From the November 2017 IBDP History Paper 2 exam
In the broad theatre of history, democracies, in their formative or mature stages, have often been subjected to a myriad of crises, both domestic and foreign, that invariably shape their political landscapes. Such challenges, while straining the socio-political fabric, often engender institutional reform, redefine socio-political discourse, and redirect national trajectories. The impact of these domestic crises is the crux of our discussion with a particular focus on two democratic states, the United States and France. The United States, formed in the crucible of the Revolutionary War, has weathered multiple domestic crises, including the Civil War and the Great Depression. In contrast, France, a veteran of several revolutionary movements, experienced significant domestic upheaval during the French Revolution and the Paris Commune. This essay will delve into these events and evaluate their respective impacts on the political development of these two nations.
In the case of the United States, the Civil War (1861-1865) represented a significant domestic crisis that reshaped the country's political landscape. The conflict, largely rooted in a bitter ideological divide between the industrialised North and the slaveholding South, put the nation's democratic ideals to a stern test. In terms of legislation, the most consequential outcome was the passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, collectively known as the Reconstruction Amendments. McPherson posits that these amendments, while ostensibly aimed at integrating freed African Americans into society, laid the foundation for a more comprehensive interpretation of citizenship and civil rights. Indeed, the 13th Amendment abolished slavery, thereby dismantling the socio-economic system that was at the heart of Southern society. The 14th Amendment, while guaranteeing equal protection under the law, conferred citizenship to all individuals born or naturalised in the United States, including former slaves. Lastly, the 15th Amendment ostensibly extended voting rights to all male citizens irrespective of race or previous servitude. Foner further elucidates that, though these amendments did not instantaneously transform the racial dynamics in America, they marked the beginning of a long-drawn process towards racial equality. The War and subsequent amendments challenged the hitherto prevalent socio-political order and gave impetus to a gradual yet profound change in American society. However, the Civil War's impact was not limited to legal and social change alone. It also brought about seismic shifts in the country's political power dynamics. The South's defeat and subsequent Reconstruction resulted in a momentous power shift from Southern Democrats to Northern Republicans. As Oakes contends, this shift helped consolidate Republican control over the federal government, allowing them to implement their vision for a liberal capitalist economy and society. The Homestead Act, the Pacific Railroad Act, and the National Banking Act, all enacted during the War, were significant policies reflecting this Republican vision. In the long run, the War and the subsequent Reconstruction helped consolidate federal power, setting the stage for the United States to emerge as a unified nation-state from the ashes of a fractured confederation. McPherson argues that the transformation from a loose confederation of states to a more cohesive nation-state was one of the most enduring impacts of the War. Lincoln's leadership during the crisis exemplified this evolution. His Gettysburg Address, with its famous reference to a "government of the people, by the people, for the people," underscored the democratic ideals that the Union sought to uphold. Nonetheless, it is essential to note that the Civil War's impact on the country's democratic development was far from straightforward or uniformly positive. While the War ended slavery, it did not immediately usher in racial or social equality. As Foner elucidates, despite the constitutional amendments, African Americans faced widespread discrimination and disenfranchisement, particularly in the South, where the rise of the Ku Klux Klan and the enactment of Jim Crow laws undermined the rights promised to them. Additionally, whilst the War strengthened federal power, it also marked the beginning of a protracted struggle over states' rights, a contentious issue that continues to inform American politics today. As such, the Civil War constituted a watershed moment in American history, irrevocably altering the country's socio-political landscape. Its impact on the development of the United States as a democratic state was profound and far-reaching, setting the stage for the nation's future growth and evolution. Nonetheless, the struggle for true equality and the balance between federal and states' rights, both rooted in this seminal crisis, underscored the complex and often contradictory nature of democratic progress.
Moving our focus across the Atlantic, France's democratic journey was shaped, amongst other factors, by the monumental crisis of the French Revolution (1789-1799). This decade-long period of social and political upheaval, triggered by widespread discontent with the monarchy and the social inequalities of the ancien régime, irrevocably altered France's political landscape. The Revolution's impact on France's democratic development was multifaceted. One of its most significant outcomes was the rise of republican ideals. As Hunt illustrates, the Revolution was a crucible for democratic principles such as liberty, equality, and fraternity. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, promulgated in 1789, set forth these principles, articulating the concept of popular sovereignty and civil equality that would underpin French democracy. The notion of "liberty, equality, fraternity," even today, forms the cornerstone of the French Republic, indicating the lasting influence of the Revolution. The Revolution also led to radical political restructuring, marking the end of the monarchy and the establishment of the First French Republic. Doyle points out that the beheading of Louis XVI not only symbolised the end of monarchical rule but also ushered in a period of radical political experimentation that culminated in the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte. Although Bonaparte's reign saw an autocratic turn, the democratic ideals that had fuelled the Revolution continued to simmer beneath the surface. It's noteworthy to mention that the Revolution's democratic influence extended beyond France's borders. It ignited a spark of revolutionary fervour that spread throughout Europe and beyond. As Schama asserts, the French Revolution served as a beacon of hope for other nations yearning for democratic reform. Its influence on democratic movements, from the uprisings of 1848 to the decolonisation movements of the 20th century, testifies to its far-reaching impact. However, like the American Civil War, the French Revolution's influence on democratic development was not without its complexities and contradictions. As mentioned earlier, the revolution led to the rise of Bonaparte, who eventually crowned himself Emperor. This autocratic turn, as Robespierre explains, underscores the dialectic nature of the Revolution, which, while championing democratic principles, also spawned periods of intense political repression and autocracy. Moreover, while the Revolution engendered the principles of equality and popular sovereignty, it did not immediately translate into universal suffrage. As Hunt points out, despite the revolutionary rhetoric of universal rights, voting remained restricted to men who paid a certain amount of tax, excluding women and the poorer sections of society. It wasn't until much later, in the 19th and 20th centuries, that France would grant suffrage to these groups. In conclusion, the French Revolution, like the American Civil War, constituted a pivotal moment in the country's democratic development. Its impact was profound, giving rise to republican ideals and contributing to the end of the monarchy. However, its legacy was also fraught with contradictions, highlighting the complex and multifaceted nature of democratic development. The influence of this domestic crisis on France's democratic journey underscores the vital role such crises play in shaping national political trajectories.
Yet, another French domestic crisis, albeit less known yet profoundly impactful on French democracy, was the Paris Commune of 1871. This civil uprising was born out of a mixture of socio-political factors, most notably the Franco-Prussian War's disastrous outcome and the socio-economic inequalities inherent in the Third Republic's establishment. The Commune, though short-lived, left a lasting impact on France's democratic development. The Commune was the working class's attempt to seize political control and establish a more equitable society. As Lissagaray notes, it was the first instance of the proletariat attempting to govern itself, making it a seminal moment in the history of socialist movements. It represented a direct challenge to the political establishment and questioned the nature of representative democracy, advocating a more participatory form of governance. Furthermore, as Ross explains, the Commune's revolutionary measures, such as the separation of church and state, the establishment of secular education, and the implementation of worker self-management, reflected a radical vision of democracy that went beyond mere political representation. These measures, although short-lived, influenced subsequent socialist and labour movements, contributing to a more expansive understanding of democracy. However, the Commune's impact on French democracy was not uniformly positive. As Gluckstein notes, its violent suppression underscored the limits of democratic reform within the existing political system. The "Bloody Week," during which the French army brutally crushed the Commune, resulted in extensive loss of life and left deep socio-political scars. This violent response to the Commune highlighted the tensions between the burgeoning labour movement and the conservative political establishment. Nonetheless, the Commune's influence on French democracy was significant. It expanded the discourse on democratic governance, influencing subsequent movements for social and political reform. Its legacy, both inspiring and tragic, serves as a poignant reminder of the complex dynamics that shape democratic development.
In conclusion, both the French Revolution and the Paris Commune underscore the profound impact domestic crises can have on the development of democratic states. Through these crises, both the United States and France underwent significant transformations that shaped their respective political landscapes. The exploration of these crises elucidates the multifaceted nature of democratic development, underscoring the transformative potential of domestic upheavals in shaping a nation's political destiny.
