So, between the years 1815 and 1850 :
Was what happened in this period the greatest loss of freedom until this point in Europe?
- To say whether or not it's actually the "greatest loss" requires a little glimpse into what exactly was going on from 1815 ,when France finally calmed down (at least for a bit), to 1850.
- One important place to start is with something called the
dual revolution.
- While we discussed whether or not the dual revolution lent itself more toward the political side or the economic side of revolution, it is generally seen as encompassing of both.
In fact :
- The "dual revolution" describes the fusing together of political and economic change across Europe, which had previously been events that seemed more independent of each other.
Looking at the presence of the dual revolution in all these countries, we go back to one of our favorite questions :
Was the dual revolution good or bad?
 |
| Deciding whether a revolution was good or bad |
- Before we start trying to answer that, however, the question has a different implication in the case of the dual revolution, specifically:
Did the dual revolution have to do with increasing or decreasing freedom?
- Basic political and economic ideas behind the revolution aimed at certain measures of reform and alternative ideologies. Proponents of the various ideologies aimed to increase freedom within their respective movements.
- However, --> loud conservative reaction is often credited with decreasing freedom even more because of fear of new and potentially challenging societal movements.
- Appears that the strong response did more to decrease freedoms.
Speaking of the conservative reaction, it too, played a role in the backdrop of this period. Perhaps its most well-known supporter was the Austrian monarch, Metternich.
- One of Metternich's main concerns and key ideas was ensuring that there was both legitimacy and stability in international relations.
Who ,in Metternich's view, was a legitimate ruler?
- Hereditary monarchs
And, what did he refer to when he talked about stability?
- Here, Metternich meant that everything was ultimately supposed to preserve the balance of power among countries.
Metternich did not only talk about wanting the conservative hereditary monarch rule and strict balance of power, he also took steps to achieve these ideas.
Such steps included:
- The Congress of Vienna
At the Congress, Metternich, as leader of Austria, met with the other Great Powers of the time (Great Britain, Russia, Prussia, France)
- During meeting, members of the Quadruple Alliance --> decided that they wanted compensation for defeating Napoleon in the form of territorial expansion.
- Russia and Prussia got a little too excited though about how much land they wanted.
-Russia: wanted control of the land that made up the ancient Polish kingdom
- Prussia : wanted complete control over Saxony
- Because these gains would shift the balance of power :
Taking the cue that it might cause war, Prussia and Russia both backed down from their demands and each settled for only a fraction of the land they previously requested
- This episode illustrates Metternich's willingness to protect the sacred balance of power between the leading European nations
- After this:
 |
| Russia, Austria, Prussia |
Going back to the dual revolution and Metternich's almost crusade-like conservatism points to the fact that there were challenging, new ideas that were present. Two of these ideas included:
1. Liberalism :
- It wasn't exactly new by the time, and was increasingly seen as losing its edge as a political tool.
Is this why some started to shy away from it ?
-Compared to the newer tools, such as Nationalism and,later, Socialism, liberalism seemed to be less radical and different. It was something that was tried and often failed in its attempts. Therefore, many thought more radical systems would help bring change.
Why,then, was liberalism seen as being less radical, than say Nationalism?
- Ideas contained in systems such as nationalism went farther than those contained in liberalism. In liberalism, each person was given a certain amount of rights. However, nationalism, in theory, was based around an all-unifying cultural identity amongst every person. It appeared as a more militant force binding the people of a nation.
2. Nationalism :
Premise= people united within a country where the country is seen as superior to all else
- Such a system, while it seemed to give citizens a common cultural identity, often led to aggression and militant response toward other "inferior" countries.
Another issue that arose in nationalism was its lack of realistic application.
Getting a sense for what was going on in the period, now we can revisit the question at the top:
Was what happened in this period the greatest loss of freedom until this point?
- In a sense, it was the greatest loss of freedom.
Perhaps this is illustrated most fully by Metternich and the Congress of Vienna where the monarchs of the leading nations essentially met to decide when a people went to far toward another idea, for example the liberal movement in Spain. Therefore, there was a great repression during this time that resulted in a widespread loss of freedom.
3. The Voting Districts
