gains and losses of social groups during french revolution?
368243
Well, the BIGGEST loss for the nobility was the loss of their heads...\n\nhur!hur!
242816
The positive outcomes of the industrial revolution include new technology in manufacturing, more disposable products that helped stimulate the economy, and child labor laws.\n\nThe negative outcomes included health issues from workers in unsanitary working conditions and industrial manufacturing eliminated jobs for many skilled craftsmen.
738349
1. Because the first and second estates consisted of clergy members (the church) and the second estates the Nobility. They had to pay no taxes and their voices were the first ones heard when an issue came up.\n3. the third estate, had no money because of inflation of food products, which they needed. Also because of unemployment. \n4. Being born into a social class you usually cannot move up or down unless you are married to someone of a higher class (this was very rare back then) and usually the third class could not voice their opinions
468942
the art of rennaissance aroused a feeling of identity and originality among the common people of  Europe. It also enlighted a new sense of nationality and unity which helped them in revolting against the papal authorities.This lead to Counter Reformation.Look, during that particular era the suffering class i.e the workers had faced a lot of problems like the burden of taxation, less revenue etc. Rennaissance \ngave them all ideas of independence, liberty and freedom. It made them realize that even they had the authority to protest against the evil-doings of the high classes and struggle for thier freedom. As to conclude, I'd say that altogetherly, Renaissane offered a platform for the revolutionist thinkers to exchange their views and bring -up new socialist ideas for liberty.
1179941
Here is an article by Stan Rubenstein about it....\n\nWHETHER revolutions make men or men make revolutions is as debatable today as it was when Thomas Carlyle stated the case during the period of the French Revolution. But one cannot deny that a revolution usually has some individual closely associated with it. We tend to connect Washington with the American Revolution, Lenin with the Russian Revolution and Castro with the Cuban Revolution. \n\nSun Yat Sen seems to belong to the Chinese Revolution of 1911, for after more than two thousand years of dynastic rule, China, amid the turmoil and chaos of the Manchu dynasty, established its first Republic. And with the emergence of this revolutionary government one man stood out as the leader - Sun Yat Sen. \n\nPrior to 1911 Sun Yat Sen traveled widely, spending some time in Japan and the United States. Influenced by western concepts of industrialization, he carried back to his native land ideas that differed from those normally prevalent in Chinese culture. These ideas affected ensuing events in a significant way. \n\nOf particular importance was his book San Min Chui, or Three Principles of the People. This work is still popular among the Chinese and it cuts across political lines. The proposed reform was embodied in what he called the peoples' principle, and the plans were to be altered or revised as the revolution took various turns. \n\nHis concepts of nationalism and democracy appealed to the dignity and loyalty of the Chinese and strengthened them in their resolve to rid themselves of all foreign powers and gain the respect of the international community. Democracy was envisioned to rest with the wishes of the people as interpreted through their leadership. \n\nThe principle of livelihood, his third important contribution, was Sun's hope of achieving a desirable living standard for the Chinese based on an equalization of land ownership and regulation of capital. When he was asked what the policy of China was he responded, "We propose that the government shall levy a tax proportionate to the price of the land, and if necessary buy back the land according to its price." \n\nAccording to this formula the landowners could set the value, and if the value was excessive the landowner would have to pay high taxes. If the value set was too low the government would buy the property. From this point forward all increases in land value would go to the community and increases in value would help defray the costs of government. \n\nSince Sun's ideas were influenced partially by Henry George and partially by Karl Marx, he advocated that the state should regulate capital and serve as a source of promoting industry. He disagreed with Marx's analysis of class struggle however, and attempted to reconcile parts of both systems. \n\nSun's program was not carried out during his lifetime but it is ironical that the Chinese Communists have been influenced by some of the thoughts concerning the state regulation of capital, and the Nationalist Chinese have incorporated some of his basic views on the equalization of land ownership.
93276
Well, if you look at france in the late 1700s, Louis the xvi (16th) got his head sliced off because of his treatment to the commom people so that may a good indication on how people felt about monarchy even a hundred years prior. Many bad things lead up to a situation like that and it just doesn't happen over night. I am a history grad. and I could help you if need be. You can email me if you want.
894862
That's a great question to ask, and historians have been debating that one for some time.  A good historian to look into on this is Thomas Dublin (who, incidentally, is a really cool professor and for a well-regarded scholar has very little ego), who did a lot of early work on this topic.  \n\nI personally would say benefit.  Certainly the mill girls gained experiences that they never would have had otherwise and made money.  They also in many cases found husbands in the area.  They were taken care of, did not fall prey to rogues and scammers, and did get intellectual benefits as well. They even put out their own newsletter and worked together for economic justice and gains.
609223
Voltaire has influenced many modern ideas including the freedom of religion and the right to a fair trial. His ideas led to social reform in France.\n\nYou can find his works here:\nhttp://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/v#a913
965201
The first European country with democratic idea(l)s was France. During the French Revolution from 1789 to 1799 the values "liberte" ((personal) freedom), "egalite" (equality) and "fraternite" (brotherhood) were the leading ideals in French society. Back then monarchy was brought to its fall and a new, democratic government was built. Unfortunately, one of the revolutions leaders, Robespierre, saw the only solution to bring the revolution to success in executing any possible "enemy" of it during his Reign of Terror. In the end, he was executed himself, the revolution failed, France ended up in monarchy again. The main problem was the extreme poverty among the people, the poor hoped through the revolution there would be less hunger and poverty, because the noblemen were killed and their properties taken, but with time passing they had to face the fact that they cannot make bread out of blood (I hope you know what I mean?)\nThe U.S.A. was the first country to successfully adopt the democratic ideals of the French Revolution and that, by the way, is the reason why France gave the Statue of Liberty with the torch of enlightenment to the U.S., the same torch is located in Paris as wyell. I hope I could help you a little... sorry for my English, I hope I used the right historical terms (I translated them literally from the German terms I know)
432597
Well, the American Revolution was related to the economy because the British government was taxing the colonies on anything they did, not giving the colonists any say in the taxes.  The French revolution was related because the King was essentially hoarding all of the wealth, taxing the snot out of the population, so they revolted.  Marie Antionette's "let them eat cake" comment didn't help either.\nThe Russian revolution was largely the same thing, the nation was poor as dirt, and still living pre-industrial technologies.
119604
The French Revolution began in 1789 with the meeting of the States General in May and lasted until 1799.
73130
The main problem before the reforms of Solon in the early 6th century BC was class strife. There were very small numbers of people who had significantly more wealth than the rest of the city. His reforms intorduced the first democratic elements, but the civil strife didn't really go away and a tyrant took over until the late 500s BC, when Cleisthenes set up their democracy as we know it. The civil strife never really went away, but it was much better once every citizen had an equal share in government.
15724
not an easy answer, I would recommend reading "The Status Seekers" by Vance Packard, or the scaled down version (it is just selections from the book) "American Social Classes in the 1950's", edited by Daniel Horowitz
334065
Now if I was an ordinary person I'd most probably be unable to write anyway, but I would try to show how well our side was doing.\nTry to show that revolution would occur in all countries like France, as others followed the example set.\nShow how Napoleon was gradually conquering the world, well it doesn't have to be true does it, and make sure that Napoleon had a copy of it. Then he would give you more information, and most probably a decent meal.\nMention what a great thing it was to drive on the right.\nEnclose a charter for all good citizens of the revolution to follow.
228950
he few roads that still existed were in a bad state, bridges were scarce, and brigands were common. For this reason during the Dark Ages, which lasted until about 1000 A.D., populations were tightly bound to the land surrounding the feudal lord's castle. People moved about only when there were festivals in other cities. These were the only occasions on which people could buy or look at different goods and have a chance to sell their own food or objects and fabrics made for sale. Fear controlled people’s lives and induced them to ask for protection from powerful warriors who had constructed well-defended castles, or from monasteries, which did not have soldiers but did have thick walls to hide behind. Life was hard, and , people thought little of clothing. Clothes were often made at home and were often rough and shapeless. Trousers, tunics and shawls were used to keep away the cold. The shawls were made of wool or fur and put over the shoulder. Most Europeans were dressed like today’s Benedictine monks, except for men’s trousers. Shoes were leather wrapped around the foot. Colors were plain; they were shades of gray, brown, dark blue and red. Conical hats were commonly worn.\n\nThis was a pyramidal society because the classes of people were in a shape of a pyramid.. with the kings and queens at the top of the pyramid (and were few in number) down to the peasants (who were many in number). In the middle were feudal lords, clerics, and others, such as vassals.\n\nTAILORING\nIn the Middle Ages, for the wealthy, most clothes were created by tailors. Some fabrics tailors used were : Burnet, perse, lincoln scarlet, kersey, russet, chalons, damask, and sandal. (Most of the population, however, made their clothing themselves).\n\nCLOTHING\nOften, kings and queens would wear crowns and brightly colored silks. Obviously, their clothing was very expensive and only they had enough money to afford such beautiful things.\n\nShoemakers and their spouses often wore borealis hats. The clothes they wore with that were woolen coats with fur-trimmed sleeves. Inside the coat was a woolen doublet.\n\nHoly orders, such as friars, wore cloaks with hoods and habits. On their clothes was a rope belt with wooden beads for counting prayers.\n\nFelt hats with stirrups and brown jackets were the daily wear of manor lords. Peasants' daily wear was simple: straw hats that they made themselves, linen shirts that they made themselves, leather flasks, hoses (pants), and pewter badges or good luck charms.
879133
1-The earliest social effects were the loss of  jobs and the  scarisity of hard cash. A shortage of good folowed fast and even if you had the cash you were short of goods and scared to spend. The big guy sit down on the money and it went out of circulation fast. People lost homes, families, so many died, and suffered malnutrion due to simply no food. Parents saw children die of starvation, mothers and wives saw  husbands go the suicide route be cause he was helpless to feed his family.\nSchool for many came to a stand still., many school nationwide were closed,and millions of children went without education.\nMy grandparents pulled their corn and gave the griss mill half of it as payment for turning the rest into corn meal. They were oneof the lucky ones.\nMedicine and medical care suffered.\nFamilies split up and the great movement west started. Before the depression Georgia's population was much more  than that of California.  The promise of work in the produce fieldsand fruit grovesof California sent many people there to go humry  with out even shelter over their heads.\nMen left their homes, looking for work and started the great "hobo" rides to nowhere. This usually meant they left a wife and children at home of on the roads. with nothing. Transients were usually refused help in cities and forced from small towns where people protected what little they had left.\nAll of the  old films of the soup kitchens show the men who were fathers, husbands, sons ect  getting a bare meal to just survive past starvation so you can imagine what the women  left behind with children suffered. Many families were suffering. Most familes on the move left or were thrown off their farms with what ever they could carry. \nThe depression meant the beganning of the end of the small farm dominance in America, and the beganing of large corporations.  Homes and farms which had been in the family for generations even back to the revolution were taken for token taxes of a few dollars. many farms went under the tax mans auction for under 5 bucks.\n\n2-Radical groups (like Hitler did in Germany) gained support because they gave the poor, and displaced something to blame their troubles on. They had seemingly good answers to soemhard  questions. They found the scapegoat the public was looking for and usually they were right in that it was the rich guy. This is what gave such a rise to such ideologys as socialism,and communism.  The public had no jobs like in Germany/europe (and as  always plenty of beer or boose) and they had plenty of mad, upset, and hungry people with plenty of time on their hands to listen to them.&#92;\n\n3-I heard  my father talk of some folks on the road getting help from strangers. My grandfather told him of walking and asking people for work for food.While he mentiond many towns would force you out if you were not a native some (especially farm families) would share their last with you. There were new bonds formed, new friends made, and a better appreciation of life and everything material after the depression started. My father as a young boy remebers when things began to pick up and people began to hope again. \n\n4- When people went to the banks and found them closed all at once they did not under stand what happened. Every bank only keeps a percentage their value in money on hand.  The rest is on loan for proifit. when the news began to filter down those on the inside withdrew theirs leaving nothing. When people woke up with no job,and no money this signaled the end of the 20s. and it nearly happened over night  which is why so many people suffered so fast.\nLitterially no goods for consumers,and no funds to purchase what there was brought in the 30s. Government for the most part became non functional and allowed those who did have money and power to later control the country. People like the Kennedys began their wealth during this time and used the depression to do so. Prohibition saw the small farmers who manuf
5397
If it were simple it wouldn't be an exam question.  \n\n(I'd write about specifics, and say the impact of colonial rule depends on the nature of the colonial power and rule, and the people who implemented it, and on the society and peoples on whom the rule was imposed.  Fopr instance, there were great differences in the forms of colonialism practiced in Africa by Britain, France and Belgium. In almost every case colonialism introduced "modern" practices for good and ill, and creaated gerrymandered countries which intensified conflict between incompatible local societies.)