This study offers a comparative analysis of the foreign and domestic policies of Prince Clemens Metternich of Austria and Thomas Jefferson of the United States. Their statecraft is examined from the perspective of the philosophy of the Enlightenment, which both claimed provided a prescriptive agenda for their initiatives. The objective of this research is to trace what impact, if any, these ideas had on the actual political conduct of these representative statesmen of the early nineteenth century. Conventional treatments of Jefferson emphasize his archetypically “Enlightenment” political philosophy. Metternich, on the other hand, is commonly considered a reactionary or, at best, a callous Realpolitiker.
After a careful examination of their political theories, the historical record, and the documentary sources, the study concludes that these assessments should be radically revised. Jefferson, it is argued, defined American interests largely in the material terms of a balance of power and followed a traditional and conservative approach to social policy. Metternich, conversely, was strongly attached to the Kantian idea of European federation, strove to create a legal foundation for a “cooperative” European states-system, and attempted a series of innovative and enlightened domestic reform projects. The “traditional” reading of their statecraft is a result of late nineteenth century nationalist historiography which interpreted their policies in a manner best suited for advancing particular ideological arguments.
Both historical and theoretical sources are deployed to advance and defend the proposition that the ideas of the Enlightenment achieved political expression in the statecraft of Metternich, but were virtually ignored in practice by the more pragmatic Jefferson.