The Defense of the Old Regime, 1815–48 465tion of six farm workers (the Tolpuddle martyrs) in
1834 for taking a secret oath. The conditions of penal
servitude were harsh and included corporal punish-
ment; one Irish nationalist received one hundred lashes
for singing a rebel song.Challenges to the Old Order:
The ‘-isms’
The changes that had shaken Europe in the generation
before 1815—the intellectual ferment of the Enlighten-
ment, the political upheaval of the French Revolution,
the social transformation of industrialization—had all
produced pressures to reform the Old Regime. After
1815 these ideas of change began to crystallize into po-
litical doctrines (or ideologies). These new doctrines
are known as the “-isms” because they took names end-
ing in ism,a linguistic vogue that began with the word
liberalism(coined in 1820), continued with the terms na-
tionalismand socialismin the 1830s, and soon included
such doctrines as radicalism, capitalism, Marxism, and
feminism. These doctrines were sometimes compatible
with each other and sometimes in conflict with each
other, but they all called for changes in the Metter-
nichian order.
The first of these doctrines, liberalism, was derived
from the Latin word liber(free) to denote a doctrine
about individual freedom. Early nineteenth-century lib-
eralism (sometimes called classical liberalism to distin-
guish it from later liberalism) sought individual
freedoms (such as freedom of speech), laws extending
such liberty to more individuals (such as minorities),
and the removal of impediments to liberty (such as laws
favoring members of an established national church).
To achieve such aims, liberals commonly demanded
two fundamental documents: (1) a constitution estab-
lishing a representative government and specifying its
powers, and (2) a bill of rights guaranteeing individual
liberties. Few countries possessed such constitutions or
bills of rights, and most monarchs opposed them. Lib-
erals, therefore, were among the primary opponents of
the Metternichian restoration.
A second ideology—nationalism—created addi-
tional problems for conservatives. This doctrine shifted
discussion toward the collective rights of a nation. Na-
tionalists asserted that it was possible to identify dis-
tinct nations, based upon shared characteristics such as
language (see map 24.2). This nationalism is illustrated
by a German song, Ernst Arndt’s Where Is the German’s Fa-
therland?: “Where is the German’s Fatherland? Name me
at length that mighty land! ‘Where’er resounds the Ger-
man tongue, Where’er its hymns to God are sung.’ ”
Other nationalists defined their nation by a shared cul-
ture, history, or religion. All advocated the creation of
nation-states independent from foreign rule, uniting
members of the nation in a single, self-governing state.
Nationalists considered these objectives more impor-
tant than the political rights that liberals sought. As a
Rumanian nationalist said in the 1840s, “The question
of nationality is more important than liberty. Until a
people can exist as a nation, it cannot make use of lib-
erty.” One could be both a liberal and nationalist, seek-
ing a nation-state that granted liberty, as Giuseppe
Mazzini did in his movement called Young Italy (see
document 24.3), but the two objectives often conflicted
with each other.
Governments especially dreaded radicalism, the
term they usually applied to democratic movements.
Radicals endorsed liberalism but demanded more;
whereas liberals were willing to accept a limited fran-
chise, radicals called for a democratic franchise and
sometimes for the abolition of monarchy. In the words
of Mazzini, radicals “no longer believed in the sanctity
of royal races, no longer believed in aristocracy, no
longer believed in privilege.” Radical movements,
such as the Decembrists in Russia and the Chartists
in Britain, however, made conservatives think of
Robespierre and the guillotine.
The term socialismwas also coined in the 1830s to
identify doctrines stressing social and economic equal-
ity. Marxist socialism did not become a significant polit-
ical philosophy until after midcentury, but many forms
of pre-Marxist socialism existed. The earliest, known as
utopian socialism, grew from critiques of industrial soci-
ety. Robert Owen, the son of a poor Welsh artisan,
made a fortune as a textile manufacturer and devoted his
wealth to improving industrial conditions. He branded
the factory system “outright slavery” and called for a
new social order based on cooperation instead of com-
petition. Owen applied his ideas to his own factories at
New Lanark, Scotland, where he limited his profits and
invested in building a comfortable life for his workers
(see illustration 24.3). This won Owen an international
reputation, but neither industrialists nor governments
copied his ideas. Utopian socialism took different forms
in France. The founder of French socialism, Count
Henri de Saint-Simon, reversed the pattern of Owen’s
life: He was born to the nobility, squandered his for-
tune, and died in poverty. He was a hero of the Ameri-
can Revolution, a prisoner of the French Revolution, and
a critic of the industrial revolution. He denounced all