The atheistic french revolution was a mistake

feel the bern

...

>I unironically support Donald "Meme" Drumpf
He-He's gonna m-make America g-great again right?...r-right?

Greater than ever before, low-energyfag. You must be pretty sad that your candidate doesn't even have the balls to directly confront his opponent who's ripping him to shreds in every regard politically.

>I caused it and I don't know what to do!
fixed

>every businessman is Wall Street

>drumpf isn't their personification

Fuck you, monarchist turd.

The Great French Revolution is one of the high points in human history.

Death to kings!!

Long live the French Republic!

I see, so it's not because of anything he's done, it's because he's a personification of the people who did it! Thanks for clearing that up and have fun not being in the General.

m'comrade

Remember the white terror of 1794-96?

Fuck christianity, fuck nobility and fuck the Vendee.

Catholics are murderers and liars.

Religion is a mental disorder.

The French Revolution was perhaps the greatest thing to ever happen in Europe. Go fuck yourself.

Thank you, Comrade.

The Catholic Church built western civilization, no mental gymnastics will change this fact.

Cool hat.

>- the deportation of clergy and the condemnation of many of them to death,
>- the closing, desecration and pillaging of churches, removal of the word "saint" from street names and other acts to banish Christian culture from the public sphere
>- removal of statues, plates and other iconography from places of worship
>- destruction of crosses, bells and other external signs of worship
>- the institution of revolutionary and civic cults, including the Cult of Reason and subsequently the Cult of the Supreme Being,
>- the large scale destruction of religious monuments,
>- the outlawing of public and private worship and religious education, forced marriages of the clergy, forced abjurement of priesthood, and the enactment of a law on 21 October 1793 making all nonjuring priests and all persons who harbored them liable to death on sight.

AWESOME.

You welcome.

No. The Greco-Romans built western civilization. Your faith only picked up the pieces when it collapsed and discarded the pieces it thought weren't useful for religious purposes.

And now communism will destroy western civilization.

t. anarcho-communist

youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZDj5nM0KbdUTEpoka1oyAR8BtHfIiVJm

>t. anarcho-communist
Is that supposed to be an insult?

ITT: FUCK traditional shit and civilization haha I read nietzsche once you know

>FUCK traditional shit
That's the spirit.

Like fuck I'm wasting my time on your insipid propaganda at 1:00 in the fucking morning. Piss off.

>we saved france and sheit

>implying

Damn right they did.

Saved people from the only enemy there is, the upper class.

>MUH TRADISHUN

>sucked an emperor's cock a decade later

>Is a republic at this very second.

It's not that I love tradition, it's that you hate it just because it's tradition. If that's not edgy as fuck I don't know what is.

Robespierre was the fucking hero who saved Europe from the hell that is feudalism. He did LITERALLY nothing wrong and in some respects didn't go far enough, only wannabe slaves like you think that his republic was worse than the monarchy.

>it's that you hate it just because it's tradition.
There's perfectly valid arguments as to why countries shouldn't be run by dudes just because they're descended from early medieval warlords and why religion isn't all that great.

>it's that you hate it just because it's tradition
Nice strawman, retard. All practices should all be examined and done away with if they're bad, the only reason to bring up "tradition" is if you want to defend obviously retarded shit on the basis of "well we've always done it this way".

So, mysore confirmed for master warriors?

>implying Robespierre didn't turn the whole population of France into literal slaves

muh party hegemony
muh political coercion
muh mass execution of peasantry
muh conscription
muh nationalism YOU'RE BOUND TO YOUR STATE HMMMOKAY

>pre-revolutionary Europe was not better than post-revolutionary Europe

Whatever you say lads

Yes

>pre-revolutionary Europe was not better than post-revolutionary Europe

Right, if you enjoy being a serf and having your country run by inbreds then yeah. I suppose pre-revolutionary Europe was the tits.

>inb4 "muh tradition muh fugga"

>muh party hegemony
>muh political coercion
I love how reactionaries only care about democracy when they're trying to demonize people they don't like.

>muh party hegemony
A temporary measure while the Republic was being assaulted on all sides is evil incarnate, while 1500 years of monarchist tyranny is just fine and dandy with you?

>muh mass execution of nobility
Fixed that for you. Some unlucky commoners were in the wrong place at the wrong time, but it was better to be overzealous than to let the feudal system survive in any respect. A few hundred innocent lives were a drop in the bucket compared to what had been happening and what would happen again if they weren't thorough.

>muh conscription
The Ancien Regime did it too. Every fucking state does this, and it was especially important while foreign reactionary armies were invading from all sides.

>muh nationalism
National liberalism, as opposed to monarchism.

>I love how reactionaries only care about democracy when they're trying to demonize people they don't like.
Also this

Yes

The attempted Dechristianization of France was literally the ONLY mistake the revolution made, and it would've been perfect if the ideas of Roustan (the idea that Republicanism, patriotism and piety are not irreconcilable) had found more of a following in France. On the other hand, the clergy was to blame to al arge degree for siding with the Ancien Regime and refusing to give up temporal power. While antireligiosity wasn't neccessary, anticlericalism was.

Luckily based Napoleon and his 1801 Concordat reconciled the Revolution and the Catholic Church. History would've been awesome if the Coalition had respected the Amiens treaty instead of violating it scantly a year after its signing.

Being a serf was way preferable to being a 19th century wage laborer.

>everything is locally made
>you own all your own tools
>make your own profit
>shittons of Catholic holidays; so many days off
>kings have little power to dictate social policy
>lords are too occupied to care, pretty much do what you want as long as you aren't an outright outlaw
>lots of open land
>close-knit community, friendly and comfy as fuck

Sure sounds like shit, I'd much rather live in a cramped series of tight brick buildings and wake up early so someone else can pay me for making them money in dangerous environments with almost no leave and being encouraged to not mingle with other workers like me.

Monarchies were more lenient to people when it came to political affiliations, since unless you were a person of stature or tried to cause trouble it really didn't matter if you supported some other king, you didn't have a vote and they didn't have to force you to support them. You'd think, on the other hand, that someone who claims to support republicanism would deny someone trying to take away their right to self determination in politics?

>some unlucky commoners
Yeah, over 19,000 people but you know they were just unlucky

>national liberalism
A fancy way of saying "the state belongs to you and you belong to the state and there is nothing you can do about it"

I think they had the right idea with secularism, but not outright hostility towards religion.

...

I agree to an extent. However capitalism was inevitable as the bourgeoisie were getting exponentially more powerful with industrialization than the nobility could compete with.

However being a serf was still fucking shit, thus the solution is communism.

>over 19,000 people
Out of an estimated three million. And on top of that, less than all the people who died at Austerlitz in a single day. Now consider that many of those 19000 commoners were involved in armed uprisings such as the Vendée. Now consider that in England, the Bloody Code had many more victims even if we exclude the people who were "just" deported and not downright executed.

England in a normal state was bloodier than France in a state of emergency.

It was not preferable nor ideal, but the Terror was a neccessity. It did not arise for shits and giggles, but to keep together a country beset by enemies from the outside and the inside.

Pretty much this [spoiler]though I'd also like it if it were more like America in regards to its attitude to religion: anti-clerical but with an overwhelmingly religious population and awe for the religious institutions. Tocqueville noted that in the mind of the American, liberty and Christianity were inseperable.[/spoiler]

>Monarchies were more lenient because people were so powerless it simply didn't matter if they disagreed.
>But Robespierre's literal wartime politics are totally worse and evil because . . .?

Hmm, okay then.

>the bourgeoisie were getting exponentially more powerful with industrialization than the nobility could compete with.

Hence, what we call the French Revolution was born. Now you're getting it.

>the solution is communism
>you don't even own any of the shit you work with or create, it just goes into the mass collective machine

>Parliament
Not even once

And hell, they did that over the span of centuries. Robespierre pulled it off in a few years.

>we republicanz wuz gud boys we dindu nuffin

The Declaration of Pillnitz pretty much confirmed that Austria didn't actually want to go to war unless the state of the French royalty had reached such an abysmal point that violent transgression was necessary. The Republican radicals, however, pushed for war heavily, and they got it. The war was the Republic's fault.

>Hence, what we call the French Revolution was born. Now you're getting it.
I'm not sure you understand.

Capitalism was inevitable because of the shifting economic power of the time. It wasn't brought on by ideology but by material conditions, had the French revolution happened or no we would still be living in capitalism. Thus why even the ancien regimes that survived the revolution found the powers of the nobility quickly being eroded away by the massive growth of the bourgeoisie.

>>you don't even own any of the shit you work with or create, it just goes into the mass collective machine
It doesn't, communism is predicated on the absence of private property and thus the collective management of industry. Whilst the fruits of your labour aren't individually owned by yourself in every profession this is becuase communism accounts for the fact that in modern economies labour is divided over a large workforce thus the distribution of resources ought to be democratically controlled by the workers.

Of course there's other more individualistic solutions to this like mutualism. But wanting to go back to feudalism is retarded.

>Austria didn't actually want to go to war unless the state of the French royalty had reached such an abysmal point that violent transgression was necessary
In other words they went to war in order to protect their fellow noble cousins, that they were afraid of the revolution like everyone said they were.

Yeah nah that's not a good reason for going to war.

>the ancien regime was a mistake

ftfy desu baka

>227 years later
>catholics are still butthurt about the French Revolution

It was in the 1790s, and the Republicans knew it. They pressed the conflict with Europe intentionally to drive the country to war and spread the revolution through violent means. It was still entirely their fault.

>They provoked other European countries into going to war with them to spread the revolution!
Right, lad. It's not like just declaring war on your neighbours is more difficult than manipulating the entire planet into trying to destroy your country.

They pressed the French people as well as the foreign governments. You do realize the Assembly declared war, not Austria, right?

I do, it's just following your logic it would have been easier just to sneak attack Austria to begin with rather than bother with all the diplomatic posteuring that preceeded the declaration of war.

Not necessarily. The Assembly had to vote on the war, and the radicals were an initial minority. They had to flare up tensions in order to convince the people and the rest of the Assembly that Austria was in fact hostile and that France needed to strike.

The thing is France didn't have to flare up tensions. Assuming they did plan it all then the noble emigres did all the work for them in agitating foreign monarchs to do something about France. Following this logic this logic you would not only have to believe that the radicals were masterminds, but that Leopold was an absolute fool that got played like an accordion by them.

Which is why it's probably not true given that the revolutionary radicals weren't particularly subtle or even clever.

Not him, but then there's also the fact that the flight to Varennes already did more than enough to sow distrust towards Austria. Let me emphasize that constitutional monarch Louis XVI was on his way to Austria to ask his father in law to invade HIS OWN COUNTRY.

just go back being a 20yo hedonist and a buthurt

>>Capitalism was inevitable because of the shifting economic power of the time.
Do you understand that what you call capitalism is the HUman Rights ?

No and I don't understand what that sentence is even supposed to imply either.

Not him, but I think his point is that to have an effective modern democracy, you need free workers who can both produce and consume, with such institutions as serfdom and slavery being counterproductive to that end. This is also why the US civil war happened: the agricultural south wanted slaves, the industrialized north wanted wage slaves.

Catholicism in France died with the Gallican Church in the 17th century already.

Your mom giving birth to an autistic failure like you was a mistake

>links to a series of lectures totaling more than 5 hours in length at the least as a retort

This is /pol/ tier autism and debate tactics.