The French were fighting among themselves at the expense of family relationships. Desan states that, "Reformulation of the Republic was fundamentally intertwined with a new emerging vision of the relationship between the family, law, and state." The petitioners or opposing side of all these reforms argued that social order was based on families being unified. The family was being separated during this time of political upheaval and the petitioners took it upon themselves to reunite the family and in so doing they would bring back social order of the state.
Ultimately, these reforms were kept to a minimal. The law was given less power over the family.
3 comments:
It is interesting that the family was the basis over whether the reforms were successful. I think the author is also arguing that degredations of families became an excuse to limit reforms across society. Social order being more important than liberty was applied not just to families, but to all aspects of social change.
That is also a very interesting point to see the connection between greater liberty which had a large impact on the freedom of families. It is fascinating how political changes, especially drastic revolutions, have such a large impact upon family. This is a great example of how political states, laws, and families are intertwined.
I agree with J.R. when it was stated that the author was arguing that the degradation of the family unit became an excuse to limit reforms across society. When reading that, I thought of the same exact thing happening in society today. Nothing really has changed. The "law" is always trying to intervene when it comes to the family (Prop 8 for example), and the definitions and reforms they impose do not always bring about the most positive outcomes. The fight between church and state in regards to the family has been an ongoing debate ever since the middle ages, and continues in our current day politics.
Post a Comment