10 ms·

The revolution set the stage for the modern world though, a world separated in sovereign states (instead of kingdoms) the three branches government etc I'm fai

by ern 10y ago

The revolution set the stage for the modern world though, a world separated in sovereign states (instead of kingdoms) the three branches government etc I'm fairly certain that the US was already independent and had adopted the current Constitution by the time the French Revolution happened.

id 10y ago
The US is not the world though.
- gcatalfamo 10y ago
  Thank you. US people just don't get it.
- hnal943 10y ago
  Yes, but the original claim was that the French Revolution codified the idea of the separation of powers, which is clearly false. The evidence of that is that America already existed with this structure and was obviously known to the west.
  - david927 10y ago
    Democracy was also known in Greece a couple thousands of years prior. As others have stated, the ideas were the ideas of the enlightenment and while America was a wonderful project, it wasn't the real example to show that these ideas could work -- the French Revolution did that.
    - gkya 10y ago
      The ideas worked only about 10 years though, until Napoleon.
      - david927 10y ago
        Not at all. Napoleon was definitely seen as a force in that direction and that was a large part of his appeal to the masses.
        gkya 10y ago
        Some interesting fact-bending here.
        umanwizard 10y ago
        He's right. In a dichotomy of revolutionaries vs. monarchists, Napoleon is definitely seen as the former. It's not really as simple as democracy vs. lack thereof. Many of the most radical revolutionaries were extremely undemocratic. At times during the Revolutinary period even suggesting democratic measures (like implementing the Constitution) could get you killed.
    - tnecniv 10y ago
      Except it didn't work. After overthrowing the monarchy, France went through a number of highly unstable governments until Napoleon ascended to the throne in 1805. That period was called the Reign of Terror for a reason. If you were suspected of being a counter-revolutionary, you could be executed without trial. After Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo, the French monarchy was restored. When the Second Republic was established after the revolution of 1848, Napoleon III quickly abused his uncle's popularity to establish another dictatorship within five years. This lasted until 1870.
oblio 10y ago
Well, sorry to say this (it might offend Americans), but nobody important at the time really cared. Except for Britain, as the directly involved party. The US at the time was a minor player and its independence and democratic process didn't really affect a lot of people. Abraham Lincoln, ~80 years after the American Revolution was replying to San Marino's government along the lines: you are the only fellow state in the world (San Marino being the oldest republic in the world) in this period of turmoil (i.e. Civil War). The French Revolution was the event that kick-started the spread of democratic ideas and regimes throughout the Old World. It brought about the downfall of the medieval regimes, the abolition of serfdom and slavery, etc. The American Revolution was more of a symbolic event at the time. On the other hand the fall of the French monarchy was a colossal event at the time: the new French Republic was continuously attacked by all its neighbors to prevent the dangerous ideas from spreading.
- Symmetry 10y ago
  Well, Poland was inspired to adopt a democratic constitution in 1791 and the speed with which its neighbors invaded probably shows that they cared about the spread of democracy too in a more negative way. But yes, that wasn't as significant as the French Revolution.
  - Annatar 10y ago
    Ironic that the Poles set themselves back by electing their new right-hardline leader, who immediately moved in to take control over the national television, don't you think? The elected official in question actually saw no problem with that. To make matters even "better", he is stuck to communist regime / fascist methodology of tightly controlling television and radio... in the age when everybody is on the Internet... awesome! I know of another guy, over in Turkey, who works the same way... Ataturk would be turning over in his grave if he saw what that other guy is doing in the country he founded. Anyway, when is Poland holding the referendum on leaving the european union?
    - Symmetry 10y ago
      I think you're talking about the Second Polish Republic in 1918. They didn't have televisions in 1791.
stangeek 10y ago
The US independance was completely inspired by the "Lumières" (the philosophical movement of the Enlighteners), which originated in France and led to the French revolution as well as the emergence of true democracy accross Europe. So even if the US was already independant by the time the French Revolution happened, this is only because it was way more complicated to achieve the latter. But let's not be mistaken about its origins.
- hartpuff 10y ago
  > But let's not be mistaken about its origins. Let's not make nonsensical statements like US independence was completely inspired by the Lumières then. Most notably, US independence was also inspired by the Glorious Revolution in England (the American Bill of Rights is even based on the English Bill of Rights), about a century earlier.
  - stangeek 10y ago
    The glorious revolution was the direct consequence of the Lumières - in fact it was part of the movement!
    - hartpuff 10y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution HTH
    - ZenoArrow 10y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumières https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumières "The Lumières (literally in English: Enlighteners) was a cultural, philosophical, literary and intellectual movement of the second half of the 18th century" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution "The Glorious Revolution, also called the Revolution of 1688" Your proposed timelines are a little off, old bean. ;-)
- ealloc 10y ago
  There was a lot of inspiration the other way too, though. Here are two little instances I came across recently where the french copied their rhetoric and symbolism from America: In 1787 Thomas Jefferson said, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants". Then in 1793 Bertrand Barère, in an influential speech to the national assembly advocating execution of the king, repeated "The tree of liberty grows only when watered by the blood of tyrants" . In French sources the quote is often (incorrectly) attributed to Barère only. Similarly, during the American revolution, Americans raised symbolic "liberty poles" in their towns. Directly inspired by this, during the french revolution most cities raised and decorated "Trees of Liberty" in their central squares. King Louis even stooped to visiting and honoring the one in Paris to appease revolutionaries (it didn't help). (The French took the idea of "watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants" quite literally).
increment_i 10y ago
You would be correct to believe that.

by ern 10y ago

id 10y ago

The US is not the world though.

gcatalfamo 10y ago
Thank you. US people just don't get it.
hnal943 10y ago
Yes, but the original claim was that the French Revolution codified the idea of the separation of powers, which is clearly false. The evidence of that is that America already existed with this structure and was obviously known to the west.
- david927 10y ago
  Democracy was also known in Greece a couple thousands of years prior. As others have stated, the ideas were the ideas of the enlightenment and while America was a wonderful project, it wasn't the real example to show that these ideas could work -- the French Revolution did that.
  - gkya 10y ago
    The ideas worked only about 10 years though, until Napoleon.
    - david927 10y ago
      Not at all. Napoleon was definitely seen as a force in that direction and that was a large part of his appeal to the masses.
      - gkya 10y ago
        Some interesting fact-bending here.
        umanwizard 10y ago
        He's right. In a dichotomy of revolutionaries vs. monarchists, Napoleon is definitely seen as the former. It's not really as simple as democracy vs. lack thereof. Many of the most radical revolutionaries were extremely undemocratic. At times during the Revolutinary period even suggesting democratic measures (like implementing the Constitution) could get you killed.
  - tnecniv 10y ago
    Except it didn't work. After overthrowing the monarchy, France went through a number of highly unstable governments until Napoleon ascended to the throne in 1805. That period was called the Reign of Terror for a reason. If you were suspected of being a counter-revolutionary, you could be executed without trial. After Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo, the French monarchy was restored. When the Second Republic was established after the revolution of 1848, Napoleon III quickly abused his uncle's popularity to establish another dictatorship within five years. This lasted until 1870.

oblio 10y ago

Well, sorry to say this (it might offend Americans), but nobody important at the time really cared. Except for Britain, as the directly involved party. The US at the time was a minor player and its independence and democratic process didn't really affect a lot of people. Abraham Lincoln, ~80 years after the American Revolution was replying to San Marino's government along the lines: you are the only fellow state in the world (San Marino being the oldest republic in the world) in this period of turmoil (i.e. Civil War). The French Revolution was the event that kick-started the spread of democratic ideas and regimes throughout the Old World. It brought about the downfall of the medieval regimes, the abolition of serfdom and slavery, etc. The American Revolution was more of a symbolic event at the time. On the other hand the fall of the French monarchy was a colossal event at the time: the new French Republic was continuously attacked by all its neighbors to prevent the dangerous ideas from spreading.

Symmetry 10y ago
Well, Poland was inspired to adopt a democratic constitution in 1791 and the speed with which its neighbors invaded probably shows that they cared about the spread of democracy too in a more negative way. But yes, that wasn't as significant as the French Revolution.
- Annatar 10y ago
  Ironic that the Poles set themselves back by electing their new right-hardline leader, who immediately moved in to take control over the national television, don't you think? The elected official in question actually saw no problem with that. To make matters even "better", he is stuck to communist regime / fascist methodology of tightly controlling television and radio... in the age when everybody is on the Internet... awesome! I know of another guy, over in Turkey, who works the same way... Ataturk would be turning over in his grave if he saw what that other guy is doing in the country he founded. Anyway, when is Poland holding the referendum on leaving the european union?
  - Symmetry 10y ago
    I think you're talking about the Second Polish Republic in 1918. They didn't have televisions in 1791.

stangeek 10y ago

The US independance was completely inspired by the "Lumières" (the philosophical movement of the Enlighteners), which originated in France and led to the French revolution as well as the emergence of true democracy accross Europe. So even if the US was already independant by the time the French Revolution happened, this is only because it was way more complicated to achieve the latter. But let's not be mistaken about its origins.

hartpuff 10y ago
> But let's not be mistaken about its origins. Let's not make nonsensical statements like US independence was completely inspired by the Lumières then. Most notably, US independence was also inspired by the Glorious Revolution in England (the American Bill of Rights is even based on the English Bill of Rights), about a century earlier.
- stangeek 10y ago
  The glorious revolution was the direct consequence of the Lumières - in fact it was part of the movement!
  - hartpuff 10y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution HTH
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumières https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumières "The Lumières (literally in English: Enlighteners) was a cultural, philosophical, literary and intellectual movement of the second half of the 18th century" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution "The Glorious Revolution, also called the Revolution of 1688" Your proposed timelines are a little off, old bean. ;-)
ealloc 10y ago
There was a lot of inspiration the other way too, though. Here are two little instances I came across recently where the french copied their rhetoric and symbolism from America: In 1787 Thomas Jefferson said, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants". Then in 1793 Bertrand Barère, in an influential speech to the national assembly advocating execution of the king, repeated "The tree of liberty grows only when watered by the blood of tyrants" . In French sources the quote is often (incorrectly) attributed to Barère only. Similarly, during the American revolution, Americans raised symbolic "liberty poles" in their towns. Directly inspired by this, during the french revolution most cities raised and decorated "Trees of Liberty" in their central squares. King Louis even stooped to visiting and honoring the one in Paris to appease revolutionaries (it didn't help). (The French took the idea of "watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants" quite literally).

increment_i 10y ago

You would be correct to believe that.