We had some commentary regarding the french revolution as compared to the yellow vest protests. Most people wrongly believe the "french revolution' was all about the people tossing an insolent ruler to the curb. And then gaining enlightenment. It was nothing of the sort.
AnonymousDecember 12, 2018 at 8:05 PMForget the "French Revolution" of 1789 as a model, if that is what you are referencing, because it was probably another (the first?) bankster revolution.
"the "French Revolution" of 1789 as a model, if that is what you are referencing, because it was probably another (the first?) bankster revolution"
Yah, and it spread "enlightennment" as was claimed, but, I don't actually think so- story for another day!
gallier2December 14, 2018 at 4:21 AM
Really a pity you can't read french. The books and conference of Marion Sigaut are wonderful eye openers concerning the history of the revolution and the pre-revolutionary regime.
There's one thing that most people miss with the French revolution, is that the "liberals" had put in place their agenda "free market and liberalism"
Recall my explanation of "liberal"?Pt.3: Gilet Jaunes/Yellow Vests: Erasing the Middle Class from Existencegallier's comment continues below:
"(called the physiocrats) long before the revolution (Turgot died in 1781 for example). That was in fact the big fault Louis XVI made, he put the liberals in charge of the realm. This is, what drove people to rebel. The bourgeoisie then took over and installed the terror regime. The repression was done against the old order of things and it is clear from the historical record that the normal commoner sided with the old regime and wanted a restoration of the kingdom as it was before the liberals ran things. This can be seen with the rebellion of the Chouans that was repressed in what can be called the first genocide"
The King put the Liberals in charge.... the people revolted and death ensued. Sounds familiar
ChouannerieThe Chouannerie (from the Chouan brothers, two of its leaders) was a royalist uprising or counter-revolution in 12 of the western départements of France, particularly in the provinces of Brittany and Maine, against the French First Republic during the French Revolution. It played out in three phases and lasted from the spring of 1794 until 1800.[1]
Gallier the Elder sent the piece below that clarifies reality vs the multitudinous lies of l'histoire.Merci. And yes, the information is worth publishing To have a pertinent historic view about "french revolution" and the movement gilets jaunes a translation of a text and video from Marion Sigaut (Historian). I'm sure it is very important to understand the great difference between the two events, once and now. There is need to publish it, but it is needfull to clearly unterstand the context. The old "game" of power and wealth for few against the many whom creates wealth. In biologic you may call it parasitism.The link: http://marionsigaut.com/2018/12/07/les-gilets-jaunes-lancien-regime-et-la-revolution/And now the translation by deepl/translateThe Yellow Vests, the Ancien Régime and the RevolutionIt was tempting, for the French kneaded with republican culture that we are, to draw a parallel between the current yellow vest uprising and the French Revolution.There has been no shortage of this, and we regularly hear Macron compared with Louis XVI, the political class with the nobility, and this system in decomposition with the Ancien Régime.I would like to set the record straight.Yes, the French people were hungry on the eve of the French Revolution.But the reason is not that the "nobility and the clergy" would have put their pockets full of it to the detriment of the people, as we often hear.And the desperate crowds who were punching with completely outdated police forces were not calling for the end of the Old Regime, but for its rescue.And the prohibition of the new.Always the kings of France had assured that the bread of the people would be accessible to all at the best price, and this was the raison d'être of royalty.The king was the foster father, and his authority sent a police force to the markets to protect the people from the appetites of the merchants.The grain police, which was punctual, respected and endowed with real powers, provided a kind of public food service and only let merchants do their shopping once the local population, the whole local population, had used it.In the event of a shortage, when for political (war) or climatic reasons, grain was missing, its price was set by negotiation between local authorities and merchants.This negotiation was called taxation (or rate setting).The people trusted the king to protect him from the greed of the profiteers, and Henry IV had made the export of wheat, in the event of a disaster, a crime of lese majesty, therefore punishable by death: the bread of the people was sacred in the name of the common good.One day the Enlightenment arrived, which claimed to replace the common good with the pursuit of profit.Unscrupulous people pushed the king into debt until he could no longer afford it, and then convinced him that, in order for him to repay the debt, he had to liberalize the subsistence trade.Let the wheat flow without the hassles of the grain police, let the law of supply and demand set the price, let it happen, let it happen.Louis XV decided to try the experiment in 1763, but in the face of violence and the cries of the indignant population in the face of rising prices, he chose to go back and return to the old system.When he came to the throne in 1774, the young Louis XVI was convinced by the arguments of the brilliant Jacques Turgot, who presented him with all the advantages he would have to liberalize the subsistence trade.Intimidated, eager to do the right thing and totally lacking in experience, Louis XVI let Turgot empty the attics and let the merchants take the grains instead of the consumers, under the applause of Voltaire who finally saw his dreams come true.It was an uprising: as one man (and women in the lead) and with the screams of "taxation! taxation! taxation! "the population left to collect their grain and distributed it at the "right price", the one that does not hurt anyone and allows everyone to live.If the gigantic demonstrations of yellow vests demanding affordable fuel look like anything, it is the crowds of the Flour War.In both cases, the people demand to be heard and refuse to pay for a debt that is not their own.As late as 1776, the king heard his people and returned to the old system, the grain police system: he sent Turgot away.However, the debt continued to increase, over and over again.When it was such that the State could no longer be able to pay its officials, when all the usual expedients were exhausted, the king, cornered, agreed, one last time, to liberalize trade in subsistence goods.Then he was forced to convene the General States, an assembly responsible for distributing the tax and bringing the king the grievances of the peoples.The Liberals were on a roll, and had obtained, at the same time as the free movement of food, a free trade contract between France and England that flooded the French market with cheap products made by children and workers reduced to poverty.The rise in the price of bread was accompanied by abominable unemployment, and the six months before the Bastille was taken were made up of riots by the unemployed and families demanding the return of the protective system that had been in place until then and not its abolition.The people did not contest the old regime, but the new one, that of capitalism applied to its substance.Heated by the Masonic lodges determined to overthrow all the protections of the people and the obstacles to profit, the deputies of the States-General proclaimed themselves a constituent assembly and set in stone the market economy that the people rejected with all their might.This is the Revolution.The king could do nothing more since he was overthrown: he was no longer going to hinder the profiteers who were finally in power.Those who took his place and killed him were those who imposed on the French people the economic barbarity that still prevails today.It was the bourgeoisie that wanted, made and won the French Revolution to impose a regime that the French people did not want.It was imposed on him by terror and massacres. It has suffered poverty, proletarianization, economic barbarism and the loss of its entire tradition.If Macron looks like someone, it is certainly not the king whom the people cherished and considered as their father.Macron is only the latest of the successors of those who murdered him to impose the reign of royal money against the common good.How I'm understanding the 'bourgeoisie' as described above, is in the classic marxist definition of the capitalist class- the bankers for sure. It appears once they knocked out the competition they morphed into their natural state, the predator class.
- (in Marxist contexts) the capitalist class who own most of society's wealth and means of production.
OriginRelated:
-
Pt.3: Gilet Jaunes/Yellow Vests: Erasing the Middle Class from Existence
-
Pt.2: Gilet Jaunes/Yellow Vests Are Visible to Jupiter
-
Pt. 1: Gilet Jaunes/Yellow Vests Vs the Yellow "Leaders" of France