Turn a Bourgeois state-reform into an actual revolution

I love how you fucking commies will on one hand go, "not muh true communism", while out the other side of your mouth adopting pre-communist mass murderers as part of your movement.

>2800817

Basically this. French Revolution never really extended universal suffrage to anyone; it was a revolution by the lower class with the middle class benefiting. It was better than the feudalism preceding it; laid the necessary groundwork for capitalism. It was in many ways the model for the revolution that Marx envisioned sweeping the world, but this time for communism and universal suffrage.

Robespierre was a bit of a nut but he gets blamed for a lot of shit he didn't do and he was 'good' insofar as anyone in the committee could've been

He was the hero France deserved

>>Turn a Bourgeois state-reform into an actual revolution

And why is that a good thing? Why should Revolution be desirable in the first place? France was in no need of Masonic subversion.

>Put a maximum on bread's price to stop borgs from speculating and causing mass starvation

And yet he only aggravated the economic woes of France.

drmiguelfaria.com/articles/economic-terror-french-revolution

>Crushed royalist and liberal traitors

He WAS a traitor.

>Tried to implement a Rousseauist christian heresy againts extremist atheists

All while he murdered priests and nuns.

>Punished those who were guilty of vendée slaughter

While encouraging his own mass executions.

>Even Napoleon said he would have been one of the greatest frenchmen in history if he had lived longer

Which means nothing coming from the man who allowed France to be ruled by Jewish bankers for the next 200 years.

>it was a revolution by the lower class

No it wasn't. It was a revolt by the middle class using the lower class as a shield.

No

Robespierre himself did not support executing priests and nuns who refused to take the Civil Oath. He supported exiling them from France.

He didn't support the execution of Marie Antoinette, and recommended exile for the remaining family. He withdrew his support of exile, and his submitted complaints about bringing her to trial, when his enemies started using it against him and it became dangerous to his own life. Months later, again, he didn't support executing the king's sister or the ragtag bunch of nobles who were beheaded with her.

Most of what people think Robespierre did or supported were other people in the government, many of whom lived through the Revolution by placing everything on Robespierre and his personal companions.

This is reactionary garbage from someone who probably has a very basic understanding of the history of the Revolution. Louis XVI was a traitor and a spineless coward.

Is there anything Jews didn't do according to /pol/? You wackos give them so much credit it must be flattering for them.
Eh he was wrong on exiling the royal family. Both king and queen already tried to escape from France to Austria. If they succeded they would've been an enormous asset in the hands of the Coalition. The execution was the only right thing to do after their attempted escape.

>The execution was the only right thing to do after their attempted escape.

This. The most annoying part about Louis XVI is that he was given so many chances by the reformers in the initial stages of the revolution to jump on board and yet he constantly threw it back in their faces once he thought the Conservatives were going to win. The flight to Varennes was the last straw.

Robespierre supporting exile for the royal family after the execution of Louis XVI, which he fully supported, in fact he supported doing it without a trial because it gave the king legitimacy. The execution of Louis XVI (and/or Marie Antoinette) did not directly correlate at all to their flight--which took place 2 years prior in a completely different political climate, and which was not to Austria but to a royalist stronghold in France, and one of the reasons why the escape attempt failed is that Louis XVI refused to take the shortcut which involved zipping over the border and then back into France.

He was a hero we need but dont deserve.

He was a weak fool. If he didn't refuse to cooperate France would most likely just shift to constitutional monarchy and the bloodshed would've never happened.

He was power hungry. Centralization of the court at Versailles was a mistake.

...

Ridiculous, the mobs of Paris practically ran the country during the Terror. Fear of the lower class is what spiraled the revolution into the mess it became, and collapsed it back to the conservative reign of Napoleon as every moderate reeled from the excess of the Terror. Womens march on Versailles, etc.It started as a middle-class revolution, sure, but to say the lower class were used, or not involved in it, is ridiculous.

He wasn't power hungry, he was just an idiot. If he was power hungry he would have worked harder to maintain his position. He just went with whatever side would keep him in his life of luxury and left it to his minions to do all the work.

It was run by the middle class who printed the media, wrote the speeches and directed the mobs. The mobs were handy but they didn't direct it.

The only things Louis XVI fought against were

-the stripping away of religious freedoms and the making of the civil oath for clergy mandatory

-the threat of confiscation of public and private property, arrests, lose of pensions, and possible deportation for clergy who wouldn't sign the oath

-the increasing restrictions on personal liberty, particularly of the royal family, and the growing mob violence and chaos which was never punished by the government but left to run wild.

-sentence of death to any emigres who were suspected of engaging in diplomacy or taking up arms abroad; this would mean condemning his brothers to death, so, not, shocking he used a veto. After he used the veto he ordered his brother to return to France within 2 months or lose his rights as an heir to the throne; he also wrote both his brothers scathing letters telling them to stop raising armies and threatening France because it was not his desire or policy.

Other legislation, whether he liked it or not, he followed. He literally carried a copy of the Constitution in his pocket so that he could consult it as a show that he was willing to carry it out, despite his own personal misgivings about it.

Almost every single reform pushed through in 1789-1791 (minus the ones about stripping nobles of privileges--not the financial and tax privileges, which Louis XVI tried to do away with multiple times, but the ~prestige~ such as certain titles being above others and getting social benefits from that) was something Louis XVI tried to do during his reign but failed because of the noble-led Parlements. Like, it's honestly astounding that Louis XVI went along with reform after reform after reform after reform in the Revolution. If it had been Louis XV, he would have slaughtered the initial mobs on the spot. Louis XVI? "Eh, well, fuck. They want it. They can have it" until the new 'reforms' or rather legislation began to interfere with his conscious and religion.

Those middle class who were cowering and descending into increasing radicalism to appease the mob? A bare fraction of the middle class was radical enough to support Robespierre's reign, many of his allies weren't even properly middle class (petite bourgeois) but talented orators good at whipping the mob up. I don't think any fair appraisal puts the middle class in charge of the operation at the height of the Terror. The Army was also rapidly stocking with promoted lower-class men replacing the fleeing French aristocracy. This is like saying the Three Glorious Days wasn't a lower-class revolution when it was literally done by peasant mobs in the streets of Paris. The pamphlets that disseminated the information that sparked the revolt of the lowest class can't be interperted as making the revolution *not* enforced at its core by the massless people of Paris.

>cowering
You mean Danton, Robespierre and Murat who actively used the mobs to their own ends? They weren't cowering. They were riling them up to get what they wanted and when they didn't want to use them they would use their own men to put them down such as with the Thermidorian reaction.

The replacement of the aristocracy in the army was what won them the war.

This is where we disagree then. I don't think Robespierre was anything except a very, very scared man during the Terror. I've never seen a master manipulator from his actions, but the classic figure of someone way over their head.

Sure, they used the mobs to get into power, but they didn't create or even continue keeping the mobs riled up. The mobs were a pre-existing condition they used to rise up. As a poster above points out, Robespierre supporting or masterminding the Kings execution is tenuous at best. He didn't stand in the way of the execution in the end because if he did, it'd him who was a royalist next week, and him on the stand being executed. The fervor of the committee's execution is the only thing that was suppressing the masses from overthrowing the government and lynching them next; Paris was not happy about the failures of the government at all through the revolution. The committee directed nothing, they rode the wave and prayed they'd stabilize the republic and come out alive for it. Maybe they did relish the power the mob gave them, but it was so fickle they were completely beholden to it for most of the Terror. There are a few reports of Rob's health declining from the stress of the job, as well as his general disposition for the entire Terror.

>tfw counter reactionary still exist

This.
God save the King!

>materialism is so boring
>Veeky Forums

good pic

Father of modern genocide. Truly a great man.

>He was the hero France deserved
He still watch over us

>be 13
>I admire Robespierre so much
>I know all his quotes
>All evenings I pray to Robespierre
>I thank him for the Republic that we've been given, by our Creator
>"Robespierre is love, Robespierre is the Revolution", I say
>My father gets mad and calls me a faggot
>He's jealous of my devotion to the Terror
>He slaps me and sends me to my room
>I cry because it hurts
>I lie on my bed
>A warmth is moving towards me
>I feel something touch me
>It's Maximilien Marie Isidore de Robespierre
>I am so happy
>He whispers in to ear, "it's time for Terror"
>He makes me lie down on the bed
>I'm ready
>I spread my ass cheeks for the Revolution
>He penetrates me with his incorruptible dick
>It hurts, but I do it for la Republique
>I can feel my butt tearing as my eyes start to water
>He pushes farther
>I want to please Maximilien
>He roars "Despotism!" while he fills me with his fraternity
>My dad walks in
>Maximilien looks him in the eye and says "The Revolution is the war of liberty against its enemies."
>He leaves through my window
>Maximilien Robespierre is life, Maximilien Robespierre is the Revolution
>Next morning, I find my dad decapitated

>mass murderers
nah

One sane post in a mass-hysterical circle jerk of a sociopaths.

>crying about jewish bankers ruling france
>a sane post

Yes, absolutely

>bankers don't rule the west
Sure thing.