Joseph de Maistre is one of the harshest counter-revolutionary critics of the French Revolution. He calls for a return to traditional Catholicism and the Restoration of the monarchy. The book _Considerations on France_ takes a look at his arguments for that tradition and his understanding of the dark side of human existence through his unique Christian perspective. De Maistre was both a Freemason and a Roman Catholic, an arch-conservative traditionalist, and a strong believer in the primacy of papal authority in the secular and spiritual realms. In this book, he criticizes those eighteenth century philosophers and their belief in progress and the "social contract" ideal. He explains why the traditional development of society is more appropriate, given the rootedness of man in sin. This is an important work to understand the thought of De Maistre, a Catholic reactionary.

This book may be helpful for every person interested in the French Revolution. It shows a "reactionary" vision of the Revolution, and describes all the human right violations done by the revolutionaries. In de Maistre's view, the French Revolution is a divine punishment for France. France had not follow its special vocation: to be a stronghold of the christian faith, and therefore came the Revolution. Perhaps the most interesting thing is that all De Maistre's predictions became true, specially the Restauration of Monarchy. Most books about the French Revolution are pure apologies. If you want to read something very different, read this book.

I picked up this book in a wonderful pocket edition in Spanish, which allowed me to read it in snatches. I believe it is better read thus, rather than in one sitting (I can't imagine reading 500+ pages of complex arguments in one go). The author, Count Joseph de Maistre, was a Catholic Savoyard nobleman who was born in the Ancién Régime's twilight and was almost buried by the revolutionary upheavals after 1789. Separated from his family and nearly broke, he endured a long odyssey through Europe, always escaping the revolutionaries just before their arrival into a territory, at last seeking refuge in Saint Petersburg where he quickly became a local fixture, well respected as a very learned man. His learning is visible in the St. Petersburg Dialogues, where he has three characters (the count- apparently himself-, the senator - an elderly Russian nobleman- and the knight -a young French soldier) meet at the Count's dacha for 11 nights to debate all sort of matters. They discuss the nature of Providence, and address the old question "why does the good man suffer, whereas the evildoer thrives?" in a very ingenious way. They discuss the origin of languages, the limits of science, the future of mankind. There is also a very long disquisition in which the Count tears Locke's "Treatise on Human Understanding" to tatters. The writing is wonderfully fluid and a character may talk about an issue for pages on end, but this is never boring because the arguments move forward very quickly. De Maistre was a great polemist and many of his arguments were apparently meant to shock the reader. This will happen at times even when the reader tends to agree with most of the Count's arguments (as in my case). Clearly, after the passing of Gilbert K. Chesterton (1930's) there hasn't been a worthy Catholic polemist willing to take on many of the fallacies of the modern mindset.

The Dialogues is, at its best, worthy of the Socratic dialogues on which it was modelled, although De Maistre is as guilty as Plato of never giving opposite viewpoints enough airtime. He may have been worried about fortifying them, which was opposite to his intention. De Maistre shows that religion doesn't have to be fair, only consistent. The Count, possessed of one of the bleakest views on nature imaginable, lived up to his own somber expectations. Having lived in exile for a quarter century, he died a few years after the Restoration, unable to enjoy the re-establishment of absolute monarchy and absolute religion.

I found the book to be very uplifting in the spiritual sense and very much enjoyed the robust argumentation.

De Maistre is one of the most incisive political philosophers ever to take pen in hand: he was able to predict the social impact of the French Revolution's demented ideas with unerring precision, and he dissects the revolutionary mentality with ruthlessness. The frame of his analysis is one simple principle: man is flawed. It is ridiculous to believe that a perfect social order can be dreamed up and implemented by imperfect human beings. While other critics of the French Revolution, like Edmund Burke or the older (and wiser) Thomas Jefferson cannot fully attack revolutionary principles (because they subscribed to a modified version of them), De Maistre revels in adopting a position diametrically opposed to those principles and ably defends it. He demonstrates not only the fallacy of utopian social planning, but he also refutes the tired chestnut that authority and tradition are stultifying or repressive - authority lends order to chaos, and tradition prevents the wheel of government from being bloodily reinvented every generation by idiotic murderers like Lincoln, FDR, Hitler and Mao. The book is not only a spirited defense of traditional European culture against perverse universalist ideology, it is also a literary masterpiece. Unlike Rousseau's Social Contract or Montesquieu's Spirit of the Laws, this particular Frenchman (actually Savoyard) wrote in a lucid, engaging and conversational style full of wit and paradox instead of stolid pronouncement. Its literary artifice (it is written as a series of conversations - the dialogues of the title - between a young French nobleman at the Court of St. Petersburg and several interesting companions) is pleasant and reveals the fads and thinking of the times in a playful and enjoyable way. It is rare to find a work which is simultaneously so thought-provoking and so well wrought. Next time you read a blow-dried, boring book by a hack like Garry Wills, remember that 200 years ago political writers still had independent minds and literary talent.

This biography of the French Counter-revolutionary thinker, Joseph de Maistre, provides an excellent introduction to the thought of this Catholic militant. Joseph de Maistre was an arch-reactionary opponent of the French revolution and proponent of a properly restored monarchy and Catholicism and a united Christianity under papal rule. The main bases for his thought lie in his Catholicism, his adherence to Tradition and the monarchy, his anti-Modernism and reaction to the ideals of the French revolution, and in the occultist illuminism of Saint-Martin and the Freemasonic tradition. In his "Considerations sur la France", de Maistre argues against the thought of the "philosophes" and eighteenth century Enlightenment thinkers and for a restored monarchy and Catholicism rooted in tradition. Contrary to the Revolutionary idealism, Maistre argues that man is imperfect and rooted in sin and thus a rational reconstruction of society is doomed to failure. In "Du Pape", de Maistre outlines his belief in papal authority and the supremacy of the Catholic Church. As a Catholic de Maistre believes the Pope to be infallible and in the necessity of his wielding power over earthly sovereigns. Both a Freemason and a Catholic, de Maistre argues for a Catholic subsumption of the Orthodox Churches, the Protestant Churches, and other schismatics and heretics under papal rule. This particular book brought much strong reaction because of the radical nature of its main argument. De Maistre's Catholicism is extreme in its opposition to both the Reformation and Modernity. De Maistre spent much of his time in Russia as an ambassador for Sardinia, and in the "Soirees de Saint-Petersbourg", he presents arguments about various aspects concerning the laws and the need for a return to tradition. De Maistre has unique thoughts about the origins of languages and the American Indians and other aboriginal peoples. Contrary to the popular Rousseauian "noble savage" ideal, de Maistre presents a much more realistic picture of the American Indian and the development of the world's religions from a primordial tradition and encounter with God. His other works include discussions of illuminism, theosophy (especially that of Saint-Martin, to whom he was a follower of), supernaturalism and occultism, and the nature of tradition and government. The author shows de Maistre to be a precursor to Romanticism in his aesthetic writings. Furthermore, the author examines de Maistre's influence on subsequent thinkers including Catholics such as Jacques Maritaine, and others such as Charles Maurras and Baudelaire. This book is an excellent biography of a reactionary opponent to the French Revolution and modernity, a Catholic Traditionalist, and a thinker who calls for a restoration of monarchism and privelege. In particular, this book focuses on the role of de Maistre in literature. While the thought of de Maistre would certainly not be considered popular today, his thought is a uniquely Catholic and traditional one which offers hope against the viscitudes of modernity.

Hats off to Dr. Bradley, whose interpretive, integrative, and deductive abilities are obviously surging, at this early point in his career. Never before have I read anything about De Maistre that pierced so painfully, to the point of seeing his logic as it applies to us all. It made me proud, and ashamed. Compelling.