After a series of failed coups d'état masterminded by the Marquis de Lafayette, the French regime was completely controlled by the bourgeoisie representing the constitutional monarchy and a small number of liberal nobles......

Of course, in order to gain the support and cooperation of the king, the National Constituent Assembly will also more or less take into account the concept of King Louis XVI to legislate. Pen @ fun @ pavilion wWw. ｂｉｑUｇE。 ｉｎｆｏ

Whether King Louis XVI or the National Constituent Assembly was in control, the National Constituent Assembly was led by Barnaf, Dipole, Charles. Morality. Although the constitutional monarchists, led by the Lamet Triumvirate, have publicly declared their recognition of the achievements of the resolutions since the Revolution, they fear that the awakened French people will once again threaten the French government.

Thus, after the Kingdom of France stabilized in October, the National Constituent Assembly, controlled by the Big Three, joined forces with King Louis XVI and began to establish a legal framework for the democrats.

The majority of the people sitting in the National Constituent Assembly are bourgeoisie, who want to maintain their political superiority, and in order to avoid the participation of all strata of the people in political life and in the management of state affairs, they avoid the consequences of the solemnly affirmative principles of the Declaration of Human Rights, which in short, hang high the Declaration of Human Rights in favor of the French people, but deliberately avoid the unfavorable provisions in its implementation!

This approach is clearly already in the shadow of most democracies in the 21st century, and it is a precedent for political fraud.

On this basis, the first problem for the National Constituent Assembly was the abysmal fiscal deficit of the Kingdom of France, and the religious problem that had been stalled since the abolition of tithes and religious privileges.

The question of finance and religion became two of the most prominent issues in the political life of the French government after stabilization.

As we all know, in a country with strong traditional religious influence, such as the Kingdom of France, the native church in France has a large amount of wealth accumulation, so the constitutional monarchist politicians led by the Big Three began to attack the wealth of the church after obtaining Lin Haoda's acquiescence.

Although the church forces belong to a large part of the old power class, they are not of the same mind as the old forces of the feudal aristocracy, before the French Revolution, it was not uncommon for local churches to compete for power and profit with small and medium-sized nobles and even big nobles, and most importantly, the church forces did not have their own military armament!

The church monks had a huge influence in the upper class of French society, and they also relied on God to fool many ignorant French civilians among the people, but as early as the time of Louis XIV, the church lost the right to have an exclusive army at the legal level, and by the time of Louis XVI, the church became a big fat sheep that seemed to be huge, but in fact did not have many "sharp blades".

In order to increase fiscal spending, the First Council of State convened by the three giants of the constitutional monarchy ordered that each mint be allowed to accept silver cutlery sent by individuals, thus increasing the source of raw materials for minting silver coins.

Subsequently, the National Constituent Assembly enacted a new decree to dispose of silverware that was not necessary for 'proper worship'!

This decree amounted to a direct deprivation of a large number of silver ornaments and small objects in churches everywhere, and the constitutional bourgeoisie, in order to better exploit the wealth of the clerical class, secretly entered into a win-win deal with the bishop of Orton, Talerlang.

The local bishop, who was in a high position in the Church, submitted to the National Assembly a proposal to place the property of the monks under the control of the State:

"Monks are not owners of property like other owners, and the state has very broad rights over all groups, and can exercise property rights over monks. It can shatter the socially useless groups of this hierarchy, whose property will inevitably be shared reasonably throughout the country, and whatever the sacred nature of the lawfully owned property, the law can only preserve what the legislator has consented to.

We know that only those parts of this property that are necessary for the livelihood of the priests belong to them, and the rest belong to the monasteries and the poor.

If this subsistence is borne by the State, the property of the beneficiaries is not violated, and the State may, first, deprive the religious communities that are to be outlawed and guarantee the livelihood of their members; secondly, the state can collect the empty salaries; Thirdly, the State may reduce the income of the current staff by a certain percentage and assume the initial debt of these properties......"

This proposal was immediately hotly debated in the National Assembly, and some religious forces strongly condemned it, insisting that property is sacrosanct, as stated in the Declaration of Human Rights, and therefore the State has no right to place church property under the administration of the State!

However, the representatives of the constitutional monarchist bourgeoisie, led by the Big Three, pointed out: "People's property can be dispossessed, not to mention that the clerical caste is not the owner of the property, but only the administrator of the property, the income of which should be used for charities and public interests, such as hospitals, schools, religious ceremonies, etc.

Since the state is responsible for these undertakings from now on, it is only natural that these properties belong to the state! “

Immediately, the constitutional monarchist bourgeoisie in the National Assembly passed the proposal by a majority of votes - that all ecclesiastical property should be placed at the disposal of the State, which would be responsible for providing 'proper' religious expenses, maintaining the clergy and providing relief to the poor.

From this resolution, it can be seen that the National Assembly was not hostile to the traditional Church, but only wanted to use the vast wealth of the Church to alleviate the financial difficulties of the Kingdom of France and to bring religious affairs under the administration of the State.

After the introduction of this decree, the clergy of the Church could no longer enrich themselves and had to rely on regular state salaries for their livelihood......

The National Assembly was completely expropriated by the Church through legal procedures, so it was difficult for the Church forces without the support of force to resist, and they could only be forced to watch as the government of the Kingdom of France confiscated the vast wealth of the Church!

After successfully embezzling the wealth of the Church, the huge financial gap of the Kingdom of France was finally alleviated, but the constitutional monarchist bourgeoisie led by the Big Three knew very well that most of the wealth of the Church came from land, not from cash, precious metals and even living materials that could be circulated!

Therefore, if the land where the church has the majority of the wealth is converted into cash, it will naturally be able to make up for the financial gap in France, but this conversion is not as simple as lip service, and the red deficit in the financial accounts of the French government, which has embezzled the wealth of the church, has not eliminated much......

However, the constitutional monarchist bourgeoisie still had a very good way, and this method made Lin Haoda, who lived in the Tuileries Palace in Paris, shine in his eyes, as if he saw the door of a new world open to him!

The constitutional monarchist bourgeoisie established a tax-based electoral system to determine the right to elect local officials to members of the National Assembly.

The situation in which the French government adopted the constitution divided the whole kingdom of France into several groups of people through the differences in political rights.

The French government declared that only citizens of the Kingdom of France were considered French, and they excluded most of the rural serfs, tenants, poor peasants, etc., who could not even guarantee personal freedom, from the status of French citizens.

These French, who have no human rights and are not even citizens, make up the majority of the nearly 30 million Frenchmen, and probably nearly 20 million people belong to the French, who are not citizens......

Among French citizens, on the other hand, there are four classes according to the amount of tax paid and the right to property at their disposal:

The lowest passive citizens are the French who have no property rights, mainly referring to the low-class French commoners living in the cities, who do not even own their own real estate, and can only rely on selling their labor to obtain the necessary living materials, belonging to the lowest level of the various French cities, but as passive citizens, they have the right to protect their person, property and freedom, but they have no right to actively participate in the formation of public power, and about 3 million French people have been deprived of the right to vote......

Passive citizens are active citizens, and the French government has become the 'real shareholders of huge social enterprises', in fact, these people are French people with certain assets, who can rely on their own income to support themselves, and even have their own small workshops and shops, these people are the foundation of the social productivity of the Kingdom of France!

In terms of tax payments, active citizens are eligible for direct taxes equivalent to at least three days' worth of work in the local area, and there are about 4 million people who can form a local 'primary council' to elect local municipalities and electors.

The second class of French citizens are electors, with a ratio of about 1 to 100 active citizens, about 50,000 in the country, who pay taxes equivalent to the value of a 10-day working day in the local area, and electors form 'electoral assemblies' in provincial capitals to elect deputies to the National Assembly, judges and provincial administrators.

Finally, the highest level of citizenship is the deputies who make up the 'Legislative Assembly', and the members of the National Constituent Assembly belong to this class, and these deputies are more restrictive, they must own some private property, and they have to pay a certain additional tax on representatives, which is not a small amount, which is more than five times the direct tax paid by the electors!

Of course, for the really rich, paying this tax and sitting in the National Constituent Assembly, the highest power in the Kingdom of France, is definitely a sure deal!

This electoral system, in which the eligibility for election was determined by the amount of tax paid, allowed the money aristocracy to replace the mendi aristocracy, and since then, the power of capital has completely surpassed the ancient aristocratic tradition!