PSYCHOLOGY OF REVOLUTIONS

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21506, 22 June 1935, Page 27

PSYCHOLOGY OF REVOLUTIONS

—*— ADDRESS BY MISS A. CANDY At the monthly meeting of the Parents' National Educational Union, held at Selwyn House last night, Miss Alice Candy gave an interesting address on the "Makers of Revolution," dealing not with the men who paved the way for revolution, but with the men who, either by ability or by a toss of chance, reached high places after revolution had broken out. Defining revolution as sudden radical change in social organisation, accomplished not necessarily by bloodshed, Miss Candy said it was interesting to study the psychology of the revolutionaries, many of whom maintained that their aim was not to destroy the old, but to establish the new. This could be accomplished neacefully only if vested interests did not oppose the change, and if the utmost intellectual energy was used in bringing about the change. Dealing especially with the French revolution of 1789, Miss Candy asked her audience to bear in mind that change was badly needed in France in the eighteenth century. The revolution was a revolution of the middle classes, who sought the abolition of the privilege of the aristocracy and the establishment of an orderly government. The Reign of Terror was brought about by men who feared for their country, which was threatened by enemies without and traitors within.

Abbe Sieves. Amongst men who attained power during the revolution, men who were merely instruments, and who were later tossed aside. Miss Candy first mentioned the Abbe Sieyes, one of several middle-class men, who had imbibed the teachings of the philosophers, and who were inexperienced in politics. Of Abbe Sieyes it might truly be said that he loved mankind, but disliked man. During 10 years of cloistered life he studied philosophy even more than theology, and when he was placed in charge of a parish, the very teal wrongs of the people made him dislike existing institutions. lie entered politics, for which he had no great liking. In 1794 he thoughthe saw the solution of the country's difficulties in the rise ef a strong man —Bonaparte—and when Bonaparte was exiled he, too, was sent out of France.

Caiaille Dcsmotillna Of a somewhat different type was CamlHc Dcsmoulins, a man of envious, grudging, bitter spirit, well educated, but somewhat incompetent, a man who thought that he would play a leading part in a better organised world. He was a demagogue, with power to influence tne mob; he fulminated against the church and the state, the living and the dead, and was rewarded with political promotion. He, indirectly, if not directly, Miss Candy said, v/as responsible for the Reign of Terror. After his marriage to a gentle wealthy woman, he became less bitter and would .gladly have withdrawn from participation in the revolution. But Nemesis was awaiting him. He v/as sen to the guillotine, whither his wife followed him a few days later. Their only child, a son, went to Ilayxi. He had two daughters, who later lived in poverty. An appeal for financial aid was made on their behalf to the French Government, but it was unavailing.

Miss Candy then brieiiy described Brissot, a member of a party that delighted in phrase-making, who advocatca the sovereignty of the people, but who gave nothing to the people. In spite of blemishes on his character, Danton, Miss Candy thought, was the most selfless, leas! self-seeking of the revolutionaries. He belonged to the people; he w.is well educated, a barrister by profession. He was no theorist, but an opportunist, a demagogue, a noisy orator, and splendid debater. He became Minister for Justice, and set up the committee of public safety. Although he had come down to history as a perpetrator of dreadful aeeds, and although he allowed the extortions of profiteers who made money out of their country's agony, he was an accomplice rather than an agent of The Terror. He wa3 an enemy of Robespierre, and was eventually executed.

Marat, who advocated a monarchy under Louis XVI., and who advocated the simple but unworkable plan of relieving the necessities of the poor by taking the surplus of the rich, became extremely popular. He dressed like the poor and wore very dirty clothes. It was the irony of fate that death came to him while he was in his bath! After describing the chief characteristics of Robespierre and St. John, Miss Candy concluded an instructive address'by remarking, "It was extraordinary how inexorable was justice. These men did not have to wait till they reached heaven or hell for their deserts. The things they had created destroyed them." A vote of thanks was accorded Miss Candy, on the motion of Miss Westall. Mi*3 J. R. Foster presided at the meeting, and supper was served by Miss J. Holderness and her staff.