The Congress of Vienna

If their power is threatened people should do whatever they can to avoid losing it.  In the Congress of Vienna, many difficult decisions that had to do with the risk of potentially losing power were made.  After the defeat of Napoleon Bonaparte, representatives from many European countries gathered together to discuss how to recreate a functional government system.  To get a good understanding of the Congress of Vienna, our entire class participated in an interactive moc-congress type experience.  After being divided up, each group read a scenario from the Congress of Vienna and were given three solutions to choose from.  By viewing different situations and interactively engaging in them, our class received an interesting point of view regarding what kinds of decisions people should make when their power is threatened.

Above is a photo which my family and I took when we visited Austria last summer.  The Schӧnbrunn Palace can be seen up close, along with the rest of the city of Vienna in the background.

                An example was when the congress had do decide what they should do to prevent future revolutions.  The host of the congress, Prince Clemens von Metternich of Austria, spent more than ten years witnessing rebellions and revolutions tearing apart nearby countries.  Revolutions were quite popular during this time period, so the congress had to do their best to prevent future ones from happening.  The congress discussed this issue and came up with a few ideas, one example being the Principle of Intervention.  Basically, this ideology allows the great powers or fellow European countries to send their troops into another country to help stop any revolution occurring there.  Our group originally thought it would be best to consider any acts of rebellion sinful and if people still rebelled, the government would thus crush it.  But after hearing this idea, it seems like a better one.  It is less assuming that the people will not rebel based off of fear, and more being prepared in case something still happens.

Above is a map of what Europe looked like during this time period. 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/05/Map_congress_of_vienna.jpg/450px-Map_congress_of_vienna.jpg

            However, the system does still have some flaws.  The Principle of Intervention went back to a monarchy based society.  If the people disagreed with this, they would be more likely to rebel.  Also, what happens if some countries, like England for example, decide not to take part in the system?  If a rebellion happens there, than how will it be resolved?  Finally, it would be difficult to maintain the Principle of Intervention if the countries claim new land.  If countries start claiming new land in faraway areas, it would be difficult for an army to intervene if a rebellion was to happen in this colony because it would be so far away.  However, if a rebellion were to happen, the system would still most likely be functional, despite having its flaws.  While there could have been a few modifications, overall, the Congress of Vienna made plenty of well thought and potentially beneficial decisions that should be able to prevent any countries from losing their power. 

Napoleon's Impact on France's Sytems

        Triumphant, heroic, cunning, and tyrannical, there are multiple different views, thoughts, and perspectives of Napoleon Bonaparte, and these are a few of the many words used to describe him.  He greatly impacted the social, political, and economic systems in France and many other countries in Europe during his time as ruler. 

       Napoleon’s impact towards the social system in Europe involved many changes that benefitted many people.  Some, including Madame de Stael, believe that Napoleon was intruding and tyrannical.  She explained that "his profound contempt for all the intellectual riches of human nature... are 'the eternal enemies of the continent.'" Her views of Napoleon show her negative feelings towards him, probably because of her bias towards him after being exiled from France and wishing to restore the older French government.  Others who served Napoleon, including Marshal Michel Ney, favored him more and talked well about him.  He said, “To the emperor Napoleon, our sovereign, belongs alone the right to rule over our beautiful country.”  He seems glad and positive about Napoleon’s rule over France, which is quite different than Madame de Stael’s view.  While some people agreed with him and others did not, Napoleon did make many potentially beneficial decisions to the social system while ruling France.  Napoleon established a different system than the monarchy which rewarded people by social class.  This new system was called “meritocracy” and had to do with the people of France earning rewards based off of their skill.  This most likely made the average peasants at the time quite happy, as they could be more equal to everyone else.  Napoleon also made sure that access to education was available to all citizens, as this was not how things were before he became the ruler of France.  So while some may disagree because of their differing perspectives, Napoleon did a lot to ensure that the social system in France was greater than it was before his rule. 

            Napoleon had a created a similar impact in the political field, as well.  Napoleon redrew the map of Europe, and this could have to do with the way we view our globe today.  Also, Napoleon sent French armies to end serfdom and nobility.  This is similar to his addition of meritocracy, as it has to do with his rule involving more equality than the previous monarchy.  He is often regarded as one of the greatest generals, too.  In his article, “The Lost Voices of Napoleonic Historians”, Thomas J. Vance quotes John C. Ropes who said, “’While we do not hesitate to speak with proper severity of Napoleon’s reckless course in 1813 and 1814, of his obstinate adherence to a military solution of the difficulties which encompassed his Empire, of his indifference as a solider to the evils of war, of his forgetfulness as soldier of his duties as a sovereign…’”  Here, Ropes is explaining that while Napoleon was regarded as a tyrant, he was also a great military leader.  He later finished his thoughts by saying, “’let us be equally frank in acknowledging his great qualities…’”  Napoleon’s being a great leader, abolishing noticeable forms of unequal social class, and redrawing maps are some of the many reasons why his impact on the political system was very large. 

 

What Napoleon's re-drawn map of Europe may have looked like. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a9/Revolutions_of_1848_in_Europe_(pasopt_eng).svg/2000px-Revolutions_of_1848_in_Europe_(pasopt_eng).svg.png

            Finally, Napoleon also largely impacted the economic system of France.  First off, Napoleon established a bank known as, “The Bank of France”.  When he established this bank, Napoleon made sure that the budget was balanced and that massive public work programs were undertaken.  This was a big move in terms of the country’s economics.  However, some of the ways Napoleon impacted the economics were wrong through many perspectives.  While the French Revolution was occurring, Napoleon took a substantial amount of money from the country of Italy, as well as some of its beautiful artwork.  While this gave money to France, it has to do with some of Napoleon’s traits as a tyrant.  Another way Napoleon impacted the economic system was a quite famous one.  When Thomas Jefferson made the Louisiana Purchase, he bought all of that land from Napoleon.  This was a very interesting way for him to earn money.  Economics were greatly impacted during Napoleon’s rule. 

            The social, political, and economic systems all went through a great change and experience during Napoleon’s rule over France.  While some of it showed that Napoleon was a cunning tyrant, other parts of it supplied evidence that Napoleon was a great leader at times.  But with differing perspectives constantly surrounding historical events, it can be difficult to tell what is right and what is wrong. 

A Letter from a Luddite

Think of a friend or family member who is completely against cell phones.  They may often tell you to put your phone away, but do people like them dislike technology so much that they would be willing to smash it?  During the Industrial revolution there were people who would do such things.  They were called the luddites, and they were not really anti-tech.  Instead they had specific motives and reasons for sabotaging machines and factories, and most had to do with the fact that luddites were losing their jobs.  The luddites were skilled workers, with excellent weaving and mechanical skills, and when they started their attacks, they followed the mythical figure, Ned Ludd.  When the Industrial Revolution kicked off, many luddites started to be replaced by new machines.  Many lost their well-paid wages, and many lost their jobs.  Below is a mock primary source letter from the perspective of a skilled weaver who is currently struggling to earn money to maintain for his family.  With machines replacing him, supplying for his family will become a challenge. 

                                                    

A group of Luddites destroying machines in the Industrial Revolution

 http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/What-the-Luddites-Really-Fought-Against.html

 

 

        Dear Mother and Father,

I am writing to you regarding the rough times in the factories.  Just a few weeks ago I was earning a fair and reasonable amount of money for my work as a weaver.  Fellow workers often complemented me for being the most skilled in the factory.  My boss has also mentioned the possibility of a promotion... and I was thrilled to hear that he wanted me to interview for it!  As the weeks went by, there were less workers showing up each day.  Some workers who I have befriended began not showing up, and I was nervous that they had become ill.  But as the days went by, I noticed new machines and technology being brought into the factory and fulfilling the jobs some of my old friends had.  I began to realize that the issue was more complex than I thought.  I was still quite confused with the situation, and when my boss called me into his office, not two weeks ago, my heart began to pound.  I thought it was time to be interviewed for the promotion.  I sat down, and has he continued to speak I slowly began to understand that these circumstances were nothing more than the opposite.  He was... well, I'll just say that it ended with me losing my job.  He said that no one needs to be promoted or work as a simple weaver as I was previously because the new technology and machines would do those jobs for us.  I was shocked, furious, yet still holding back my emotions, trying to understand his perspective and motives for his actions.  That quickly stopped when I heard that factories were hiring young girls to work with the machines.  These girls have had no skill or experience.  My fellow employees and I had been working for years and were quite skilled with our jobs, so why are they firing us and hiring them?  I knew that I couldn't just let this happen in front of me, as I need work to supply for both of you.  I know my brother is making some money, but we need at least two jobs in the family to live a happy and healthy life. 

I have decided to live a new life.  This negative impact of machines replacing me has lingered over me for weeks now, and it is time to stand up and make a difference.  I have decided to join some of my friends and fellow employers in a group known as the luddites.  Luddites consist of people who are going through similar experiences as me, and they destroy factory machines, and sometimes, even the factories themselves if necessary.  After talking with my former boss twice since being fired, I am now aware that he has no sympathy for us and will not change his mind easily.  He will lean from his mistakes after we break his new machines, showing him that he cannot run his factory without them.  He will regret his decision of firing us.  Please keep in mind that all of this is confidential and shall not be shared with anyone.  The date, time, and other specifics are also classified.  After our attack of the factory, I plan to move on and look for a different job.  I cannot just leave you behind.  Do not worry for me, as if everything in the operation goes as planned, nothing unfortunate shall happen to any of us.  I miss you all very much and hope I can earn enough money in the future to return home and visit you.  I will be careful and I look forward to moving on to different paths in the future.

Warmly,

John