| ||||||||||
American Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of RightsWritten by: KJohns19 Few political documents have affected the world quite like the American Declaration of Independence or the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen. The repercussions of each have had a profound effect on world history up to this point. But why did these documents have such an effect? The answer lies in the common philosophical backgrounds of the two. The writings of Rousseau, Locke and Montesquieu all contained ideas that were later used by Thomas Jefferson and the National Assembly to compose the two documents. Rousseau's ideas of a social contract, which states that the general will and the people were sovereign, and if a king abuses the liberty of the people they have a right and a duty to dissolve the current government and create a new one (McKay, 581), were central to both documents. Jefferson had Rousseau's ideas in mind when he wrote the Declaration of Independence. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states...a prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people...we therefore...solemnly publish and declare, that these United Colonies are...independent states... (Jefferson, 1-2). The reasons, such as suspension of colonial legislatures, impressment of American sailors and the importation of mercenaries (Jefferson, 2), given for the dissolution of the political connections that the American and British people have held for over 100 years all relate to the King's tyrannical tendencies and the peoples right to choose a different government. The edict also states that although petitions of grievances were issued, the King turned a deaf ear. The Declaration of the Rights of Man is not only built on the social contract, but also on Rousseau's idea of general will of the people. He defines the general will as being, "Sacred and absolute, reflecting the common interests of the people, who have displaced the monarch as the holder of the sovereign powers. (McKay, 581)" Passing and enforcing arbitrary laws are considered to be an act of tyranny and a substantial reason, according to Rousseau, to declare the current government void and establish a new one. Article VII clearly states that arbitrary laws and orders cannot exist.(Sherman, 100) The fact that this is distinctly stated implies that arbitrary laws were being passed and enforced under Louis XVI. Article VI states that law is the expression of the general will every citizen has the right to participate personally or through his represenative.... (Sherman, 100) Locke's ideas of natural rights, the rights of human beings to the pursuit of life, liberty, and property (McKay, 524), is clearly stated in both declarations. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson used the exact words in the preamble - life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - in which he uses happiness to mean property.(1) He also cites examples of the arbitrary suspension of liberties by George III such as the right to peaceably assemble, taxation without the consent of the colonists, maintenance of a peacetime standing army, and the right to a trial by jury.(1-2) A reference to natural rights also appear in the preamble of the Declaration of the Rights of Man. Article II of the proclamation directly states, "The aim of all political associations is the preservation of the natural ... rights of man (which are)... liberty, property, security and resistance to oppression. (Sherman, 99-100)" Article IV defines liberty as: The freedom to do everything which injures no one else hence the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits except those which assures to the other members of society the enjoyment of the same rights. These limits can only be determined by law.(Sherman, 100) The rights of freedom from arbitrary imprisonment and the idea of someone accused of a crime is innocent until proven guilty (Sherman, 100) were all laid out by the national Assembly and run parallel to Locke's ideas about human rights. Montesquieu's ideas of the courts being the foremost protector of liberties (577) is used as a reason for the break with Great Britain. The justices of the admiralty or naval courts that existed in colonial America served at "King's Pleasure" rather than "Good Behavior", ensuring that the decisions of the courts would be biased in favor of the King. The right to a trial by jury was also suspended for those who broke the laws laid down by the Navigation acts. The colonials expressed these concerns in the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of the Rights of Man also hold Montesquieu's interpretation of the courts. It provides for the right to a trial and freedom from punishments that are not strictly and obviously necessary.(Sherman 100) It also holds that all men are equal in the eyes of the law. Both the Declaration of Independence and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen have common roots in the arguments of the Enlightenment, and in the Enlightened philosophies Rousseau, Locke and Montesquieu. Rousseau's idea of a social contract, Locke's natural rights, and Montesquieu's idea of the courts being the defenders of liberties all came into play when the two documents were written, and in being written, the culmination of the Enlightened thinkers came to their peak.
|
| screamingbutterfly 2001-10-13 07:00AM | |
|
Very good... it would probably help students reading it if sources were cited better or bibliography included.. I thought you made a very clear comparisson - nice introduction and good structure --------------------- ~Heather~ | |
| publius2k 2006-03-26 02:56AM | |
|
Interesting but doesn't give credit where credit is due. Was it really the original thought of just Rousseau, Locke and Montesquieu? Please research further. Is it a mere coincidence that this outbreak of thoughts of liberty came after Columbus? Jefferson did not equate happiness with property: 'I am convinced that those societies (as the Indians) which live without government enjoy in their general mass an infinitely greater degree of happiness than those who live under the European governments. Among the former, public opinion is in the place of law, & restrains morals as powerfully as laws ever did anywhere' - Thomas Jefferson The concept of owning land was foreign to the Indians, who deemed it to be 'the commons' as are air and water. 'That, on the principle of a communion of property, small societies may exist in habits of virtue, order, industry, and peace, and consequently in a state of as much happiness as Heaven has been pleased to deal out to imperfect humanity, I can readily conceive, and indeed, have seen its proofs in various small societies which have been constituted on that principle.'-Thomas Jefferson [1822] As to freedom from bosses, masterlessness: "Of all the virtues presumed by fancy or theory to be inherent in the Indian way of life, only one, but that the greatest, was apparent to the white borderer. For him this one glistened with an irresistible appeal. It was the priceless boon for which all men of all times have yearned the most profoundly. Whatever his other circumstances, the Indian enjoyed total freedom as an individual. However cruelly buffeted otherwise by fortune, he lived out his life wholly untroubled by the restraints and dictates that make the individual the creature of overnment and commerce in every more developed society. Having become familiar with the edge of the wilderness, the [white/euro] borderer plunged into it in pursuit of an equal freedom for himself." -- Disinherited, by Dale Van Every (1966), Ch. 1, The Lost Birthright of the American Indian, p. 8 Suggested reading: "New Worlds for Old - Reports from the New World and Their Effect on the Development of Social Thought in Europe, 1500-1800" by William Brandon "Indian Givers: How The Indians Of The Americas Transformed The World" and "Native Roots: How The Indians Enriched America" --- both by Jack Weatherford Free eBooks online: American Indians - Exemplars of Liberty Native America and the Evolution of Democracy - Bruce Johansen http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/6Nations/EoL/ 'Forgotten Founders -- Benjamin Franklin, the Iroquois and the Rationale for the American Revolution' - Bruce Johansen http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/6Nations/#FF see also: 'Everything runs smoothly without soldiers, gendarmes, or police, without nobles, kings, governors, prefects or judges; without prisons, without trials. All quarrels and disputes are settled by the whole body of those concerned....' --Lewis Henry Morgan re the Iroquois culture in 'Ancient Society' [1877] The Origin of the Family, Personal Property, and the State, by Frederick Engels | |
| publius2k 2007-01-12 01:20AM | No Rating |
|
The concepts associated with the revolutions in France and North America did not originate in Europe. Rousseau and Locke didn't dream up their views on their own but were inspired by the existing systems in the Americas. Maybe when and if the works of those like 'History of the Indies' by Las Casas are finally translated in their entirety into English, people will begin to appreciate the extent of the gifts of the Indians. ================================ The following excerpts are from: New Worlds for Old - Reports from the New World and Their Effect on the Development of Social Thought in Europe, 1500-1800 by William Brandon [1986] Ohio University Press ================================ "A life lived free of toil and tyranny, free of masters, free of greed and the struggle for gain, became so much the key picture presented by the first historian of the New World, Peter Martyr of Anghiera, that his English translator summed it up in the repeated word 'liberty'. Their "aunciente libertie" (says this translator, Richard Eden, writing in the 1550s) had made the New World people "most happye of all men." They were living in the golden age, wrote Peter Martyr (and explained Richard Eden, "of whiche owlde wryters speake so much: wherin men lyved simply and innocentlye") without even weights and measures to cause disputes, free of lawsuits and law enforcement, free of calumniating judges and the resultant learned professions of craft and deceit, free of books, free of the pernicious presence of deadly money, content only to satisfy nature -- and, added Richard Eden to his translation, incapable of servitude, having "been ever soo used to live at libertie, in play and pastyme." [p.6] "Among the people there, he wrote, "Myne and Thyne (the seedes of all myscheefe) have no place . . ." (In his origin Latin, "necque meum aut tuum, malorum omnie semina . . .") Land was held in common, as free to all as the sunlight or the sea, "in open gardens, not intrenched with dykes, dyvyded with hedges, or defended with waules. They deal trewely one with another, without lawes, without bookes, and without Judges." They lived without toil, he was informed, so bounteous was their fair country and so innocent their wants, in their "free kynde of life" that was "given to Idlenes and playe." [p.7] "In his Journal entry for Christmas Day 1492, Columbus declared with some solemnity that in all the world "I do not believe there is a better people or a better country; they love their neighbors as themselves" and was moved to add that "they have the softest and gentlest speech in the world and are always laughing." [p.8] Of the book 'Utopia' by Thomas More [1516], several historians have noted that the reports of the culture of the 'Indians' in the 'New World' contributed to the novel's concepts of equality, liberty and justice, especially perhaps the letters/reports of Amerigo Vespucci. "... passages speaking of American natives living together in perfect equality, each his own master, sharing everything in common, without private property, despising pearls and gold. Sydney Lee came many years ago to the even more single-track conclusion that 'Utopia' owed its "foundation" to the "letters of Amerigo Vespucci . . ." [p.9] "The Spanish historian José de Acosta, writing in the 1580s after a number of years in the New World, chiefly Peru: "Surely the Greeks and the Romans, if they had known the Republics of the Mexicans and the Incas, would have greatly esteemed their laws and governments. We today only enter there by the sword, giving them no heed, no hearing, no more consideration than a venison in the forest . . . Men more profound and diligent, who have penetrated the secrets of their customs and their ancient government, have an entirely different opinion, and marvel at the order and reason that existed among them." [p.12] [Why did this passage make me think of the USA and countries like Iraq that it is so intent on attacking/invading?] "Geoffroy Atkinson, a specialist in the "geographical" literature of this period in France, cites a long list of French language works of the sixteenth century that dwell largely on the accepted "fact" that a land enjoying a real live Golden Age has been discovered in America. Great names joined this chorus of revelation, as in a little book in French based on a few pages from the famous cardinal Pietro Bembo's history of Venice, with a ring already familiar: the people of the isles of the New World "for the most part live a life of the age of gold, they don't know what it is to set up boundaries and distinguish possessions. They have no lawsuits, no law, no books of writing, no merchandise . . ." The same familiar ring was sounded in the works by one of the best-known mapmakers of the epoch, Jodocus Hondius: "The people of this Country are content with the bounty of nature, neither doe they know what belongs to mine, or thine, or money, but have all things in common, even as nature bestoweth the light of the Sunne and the water on all men equally; therefore their Gardens are open and unfenced, and nature teacheth them that which is right without lawes." ... typical is Jean Macer, summing up the New World: "Those who live there exceed and excel all other peoples in kindness, warmth and humanity . . . For it is unheard of that anyone is ever in any way ill-treated among them ..." [p.12-13] "The new idea of total liberty retained a leading place in these accounts. Léry, from personal observation: ". . . they have neither kings nor princes, and consequently each is more or less as much a great lord as the other." Macer, drawing conclusions from what he had heard and read: "They do not recognize a King or any superior, and will not subject themselves to the orders of anyone. Each is a King, master and Lord." [p.13] "It is a nation, would I answer Plato," so reads "Des Cannibales" in its first English translation (1603) ... "that hath no kinde of traffike, no knoweldge of Letters, no intelligence of numbers, no name of magistrate, nor of politike superioritie; no use of service, of riches or povertie; no contracts, no successions, no partitions, no occupation but idle [modern French scholarship makes the meaning of this phrase 'no occupation but that which is agreeable'] . . . no use of wine, corne, or mettle. The very words that import lying, falsehood, treason, dissimulations, covetousness, envie, detractions, and pardon, were never heard of amongst them." [p.18-19] Shakespeare referenced these icons of American Indian culture in his play The Tempest, in act 2, scene 1 of which he wrote: "I' the commonwealth I would by contraries Execute all things: for no kind of traffic would I admit; no name of magistrate; Letters should not be known; no use of service, Of riches, or of poverty; no contracts sucessions; bound of land, tilth, vineyard, none; No use of metal, corn, or wine, or oil; No occupation; all men are idle, all; And women too; but innocent and pure; No sovereignty . . ." [p.19] | |
| PlanetPapers.com | Contact Me | Copyright © 2007 | Privacy Policy | Add to Favorites |