What do you think?
Rate this book
Revolutionary Spring: Europe Aflame and the Fight for a New World, 1848-1849
An epic history of the 1848 revolutions that swept Europe and the charismatic figures who propelled them forward, with deep resonance and frightening parallels to today--from a renowned Cambridge historian.
Historically, 1848 has long been overshadowed by the French Revolution of 1789, the Paris Commune of 1870, and the Russian revolutions of the early twentieth century. And yet in 1848, nearly all of Europe was aflame with conflict. Parallel political tumults spread like brush fire across the entire continent, leading to more significant and lasting change than earlier upheavals. And they brought with them a new awareness of the concept of history; the men and women of 1848 saw and shaped what was happening around them through the lens of previous revolutions.
Celebrated Cambridge historian Christopher Clark describes this continental uprising as "the particle collision chamber at the center of the European nineteenth century," a place where political movements and ideas--from socialism and democratic radicalism to liberalism, nationalism, corporatism, and conservatism--were tested and transformed. The insurgents asked questions that sound modern to our ears: What happens when demands for political or economic liberty conflict with demands for social rights? How do we reconcile representative and direct forms of democracy? How is capitalism connected to social inequality? As a result of the events of 1848, the papacy of Pius IX and even the Catholic Church changed profoundly; Denmark, Piedmont and Prussia issued constitutions; Sicily founded its own all-Sicilian parliament; the Austrian Chancellor Metternich fled from Vienna. The revolutions were short-lived, but their impact was profound. Public life, administrative cultures and political thought were all transformed by this mid-century convulsion. Those who lived through them were marked for life by what they had seen and experienced.
Elegantly written, meticulously researched, and filled with a fascinating cast of charismatic figures, including the social theorist de Tochqueville and the troubled Priest de Lamennais, who struggled to reconcile his faith with politics, Revolutionary Spring is a new understanding of 1848 that offers chilling parallels to our present moment. "Looking back at the revolutions from the end of the first quarter of the twenty-first century, it is impossible not to be struck by the resonances," Clark writes. "If a revolution is coming for us, it may look something like 1848."
Historically, 1848 has long been overshadowed by the French Revolution of 1789, the Paris Commune of 1870, and the Russian revolutions of the early twentieth century. And yet in 1848, nearly all of Europe was aflame with conflict. Parallel political tumults spread like brush fire across the entire continent, leading to more significant and lasting change than earlier upheavals. And they brought with them a new awareness of the concept of history; the men and women of 1848 saw and shaped what was happening around them through the lens of previous revolutions.
Celebrated Cambridge historian Christopher Clark describes this continental uprising as "the particle collision chamber at the center of the European nineteenth century," a place where political movements and ideas--from socialism and democratic radicalism to liberalism, nationalism, corporatism, and conservatism--were tested and transformed. The insurgents asked questions that sound modern to our ears: What happens when demands for political or economic liberty conflict with demands for social rights? How do we reconcile representative and direct forms of democracy? How is capitalism connected to social inequality? As a result of the events of 1848, the papacy of Pius IX and even the Catholic Church changed profoundly; Denmark, Piedmont and Prussia issued constitutions; Sicily founded its own all-Sicilian parliament; the Austrian Chancellor Metternich fled from Vienna. The revolutions were short-lived, but their impact was profound. Public life, administrative cultures and political thought were all transformed by this mid-century convulsion. Those who lived through them were marked for life by what they had seen and experienced.
Elegantly written, meticulously researched, and filled with a fascinating cast of charismatic figures, including the social theorist de Tochqueville and the troubled Priest de Lamennais, who struggled to reconcile his faith with politics, Revolutionary Spring is a new understanding of 1848 that offers chilling parallels to our present moment. "Looking back at the revolutions from the end of the first quarter of the twenty-first century, it is impossible not to be struck by the resonances," Clark writes. "If a revolution is coming for us, it may look something like 1848."
1152 pages, Hardcover
First published April 27, 2023
540 people are currently reading
9046 people want to read
About the author
Christopher Clark
12 books593 followersSir Christopher Munro Clark FBA is an Australian historian living in the United Kingdom and Germany. He is the twenty-second Regius Professor of History at the University of Cambridge. In 2015, he was knighted for his services to Anglo-German relations.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 148 reviews
September 12, 2024
Complicated Failure.
Christopher Clark begins his new book on the 1848 Revolutions of Europe by stating he had no enthusiasm for this topic as a school boy, due to its complicated nature, huge scope and finally as it is generally seen as a failure. This has reflected in this book, the Revolutions are very difficult to understand as they are pockets of uprisings loosely connected across multiple countries, with varying results. The subject is fascinating, but I challenge you to find someone who can explain the events in a detailed and coherent way.
I have said before with my reviews of Clark’s other works, that I find him hard to read. His style to me always feels wordy and I do not find him the most engaging or eloquent of writers. Unfortunately some do it much better. But I admire and respect Clark, his opinions always seem to be balanced, backed up with solid facts and research. He does not present with bias and also tackles huge overreaching topics, where most would fall. Sleepwalkers is phenomenal, Revolutionary Spring is average.
Clark writes that he could see the people of 1848 ‘in us’. What he means by that is they had come through a period of instability, the Napoleonic Wars, as we the Second World War and are now looking for change. He states that best comparison for the events is the Arab Spring of 2011 when the world watched with hope that democracy and stability would come to Middle East. Like 1848, nothing much had in fact changed.
The book follows the chronological precedent, from the world before 1848, to the last rumblings in 1849 and how this event had a impact on the impending Crimean War which was about to start. We learn the route causes of revolts, hunger, economic downturns, plague, high immortality and greedy landlords. However, Clark notes that the revolution was political and not an economic or social complaint. The ringleaders wanted change and as with all revolutions, they waited until society was suffering to pounce. He sows this together with thematic details. How the revolution effected woman, who the liberals, radicals and conservatives are and what the loosely believed. Clark states these groups were often hard to define, although the radicals were the far left, pre-Marxist types. The liberals are from the petit bourgeoisie, whom Clark sympathises with most. With this the politics of geography come into play as we also journey around Europe, from France to Germany (mostly Prussia) to the Austrian Empire and the Italian States. The world leading to the First World War is forming.
This book has a huge scope, asks and attempts to answer huge questions, but is extremely complicated and heavy. This is not a casual bedtime read. As a student of history and a reader of Clark I thought it would be easier for me, but it wasn’t. So if you want to pick this up, be prepared to re-read pages and to come away only a small portion of the context committed to memory. This book will need a couple of read throughs to take away what it has to offer, however my problem is that, that is a huge sacrifice. I will have to place it on the shelf for a few years before I could face it again. However, never say never!
Christopher Clark begins his new book on the 1848 Revolutions of Europe by stating he had no enthusiasm for this topic as a school boy, due to its complicated nature, huge scope and finally as it is generally seen as a failure. This has reflected in this book, the Revolutions are very difficult to understand as they are pockets of uprisings loosely connected across multiple countries, with varying results. The subject is fascinating, but I challenge you to find someone who can explain the events in a detailed and coherent way.
I have said before with my reviews of Clark’s other works, that I find him hard to read. His style to me always feels wordy and I do not find him the most engaging or eloquent of writers. Unfortunately some do it much better. But I admire and respect Clark, his opinions always seem to be balanced, backed up with solid facts and research. He does not present with bias and also tackles huge overreaching topics, where most would fall. Sleepwalkers is phenomenal, Revolutionary Spring is average.
Clark writes that he could see the people of 1848 ‘in us’. What he means by that is they had come through a period of instability, the Napoleonic Wars, as we the Second World War and are now looking for change. He states that best comparison for the events is the Arab Spring of 2011 when the world watched with hope that democracy and stability would come to Middle East. Like 1848, nothing much had in fact changed.
The book follows the chronological precedent, from the world before 1848, to the last rumblings in 1849 and how this event had a impact on the impending Crimean War which was about to start. We learn the route causes of revolts, hunger, economic downturns, plague, high immortality and greedy landlords. However, Clark notes that the revolution was political and not an economic or social complaint. The ringleaders wanted change and as with all revolutions, they waited until society was suffering to pounce. He sows this together with thematic details. How the revolution effected woman, who the liberals, radicals and conservatives are and what the loosely believed. Clark states these groups were often hard to define, although the radicals were the far left, pre-Marxist types. The liberals are from the petit bourgeoisie, whom Clark sympathises with most. With this the politics of geography come into play as we also journey around Europe, from France to Germany (mostly Prussia) to the Austrian Empire and the Italian States. The world leading to the First World War is forming.
This book has a huge scope, asks and attempts to answer huge questions, but is extremely complicated and heavy. This is not a casual bedtime read. As a student of history and a reader of Clark I thought it would be easier for me, but it wasn’t. So if you want to pick this up, be prepared to re-read pages and to come away only a small portion of the context committed to memory. This book will need a couple of read throughs to take away what it has to offer, however my problem is that, that is a huge sacrifice. I will have to place it on the shelf for a few years before I could face it again. However, never say never!
July 9, 2023
Christopher Clark's Revolutionary Spring offers a staggering chronicle of 1848, the year in which Europe exploded into a massive, simultaneous upheaval against the established order. Clark provides a deep dive into the conditions which generated such epochal unrest, from the nationalist movements of Italy and Germany, the tottering "July Monarchy" of France and the complicated interplay of nationalisms in the Austrian and Russian Empires. All manner of freedom struggles seized the moment: liberal and radical Frenchmen sought to redeem the lost Republic from Louis Philippe, while German nationalists viewed unification as a goal not only to strengthen their state but to ensure greater liberty against the landed classes. Independence groups, particularly Italians, Poles and Hungarians, worked to further their causes, though uniting peoples often proved easier than done; Balkan nationalists clashed with pan-Slavic movements, loyalty to the Church and peasant disdain for the landowners who often led these movements. As Clark shows, the revolution wasn't even a strictly European phenomenon; France's Republican government was forced to emancipate their slaves in the West Indies, England instituted economic reforms to forestall an uprising, and ripples of the "Spirit of '48" made their way to the United States and Australia. Not since the French Revolution of 1789 had an eruption of the social order been so widespread and profound; and though their success was mixed at best, the forces it unleashed could not be rebottled.
Clark's book is a hefty 758 pages of text in its hardback edition, much of it devoted to setting the stage with political background. While casual readers might find these earlier passages daunting, they're worth the effort so that when Clark's narrative finally arrives at the Revolution, it's easy to keep all the names and peoples straight. Clark is a witty and authoritative writer, finding telling details and amusing anecdotes such as the Czech nationalist who crashes a fancy dress ball dressed in rotting wolfskins, or dueling French and German nationalist ballads about the taste of Rhine wines! The narrative is peopled with a who's-who of 19th Century notables, from statesmen like Otto von Bismarck (who appropriated the liberal aspirations of the Frankfurt parliament to his expansion of Prussian power) and Napoleon III (shrewdly subverting France's republican movement for his own benefit) to Hungary's romantic nationalist Louis Kossuth, Italy's doomed revolutionary Giuseppe Manzini, French feminist and novelist Marie d'Agoult (known to posterity as Franz Liszt's romantic partner, a disservice to her intellect and accomplishments), Karl Marx, whose resentment at the revolution's failure shaped his development of communism and American journalist Margaret Fuller, who died fleeing Italy with her lover.
Clark shows that this heady moment collapsed through the rebels' general disorganization, allowing their enemies to outmaneuver or crush them. France's Napoleon III won an election as a republican only to assert himself as dictator, then Emperor; this Bonaparte skillfully played the revolutionary sentiments of his people against their fond memories of his uncle. The Roman Republic's espousal of religious tolerance (which spilled into anticlericalism) eroded much of its support, allowing Pope Pius IX (initially driven into exile) to invite a French invasion to restore his power. In Northern Italy and Eastern Europe, Austria, Russia and other powers simply crushed the risings with brute force. Few of the regimes established in 1848 survived the next two years, but the causes - liberal nationalism that would unify Germany and Italy, while conversely destroying Austria; ideas both for democratic reform and radical change which animated future revolutionaries; class consciousness in face of industrial development and reactionary violence; universal brotherhood and freedom from slavery and gender oppression - would dominate European (and world) politics for the next century. Perhaps Clark errs in drawing direct parallels with more recent upheavals in Europe and the United States; but it's hard not for readers to reach the same conclusions, that the issues of 1848 remain as alive and contested as ever.
Clark's book is a hefty 758 pages of text in its hardback edition, much of it devoted to setting the stage with political background. While casual readers might find these earlier passages daunting, they're worth the effort so that when Clark's narrative finally arrives at the Revolution, it's easy to keep all the names and peoples straight. Clark is a witty and authoritative writer, finding telling details and amusing anecdotes such as the Czech nationalist who crashes a fancy dress ball dressed in rotting wolfskins, or dueling French and German nationalist ballads about the taste of Rhine wines! The narrative is peopled with a who's-who of 19th Century notables, from statesmen like Otto von Bismarck (who appropriated the liberal aspirations of the Frankfurt parliament to his expansion of Prussian power) and Napoleon III (shrewdly subverting France's republican movement for his own benefit) to Hungary's romantic nationalist Louis Kossuth, Italy's doomed revolutionary Giuseppe Manzini, French feminist and novelist Marie d'Agoult (known to posterity as Franz Liszt's romantic partner, a disservice to her intellect and accomplishments), Karl Marx, whose resentment at the revolution's failure shaped his development of communism and American journalist Margaret Fuller, who died fleeing Italy with her lover.
Clark shows that this heady moment collapsed through the rebels' general disorganization, allowing their enemies to outmaneuver or crush them. France's Napoleon III won an election as a republican only to assert himself as dictator, then Emperor; this Bonaparte skillfully played the revolutionary sentiments of his people against their fond memories of his uncle. The Roman Republic's espousal of religious tolerance (which spilled into anticlericalism) eroded much of its support, allowing Pope Pius IX (initially driven into exile) to invite a French invasion to restore his power. In Northern Italy and Eastern Europe, Austria, Russia and other powers simply crushed the risings with brute force. Few of the regimes established in 1848 survived the next two years, but the causes - liberal nationalism that would unify Germany and Italy, while conversely destroying Austria; ideas both for democratic reform and radical change which animated future revolutionaries; class consciousness in face of industrial development and reactionary violence; universal brotherhood and freedom from slavery and gender oppression - would dominate European (and world) politics for the next century. Perhaps Clark errs in drawing direct parallels with more recent upheavals in Europe and the United States; but it's hard not for readers to reach the same conclusions, that the issues of 1848 remain as alive and contested as ever.
June 23, 2023
How does one say “I could not put the book down” about a 900 page book? … and a nonfiction history book on top of it?
Between 1848 and 1849 virtually the entire continent of Europe became the scene of protests, rioting, the fall of some monarchies, the near fall of others, experiments with new legislative bodies, military conflict, political repression, all resulting in thousands of individuals dead and wounded, thousands more imprisoned, and thousands more displaced. Britain escaped - it’s complicated - and the US had its conflicts later. All of this was widely covered in the media - although far less rapidly than today (no transatlantic cable yet and of course no internet). This is the period of social chaos that gave birth to “The Communist Manifesto”
If one is interested in political polarization, especially as occurs today, than this period is when many of our current dichotomies first made their appearances - left versus right; radical versus liberal versus conservative; class conflict, and movements for emancipation of all sorts. Parallel to this is a time of economic disturbances, potato famines, unemployment, labor unrest, and class warfare. This seems to be the point at which a number of conflicts initiated by Napoleon were finally tied up, at least partially, while other stories that continued into the 20th century were just getting unleashed.
The trouble, is that nothing big seemed to happen - at least compared with global warfare or the rise of national superpowers. That conclusion would be deceptive, however. Compared with the 20th century one is tempted to see the 19th as a bit boring, but no — there is much going on, throughout Europe, all at once, certain to affect the world going forward. It is hard to keep track of it all. Significant parts of European and world history after 1850 can be clearly linked back to developments that occurred during the upheavals of 1848-1849.
The only obvious parallel period that I can think of is the so-called “Arab Spring” which affected large parts of the Arab world between 2010 and 2012. I am not at all confident of the context and background so I will not push the comparison too far. There are also plenty of parallels between the times of this book and the current craziness of US and Western politics. Media? There are media aplenty although not as many - and as instantaneous - as with today. Conspiracies? Conspiracy theorists will feel right at home - and some of them were real - although many were not. Blustering authoritarians? Again, there are plenty and the chasm between the haves and the have-nots is much more sharply drawn. … and everyone seems suspicious of the Russians and the Tsar.
Christopher Clark is an extraordinary historian who wrote “The Sleepwalkers”, about how all the nations of the world drifted into World War 1 in the summer of 1013.
This book follows a rough chronological order of precursors to the revolutions, the early stages, middle stages (stagnation; counter-revolution, and later states). Within the general ordering the book comprises chapters that focus on particular topics that occurred across Europe, although in ways that differed widely across locations. Several of the chapters could be separate books or long monographs in their own right. The writing is clear and understandable and chapters even have sections that either stop and take stock of the exposition or else sum up at the conclusion.
The before and after view of the revolutions in the book - most failed and reactionary elements seemed to reassert their power - is deceptive. While the left was not successful, leftist groups learned from the experience and began to focus more on accomplishments and getting things done going forward. The same is true on the right. Post 1849 was not a simple reversion to the old days. The establishment learned from the experience and behaved very differently. This was the beginnings of urban renewal and public health initiatives. Governments made increasing investments in what we would call “infrastructure” - enhanced roads and transport, the building of sewer systems, the growth of transportation and communication systems. It was also a time of great change economically. The growth of infrastructure permitted the growth of markets and trade, which in turn increased the wealth of many and perhaps suppressed some of the prior rationales for popular discontent and revolution. To direct this urban renewal, infrastructure, and new market activity, people needed more information and so this is where the growth of public efforts at data collection and statistical activities are seen. The bourgeoisie wins and prospers relative to the aristocrats.
All of this moved in new directions, with new conflicts up through the end of the long 19th century and towards 1914.
I will stop here. There is so much going on in this book that any attempts at summaries would be pointless or even counterproductive.
Between 1848 and 1849 virtually the entire continent of Europe became the scene of protests, rioting, the fall of some monarchies, the near fall of others, experiments with new legislative bodies, military conflict, political repression, all resulting in thousands of individuals dead and wounded, thousands more imprisoned, and thousands more displaced. Britain escaped - it’s complicated - and the US had its conflicts later. All of this was widely covered in the media - although far less rapidly than today (no transatlantic cable yet and of course no internet). This is the period of social chaos that gave birth to “The Communist Manifesto”
If one is interested in political polarization, especially as occurs today, than this period is when many of our current dichotomies first made their appearances - left versus right; radical versus liberal versus conservative; class conflict, and movements for emancipation of all sorts. Parallel to this is a time of economic disturbances, potato famines, unemployment, labor unrest, and class warfare. This seems to be the point at which a number of conflicts initiated by Napoleon were finally tied up, at least partially, while other stories that continued into the 20th century were just getting unleashed.
The trouble, is that nothing big seemed to happen - at least compared with global warfare or the rise of national superpowers. That conclusion would be deceptive, however. Compared with the 20th century one is tempted to see the 19th as a bit boring, but no — there is much going on, throughout Europe, all at once, certain to affect the world going forward. It is hard to keep track of it all. Significant parts of European and world history after 1850 can be clearly linked back to developments that occurred during the upheavals of 1848-1849.
The only obvious parallel period that I can think of is the so-called “Arab Spring” which affected large parts of the Arab world between 2010 and 2012. I am not at all confident of the context and background so I will not push the comparison too far. There are also plenty of parallels between the times of this book and the current craziness of US and Western politics. Media? There are media aplenty although not as many - and as instantaneous - as with today. Conspiracies? Conspiracy theorists will feel right at home - and some of them were real - although many were not. Blustering authoritarians? Again, there are plenty and the chasm between the haves and the have-nots is much more sharply drawn. … and everyone seems suspicious of the Russians and the Tsar.
Christopher Clark is an extraordinary historian who wrote “The Sleepwalkers”, about how all the nations of the world drifted into World War 1 in the summer of 1013.
This book follows a rough chronological order of precursors to the revolutions, the early stages, middle stages (stagnation; counter-revolution, and later states). Within the general ordering the book comprises chapters that focus on particular topics that occurred across Europe, although in ways that differed widely across locations. Several of the chapters could be separate books or long monographs in their own right. The writing is clear and understandable and chapters even have sections that either stop and take stock of the exposition or else sum up at the conclusion.
The before and after view of the revolutions in the book - most failed and reactionary elements seemed to reassert their power - is deceptive. While the left was not successful, leftist groups learned from the experience and began to focus more on accomplishments and getting things done going forward. The same is true on the right. Post 1849 was not a simple reversion to the old days. The establishment learned from the experience and behaved very differently. This was the beginnings of urban renewal and public health initiatives. Governments made increasing investments in what we would call “infrastructure” - enhanced roads and transport, the building of sewer systems, the growth of transportation and communication systems. It was also a time of great change economically. The growth of infrastructure permitted the growth of markets and trade, which in turn increased the wealth of many and perhaps suppressed some of the prior rationales for popular discontent and revolution. To direct this urban renewal, infrastructure, and new market activity, people needed more information and so this is where the growth of public efforts at data collection and statistical activities are seen. The bourgeoisie wins and prospers relative to the aristocrats.
All of this moved in new directions, with new conflicts up through the end of the long 19th century and towards 1914.
I will stop here. There is so much going on in this book that any attempts at summaries would be pointless or even counterproductive.
June 8, 2024
Christopher Clark is a Professor of History at the University of Cambridge. Originally from Australia, he has lived in England for many years. I had previously seen him in a documentary about European history, during which he mentioned the revolutions around various parts of Europe that took place in 1848-1849. I had not heard or read much about these revolutionary events and wanted to learn more. This book certainly served the purpose. It includes elements of religion, philosophy, politics, art, culture, social classes, industrialization, and more. It is an ambitious and comprehensive effort, covering all facets of society that led up to the revolution, the revolution itself in its many locations around Europe, the aftermath, and its global impact.
Parallel uprisings occurred in Paris, Vienna, Pest Milan, Venice, Prague, Berlin, Bucharest, and other locations, extending as far south as Sicily and as far north as Scandinavia. It is epic in scope. I liken it to drinking from the proverbial fire hose. I had only a cursory knowledge of the many topics and people covered, and needed to look up many of the names and places as I went along. Clark provides both a top-down big picture and the bottom-up specifics of individual events. He covers the historic background, high level context, and details of individual uprisings. Plus, he ties it all together. This is a well-organized scholarly work with plenty of footnotes and end notes. It is a lengthy read but well worth my time. I think it might help to have a little more background and knowledge than I had going into it, but I came away with a much better grasp of European history.
Parallel uprisings occurred in Paris, Vienna, Pest Milan, Venice, Prague, Berlin, Bucharest, and other locations, extending as far south as Sicily and as far north as Scandinavia. It is epic in scope. I liken it to drinking from the proverbial fire hose. I had only a cursory knowledge of the many topics and people covered, and needed to look up many of the names and places as I went along. Clark provides both a top-down big picture and the bottom-up specifics of individual events. He covers the historic background, high level context, and details of individual uprisings. Plus, he ties it all together. This is a well-organized scholarly work with plenty of footnotes and end notes. It is a lengthy read but well worth my time. I think it might help to have a little more background and knowledge than I had going into it, but I came away with a much better grasp of European history.
October 28, 2023
Revolutionary Spring: Europe Aflame and the Fight for a New World, 1848-1849, Christopher Clark, 2023, 873 pages, Dewey 940.284, ISBN 9780525575207
Political change in Europe: monarchies are challenged; republics are mooted. Doesn't cover the flight of millions of Europeans to the United States and elsewhere.
PRECARITY
CLASSES, Nantes, Brittany, France, 1836. pp. 15-20.
1. wealthy. Average 2 children. 10-15 rooms. Average age at death 59 yrs. One death per 78 residents per year.
2. high bourgeoisie. Debutante balls. Horses, carriages.
3. prosperous bourgeoisie. Use omnibus. Frugality & work.
4. distressed bourgeoisie. Clerks, professors, shopkeepers. Expenses > means. Strictest economy.
5. poor bourgeoisie. 1,000-1,800 francs/yr. 2-3 rooms, no servants, patchy education for children. Clerks, cashiers, lesser academics. Survive; anxiety.
6. well-off workers. 600-1000 francs/yr. Without care for future. Printers, masons, carpenters, cabinetmakers. Long, hard work. Enough food, clothing, & fuel. Means = aspirations, so are happiest inhabitants.
7. poor workers. 500-600 francs/yr.
8. miserable workers. 300 francs/yr. The poorest live in sewerlike basements. Work 14 hours/day for 15-20 sous. Average age at death 31 years. One death per 17 residents per year.
300 francs/year for miserable workers:
150 bread
46 salt, butter, cabbages, potatoes
35 fuel (wood, peat)
25 rent
15 light
12 footwear
12 laundry
3 repair of broken furniture
2 change of domicile (at least once/year)
0 clothing (wear old clothes people give them)
0 doctor
0 pharmacist (sisters of charity bring meds)
A certain amount is also spent at the bar. Despite occasional charity bread, the existence of these families is horrific.
The average Parisian worker in 1830 earned 20-100 sous/day. p. 178.
Half the children of weavers and cotton spinners died before age two; half the children of merchants, businessmen, and factory directors reached age 29, as of 1840, in Haut-Rhin, France/Swiss border. pp. 20-21.
50-60% of Prussians lived on a subsistence minimum, in the 1840s. p. 34.
CROP FAILURE
Phytophthora infestans, potato-blight fungus, reached Europe from America around 1840. 60,000 Dutch and 1.1 million Irish starved to death in 1845 and 1846. The crop never recovered. pp. 44-45.
HARVEST FAILURES of 1846/7 led to hunger riots across Spain, Germany, Italy and France, including 158 riots in Prussia in April/May 1847, when food prices were highest. p. 255.
Hunger is a political phenomenon, not a natural one. p. 48.
Only through association would the working masses overcome the structural weakness of the individual. p. 53.
Estate-owning noblemen who promised to liberate the peasants faced a credibility deficit. p. 73.
Impoverishment mostly makes people inactive, rarely revolutionary. p. 88-89. Men adapt themselves to material suffering with little difficulty when they do not feel despised. p. 114.
The elite used the threat of general unrest to extract concessions from the government. "God preserve this country from the horrors of anarchy and the rage of the people!" pp. 212, 278.
ORATORY flourishes only under a free political constitution. Oratory requires clear understanding, good judgment, a lively spirit, a strong, pleasant-sounding voice and the highest dignity when presenting an address. --Robert Blum, 1845. p. 220.
In Hungary, as elsewhere, the frustration of moderate reform strengthened the case for a more radical approach. p. 232.
Hungarian lower gentry were getting a bit richer in 1801-1848, but feeling much poorer, as their conspicuous consumption exceeded their gains. p. 233.
The French government's attempt to shut down banquets featuring opposition speakers, triggered a revolution. p. 245.
Once "too little too late" has been reached, government concessions no longer mollify but only embolden the political opposition. p. 266.
REPRESSION
The only way to cultivate a 'good press' is kill all the journalists. My enemies? I have none. I have had them all shot. --Ramón María Narváez, Spanish prime minister and dictator, 1848. p. 340. Only power can rule. pp. 655, 657, 676, 680.
WHAT NOW?
All governments face insoluble problems--that is what government is for. It is in the nature of political problems that they cannot be 'solved.' p. 342.
THEY DIED FOR THE REPUBLIC
In honoring the dead revolutionaries, the new governments legitimized themselves. pp. 354-355
RESPECT
A ruler in an ermine coat still receives much more respect and obedience from Europeans than one in a frock coat. p. 384. Those who have done away with even the frock coat in the hope of making the worker's smock the sole general uniform of humanity learned that the smocks do not obey when a smock is giving the orders. p. 386.
REGIME CHANGE?
The new parliaments were conservative! They were dominated by the same people who had been the elite of the old regimes. pp. 385, 387, 407.
COUNTER-REVOLUTIONS
Many monarchies retook power. pp. 393, 404, 406-407.
SIGNIFICANCE
Representative governments, even if short-lived, paved the way for the coming nation-states by creating political infrastructure and involving people in political debates. p. 394.
SLAVERY
Slaves on Martinique revolted in 1789, 1800, 1811, 1822, and 1831. On 1848.04.12, news reached Martinique that the new French government would write a law abolishing slavery. pp. 416-417. Slaves revolted; on 1848.05.23, the governor of Martinique emancipated the slaves--before any order came from Paris. p. 418. Emancipation spread to Guadeloupe and nearby Dutch islands. Successive French governments became ever more accommodating to slaveowners' requests for indulgence; by 1858, the emancipation law was so loopholey as to be ineffective. Former slaves in Martinique were bound to their plantations by vagrancy law, a workbook system, and a head tax. p. 424. Slavery would not be suppressed in French West Africa until 1905. p. 425. [In the U.S., slavery as punishment is still legal.] But 1848 was a start. p. 426.
WOMEN
Women participated in the revolutions, but remained subservient to men. French women weren't allowed to vote until 1946. p. 437.
JEWS
The poorest European Christians had for centuries blamed economic distress on local Jews. p. 454. Jews were easier targets than wealthy and powerful Christians. p. 456. Modern anti-Semitism preached "emancipation /from/ the Jews." p. 462.
ROMA
Some 400,000 Roma were enslaved in Romania. Emancipation would wait until the mid-1850s--and is arguably incomplete even in 2023. p. 465.
PEASANTS
The new governments taxed peasants heavily, losing their support. pp. 507-511. Peasants were still obliged to provide goods and services to the lords of lands they worked. In Hungary, peasant/landlord laws would be unresolved until 1896. p. 512.
FAKE NEWS
A crowd of workers, with official preclearance, walked to the Hôtel de Ville, 1848.04.16, to present a list of candidates for command posts in the French National Guard and to demand progress on labor reform. The Provisional Government instead called out the troops to meet the demonstrators with bayonets. The crowd disbanded. National Guard units then attacked the premises of radical clubs in Paris. Reports had circulated that the clubs were preparing a violent seizure of power: lies, engineered to trigger a crisis. pp. 479-480.
US vs. THEM
Solidarity within nations accompanied embittered relations between them. p. 541.
MIGHT MAKES RIGHT?
The powers of the old regimes always dominated the revolutionaries militarily. p. 549. In Hungary, 370,000 Russians, Austrians and Croatians defeated 170,000 Hungarians' hopes of independence. p. 674.
PEASANTS
Peasants still adored their emperors. Revolutionaries made no rural inroads p. 614.
COLLABORATION
Political clubs were nuclei of revolution. pp. 638, 647.
WHICH SIDE ARE YOU ON?
Pragmatic, moderate politicians win few friends in an environment polarized by conflict. p. 640, 648.
BYE!
Where /is/ the German Fatherland? In England and America! The only refuge from Russian, Prussian, and Austrian bayonets! p. 695.
WINNERS
Elites used state power to control nations. p. 747. The new governments spent money on rail, canals, telegraph, roads, and other investments to grow the economy. pp. 715-717
THE UPSHOT
We don't say that an ocean storm, a solar flare, or a massive snowfall succeeded or failed; we measure their effects. Revolutionaries largely didn't achieve what they hoped. The old regimes retook power, but now with many constitutions, parliaments, and new political avenues. pp. 745-746. No one represented rural commoners, which most Europeans were. pp. 746-747.
Political change in Europe: monarchies are challenged; republics are mooted. Doesn't cover the flight of millions of Europeans to the United States and elsewhere.
PRECARITY
CLASSES, Nantes, Brittany, France, 1836. pp. 15-20.
1. wealthy. Average 2 children. 10-15 rooms. Average age at death 59 yrs. One death per 78 residents per year.
2. high bourgeoisie. Debutante balls. Horses, carriages.
3. prosperous bourgeoisie. Use omnibus. Frugality & work.
4. distressed bourgeoisie. Clerks, professors, shopkeepers. Expenses > means. Strictest economy.
5. poor bourgeoisie. 1,000-1,800 francs/yr. 2-3 rooms, no servants, patchy education for children. Clerks, cashiers, lesser academics. Survive; anxiety.
6. well-off workers. 600-1000 francs/yr. Without care for future. Printers, masons, carpenters, cabinetmakers. Long, hard work. Enough food, clothing, & fuel. Means = aspirations, so are happiest inhabitants.
7. poor workers. 500-600 francs/yr.
8. miserable workers. 300 francs/yr. The poorest live in sewerlike basements. Work 14 hours/day for 15-20 sous. Average age at death 31 years. One death per 17 residents per year.
300 francs/year for miserable workers:
150 bread
46 salt, butter, cabbages, potatoes
35 fuel (wood, peat)
25 rent
15 light
12 footwear
12 laundry
3 repair of broken furniture
2 change of domicile (at least once/year)
0 clothing (wear old clothes people give them)
0 doctor
0 pharmacist (sisters of charity bring meds)
A certain amount is also spent at the bar. Despite occasional charity bread, the existence of these families is horrific.
The average Parisian worker in 1830 earned 20-100 sous/day. p. 178.
Half the children of weavers and cotton spinners died before age two; half the children of merchants, businessmen, and factory directors reached age 29, as of 1840, in Haut-Rhin, France/Swiss border. pp. 20-21.
50-60% of Prussians lived on a subsistence minimum, in the 1840s. p. 34.
CROP FAILURE
Phytophthora infestans, potato-blight fungus, reached Europe from America around 1840. 60,000 Dutch and 1.1 million Irish starved to death in 1845 and 1846. The crop never recovered. pp. 44-45.
HARVEST FAILURES of 1846/7 led to hunger riots across Spain, Germany, Italy and France, including 158 riots in Prussia in April/May 1847, when food prices were highest. p. 255.
Hunger is a political phenomenon, not a natural one. p. 48.
Only through association would the working masses overcome the structural weakness of the individual. p. 53.
Estate-owning noblemen who promised to liberate the peasants faced a credibility deficit. p. 73.
Impoverishment mostly makes people inactive, rarely revolutionary. p. 88-89. Men adapt themselves to material suffering with little difficulty when they do not feel despised. p. 114.
The elite used the threat of general unrest to extract concessions from the government. "God preserve this country from the horrors of anarchy and the rage of the people!" pp. 212, 278.
ORATORY flourishes only under a free political constitution. Oratory requires clear understanding, good judgment, a lively spirit, a strong, pleasant-sounding voice and the highest dignity when presenting an address. --Robert Blum, 1845. p. 220.
In Hungary, as elsewhere, the frustration of moderate reform strengthened the case for a more radical approach. p. 232.
Hungarian lower gentry were getting a bit richer in 1801-1848, but feeling much poorer, as their conspicuous consumption exceeded their gains. p. 233.
The French government's attempt to shut down banquets featuring opposition speakers, triggered a revolution. p. 245.
Once "too little too late" has been reached, government concessions no longer mollify but only embolden the political opposition. p. 266.
REPRESSION
The only way to cultivate a 'good press' is kill all the journalists. My enemies? I have none. I have had them all shot. --Ramón María Narváez, Spanish prime minister and dictator, 1848. p. 340. Only power can rule. pp. 655, 657, 676, 680.
WHAT NOW?
All governments face insoluble problems--that is what government is for. It is in the nature of political problems that they cannot be 'solved.' p. 342.
THEY DIED FOR THE REPUBLIC
In honoring the dead revolutionaries, the new governments legitimized themselves. pp. 354-355
RESPECT
A ruler in an ermine coat still receives much more respect and obedience from Europeans than one in a frock coat. p. 384. Those who have done away with even the frock coat in the hope of making the worker's smock the sole general uniform of humanity learned that the smocks do not obey when a smock is giving the orders. p. 386.
REGIME CHANGE?
The new parliaments were conservative! They were dominated by the same people who had been the elite of the old regimes. pp. 385, 387, 407.
COUNTER-REVOLUTIONS
Many monarchies retook power. pp. 393, 404, 406-407.
SIGNIFICANCE
Representative governments, even if short-lived, paved the way for the coming nation-states by creating political infrastructure and involving people in political debates. p. 394.
SLAVERY
Slaves on Martinique revolted in 1789, 1800, 1811, 1822, and 1831. On 1848.04.12, news reached Martinique that the new French government would write a law abolishing slavery. pp. 416-417. Slaves revolted; on 1848.05.23, the governor of Martinique emancipated the slaves--before any order came from Paris. p. 418. Emancipation spread to Guadeloupe and nearby Dutch islands. Successive French governments became ever more accommodating to slaveowners' requests for indulgence; by 1858, the emancipation law was so loopholey as to be ineffective. Former slaves in Martinique were bound to their plantations by vagrancy law, a workbook system, and a head tax. p. 424. Slavery would not be suppressed in French West Africa until 1905. p. 425. [In the U.S., slavery as punishment is still legal.] But 1848 was a start. p. 426.
WOMEN
Women participated in the revolutions, but remained subservient to men. French women weren't allowed to vote until 1946. p. 437.
Forward! call the apostles of light
Let us be torches of truth and right.
Backward! howl the men of the dark
Hide from the brightness of the spark.
Forward we struggle and forward we strive
The will to action keeps us alive.
Backward, if safety and wealth you prefer
Back to the darkness of things as they were.
--Kathinka Zitz-Halein, 1850. pp. 440-441.
JEWS
The poorest European Christians had for centuries blamed economic distress on local Jews. p. 454. Jews were easier targets than wealthy and powerful Christians. p. 456. Modern anti-Semitism preached "emancipation /from/ the Jews." p. 462.
ROMA
Some 400,000 Roma were enslaved in Romania. Emancipation would wait until the mid-1850s--and is arguably incomplete even in 2023. p. 465.
PEASANTS
The new governments taxed peasants heavily, losing their support. pp. 507-511. Peasants were still obliged to provide goods and services to the lords of lands they worked. In Hungary, peasant/landlord laws would be unresolved until 1896. p. 512.
FAKE NEWS
A crowd of workers, with official preclearance, walked to the Hôtel de Ville, 1848.04.16, to present a list of candidates for command posts in the French National Guard and to demand progress on labor reform. The Provisional Government instead called out the troops to meet the demonstrators with bayonets. The crowd disbanded. National Guard units then attacked the premises of radical clubs in Paris. Reports had circulated that the clubs were preparing a violent seizure of power: lies, engineered to trigger a crisis. pp. 479-480.
US vs. THEM
Solidarity within nations accompanied embittered relations between them. p. 541.
MIGHT MAKES RIGHT?
The powers of the old regimes always dominated the revolutionaries militarily. p. 549. In Hungary, 370,000 Russians, Austrians and Croatians defeated 170,000 Hungarians' hopes of independence. p. 674.
PEASANTS
Peasants still adored their emperors. Revolutionaries made no rural inroads p. 614.
COLLABORATION
Political clubs were nuclei of revolution. pp. 638, 647.
Build community. Organize. When people get together, all sorts of things are possible. If you’re isolated, you’re going to break.
--Noam Chomsky, /Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky/, pp. 121, 185 of 400.
The good things that have been done, the reforms . . . all of that was not done by government edict. . . . It was all done by citizens' movements. And then keep in mind that great movements in the past have arisen from small movements, from tiny clusters of people that have gotten together here and there. If you have a movement strong enough, it doesn't matter who's in the White House. What really matters is what are people doing, and what are people saying, what are people demanding. --Howard Zinn, /You Can't Be Neutral on a Moving Train/
WHICH SIDE ARE YOU ON?
Pragmatic, moderate politicians win few friends in an environment polarized by conflict. p. 640, 648.
BYE!
Where /is/ the German Fatherland? In England and America! The only refuge from Russian, Prussian, and Austrian bayonets! p. 695.
WINNERS
Elites used state power to control nations. p. 747. The new governments spent money on rail, canals, telegraph, roads, and other investments to grow the economy. pp. 715-717
THE UPSHOT
We don't say that an ocean storm, a solar flare, or a massive snowfall succeeded or failed; we measure their effects. Revolutionaries largely didn't achieve what they hoped. The old regimes retook power, but now with many constitutions, parliaments, and new political avenues. pp. 745-746. No one represented rural commoners, which most Europeans were. pp. 746-747.
September 11, 2023
I'm of two minds on this book. If you're a historian looking for a deeply-researched, deeply-sourced detailed analysis of the 1848 revolutions, this is a 4-star book. And the 1,100+ page count is actually a positive for you.
However, if you're a more general reader with an interest in history and you picked up this book looking to gain a better understanding of a confusing bit of European history (and/or had your interest piqued by all the comparisons to the Arab Spring revolutions), this book is overkill. You'll be left adrift by the author's expectation that you're already conversant in earlier 19th-century European uprisings, and your eyes will glaze over at the level of detail around each country's revolution.
As you might have guessed, I'm more the latter. And though I did find myself skimming sizable chunks of this book, I learned a lot. I came away with a solid understanding of the 1848 revolutions -- their causes, why they succumbed to counter-revolutions and yet still had an impact on European societies going forward. There's a really good 500-page generalist history of the 1848 revolutions buried among these 1,100 pages. I'd give that book a 4-star rating. But in its current state, it's a 3.5-star book for me.
However, if you're a more general reader with an interest in history and you picked up this book looking to gain a better understanding of a confusing bit of European history (and/or had your interest piqued by all the comparisons to the Arab Spring revolutions), this book is overkill. You'll be left adrift by the author's expectation that you're already conversant in earlier 19th-century European uprisings, and your eyes will glaze over at the level of detail around each country's revolution.
As you might have guessed, I'm more the latter. And though I did find myself skimming sizable chunks of this book, I learned a lot. I came away with a solid understanding of the 1848 revolutions -- their causes, why they succumbed to counter-revolutions and yet still had an impact on European societies going forward. There's a really good 500-page generalist history of the 1848 revolutions buried among these 1,100 pages. I'd give that book a 4-star rating. But in its current state, it's a 3.5-star book for me.
August 25, 2024
en los agradecimientos Clark cita a su director de tesis Jonathan Steinberg cuando decía: "llevo veinte años enseñando este tema y todavía no lo entiendo". la sensación leyéndolo es que siempre va a ser un poco eso, pero Clark logra acercarse lo máximo posible a una explicación satisfactoria
esto es todo lo que creo que un libro de historia debería ser. dedica doscientas páginas a explicar los antecedentes y el contexto de las revoluciones de 1848 y otras setenta a explicar sus consecuencias inmediatas en términos de la perduración de las conquistas obtenidas tras su estallido. da la importancia debida a explicar las condiciones en las que vivía la mayoría de la población, la complejidad de la estructura social de aquel entonces y el clima intelectual que propició lo que él llama "la única revolución auténticamente europea que ha habido jamás".
me ha gustado mucho que reconozca las luces de los revolucionarios y los ideólogos detrás del estallido social de 1848 pero, que, a su vez, dedique un capítulo entero a explicar cómo se olvidaron sistemáticamente de preocuparse por la emancipación de grupos sociales como el de las mujeres, los esclavos o los judíos y gitanos europeos sin hacer ningún intento de exculparles (por ejemplo, señalando que incluso si la mayoría de revolucionarios ignoraban la cuestión del género o la de la esclavitud sí hubo teóricos -como Engels o Victor Schoelcher en estos dos casos- que alzaron la voz contra estas desigualdades y, por tanto, no resulta anacrónico señalar el error de aquellos que no lo hicieron). me han gustado algo menos las escasas referencias al imperio ruso y al imperio otomano, dos de las potencias más relevantes en la Europa de entonces, pero es cierto que hacia el final comienzan a aparecer algunas y Clark tiene la excusa de que en realidad las revoluciones del 48 no tuvieron apenas consecuencias directas sobre los sistemas políticos de estos dos Estados (aunque sí alteraron notablemente el juego de poder internacional en el que ellos eran actores clave)
obviamente, es difícil seguir la narración porque relata hechos que ocurrieron de manera prácticamente simultánea en todo el continente europeo y las variaciones motivadas por circunstancias locales son básicamente infinitas. pero qué buen intento ha hecho Clark, qué bien me lo he pasado leyéndolo y cuánto he aprendido. había abandonado lo de puntuar los libros pero no me resisto a ponerle las cinco estrellitas a este
esto es todo lo que creo que un libro de historia debería ser. dedica doscientas páginas a explicar los antecedentes y el contexto de las revoluciones de 1848 y otras setenta a explicar sus consecuencias inmediatas en términos de la perduración de las conquistas obtenidas tras su estallido. da la importancia debida a explicar las condiciones en las que vivía la mayoría de la población, la complejidad de la estructura social de aquel entonces y el clima intelectual que propició lo que él llama "la única revolución auténticamente europea que ha habido jamás".
me ha gustado mucho que reconozca las luces de los revolucionarios y los ideólogos detrás del estallido social de 1848 pero, que, a su vez, dedique un capítulo entero a explicar cómo se olvidaron sistemáticamente de preocuparse por la emancipación de grupos sociales como el de las mujeres, los esclavos o los judíos y gitanos europeos sin hacer ningún intento de exculparles (por ejemplo, señalando que incluso si la mayoría de revolucionarios ignoraban la cuestión del género o la de la esclavitud sí hubo teóricos -como Engels o Victor Schoelcher en estos dos casos- que alzaron la voz contra estas desigualdades y, por tanto, no resulta anacrónico señalar el error de aquellos que no lo hicieron). me han gustado algo menos las escasas referencias al imperio ruso y al imperio otomano, dos de las potencias más relevantes en la Europa de entonces, pero es cierto que hacia el final comienzan a aparecer algunas y Clark tiene la excusa de que en realidad las revoluciones del 48 no tuvieron apenas consecuencias directas sobre los sistemas políticos de estos dos Estados (aunque sí alteraron notablemente el juego de poder internacional en el que ellos eran actores clave)
obviamente, es difícil seguir la narración porque relata hechos que ocurrieron de manera prácticamente simultánea en todo el continente europeo y las variaciones motivadas por circunstancias locales son básicamente infinitas. pero qué buen intento ha hecho Clark, qué bien me lo he pasado leyéndolo y cuánto he aprendido. había abandonado lo de puntuar los libros pero no me resisto a ponerle las cinco estrellitas a este
January 8, 2025
This is a tour-de-force of trenchant scholarship. Clark is a charismatic writer, and in this meticulously researched behemoth of a book, he brings forth what is most compelling about history: although it is swept by systemic forces, transnational processes, and in the modern era capitalist logic of vested interests, it remains a contingency, “a particle collision chamber” where—like during the 1848 Revolutions themselves—no outcome is predetermined.
The book's main contribution is the rejection of the oft-repeated assertion that the 1848 risings were a failure. Precisely because of history's indeterminateness and lack of telos, according to which one could formulate a detached, nonpartisan value judgment, on the one hand, and the substantive consequences that the Revolutions had (“no one came out of the Revolutions the same”), on the other, Clark smoothly dispelled this myth. All revolutions—as well as other social events—are polyvocal. They have no intent. People do.
I would have welcomed a more thorough exposition of ideas which sparked, moved or impeded these “particles” in their respective paths. But I understand this is not what the book was meant to be. Although Clark started with the “social question”, his radically moderate political positions and Archimedean (lack of) positionality skewed his discussion towards the “liberals” and their Schwerpunkte, such as constitutions, parliaments and political emancipations. As a result of this transition into a full-blown “political history”, the book had a downward trajectory.
The book's main contribution is the rejection of the oft-repeated assertion that the 1848 risings were a failure. Precisely because of history's indeterminateness and lack of telos, according to which one could formulate a detached, nonpartisan value judgment, on the one hand, and the substantive consequences that the Revolutions had (“no one came out of the Revolutions the same”), on the other, Clark smoothly dispelled this myth. All revolutions—as well as other social events—are polyvocal. They have no intent. People do.
I would have welcomed a more thorough exposition of ideas which sparked, moved or impeded these “particles” in their respective paths. But I understand this is not what the book was meant to be. Although Clark started with the “social question”, his radically moderate political positions and Archimedean (lack of) positionality skewed his discussion towards the “liberals” and their Schwerpunkte, such as constitutions, parliaments and political emancipations. As a result of this transition into a full-blown “political history”, the book had a downward trajectory.
November 19, 2023
Droht eine Revolution?
„Von einer nichtrevolutionären Lösung der Polykrise, mit der wir derzeit konfrontiert sind, scheinen wir sehr weit entfernt zu sein.“
Wie der Satz gemeint ist, wird nach der Lektüre dieses eintausend Seiten starken Werkes naturgemäß klarer, aber auch so löst er sicherlich ein gewisses Schaudern aus.
Umfassend, monumental, vielschichtig, vielfältig, breit und konsequent europäisch angelegt ist dieses Buch, das dem Leser eine Herausforderung beschert, für die er reich belohnt wird. Tatsächlich werden die Vorgänge um 1848/49 klarer, denn Clark räumt viele Mythen beiseite (allein der Fokus vieler Darstellungen auf die nationale Entwicklung verschleiert eine Menge) und lässt den historisch Interessierten teilhaben an hochdramatischen und immer wieder erstaunlichen Entwicklungen und Ereignissen.
Tatsächlich möchte ich dieses Buch nicht missen, denn es hat mir auch Antworten auf Fragen gegeben, die dort gar nicht gestellt werden. Kann das Volk in Russland Putin stürzen? Das sieht ganz schlecht aus, weil das Regime im Kreml das konsequent umgesetzt hat, was viele Staaten 1848 versäumten bzw. der Aufruhr einen anderen Charakter hatte, als die vorangegangenen und erwarteten.
Für mich gemeinsam mit Neil Price „Die wahre Geschichte der Wikinger“ Sachbuch des Jahres 2023. Ich bin begeistert.
„Von einer nichtrevolutionären Lösung der Polykrise, mit der wir derzeit konfrontiert sind, scheinen wir sehr weit entfernt zu sein.“
Wie der Satz gemeint ist, wird nach der Lektüre dieses eintausend Seiten starken Werkes naturgemäß klarer, aber auch so löst er sicherlich ein gewisses Schaudern aus.
Umfassend, monumental, vielschichtig, vielfältig, breit und konsequent europäisch angelegt ist dieses Buch, das dem Leser eine Herausforderung beschert, für die er reich belohnt wird. Tatsächlich werden die Vorgänge um 1848/49 klarer, denn Clark räumt viele Mythen beiseite (allein der Fokus vieler Darstellungen auf die nationale Entwicklung verschleiert eine Menge) und lässt den historisch Interessierten teilhaben an hochdramatischen und immer wieder erstaunlichen Entwicklungen und Ereignissen.
Tatsächlich möchte ich dieses Buch nicht missen, denn es hat mir auch Antworten auf Fragen gegeben, die dort gar nicht gestellt werden. Kann das Volk in Russland Putin stürzen? Das sieht ganz schlecht aus, weil das Regime im Kreml das konsequent umgesetzt hat, was viele Staaten 1848 versäumten bzw. der Aufruhr einen anderen Charakter hatte, als die vorangegangenen und erwarteten.
Für mich gemeinsam mit Neil Price „Die wahre Geschichte der Wikinger“ Sachbuch des Jahres 2023. Ich bin begeistert.
May 5, 2024
absolutely amazing but very long
This is one of the best history books I have ever read - and the situation in Európe at the time is in many respects similar to today
This is one of the best history books I have ever read - and the situation in Európe at the time is in many respects similar to today
November 7, 2023
Monumental work!
For me was so much new information that I can not even try to evaluate this book properly. Lookking foward to read (listen to) more books from the autor, mister Christopher Clark.
For me was so much new information that I can not even try to evaluate this book properly. Lookking foward to read (listen to) more books from the autor, mister Christopher Clark.
May 23, 2024
Overall it's good, well researched, informative, covers a lot of ground, and a number of readers I know whose opinions I value really liked it ...but given the subject matter surprised to find that I often got bogged down/lost motivation/started looking for excuses not to pick it up. Ended up feeling more like an assignment for a class (which isn't necessarily bad) as opposed to something I was reading for pleasure.
August 12, 2024
Great book on an extremely complex and broad topic, the revolutions of 1848-1849. I can only imagine that writing this book with its ambitious scope was very hard and time-consuming. Still, Clark did a great job at it and managed to turn it into a readable, informative and entertaining book. The Revolutions that took place in 1848 and 1849 were all over the place and many things happened simultaneously and not always over the same causes, though there are overlapping themes. Though the complex nature of the events (and of the ideas/ideologies) and the fact that I haven't read much on this period, made it quite an intimidating book to me, I managed to read it quite fast and Clark's way of writing and structuring helped a lot.
Certainly a book that everybody interested in 1848-1849 must read. However, I would NOT recommend this book to the average reader, simply for the fact that the events are a bit too complicated for the non-history fanatics. And even if you like history, this topic must really really interest you if not I wouldn't recommend it.
One great quote from the book described the events perfectly:
"The narrative bursts its banks, the historian despairs and 'meanwhile' becomes the adverb of first resort."
Certainly a book that everybody interested in 1848-1849 must read. However, I would NOT recommend this book to the average reader, simply for the fact that the events are a bit too complicated for the non-history fanatics. And even if you like history, this topic must really really interest you if not I wouldn't recommend it.
One great quote from the book described the events perfectly:
"The narrative bursts its banks, the historian despairs and 'meanwhile' becomes the adverb of first resort."
July 7, 2024
I enjoyed Clark’s analysis and conclusions in this work. He does a great job of explaining the material realities and philosophical underpinnings of the revolutions, and those that carried them out and opposed them.
The one place I feel this book lost me is in the descriptions of the revolts themselves. The book doesn’t turn any of the great figures of the revolutions into real characters we can follow through the events they lived. In my opinion, it makes it a bit hard to follow along with the descriptions of the revolutions as they occur. On the other hand, Clark’s explanations of why things are happening, I think is very good.
I think Clark does a great job of analyzing and explaining how important 1848 was for the rest of European history and why it is especially relevant in our current era.
If you’re looking for a book that will follow the hour-by-hour events of the likes of Kossuth or Lamartine, this isn’t the book for it.
But if you want a good explainer of the various revolts, their causes, and continued relevance to this day I think this is an excellent book.
The one place I feel this book lost me is in the descriptions of the revolts themselves. The book doesn’t turn any of the great figures of the revolutions into real characters we can follow through the events they lived. In my opinion, it makes it a bit hard to follow along with the descriptions of the revolutions as they occur. On the other hand, Clark’s explanations of why things are happening, I think is very good.
I think Clark does a great job of analyzing and explaining how important 1848 was for the rest of European history and why it is especially relevant in our current era.
If you’re looking for a book that will follow the hour-by-hour events of the likes of Kossuth or Lamartine, this isn’t the book for it.
But if you want a good explainer of the various revolts, their causes, and continued relevance to this day I think this is an excellent book.
July 6, 2023
Well written and constructed overview of the upheavals, political and social, of 1848; noteworthy that it includes sections on the European colonies in America and Africa, considering the issues of slavery and imperialism. Good on the fissures within the initial revolutionary surge, especially over the social question, that helped permit the counterrevolution. Interesting that Clark uses the Arab Spring as a contemporary analogy when a few years ago it would have been 1968: history rolls on.
September 23, 2023
At 754 pages, this is easily the best single-volume account of the 1848 revolutions. Not only does it break down the otherwise difficult to understand disparate revolutions of that year, it does so in an incredibly readable way. I found this book hard to put down, an incredible feat for a nearly 800 page academic non-fiction work.
January 14, 2025
If I were simply judging this as a research tool, I'd rate it 5 stars: this is the definitive endgame for studying the revolutions of 1848 across the entirety of the world, never mind Europe. But if I was judging this as an historical read...then OMG WHY OH WHY would you try to write a SINGLE book on the entirety of worldwide 1848 revolution, never mind Europe?!? This is simply too much, too dense, too packed...even the print is microscopic, which doesn't do the reader any favours. The perfect tool to use for a thesis...but not for a relaxing dip into history.
May 24, 2025
Goed overzicht van alles wat er gebeurde omtrent het revolutiejaar. Af en toe een tikje langdradig maar veel geleerd over iets wat in de Nederlandse geschiedenislessen tamelijk snel behandeld wordt zonder de bredere Europese ontwikkelingen in detail te bespreken.
December 5, 2023
رشد و گسترش شتابان شهرهای صنعتی، یعنی شهرهایی که حول محور کارخانجات ماشینیِ نوین پس از انقلاب صنعتی در نقاط مختلف اروپا، یکی پس از دیگری پدیدار شدند، در اوایل سدة نوزدهم تمرکزهای جمعیتی بیسابقهای را دامن زد که شاید بتوانم آن را یک نقطة عطفِ متمایز در فرگشت شهرنشینی بنامم. این رخداد موجب شد تا بخشی از اعضای طبقات متوسط شهرِ صنعتیِ نوین، کسانی که امکان امرارمعاش از طریق تدریس و تحقیق در مؤسسات آموزشی و دانشگاههای نوین را داشتند، آرامآرام درگیر یک مسئلة نوین بشوند: «مسئلة اجتماعی». نوعِ رویکرد آنها به این مسئله، رویکردی فنّی، علمی و تجربی بود و موضوعِ مطالعه و پژوهشِ «آماری» آنها هم، شرایط زندگی در محلات کارگرنشین و اوضاع و احوال انسانهای در-حاشیه-ماندة این شهرهای نوظهور. موضوعاتی مثل بهداشت عمومی، امکانِ دسترسی برابر به آموزش و پرورش، خدمات عمومی مثل درمانگاه یا کتابخانه و نظایر آن، رفتهرفته به اجزاء اصلی «مسئلة اجتماعی» تبدیل شد.
از همان اوایل سدة نوزدهم معلوم بود که لندن، برلین، پاریس، وین و رُم، و در ادامه نیز پراگ و بودا و پست و دیگر شهرهای روبهتوسعه-نهادة اروپای غربی و مرکزی، شاهد ظهور جبهههای اجتماعی مختلف شدهاند که با گذر زمان و نزدیکتر شدن به میانههای آن سده، مرزبندیها و خطکشیهای میان آنها روشنی هر چه بیشتری پیدا میکرد. از یک سو محافظهکارانی بودند که در مواجهه با مسئلة اجتماعی، برنامههای حمایتی و صندوقهای کمکهای انساندوستانه را، بهخصوص تحت حمایت دربارهای اروپایی، راهحل طبیعی میدانستند. از سوی دیگر، لیبرالهای عموماً موّلدِ صنعت و تولید بودند که طبقات میانی جامعة جدید را شکل دادند و راهحل درست مواجهه با مسئلة اجتماعی را رشد و توسعة هر چه بیشتر فناوری و صنعتیشدنِ هرچه بیشتر جامعه در همة ابعاد آن، برای افزایش هر چه بیشتر سرمایه و بهرهمندی تعداد هر چه بیشتر مردم از عوایدِ مادّی و معنوی آن در نظر میآوردند. در نهایت، رادیکالهایی نمایان شدند که در کل، واکنشی بنیانشکن در مواجهه با صنعتیشدن و شهرنشینی برآمده از آن از خود بروز دادند و بر آن بودند که آدمی باید از این خواب گران برخیزد و دوباره به شرایط طبیعی خویش بازگردد. بااینحال هر سة این جریانها در یک اصل با یکدیگر اشتراک داشتند و از «وفاداران متعصبِ دینمدار قلمرو امپراتوریِ مقدّس روم» متمایز میشدند: بیشتر اعضای آنها از فلسفه به سمت علوم طبیعی گرایش داشتند و بر این باور بودند که علم بهترین توضیح را برای وضع بشر دارد و آیندة درخشان انسان در بهرهگیری نظاممند از دستاوردهای آن، بهخصوص در مواجهه با مسئلة اجتماعی نهفته است.
یکی از شخصیّتهای برجستة سدة نوزدهم سن-سیمون و اصول وی بود که اثری قابل توجه بر رویدادها و افکار اروپائیان در طول این سده برجای گذاشت. حتی لویی ناپلئون بناپارت سوم هم پس از کودتا، عملاً در مسیری گام برداشت که سن-سیمون و پیروانش برای او هموار کرده بودند. وی آورندة گفتمان نواندیشیِ مسیحی بود؛ نوآوریهای فنی را به عنوان رهایندگانِ انسان از چنگال بردگی و خرافات و فقر و دردمندی میستود؛ اتحاد همة اروپائیان را برای دستیابی به آیندة درخشان ترویج میکرد؛ انرژیهای جنسی را محور اصلی نوآوریهای اجتماعی نوین میدانست و بهخصوص بر نقش زنان و جنبشهای زنانه در توسعة جوامع تأکید میکرد؛ در پی تأسیس کلیسای برابریطلبِ نو و آن مسیحیتی بود که عشق برادرانه را در قلب نظمِ اجتماعیِ کمالیافته بنشاند. روشنفکران چپ و صنعتگران و کارگران رادیکال در جریان رخدادهایی که به بهار انقلابیِ اروپای سدة نوزدهم (۱۸۴۸-۱۸۴۹) معروف شد، زبان و تصاویر کاتولیک عوامانه را علیه حکومتهای سلطنتی به کار میبردند و متفکران کلیدی آنها دست به کار جداسازی ”مسیحیت واقعی“ از ”مسیحیت بازاری“ شدند تا ایمان مسیحیت راستین را با استدلالهای رفرمیستی یا سوسیالیستی در هم آمیزند. وسوسه میشوم که علی شریعتی را یک نسخة سن-سیمونیِ صادراتی بنامم! او که از ابوذر یک کمونیست تمامعیار ساخت و اسلامِ علوی را جنبش تمامعیار زحمتکشان دانست. کمونیسم برای متفکرِ فرانسویِ رادیکال، اتین کابه چیزی جز ”مسیحیت در عمل“ نبود!
پس از سن-سیمونیها، چپهای رادیکال و لیبرالهای میانه و حتی مایل به چپ تا حدود زیادی با یکدیگر هممسیر شدند. هرچند در ادامه اوضاع و احوال چنان پیش رفت که با رادیکالیزهشدن هر چه بیشتر چپها، لیبرالها و محافظهکاران نزدیکی بیشتری با دربارهای سنتی یافتند و به جستجوی راههایی مؤثرتر برای مواجهه با مسئلة اجتماعی و ایجاد تغییرات واقعیتر برآمدند. از آن سو�� صحنة اجتماعی برای چپهای رادیکال (و نه لیبرالهای چپ) که به دنبال تأسیس یک دولتِ مقتدرِ همهکاره و مسلّط بر جان و مال مردم بودند، نمایش و تئاتر بسیار مهم بود. آنها در میادین و خیابانها و قهوهخانهها، انرژی بسیاری را صرف بافتن و تافتن داستانها، نمایشنامهها، شعرها و رقصها و آوازها میکردند تا بلکه با این کار خویش به وقایع حال و هوایی حماسی ببخشند و آنها را به سمت جلو سوق دهند. تئاترهای خیابانی به دانشجوهای رادیکال و بخشهایی از رادیکالهای طبقة متوسط شهری این امکان را میداد تا در لحظات سرشارتری از هیجانات جمعی زندگی کنند، سدها را بشکنند، خودِ خصوصی خویش را با یک هدفِ عمومی درهمآمیزند. این منظرة نمایشی و بداهه این ذهنیت را بوجود میآورد که گویی انسانِ انقلابی، به عنوان یگانه عاملیت تقدیر خویش، بهشکلی زنده در حال نگارش و ویرایش تاریخِ خویش است و خود و تاریخ را همزمان میسازد.
اروپای میانة سدة نوزدهم، بهویژه در سالهای منتهی به ۱۸۴۸ و پس از آن، به راستی بستر ظهور و بروز مدلهای اجتماعی-سیاسی اگر نه بیسابقه، دستکم کمسابقهای بود. ناسیونالیسم یکی از محصولات پر زرق و برق این بوتة جوشان و زایا بود. میهنپرستیِ ناسیونالیستی زمانی سر برآورد که فرهنگدانان و فرهنگگرایان الیت نقاط مختلف اروپا تصمیم گرفتند برنامههای فرهنگی خویش را با ابزارهای سیاسی به اجرا بگذارند. در این صحنه، هیچچیز به اندازة زبان کارآمد نبود. ولی مشکلی عمیق وجود داشت که به تناقضهایی بعضاً مضحک دامن میزد. هر چند ناسیونالیسم نورسته از احساسات عمیق میهنپرستان برای بازیابی یک شکوه کهنه و باستانی و تلاش برای احیاء و رستاخیز آن سرچشمه میگرفت، ولی بجز زبانِ مادری ابزار چندانی برای بروز و ظهور در چنته نداشت. سرزمینهای اروپایی بهشدت در هم گره خورده بودند و در عمل، امکان ناچیزی برای شکلگیری ناسیونالیسمهای سرزمینی وجود داشت و بزرگترین دشمن ناسیونالیستهای اروپایی گذشته و حال را ژئوپولتیک در بر میشود که تا مدتها برگ برندة محافظهکاران و وفاداران به نظم سنتی بود. اما شکلدادن به ناسیونالیسمهای زبانی هم در اروپای ساکن زیر خیمة میراث «امپراتوری مقدّس روم» ساده نبود. یک مشکل نغز آنجا بود که از مجارستان تا بلژیک، از پروسیه تا سیسیلی، بسیاری از میهنپرستان اساساً نمیتوانستند به زبان مادری خویش صحبت کنند و یا اینکه آن را بسیار کم میدانستند!! آنها در محافل خصوصیتر خویش عموماً به آلمانی یا حتی لاتین با هم ارتباط میگرفتند و بیشتر ناسیونالیستهای مجار فرانسوی یا آلمانی را هنگام به وجود آمدن کشمکشهای پیچیده، به راحتی جایگزین «زبان مادری» خود میساختند که در آن زمانها صرفاً به چند «فعل» و «واژة» محدود تقلیل مییافت!!! از طرفی هم، با آنکه حس وحدت ملّی به وجود آمده هوش از سر بخشی پر نفوذ از الیتهای میانهرو میبرد، فریبنده هم بود. بسیاری از دهقانانی که به راحتی زیر خیمة ملیگرایی جمع میشدند، به راحتی هم میتوانستند از آن فاصله بگیرند (اگر وقفهای هر چند موقت در منافع و خواستههایشان به وجود میآمد). در جایی مثل آلمان، که آن را یکی از مراکز بنیادین شکلگیری و گسترش ناسیونالیسم اروپایی میشناسیم، پروتستانها و کاتولیکها، جمهوریخواهان رادیکال و لیبرالهای میانهرو هرگز دید یکسانی نسبت به ناسیونالیسم و میهندوستی نداشتند.
فارغ از پاتریوتیزم ناسیونالیستی، میل به جمهوریخواهی، بهخصوص نزد لیبرالهای مایل به چپ و رادیکالهای دموکرات به شدت بالا بود. جمهوریخواهی در بافت اروپای سدة نوزدهم به خودی خود یک امر به غایت رادیکال محسوب میشد و بسیاری از فعالان و حامیان اصلیِ آن به ناگزیر به شکلی مخفیانه و در ’خاموشی‘ فعالیت میکردند. اساساً جمهوریخواهی بدون ”فراموشخانه“ و ”دسیسهچینی“ در آن بافت و سیاق چندان امکانپذیر نبود. جمهوریخواهان رادیکال انجمنهای مخفی و سلسلهمراتبی خودشان را راه میانداختند و زیر ستارة پنجگوشِ «ایشتار» و بیرقِ سرخ سوسیالیسمِ دموکرات خویش جمع میشدند و میکوشیدند تا با تأسیس یک جمهوریِ تمامیتگرا، جامعه را از همة مالکیت خصوصی پاک کنند. آنها دولتی میخواستند که به قول لودویکو بونارروتی، مثل یک مادر برای همة اعضای جامعة خود هزینة تحصیل، غذا و کار برابر را تأمین کند. آنها این مطالبه را خواست اصلی همة فیلسوفان جهان میدانستند و تنها راهِ بازسازی و بازگشت به «اورشلیم» به شمار میآوردند! همین فراموشخانهها بودند که در شرق مدیترانه جمهوری «ترکان جوان» را ساختند تا همچون موریانه پایههای پوسیدة امپراتوریِ کهنة عثمانی را تا آخرین قطعه ببلعد و در دهة ۱۹۲۰، ایران را در آستانة تبدیلشدن به یک جمهوری پیش کشیدند.
میگویند یک سرزمین، انگلستان، هرگز طعم آشوبها و جنبشهای بهار انقلابی اروپایی را نچشید. حتی میهندوستان انگلیسی همین را نه تنها وجه تمایز و برتری خود نسبت به اروپای قارهای، بلکه دستاویزی برای گسستن از پادشاهیهای متحد بریتانیا میکنند تا یکبار دیگر انگلستان را به آن شکوه و یگانگی مثالین خویش بازگردانند! البته اوضاع به این سادگیها هم نیست. بهار انقلابی در انگلستان هم اتفاق افتاد، اما نه در سرزمین اصلی و متروپولیس آن؛ بلکه در حاشیههای استعماری. فشارهای مالیاتی به موقع از روی شانههای مردم متروپولیس برداشته شد و روی زمینداران، کارگران، مزدبگیران و بردگان حاشیههای استعماری سنگینی کرد و از اتفاق، در آنجا آشوبهای دردناکی را هم موجب شد. الگوی بهتر مواجهه با بهار انقلابی را پادشاهی هلند در اختیار میگذارد. پادشاه هلند با رصدکردن اوضاع و احوال سرزمینهای دیگر، بهویژه فرانسه و ایتالیا و اتریش، بهشکلی هوشمندانه برنامههای اصلاحاتی همهجانبهای را برای مواجههای معقول با مسئلة اجتماعی طرحریزی کرده و به اجرا میگذارد. دست هلند برای این کار بسیار باز بود و از نیروهای مشاوره و برنامة خبرهای برخوردار بود و البته نظام پادشاهیِ مردمداری هم داشت. هر چه باشد، همة ما میدانیم که هلند منشأ و خاستگاه اصلی رنسانس عقلانی-حقوقی اروپا بود و نخستین جایی که در آن حوزههای خصوصی و عمومی، بسیار پیش از نقاط دیگر اروپا (به استثناء بریتانیا) بر مبنای نوزایی قانون طبیعی رومی از یکدیگر تفکیک شدند. هلند از عطر شکوفههای بهاری ۱۸۴۸ بسیار لذّت میبرد زمانی که بیشتر جاهای دیگر اروپا غرق در کشمکش و درگیری و خونریزی بودند!
نکتة مهم در مورد بهار انقلابی، «اروپاییبودن» و «تراملیّت» نهفته در آن بود. جالب است که انواع ایدههای بیسابقه و کمسابقه، از لیبرالیسم گرفته تا سوسیالیسم، دموکراسی رادیکال، رادیکالیسم برابریطلب، سوسیال دموکراسی و ناسیونالیسم، هر کدام در نقاط متفاوتی از این قاره دست بالا را میان فعالان مدنی و سیاسی به خود گرفتند، اما چند عنصر بنیادین در همة آنها مشترک بود و به کل جریانات سدة نوزدهم خصلتی «تراملّی» و به معنای واقعی کلمه «اروپایی» میبخشید. این مشترکات در همهجا قابل توجه بود: مطالبة قانون اساسی، آزادیهای انسانی و مدنی، آزادی مطبوعات، آزادی انجمنها و اجتماعات، حق برخورداری «ملتها» از «سپاه ملّی»، اصلاح حق رأی. این عناصر عمومی لیبرال اروپای سدة نوزدهم را میتوان حاصل چندین دهه گفتگوها و مجادلههای استثنایی ”تراملّی“ به شمار آورد.
رادیکالها سهم چندانی از بهار انقلابی اروپایی نبردند؛ فقط توانستند جوامع آرمانی خود را با کمی تأخیر، در طول سدة بیستم به سرزمینهای شرقی اوراسیا و امریکای جنوبی و مرکزی صادر کنند و مردم آن سرزمینها را به خاک سیاه بنشانند!! آنچه در عمل در بسامد بهار انقلابی اروپا اتفاق افتاد، شکلگیری دولتهای موقّت بسیار معتدل، حتی با مشارکت جدّی محافظهکاران و سنتگرایان میانهروتر بود که اتفاقاً به شکلگیری برنامههای اجتماعی بسیار موفقیتآمیزی انجامید. رادیکالهایی مثل مارکس و انگلس از این مینالیدند که مردمان رنجکشیده هنوز به آگاهی طبقاتی مطلوب خود دست نیافتهاند و نسبت به شرایط خویش در «عقبماندگی» به سر میبرند. در عین حال، لیبرالها نیز هر چه بیشتر از شدّتیابی رادیکالیسم چپ به وحشت افتاده و میترسیدند، بیشتر به سمت نیروهای نظم اجتماعی گرایش مییافتند. لیبرالها هر جا که دولت را در اختیار میگرفتند، باشگاههای سیاسی دموکراتیک، مجامع عمومی و تظاهرات را همواره تحت نظارت پلیس و اقدامات امنیتی پیشگیرانه قرار میدادند و همزمان، چشم به روی همة هجمههایی که محافظهکاران سنتگرا به مشروعیت انقلاب روا میداشتند میبستند تا از رادیکالیزهشدن فضا پرهیز کنند. محافظهکاران و لیبرالهای راستگرا هم رفتهرفته از جنبههای مختلف اجتماعی «انقلابزدایی» کرده و برنامههای ضدانقلابی را با فراغ بال بیشتری پیش میبردند. در داخل مجامع انقلابی، لیبرالها به شکلی فزاینده تمایل یافتند تا همراه و متهد با دشمنان محافظهکار سابق خویش، علیه چپهای رادیکال و حتی میانهرو موضع بگیرند.
این وضعیت را ذکر مثالی از رخدادهای چند سال اخیر ایران به خوبی روشن میکند. تابستان سال ۱۴۰۱ شاهد خیزش جنبشی بود که به «جنبش مهسا» معروف شد و با مشارکت بیسابقة دیاسپورای ایرانیان خارج از کشور، فراگیری و گسترش جهانی بیسابقهای یافت. عناصر اصلی جنبش مهسا با شعار ’زن، زندگی، آزادی‘، عملاً عناصری رادیکال بودند و بروز آنها در کوچه و خیابان توسط نسل «زِد»، از بوسههای همجنسگرایانه گرفته تا نمایش جنسیِ بدنِ زن در حالات مختلف، عملاً رادیکالترین نیروها را دور خود جمع کرد؛ از رادیکالیسم جنسی گرفته (که به روشنی روی استیج برلین رونمایی شد!) تا رادیکالیسم هویتی و انواع جریانهای «اینترسکشنال» اجتماعی دیگر. و به چشم دیدیم که چطور مطالبات این جنبش رادیکالیستی هر چه بیشتر و بیشتر خواستهها و مطالبات الیتِ روشنفکر با محوریت ایرانیان دانشگاهنشین خارج از کشور را منعکس میکرد و پیش میکشید، لیبرالهای میانهرو (هم چپ و هم البته بیشتر راست) داخلی (شاید بتوان بخشی از تحولخواهان و اصلاحطلبان را در این دسته جای داد)، با سرعتی بیشتر خودشان را کنار کشیدند و به بازگشت محافظهکارانة نظم در جامعه روی خوشتری نشان دادند.
از آن طرف، آن بدنة فرودست که اساساً دغدغههای الیت اجتماعی و رادیکال برج عاجنشین را ندارد و در دی ۹۶ و آبان ۹۸ برای ”یک لقمه نان“ دست به شورشهای کور زد، همراه با رادیکالتر شدن «زن، زندگی، آزادی» که عملاً در سیطرة کنسرتهای پرزرقوبرق و شو-آفهای قشرِ بورژوای الیت غربنشین درآمده بود، فاصلهاش با آن جنبش بیشتر و بیشتر شد و خود را با جریانهای لیبرالِ میانهرو (مایل به راست) و ملیگرات�� و رهبران آن هر لحظه نزدیکتر و همدلتر احساس کرد و دید. درست همین اتفاق در اروپای سدة نوزدهم و در جریانهای ’ضد انقلاب‘، چنان کارل مارکس را برآشفت که این قشر دردکشیده را ”عقبمانده“هایی خواند که علاقهای به تغییر شرایط خویش ندارند و آنها را از اینکه به جریانهای محافظهکار و لیبرالهای میانهرو و عموماً ناسیونالیست رأی داده و دلبستهاند و به قدر کافی ’آگاهی طبقاتی‘ نیافتهاند، شماتت و سرزنش کرد. مشکل بزرگ مارکس که در لابهلای خطوط این کتاب به خوبی نمایان میشود، علاوهبر درک معیوب و منحرف او از تاریخ فرهنگ انسان، این هم بود که یک مدل ذهنی دلبخواهی را پرورش داده بود و به هر نحو ممکن میخواست تا آن را بر واقعیتهای بیرونی تحمیل کند؛ به عبارتی ماتریالیسم او از ایدآلیسم هگلی به مراتب ایدهآلگراتر بود!! این دقیقاً همان مشکلی است که رادیکالهای امروز، خواه در ایران یا در غرب بدان دچار هستند و متأثر از آن همواره ناکام ماندهاند.
در جریان بهار انقلابی ۱۸۴۸ و دولتهای موقت پس از آن هم شاهدیم که مسئلة دهقانان و رعایا برای رادیکالها و لیبرالهای عمدتاً شهرنشین برآمده از بستر صنعتی بورژوا (مثل شخص مارکس و انگلس) امری ناشناخته بود، درحالیکه محافظهکاران، لیبرالهای دست راستی (عمدتاً زمینداران و ملّاکان) و درباریان این قشر را خوب میشناختند و میتوانستند به موقع با وعدههای مؤثرتر و عملیتر، آراء و قلوب آنها را به سوی خویش سرازیر کنند. واقعیت این بود که طبقات فرودست دهقانی-کارگر عملاً یک معمای ناشناختنی برای الیتهای «جهانوطنی» باهوش بودند و هنوز هم هستند. رشد راستگراییهای عموماً ناسیونالیست با مشارکت همین طبقات فرودست که امروز در جایجای اروپا، امریکای جنوبی و مرکزی و دیگر نقاط جهان، حتی «سرزمینِ تکشاخهای کانادا»، شاهد آنیم، هرگز اتفاقی نیست. اتفاقاً، خلاف باور معوج مارکس و انگلس، طبقات فرودست از جایگاه خودشان آگاهی کامل دارند و بنابر هوش زیستی، خوب میدانند چه کسانی و کدام جریانها منافع آنها را بیشتر و بهتر تأمین کرده و خواهند کرد!
برنامة توسعه در تقابل با ایدئولوژی رادیکال (مثال لوئی ناپلئون بناپارت سوم)؛ یکی از ثمرات جدّی و شایان توجّه پسا بهارِ انقلابیِ اروپا، شکلگیری و ظهور دولتهای راستگرایی بود که کمترین شباهت را به دولتهای محافظهکار پیش از بهار اروپایی نداشتند. بهار انقلابی هر چند به زهرِ تلخ رادیکالها تبدیل شد، مردمانِ تشنة لیبرالیسم و بهبود شرایط اقتصادی و اجتماعی را عمیقاً به آینده امیدوار کرد. دولتهای جدید یکی پس از دیگری با مشارکت و آمیزش راستها و چپهای میانهرو تشکیل کابینه دادند. در فرانسة ۱۸۵۲، لویی ناپلئون بناپارت سوم، برادرزادة ناپلئونِ بزرگ که با کمک بریتانیا از لندن بازگشته بود، با کودتا حکومت فرانسه را در دست گرفت و هر سال نزد فرانسویان جایگاه محترمی یافت. او یک شخصیت اوتوکرات و محافظهکار داشت و دولتی دست راستی را هم تأسیس کرد، ولی آرمانهای سن-سیمون و هواداران او را به راحتی میشد در برنامههای توسعهای او مشاهده کرد. راهسازی، توسعة کارخانجات، بهبود شرایط بهداشتی شهرها، گسترش خدمات عمومی تنها بخشهایی از دولت توسعهگرای ناپلئون سوم بود. چنین بود که خلاف میل و خواست رادیکالهایی نظیر نیچه که در میانهروهای لیبرال، آدمهای میانمایه و بیخاصیت میدیدند، در طول نیمة دوم سدة نوزدهم مسئلة اجتماعی از حالت آرمانگرایانه به برنامهای اداری-اجرایی دگردیسی یافت و رشد و توسعة سرزمینهای اروپای غربی و مرکزی را تا آستانة جنگ جهانی نخست به همراه آورد.
از همان اوایل سدة نوزدهم معلوم بود که لندن، برلین، پاریس، وین و رُم، و در ادامه نیز پراگ و بودا و پست و دیگر شهرهای روبهتوسعه-نهادة اروپای غربی و مرکزی، شاهد ظهور جبهههای اجتماعی مختلف شدهاند که با گذر زمان و نزدیکتر شدن به میانههای آن سده، مرزبندیها و خطکشیهای میان آنها روشنی هر چه بیشتری پیدا میکرد. از یک سو محافظهکارانی بودند که در مواجهه با مسئلة اجتماعی، برنامههای حمایتی و صندوقهای کمکهای انساندوستانه را، بهخصوص تحت حمایت دربارهای اروپایی، راهحل طبیعی میدانستند. از سوی دیگر، لیبرالهای عموماً موّلدِ صنعت و تولید بودند که طبقات میانی جامعة جدید را شکل دادند و راهحل درست مواجهه با مسئلة اجتماعی را رشد و توسعة هر چه بیشتر فناوری و صنعتیشدنِ هرچه بیشتر جامعه در همة ابعاد آن، برای افزایش هر چه بیشتر سرمایه و بهرهمندی تعداد هر چه بیشتر مردم از عوایدِ مادّی و معنوی آن در نظر میآوردند. در نهایت، رادیکالهایی نمایان شدند که در کل، واکنشی بنیانشکن در مواجهه با صنعتیشدن و شهرنشینی برآمده از آن از خود بروز دادند و بر آن بودند که آدمی باید از این خواب گران برخیزد و دوباره به شرایط طبیعی خویش بازگردد. بااینحال هر سة این جریانها در یک اصل با یکدیگر اشتراک داشتند و از «وفاداران متعصبِ دینمدار قلمرو امپراتوریِ مقدّس روم» متمایز میشدند: بیشتر اعضای آنها از فلسفه به سمت علوم طبیعی گرایش داشتند و بر این باور بودند که علم بهترین توضیح را برای وضع بشر دارد و آیندة درخشان انسان در بهرهگیری نظاممند از دستاوردهای آن، بهخصوص در مواجهه با مسئلة اجتماعی نهفته است.
یکی از شخصیّتهای برجستة سدة نوزدهم سن-سیمون و اصول وی بود که اثری قابل توجه بر رویدادها و افکار اروپائیان در طول این سده برجای گذاشت. حتی لویی ناپلئون بناپارت سوم هم پس از کودتا، عملاً در مسیری گام برداشت که سن-سیمون و پیروانش برای او هموار کرده بودند. وی آورندة گفتمان نواندیشیِ مسیحی بود؛ نوآوریهای فنی را به عنوان رهایندگانِ انسان از چنگال بردگی و خرافات و فقر و دردمندی میستود؛ اتحاد همة اروپائیان را برای دستیابی به آیندة درخشان ترویج میکرد؛ انرژیهای جنسی را محور اصلی نوآوریهای اجتماعی نوین میدانست و بهخصوص بر نقش زنان و جنبشهای زنانه در توسعة جوامع تأکید میکرد؛ در پی تأسیس کلیسای برابریطلبِ نو و آن مسیحیتی بود که عشق برادرانه را در قلب نظمِ اجتماعیِ کمالیافته بنشاند. روشنفکران چپ و صنعتگران و کارگران رادیکال در جریان رخدادهایی که به بهار انقلابیِ اروپای سدة نوزدهم (۱۸۴۸-۱۸۴۹) معروف شد، زبان و تصاویر کاتولیک عوامانه را علیه حکومتهای سلطنتی به کار میبردند و متفکران کلیدی آنها دست به کار جداسازی ”مسیحیت واقعی“ از ”مسیحیت بازاری“ شدند تا ایمان مسیحیت راستین را با استدلالهای رفرمیستی یا سوسیالیستی در هم آمیزند. وسوسه میشوم که علی شریعتی را یک نسخة سن-سیمونیِ صادراتی بنامم! او که از ابوذر یک کمونیست تمامعیار ساخت و اسلامِ علوی را جنبش تمامعیار زحمتکشان دانست. کمونیسم برای متفکرِ فرانسویِ رادیکال، اتین کابه چیزی جز ”مسیحیت در عمل“ نبود!
پس از سن-سیمونیها، چپهای رادیکال و لیبرالهای میانه و حتی مایل به چپ تا حدود زیادی با یکدیگر هممسیر شدند. هرچند در ادامه اوضاع و احوال چنان پیش رفت که با رادیکالیزهشدن هر چه بیشتر چپها، لیبرالها و محافظهکاران نزدیکی بیشتری با دربارهای سنتی یافتند و به جستجوی راههایی مؤثرتر برای مواجهه با مسئلة اجتماعی و ایجاد تغییرات واقعیتر برآمدند. از آن سو�� صحنة اجتماعی برای چپهای رادیکال (و نه لیبرالهای چپ) که به دنبال تأسیس یک دولتِ مقتدرِ همهکاره و مسلّط بر جان و مال مردم بودند، نمایش و تئاتر بسیار مهم بود. آنها در میادین و خیابانها و قهوهخانهها، انرژی بسیاری را صرف بافتن و تافتن داستانها، نمایشنامهها، شعرها و رقصها و آوازها میکردند تا بلکه با این کار خویش به وقایع حال و هوایی حماسی ببخشند و آنها را به سمت جلو سوق دهند. تئاترهای خیابانی به دانشجوهای رادیکال و بخشهایی از رادیکالهای طبقة متوسط شهری این امکان را میداد تا در لحظات سرشارتری از هیجانات جمعی زندگی کنند، سدها را بشکنند، خودِ خصوصی خویش را با یک هدفِ عمومی درهمآمیزند. این منظرة نمایشی و بداهه این ذهنیت را بوجود میآورد که گویی انسانِ انقلابی، به عنوان یگانه عاملیت تقدیر خویش، بهشکلی زنده در حال نگارش و ویرایش تاریخِ خویش است و خود و تاریخ را همزمان میسازد.
اروپای میانة سدة نوزدهم، بهویژه در سالهای منتهی به ۱۸۴۸ و پس از آن، به راستی بستر ظهور و بروز مدلهای اجتماعی-سیاسی اگر نه بیسابقه، دستکم کمسابقهای بود. ناسیونالیسم یکی از محصولات پر زرق و برق این بوتة جوشان و زایا بود. میهنپرستیِ ناسیونالیستی زمانی سر برآورد که فرهنگدانان و فرهنگگرایان الیت نقاط مختلف اروپا تصمیم گرفتند برنامههای فرهنگی خویش را با ابزارهای سیاسی به اجرا بگذارند. در این صحنه، هیچچیز به اندازة زبان کارآمد نبود. ولی مشکلی عمیق وجود داشت که به تناقضهایی بعضاً مضحک دامن میزد. هر چند ناسیونالیسم نورسته از احساسات عمیق میهنپرستان برای بازیابی یک شکوه کهنه و باستانی و تلاش برای احیاء و رستاخیز آن سرچشمه میگرفت، ولی بجز زبانِ مادری ابزار چندانی برای بروز و ظهور در چنته نداشت. سرزمینهای اروپایی بهشدت در هم گره خورده بودند و در عمل، امکان ناچیزی برای شکلگیری ناسیونالیسمهای سرزمینی وجود داشت و بزرگترین دشمن ناسیونالیستهای اروپایی گذشته و حال را ژئوپولتیک در بر میشود که تا مدتها برگ برندة محافظهکاران و وفاداران به نظم سنتی بود. اما شکلدادن به ناسیونالیسمهای زبانی هم در اروپای ساکن زیر خیمة میراث «امپراتوری مقدّس روم» ساده نبود. یک مشکل نغز آنجا بود که از مجارستان تا بلژیک، از پروسیه تا سیسیلی، بسیاری از میهنپرستان اساساً نمیتوانستند به زبان مادری خویش صحبت کنند و یا اینکه آن را بسیار کم میدانستند!! آنها در محافل خصوصیتر خویش عموماً به آلمانی یا حتی لاتین با هم ارتباط میگرفتند و بیشتر ناسیونالیستهای مجار فرانسوی یا آلمانی را هنگام به وجود آمدن کشمکشهای پیچیده، به راحتی جایگزین «زبان مادری» خود میساختند که در آن زمانها صرفاً به چند «فعل» و «واژة» محدود تقلیل مییافت!!! از طرفی هم، با آنکه حس وحدت ملّی به وجود آمده هوش از سر بخشی پر نفوذ از الیتهای میانهرو میبرد، فریبنده هم بود. بسیاری از دهقانانی که به راحتی زیر خیمة ملیگرایی جمع میشدند، به راحتی هم میتوانستند از آن فاصله بگیرند (اگر وقفهای هر چند موقت در منافع و خواستههایشان به وجود میآمد). در جایی مثل آلمان، که آن را یکی از مراکز بنیادین شکلگیری و گسترش ناسیونالیسم اروپایی میشناسیم، پروتستانها و کاتولیکها، جمهوریخواهان رادیکال و لیبرالهای میانهرو هرگز دید یکسانی نسبت به ناسیونالیسم و میهندوستی نداشتند.
فارغ از پاتریوتیزم ناسیونالیستی، میل به جمهوریخواهی، بهخصوص نزد لیبرالهای مایل به چپ و رادیکالهای دموکرات به شدت بالا بود. جمهوریخواهی در بافت اروپای سدة نوزدهم به خودی خود یک امر به غایت رادیکال محسوب میشد و بسیاری از فعالان و حامیان اصلیِ آن به ناگزیر به شکلی مخفیانه و در ’خاموشی‘ فعالیت میکردند. اساساً جمهوریخواهی بدون ”فراموشخانه“ و ”دسیسهچینی“ در آن بافت و سیاق چندان امکانپذیر نبود. جمهوریخواهان رادیکال انجمنهای مخفی و سلسلهمراتبی خودشان را راه میانداختند و زیر ستارة پنجگوشِ «ایشتار» و بیرقِ سرخ سوسیالیسمِ دموکرات خویش جمع میشدند و میکوشیدند تا با تأسیس یک جمهوریِ تمامیتگرا، جامعه را از همة مالکیت خصوصی پاک کنند. آنها دولتی میخواستند که به قول لودویکو بونارروتی، مثل یک مادر برای همة اعضای جامعة خود هزینة تحصیل، غذا و کار برابر را تأمین کند. آنها این مطالبه را خواست اصلی همة فیلسوفان جهان میدانستند و تنها راهِ بازسازی و بازگشت به «اورشلیم» به شمار میآوردند! همین فراموشخانهها بودند که در شرق مدیترانه جمهوری «ترکان جوان» را ساختند تا همچون موریانه پایههای پوسیدة امپراتوریِ کهنة عثمانی را تا آخرین قطعه ببلعد و در دهة ۱۹۲۰، ایران را در آستانة تبدیلشدن به یک جمهوری پیش کشیدند.
میگویند یک سرزمین، انگلستان، هرگز طعم آشوبها و جنبشهای بهار انقلابی اروپایی را نچشید. حتی میهندوستان انگلیسی همین را نه تنها وجه تمایز و برتری خود نسبت به اروپای قارهای، بلکه دستاویزی برای گسستن از پادشاهیهای متحد بریتانیا میکنند تا یکبار دیگر انگلستان را به آن شکوه و یگانگی مثالین خویش بازگردانند! البته اوضاع به این سادگیها هم نیست. بهار انقلابی در انگلستان هم اتفاق افتاد، اما نه در سرزمین اصلی و متروپولیس آن؛ بلکه در حاشیههای استعماری. فشارهای مالیاتی به موقع از روی شانههای مردم متروپولیس برداشته شد و روی زمینداران، کارگران، مزدبگیران و بردگان حاشیههای استعماری سنگینی کرد و از اتفاق، در آنجا آشوبهای دردناکی را هم موجب شد. الگوی بهتر مواجهه با بهار انقلابی را پادشاهی هلند در اختیار میگذارد. پادشاه هلند با رصدکردن اوضاع و احوال سرزمینهای دیگر، بهویژه فرانسه و ایتالیا و اتریش، بهشکلی هوشمندانه برنامههای اصلاحاتی همهجانبهای را برای مواجههای معقول با مسئلة اجتماعی طرحریزی کرده و به اجرا میگذارد. دست هلند برای این کار بسیار باز بود و از نیروهای مشاوره و برنامة خبرهای برخوردار بود و البته نظام پادشاهیِ مردمداری هم داشت. هر چه باشد، همة ما میدانیم که هلند منشأ و خاستگاه اصلی رنسانس عقلانی-حقوقی اروپا بود و نخستین جایی که در آن حوزههای خصوصی و عمومی، بسیار پیش از نقاط دیگر اروپا (به استثناء بریتانیا) بر مبنای نوزایی قانون طبیعی رومی از یکدیگر تفکیک شدند. هلند از عطر شکوفههای بهاری ۱۸۴۸ بسیار لذّت میبرد زمانی که بیشتر جاهای دیگر اروپا غرق در کشمکش و درگیری و خونریزی بودند!
نکتة مهم در مورد بهار انقلابی، «اروپاییبودن» و «تراملیّت» نهفته در آن بود. جالب است که انواع ایدههای بیسابقه و کمسابقه، از لیبرالیسم گرفته تا سوسیالیسم، دموکراسی رادیکال، رادیکالیسم برابریطلب، سوسیال دموکراسی و ناسیونالیسم، هر کدام در نقاط متفاوتی از این قاره دست بالا را میان فعالان مدنی و سیاسی به خود گرفتند، اما چند عنصر بنیادین در همة آنها مشترک بود و به کل جریانات سدة نوزدهم خصلتی «تراملّی» و به معنای واقعی کلمه «اروپایی» میبخشید. این مشترکات در همهجا قابل توجه بود: مطالبة قانون اساسی، آزادیهای انسانی و مدنی، آزادی مطبوعات، آزادی انجمنها و اجتماعات، حق برخورداری «ملتها» از «سپاه ملّی»، اصلاح حق رأی. این عناصر عمومی لیبرال اروپای سدة نوزدهم را میتوان حاصل چندین دهه گفتگوها و مجادلههای استثنایی ”تراملّی“ به شمار آورد.
رادیکالها سهم چندانی از بهار انقلابی اروپایی نبردند؛ فقط توانستند جوامع آرمانی خود را با کمی تأخیر، در طول سدة بیستم به سرزمینهای شرقی اوراسیا و امریکای جنوبی و مرکزی صادر کنند و مردم آن سرزمینها را به خاک سیاه بنشانند!! آنچه در عمل در بسامد بهار انقلابی اروپا اتفاق افتاد، شکلگیری دولتهای موقّت بسیار معتدل، حتی با مشارکت جدّی محافظهکاران و سنتگرایان میانهروتر بود که اتفاقاً به شکلگیری برنامههای اجتماعی بسیار موفقیتآمیزی انجامید. رادیکالهایی مثل مارکس و انگلس از این مینالیدند که مردمان رنجکشیده هنوز به آگاهی طبقاتی مطلوب خود دست نیافتهاند و نسبت به شرایط خویش در «عقبماندگی» به سر میبرند. در عین حال، لیبرالها نیز هر چه بیشتر از شدّتیابی رادیکالیسم چپ به وحشت افتاده و میترسیدند، بیشتر به سمت نیروهای نظم اجتماعی گرایش مییافتند. لیبرالها هر جا که دولت را در اختیار میگرفتند، باشگاههای سیاسی دموکراتیک، مجامع عمومی و تظاهرات را همواره تحت نظارت پلیس و اقدامات امنیتی پیشگیرانه قرار میدادند و همزمان، چشم به روی همة هجمههایی که محافظهکاران سنتگرا به مشروعیت انقلاب روا میداشتند میبستند تا از رادیکالیزهشدن فضا پرهیز کنند. محافظهکاران و لیبرالهای راستگرا هم رفتهرفته از جنبههای مختلف اجتماعی «انقلابزدایی» کرده و برنامههای ضدانقلابی را با فراغ بال بیشتری پیش میبردند. در داخل مجامع انقلابی، لیبرالها به شکلی فزاینده تمایل یافتند تا همراه و متهد با دشمنان محافظهکار سابق خویش، علیه چپهای رادیکال و حتی میانهرو موضع بگیرند.
این وضعیت را ذکر مثالی از رخدادهای چند سال اخیر ایران به خوبی روشن میکند. تابستان سال ۱۴۰۱ شاهد خیزش جنبشی بود که به «جنبش مهسا» معروف شد و با مشارکت بیسابقة دیاسپورای ایرانیان خارج از کشور، فراگیری و گسترش جهانی بیسابقهای یافت. عناصر اصلی جنبش مهسا با شعار ’زن، زندگی، آزادی‘، عملاً عناصری رادیکال بودند و بروز آنها در کوچه و خیابان توسط نسل «زِد»، از بوسههای همجنسگرایانه گرفته تا نمایش جنسیِ بدنِ زن در حالات مختلف، عملاً رادیکالترین نیروها را دور خود جمع کرد؛ از رادیکالیسم جنسی گرفته (که به روشنی روی استیج برلین رونمایی شد!) تا رادیکالیسم هویتی و انواع جریانهای «اینترسکشنال» اجتماعی دیگر. و به چشم دیدیم که چطور مطالبات این جنبش رادیکالیستی هر چه بیشتر و بیشتر خواستهها و مطالبات الیتِ روشنفکر با محوریت ایرانیان دانشگاهنشین خارج از کشور را منعکس میکرد و پیش میکشید، لیبرالهای میانهرو (هم چپ و هم البته بیشتر راست) داخلی (شاید بتوان بخشی از تحولخواهان و اصلاحطلبان را در این دسته جای داد)، با سرعتی بیشتر خودشان را کنار کشیدند و به بازگشت محافظهکارانة نظم در جامعه روی خوشتری نشان دادند.
از آن طرف، آن بدنة فرودست که اساساً دغدغههای الیت اجتماعی و رادیکال برج عاجنشین را ندارد و در دی ۹۶ و آبان ۹۸ برای ”یک لقمه نان“ دست به شورشهای کور زد، همراه با رادیکالتر شدن «زن، زندگی، آزادی» که عملاً در سیطرة کنسرتهای پرزرقوبرق و شو-آفهای قشرِ بورژوای الیت غربنشین درآمده بود، فاصلهاش با آن جنبش بیشتر و بیشتر شد و خود را با جریانهای لیبرالِ میانهرو (مایل به راست) و ملیگرات�� و رهبران آن هر لحظه نزدیکتر و همدلتر احساس کرد و دید. درست همین اتفاق در اروپای سدة نوزدهم و در جریانهای ’ضد انقلاب‘، چنان کارل مارکس را برآشفت که این قشر دردکشیده را ”عقبمانده“هایی خواند که علاقهای به تغییر شرایط خویش ندارند و آنها را از اینکه به جریانهای محافظهکار و لیبرالهای میانهرو و عموماً ناسیونالیست رأی داده و دلبستهاند و به قدر کافی ’آگاهی طبقاتی‘ نیافتهاند، شماتت و سرزنش کرد. مشکل بزرگ مارکس که در لابهلای خطوط این کتاب به خوبی نمایان میشود، علاوهبر درک معیوب و منحرف او از تاریخ فرهنگ انسان، این هم بود که یک مدل ذهنی دلبخواهی را پرورش داده بود و به هر نحو ممکن میخواست تا آن را بر واقعیتهای بیرونی تحمیل کند؛ به عبارتی ماتریالیسم او از ایدآلیسم هگلی به مراتب ایدهآلگراتر بود!! این دقیقاً همان مشکلی است که رادیکالهای امروز، خواه در ایران یا در غرب بدان دچار هستند و متأثر از آن همواره ناکام ماندهاند.
در جریان بهار انقلابی ۱۸۴۸ و دولتهای موقت پس از آن هم شاهدیم که مسئلة دهقانان و رعایا برای رادیکالها و لیبرالهای عمدتاً شهرنشین برآمده از بستر صنعتی بورژوا (مثل شخص مارکس و انگلس) امری ناشناخته بود، درحالیکه محافظهکاران، لیبرالهای دست راستی (عمدتاً زمینداران و ملّاکان) و درباریان این قشر را خوب میشناختند و میتوانستند به موقع با وعدههای مؤثرتر و عملیتر، آراء و قلوب آنها را به سوی خویش سرازیر کنند. واقعیت این بود که طبقات فرودست دهقانی-کارگر عملاً یک معمای ناشناختنی برای الیتهای «جهانوطنی» باهوش بودند و هنوز هم هستند. رشد راستگراییهای عموماً ناسیونالیست با مشارکت همین طبقات فرودست که امروز در جایجای اروپا، امریکای جنوبی و مرکزی و دیگر نقاط جهان، حتی «سرزمینِ تکشاخهای کانادا»، شاهد آنیم، هرگز اتفاقی نیست. اتفاقاً، خلاف باور معوج مارکس و انگلس، طبقات فرودست از جایگاه خودشان آگاهی کامل دارند و بنابر هوش زیستی، خوب میدانند چه کسانی و کدام جریانها منافع آنها را بیشتر و بهتر تأمین کرده و خواهند کرد!
برنامة توسعه در تقابل با ایدئولوژی رادیکال (مثال لوئی ناپلئون بناپارت سوم)؛ یکی از ثمرات جدّی و شایان توجّه پسا بهارِ انقلابیِ اروپا، شکلگیری و ظهور دولتهای راستگرایی بود که کمترین شباهت را به دولتهای محافظهکار پیش از بهار اروپایی نداشتند. بهار انقلابی هر چند به زهرِ تلخ رادیکالها تبدیل شد، مردمانِ تشنة لیبرالیسم و بهبود شرایط اقتصادی و اجتماعی را عمیقاً به آینده امیدوار کرد. دولتهای جدید یکی پس از دیگری با مشارکت و آمیزش راستها و چپهای میانهرو تشکیل کابینه دادند. در فرانسة ۱۸۵۲، لویی ناپلئون بناپارت سوم، برادرزادة ناپلئونِ بزرگ که با کمک بریتانیا از لندن بازگشته بود، با کودتا حکومت فرانسه را در دست گرفت و هر سال نزد فرانسویان جایگاه محترمی یافت. او یک شخصیت اوتوکرات و محافظهکار داشت و دولتی دست راستی را هم تأسیس کرد، ولی آرمانهای سن-سیمون و هواداران او را به راحتی میشد در برنامههای توسعهای او مشاهده کرد. راهسازی، توسعة کارخانجات، بهبود شرایط بهداشتی شهرها، گسترش خدمات عمومی تنها بخشهایی از دولت توسعهگرای ناپلئون سوم بود. چنین بود که خلاف میل و خواست رادیکالهایی نظیر نیچه که در میانهروهای لیبرال، آدمهای میانمایه و بیخاصیت میدیدند، در طول نیمة دوم سدة نوزدهم مسئلة اجتماعی از حالت آرمانگرایانه به برنامهای اداری-اجرایی دگردیسی یافت و رشد و توسعة سرزمینهای اروپای غربی و مرکزی را تا آستانة جنگ جهانی نخست به همراه آورد.
August 30, 2024
Clark’s Revolutionary Spring is a humane yet unsentimental look at the 1848-1849 revolutions. Amazingly broad in scope it shows just how many social conflicts were shrouded in the upheaval of those years. Unlike the revolutionaries of 1789, those or 1848 knew they were making a revolution and constantly harked back to that predecessor. It all began with springtime of nations, with a revolt against king Ferdinand of the Two Sicilies. I loved it that, in spite of many decades of preparation and defense against popular insurrections, the monarchy was wrong footed and kicked out to the mainland by simple notices informing that a revolution would occur on January 12, 1848, and so it happened, without any particular preparations. That was the case all over Europe, as Clark says, revolutions made revolutionaries rather than the opposite. As they spread across the Italian states, pope Pius IX (who had been something of a darling to Italian liberals, who saw him as the possible rallying point for an Italian federation) had to flee dressed as a common priest. He abandoned his initially openness to reform and became an arch-reactionary, with consequences for the Catholic Church for more than a century (his policies would only be partially and temporarily revoked after the Vatican II Council). Tough guy and brilliant minister Metternich was forced to flee to England, along with poor Louis Philippe, a constitutional and highly competent monarch. The parlous state of the Austro- Hungarian empire was evident in the sorry mental state of emperor Ferdinand and in the way Hungary fought to break away. In the Habsburg lands there were at least four revolutions: a bourgeois revolution against absolutism; a proletarian revolution against the extant order, an independence war by the Hungarians, and multiple lesser wars, including by Slavs against Hungarians and by Italians against Austrians. I was moved by the story of the Galician nobles who tried to lead an independence war to revive the Polish states, that had been dismantled in the previous century by Prussians, Austrians and Russians. However, the peasants did not regard themselves as Poles but as Austrians and, when the nobles tried to push them, they revolted and a huge massacre of Polish nobles by the peasants evoked the jacqueries of the latter Middle Ages. Initially, the guardians of order reeled and made concessions, such as enacting constitutions, but later they pushed back in bloody counterrevolutionary actions that were followed by bloodier, more proletarian uprisings. In the end, the regimes that followed 1849 learned much from revolutionaries and indeed adopted many of their proposals. Except Russia, where there were no uprisings. The Russian authorities, instead, thought the Western institutions that resulted were unsuitable for their people and decided to follow pan-Slavic notions and ideals. And Russian discontents thought that Western revolutionaries were not tough enough, and became more violent and doctrinaire, thus establishing the route that would lead them into the Bolshevik revolution and decades of bloodshed. It was interesting to see that many defeated revolutionaries, especially Hungarians, fled to Ottoman territories, where some became military or administrative leaders, and they were well treated. The Ottomans refused to hand over these people to the Austrian government, because they assumed they would all be shot. This gallant behavior would later be held as a casus belli for the Crimea War by the Russians.
In a book this big there are many, many interesting characters, from Mazzini and Garibaldi, to Blanc, Blanqui and Raspail, to Bismarck and Louis Napoleon, to Georges Sand. Karl Marx was there, and he and Friedrich Engels captured the spirit of the moment (Zeitgeist) in their phenomenally successful tract, the Communist Manifesto. There are many interesting details. I did not know Marx’s lawyer father defended peasants who had continued to use lands that were formerly commons, after they were privatized, thus probably providing Marx with some input for some of his early writings on that subject. I liked, as Clark evidently does, the talented revolutionary Robert Blum, who, as a theater man and a man of the people, became a leader of the Frankfurt parliament, where he opposed the turn toward nationalism on the part of Prussia. He wanted a democratic Germany but he wouldn’t get it: it would be more than 70 years later his dream would be briefly realized in the Weimar Constitution. Before he was executed he wrote a magnificent good bye letter to his wife and children, and he became the subject of songs and even slang expressions in Southern Germany. Clark ranges even beyond Europe, in Latin America, where he notes the impact of this great upheaval, the first global one even in an age prior to the telegraph’s diffusion. He does say that sympathizers of these revolutions in Colombia ended slavery, but I wish he’d told that in 1849 radical artisans and workers threatened Congress and obtained the election of left wing President José Hilario López, who later freed the slaves. In 1848 the Liberal party was created by these people, but in 1849 the Conservative Party would be established to oppose it. These parties would go on to lead (and mislead) Colombia for a century and half, through several civil wars and a decade and a half of strife known as La Violencia. But one can’t expect an author to get so much detail into a single book, even one as large, and great, as this one.
This is a triumph of research, narrative and ability to tells story in a a compelling, non condescending way.
In a book this big there are many, many interesting characters, from Mazzini and Garibaldi, to Blanc, Blanqui and Raspail, to Bismarck and Louis Napoleon, to Georges Sand. Karl Marx was there, and he and Friedrich Engels captured the spirit of the moment (Zeitgeist) in their phenomenally successful tract, the Communist Manifesto. There are many interesting details. I did not know Marx’s lawyer father defended peasants who had continued to use lands that were formerly commons, after they were privatized, thus probably providing Marx with some input for some of his early writings on that subject. I liked, as Clark evidently does, the talented revolutionary Robert Blum, who, as a theater man and a man of the people, became a leader of the Frankfurt parliament, where he opposed the turn toward nationalism on the part of Prussia. He wanted a democratic Germany but he wouldn’t get it: it would be more than 70 years later his dream would be briefly realized in the Weimar Constitution. Before he was executed he wrote a magnificent good bye letter to his wife and children, and he became the subject of songs and even slang expressions in Southern Germany. Clark ranges even beyond Europe, in Latin America, where he notes the impact of this great upheaval, the first global one even in an age prior to the telegraph’s diffusion. He does say that sympathizers of these revolutions in Colombia ended slavery, but I wish he’d told that in 1849 radical artisans and workers threatened Congress and obtained the election of left wing President José Hilario López, who later freed the slaves. In 1848 the Liberal party was created by these people, but in 1849 the Conservative Party would be established to oppose it. These parties would go on to lead (and mislead) Colombia for a century and half, through several civil wars and a decade and a half of strife known as La Violencia. But one can’t expect an author to get so much detail into a single book, even one as large, and great, as this one.
This is a triumph of research, narrative and ability to tells story in a a compelling, non condescending way.
March 24, 2024
Clark entstaubt Puzzleteile, die von einer nationalistischen Geschichtsschreibung überdeckt waren, und fügt sie zu einem Bild zusammen. Es wird deutlich, dass die Revolutionen von 1848 ein europäisches Phänomen waren. Dieses Narrativ ist im auseinanderdriftenden Europa von grosser Wichtigkeit. Allerdings verliert man beim Lesen durch die vielen Namen und Orte schnell den Überblick und durch den Umfang des Bandes hat man am Ende doch nur Fragmentarisches im Kopf. Die Kapitel sind aber zum Glück sehr gut übertitelt und man findet sich schnell zurecht, wenn man etwas nachschauen will.
December 17, 2023
Clark sets up the revolution with talk of the capitalist industrial economy which accelerated profit and created poverty at the same breakneck speed, places like Ireland, “whose population grew at between two and three times the rates prevailing in north-western Europe, producing a population density in rural districts that was unrivaled across the continent.” Around 1.1 million perished out of a then population of 8.3 million of famine and related disease and to think this all took place on the shores of the greatest empire
This period reminds you of the perennial potency of nostalgia, that one-stop fix all pseudo sanctuary offered up to the masses by contrived ideas of a fictitious shared past, a seductive glorious history where everything was better. And of course the further from the roots of these origin myths, the stronger the pull of them becomes.
The constant production and the evolution of myths, like ethnic purity promoted to aspirational status, but of course myths just like tradition are 100% man made and we should forever be on our watch when people go to extreme lengths to propagate and promote them, without ever questioning their legitimacy.
Some of the most notable things to emerge from this period of history, is how so many things broadly remain the same, the ruling classes go to extraordinary lengths to hold onto power and rarely give anything meaningful back without a fight. They have successfully created and perpetuated a system which serves to protect and strengthen their personal circumstances above everyone else, laws are made for them by them, suppressing the rights of workers, wages continue to be kept artificially low in order to allow profits to grow increasingly higher, always at the expense of those who create most of it. Meanwhile the left remains notoriously fractured and divided, prone to petty infighting and consistently struggles to work together to present a cohesive, united front to attain clear, useful goals which often makes the work of the ruling classes all the easier.
The shelves of bookstores and libraries around the world are bursting with tomes from countless, privileged academics from elite universities, but this isn’t automatically a good thing. A fine academic doesn’t necessarily translate to a fine writer, and there are countless books out there to show this. Clark’s style is painfully dry and this was crying out for some life to breathed into it, something to break the flat monotony of his delivery. His research and knowledge is evidently of a high standard, but he doesn’t appear to have the qualities to bring all of that knowledge together and make it enjoyable to read for a wide audience. More often than not this made for absolutely punishing reading, the kind that puts off countless people from reading history books, because they mistakenly believe that they are all as drab and impenetrable as this.
Something not covered in here is the impact of later events which would have global repercussions like the two biggest tragedies to impact the 20th century in two World Wars, but the difference was after these wars, power had to concede something to the masses who endured so much trauma, suffering and death, such as the case of the UK where Attlee’s Post-War Labour government introduced the likes of the welfare state and the NHS and nationalised certain industries, both as a thank you and a compensation to the masses.
Whereas when we compare that to the 21st century, and look at the two major global catastrophes - the financial crisis caused by the greed and incompetence of the finance industry and the global pandemic. These were both opportunities for deep self-reflection and wider examination and closer scrutiny of the systems we live under and yet both times all that happened was that the rich and powerful used both disasters to exploit other’s needs, weakness and vulnerabilities, taking more from the commons and they grew even more rich and powerful at the expense of everyone else.
This period reminds you of the perennial potency of nostalgia, that one-stop fix all pseudo sanctuary offered up to the masses by contrived ideas of a fictitious shared past, a seductive glorious history where everything was better. And of course the further from the roots of these origin myths, the stronger the pull of them becomes.
The constant production and the evolution of myths, like ethnic purity promoted to aspirational status, but of course myths just like tradition are 100% man made and we should forever be on our watch when people go to extreme lengths to propagate and promote them, without ever questioning their legitimacy.
Some of the most notable things to emerge from this period of history, is how so many things broadly remain the same, the ruling classes go to extraordinary lengths to hold onto power and rarely give anything meaningful back without a fight. They have successfully created and perpetuated a system which serves to protect and strengthen their personal circumstances above everyone else, laws are made for them by them, suppressing the rights of workers, wages continue to be kept artificially low in order to allow profits to grow increasingly higher, always at the expense of those who create most of it. Meanwhile the left remains notoriously fractured and divided, prone to petty infighting and consistently struggles to work together to present a cohesive, united front to attain clear, useful goals which often makes the work of the ruling classes all the easier.
The shelves of bookstores and libraries around the world are bursting with tomes from countless, privileged academics from elite universities, but this isn’t automatically a good thing. A fine academic doesn’t necessarily translate to a fine writer, and there are countless books out there to show this. Clark’s style is painfully dry and this was crying out for some life to breathed into it, something to break the flat monotony of his delivery. His research and knowledge is evidently of a high standard, but he doesn’t appear to have the qualities to bring all of that knowledge together and make it enjoyable to read for a wide audience. More often than not this made for absolutely punishing reading, the kind that puts off countless people from reading history books, because they mistakenly believe that they are all as drab and impenetrable as this.
Something not covered in here is the impact of later events which would have global repercussions like the two biggest tragedies to impact the 20th century in two World Wars, but the difference was after these wars, power had to concede something to the masses who endured so much trauma, suffering and death, such as the case of the UK where Attlee’s Post-War Labour government introduced the likes of the welfare state and the NHS and nationalised certain industries, both as a thank you and a compensation to the masses.
Whereas when we compare that to the 21st century, and look at the two major global catastrophes - the financial crisis caused by the greed and incompetence of the finance industry and the global pandemic. These were both opportunities for deep self-reflection and wider examination and closer scrutiny of the systems we live under and yet both times all that happened was that the rich and powerful used both disasters to exploit other’s needs, weakness and vulnerabilities, taking more from the commons and they grew even more rich and powerful at the expense of everyone else.
February 8, 2025
An extensive and deeply researched overview of the set of revolutions that marked many European cities in 1848-1849, as well as the counter-revolutions that suppressed these popular revolts. Tying together these sometimes disparate set of geographical and political contexts is a difficult task, but Clark does this very well and also manages to draw interesting parallels to contemporary times.
At one point the shifting to different countries and political figures became a bit exhausting, and when the Croatians started to revolt against the Hungarians who revolted against the Austrians ... I guess you can't blame the author for things being quite complicated.
At one point the shifting to different countries and political figures became a bit exhausting, and when the Croatians started to revolt against the Hungarians who revolted against the Austrians ... I guess you can't blame the author for things being quite complicated.
December 19, 2023
Excellent book. I never learned anything about the 19th Century, much less in Europe. This comprehensive study of the 1848 revolutions has done enormously to help me understand this crucial moment of our not-so-distant history.
July 13, 2024
Exceptional history writing. Draws together a narrative of 1848 with a temporal and thematic structure that means you rarely feel lost or disorientated, which is impressive given the geographical scope. Consistently gripping, even given the length, and surprisingly often quite funny. I really enjoyed the author's commentary on the parallels with the present moment, especially with regard to the mass protest decade of the 2010's, which largely suffered the same fate.
April 23, 2025
Dos meses he tardado en leer este tocho de casi 1000 páginas y he disfrutado cada una de ellas. El año 1848 se forjaron o maduraron muchas de las ideas que todavía manejamos: Constitución, liberal, conservador, liberal-conservador, radical, socialista, comunista, nacionalista... Este libro ayudará a entenderlas, y también a aprender cómo hacer (o cómo no hacer) una revolución y una contrarrevolución.
January 6, 2024
Great analysis of the 1848 revolutions across Europe. Very well written. His main point is that the traditional view of the 1848 revolutions - that they were very complicated and they failed - is wrong. They were complicated but they did not fail. They did not overthrow governments everywhere and even when they overthrew a government and installed their own it didn't usually last very long. But they changed Europe forever. Their liberal democratic ideas permeated society slowly but surely. Conservative governments got a fright and undertook reform in order to forestall repeats of the 1848 revolutions.
December 23, 2024
A comprehensive and fascinating account of the revolutions and counter-revolutions of 1848, giving you a great sense of the drama and significance of that year across Europe, but also of the complexity of the forces at work (liberalism, radicalism, social change, nationalism) and how they defy simple narratives. I found interesting some of the events Clark highlights that challenge easy preconceptions, such as how some of the “nationalist” bourgeoise and aristocratic rebellions in Eastern Europe were put down with the help of the local peasantry, who actually preferred the rule of the Emperor in Vienna to that of their local landlords. You realise how recent (and fragile) a phenomenon our notion of coherent nation states is. On the spectrum of academic history text to popular history, this is, for me, a little more towards the academic end, though very readable. It’s quite literally weighty. If you’re interested in the topic and up for a big read, this is a good one.
February 4, 2025
Dense and hard to keep track of names and events, but very well written and really important - this was the beginning of modern politics, and it's very relevant today.
October 1, 2023
This is 5 stars for those who are looking for a (not "the") definitive history of the revolutionary period in Europe about 1848. For those who are looking for a more general history, I think this would be more of a 3 star rating.
Clark's strength is in surveying all of Europe, and a bit of the colonial overseas territories (e.g., Guadeloupe and Martinique), providing a synthesis of a huge number of broadly parallel yet distinct movements in many countries. This is also the weakness that I referred to for the 3-star reader - it's immensely complicated to follow the hundreds of individuals involved in dozens of locations over a period of a couple of years.
I think that it will be hard to top this analysis. I am sure someone will someday in the future but for now this is probably as good as a person is going to get for a one-volume history of the period.
The parallels with today's restlessness in public discourse is interesting but I think that it might be a bit of stretch to consider that we are in a similar situation globally. In various regions, though, I think he is right in forecasting some similar situations.
As a side-note, the last photo in the book is of the "Freedom Convoy" in my hometown of Ottawa in 2022, which I witnessed personally. I never felt that there was any revolutionary potential in that demonstration, just a lot of yahooery and blowing off of steam.
Clark's strength is in surveying all of Europe, and a bit of the colonial overseas territories (e.g., Guadeloupe and Martinique), providing a synthesis of a huge number of broadly parallel yet distinct movements in many countries. This is also the weakness that I referred to for the 3-star reader - it's immensely complicated to follow the hundreds of individuals involved in dozens of locations over a period of a couple of years.
I think that it will be hard to top this analysis. I am sure someone will someday in the future but for now this is probably as good as a person is going to get for a one-volume history of the period.
The parallels with today's restlessness in public discourse is interesting but I think that it might be a bit of stretch to consider that we are in a similar situation globally. In various regions, though, I think he is right in forecasting some similar situations.
As a side-note, the last photo in the book is of the "Freedom Convoy" in my hometown of Ottawa in 2022, which I witnessed personally. I never felt that there was any revolutionary potential in that demonstration, just a lot of yahooery and blowing off of steam.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 148 reviews