Fair Shares for All: Jacobin Egalitarianism in Practice Book

This book is more of a historical account of the policies of the provincial Jacobins, with discussion of the context of the national scene and the philosophical / social ideological currents among the Jacobins and other revolutionary forces. It is limited in portraying the people's lives, socio-economic and cultural lifestyles being created.

The book discusses what the author refers to as the mainstream Jacobin policies in the French provinces around 1793. The characterizes the Terror as being associated with Jacobin extremists who constituted about 20% of the Jacobins. He tells us that the Jacobin mainstream in the provinces is a better representation of the beliefs and work of the Jacobins at that time. The efforts of such social change activists was complicated by the
wartime conditions of France.

The book begins explaining that there has been much argument in recent decades that there was too much violence in the French Revolution (and its use in coercive ways), especially attributed to the Jacobins and advocates of "equality". To me, there certainly can be excessive violence, but I also understand that non-egalitarian societies maintain the status quo by force. I accept that violence tends to be necessary to make more egalitarian change (those sectors that benefit from inequality are not only willing to have the less fortunate suffer from poverty, but also are willing to use violence to maintain their unequal status). See below regarding non-violent social change.

Different forces in the French Revolution put different importance on "liberty" and "equality." Advocates of equality noted that poverty greatly limits one's liberty. The Jacobins did not envision precise equality for all, but equality of opportunity and equality of necessities. They felt inequality must be limited - for instance, saying no man should be so poor he would sell himself and no man should be so rich as to be able to buy other men.

Many of the policies he describes the Jacobins advocating and/or implementing sound like modern "social safety net" (or social democratic) policies, progressive taxation, public education, women's rights, etc. There were also efforts to guarantee work for all, but I'm not sure whether that would have been implemented as much if it weren't needed for the war effort.

- - - - - - -

Regarding non-violent social change

When I was in college, I took a Peaceful Societies course during which I wrote a term paper on historic non-violent movements which led to significant social change. The professor suggested I do a directed study course to develop the paper towards publication (it did not get published.) My study did show that in specific situations and given enough time, non-violent movements can accomplish social change within certain limits. However, the cases I studied also can be used to argue the limitations of non-violent movements and the lack of examples for certain levels / kinds of non-violent social change. As a result, I appreciate that people often shy away from violence, but I'm cautious about those who argue against violence to accomplish *fundamental* social change - such as in the French Revolution. The trick is to know which cases call for it, when it is time for it, and how to identify individuals using it for their own power.