French Conservatism/fascism

11 Pages 2708 Words

critics of French Reactionary thought, will be the next focus of this essay. Following this, the ‘truth claims’ regarding the nature of society, which stem from the nature of man, that are expressed in this particular form of conservatism will be seen. Reference again to Joseph de Maistre and Charles Mourras, will see the varying ways in which the basis for society is found to be spiritual unity, which is absent from the present day as it was at the time these theories were first formed. Finally, by analysing the methods prescribed by Mourras to ‘cure’ society, it will be shown that while the ‘truth claims’ in this doctrine may seem quite logical and accurate, the system which these thinkers promote is ultimately destined to be failure and rejection by all but the most extreme that have followed them.
As one of the founders of the French Reactionary School, Joseph De Maistré lays down his principle view of mankind in Study of Sovereignty. Believing in the infallibility of God, de Maistré states that the “nature of any being is the sum of the qualities attributed to it by the Creator.” As he believed God created mankind to procreate and spread across the globe, so he saw the nature of mankind to be sociable. Looking back at history, de Maistré noted that this was shown throughout time, by the way people naturally came together to form societies before any notion of nation or state were even dreamt of. Thus, de Maistré rejects the idea of a ‘state of nature’ that others such as Locke, Hobbes and Rousseau believed, as he saw the natural state of man to be that as it is; societal. Given this, de Maistré rejected the idea of a social contract as the basis for government and society, as can be found in Rousseau’s Social Contract and Hobbes’ Leviathan, in favour of naturally forming societies with customs and conventions formed prior to, and superior to written law.
De Maistré also finds fault with t...