Good point. People like to lump our Glorious Revolution and the Frenchie's together, but they were really quite different.
Americans were fighting under a unified authority against an offshore power. The French were faction fighting for control of their own system.
The Americans were fighting because their industry was doing very well. The French were fighting because they were starving...or at least that was the pretext.
Basically, the French Revolution was antifa, with the expected post-revolution results.
The French were fighting because they were starving...or at least that was the pretext
Yep. The pretext was a little thin, but people bought it. What was actually happening was an insurrection to bring down the authority of the monarchy and the Church in one fell swoop. It was pressed for in secret boys clubs like the Illuminati and the Freemasons all over Europe and is documented extensively by several contemporary texts such as "Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism" by Augustin Barruel, a French exile living in England at the time and close cohort of the famous Edmund Burke, founder of modern conservatism.
Same shit happened to the Tsar in Russia to kick of the Bolshevik takeover.
Well we both know my money would be on a group of subversives that have been thrown out of over a hundred nation-states for fomenting revolution.
However on the other hand, I do know that the conspiracies hammered out by secret societies like the Illuminati and Freemasons all over Europe that had been talked in whispers about overthrowing the contemporary authorities for a decade leading up to the French Revolution are well documented by scholars of the time, and I'm not sure whether the two threads are intertwined.
Yes. Without the French Revolution, there is no communism.
Absolutely. All of the weird, society-reconstructing decimal time, 10 day weeks, reworked months, etc seems commie af before its time.
They were, literally, Marx's inspiration. Your observation is not immaterial.
Marx followed Neitzsche, and that came from Kant's Critique of Pure Reason.
Did not know this detail. Also, Nietzche was garbage, change my mind.
Well, damn. TIL. lol
Birds of a shit feather flock together, after all
So, Communism.
But... but... are you anti-science??
Good point. People like to lump our Glorious Revolution and the Frenchie's together, but they were really quite different.
Americans were fighting under a unified authority against an offshore power. The French were faction fighting for control of their own system.
The Americans were fighting because their industry was doing very well. The French were fighting because they were starving...or at least that was the pretext.
Basically, the French Revolution was antifa, with the expected post-revolution results.
Yep. The pretext was a little thin, but people bought it. What was actually happening was an insurrection to bring down the authority of the monarchy and the Church in one fell swoop. It was pressed for in secret boys clubs like the Illuminati and the Freemasons all over Europe and is documented extensively by several contemporary texts such as "Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism" by Augustin Barruel, a French exile living in England at the time and close cohort of the famous Edmund Burke, founder of modern conservatism.
Same shit happened to the Tsar in Russia to kick of the Bolshevik takeover.
Guess who funded the French Revolution?
I'll bet I could guess but can you point me to the evidence instead?
What's your guess?
Well we both know my money would be on a group of subversives that have been thrown out of over a hundred nation-states for fomenting revolution.
However on the other hand, I do know that the conspiracies hammered out by secret societies like the Illuminati and Freemasons all over Europe that had been talked in whispers about overthrowing the contemporary authorities for a decade leading up to the French Revolution are well documented by scholars of the time, and I'm not sure whether the two threads are intertwined.