Sunday, August 30, 2009
The Burschenschaft
The Burschenschaft group and their focus was probably the most interesting thing about the readings we have done so far. One thing that struck me about this group was the specific rights they demanded. As Robertson points out they "emphatically rejected the snobbery of the old student fraternities and proclaimed that they were in favor of democratic integration of all social classes...they also hoped to turn the duel from an aristocratic right to a purifying 'human' ordeal..." (Students on the Barricades pp. 368) As Robertson points out there demands for "democratic integration of all social classes" was really just a smoke screen to grant the rights of the aristocracy to these mostly middle class students. Their demand of the right to duel, a right enjoyed by the aristocracy, is the key to clearing away the proverbial smoke screen the Burschenschaft erected behind their equality for all demands allowing a look into their true intentions. The right of dueling was denied to all but people of noble birth for most of history. To have the right to engage in dueling would, in essence, elevate the middle class to a level equal to the aristocracy. Now why would the right of dueling be so important to people who express the opinion that all people should be equal under the rule of law? That is the question that keeps coming back to me.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What we have here is a situation where the Burschenschaft want to "have their cake and eat it too." I, for what it's worth, believe that this student organization does truly want equality for all people under the rule of law. They want Joe the plumber and Fred the noble to both have equality and not a situation like in Animal Farm, where everyone is equal, but "some are more equal than others." At the same time, these students (like you and I) want what they cannot have. The Grass is always greener on the other side... They want equality for all, but they also want more power, prestige, and rights than the rest of the middle and lower classes... like the elites strangely enough...
ReplyDeleteIt's possible that the reason for which they sought the right to duel was no more complicated than that they believed dueling to be an effective and more expedient way of settling conflict. Just a thought.
ReplyDeleteI partially agree with Milton. While the Burchenschaften did champion equality for all, it is more likely that these elite/upper middle class students sought to acquire the same privileges, rights and traditions that the upper classes enjoyed. Protecting something as abstract as one's honor through dueling was hardly a concern of the working classes, and this particular preoccupation of the Burschenschaften exemplifies their disconnect with the lower classes. As far as dueling being a way to settle conflict goes, didn't these fraternities champion democratic methods of decision making? That seems a bit out of character to me...
ReplyDeleteThe desire by the Burchenschaften to be allowed to duel is, in my opinion, a continuation of the age old desire by the middle class to elevate themselves above the lower classes. In class we talked about how around this time (1848-ish) many were still trying to define what it meant to be middle class. The middle class knew they were not the aristocracy, but it was a more fuzzy matter to compare the middle and lower classes around 1848. The students probably thought that by gaining the middle class the right to duel, it would further distance the middle class from the workers by making the middle class closer to the aristocracy. As to how dueling fits in with the Burchenschaften's proclamations of everyone being equal under the rule of law, there is but one answer: it doesn't.
ReplyDeleteThe question of duelling as a status symbol raises the larger question of Robertson's perception of the students. Did she see them as true agents of equality and democracy or as up and comers interested in acquiring elite status for themselves? Based on her article, do they students seem genuinely concerned for social equality or with ensuring their social mobility?
ReplyDelete