By the second half of the century, there were so many new ideological terms that even a bare listing of them would fill a page.
"worldview" was another way of referring to the same idea.
The purpose of these terms, or why they appeared in such profusion, is not clear.
The first thing they said to various elements of the population was uncertain.
The generalizing content of the new isms was not new at all, and can be traced back to the time of Plato and Aristotle.
Not all the new isms are full-blown worldviews.
The early nineteenth century saw a taste for wide-ranging ideological rumination, associated with the growing consensus that a new, threatening world was emerging in Europe.
The spread of these new isms to the four corners of the earth is a sign of Europe's rising prestige and influence.
Many are still with us even though they have different meanings.
It was published by John Wiley & Sons.
There was some arbitrariness to how an issue became widely recognized as a formal "Question" with a capital letter, but the following were among the most important: the Social Question and the Woman Question.
Most of these questions had obvious roots in the past, but there was now a significant novelty to them: People in Europe had begun to believe that there were reasonable, proximate, and definitive solutions to these questions, whereas in the past the tendency had been to regard poverty as an issue.
The growing belief in the possibility of solutions was associated with a rising respect for the power of reason and the scientific method.
Society could be incomparably more productive, more just, and more free than it had ever been because of a growing confidence in Europe's superiority to the rest of the world.
There were substantial and lasting objections to this expanding belief in progress and human perfection.
The horrors of the French Revolution were not far away, and industrialization was still viewed negatively by many.
The legend of Faust, a tragic figure who, in a bargain with the Devil, gave up his soul for god-like knowledge and eternal youth, fascinated Europe's educated population in the 19th century.
Prometheus, who had revealed the secret of fire to mortals and was punished by Zeus by being chained to a rock, was one of the ancient tales that found renewed interest.
The isms were assumed to be a result of an intricate process of ideological debate, and are best approached not as isolated or entirely coherent entities, but as initially diffuse and inchoate, taking form in dynamic interplay with one another over time.
The ideologists of the left were challenged by those of the right, who distrusted reason and harbored no hopes for ultimate human perfection.
Competing ideologists borrowed elements from one another and used them in different ways.
Few on the right actually announced that they were against liberty or justice, but what they meant in using such terms was different from what those on the left understood.
The meanings of various isms have changed remarkably by the twenty-first century, making it all the more difficult to understand what they were meant to mean.
There is a broadly felt need for new words.
In the case of the isms, it seems obvious that while powerful new forces and disruptive developments were everywhere in evidence, their ultimate meaning for the future was uncertain.
The need to coin words for these developments was done as part of an effort to come to grips with them.
It also meant demystifying them.
The critical work of twentieth-century scholars has helped to undermine assumptions about the appeal of these ideologies.
Marx and many other nineteenth-century philosophers considered axiomatic are no longer seen as correlations of social class and ideology.
In the 19th century, it was obvious that the poor would be attracted to ideologies that promised them a better life.
Entrepreneurs would have been attracted to an ideology that promised to liberate them from governmental restrictions.
Complicated factors, such as the difficulty of defining, or even understanding, what a given person's self-interest actually is, have been found to be an important factor in ideological preferences.
The earlier assumption that most individuals would be able to arrive at informed decisions about their true interests must be considered seriously flawed because people define their interests in subtle, unpredictable, and even self-destructive ways.
Class identity is an imperfect guide to why ideologies were embraced in the 19th century because of the additional difficulty of defining social class.
The powerful supra-class appeals of the revolutionary mystique, as discussed in Chapter 1, were felt by people from all classes, as well as the emotionally unstable and those who were hungry for power.
Rational calculations of self-interest or the interests of one's class were often worked against by religious beliefs.
We need to be alert to the dangers of oversimplification, related to the mysteries of the human psyche, because we can certainly make useful generalizations about the ideological identities that Europeans were assuming.
By the early twenty-first century, most of the isms that existed in the early 19th century have evolved to the point that they still have their original meanings.
Conservatism, liberalism, and socialism are the three most significant histories.
Conservatives rule by conservatives in the first half of the century.
Liberalism reached its zenith in the two to three decades following 1848 as conservatives were challenged with growing boldness.
socialism remained a fringe ideology until the last decades of the 19th century, despite the fact that there were highly diverse strands of socialist theory.
In the 19th century, the three ideologies were constantly modified and the lines that divided them were not always clear.
The overview gives an impression of greater clarity and coherence than was obvious to contemporary observers.
Each of the three had their own visions of the Highest Good and the Enemy of the day.
The most characteristic ideology of the 19th century is liberalism.
Human beings are best off when they are free, according to the liberals.
The liberals' Highest Good was freedom for the individual.
The face of the Enemy could be seen in those who tried to suppress freedom.
Conservatives harbored large reservations about the effects of individual liberty; they believed that human beings, especially the lower orders, are best off when guided and sheltered by religion, authority, and tradition; without such guidance, liberty was positively dangerous and "free" people inevitably stumbled.
The conservatives' highest good had to do with order.
They believed that free individuals were fatally inclined to sin and that traditional political authority was divinely sanctioned.
Those who harbored naive, dangerous hopes about what freedom could accomplish were the enemy for conservatives.
Both liberals and conservatives were attacked by the socialists.
Most socialists believed that human beings are best off when they are bound together in a harmonious union, which is only possible in the context of social and economic equality.
Their Highest Good was harmony and cooperation, and they defined the Enemy as those who violated or disrupted fraternal feelings, either by using freedom or abusing authority, as they believed the liberals did.
Conservatism might be the most fundamental of the three, the ideology with the strongest claims to a long and distinguished lineage.
Most human societies up to modern times have been conservative.
The European rural lower orders revered tradition more than the nobility, royalty, and Church authorities did.
Conservatives in power, such as Metternich, believed that social stability required the application of physical force by ruling authorities.
Joseph de Maistre believed that fear of the hangman was the foundation of a properly functioning society.
The more extreme conservatives, such as the Ultras in Restoration France, were often termed "reactionaries," another new word, first used to describe those reacting against the violent excesses of the Terror in 1794.
The Ultras in France wanted to overturn the reforms of the Revolution.
A return to an idealized past was what many in their ranks wanted.
Metternich's liberal opponents used to call him a reactionary, but since he accepted that at least some of the recent past had to be preserved, he was simply conservative.
Conservatism's most influential theoretical expression was dated to a quarter-century before the term gained currency.
His writings attracted special attention because of the penetrating way he described a rationalism gone wild in France - the belief by revolutionaries that they could simply abolish, within the span of a year, institutions laboriously built up over hundreds and thousands of years.
Their ideas were often catastrophically so.
Burke's defense of the social utility of privilege and tradition was characterized by an unusual sophistication that continued to impress generation after generation of conservatives.
Even if they heaped praise on him.
Burke was sympathetic to the revolutionaries in Britain's American colonies and his record up to 1790 might have been considered liberal, at least in the respect he showed for the traditional liberties of the upper orders in opposition to royal power.
His description of state and society as similar to a complex living organisms was not original, but he made the case with unusual delicacy.
He identified the enemy of conservatives as the terrible simplifiers who were away from their natural leaders.
He said that corruption, inefficiency, and cruelty, not wisdom and social responsibility, were the main products of tradition and privilege.
The clarity and effectiveness of his prose, linked to his preexisting fame by the early 1790s, was the main reason for his importance.
He was one of the most effective defenders of the American Revolution, along with Burke.
Mary Wollstonecraft became an icon for feminists because of her anti-Burkean point of view.
She traveled to France to observe the revolution with her own eyes because she was so enthusiastic about it.
The rights of man to liberty and legal equality were denied to women by the French revolutionaries.
She and other women who were associated with the Jacobins would die in the reaction to the Terror.
During their lifetimes, Wollstonecraft and de Gouges only attracted a small following, but their ideas continued to spread in the following centuries.
The early feminists posed fundamental questions about the human condition, and did so in ways that exposed serious problems with all three main isms.
Many if not most liberals, in spite of their assumed universalism, were in fact speaking only about "man" and not all of humanity when proclaiming the value of liberty.
The fitness of women for civil equality and modern freedom was doubted by the majority of early liberals.
It was thought that women should be dependent on men for protection and guidance because of their inherent weaknesses.
It would be wrong to grant them the same freedom as men.
Women who embraced feminist ideas moved from an initial interest in individualism to socialism due to the fact that feminism found at least a somewhat sympathetic hearing.
At this point in time, socialist activists and theorists differed, but they all agreed with early feminists.
Early socialists and early feminists defined themselves in opposition to liberalism because of their hypocrisies and egoistic individualism.
The liberals left out the majority of the adult male population as well as all females when they defined freedom and equality.
The socialist critique of elitism focused on the implications of the distribution of private property.
Extreme inequality of wealth and property ownership corrupted the human spirit by subverting the sense of human solidarity and legitimizing exploitation was a common theme in socialist literature.
One of the most influential of the early socialists in France declared himself a radical feminist.
He rejected patriarchy and the bourgeois family.
He said that the position of women in the society around him was better than that of slaves.
The equality he defended had to do with human rights and dignity, not physical or intellectual abilities.
He said that women were profoundly different in their emotional and spiritual natures.
He argued that women could only be free if their characters were allowed to be expressed without the restrictions of traditional Christian morality.
By the 1830s, liberal theory had developed into a more sophisticated and integrated body of thought than feminism or socialism, but it still had a variety of different positions.
The liberals focused on political reform in opposition to the post-1815 reaction.
Liberal ideas took on more explicitly antisocialist dimensions as socialism began to gain greater following by mid-century.
Most members of the middle class were shocked by Fourier's ideas and his belief that private property and the free-market economy should be abolished.
There were significant overlaps with socialism on the left fringe of liberalism.
Disillusioned radicals collaborated with various kinds of socialists in their quest for what seemed to them to be more consistent, less hypocritical forms of liberty, equality, and Fraternity, but their emphasis remained more individualistic and more attached to private ownership.
Britain's long and bitter conflict with France made it difficult for the Philosophical Radicals to identify with the French Revolution.
The ideas of the Philosophical Radicals were based on Enlightened principles, British rather than French in flavor, but still with a parallel respect for the ability of human reason to reform society in far-reaching ways.
Jeremy Bentham, a prolific author who advocated for radical reforms in all branches of British life, was their most influential guide.
The British government was thought to be in the hands of a parasitical aristocracy and that cruelly disproportionate punishments were often prescribed for trivial crimes, such as the death penalty for pickpockets.
The "wisdom of the ages" should not be evaluated on how long a law had existed, but on how efficiently and fairly it served society.
He found that many of Britain's laws did a poor job.
Classical Liberalism was born out of a critique of Britain's existing state, society, and economy by Bentham.
Since Britain by the second half of the century was the country where liberalism was the most successful, a model for liberals on the Continent, the prominence of British thinkers in formulating liberal theory was only natural.
Mill was associated with the Utilitarians before the publication of that work.
His father, James Mill, had written an influential volume on "political economy" in 1819.
The study of political economy was published by John Stuart, who was said to be able to read classic Greek and Latin texts as a child.
By the early to mid decades of the nineteenth century, liberalism had acquired a set of political, economic, and cultural-intellectual dimensions thanks to the publications of such men as James Mill and John Stuart Mill.
Mill deviated from the original ideas of the Utilitarians.
The middle and upper classes were associated with the word "democrat" throughout the 19th century.
They were worried that a popular majority would move to redistribute wealth.
"Constitutionalism," one of the many isms that appeared but then faded in popularity, might have been more precise in application to Mill's synthesis, since in defining liberty he stressed the importance of the rule of law, due process, and constitutional limits on both executive power and popular Mill was worried about the threats of democracy to liberty.
Britain's mature liberalism was an ideology of freedom but with a lot of qualifications having to do with freedom's potential excesses.
It was aware of the destructive role of emotions in human affairs.
The liberal state was to be strong in protecting property, but weak in regulating the economy.
Being assertive in matters such as establishing a sound currency or accurate weights and measures is important.
In Britain, attending to national defense meant a strong navy, but in all countries, such a recognition worked to rationalize growing state power.
The deputies to Parliament were still to be men of property, education, and high social standing, not ordinary manual laborers, even though the conception of freedom involved parliamentary government and open pub lic debate on matters of state.
In the more abstractly intellectual realm, artists and intellectuals under liberal governments were to be allowed a lot of creative freedom, but in practice their freedom remained significantly restricted compared to later understandings of it.
Intellectual and artistic freedom was of primary concern to educated elites, not the mass of ordinary citizens.
As he grew older, John Stuart Mill became more concerned about issues of social equality, finally agreeing with left-wing critics of Classical Liberalism that formal political equality, when associated with extreme economic inequality, was illusory and would tend to self-destruct.
He concluded that there had to be a way to bridge the yawning gap between rich and poor in order to open up a more genuine equality of opportunity for those born poor.
A number of moderate socialist critics of laissez-faire capitalism received a sympathetic hearing from him.
The inclinations of liberals toward the end of the 19th century and into the 20th were similar to those of him in the 1860s.
After his death, Mill's sympathetic attention to the issue of equal rights for women presaged another direction in which liberalism would develop.
His close association with Mrs. Taylor influenced his early feminism.
They collaborated on a number of works that criticized the indignities that women faced in Britain and elsewhere.
Mill was aware of the influence that Taylor had on him.
They argued that equal and free participation by women in society would be useful to all of society and that the current debased situation of women was irrational and violated the principle of justice.
"human equality" did not mean that humans of the same sex were the same; men and women were different in many aspects.
They were thought to be different in a number of ways.
Their equality had to be thought of in moral terms, having to do with equality of legal rights and related issues of individual human dignity or worth.
The concept of equal worth of the human soul, male and female, before God is related to this definition of equality.
It wasn't possible to prove equality by scientific measurement.
Mary Wollstonecraft, for all her admiration of the application of a liberating reason by the French Revolution, was also moved by a fervent Christian faith.
Feminism maintained that women were equal to men in physical and intellectual capabilities, or at least close to it.
It was argued that women could assume most roles in the public sphere that had traditionally been closed to them because of their physical infirmities.
In popular discourse, these various kinds of arguments were not often distinguished from one another.
Women should be eligible for combat duty in the nation's wars if they can take on the heavier types of manual labor that men did, or if they have the strength to do it.
The concept of women's equality of rights suggested a larger agenda.
Equal education for women, equal inheritance and property rights, legal equality in marriage, and responsibility in child-rearing were some of the rights that were granted.
There was not much of a chance of laws guaranteeing female equality being enacted in the early 19th century due to the opinion of females as well as males that these ideas were impractical, dangerous, or immoral.
The period of regression in women's rights in the 19th century was considered by some scholars to be a time of a more confident assertion of female superiority.
In this regard, what passed as science in the 19th century seems to have played a role in the same way as it did in regards to the issue of equality in the racial realm, since leading scientists claimed to have discovered irrefutable scientific evidence for inequality in both the sexes and the races.
Some of what passed for scientific inquiry in the 19th century was by modern standards not scientific, and it offered confirmation of existing prejudgments that women were physically, mentally, and morally inferior to men, just as the blacks of Africa and other non-European races were.
Christian leaders of the day were among the most ardent in opposing "scientific" racism, which was used to justify the enslavement of Africans.
Christian leaders were resistant to science because of the way it threatened biblical certainties and other religious dogmas, but it is not true that their religious dogmatism prevented them from moving in "humanistic" or universalistic directions.
Christian dogma rarely made male religious leaders in favor of feminists since biblical texts explicitly mandated a role for women.
Marx's critique of early socialism's utopian tendencies and his claim to have formulated a scientific version influenced feminist or socialist ideas to appeal to both the intelligentsia and the working class.
Marx's socialist vision was an easy target for him because he claimed to be guided by reason and science.
In the 1960s, his vision resembled what would be called a "non-repressive society," which would allow for unimpeded instinctual gratification and be characterized by many fewer negative sanctions than had existed in the past.
The term "phalanx" was one of the many terms he came up with.
The Utilitarians and the proponents of laissez-faire economics were contemptuous of what other theorists had claimed to discover in their use of reason.
He did not see industrialization as a liberating phenomenon.
It was a violation of human needs and human nature.
The increased productivity that might arise from specialized, repetitive tasks was not worth the price that was paid.
He was disgusted by the corrupt financiers that he saw in the late 1790s.
In his treatment of the idea of equality, he stressed the physical and psychic differences of the people, even though he accepted the moral equality or equal worth of human beings.
Both sexes need to be aware of their differences to find genuine fulfillment.
In his system, the patriarchal family would cease to exist because Fourier was against the subordination of women to men.
Each day, he waited in his office for the millionaire who would finance his projects.
He waited in vain.
There were colonies in France and the New World that were only partial efforts to establish what he had in mind.
The system can be considered a monument to the imagination, a thought- provoking departure from an emerging capitalist society.
Marx used the term "utopian" for any early socialist.
The lack of realistic means to put his ideas into practice was what they found lacking in Fourier.
He was a benevolent factory owner who made a nice profit by introducing such measures as a shorter working day, safer factory conditions, and more pleasant factory conditions.
Thousands of people visited Owen's factory in the opening years of the 19th century.
Owen's criticisms of the greed and social irresponsibility of the country's emerging capitalists made him a favorite of Britain's conservative classes.
Owen revealed himself to be a man of the Enlightenment as he developed his own ideas.
His attacks on Christianity as well as his belief in large-scale social engineering became unpopular with conservatives.
Owen believed that people's natures were formed by their environment, while Fourier believed that human nature was fixed at birth.
Owen wanted to change Britain's destructively competitive environment in order to reform or improve the nature of its inhabitants.
In order to make it harmonious with unchanging human passions, Fourier wanted to introduce a new yet still rational environment.
Owen was interested in improving and humanizing but not abolishing industrialization.
He was more aware of the promise of increased productivity of labor through modern industrial techniques than he was.
His initial steps in a socialist direction had nothing to do with modern techniques of production.
He proposed a way to remedy unemployment by establishing self-contained agricultural communities.
Owen sailed for America in 1824 to launch a more radical utopian-socialist project in Indiana because he couldn't get the government or wealthy donors to support his plans.
The first Owenite settlement in the United States was New Harmony.
The factory at New Lanark did not qualify as socialist in many ways.
Efforts were made to establish common ownership and popular rule for both men and women.
These were mostly self-contained agricultural communities, not factories with labor-saving machinery.
Middle-class idealists who first signed up for these communities were forced to give up the kind of labor that might have allowed them to survive.
There were a number of problems that arose before there were disagreements and hostile groups.
Owen was nearly bankrupt because of his financial support for these communities.
The labor movement in Britain had begun to associate itself with his ideas.
The idea of isolated agricultural communities as a way to introduce a new cooperative world of socialism was viewed with skepticism because they were not adequately aware of the challenges of the new industrial world.
Claude-Henri de Saint-Simon's writings attracted attention.
He has been included among the early socialists because of his admirers taking his ideas in socialist directions, but he is best described as a prophet of modernity in ways that did not fit into either socialist or liberal categories.
Saint-Simon was more aware of the long-range implications of industrialization than the early socialists.
He looked to a time when new elites would rule society on principles of rationality, creativity, efficiency, and productivity.
Owen and other socialists linked their ideas with the emerging demands of the lower classes, but Saint-Simon was an unabashed elitist, one who saw no reason to consider the common people capable of informed opinions and enlightened rule.
He supported the idea of "careers open to talent" for unusual individuals from the lower orders.
Saint-Simon distrusted liberty as it tended to foster a socially destructive competitiveness, even though he dismissed social equality as a sterile, confined notion.
The exclusive responsibility of a new elite would be to make sure the general welfare of society is maintained.
The more practical Saint-Simonians went on to become successful financiers and entrepreneurs.
Saint-Simonians believed in giving the state more regulatory power than the proponents of laissez-faire economics did.
The left-wing or more socialistic of the Saint-Simonians proposed an economic system in which the state would, upon the death of wealthy citizens, redistribute their property to other citizens on principles of merit, thus abolishing the "privilege" of inherited property.
The Saint-Simonian idea that increasing productivity through industrialization was the only realistic solution to the Social Question was the only realistic idea that repelled property owners.
"Communist" socialists believed that there was a fixed amount of wealth in society.
Appropriating the wealth of the upper classes would be involved in aid to the poor.
Since the wealthy could be expected to resist, primitive socialism implied violence.
The more primitive form associated with Babeuf was different from the communism of Marx and Engels.
It's fame is almost entirely retrospective, since at the time its young authors were obscure activists and their pamphlet had an insignificant impact on the major events of 1848-50.
It is an initial sketch of the ponderous tomes Marx would labor in the following decades.
There was a paean to the achievements of modern industry in the pamphlet.
In their dismissal of the dreams and utopian experiments of previous socialists, Marx and Engels worked in their own trenchant predictions about how a future socialist state would be achieved through violent revolution by the organized working class.
"Proletariat" was a new word created by Blanqui and was previously used by Babeuf.
The notion was used with key refinements.
The emphasis on class conflict and violent revolution in Marx and Engels' vision of a liberated human condition was very different from the tradition of Babeuf and Blanqui.
The assertion that a repressive capitalist stage was necessary before establishing socialism is confident.
Marx and Engels later claimed to be hard-headed realists, strictly scientific in their analysis, but their ideas were influenced by early nineteenth-century romanticism, a highly unscientific frame of mind.
The spirit of the age is often described as Romanticism.
Although the term was initially used to describe cultural and artistic trends, all three of the major political ideologies in their early stages have been termed Romantic.
Romantic tendencies began to appear in response to the "cold" rationalism of the Enlightenment in the late 18th century.
Romantics were fascinated by the wild and untamed, both in the world of nature and in the human personality.
Romantic love is considered to be the most destructive emotion of all time and may be considered the most wild and incomprehensible.
Even more than was the case with the proponents of the three political ideologies, various Romantics used the same words to mean remarkably different things.
There are connections to the thought of Edmund Burke.
The main thinkers of the Enlightenment were aware of the importance of emotion.
Smith wanted to put greed to use in the free market.
What Romantics meant by "emotion" was not always clear.
There are differences between the emotional emphases of romanticism and the rational emphases of classicism.
Classicism is controlled, balanced, and formal, whereas romanticism is dreamy, heated, and passionate.
Matters were not as clear in terms of political ideology.
On the one hand, Burke's liberalism of tradition was Romantic in tendency, but on the other, romanticism and liberty were natural allies in their desire for liberation.
The liberals who wanted freedom were different from the liberals who wanted a stable society of property, family, and free enterprise.
The chivalry of the Middle Ages and the heroic virtues of the Crusaders were glamorized by some conservatives.
Napoleon was seen by many Romantics as Satan's spawn.
Feminism was linked with the rationalist left, but some of its theorists tended to elevate feminine emotions as superior to male rationality.
The justification of rebellion through emotions has historically settled on the right and left, a point that was particularly evident in the twentieth century, since both the Bolsheviks and the Nazis considered themselves revolutionaries who spoke for the people.
The bomb-throwers of the late nineteenth century and the Islamic fanatics of the early twenty-first century were both termed Romantics because of the way their ideas attracted selfish idealists, on the one hand, and powerhungry fanatics, on the other.
The second part covers from the late 1820s to the early 1870s.
The years have seen a transformation from romanticism to realism in visual art, music, and literature.
By the late 1840s, Metternich's efforts to smother left-wing and nationalist movements had run their course, with revolutions rapidly spreading throughout most of the Continent between 1848 and 1850, unparalleled in their initial spontaneity - but also remarkable in their ignominious collapse.
The next two decades began again with a period of restriction but ended with dramatic developments such as the unification of Italy and Germany.