I agree it was a lot of bloodshed but eventually the change was huge. France is still by far the most socialist country in Western Europe.
> I agree it was a lot of bloodshed but eventually the change was huge. Political mass-murder of innocent women and children, mass conscription (slave armies), total war, 5 million dead, entire regions devastated for generations...totally worth it though.
> Political mass-murder of innocent women and children
I agree it was a lot of bloodshed but eventually the change was huge. France is still by far the most socialist country in Western Europe.
The major impact was the rise of national identities following the revolutionary wars and Napoleonic conquests. The same population who took part in the Terror voted happily for noted autocrat Napoleon, then lived under kings of various levels of mediocrity, briefly under a Republic before electing the then-President Emperor (because that turned out so well the first time), before returning to a Republican regime aft…
France never reverted to the kind of excesses that the set of Royalty at the time of the French revolution practiced.
And yes, you're right the effect wasn't a direct one but it definitely became part of the DNA of France. For instance the role of the church before and after the revolution are tremendously different and aristocracy never managed to get the same strong grip on France as it did before.
The murder of Lavoisier is one of the most horrible outcomes of the French Revolution -- which was generally horrific, mass drownings [1], Reign of Terror (the word 'terrorism' comes from this episode in French history[2]) and whatnot. That is what I think about on Le Quatorze Juillet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drownings_at_Nantes [2] http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=terrorism
Revolutions are violent, especially when they are over-throwing 10 centuries of monarchy. Did you know that the 14th of July is not a celebration of the storming of the Bastille? It is actually celebrating the 14th of July 1790, the Fête de la Fédération, a pacific celebration of the French nation.
Or it has its origins in both. Especially as the Fête de la Fédération was the commemoration the year after the storming of the Bastille.
It might help were the 14th not commonly referred to as Bastille day and feature a military parade.
The murder of Lavoisier is one of the most horrible outcomes of the French Revolution -- which was generally horrific, mass drownings [1], Reign of Terror (the word 'terrorism' comes from this episode in French history[2]) and whatnot. That is what I think about on Le Quatorze Juillet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drownings_at_Nantes [2] http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=terrorism
Revolutions are violent, especially when they are over-throwing 10 centuries of monarchy. Did you know that the 14th of July is not a celebration of the storming of the Bastille? It is actually celebrating the 14th of July 1790, the Fête de la Fédération, a pacific celebration of the French nation.
In 1989, for the bicentennial, primary school held ceremonies/parties, some kids built a cardboard milk box Bastille prison replica.
The murder of Lavoisier is one of the most horrible outcomes of the French Revolution -- which was generally horrific, mass drownings [1], Reign of Terror (the word 'terrorism' comes from this episode in French history[2]) and whatnot. That is what I think about on Le Quatorze Juillet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drownings_at_Nantes [2] http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=terrorism
Revolutions are violent, especially when they are over-throwing 10 centuries of monarchy. Did you know that the 14th of July is not a celebration of the storming of the Bastille? It is actually celebrating the 14th of July 1790, the Fête de la Fédération, a pacific celebration of the French nation.
"There were two 'Reigns of Terror,' if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the 'horrors' of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror—that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves." —A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, Mark Twain
The murder of Lavoisier is one of the most horrible outcomes of the French Revolution -- which was generally horrific, mass drownings [1], Reign of Terror (the word 'terrorism' comes from this episode in French history[2]) and whatnot. That is what I think about on Le Quatorze Juillet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drownings_at_Nantes [2] http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=terrorism
I'm suspicious that you can really describe the French Revolution as "generally horrific". Sure, there were quite a few executions (~40k or so), that were often arbitrary and spectacular. And the Vendée rebellion got massacred (~100k+ depending on the source) [1]. But what really contributed to the death toll were the Revolutionary wars [2] and the Napoleon campaigns [3]. By contrast, modern warfare with machine guns…
There is something particularly horrific about being killed in a political purge. Getting killed by a falling bomb isn't personal; you just happened to be under the wrong piece of airspace at the wrong time. The people who died in the Reign of Terror or Stalin's Purges or the Cambodian genocide lost a pernicious game of playground politics. Their executioners knew their names.
Not the only one to die just because, in those times.
The French Revolution saw so much bloodshed for so little change (for the ordinary people at least).
Also I see some irony that when there is a terrorist attack that kills innocent people in Paris, the way to show solidarity is to sing this in football matches:
Do you hear, in the countryside, the roar of those ferocious soldiers?
They're coming right into your arms to cut the throats of your sons, your women!
To arms, citizens, form your battalions,
Let's march, let's march!
Let an impure blood soak our fields!
Such injustice. Who knows what else he had on his mind before he was decapitated. Bias does no one any good. He was punished only because of his social standing and profession. He did no ill towards his fellow frenchmen yet was butchered to satiate their hatred towards the "elite".
It seems that he was hardly an innocent bystander. > Lavoisier was a powerful member of a number of aristocratic councils, and an administrator of the Ferme Générale. The Ferme générale was one of the most hated components of the Ancien Régime because of the profits it took at the expense of the state, the secrecy of the terms of its contracts, and the violence of its armed agents. All of these political and economic…
The ancien régime was deeply flawed, but don't forget that the winners write history. Indeed, we live inside the Revolution still, so you can trust barely anything you've ever read on the subject. If you'd like an alternate perspective, I can recommend this volume: http://www.amazon.com/French-Revolution-Revolutions-Modern-W...
NOVA broadcasted a nice piece on him on the centenary of Relativity a few weeks ago. A book was written about Eisteins enery equation explaining who invented each term. Lavoiser is credited with 'm' for the conservation of mass. Einstein generalized this conservation to the total of E and m together instead of each independently.
The murder of Lavoisier is one of the most horrible outcomes of the French Revolution -- which was generally horrific, mass drownings [1], Reign of Terror (the word 'terrorism' comes from this episode in French history[2]) and whatnot. That is what I think about on Le Quatorze Juillet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drownings_at_Nantes [2] http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=terrorism
I'm suspicious that you can really describe the French Revolution as "generally horrific". Sure, there were quite a few executions (~40k or so), that were often arbitrary and spectacular. And the Vendée rebellion got massacred (~100k+ depending on the source) [1]. But what really contributed to the death toll were the Revolutionary wars [2] and the Napoleon campaigns [3]. By contrast, modern warfare with machine guns…
Well, you need to put the numbers in perspective. In 1789 the population of Paris was around 600-700k. So in relative terms, an amount of people that is equivalent to 6%ish of Paris got executed, and in total a fifth of the equivalent of Paris died. Seems pretty bad to me. Also, all this happened in 3 short years.
Besides, they're both just really horrific. "40k is nothing" is not quite the right attitude here.