Equality In A Tale Of Two Cities

Sparked by the increased Enlightenment rhetoric of equality and liberty, horrible economic losses after the Seven Years War, and the closing monetary gap between the privileged Nobility and heavily taxed upper middle, bourgeoisie class, the people of France began to revolt against the Absolute monarch’s tyranny. The Third Estate, the vastly larger legislative body out of the Clergy’s First Estate and the Nobility’s Second Estate, started this crusade for rights with a cry for one unified assembly and tax changes. However, the initial, orderly change through the political elite by constitutional law quickly evolved into the urban poor and working class’ more radical call for democracy and true equality. Once they killed the king and obtained

Dickens’ portrayal of the vengeful Sans-Culottes jury ruling guilty without any proof contrasts greatly with the Revolutionary government’s efforts to enforce the egalitarian government, where it could regulate the price of bread, so everyone could afford to eat. Witnessing the economic hardships and high taxes of the monarchy era, the new French government wanted to help families and fix the poverty issues of before with stringent directives. Similarly, the State increased production, mostly in arms manufacturing, telling builders what to make and giving them materials, so that the economy would improve and in case of attack, France would have protection. Likewise, through new calendars and replaced Catholic holidays, the government tried to transform society with reason and nature’s laws, which it thought would bring progress and eventually happiness to its citizens. These strict new rulings and foci on Enlightenment values illustrate that during the Reign of Terror, France was actually heavily regulated and controlled, rather than the chaos and disorder that Tale of Two Cities

Like the movie exposes, many people died and the courts were eager to convict, but it was all in the name of the French nationalism and loyalty. The government did not just murder as vengeance for the unequal treatment and nobility privileges, (although that was probably the case for some) but also to save the republic and enforce justice. In this time, France now had a common language and valued popular sovereignty, and the French citizens began to have a national identity and commitment to each other and their revolution. To defend their revolution, the government felt an obligation to protect their ideology by ridding the country of opposition. And again, if revenge solely fueled the Reign of Terror, that large of a number of peasants would not have died because they didn’t contribute to the inequalities of the monarchy. In fact, they held the brunt of much of the inequity. Therefore, the executions must have also been for the protection of the state, sparked by the people’s desire to transform and keep improving France. Furthermore, at this time Madame Defarge would probably been pushed out of a powerful position in the revolution because during the