Would we consider the early bourgeois revolutions "leftist" movements?

[Tzadikim]

I got into a pretty hefty debate with my reactionary uncle earlier this week. He's quite intelligent, and well-versed in political theory, and insists that the American revolution in particular was a "right-wing revolution" for the simple reason that it originated in anti-tax protests.

Now, I'm normally not one to get caught up in issues of petty semantics, which this certainly is, but this struck me as a particularly idiotic line of argument. The American revolutionaries were quite clearly anti-monarchical; and those mythologized "redcoats" they fought against were probably early representatives of throne-and-altar reactionism.

And it's not, of course, as if the Right has always embraced laissez-faire. Alexander Hamilton's "American System", the earliest expression of protectionism in America, was considered a reactionary throwback to mercantilism at the time. It seems to me that people like my uncle have no grasp of the fact that today's revolutionary becomes tomorrow's stalwart conservative. The history of the Republican Party in America proves this maxim.

This does, however, give me pause: if people are genuinely earnest in their anti-Statism, then perhaps a new rhetorical tact is needed? Focusing on right-wing corporatism - propping up Big Business by means of the State - might be a useful argument to incorporate in any future engagements.

[AnthArmo]

I think your uncle is considering the political spectrum in a very American centric way.

It would help if you pointed out that the political spectrum originated in the French Revolution, and Revolutionaries that supported the end of Feudalism were considered "Left" and Reactionaries were considered "Right". Then just point out that the Revolutionaires of both the American and French Revolution were essentially driven by the same enlightenment era ideals and hey presto, you've proven your uncle wrong.

Regardless, at their time, The American revolutionaries were considered "Leftist" because they supported radical change. Thats the most essential feature of the Left. Being "Anti-Tax" as a Rightist is a relatively recent, and mostly western, development.

[Tzadikim]

I think your uncle is considering the political spectrum in a very American centric way.

In this instance, though, it might be justified, given that the subject of the debate was in particular the American Revolution. The same discussion probably applies to the French as well, however.


It would help if you pointed out that the political spectrum originated in the French Revolution, and Revolutionaries that supported the end of Feudalism were considered "Left" and Reactionaries were considered "Right". Then just point out that the Revolutionaires of both the American and French Revolution were essentially driven by the same enlightenment era ideals and hey presto, you've proven your uncle wrong.

Regardless, at their time, The American revolutionaries were considered "Leftist" because they supported radical change. Thats the most essential feature of the Left. Being "Anti-Tax" as a Rightist is a relatively recent, and mostly western, development.

Oh, trust me, I'm well aware of it. For a great period of time laissez-faire was a *revolutionary* philosophy that promised a break from the State-mercantilist policies of European royalty. That's why Alexander Hamilton and the Pro-Administration/Federalist Party of the early American Republic were perceived at the time as being reactionary, despite advocating for measures that today would be considered "liberal".

It's getting the thrust of this idea across that I find to be difficult. People seem to have a genuinely difficult time understanding the fact that radical ideas gradually become institutionalized and lose their revolutionary flavor.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Look up the political program cited at the bottom of this link:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/mere-democracy-economic-t120765/index.html

Then compare it to the political programs of the respective bourgeoisie of those early revolutions.

[cb9's_unity]

"In short, the Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things."-Karl Marx

The quote in itself doesn't answer your question but I think it provides a little guidance.

The American revolution was a revolt against British(thus aristocratic) control of social conditions. It was a fight for total bourgeois control of power. Thus for its time it was progressive. Whether its leftist or not is quite a bit more subjective. In modern terms they would certainly be considered right wing, but as AnthArmo pointed out, the original leftists originated in the french revolution. The American revolutionary's certainly share many similarity's with the revolutionary's in france.

[Yazman]

"In short, the Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things."-Karl Marx

I feel that this quote basically means we should not be sectarian but that we should extend support to all revolutionary leftist movements. I don't think it means support for all revolutionary movements in general.

[Chambered Word]

These revolutions were classical liberal revolutions, if I'm correct. So at the time they would be considered leftist, or at least centre-left.

AnthArmo's post explains it pretty well.

[RadioRaheem84]

Correct. Liberal Revolutions were considered left in their day. Marxism and Anarchism (Libertarianism) stems from that classical liberal tradition taken to its logical conclusion. Socialism and Liberalism share a common bond in the Enlightenment.

[Muzk]

Two stage theory, backwards aristocratic countries first have to go through a phase of bourgeoise democracy to later become socialist, so they were kind of "left", I guess. Ask your uncle to define left first, maybe it will get clearer.