How did the ideas of Abbe Sieyes contribute to the development of a revolutionary situation in France in 1789?

Question

All comments are appreciated!

Answer 1

Hi M.

One could say that his connecton with the French Revolution began when his pamphlet, Qu'est-ce que le Tiers Etat? was published in January 1789. due to this  He became a a prominent figure at the Estates General.

On June 17, he brought about the vote that transformed the Third Estate into the National Assembly. M. It would be safe to say that  Sieyes was essentially a revolutionist, because he held that political oppression can never be right, and that resistance to oppression can never be wrong…he  sacrificed equality by refusing the vote to those who paid no taxes.

as an important figure to the Revolution, especially in its early stages.  Sieyes was a fan of the Locke. He controlled  France twice, by sheer political power. This political power did not derive from public opinion, but from Sieyes' political thoughts. M,  Sieyes was a political thinker, the best of his time, but he lacked the pulse of the people and therefore was a poor politician.

Overall M, Emmanuel Joseph Sieyes was a great political thinker who wanted a constitutional monarch, but lacked the confidence to create this form of government. A lack of confidence does not create a weak man or a failure, he is just human. No one can be expexted to be perfect at the perfect times. Sieyes was essential to the Revolution, he helped create the National Assembly and the Constitution of Brumaire. No matter how you view his potential ability, in reality, he did well by his country.

I hope this helps.

Good luck my friend.

CATHORIO.

Answer 2

Here's the summary from wikipedia:

The contributions of Sieyès’s pamphlet, "The Third Estate,"  were indispensable to the revolutionary thought that projected France towards the French Revolution. In his pamphlet he outlined the desires and frustrations of the alienated class of people that made up the third estate. In many senses of the expression, he was the force that ripped the band-aid off the Ancien Régime in France, there by revealing the fraudulent nobility and more importantly the overburdened and despondent working class on which they preyed. The pamphlet was essentially the rallying cry that united a voiceless class, whose subjugation by an elitist and self-serving French political culture gave way to an unheard-of political force, nonetheless, a force with outlined and clearly stated grievances that for the first time were not to be overlooked in the convocation of the Estates General.

The pamphlet redefined the meaning of “public service,” against the conventional wisdom. The aristocracy defined themselves as an elite ruling class charged with the “arduous” task of maintaining the social order in France. On the contrary, Sieyès saw public service as a function performed not by the first or second but rather the third estate. Expression of radical thought at its best, the pamphlet placed sovereignty not in the hands of the uninformed, self-serving aristocrats, but instead defined the nation of France by its working class, whose daily trials and tribulations “are the activities which support society.” The French Revolution could not have been what it was without this patriotic and “radical” message, more importantly one so eagerly dispersed by the rising revolutionary politics within the third estate.

Furthermore, by defining the third estate as the primary mechanism of public service, he deliberately called into question the role of the aristocracy, alternatively portraying their role as foreign to the nation of France. The aristocratic arrogance and their ability to act absolutely and without query were precisely the grounds upon which Sieyès justified noble privilege as “treason to the commonwealth.” This being perhaps the most daunting of his rhetorical repertoire, Sieyès essentially used the nobility’s own arrogance and self-imposed privileges to establish the aristocracy as an alien body acting outside of the general will and the nation of France. Ironically, it was for these exact self-serving means that the Parlement of Paris pressured the king to call the Estates general. As a consequence, the resulting conflict between the orders inspired the proper political sphere from which the revolution grew.

Perhaps most significant was the influence of Sieyès’s pamphlet on the structural concerns that arose surrounding the convocation of the Estates general. Specifically, the third estate demanded their representation be made up of members from the third estate, that the number of deputies for their order be equal that of the two privileged orders combined, and most controversially “that the States General Vote, Not by Orders, but by Heads.” The pamphlet took these issues to the masses and their partial appeasement was met with revolutionary reaction. By addressing the issues of unjust representation directly, Sieyès inspired resentment and agitation that united the third estate against the feudalistic traditions of the Ancien Régime.