PDF freepe.co Î La Révolution Française Epub æ La Révolution

انقلاب فرانسه ۱۷۹۹ ۱۷۸۹ دوره‌ای از دگرگونی‎های اجتماعی سیاسی در تاریخ سیاسی فرانسه و اروپا بود ویژگی اساسی این انقلابف استقرار موفقیت آمیز وحدت ملی از طریق انهدام رزیم ارباب رعیتی و نراتب ممتازه فئودالی بوداین انقلاب، یکی از چند انقلاب مادر در طول تاریخ جهان است که پس از فراز و نشیب‎های بسیار، منجر به تغییر نظام سلطنتی به جمهوری در فرانسه و ایجاد پیامدهای عمیقی در کل اروپا شدپس از انقلاب در ساختار حکومتی فرانسه، که پیش از آن سلطنتی با امتیازات فئودالی برای طبقه اشراف و روحانیون کاتولیک بود، تغییرات بنیادی در شکل‎های مبتنی بر اصول روشنگری، ملی‌گرایی دموکراسی و شهروندی پدید آمدمورخین دربارهٔ طبیعت سیاسی و اقتصادی اجتماعی انقلاب فرانسه اختلاف نظر دارند تفسیرهای متداول مارکسیستی مانند تفسیر ژرژ لوفور این انقلاب را نتیجه برخورد بین طبقه اشرافی فئودالی و اعضای سرمایه‌گرای طبقهٔ متوسط جامعه دانسته‌اند بعضی از تاریخ‌دانان استدلال می‌کنند که طبقهٔ اشرافی قدیمی یه حکومت پیشین در برابر اتحادی از اعضای طبقهٔ متوسط جامعه و روستاییان آزرده و حقوق‌گیران شهری تسلیم شدند با این حال تفسیری دیگر ادعا می‌کند که انقلاب نتیجه از کنترل خارج شدن حرکت‌های اصلاحی گوناگون اشرافی و مربوط به قشر متوسط جامعه بوده‌است مطابق این نظریه این حرکت‌ها همزمان با حرکت‌های مردمی حقوق‌گیران شهری جدید و روستاییان ایالت نشین بودند اما هرگونه اتحاد در بین قشرها تصادفی و اتفاقی بوده‌است اما بسیاری از تاریخ‌دانان بسیاری از خصوصیات حکومت پیشین را از دلایل انقلاب دانسته‌اند ارسال شده در فروردین ۱۴ ۱۳۹۷دسته‌ها معرفی کتاببرچسب‌ها آلبر سوبولبرای انقلاب فرانسه ؛ جلد دوم دیدگاهی بنویسید


10 thoughts on “La Révolution Française

  1. says:

    It took me ten months of consistent grinding effort to read this book I found it to be one of difficult and time consuming books that I've ever read My patience was not really rewardedThe only reason I read it is because I want to read everything about the French Revolution and this book contains information that is simply too boring to appear elsewhere I learned all about the economy of prerevolutionary France and the various ways that the assignat and bread maximums did not work He is also the only historian I've read yet that weights all parts of the Revolution so evenly that he gives eual time to the White Terror which is usually overshadowed by the regular TerrorHe also made it to page 525 before I found a mistake which is some kind of record I feel that he misinterprets Napoleon's intentions towards England but honestly SFW? 525 pages of closely reasoned single spaced nonstop dates and names I don't mind if he misses a motivationI have no idea how anyone expected to read this book before Wikipedia It was clearly meant for people who already knew everything in it I guess you were supposed to attack it with a biographical dictionary in one hand either that or you were supposed to be a student in one of Soboul's classes If his intention is to impress me that he knows everything about the French Revolution mission accomplished You were smart Dr Soboul CongratulationsI on the other hand had to resort to the internet every third sentence because he never explains who he's talking about or why He mentions Condorcet several times but never tells you why he thinks he was important until exactly four pages from the end I cannot imagine that many Americans besides myself ever made it to four pages from the end so it was sort of a waste to ship the book all the way over here from Mr Condorcet's point of view There is just no good reason to write text this dense As I said I read it because I was desperate for the information and determined Nobody else is even interested in the French Revolution at all I honestly can't imagine why anyone would pick this book up It's a total failure as an introductory source because he simply assumes that you know the subject perfectly It should be read after reading twenty or thirty other books when you are so curious about the details of Babeuf's Conspiracy of Euals that you just can't wait any His economics are intriguing I am no economist but I must admit that I never found Necker's portion of the story clearer than here Soboul also really liked that dashing young sociopath Saint Just who is basically portrayed as Luke to Robespierre's Ben Revolutionary fervor is oddly forgivable to Soboul who is rather harshly disposed to writing off huge segments of the French population and not the ones you'd think Of all the historians I've read he's the one with the most pragmaticpsychopathic view of the Terror and discusses its effectiveness and efficiency with the calm precision of a Mafia boss It was at this time and when reading his barely concealed panegyrics for Babeuf that I was most uncomfortably aware that Soboul had a very militant view of life and social warfareI can't say whether it was his prejudices or mine but I must admit that for the first time in my studies of the French Revolution while reading about the jeunesse dorée and the White Terror I was moved to get a rifle and a time machine and put some holes in some ancient fools Wow were those guys jerksThey say this guy pioneered social history or history from below and I don't know if that's true or not It does seem to me that this is a modern history written in an old fashioned style so perhaps that is trueHe also switches back and forth between regular dates like January and April and revolutionary dates like Thermidor and Nivose completely at random which is FUCKING OBNOXIOUS HERE IS A HINT FOR ENGLISH WRITERS ON THE FRENCH REVOLUTION you are already translating Septembre into September so go a fucking head and translate Fructidor into September too For the sake of fuck it is so annoying


  2. says:

    Albert Soboul Fransız devrimini klasik Marksizm çerçevesinden değerlendiren bir tarih sunmuş Alanın klasiklerinden Fransız Devrimi'ne ilişkin Marksist tarih vs Revizyonist tarih tartışmasının merkezindeki metinlerden biri Kitabın yazarı Nazi işgali altındaki Fransa'daki direnişe destek olduğu için üniversitedeki görevinden uzaklaştırılmış tescilli bir sosyalistYazarın geldiği gelenekten kaynaklı olarak oldukça akıcı anlaşılır bir giriş metni Sınıflar arasındaki mücadeleyi Jakobenleri yıkılmaya mahkum çelişkili ideolojilerini Termidor karşı devrimini burjuva iktidarın kuruluşunu ve Napolyon'un adım adım gelişini güzel aktarmış Marx'ın da düşünsel dayanaklarından biri olan Fransız Sosyalizminin kökenlerini hep merak ederdim Kitapta Babeuf ve arkadaşlarının komünist devrim girişimini ve başarısız olmalarının ardından idam edilişlerini anlattığı bölümler ayrıca ilginç ve coşku vericiydi İçerik açısından yanlışlarını doğrularını eleştirebilecek bir bilgi birikimine sahip değilim Ancak biçimsel olarak kronolojiye çok fazla yaslandığını ve fazlasıyla meclis ve hükümet odaklı bir tarihsel anlatım sunduğunu gözlemledim Fransız Devrimi'ndeki ideolojik mücadele alanını da başka çalışmalar okuyarak doldurmak gerekiyor çünkü kitapta pek yok


  3. says:

    The France of the old regime was divided into estates or classes By the onset of the French Revolution there developed classes within the third estate Intraclass dynamics within the third estate determined the fate of the country Claude Manceron's history of the final years leading up to French Revolution devotes much of the narrative to individual lives of many members of the third estate who aspired to nobility or feigned noble status It is inconceivable that a substantial history of the revolution would not examine the successive stages and ultimate outcome of the revolution as based on class with the winning class being the bourgeoisie and precisely how they prevailed France would not shake loose hereditarydynastic nobility as a basis for the legitimacy of political power until nearly a century after the revolution because of this bourgeios victory


  4. says:

    “La Revolución Francesa” de Albert Soboul es un clásico de la historiografía francesa y un referente obligado para los estudiosos de este periodo trascendental para el desarrollo de las instituciones y sociedades actuales Este importante suceso es el germen y modelo a seguir de las revoluciones burguesas con todos sus aciertos y errores Una revolución ue significó la caída del Antiguo Régimen de la monaruía del feudalismo y de la aristocracia para establecer el predominio de la burguesía y la “democracia” la creación de derechos y el disfrute de libertades civiles y económicas ue permitieron el auge del naciente capitalismo Si bien el ascenso del capitalismo y la burguesía se produjo un siglo de antes en los Países Bajos y en Inglaterra; fueron los utópicos ideales las sangrientas matanzas las redes inabarcables de sus consecuencias y la mística colectiva lo ue convirtió a la “Toma de la Bastilla” en la puerta de acceso a la edad contemporáneaLa Revolución Francesa reviste un doble carácter en tanto la burguesía lideró organizó y estableció la preponderancia de sus intereses antes durante y después de los acontecimientos las fuerzas de choue fueron los campesinos y los barrios populares ue tenían intereses muy distintos a los de la burguesía Producto de esta ambivalencia se suscitan contradicciones como la declaración de la Independencia de los negros en las Colonias Francesas del Caribe decretada el 16 del Pluvioso del año II y abolida poco después al constatar la ruina económica de los “Grandes Blancos” propietarios esclavistas de las plantaciones con importante influencia política en la Asamblea y en el Directorio La revolución trajo consigo la contrarrevolución; las ideas filosóficas de libertad y de igualdad entre los hombres; los conflictos entre girondinos y jacobinos origen de las posiciones liberalesconservadoras; la declaración de los Derechos Universales del Hombre; el sufragio y la ciudadanía; la primera Ola feminista Todos estos componentes de la ilustración se cristalizaron en reformas y discursos contradictorios El enojo popular primero y la saña de los líderes políticos después llevaron al cadalso a miles y miles de personas incluso a los mismos ue hicieron la revolución como Datón o Robespierre La guillotina se erigió como símbolo mortal del progreso instrumento ue rebanaba de un tajo los rezagos de las antiguas instituciones Este libro tiene el acierto de acercarse a los acontecimientos desde una perspectiva social explicando las fuerzas ue actuaron en el proceso analizando los conflictos de intereses y examinando las relaciones de producción entre los antagonistas sociales aristocraciaburguesíacampesinado para reconstruir una versión de la historia desde abajo Se plantean además importantes cuestiones referentes a la descristianización durante los 10 años de Revolución la participación femenina militante los intentos fallidos de democracia directa los sacerdotes revolucionaros de acción y de fe ue tenían contacto directo con las necesidades de los más pobres la organización del partido la consolidación de las nociones de patria y nación el mito y recuerdo en suma de una libertad jamás alcanzada y aún añorada ue sigue exaltando a historiadores lectores y académicos


  5. says:

    This book took me 2 months to get through It's a hard read not sure if this is because of translation issues but I learned a lot The author seems very sympathetic to the Jacobins and the Terror It's not good in the sense that it's easy to read or follow but I think that's a sign of the fact it was written in the 70's and translated possibly It assumes the reader knows a lot of the characters in the revolution beforehand Mostly it's shortcomings stem from being written in an era when academics were forgiven for being bad writers


  6. says:

    Es intersante Es un abordaje eminentemente socioeconómico Para legos en la materia como es mi caso no es una lectura fácil No obstante hecha luz y desidealiza el caracter de esta revolución Pasar del regimen fudal y eminentemente aristocrático a un regimen burgues y capitalista fue un avance muy importante aunue parcial en la evolución de la sociedad Los ideales ue movilizaron este movimiemnto social libertad igualdad fraternidad facticamente no fueron ni tan romáticos ni tan ideales y tampoco fueron plasmados de un día para el otro de hecho no llegaron a plasmarse salvo parcialmente Interesante lectura


  7. says:

    Al empezar a leer un libro breve sobre la revolución francesa esperaba una visión sintética de los hechos pero más bien me pareció un análisis centrado en lo económico para alguien ue ya esté bastante versado en la materiaDicho esto es una lectura interesante para profundizar en el conocimiento de la revolución francesa


  8. says:

    43


  9. says:

    Scorrevole e dettagliato L'autore riesce ad offrire una panoramica vivida e brillante degli avvenimenti della Rivoluzione


  10. says:

    Sobul's book is an extremely detailed read with only a few flaws Firstly it completely covers the entire revolutionary period from aristocratic revolt in the 1780s to the storming of the Bastille in 1789 the journees of 1792 and 1793 The Terror Thermidor and Napoleon its all there in detail Sobul's analysis is on bases on class warfare and he very aptly traces how this class conflict developed over the time period The skill with which he does this is very impressive and brings a nice perspective to the revolution and perhaps importantly can lead to an understanding of the revolutionary movements of todayThe book does have some flaws Sobul's writing can be uite a bit dry he doesn't capture the emotion and power of the revolutionary spirit which you would expect to find in a book about the Fr Revolution You understand full well why the Parisians were out in the streets but at times the connection is lost In fact in many points reading the book I felt as if Sobul wasn't conveying a real reason to care about what was happening just explaining it this is a shame and in fact I don't think was his intention his conclusion to the book ends with how the revolutionary spirit lives on to this day but I feel almost like he failed in his task of expressing that Its clear that he expects his reader to have some knowledge of the revolution already so I would never ever consider recommending it to someone who knew nothing about it The pace moves a bit too uick in some spots and you feel as if you must have missed something uite freuently Alot of that stems from the fact the book is short covering a decade of history in 500 pages is impressive but its clear that he had to rush some points Of course those points that I felt rushed through were most likely the points I knew nothing about I'm far from an expert on the topic and that I think is the real nature of this book its an amazing reference book one that I can see myself flipping through for years to come to track down facts and info from All in all I highly recommend it the analysis is amazing and being able to read about the whole revolution in 1 narrative and 1 volume straight through is a real joy Just so long as you have your basics down already you'll get alot of mileage out of this book