>let them eat cake
What did she mean by this?
>>410975
She wanted to order a DQ ice cream cake for all the plebs. The ungrateful bastards had to go revolutionary because the delivery guy was late.
>>410975
>he fell for Rusing Rousseau's joke
When will people ever learn? If Rousseau wrote it, it's false or retarded.
>>410975
She meant that she came out of her mom's ass instead of the customary opening in the vagina.
>>410975
Just banter lads.
> LET THEM MEME KEK
Basically it is Jacobins Propaganda
>>410975
They demanded wheat for bread. when told what they wanted her supposed response was "bread? let them eat cake." but this is untrue. there is no actual evidence that she said this as the only sources come from revolutionaries who would like to discredit her.
>>410997
Rousseau died a lot earlier lol
>>410975
what she supposedly meant by this was an insult. she understood they did not have bread let alone something as expensive as cake which she had in abundance. basically a jab at them for being too poor
>>410975
No idea because she probably never said it.
>>410975
she said something more along the lines of let them eat brioche if she said it at all
>>410975
Seeing as she never said that, nothing.
>>410975
She didn't understand that they didn't have bread because they were too poor to afford it, she thought they should just go and buy (even more expensive) cake instead.
It's an example of how out of touch with the life of the average person was.
>>411540
A lot earlier than what? Than writing his Confessions, which is the only place this quote appears in?
She never said that. Next stupid question.
>>410975
>What did she mean by this?
If they have no "bread" as such, then let them eat "brioche" a bread made with eggs, sloppily translated into English as a cake.
It meant that she was grossly ignorant of the economics of the French State and society, or was grossly callous about the ordinary people's lives.
>>412829
>>411663
>>411629
>>410997
Actually since /his/ is full of autists with a compulsive urge to correct misconceptions, baiting here is simple as shit.
>What did she mean let them eat cake?
>Were the Egyptians really black/white?
>Who were the most badass warriors and why the Vikings?
>Why did people in the dark ages think the Earth is flat?
>Did Jesus even exist?
Literally every fucking time there's several spergs falling for that shit and threads like this get reposted ad infinitum
>>413561
Egyptians weren't black but there was a time where they were taken over by the Nubians which were sub-Saharan.
>>411536
>as the only sources come from revolutionaries who would like to discredit her.
The revolutionaries never accused her of saying 'let them eat cake.' She wasn't accused of saying it until the 19th century. French revolutionaries did accuse her of wanting to slaughter French children and drink their blood, having sex with everyone and anyone that moved, poisoning her one son, molesting the other, etc. But no 'let them eat cake.'
was Marie Antoinette a bitch?
>>416428
Not really.
The worst thing she did was alienate people at court because she didn't like having to hang around people or invite people based on their rank, but based on well, actually liking them. Which, when their whole world and upbringing is based on "your family lineage and title entitles you to certain things," was pretty outrageous.
And so the peasants eat cake, yet it was never enough to fill the holes in their lives. The people sought material living until they could no more, and then perished.
did she eat cake?
>>416581
>mfw you just made a reasonable philosophical argument for western civilization from that point on off of a quote that never happened
>mfw 4chan is the only place this happens
You're a fucking genius.
>>410975
Nothing, she didn't say it.
But the point of the statement is that it's saying the right can't understand the rights of the poor. Kinda like when people just say "get a job" when it's a shitty job market and a large percentage is unemployed not by choice.
>>419425
the rich*
>>419425
>rights
Lmfao
>>416581
And from this day fourth, the "let them eat cake" statement became a tool for the reactionaries.
Fuck anon.
That was brilliant.
>>419464
Yeah I meant plight. I don't know what's going on today, 2 fuckups in one sentence
>>419471
Well, it wasn't exactly my point.
But I guess you're correct as well.
>>410975
Its supposed to be a sign of her gross ignorance/callousness
the question was asked in response to someone telling her the people of Paris were starving and had no bread to eat
its supposed to display how she thought
>lol okies if u gots no bred you could always eat caek in the mean time
and shows how she doesnt understand how rare a treat it is for commoners not like herself
its apparently just gross propaganda though so whatever
>>410975
She didn't actually say it.
>>410975
1. She didn't say this, it's a complete myth.
2. She was utterly frivolous, and detached from earthly problems : hearing that people protested because of a bread shortage, she replied that they should eat "brioche" (a kind of sweet bread, luxury product) instead
It's a symbol of her disconnection to people living in misery.
Candid vision of a stupid little bitch living in an ivory tower, if you prefer.
>>416428
She was more of the typic YOLO teenage girl, oblivious to matters such as politic or responsability.
Not a bad person, loving mother and everything, but she could have been so much more.
>>416581
>>419389
>>419466
Wait -- what?
>>419411
>So basically she was pretty reasonable as a person by today's standards?
Pretty much. She was charitable, adopted orphans, you pretty much only had to mention some misfortune and she was there to right it, she repeatedly showed she had sympathy for the plight of the poor even though she by the nature of her birth and lifestyle couldn't understand it.
>It is certain that when people who are suffering treat us so well, we are even more obligated to work for their happiness.
I suppose if you count her 14-year old self snubbing Du Barry that would count as something mean butt, 14 year old teenager being manipulated by her aunts isn't all that terrible.
I just watched Rose of Versailles.
Official /his/ approved Chinese Cartoon.
>>416598
I'm not the OP, nor do I make these threads.
>>419389
truly epic my fellow redditor
>>420368
>revolution happens
>western civilization now becomes an endless pit of self gratification and indulgence
>let them eat cake
>they ate but could never fill the hole in their bodies
>>418467
these hips don't lie
>>422015
>you'll never have a qt with a doorway-busting dress
why live
>>416581
senpai i bow to your genius
>>420351
>She was utterly frivolous, and detached from earthly problems
The funny thing is that was untrue. When that ridiculous diamond necklace from the previous king got presented to her, her reaction was basically, "are you crazy? With the money that thing costs, we could practically triple the size of the royal navy. Get that thing out of my sight!"
>>422451
She was frivolous. Sure, she denied that necklace: but she also spent millions over the years on dresses, pearls, jewels, her estates, etc.The reason that jewelry even approached her with the necklace was that he knew she adored diamonds--she had spent almost 600,000 livres on a set of bracelets and earrings just 2 years before--and kept adding to her collection.
Of course, having said that, Marie Antoinette did not spend nearly as much as Louis XV's mistresses, the other royal family members, or even later French consorts. Empress Josephine spent far more than Marie Antoinette. Her sisters-in-law and aunts spent more than her. But she was an easier scapegoat then and now.
>>410975
Who else noticed?
>>422557
wow, I never noticed marie antoinette in that picture before
>>418467
i'd eat her cake if you know what i'm saying
>>410975
>>411015
>>411536
>>411549
She did say but it wasn't an insult. She was so protected, pampered and privileged that she didn't even know wheat bread existed let alone that bread was all "her people" could barely afford to eat. She was so oblivious to how anyone but her were living and just thought everyone was eating slightly less as well as her. Didn't deserve to get raped and murdered desu she was so innocent
>>413561
>Who were the most badass warriors and why the Vikings?
But they were, you massive idiot
>>423931
>Didn't deserve to get raped and murdered
Nor did she deserve to benefit from a system predicated on mass rape and murder.
Nor is "deserve" a meaningful historical category.
>>423931
>she did say it
She didn't, though. The specific phrase comes from a work written by Rousseau, who claims it was a story about a "great princess." It was written when she was only a child, and was still the youngest/most unimportant of Maria Theresa's daughters. Hardly a 'great princess.'
Even then, she wasn't accused of saying it in her lifetime. Multiple other members of the French royal family were attributed to that saying or similar sayings (such as "Why can't the peasants put up with pie crust?") and the phrase itself is basically a folktale that goes back as far as ancient China, except instead of "let them eat cake" it was "well then let them eat (expensive rice dish)"
I also don't know where you're getting the rape from, but she wasn't raped. And she knew that the poor weren't eating 'slightly less well than her', hence multiple letters where she talks about the plight of the poor.
