Anne-Robert-Jacques Turgot’s article, On Foundations, in The Old Regime and the French Revolution criticizes the Old Regime's use of charities, as common free assistance to the community of the church or power individuals. Turgot agrees this model for assistance wrecks individual develops and dependability in the workforce. Turgot believes these charities were created only for the church and wealthy individual benefits not the public good. These actions of the Old Regime put less fortunate people at a disadvantage. Turgot accept as true that Foundations do not promote high efficiency in the workplace. He uses Spain and parts of Italy as examples of places with the assistance and states how unhappy in terms of efficiency and poverty.This abuse …show more content…
creates a class that chooses to live the life of a drifter to only migrate from soup kitchen to the soup kitchen. As if they are a lion tamed in a cage that becomes satisfied with its new found home of surrounding bars and three meals a day locking up their potential to fend for their own lives. The very nature of able-bodied men would become the lion behind bars instead of productive members of society. These foundations are negative to society, according to Turgot because the funds that could otherwise be used for the general public good, instead of for the particular goal of the founder.
However, because the foundation is mainly concerned with it’s own cause, and is often not in tune with the changing needs of the general public. Turgot wants the people of France to earn their merit, “you will see emulation take fire immediately in the heart of every family”, as citizens to solve their problem through education and determination. Turgot strives for equal education to guarantee employment. A greater society is one where individuals can do what interest them while supporting family needs to survive with higher education. The greatest accomplishment for a citizen is to create a life that is supported financially from their jobs. Turgot was not a ally of foundations because he wanted more power with the citizens. The foundations greed would lead to the cultural death of humanity to only dependent upon charity. Turgot wants new social order, one where citizens are educated and not holding their hands out for …show more content…
charity. inactivity mindsets are created because the purpose of a foundation can find the socity problems with the creation of a inaction genderation. A genderation profit has become the aspect of the foundation for the church and wealthy individuals. This foundations idea is worsened to only repeat its self instead of reformed. The founders obviously take more concern to the division in their cultureal values than creating new foundations. Turgot sees that “ majority of foundations far outlive their utility” so he recommends that no more foundations be created. Then Turgot proposes that foundations be destroy funds taken for general projects to help with issues like education and manner for all families. Next citizens need to help their own society by disbanding for these foundations. If citizens are not depended only on donations, the need in a particular area then the money will be moved where its really need because all citizens are helping in the society and fulling the current needs of the general public. This act according Turgot will make society responsible for depending on itself as to create “citizens” out of “subjects” and make for stronger mind people that feel civic pride and strive to better the governement. He argues that humanity has an responsibility to be aware of the problems that were most current and relevant to the time weather your clergy, nobility or commoner. He considered the fact that society changes over time, and thus the needs change, and foundations were not only causing delay in progress but were an actual hindrance to social advancement. Though his ideas on demolishing foundations, redistributing their funds, and creating a sense of civic understanding in citizens may have seemed radical to the Old Regime, they were truly in the spirit of the Enlightenment, and displayed Turgot’s faith in the possibility of an intelligent, empathetic, progressive society of active, political citizens. Turgot has interesting thoughts for the current foundations and providing for the public good in the future.
He feels “free associations and voluntary subscriptions of some generous citizens” would be most useful in providing relief when needed. These resources would be temporary and only used where needed in society. This prevents profit from occurring and keeps the focus on the public good. This way, as needs arose resources could be provided accordingly. As for the current foundations Turgot feels their assets should be reallocated, and “they must cease to exist immediately”. It is clear that Turgot was not a supporter of foundations and wanted more power with the citizens. He felt greed resulted with the founders and ultimately would lead to the downfall of society as we created individuals that were dependent upon charity. Turgot offers insight with creating a new society that is educated and non-reliant on charity. His goal is a society that strives on success and
accomplishment.
To conclude, three sets of views existed in the 15th, 16th, and 17th Centuries regarding the destitute. In the 1400's, the poor were treated with sympathy and charity. In the next century, the poor were regarded with suspicion and hatred, which occasionally led to abuse. By the 17th Century, charity had resumed through private citizens and religious orders, though the wealthy still regarded the idle poor as worthless and undeserving of aid. These three often-conflicting sets of views had a profound effect on the lives of the European poor: they determined how the destitute were treated and socially regarded.
In Political Confessions of Faith, Metternich identifies two elements that are most important to a nation. These two are the precepts of morality, religious as well as social, and the necessities created by locality (2). Metternich explains that whenever society strays from these elements, the only thing it its wake is bloodshed. Because of new ways of thinking, the people of this time period’s values and morals have changed. Lavish living has become more important than worship. The revolution caused the sense of locality to vanish, along with the necessities created by it. Lavish spending and entitlement led people to revolt.
Beginning in mid-1789, and lasting until late-1799, the French Revolution vastly changed the nation of France throughout its ten years. From the storming of the Bastille, the ousting of the royal family, the Reign of Terror, and all the way to the Napoleonic period, France changed vastly during this time. But, for the better part of the last 200 years, the effects that the French Revolution had on the nation, have been vigorously debated by historian and other experts. Aspects of debate have focused around how much change the revolution really caused, and the type of change, as well as whether the changes that it brought about should be looked at as positive or negative. Furthermore, many debate whether the Revolutions excesses and shortcomings can be justified by the gains that the revolution brought throughout the country. Over time, historians’ views on these questions have changed continually, leading many to question the different interpretations and theories behind the Revolutions effectiveness at shaping France and the rest of the world.
Two-hundred and ten years ago, the country of France was rapidly changing, whether for better or for worse was not yet known. At this time, young Napoleon Bonaparte was leading his fledgling empire in France. He was challenging all the laid down rules and regulations that had been in place within his country and Europe for hundreds of years. This year, however, he would enact a set of laws known as the Civil Code, which was later called the Napoleonic Code. This set of laws was one of Napoleon’s longest lasting effects on the world, as it “is still in effect today, and has served as the model for many other national codes, especially in Europe” (Princeton Review). It was this set of laws that laid down rules and guidelines that are seen as normal in a modern day sense, such as that all men are equal. These concepts were brand new to the period, and no leader had ever allowed such idea to be enacted. It went against what the kings and queens in Europe had fought so hard to maintain, the idea that aristocrats and priests were above commoners, and more importantly, above the law. The Civil Code would forever change the way the French governed their people, and how those people were represented in their government. One of the most significant aspects of it was that it protected private property, as well as restoring power to the males of the family. At this time, France was a country where you were born into your wealth and social status. However, this all changed with the Napoleonic Code as well. The society began moving towards a “merit-based society in which individuals qualify for education and employment because of talent rather than birth or social standing” (Bentley pg. 792). Among other things, the code improved education with...
Winthrop, J. (2008). A Model for Christian Charity. In N. Baym (Ed.), The Norton Anthology of American Literature Volume 1 (pp. 82). New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Charity handouts did not necessarily help feed a poor family, but aimed to “... produce most beneficial results to [the] community” (Shi 60). This meant that the wealthy didn’t directly give citizens money, but built free public utilities. Among these free services were libraries and and centers for scientific research. Without a doubt, these buildings do not help put food on the table. They do, however, create a sense of hope for educational and social improvement for the working class.
The essential cause of the French revolution was the collision between a powerful, rising bourgeoisie and an entrenched aristocracy defending its privileges”. This statement is very accurate, to some extent. Although the collision between the two groups was probably the main cause of the revolution, there were two other things that also contributed to the insanity during the French revolution – the debt that France was in as well as the famine. Therefore, it was the juxtaposing of the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy as well as the debt and famine France was in that influenced the French Revolution.
Each social class in France has its own reasons for wanting a change in government. The aristocracy was upset by the king’s power, while the Bourgeoisie was upset by the privileges of the aristocracy. The peasants and urban workers were upset by their burdensome existence. The rigid, unjust social structure meant that citizens were looking for change because “all social classes.had become uncomfortable and unhappy with the status quo.” (Nardo, 13)
Of all the long term causes of the French Revolution, the Ancien Régime was perhaps the most deeply-rooted. The Ancien Régime was the old system of government, the old order of things, before the Revolution, and it divided French society up into three ``estates'': the nobles, the clergy, and the common people (ie. everyone else, which included both peasants and the middle classes). The first and second estates were privileged in that they paid no tax at all, and for this reason, the monarch did not have a problem with their support: they were, in effect, propping up the Ancien Régime. The first and second estates also owned the larger proportion of land: although there were only 300 000 of them out of a total population of 25 million, they owned three fifths of the land in France.
Sutherland, Donald M.G. The French Revolution and Empire: the quest for a civic order. Oxford, UK. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 2003. 40-43. Print.
The unfair ways of how common people were treated compared to royalty and nobility formed the ideas of liberty, equality and fraternity, leading to the French Revolution. Unfair taxes that were only directed to the commoners, high society positions that were only to be obtained by nobles, food scarcity that only affected the poor and the royals having power over all caused the c...
Before the revolution, life in France was still observing feudal rights. The monarch, nobles, and the clergy lived a life on the back of the people. It was a very dark time for the peasants with no light in sight. The large mass of peasants grew poorer and living in famine. Crime was the way of life for the peasants because food resources began to become scarce. Leading up to the revolution, the beginning of a middle class began develop. This new class would be the leading force for the revolution in France. After the revolution the French Revolution failed to establish a representative government or a constitutional monarchy. Before the revolution, France began with an absolute monarchy. They completely abolished the monarchy by cutting off the king’s and queen’s head and ended up with Napoleon Bonaparte. The French revolution did give the people a taste of liberty, equality, and power, but that was short lived. The co...
Helping the poor and needy in the forms of providing free eating houses, distributing second-hand clothing, giving alms to the poor, and establishing asylums for wounded soldiers and abandoned children were some of the primary concerns of these civilizations (Farley et al., 2011). In 1536, England established laws for the collection of alms on Sundays (Farley et al., 2011). With the establishment of the Elizabethan Poor Laws, welfare became the federal government’s responsibility (Farley et al., 2011). This law contributed to the development of social welfare and assisted both those who were able and incapable of working. However, those capable of working were to be provided with work, and if they refused to work, they were imprisoned; orphaned and dependent children were to be apprenticed until they could care for themselves (Farley et al.,
During the late eighteenth century, France’s economy was suffering from a depression because of the Seven Years War (1756-1783), the War of Austrian Succession (1740-1748) (Frey 57), and the American War (1777-1783) (Heath 68). In an attempt to slow depression, the taxes of the Third Estate were raised, which significantly emphasized how much of a disadvantage the Third Estate was at in France, and how greatly it was affected by changes in the economy (Clough 34), especially since the members of the Third Estate were the ones who had to pay an immense portion of the taxes in French society. Because of these facts, they now lead me to ask: if the social misery of the Third Estate and the economic depression that lasted from 1787 to 1789 did not exist, how else would the French Revolution have taken place?
The reformation of the Charity Organizations didn’t grant relief themselves however they served as a resource to simplify the transaction of relief to relief applicants by: maintaining relief applicant requests, records of the aid given to them, and referring those worthy or unworthy to the proper agencies (Trattner, 1999). Their goal was to eradicate fraud and duplicity of services while also maintaining efficiency and treating poverty. The charity organization movement intended to treat poverty by enacting “friendly visitors” to look into each case and define the cause of destitution while also watching for overlapping relief. These “friendly visitors” and their investigations were the cornerstone of the Charity Organization Society’s (C.O.S) treatment; granting aid without investigation was like giving medicine without diagnosis (Trattner, 1999).