Later and modern revolutionary thought
Niccolò MachiavelliNiccolò Machiavelli, oil painting by Santi di Tito; in the Palazzo
Vecchio, Florence.
Only after the emergence of secular humanism during the Renaissance did
this concept of revolution, as a cause of the desecration of society, change
to embrace a more modern perspective. The 16th-century Italian
writer Niccolò Machiavelli recognized the importance of creating a state
that could endure the threat of revolution; but, at the same time, his
detailed analysis of power led to a new belief in the necessity of changes in
the structure of government on certain occasions. This new acceptance of
change placed Machiavelli at the forefront of modern revolutionary thought,
even though he never used the word revolution in his texts, and he was
primarily concerned with the creation of a truly stable state.
John MiltonJohn Milton at age 62, chromolithograph after a pastel by William Faithorne.
The 17th-century English writer John Milton was an early believer in
revolution’s inherent ability to help a society realize its potential. He also
saw revolution as the right of society to defend itself against abusive
tyrants, creating a new order that reflected the needs of the people. To
Milton, revolution was the means of accomplishing freedom. Later, in the
18th century, the French, Haitian, and American revolutions were attempts
to secure freedom from oppressive leadership. Modern revolutions have
frequently incorporated utopian ideals as a basis for change.
Immanuel KantImmanuel Kant, print published in London, 1812.
Immanuel Kant, the 18th-century German philosopher, believed in
revolution as a force for the advancement of humankind. Kant believed that
revolution was a “natural” step in the realization of a
higher ethical foundation for society. This idea helped serve as a basis for
the American and French revolutions.
Get Unlimited Access
Try Britannica Premium for free and discover more.
Subscribe
Karl MarxThe ideas of the German philosopher, economist, and historian Karl Marx have
been cited as the origin of accelerationism.(more)
The 19th-century German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel was a
crucial catalyst in the formation of 20th-century revolutionary thought. He
saw revolutions as the fulfillment of human destiny, and he saw
revolutionary leaders as those necessary to instigate
and implement reforms. Hegel’s theories served as the foundation for the
most influential revolutionary thinker, Karl Marx. Marx used Hegel’s
abstractions as the basis for a plan of class struggle, centred on a fight for
the control of the economic processes of society. Marx believed in
progressive stages of human history, culminating in the working-class
overthrow of the property-owning class. For society to advance, the working
class, or proletariat, must take over the means of production. Marx viewed
this eventuality as the conclusion of the human struggle for freedom and
a classless society, thus eliminating the need for further political
change. Communist revolutions led by Marxists took place in
Russia, Yugoslavia, China, Vietnam, and Cuba, among other countries, in
the 20th century.
In the mid-20th century, American historian Crane Brinton analyzed the
tendencies of a society prior to a major revolution. He saw a
prerevolutionary society as having a combination of social and political
tensions, caused by a gradual breakdown of the society’s values. This leads
to a fracture of political authority, as the governing body must rely upon an
increasingly desperate use of force to remain in power. Commensurate with
this is the emergence of reform elements that serve to emphasize the
corruption of the political authority. As the existing political order begins to
lose its grasp on authority, momentum builds among the diverse forces of
the opposition. As the government becomes more precarious, the splinter
groups that form the threat to the existing order band together to topple the
authority.
Brinton also observed the different stages of a major revolution. After the
government is overthrown, there is usually a period of optimistic idealism,
and the revolutionaries engage in much perfectionist rhetoric. But this
phase does not last very long. The practical tasks of governing have to be
faced, and a split develops between moderates and radicals. It ends in the
defeat of the moderates, the rise of extremists, and the concentration of all
power in their hands. For one faction to prevail and maintain its authority,
the use of force is almost inevitable. The goals of the revolution fade, as a
totalitarian regime takes command. Some of the basic tenets of the original
revolutionary movement, however, are eventually incorporated in the end.
The French and Russian revolutions followed this course of development, as
did the Islamic revolution in Iran in the late 20th century.
A strictly political revolution, independent of social transformation, does not
possess the same pattern of prerevolutionary and postrevolutionary events.
It may be merely a change in political authority (as in many coups d’état) or
a somewhat broader transformation of the structures of power (as in the
American and Mexican revolutions).
