousseau en Robespierre y, desde este ejemplo, examinar la cuestión de las influencias en general. Este artículo se propone rebatir esas interpretaciones en las que Robespierre es descrito básicamente como una especie de mera aplicación o extensión práctica del pensamiento de Rousseau. Para ello, se examinan las diferentes problemáticas relativas a su “gran influencia”: entre otras cosas, las contradicciones de este pensador con lo que se dijo en su (...) nombre, cómo fue reivindicado prácticamente por todos los bandos (incluso contrarrevolucionarios) o cómo hubo otras influencias muy importantes entre los principales actores revolucionarios (como la Antigüedad grecorromana). También se destaca que, aunque fuese de manera elogiosa, Rousseau fue poco citado explícitamente por Robespierre, razón por la que discursos son analizados en detalle, y se combinan este tipo de análisis internalistas con otros externalistas o contextuales. Con todo ello no se pretende negar la influencia, sino matizarla y mostrar cómo la recepción de Rousseau durante la Revolución Francesa fue productiva, compleja, coyuntural, cambiante y públicamente competida. De hecho, a menudo fue más importante la dimensión simbólica que la propiamente discursiva. (shrink)

David A. Bell and Hugo Drochon’s foreword prepares us well for Gauchet’s Robespierre. We are not to expect a biography, any form of preamble, nor footnotes, archival discoveries, nor wrestling with...

On 5 Nivôse of the Year II, addressing the National Assembly on behalf of the Committee of Public Safety, Robespierre declared: “The theory of revolutionary government is as new as the revolution that has brought it about. It should not be sought in the books of political writers, who have not foreseen this revolution, nor in the laws of tyrants, who content to abuse their power, are little concerned to investigate its legitimacy.” It is tempting to suppose Robespierre is exaggerating. (...) Whatever the relation of revolutionary government to “the laws of tyrants,” Robespierre's ties to the republican tradition in political philosophy, and especially to Rousseau, are striking and nearly everywhere acknowledged, not least by Robespierre himself. However, I am not concerned here with the question of Rousseau's influence upon Robespierre, but with the rather different question of conceptual affinity. Even if Robespierre's intent were just to put The Social Contract into practice, it is still appropriate to ask whether Robespierre is a Rousseauean. (shrink)

On 5 Nivôse of the Year II, addressing the National Assembly on behalf of the Committee of Public Safety, Robespierre declared: “The theory of revolutionary government is as new as the revolution that has brought it about. It should not be sought in the books of political writers, who have not foreseen this revolution, nor in the laws of tyrants, who content to abuse their power, are little concerned to investigate its legitimacy.” It is tempting to suppose Robespierre is exaggerating. (...) Whatever the relation of revolutionary government to “the laws of tyrants,” Robespierre's ties to the republican tradition in political philosophy, and especially to Rousseau, are striking and nearly everywhere acknowledged, not least by Robespierre himself. However, I am not concerned here with the question of Rousseau's influence upon Robespierre, but with the rather different question of conceptual affinity. Even if Robespierre's intent were just to put The Social Contract into practice, it is still appropriate to ask whether Robespierre is a Rousseauean. (shrink)

One of the most important debates in the field of eighteenth?century French intellectual history concerns the ideological significance of the rise of the cult of the Great Frenchmen. Taking this debate as a frame of reference, the paper attempts a close reading of Robespierre's Éloge de Gresset (written in 1784, published in 1785). Usually dismissed by Robespierre scholars, this text is, in fact, a very important document offering clues not only to Robespierre's intellectual formation, but also his appropriation of what (...) he regarded as the official and conventional rhetoric of his age. These questions engage the larger debate regarding the origins of the French Revolution, in particular its ?cultural origins?, and its intellectual origins, defined as the distillation of and interactions between competing representations of society and its relation to the public sphere. The thesis proposed is that Robespierre's eulogy of Gresset indicates that his anti?philosophical ideas came from a much broader array of sources than previously believed. Among these sources, Gresset's 1740s?1750s polemics against the philosophes pointed the way towards the type of criticism of the Enlightenment that underpinned Robespierre's cultural revolutionary politics. (shrink)

Durante la Revolución Francesa, el trabajo político del "lado izquierdo", del cual Robespierre fue uno de los portavoces, consistió en implementar los principios de la Declaración de los Derechos del Hombre y del Ciudadano. Esto implica que el pueblo soberano puede controlar el ejercicio del poder de sus agentes. Su función es garantizar el derecho natural del hombre a la existencia, que es la condición principal de la libertad y la razón de ser de la república. During the French Revolution, (...) the political work of the "left side", of which Robespierre was one of the spokespersons, consisted in implementing the principles of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. These imply that the sovereign people can control the exercise of the power of their agents. Their function is to guarantee the natural right of man to existence which is the main condition of freedom and the raison d'être of the republic. (shrink)

C’est par le prisme du courant révolutionnaire des Enragés que l’essayiste Claude Guillon s’est emparé des questions de genre dans la Révolution française (Notre patience est à bout. 1792‑1793 Les écrits des Enragé(e)s, Éditions IMHO, 2017) et sa réflexion se poursuit depuis dans les pages très documentées de son blog historien (La Révolution & nous, https://unsansculotte.wordpress.com). Avec ce nouvel ouvrage, Robespierre, les femmes et la Révolution, l’auteur veut explorer la « politique de...

This article contains the preface, introduction, and epilogue of Zhu Xueqin’s influential book The Demise of the Republic of Virtue: From Rousseau to Robespierre. In the preface, Zhu describes Chinese and international scholarship on Rousseau, his own intellectual formation as a member of the Cultural Revolution generation, and the overall purpose of the book. In the introduction, Zhu briefly outlines the transformation of medieval “theological politics” into modern “political theology,” or his central concern of the merger between moral idealism and (...) the political state. Finally, in the epilogue, Zhu nevertheless still seeks to rescue Rousseau by arguing that history is created by both a priori and empirical forces and that a dialogue between deconstruction and construction is required. However, for “political theology” to end, boundaries have to be set to moral idealism and it needs to be disconnected from the political state. (shrink)