Sie befinden Sich nicht im Netzwerk der Universität Paderborn. Der Zugriff auf elektronische Ressourcen ist gegebenenfalls nur via VPN oder Shibboleth (DFN-AAI) möglich. mehr Informationen...
The consequences of the great French revolution on European constitutions are still underestimated today. One does justice to these consequences best if one looks at the motives and assessments that inspired prominent politicians rather than looking at the urgently felt constitutional issues of the time. Thus, the classical writing of Wilhelm von Humboldt, who was an eyewitness to the first stages of the revolution, can only be adequately judged if one recognizes the limits that he wanted to draw around the enthusiastic plans for the realization of desirable state goals. On the other hand, his contemporary friend, Georg Forster, remained tied to these governmental ideals to the end. Carl von Clausewitz had experienced on the battlefield just which dynamics of the great armies worked, and he deduced from it that resistance could only be effective if the people were armed and constitutionally covered their spontaneity with all the necessary steps. On the other hand, Hegel, who remained all of his life and admirer of the 14th July as the symbolic dawn of a new age, saw already realized in the existing monarchy the necessarily evolved ideal; it was desirable to establish this through a constitution, but this did not appear to be essential. The four differing ideas of the correct constitution can be arranged, so to speak, in a cross of coordinates around a zero point. The tragedy of the affected people remains that the constitutional prerequisite of the modern age can been realized only through battle and insurrection.