Kraftwerk
15 years ago
11 January 2009
709-717 and the woes of being rich and powerful (also: genesis)
The framers of the US Constitution, frightened by the concept of rule by the mob, placed the electoral college as a protection against democracy. Their fear, predicated on the belief that a commoner does not know what is good for him, is visible throughout the crowns of post-Napoleonic Europe. The few in power feared a violent shift towards democracy and did their best to protect what was theirs: the thrones of Europe. The Concert of Europe and the concept of the balance of power, ostensibly for the good of all of Europe, came to being as the result of various personal and national interests (most of them were personal and national safety and the preservation of the status quo). Out of this fear grew a new conception of a legitimate state. This new state, the international state (my coinage), was legitimized by international recognition, treaties and guarantees (as it says on age 712). In that they protect the interests of the few over the many and reject the glorified individual of the Enlightenment, the formation of the Concert of Europe and the new conception of legitimacy associated with it seem almost absolutist in nature, just like Tsar Nicolas's brutal suppression of the Decembrists, when he treated them as if they, by attacking the state, had been attacking him personally.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Mr Diddy Kong,
ReplyDeleteI would like to first address your following point:
"...just like Tsar Nicolas's brutal suppression of the Decembrists, when he treated them as if they, by attacking the state, had been attacking him personally. "
I would argue that they were attacking him personally. You have forgotten the shortest definition of absolutism, from the despot's perspective: I AM THE STATE. For an absolutist ruler, who legally controls every element of the government, any attack on the government is an attack on the ruler, especially when that attack is coming from liberals.
Finally, I would say that the Concert of Europe is not a necessarily absolutist action, but instead the action of those in power desperate to find ways to maintain their power. Those actions should not fall under the definition of absolutism.
Nice comment MT. I also want to follow up and ask:I can see what you mean by your comment on the Tsar--attacking him is attacking the state, because Tsarist Russia is an absolutist state. But what of the rest of Europe? Britain was a signitory to the C of V, but it was very reticent to get involved in Continental affairs. Was this a question of realpolitik, or a question of British distaste for absolutist/unenlightened policies in European thinking, or...?
ReplyDelete