Contribution to the Correction of the Public's Judgments on the French Revolution , livre ebook

Contribution to the Correction of the Public’s Judgments on the French Revolution
SUNY series in Contemporary Continental Philosophy

Dennis J. Schmidt, editor
Contribution to the Correction of the Public’s Judgments on the French Revolution
J. G. FICHTE
Edited, Translated, and with an Introduction by
Jeffrey Church and Anna Marisa Schön
Published by State University of New York Press, Albany
© 2021 State University of New York
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission. No part of this book may be stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means including electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission in writing of the publisher.
For information, contact State University of New York Press, Albany, NY
www.sunypress.edu
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Fichte, Johann Gottlieb, 1762–1814, author. | Church, Jeffrey, 1978–editor, translator, writer of introduction. | Schön, Anna Marisa, editor, translator, writer of introduction.
Title: Contribution to the correction of the public’s judgments on the French revolution / J.G. Fichte ; translated by Jeffrey Church and Anna Marisa Schön.
Other titles: Beitrag zur Berichtigung der Urteile des Publicums über die französische Revolution. English
Description: Albany : State University of New York Press, [2021] | Series: SUNY series in contemporary continental philosophy | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2020024803 | ISBN 9781438482170 (hardcover : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781438482187 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: France—History—Revolution, 1789–1799—Foreign public opinion, German. | France—History—Revolution, 1789–1799—Philosophy. | France—History—Revolution, 1789–1799—Historiography. | France—History—Revolution, 1789–1799—Influence. | Political science—Germany—Philosophy—History. | Legitimacy of governments.
Classification: LCC DC158.8 .F52513 2021 | DDC 944.04—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020024803
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Contents
I NTRODUCTION
T RANSLATORS ’ N OTE
C HRONOLOGY
C ONTRIBUTION TO THE C ORRECTION OF THE P UBLIC’S J UDGMENTS ON THE F RENCH R EVOLUTION
BOOK ONE On Judging the Legitimacy of a Revolution
P REFACE
I NTRODUCTION
C HAPTER O NE
Does a People Actually Have the Right to Change Its Constitution?
C HAPTER T WO
Sketch of the Further Course of the Examination
C HAPTER T HREE
Is the Right to Change the Constitution Alienable through the Contract of All with All?
C HAPTER F OUR
On Privileged Classes in General, in Relation to the Right of Changing the State
C HAPTER F IVE
On the Aristocracy in Particular, in Relation to the Right of Constitutional Change
C HAPTER S IX
On the Church, in Relation to the Right of Constitutional Change
A FTERWORD
A PPENDIX O NE
Correspondence
A PPENDIX T WO
Review by Friedrich von Gentz
G LOSSARY
I NDEX
Introduction
The Beitrag zur Berichtigung der Urteile des Publikums über die französische Revolution (hereafter Contribution ), published in 1793, is the second major published work of the young, up-and-coming philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte. Fichte made a splash in the academic community already in 1792 with his Attempt at a Critique of All Revelation , an analysis of the justification and limits of claims to religious revelation that drew heavily on Kant’s critical philosophy (and, indeed, it was mistakenly thought to be authored by Kant at first). However, the French Revolution and the debate surrounding it in the German states quickly drew Fichte’s attention, leading him to write in a more popular vein in an attempt to rekindle public support for the Revolution. The Contribution was written in winter 1792–93 (the first part or booklet, comprising the preface , introduction , and chapters 1 – 3 ) and summer 1793 (the second part, comprising chapters 4 – 6 ), during some of the bloodiest periods of the Revolution. 1 The work represents Fichte’s first sustained popular writing, characterized by his distinctive blend of abstract philosophical language and concrete, passionate calls for reform. After completing the second part of the first book Fichte accepted an offer for a prestigious professorship in Jena in critical philosophy and so abandoned this project, leaving the entire second volume unfinished. 2 He then proceeded in Jena to develop his philosophical system in a series of works—above all the Wissenschaftslehre of 1794—which made him one of the most profound and influential philosophical minds of post-Kantian idealism.
The Contribution is an important text for several reasons. First, it sheds light on the German debate about the French Revolution, much less widely known than the contemporaneous debates in France, England, and the United States. Second, it is an innovative work in the history of political theory, as it synthesizes Locke’s and Rousseau’s social contract theory and Kant’s moral philosophy, yet applies contractualist principles in a much more individualistic, even anarchist, direction. Finally, the work provides insight into the development of Fichte’s thought, not only in his political philosophy, but also in his foundational theoretical work, the Wissenschaftslehre . In what follows, we will take up each of these topics, placing the work in the context of the German debate over the French Revolution (section 1), in the context of modern social contract theory (section 2), and in the context of Fichte’s philosophical development in the 1790s (section 3).
1. The French Revolution in Germany
The early response of the German public to the Revolution was celebratory. The year 1789 seemed to mark a new stage in humanity’s history for many thinkers, providing hope for the creation of a regime founded on reason, merit, and the “rights of man” rather than superstition, corruption, and privilege. Indeed, even moderate to conservative thinkers weighed in with their support. Friedrich Gentz, for example, who would go on to be one of the most vehement critics of the Revolution after translating Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France into German in 1793, wrote in 1790:
The Revolution constitutes the first practical triumph of philosophy, the first example in the history of the world of the construction of government upon the principles of an orderly, rationally-constructed system. It constitutes the hope of mankind and provides consolation to men elsewhere who continue to groan under the weight of age-old evils. 3
As the Revolution proceeded, however, many authors found the increasing radicalism and violence of the revolutionaries abhorrent. The French revolutionary army occupied Mainz in 1792–93, and peasant revolts broke out in Saxony in the wake of revolutionary enthusiasm, further dampening support. Conservative governments of many of the German states promulgated repressive policies against political subversion. Nevertheless, in journal publications throughout this period, the debate between Burke and Thomas Paine became well-known and well-rehearsed. 4
One of the most important and influential critics of the French Revolution in Germany—and a target of Fichte’s polemic in the Contribution —was August Wilhelm Rehberg. Rehberg hailed from the electorate of Hanover in Northwest Germany, which had a close relationship dynastically and hence politically with Great Britain. Like many fellow Hanoverians, Rehberg studied and was influenced by Britain’s moderate constitutional monarchy and its empiricist philosophy, embodied above all in the skepticism of David Hume. Rehberg’s friend and fellow writer Ernst Brandes travelled to England, struck up a friendship with Edmund Burke, and attempted to shape Hanoverian politics according to the model of British constitutional monarchy. Rehberg himself was commissioned by the Allgemeine Literatur Zeitung to review the latest French and English pamphlets about the Revolution. These reviews became the basis for Rehberg’s influential work, Untersuchungen über die Französische Revolution (hereafter, Untersuchungen ), published in January 1793. 5
Rehberg’s Untersuchungen consists of two parts: the first volume takes aim at the underlying principles and the deleterious consequences of the Revolution, while the second examines the history of the Revolution, its causes and missteps. Rehberg’s main critique of the Revolution’s fundamental principles concerns its overreliance on abstract reason. For Rehberg, reason can discern formal, abstract legal principles such as the rights of man or the general will, but, because of its abstractness, it cannot provide any determinate political guidance: “The laws of reason,” according to Rehberg, “are not sufficient as a basis to derive the laws of civil society” ( Untersuchungen 1:12). Rehberg uses Rousseau’s distinction between the general will and the will of all as an example. It is a crucial distinction in Rousseau’s view, but Rehberg claims that Rousseau gives us no tools for identifying the general will as over and above the aggregation of the interests of each. Reason̵