Why is the french revolution considered a bad historical event? (bad for today's first world population)
What is the non-pc truth about the french revolution?
But the French revolution is considered overwhelmingly positive in the larger effects that it caused in Europe. Only the violence and head chopping is seen bad about the revolution.
>>66773817
But there is a meme going around that it was the first event that made everything go downhill and its just a propaganda that it was good for you and ths world
>>66774058
That's the pol truth. Normie PC culture loves the revolution because it's the first victory of leftism over tradition.
>>66774249
But how exactly caused it for everything to go downhill?
Would we live in a better world today without the french revolution?
The best way I've heard revolutions described is like this.
>Reactionaries don't like the American Revolution
>Conservatives like the American Revolution but don't like the French Revolution
>Liberals like the French Revolution but don't like the Russian Revolution
>Socialists like the Russian Revolution
>>66773590
The enlightenment was a mistake.
>>66774680
That is a good simple way to express it. But I would say that the English civil war was the first revolution.
>>66773590
Libertarian retard here mjst love french revolution it was liberalisation of the market and power for the bourgeoisie nothing else.
It was deeply and mainly influenced by american rebellion
>>66773590
only good thing to come out of it tb h
yall fags are welcome for your personal liberties
>>66776767
Guess why france loose almost every important war after that
>>66777067
??
napoléon came after that
won WW1 and WW2 after that
>>66777229
Lose napoleonic war, franco-prussian war, ww2, the only impotant war win by france since the declaration was WWI
>>66777229
>won WW1 and WW2 after that
France won neither of those wars.
France's allies did.
>>66777459
Wtf ww1 was a french victory, france was the main fighter in this war, like russia was the main during ww2 the rest in the"ententes""allies" are secondary
>>66777459
>ww1
>not a french effort and victory
nigga what
>>66776767
human rights.
but, what does being human mean? every man can be considerd human? do you have to take any responsability out of these rights? what's the lowest IQ a man needs to have to be considered human and own these rights?
>>66777459
French people fought very hard and well in WW1, WW2 I'll concede.
Now shut up you irrelevant country.
>>66774485
liberte egalite fraternitie
the most degenerate ideals on earth
>>66773590
The 1968 "revolution" was far, far more stupid and pointless.
>>66773590
Louis XVI did literally nothing wrong and then suddenly a bunch of plebeian cockroaches, animated by some cosmopolitan motherfuckers, decapitated him and most of the old french aristocracy (from where came all the French Art since the medieval times). Since then our History is a History of cosmopolitan cuckolding gangfest.
>>66777833
It was mainly led by politically clueless communist art students, if I had to pinpoint a moment in history when France started to turn to shit, it would be this one, no doubt.
>>66777742
>what was the free french army
>what was the resistance
>somehow pétain and his faggot government represent every french citizen ever
>>66777459
yes it was
I didn't know french revolution was seen in a good way, howerver it led to several years of terror and beheading, reppression like there hadn't been even in the time of king, and then led to Napoleon, which is a big spet backward; an emperor is even worst than a king, the worst is that he actually got elected ( I heard that guillotin, the inventor of guillotine, had experienced his own invention, but that's probably just a joke)
>>66773590
Well, it is widely accepted that the French revolution fanned the flames of the American Revolution against the British. Soo, it could be reasonably inferred the french revolution allowed for the formation of the USA. Of course most likely the USA would have formed anyway, the taxes being imposed on the 13 colonies was nothing short of ridiculous.
To answer your question I don't think the french revolution was/is considered a bad historical event. In fact, I'm sure quite a lot of people acknowledge the revolution as a good thing.
>>66773590
It was the birth of the modern progressive movement as a secularisation of Christian morality. The PC line is that this was a good thing, the truth is that it was a major turning point that led to our current situation.
>>66778084
>Well, it is widely accepted that the French revolution fanned the flames of the American Revolution against the British.
>i am literally retarded
thanks for sharing, ahmed
>>66778038
The point was that France didn't win WW2, not that it fought Germany.
>>66778043
Also, 1789 paved the way for the downfall of christianism and the rise of sionism.
>>66778028
A shame, really.
>you will never see Old Paris
Pourquoi vivre?
>>66775577
Technically true, but it was unconnected to progressivism. It was a conflict between the aristocratic traditions of Catholicism, and the more populist (for the time) Puritanism. Modern leftists don't really have strong ties to either side.
>>66777568
But france was just as defeated as germany towards the end of the war if not more. They were at breaking point.
Theres no way they couldve done it alone, especialy when your soldiers are refusing to fight en masse and deserting.
However you can argue that russia in ww2 would've won eventually on the eastern front no matter what the allies did.
The French Revolution was a good idea that went way too far.
Once you are slaughtering innocent white women and children by the hundreds you know you did something wrong.
>>66778084
your country took offense to both revolutions, how could you have learned history so backwards?
>>66778084
>implying the French revolution happened first.
Goddamn, how do you fuck up like that?
>>66778668
Britain disliked the revolutions for geopolitical reasons not necessarily because they disagreed with enlightenment philosophy.
They were fine with Enlightenment ideology, but they also new that a Republican America/France could threaten their global hegemony.
Lucky for Britain they continued to have the greatest navy on earth for well over 100 more years so in the end no one could threaten them for a long time.
>>66778084
>Well, it is widely accepted that the French revolution fanned the flames of the American Revolution
You know that the french revolution was in 1789 and the american revolution in 1776, right?
>>66773590
> obviously talking about the first revolution
> pic is the second revolution
Nice education, m8.
>>66778038
>what was Vichy France?
...fascist
>>66778843
>>66778668
>>66778959
Oh shit, literally retarded. I meant it the other way round.
>>66777842
>Louis XVI did literally nothing wrong
He tried to raise taxes because the country was in debt and he was too spinless to ask nobles or clergy so he asked the pleb once again.
> suddenly
In 1789 there was zero talk about killing the King. It happened in 93 because Louis XVI systematically destroyed the attempted at a parlementary monarchy and tried to run away to Germany.
>Since then our History is a History of cosmopolitan cuckolding gangfest.
Napoleon was an incredible leader, Napoleon III was extremely underrated and we had some great third republic presidents. Also DeGaulle.
>>66779241
It's normal you're confused because the newly independant united states used a lot of French revolutionary philosophy, starting with the Declaration of Human Rights.
>>66778507
The puritans went to the American colonies and their descendents started the American revolution
>>66779668
Didn't actually know that, I've always held an interest in France, particularly the Revolutionary period and the subsequent rise of Napoleon. How did Napoleon get to become Emperor with such ease? One would expect post-revolutionary France to hold extreme anti-monarchal sentiment. I've always assumed he did it with military aid?
>>66778936
yeah because it had nothing to do with monarchies trying to save their asses. If england had a revolution you guys probably would have gotten to draw and quarter your rich people. maybe even have had your king done up like mel gibson in that one movie.
>>66780737
>How did Napoleon get to become Emperor with such ease?
Exactly how Cesar ended the Republic. French people at the time feared two things:
- European monarchies conquering France and forcing Louis XVIII back on the Throne. They feared the punishment for killing Louis XVI, his brother.
- Another crazy lunatic like Robespierre, doing horrific stuff just to prevent Fear number one to happen.
So what the French really wanted was someone capable of keeping the Europeans at bay while bringing more stability than the previous Terror and revolutionary government.
The Directoire, managed to bring stability by basicaly giving power to no one (Robespierre was clearly's in everyone mind) but it was also seen as dangerously weak. So all the attention turned to the generals and their ability to beat european powers. The most successfull one was Napoleon, thanks to his victories in Italy (and him showing off in Egypy) so his rise to power was clearly natural.
By the time he was in power, he built a cult of personality, making french people able to accept him becoming Emperor.
