During the nineteenth century in Europe, the majority of European workers had moved from the country into cities on account of the modernization of their farms. Due to the large increase of population in such close quarters, the living conditions of the workers were in shambles, and the people began to protest and demand better living conditions. While some sought for government reforms that would put a new emphasis on those less fortunate, others found it to be more efficient to have a full-out violent revolution to find a better economic equality.
Some of the supporters of these more radical ideas thought that gender equality was one of the true keys to a better life of the working class. Simultaneously as thousands starved from the unfair conditions, a core group of conservatives (old misers) continued to cling to the laissez-faire policies that had given them so much wealth, but were also wrong in thinking that it would also give the poor the same assets. Being that England was a traditionally more liberal and reform-minded country, it had some of the best success in creating a substantial shift in government policies to become more caring (specifically within Parliament).Those of the London Workingmen’s Association petitioned the English Parliament in 1838 for increased male suffrage (Doc 4) among other electoral reforms.
They did, in fact, find success with the passage of the “Great Reform Act,” which was a law that guaranteed male suffrage, a more fair distribution of the electorate, and the requirement that members of Parliament needed to own property. Of course, the chartists of Doc. 4 were very one-sided in their petition and failed to see that the passage of the Charter would practically allow those exact workers to obtain high seats in government.Nevertheless, the reforms did improve the overall livelihood of the British masses enough to allow John Stuart Mill to assert that “the general tendency [of evils and injustices suffered] is towards their slow diminution” (Doc. 10).
A few decades later in France, a socialist, too, stated his unhappiness with the current reform and called for a moderation easing of the harmful living conditions of the working-class through “economic and political liberation” (Doc.12), but he was a little bit too late in his ideas for a country already torn up by a more radically socialist movement.The ideas of Karl Marx’s revolutionary communist philosophy (though he was German) gained traction in politically unstable France, leading to multiple uprisings in the nineteenth centuries. His insistence that “revolution is necessary” (Doc. 6) inspired many, namely Louis Blanc, who condemned the “regime of inequality” (Doc.
7) that he believed was plaguing the state, but his statement was most clearly biased in that he was in favor of his own wished rather than the majority will.Blanc later created a very pro-worker state that supported the lives of citizens. His ideas were echoed by Ferdinand Lassalle, a German political activist, who stated “the state ..
. increases a million-fold the strength of all individuals” (Doc. 9). As France moved into the century, the radicals tended to speak less of the idea of an all-powerful socialist government and more into a kind of utopian anarchy (sort of).During the 1870’s, the Paris Commune (an organization of radical, egalitarian socialists) briefly took control of the capitol. They wanted to mirror Marx’s idea of having “no class distinctions” (Doc.
11) into a reality, but this was extremely prejudiced due to the fact that the overtakers were mostly members of the poorer class, who benefitted least from class distinctions in society and obviously would want a radical change in their favor.Throughout this period of radical economic thought, some women pushed for gender equality as a path to better lives for the urban workers as a whole, rather than just the male counterpart. One French writer and political activist by the name of Flora Tristan appealed to the sense of unity and togetherness among the working class citizens by stretching her thoughts to both sides of the cause the unity of males and females as well as that of all the poor (Doc. 5).Another Frenchwoman, Pauline Roland, took the opportunity to assert women’s right to independence, which would put them on equal footing with the male elements of the socialist revolutions, such as living and economic equality (Doc. 8).
While the viewpoints did overwhelmingly demonstrate the support for equality in nineteenth century France, their propositions were one-sided because of their own status as women; they would benefit so much from the reforms they proposed that it would be extremely logical to support their own argument.Before this need/demand for popular rule had fully gripped moderate England or radical France, a few still held to the more ancient theory that everything would work out for the best. Thomas Malthus was especially entrenched in the old way (which was what Blanc called the “regime of inequality”) that rather than accept that the poor could, in fact, rise to control many properties, he insist that there can only be so many jobs available and the agitators should be more patient (Doc. 1).The great personal bias of his viewpoint derives from his position in society as a highly-respected economist and an author -- a type of person who would never need to patiently wait for a job due to his skills and position.
Yet another Englishman, David Ricardo, agreed with Malthus that the population was just too high to help the poor (Doc. 2). Across Europe and a couple decades in the past, Saint-Amand Bazard was deploring these intellectuals for their lack of compassion, their assurance that “everything balances out” (Doc. 3).In the end, everything did balance out, but it took much legal pressure and revolution to do it. During this time period, many citizens of all the classes somewhat had a hand within the argument that was based upon the working class, and within a few decades many quarrels occurred, both violent and otherwise.
Though this was a generation of uncertainty and contempt towards those who were different, the outcome of this was overall successful and aided in the improvement of the lives of the European working class.
