Economic distress was a pivotal cause of the French revolution. Louis XVI’s ignorance towards France’s dire fiscal problems led to his unwillingness to reform, which was an important factor in the expansion of economic distress. Moreover Michael Sonenscher rightly argues that the government’s borrowing was “Euthanasia” however this view disregards France’s structural issues to which Marsha Frey suggests and upholds the view that the “government primarily relied on direct taxation such as the taille for financing” , allowing the clergy and the nobility to be exempt from this. The immunity denied the government from essential taxes. However, more recent scholarship has taken an opposing view, and Marsha Frey concluded that the insufficient and arbitrary taxation system was a reason for the economic distress but the wars France was involved in was the …show more content…
However, Marsha Frey has made the important point that the wars were not a direct cause, it was France’s lack of reform and ineffective running of the government that led to anarchy arising as Britain was also involved in wars, however arguably the difference was Britain’s modern economic system, the Central Bank led it to avoid the same dire financial state that France had acquired thus the unwillingness to reform combined with the astronomical and mounting debt led to anarchy amongst the Third Estate. It is rightly argued that rather than recognise the weaknesses in the fiscal arrangement Louis XVI indulged in luxuries which irked the Third Estate leading to the government losing its purpose. Ultimately, despite other factors