This event shows how corrupt and money hungry the government had become, by letting anyone get high up in the political chain just by feeding the gluttonous king. The next king, Louis XVI saw that the majority of France (75%) was peasants and serfs. Consequently, to try to ensure their happiness (and prevent the Revolution), he had the Estates-General abolish the feudal system, in which they held no ranking.4 This made the nobility extremely unhappy. With no feudal system, they no longer were much higher up politicly than the commoners. The next noble atrocity came with Louis XVI making the nobles pay taxes.
This made their settlement neither profitable nor socially stable, since individual colonists felt little attachment to their community but instead sought individual wealth. A lack of social bonds in the community was further exacerbated by the fact that all the initial colonists, and most of the later arrivals, were male. Without wives or children to protect, the colonists had little incentive to protect their settlement or work towards its long-term growth. The noblemen who made the journey to the Americas often came with their respective titles, but no wealth, because of the British custom of primogeniture. These second born sons intended to create their wealth through exploitation of the Native American population and the many indentured servants who came to work for them.
Around the late 19th century displeasurable and unfair actions have been acted toward farmers, working men, and minorities. The Industrialist took advantage of their lack of power, and bribed government officials and pursed corruption actions towards laborers. However, the loudest voice of the group was the Agrarian workers and American Farmers. Ask yourself, was the farmers outcry's pure pointless complaints towards Industrialist malicious actions or potential abuse that impedes an unbalanced industrialized society? Farmers were falling into unprofitable production and debt using all the profit innovating machines the government encouraged them to use.
During the time Morgan was manufacturing steel pipe tubing, Carnegie threatened to ruin him by invading his business if Morgan did not buy Carnegie out. E... ... middle of paper ... ... as farmers became more conscious of prices rising to transport their goods, they were forced to find other means of transportation to distribute their goods. Even though these men attempted to build a stable foundation for America to grow on, their negative aspects dramatically outweighed the positive. Even though Andrew Carnegie donated his fortunes to charity, he only acquired the money through unjustifiable actions. As these industrialists continued to monopolize companies through illegal actions, plutocracy- government controlled by the wealthy, took control of the Constitution.
Meanwhile, the first two estates were given a free pass despite their great wealth (Doc... ... middle of paper ... ...in great debt after the French and Indian War and corruption of the monarch and nobility. This led to a crisis over taxation, and the king started abusing his power by specifically only taxing the third estate, the poorest segment of the population. Matters slowly became worse with the economic depression. Decreased economic activity and the agricultural revolution caused many people to loose jobs and go hungry. People were already angry about taxes, and the lack of food and work only aroused the people even more.
The economic situation was only one of the elements that caused the people to question the monarchy in pre-revolutionary France. France was in great debt and almost bankrupt but this did not stop them from fighting wars. The debt -- an economic problem -- turned into a social one, when the peasants were taxed heavily in order to pay for the debt, this caused them to question greatly their position in society and the effectiveness of their monarchy. Drought and other natural disasters ruined crop production, causing food prices to rise dramatically. With taxes rising and prices too, peasants were living in famine and in poor living conditions.
During this time, they never gained support from the peasants which made up most of China. Instead, they bullied them by imposing high taxes on them which made them even more unpopular with them. So instead of gaining supporters they lost what were potential supporters.
Essentially, the ones who could bear to be taxed were not taxed and those who could not bear to be taxed were taxed. All of this lead to the oppression of the majority of the population and a rising discontentment with the government. (afe.easia.columbia.edu) The Qing government did not support forward development of its people which resulted in China being humiliated by foreign power... ... middle of paper ... ...y from the slowing effects of the corrupted conservating Qing Dynasty–and to become the superpower it is today. Works Cited "Part 1: Introduction." Chinese History.
The aristocracy immediately reacted to these taxes as declaring them unfair and would not accept them. Louis XV began with a series of Financial advisors chancellors which all had the intention of saving the monarchy from financial ruin. They made many attempts at taxation, such as a land tax, but each of these were defeated by the nobles -- the Parlements were even destroyed for a brief time, but were later restored by Louis XVI in attempt to gain public support. The government continued to become poorer and poorer and it seemed the only successful taxation was done towards the peasants, whom had the least money. The monarchy eventually fell and caused great unrest
The peasants blamed the Tsar for not speaking for his people as the peasants felt that he was not doing anything for them Another long-term cause for the attempted revolution was that the government's polices to develop industry, led by Sergi Witte, had disastrous effects on the Russian people. This circumstance was made worse by poor harvests and an industrial slump. The workers and peasants felt that the Tsar was not giving them enough support. At that time, everybody thought that the Tsar was an ineffective ruler and incapable of making important decisions. This is because the Tsar used to personally reply the letters that were sent to him, about complaints, from the Russian people.