I apprehend that this feeling extended very generally among all the
classes who do not find or make a livelihood by literature or by
politics. Among the clever people, who understood the subject, very
likely the expectation was extremely different; but among the stupid
ones who mind their business, and have a business to mind, there was a
universal and excessive tremor. The only notion of ’52 was ‘_on se battra
dans la rue_.’ Their dread was especially of Socialism; they expected
that the followers of M. Proudhon, who advisedly and expressly maintains
‘anarchy’ to be the best form of Government, would attempt to carry out
their theories in action, and that the division between the Legislative
and Executive power would so cripple the party of order as to make
their means of resistance for the moment feeble and difficult to use.
The more sensible did not, I own, expect the annihilation of mankind:
civilisation dies hard; the organised sense in all countries is strong;
but they expected vaguely and crudely that the party which in ’93 ruled
for many months, and which in June ’48 fought so fanatically against
the infant republic, would certainly make a desperate attack,—_might_
for some time obtain the upper hand. Of course, it is now matter of
mere argument whether the danger was real or unreal, and it is in some
quarters rather the fashion to quiz the past fear, and to deny that
any Socialists anywhere exist. In spite of the literary exertions of
Proudhon and Louis Blanc, in spite of the prison quarrels of Blanqui and
Barbès—there are certainly found people who question whether anybody buys
the books of the two former, or cares for the incarcerated dissensions
of the two latter. But however this may be, it is certain that two days
after the _coup d’état_ a mass of persons thought it worth while to
erect some dozen barricades, and among these, and superintending and
directing their every movement, there certainly were, for I saw them
myself, men whose physiognomy and accoutrements exactly resembled the
traditional Montagnard, sallow, stern, compressed, with much marked
features, which expressed but resisted suffering, and brooding one-ideaed
thought, men who from their youth upward had for ever imagined, like
Jonah, that they did well—immensely well—to be angry, men armed to the
teeth, and ready, like the soldiers of the first Republic, to use their
arms savagely and well in defence of theories broached by a Robespierre,
a Blanqui, or a Barbès, gloomy fanatics, over-principled ruffians. I
may perhaps be mistaken in reading in their features the characters of
such men, but I know that when one of them disturbed my superintendence
of barricade-making with a stern _allez vous-en_, it was not too slowly
that I departed, for I _felt_ that he would rather shoot me than not.
Having seen these people, I conceive that they exist. But supposing that
they were all simply fabulous, it would not less be certain that they
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account