Comparing American and French Revolutionary Documents

Though the American and French documents we studied were written with the idea of change in mind and were somewhat inspired by each other, they had different views on property and the function of such. Property was a very important aspect to take into account because these documents were not only directed towards the public, but towards the higher power (ie. the government) that would end up reading them.

The American Declaration of Independence put a distinct focus on property. The majority of the document listed the negative actions that the King inflicted on the people, and in doing so the reader can see that instead of the citizens being treated like citizens, they were essentially the property of the King. An example of this is how he “[cut] off our Trade with all parts of the world,” which was obviously a huge decision, but not one that the citizens had any say in. The action reminds me of a parent scolding a child; having the right to trade taken away and the isolation that comes with such is almost like being grounded. Property is also addressed in a more typical manner- in the context of owning something- when it is mentioned that “[he imposed] Taxes on us without our Consent.” By being so dominating and overbearing, the King makes it clear that he had total control over his governed people.

On the other hand, the French documents of independence put a slightly different twist on the concept of property. While the American document mentioned taxes being imposed without any warning, the French government actually gave the citizens a say in such (through a vote), though they only did so because they knew the odds would never be in the favor of the citizens. This led the writer to call property an “an inviolable and sacred right” and mention that it should only ever be taken away if it was legally determined to do so. With some historical context we know that the French rulers oppressed their citizens just as much as the English ones did, but such was not implicitly state as it was in the American Declaration of Independence. Personally I think this lack of specificity strengthens the French document; saying less rather than more is often powerful.

In The Declaration of Independence the King not only abused his power through raising taxes, but through treating his people like property, while The Declaration of Rights of Man and of the Citizen focused less on listing complaints, and more on introducing solutions.

Comparing American and French Revolutionary Documents

In both the American and French revolutionary doctrines, the goal is to inspire and rouse a nation into rebellion. In order to complete such a monumental task, the authors center their declarations on the idea that citizens’ natural and “inalienable” rights are being taken away by the current government.  In both the Declaration of Independence and The Declaration of the Rights of Man, natural rights are defined as god-given life, property, and liberty.  Both doctrines emphasize that liberty lies in the insurance of safety and happiness of every man.

In The Declaration of Independence, Jefferson states that men are “endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights” such as “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”[i] The Declaration of Rights of Man states that among the “imprescriptible rights of man” are “liberty, property, security, and resistance of oppression.”[ii]  Every man is born with certain rights, which are given to him by God and cannot be taken away by any government.  These documents both go on to explain that when these natural rights are taken away, it is also the right of man to rebel and resist oppression.

The documents have many connections to John Locke’s second treatise, in which he argues that all humans belong to God, are born as equals, and therefore should live as equals.[iii] This philosophy is very prevalent throughout the revolutionary doctrines.  In The Declaration of the Rights of Man, the National Assembly argues that “civil distinctions…can be founded only on public unity,”[iv] stressing Locke’s idea that men are naturally equal and inequality only comes as a result of society’s artificial distinctions.  The focus of the American and French doctrines is that governments should protect equality and prevent restrictive class distinctions.

Every man has natural rights, but if the expression of one man’s rights infringes on another’s rights, then (and only then) his rights must be restrained.  The doctrines contend that liberty results from every man expressing his rights but never violating another’s. Man’s “unalienable rights” are unalienable until they interfere with the happiness of society.


[i] Representatives of the United States, “The Declaration of Independence,” in The Communist Manifesto and Other Revolutionary Writings (Mineola: Dover Publications Inc., 2003), 63-64.

[ii] National Assembly of France, “Declaration of the Rights of Man,” in The Communist Manifesto and Other Revolutionary Writings (Mineola: Dover Publications Inc., 2003), 80.

[iii] “Social Contract Theory,” Celeste Friend, Last modified October 15, 2004. http://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/#SH2b.

[iv] National Assembly of France, “Declaration of the Rights of Man,” in The Communist Manifesto and Other Revolutionary Writings, 80.

Revolutionary Documents Comparison

Sam Wittmer

The French and American revolutions developed from each other’s ideas and actions concerning oppressors.  The American Revolution took inspiration from ideas that were circulating around France, inspiring the Declaration of Independence. Six years after the States became officially independent from Britain, the National Assembly of France released The Declaration of Rights of Man and of the Citizen, which shows influence from the Declaration of Independence.  These documents aim to highlight the natural rights of man, all stemming from the right of men to opportunity—authorized by the nation’s people and God.

There are different forms of the right to opportunity.  Prominent is the complaint against economic hindrance, both personal and in terms of the group for which the document speaks.  For the Declaration of Independence, two of the grievances are Britain’s “cutting off Trade with all parts of the world,” and “imposing Taxes without our consent.”[1]  The National assembly of France, creating the Declaration of the rights of man, twice highlights Man’s right to property. In the second Right, it is part of the “imprescriptible” rights of man; “Liberty, Property, Security, and Resistance of Oppression.”[2] Then, in the seventeenth Right, as property being “inviolable and sacred” and that “no one ought to be deprived of it.”[3] The natural economic rights are featured in both documents because the livelihood of the people depended on their physical property. Most opportunity relied on what a person could do with their assets—and therefore have a right to prosper in this respect.

The documents also demand rights to making their own decisions.  In the colonies, independent assemblies were restricted, soldiers were quartered in civilians’ houses, and migration to the colonies was restricted.  The grievance is that external forces were regulating the opportunity for the colonies to better themselves.  In France, the nobility and clergy consumed the products of the bourgeoisie, while they produced nothing themselves.  While doing this, they also had a bar that the “lower” class could reach but never pass.  Sieyes says that the words of the nobility are, “ ‘No matter how useful you are…you can go so far and no further.”[4]  With this system there is no opportunity to advance, therefore, the Assembly requires that honors be available to all people.

The documents derive the support for these natural rights from different sources, though they share similar elements.  The natural rights of the Declaration of Independence come from divine power: God being mentioned three times.  But there are tones that it is the voice of the people who accredit these rights as well.  In the French documents, the people of the third estate are responsible for these rights.  They are the majority who produce and could function as a separate state, and therefore accredit the natural rights.  But God is mentioned as the Assembly asks for the Supreme Being’s blessing before stating the rights of man.

 


[1] Representatives of the United States, “The Declaration of Independence,” in The Communist Manifesto and other Revolutionary Writings, ed. Bob Blaisdell (Mineola: Dover Publications, 2003), 65.

[2] National Assembly of France, “Declaration of the Rights of Man,” in The Communist Manifesto and other Revolutionary Writings, ed. Bob Blaisdell (Mineola: Dover Publications, 2003), 80.

 

[3] National Assembly of France, “Declaration of the Rights of Man,” 81.

[4] Emmanuel Joseph Sieyes, “What is the Third Estate?,” in The Communist Manifesto and other Revolutionary Writings, ed. Bob Blaisdell (Mineola: Dover Publications, 2003), 72.