Where did the "french revolution caused all the world's problems" meme come from?
>>883027
reactionaries who somehow think things are worse than they were under the ancient regime
>>883034
Nice bait.
Prior to the "enlightenment" mass-murder did not take place under a single Catholic monarch in the French Kingdom. The High-Medieval Period was by far the most peaceful era of France's history before the modern day.
But for morality as skewed as yours, killing millions of people for your definition of a "better world" is cool I guess...
>>883065
>Prior to the "enlightenment" mass-murder did not take place under a single Catholic monarch in the French Kingdom
Religious Wars, Huguenot massacres (notably, St. Bartholomew's Day)
>>883027
It didn't. But Robespierre was also a mass murderer. He went from a mildly deranged, focused revolutionary leader into a dictatorial maniac willing to slaughter thousands to achieve ''the republic of virtue''. The initial values of the revolution, under Lafayette and the Society of 1789 were good, and if the active/passive citizen thing had been removed it could have stayed just like that. The first fete de la federation could have marked the end of the Revolution, as a constitutional Monarchy without Feudalism.
>>883027
The people who have something to lose from it
>>883065
per capita violence is far lower today than back then. The french revolution went horribly wrong sure, but classical liberalism proved to be a far better system than what came before.
>Let's kill all of our rulers
>What could go wrong
>>883027
>mass murder of the best of the society is totally okay bro, my Bernie voting friends said so. Check out my new Che shirt made in China. Fuck capitalism, right? Hehe, I'm so clever.
You need to recognise you are scum beneath contempt. Countries which eradicate their nobility in favour of unwashed peasants promptly go to shit, as it is essentially synonymous to breaking man's backbone.
>>883149
>"let's keep working and supporting the rulers that show no regard for our welfare and use our tax monies to build their palaces and churches"
Literally cuck-tier.
>>883226
So what, the "unwashed peasants" should just let themselves be used and abused? Oh, I'm pretty sure you're a Christcuck, and your response will be "yeah, because God made them poor for a reason!", or something along the lines of that stupid bitch Mother Theresa.
Also, what makes you think you wouldn't be one of the "unwashed peasants"?
>>883149
>Implying being the ruler means you're automatically good
literally hierarchy
>>883027
teenage americans who lament their current situation and need to find some definitive origin/boogeyman to blame it on
>implying it didn't
Are you sure you aren't confusing that for the proper argument against it?
>However, in the Renaissance there was a brilliant, uncanny reawakening of the classical ideal, of the noble method of valuing everything: Rome itself woke up, as though from suspended animation, under the pressure of the new, Judaic Rome built over it, which looked like an ecumenical synagogue and was called 'Church': but Judea triumphed again at once, thanks to that basically proletarian (German and English) ressentiment-movement which people called the reformation, including its inevitable consequence, the restoration of the church, - as well as the restoration of the ancient, tomb-like silence of classical Rome. In an even more decisive and profound sense than then, Judea once again triumphed over the classical ideal with the French Revolution: the last political nobility in Europe, that of the French seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, collapsed under the ressentiment-instincts of the rabble, - the world had never heard greater rejoicing and more uproarious enthusiasm!
>True, the most dreadful and unexpected thing happened in the middle: the ancient ideal itself appeared bodily and with unheard-of splendour before the eye and conscience of mankind, and once again, stronger, simpler and more penetrating than ever, in answer to the old, mendacious ressentiment slogan of priority for the majority, of man's will to baseness, abasement, levelling, decline and decay, there rang out the terrible and enchanting counter-slogan: priority for the few. Like a last signpost to the other path, Napoleon appeared as a man more unique and late-born for his times than ever a man had been before, and in him, the problem of the noble ideal itself was made flesh - just think what a problem that is: Napoleon, this synthesis of Unmensch (brute) and Ubermensch (overman) ...
ITT butthurt wannabes
>>883147
>per capita violence is far lower today than back then.
This fucking Stephen Pinker meme. He got his data from RJ Rummel, a lolbertarian whose entire life's work was to prove that 'death by government' is the most common historical cause of death. This is the guy who thinks the British Empire, in all its years of existence, killed only 30,000 innocent people. The guy who thinks the suppression of the Cather heretics killed one million people, which would be Languedoc's entire fucking population at the time.
The man is a fucking hack.
>>883248
I'm totally on board with the revolution, but it was a mainly urban, not peasant, affair.
>>883065
Reactionaries deserved to die.
>>883727
Do you have any evidence to dispute the central thesis that per capita violence has declined. Even his critics do not seem to challenge that, they seem more upset at his analysis of it
>>883841
>tfw you will never have a party at the public execution with your fellow plebs and fuck a buxom wench under the scaffold as justice is meted out
>>883293
hierarchy is literally human nature
>>883989
>>883992
epic meme brah
humans are animals, and like all other mammal species we follow certain inherent social behaviors
we're not blank slates like the bourgeois intelligentsia told you
>>883999
Hierarchy isn't written into our genes.
Many hunter gatherers have very little rigid hierarchy.
Every behavior or social convention you can think of has probably been justified by 'muh human nature' at some point.
>>883027
They lied about wanting liberty and executed/massacred many innocents along with any supposed oppressors. They basically prevented something like the american revolution happening in europe.
>>884008
we're not hunter-gatherers anymore
>>883999
Humans, like all animals, have essentially two universal biological impulses: survive and reproduce. Even with these, humans history has a near unending list of observable phenomena where even those impulses are betrayed.
We are hard wired to perceive certain stimuli, memories, and other conditions in a certain way. The actions that are taken in response to these perceptions can take all manner of forms, and are largely guided by cultural norms (or in isolation, lack there of) of our surroundings. From these cultural norms, social constructs are created as a soft codifying of those norms. Hierarchy, as an observable phenomenon in humans, is not universal: many human societies (and in our very early history, virtually all human societies) were very egalitarian in nature, with the only real signs of hierarchy being the occasional emergence of "big men" who gain prestige (but not systemic power) through gratuity to those around them using temporary surpluses of self-acquired resources.
"Human nature" as a justification for ideological standings, both from the left and from the right, is simply a lazy bid for bypassing rational discussion when in the presence of opposition. It's basically trying to say "I'm right because I'm right."
>>884050
But we were for most of our evolutionary history.
>>884008
>Hierarchy isn't written into our genes.
It's deeper than our genes. It goes right to the heart of the universe. Even in the most primitive hunter gather society one guy is going to be better at organizing the hunting or gathering, one guy will be tasked with having the higher role of being a teacher or leader.
Even more extreme the group that sucks at hunting and gathering goees EXTINCT. You say there isn't a heir achy? How about the hierarchy where one tribe goes onto to evolve to become the first nations and another is lost to the sands of time. Where do you think nations come from dummy? They came from the tribes that were at the top of the hierarchy.
The very fact that things are different means they will form a hierarchy where the one who is strongest in a certain environment will rise to the top. Things cannot be equal if they are different.
>>884083
For most of our history as military creatures, the leader of society was a local warrior chef, surrounded by male friends and family, most he had known from childhood. They used their collective might to drive off threats and collect taxes from locals. Gangs and criminal organizations follow a similar hierarchy
But this is man at a very primitive stage, were power is local, and a small elite hold a near monopoly on force. This in tern eventually evolved into feudalism.
The type of top down, rigid hierarchy reactionaries call for is a product of a time when resources were scarce, education was the preview a a few elite, and the guy a county over a was your mortal enemy.
There is still hierarchy today of course, but its tempered by public votes, large councils of senators, strong courts, and the break down of any caste structure.
This latter system has produced far superior results
>>884083
You claim nations evolved from single tribes?
>>884077
so? we can't have an egalitarian social structure when not everybody works the same job
>>883027
Nationalism is pretty bad, 2bh
>>884269
Seems like you are switching arguments.
The general argument in >>883989, >>883999 and >>884050 seems a bit unsubstantiated.
I actually do believe humans tend to set up a pecking order of sorts when left to themselves, but you haven't really provided a compelling argument as for why that is or for why it is better that way (yes, I'm calling out your "appeal to nature").
>>883027
they tried to do democracy but they didn't do it right
they should have followed the American model
America did invent democracy after all
>>883027
It's wrong, because it's the american revolution that caused all the world's problems...
>>883027
The French Revolution caused just about everything. So if you're not happy with the way the world is, it's a reasonable place to start.
>>883027
>25. Far back in ancient times we were the first to cry among the masses of the people the words "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," words many times repeated since these days by stupid poll-parrots who, from all sides around, flew down upon these baits and with them carried away the well-being of the world, true freedom of the individual, formerly so well guarded against the pressure of the mob. The would-be wise men of the GOYIM, the intellectuals, could not make anything out of the uttered words in their abstractedness; did not see that in nature there is no equality, cannot be freedom: that Nature herself has established inequality of minds, of characters, and capacities, just as immutably as she has established subordination to her laws: never stopped to think that the mob is a blind thing, that upstarts elected from among it to bear rule are, in regard to the political, the same blind men as the mob itself, that the adept, though he be a fool, can yet rule, whereas the non-adept, even if he were a genius, understands nothing in the political - to all those things the GOYIM paid no regard; yet all the time it was based upon these things that dynastic rule rested: the father passed on to the son a knowledge of the course of political affairs in such wise that none should know it but members of the dynasty and none could betray it to the governed. As time went on, the meaning of the dynastic transference of the true position of affairs in the political was lost, and this aided the success of our cause.
>>885115
>26. In all corners of the earth the words "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," brought to our ranks, thanks to our blind agents, whole legions who bore our banners with enthusiasm. And all the time these words were canker-worms at work boring into the well-being of the GOYIM, putting an end everywhere to peace, quiet, solidarity and destroying all the foundations of the GOY States. As you will see later, this helped us to our triumph: it gave us the possibility, among other things, of getting into our hands the master card - the destruction of the privileges, or in other words of the very existence of the aristocracy of the GOYIM, that class which was the only defense peoples and countries had against us. On the ruins of the natural and genealogical aristocracy of the GOYIM we have set up the aristocracy of our educated class headed by the aristocracy of money. The qualifications for this aristocracy we have established in wealth, which is dependent upon us, and in knowledge, for which our learned elders provide the motive force.
>>884128
>local warrior chef
>>883027
Evola and other nostalgic romantics.
>>883065
>mass-murder did not take place under a single Catholic monarch in the French Kingdom.
Night of Saint Bartholomew.
French revolution started because the elites became 100% degenerate and vile, even in 19th century, the most reactionary nobles and rulers possible seemed to care about the little people in one way or another, French nobility of late ancien regime seemed to completely ignore the fact that there was a world somewhere outside of their palaces.
> the last political nobility in Europe, that of the French seventeenth and eighteenth centuries
Russians, Germans, even British still had widespread nobility with special privileges. Why are/were so many philosophers so disconnected with reality?
>>884128
What actually happened according to non-Jewish version of history.
A progressive shift of power and type of civilization has occurred from one caste to the next since prehistoric times (from sacred leaders, to a warrior aristocracy, to the merchants, and finally to the serfs)
In the West and East, the representatives of the divine royalty and the leaders who embody the two powers (spiritual and temporal) called "spiritual virility" and "Olympian sovereignity,"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_right_of_kings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandate_of_Heaven
Once the appex dissapeared, authority descended to the level inmediately below, that is, to the caste of the warriors. The stage was then set for monarchs who were mere military leaders, lords of temporal justice and, in more recent times, politically absolute sovereigns. In other words, regality of blood replaced regality of the spirit. In any event in the West, with the dissolution of the medieval ecumene, the passage into the second phase became all-enbracing and definitive. During this stage, the fides cementing the state no longer had a religious character, but only a warrior one; it meant loyalty, faithfulness, honor. This was essentially the age and the cycle of the Great European monarchies.
Then a second collapse occurred as the aristocracies began to fall into decay and the monarchies to shake at the foundations; through revolutions and constitutions they became useless institutions subject to the "will of the nation," and sometimes they were even ousted by different regimes. The principle characterizyng this state of affairs was: "The king reigns but he does not rule." Together with parliamentary republics the formation of the capitalist oligarchies revealed the shift of power from the second caste (the warrior) to the modern equivalent of the third caste (the mercantile class). The kings of the coal, oil, and iron industries replace the previous kings of blood and of spirit.
>>885137
That is such an overly simplified and romantic version of history that it may well be labelled myth.
>>883027
>Where did the "french revolution caused all the world's problems" meme come from?
They spent the century after that battling over how to run the damn country.
Meanwhile, England introduced social reforms that made the so-called ancien régime non that ancien anymore.
You can have social change without nationalists mass murdering everyone that disagrees with them, but where's the fun in that?
>>885167
It may seem almost alien, something out of this world when discussing it with your Marxist professor and comparing it to official narrative found in Jewish history books
>>885137
... No.
>>885183
Thats a nice way of dismmissing ideas that diagreee with you labeling them marxist or Jewish.
It might even surprise you that I have some sympathy for Evola's ideas, he certainly addresses certain Psycho-spiritual needs that are not satisfied by materialist culture. But that doesn't make is analysis of history right, it actually reminds me of the myth of the Greek golden age
>>885137
>non-Jewish version of history
and opinion ignored
>>885137
except this type of shift happened the other way around several times since ancient times. for example, Rome started as a kingdom, became a republic, then military strongmen became rulers, then emperors who were considered gods, or sons of gods. also, European kings during most of the middle ages never claimed to rule by divine right, it only started catching up in the late middle ages.
>>883139
this
just because the ancien regime was terrible it doesnt excuse wholesale slaughter
>>885178
>Meanwhile, England introduced social reforms that made the so-called ancien régime non that ancien anymore.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Because reactionaries do not enjoy facts, they enjoy fantasies that allow themselves to feel superior.
It's not called emancipation of the n
Jew for nothing.
>>885095
...... no
>>883027
It's true though. Let's not forget that many innocents, women and children, were murdered in the terror, many of them the republicans themselves. It was a mass hysteria but it is excused because the perpetrators supported liberalism.
>>887510
>triggered
>>883027
>destroy the westphalian system overnight thus returning Europe to constant war
>claim to promote peace and equality while killing and injuring those who did not agree with their system
>essentially just take everything bad about the old system and destroy everything good about it
I can't say that it caused all the world's problems, but I can say with certainty that it fucked everything up for everyone for at least 50 fucking years afterwards.
>>887606
I'm pretty sure that communist enjoy masturbating to Marx while being constantly cucked by bourgeois :^)
>>883027
Because it kind of did. Democracy is a fool's dream.
>>890768
>revolution doesn't happen
>principles of freedom and self-determination don't get widespread
>napoleonic code never gets written
worth it, in the end
>>890812
but then the bourgeois male has typically a fetish of cuckoldry :D
>>890974
>The French Revolution was about democracy.
>>891071
It ushered in the era of it
>>883065
What the fuck? High medieval France was defined by over a century of almost uninterrupted murder, rape, and starvation.
>>885137
What's hilarious is that Evola's version of history is distinctly "Jewish", or should I say biblical? The whole "Golden Age" and "increasing spiritual decay" meme was quite common in the eastern Mediterranean basin, notably in Greece and the Levant.
>>891174
Forget it, neoreactionaries don't even bother reading history, they just wank about the good old days before the Enlightenment even though they ignore everything about it and probably can't even comprehend pre-modern people.
Here's an example of old schoolboy trivia that somehow none of them ever heard of:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragonnades
>>890981
>principles of freedom and self-determination don't get widespread
>implying they weren't already extremely widespread from London to Paris to Berlin to Wien to Budapest to Warsaw
Republican agitation already existed without the revolution and all it really did was cause turmoil across the continent. Nothing good ever came from republicanism or those early enlightenment values.
>Napoleonic code never gets written
This is a big "so what" from me.
