Rating: 
Summary: Radical but effective change of perspective...
Review: Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) wrote many books, but his best-known one is probably "Democracy in America". Despite that, reading "The Old Regime and the Revolution" (1856) is essential in order to understand how much Tocqueville contributed to an accurate analysis of the present and past of his society, and to Political Science. Why is "The Old Regime and the Revolution" a classic?. Why do teachers keep recommending it to their students?. In my opinion, the answer to both those questions is that this book is an example of the kind of work a political scientist is capable of producing, if inclined to do so. Here, Tocqueville doesn't pay attention to the conventionally accepted truth, but looks beyond it, in order to form his own opinion. And when the result of that process is shocking, he doesn't back down bounded by conventions: he simply states his conclusions. In "The Old Regime and the Revolution" Alexis de Tocqueville does what at his time was considered more or less unthinkable: to put into question the revolutionary character of...the French Revolution. He said that the only way to understand what happened in 1789 was to study the previous social processes, and to find what they have in common with what came about later. This change of perspective was radical, but effective. It didn't presuppose anything, and so it helped the author to arrive to a seemingly strange conclusion: that the French Revolution had not only continued with the social processes that were taking place in France, but accentuated them. For example, the governmental centralization was much worse after 1789. In a way, then, the French Revolution only carried forward with what the Old Regime had already started. On the whole, I recommend this book mainly to those interested in French History and Political Science. It isn't overly easy to read, but you will realize that it is full of interesting information, and permeated by a painstakingly careful analysis regarding social processes that is remarkable. In my opinion, "The Old Regime and the Revolution" is a book that you won't regret buying :) Belen Alcat
Rating:
Summary: Radical but effective change of perspective...
Review: Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) wrote many books, but his best-known one is probably "Democracy in America". Despite that, reading "The Old Regime and the Revolution" (1856) is essential in order to understand how much Tocqueville contributed to an accurate analysis of the present and past of his society, and to Political Science. Why is "The Old Regime and the Revolution" a classic?. Why do teachers keep recommending it to their students?. In my opinion, the answer to both those questions is that this book is an example of the kind of work a political scientist is capable of producing, if inclined to do so. Here, Tocqueville doesn't pay attention to the conventionally accepted truth, but looks beyond it, in order to form his own opinion. And when the result of that process is shocking, he doesn't back down bounded by conventions: he simply states his conclusions. In "The Old Regime and the Revolution" Alexis de Tocqueville does what at his time was considered more or less unthinkable: to put into question the revolutionary character of...the French Revolution. He said that the only way to understand what happened in 1789 was to study the previous social processes, and to find what they have in common with what came about later. This change of perspective was radical, but effective. It didn't presuppose anything, and so it helped the author to arrive to a seemingly strange conclusion: that the French Revolution had not only continued with the social processes that were taking place in France, but accentuated them. For example, the governmental centralization was much worse after 1789. In a way, then, the French Revolution only carried forward with what the Old Regime had already started. On the whole, I recommend this book mainly to those interested in French History and Political Science. It isn't overly easy to read, but you will realize that it is full of interesting information, and permeated by a painstakingly careful analysis regarding social processes that is remarkable. In my opinion, "The Old Regime and the Revolution" is a book that you won't regret buying :) Belen Alcat
Rating:
Summary: Enlightening Work on several Levels
Review: Alexis De Tocqueville's work "The Old Regime and the French Revolution" marked the foundation of the prevailing historical argument of the causes of the French Revolution and is by far one of the most interesting and influential works on the subject. This being said de Tocque Ville's argument was certainly influenced by the events in Europe during his lifetime: mainly the increased centralization of political power in Germany and Europe at large and the revolutions of 1831 and 1848. In historiographical terms this book was written relatively soon after the event itself and it is certain that de Tocqueville conversed and interacted with people who were directly involved in the events of the revolution. This is both a bane and a boon to the value of the work since such direct influence would certainly obscure the objectively of hid ideas even though being able to gather data before the "dust has settled" is always advantageous. I certainly believe this book is deserving of five stars and on many levels. It is a great historical record and wonderful example of mid 19th century historiography sociology and political thought.
The idea that political centralization caused the downfall of the old regime in 18th Century France is taken for granted by most historians and political thinks now. While we learn early on that it was because of the excess of the Bourbon dynasty from Louis XIV's wars and building Projects to Louis XVI's Court etc, de Tocqueville blames centralization of power; the foundation of the nation state on the revolution. Thus, all nations by this idea will face revolution and ultimately democracy.
This book is an interesting read and when put into the proper perspective has a lot to offer. I found this book more profound and less idealistic than "Democracy in America". This is a great source and example of 19th century historiography and when read in the proper light offers an interesting and very plausible argument for the cause of the French Revolution. It also provides an interesting analysis of political philosophy thought de Tocqueville categorically discounts most of the famous thinkers in this field. If you have to read this work in part or whole for school do yourself a favor and read it thoroughly. If you are reading it for your own benefit I trust you will do the same. Either way "The Old Regime and the French Revolution" has a lot to offer and is a worthwhile read.
-- Ted Murena
Rating: 
Summary: Toqueville the Terrible
Review: Horrible, Horrible, Horrible..better than Democracy in America but still why make us poor college students suffer so much. haven't we paid our debt to society already?
Rating: 
Summary: This Time, Not a Tourist
Review: My friend Ron used to say that he was an extreme right-wing Menshevik - that he knew the revolution was coming, he just didn't approve (does he still think so, I wonder? Must ask). "Disapproval" is probably too strong a word to use for anyone with de Tocqueville's stoicism and aristocratic detachment. But he certainly knows that the revolution is upon us. At the same time, he understands the responsibilities and opportunities of governance. The persistent question is: if we are to have democracy, how do we fashion one where good government can prosper? De Tocqueville's "French Revolution" is more compact, less discursive then his "Democracy in America" because in France, he was not a tourist. This is both a strength and a weakness. His points are crisp, direct and forceful, and you never get over your admiration for his acuity. On the other hand, there is something to be said for the marvel of unfolding that presents itself as he travels through the young United States and tries to imagine the new world that is being born.
Rating:
Summary: This Time, Not a Tourist
Review: My friend Ron used to say that he was an extreme right-wing Menshevik - that he knew the revolution was coming, he just didn't approve (does he still think so, I wonder? Must ask). "Disapproval" is probably too strong a word to use for anyone with de Tocqueville's stoicism and aristocratic detachment. But he certainly knows that the revolution is upon us. At the same time, he understands the responsibilities and opportunities of governance. The persistent question is: if we are to have democracy, how do we fashion one where good government can prosper? De Tocqueville's "French Revolution" is more compact, less discursive then his "Democracy in America" because in France, he was not a tourist. This is both a strength and a weakness. His points are crisp, direct and forceful, and you never get over your admiration for his acuity. On the other hand, there is something to be said for the marvel of unfolding that presents itself as he travels through the young United States and tries to imagine the new world that is being born.
Rating:
Summary: Josh, Alexis, and Revolutionary Justice
Review: No, Josh. Reread that term paper you wrote for psych, and you will confess that the people's justice will only be served if you are punished to the full extent of the law. Actually, I like Alexis d. Unlike many modern historians, he is literate. But then, he had an easier time of it. He didn't have to play serious for the tenure committee. He also has a talent for seeing what's essential in a story. This time around: centralization caused the French Revolution. And yet another talent for seeing a national psychology, even if it's his own: The French passions for holding official positions and for philosophizing without feeling any need to produce evidence helped the revolution along. Some of Tocqueville's opinions will be especially amusing to those of us who have not yet recovered from American public schooling: The Encyclopedists and the other pre-revolutionary political philosophers we were taught to worship are here presented as dangerous (if somewhat childish) crackpots. By the way, in my day the college authorities only allowed us to read books which included differential equations. They thought that the others would harm our morals. Count your blessings.
Rating:
Summary: Josh, Alexis, and Revolutionary Justice
Review: No, Josh. Reread that term paper you wrote for psych, and you will confess that the people's justice will only be served if you are punished to the full extent of the law. Actually, I like Alexis d. Unlike many modern historians, he is literate. But then, he had an easier time of it. He didn't have to play serious for the tenure committee. He also has a talent for seeing what's essential in a story. This time around: centralization caused the French Revolution. And yet another talent for seeing a national psychology, even if it's his own: The French passions for holding official positions and for philosophizing without feeling any need to produce evidence helped the revolution along. Some of Tocqueville's opinions will be especially amusing to those of us who have not yet recovered from American public schooling: The Encyclopedists and the other pre-revolutionary political philosophers we were taught to worship are here presented as dangerous (if somewhat childish) crackpots. By the way, in my day the college authorities only allowed us to read books which included differential equations. They thought that the others would harm our morals. Count your blessings.
Rating:
Summary: Subtle plug for democracy in France and revolutionary myth
Review: The French Revolution remains one of the crucial events of modern European and world history. The revolution stands as an event that hailed the fall of feudalism and marked the triumph of the common person over the aristocracy. In truth, reality is much more complex than that presented in a common textbook. The French revolution has been an object of praise as much as it has been the focus of heated debate. While the old regime may have fallen "in a night", the revolution was a product of a gradual resentment which went far beyond an outburst of revolutionary fervor. In The Old Regime and the French Revolution Alexis de Tocqueville allows us a definitive glimpse at the circumstances that lead to revolt. In Tocqueville's mind there was never an event in which "stemming from factors so far back in the past, (was) so inevitable yet (so) completely unforeseen." In this less read work, he takes on the origins of the French Revolution and the peculiar French form of democracy it brought, in stark contrast to his portrayal in Democracy in America. The Old Regime and the French Revolution is deserving of its status as a classic for the remarkable insight it provides. While Tocqueville's work is a classic, it draws upon the work and thought of other scholars and it is revisionist in the way it changes the way the French revolution is discussed. Along with more widely accepted views on the revolution, which is important in marking it a classic) Tocqueville describes history in a way that allows the reader to place the revolution in a global perspective, while dissecting it enough to understand its intricacies.
Rating:
Summary: Lucid analysis of a momentous event in Western history
Review: This is a thorough analysis of the French Revolution that went a long way towards answering a question I had had for a long time, namely, why it is that the French Revolution bore such different fruits from our own Revolutionary War which predated it by only a few years. In it, de Tocqueville demonstrates that, contrary to popular opinion (and contrary to what you may have learned in high school history class), the tendency towards highly centralized government is in fact a characteristic of democracies, not of strong aristocracies, which tend to check its progress. The Revolution happened, not because the French aristocracy was strong and oppressive, but because it had grown weak and purposeless--most of its power having been gradually appropriated by the king over the years. When the revolutionaries overthrew both king and aristocracy, the centralization of power proceeded even more rapidly, unhindered by any of the traditional safeguards that had once limited the old regime. The revolutionaries then took the opportunity to design a new regime along Rationalist lines, with writers and philosophers (intellectuals with little practical experience in government) taking a disproportionate share of influence.
Tocqueville's writing style is always simple and unpretentious; his arguments always logical and well-supported. Despite that, this is not easy reading because of the complexity of the topic with which he deals. It is, however, well worth the time for those who would like a deeper understanding of that important time in Western history, as well as for those who would like to gain some insight into the modern political differences between ourselves and the French. I read Tocqueville's original French text, so I can't comment on the quality of this particular translation.
| 
