• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Why was the Dreyfus Affair so bitterly divisive in France? The Dreyfus Affair began in 1894 with the unjust conviction of Alfred Dreyfus, a French Artillery Officer

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Lee Waring Why was the Dreyfus Affair so bitterly divisive in France? The Dreyfus Affair began in 1894 with the unjust conviction of Alfred Dreyfus, a French Artillery Officer, for the crime of treason. The Affair was to last 12 years, and some historians would argue that it split the country in two.1 The case of Dreyfus was to create such intense public opinion, that some believe few modern French figures have been more controversial.2 Feelings of Nationalism and anti-Semitism would keep the Affair closely related to the French passions. The Press would play a large part in influencing the feelings relating to the case; helping to condemn Dreyfus as well as later increasing awareness and support in favour of him. Questions would be asked of the previously infallible Army, and as time went on the Affair would cause some to question the very foundations of the French Republic. The reasons why the Affair was so bitterly divisive have been, over the last century, subject to much debate. I want to argue that, as well as causing major divisions within France, the Affair became a symbol of these divisions, as well as a focus for certain groups to rally around. I would also show that the many reasons for the divisions it created are specific to the French political and social divisions at the time. Throughout the Third Republic, there were a great number of conflicting political parties. On the right there were the Orleanists, the Legitamists and the Nationalists. These were opposed by the Opportunists, the Radicals and Republicans. ...read more.

Middle

Zola, believing Dreyfus to be innocent, explained the case in simple terms and made the public aware that an innocent man was in prison. The article was titled 'J'accuse' and was later described as a "revolutionary act of incomparable power"21 which resulted in people taking sides. Chapman would argue that until 1897 the affair had been concentrated on two narrow groups; the people linked to Dreyfus who believed him to be innocent from the outset, his family for example, and the ministry of war, chief of staff and statistical section. He believes that had the Affair been confined to these groups, it would have been easily wound up, creating little division.22 What the press did was extend the number of people with an interest in the case so that it now included political and religious groups as well as public opinion. This complicated matters and allowed the case to be opened up to debate. Johnson believes that this would not, perhaps, create a problem in a country that had no divisive factors to begin with, as the press doesn't play too important a role. However, in a country which already has underlying divisions, the press will have much more influence23, helping to "re-kindle the dying embers of mutual antipathy."24 The Army was at the centre of the debate over Dreyfus. Dreyfus was an army officer, allegedly attempting to pass military secrets to a foreign enemy. It was the Army who suspected, charged and convicted Dreyfus. It would also be the Army who would refuse Dreyfus' retrial, even when they realised that he was innocent. ...read more.

Conclusion

The reasons have been debated ever since. Whilst there were factors such as anti-Semitism and anti-Militarism involved in the Dreyfus Affair, it was not essentially a question of whether Dreyfus was guilty or innocent. Dreyfus was ultimately a symbol, and as such highlighted many of the underlying divisions. The Affair was so divisive because it questioned of the rights of the individual in the republic. The left believed that the rights of an individual should be the states' uttermost concern, and that it should not matter that by admitting a judicial error, the army's honour, or the state system could be harmed.56Without the possibility of injustices being corrected, the left believed that the state could not exist unfortunately the right disagreed believing that "while there could be society without justice, there was never any justice without society."57In England, there was a similar case involving a naval cadet. It had many of the same circumstances as the Dreyfus Affair.58 However, it was not such a divisive affair in England. This is because essentially there were no underlying divisions on how the state should be run, as there were in France. The Dreyfus Affair had touched a nerve amongst the already sensitive French population. What had started as a case of treason against a Jew, and originally represented the dangers of a foreigner, evolved into a far more divisive affair. It pitched the left against the right over traditional targets such as the church, army and aristocracy. Ultimately, it was not Dreyfus that the French were divided upon, but a Republican France. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Political Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Political Philosophy essays

  1. The Parliamentary Reform and Redistribution Act of 1884 - 1885.

    to fully satisfy the needs of the Working Class The Independent Labour Party and The Labour Representation Committee This I believe is the first time Britain sees and actual movement towards the completion of a Labour Party for the Working Class.

  2. 'Accidental Death Of An Anarchist' was written by Dario Fo, in 1970 - Contextualisation

    The police declared that Pinelli had committed suicide after having been convinced that the real culprits were no other than Valpreda, Garganelli and the other members of the Milan group.

  1. Iran Country Study

    - Following the fall of the Soviet Union, Iranian isolation was aggravated by the launching of the peace process in 1994. Even the lasting alliance between Iran and Syria would have been threatened in case of a return of the Golan Heights to Damascus, followed by a peace treaty between the two former enemies.

  2. Wilted Socialist Rose?: Changing fortunes of the French Socialist Party

    the lack of a clear ideology, resulting in membership loss and electoral decline (Machin & Wright 1977). The SFIO had long been unpopular because of the lack of a clear ideology. The appearance of several radical Socialist parties further left made the SFIO more of a centre party instead (Cobban 1948).

  1. Socialist uses of workers' inquiry

    In fact, capitalism is a relatively new social system.1 But what exactly does 'capitalism' mean? Class division Capitalism is the social system which now exists in all countries of the world. Under this system, the means for producing and distributing goods (the land, factories, technology, transport system etc)

  2. Russia's Political Party System as an Obstacle to Democratization

    There are scholars who believe that a stable party system is manifesting itself in Russia. Several of them base their arguments on survey data accumulated prior to 1999 that indicates that voters are increasingly able to make informed choices regarding parties and that partisan attachments are beginning to form.

  1. Notes on John Stuart Mill's On Liberty

    There are two reasons that these kinds of laws should not be passed according to Mill's theory. The first reason is simply that the government has no particular interest in what I do with my own life and my own possessions, certainly no interest that compares to the overwhelming interest that I have in my own life, health, and property.

  2. Idealistic Politics

    The society that Marx visualized was one where all the citizens desired only the interests of the society by not desiring to satisfy their personal interests. History, however, does not have a basis for pure communism where a group of people have ceased to exist without any possessions and have

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work