Encyclopédistes , Magistrates, and the Corporate General Will
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8940272 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jeffrey Ryan Harris (corresponding author) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 45 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 451-480 |
| Publication date | 2022-08-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | French Historical Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0016-1071 • E-ISSN: 1527-5493 |
| Publisher | Duke University Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1215/00161071-9746601 |
| OpenAlex | W4312762945 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 33 |
This article argues that a variety of versions of the “general will” were central to late Old Regime political culture and that these included not only Jean-Jacques Rousseau's most famous anticorporatist variant but also corporate ones originating with Denis Diderot and with the Parlements (via the Jansenists). These rival variants of general will discourse all contributed to an emerging protodemocratic political culture in the last decades of the Old Regime, and they furthermore framed the debate over the forms and procedures of the Estates-General in 1789. Because French political culture in 1789 depended on a plural, contested general will discourse, François Furet's and Keith Michael Baker's arguments locating the Terror's origins in a hegemonic Rousseauist general will discourse in 1789 are incorrect. The article also thereby indicates that Timothy Tackett's argument denying evidence for Rousseau's direct influence on the deputies in 1789 cannot suffice to disprove the influence of a “discourse of will” in the National Constituent Assembly. Cet article soutient que plusieurs variantes de la « volonté générale » jouaient un rôle central dans la culture politique française à la fin de l'Ancien Régime, y compris non seulement la plus célèbre variante anticorporatiste de Rousseau mais aussi des variantes corporatives issues de Diderot et des Parlements (grâce aux Jansénistes). Ces variantes rivales dans le discours de la volonté générale contribuaient toutes à une culture politique proto-démocratique émergente dans les dernières décennies de l'Ancien Régime, et en outre elles ont délimité le débat sur les formes et procédures des Etats Généraux en 1789. Puisque la culture politique française en 1789 dépendait d'un discours pluriel et contesté de la volonté générale, les arguments de Furet et de Baker qui situent les origines de la Terreur dans un discours hégémonique rousseauiste de la volonté générale sont incorrects. Cet article indique aussi que l'argument de Tackett qui nie l’évidence d'une influence directe de Rousseau sur les députés en 1789 ne peut pas suffire pour réfuter l'influence d'un « discours de volonté » dans la Constituante
Argument (complex analysis · Ethnology · French revolution · Hegemony · Humanities · Ideology · Linguistics · Plural · Political science · Politics · Sociology · European Political History Analysis · Law · Philosophy · Political Theory and Influence · Rousseau and Enlightenment Thought
Interpreting the French Revolution
Diderot's earlier philosophical writings
Philosophy and the State in France
Enlightenment Contested
The religious origins of the French Revolution. From Calvin to the Civil Constitution, 1560-1791
Lawyers and Citizens
Power and Politics in Old Regime France, 1720-1745
The Maupeou Revolution
The Notables and the Nation
Inventing the French Revolution
The French Parlements and the Crisis of the Old Regime
Diderot
Diderot’s Politics
Furet's Revolution
New Wine in Old Wineskins
Francois Furet, the Terror, and 1789
An Assessment of the Writings of Francois Furet
The Rejuvenation and Rejection of Jansenism in History and Historiography
The Estates General as Ecumenical Council
Enlightenment against Empire
| Highly cited | No |
|---|