7 ms·

I'm a little taken aback by the title. Marie Antoinette is the very image of dislikable aristocracy. Have folks these days really forgotten why she was so hated

I'm a little taken aback by the title. Marie Antoinette is the very image of dislikable aristocracy. Have folks these days really forgotten why she was so hated? She clearly was unable to perform in the role of arguing for the french people. She was utterly divorced from their problems due to wealth disparity. If people have forgotten why she was hated, we are due for some truly violent times. This is not good: the US ruling class is the very image of pre-revolution wealth disparity, complete with Pelosi eating ice cream out of her two massive fridges during a pandemic. I'm no particular critic of Pelosi in particular, but my jaw hit the floor when I saw her make that video. How can you be this oblivious about how you come off to people? The book itself is excellent, btw, this is purely a question for the editor of "nybooks". Editor: stop pretending that people forgot why the rich are hated when the poor are starving. We aren't at the place where impoverished women take the streets demanding better prices for bread but we aren't far from it either.

IIAOPSW 6y ago
Ice cream isn't really posh, classy, or out of reach.
- kyleee 6y ago
  technically true, but she was showing off her 2 industrial fridges with probably $200 worth of ice cream. quite garish, really, at a time when the working and middle classes were thrown into chaos due to the pandemic and lockdowns
  - tanaros 6y ago
    The richest person in America has more wealth than the median household will accumulate in a million years of labor (literally). Are you sure that two fridges and a lot of ice cream should be the focus here?
    - kyleee 6y ago
      i didn't bring it up, was just commenting on it
- PrinceKropotkin 6y ago
  The second fridge (freezer?) fully stocked with ice cream is.
MeinBlutIstBlau 6y ago
All revolutions happen because of mass unemployment of the middle class. Not the aristocracy, working class, or decrepit poor. The middle class is the group of people of artisanal or union class. They are secured in either a specialized role or high paying job for a somewhat general labor role. If they lose their job en masse, finding a job becomes very hard. So now not only do they have time to kill, but they have influence in swaths. Aristocrats likely end up backing groups that begin to rise up. Which helps fan the flames of discontent. We've seen it happen France in the 1700s, Germany in the 1800s and 1900s, Russia pre WWI, China in WW2, and Spain during WW2. Imo, the US is far from this happening. The only people who often complain about radical income disparity live in one of the major cities. Granted it has merit, but there is a sizable amount of people that live outside of those HCOL areas. City people forget that there is a very wealthy, affluent, and secure America outside of cities.
- Retric 6y ago
  Slave revolts have been common throughout history, and while largely unsuccessful they disagree with your assessment. Revolutions start at every level of society from the aristocracy, poor, military, or intellectuals. What sustains revolutions behind the initial conflict is often propaganda.
  - barry-cotter 6y ago
    > Slave revolts have been common throughout history, and while largely unsuccessful they disagree with your assessment. Here is a complete list of all historically attested successful slave revolts: Haiti, 1791 That’s it. Revolutions require leadership. Overwhelming that’s going to be the educated or otherwise reasonably comfortable, or those who were recently so and want it back. Peasant revolts fail without leaders, who are either going to be nobles or bourgeois. Those who can’t organize can’t win and a bureaucracy requires literate men, who are very unlikely to be poor. Revolutions win. Slave revolts not so much.
    - Retric 6y ago
      Slaves actually called slaves where relatively uncommon in history. Include peasant uprisings and several more become relevant. However, the important bit for US isn’t the long term results it’s the chaos involved in these civil wars. The Third Servile War for example grew from 70 slave-gladiators to ~120,000 men in 2 years and won several significant battles vs the Roman Army. You really don’t want to see the modern version of that kind of fighting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Servile_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Servile_War
jcranmer 6y ago
> Have folks these days really forgotten why she was so hated? She clearly was unable to perform in the role of arguing for the french people. She was utterly divorced from their problems due to wealth disparity. She was one of the people who was arguing for the reform of the French taxation system under the idea that maybe, just maybe, the clergy and the aristocrats ought to pay some taxes instead of levying it all on the peasantry. Truly a more despotic individual has never walked the Earth. Pre-Revolution, a lot of the ire directed at her was driven by the fact that she was a woman who was actively engaging in politics as opposed to being a dandy who just looked pretty, hosted parties, and made babies. She was also criticized for being too extravagant with the public purse, though, so she might well have been complained about even if she did the proper societal role befitting a queen. Post-Revolution, the criticism shifts to the fact that she sided with foreign countries against Republicanism. In large part, she was made the solitary scapegoat of the failures of the ancien régime to help bolster support for the abolition of the monarchy, as she was already unpopular before the Revolution.
- watwut 6y ago
  She was also foreigner.
- koheripbal 6y ago
  It's important to remember that revolutions do not produce justice - they produce change.
  - exolymph 6y ago
    As Edmund Burke put it, "Those who attempt to level, never equalize."
- PrinceKropotkin 6y ago
  None of this changes the situation of what people thought of them during a beheading. I'm certainly not arguing the resulting reign of terror was in anyway justified (though it seems to have worked out well for the french in the long run).
- 6y ago
coliveira 6y ago
This seems to me a reflex of the times. Billionaires are celebrated as if they're making some great benefit the world, instead of pushing their monopolies around to make as much money as possible without regard for the law, as in the late 19th century. See how people seem to oppose the break up of Google, which would be a benefit for everyone.
dang 6y ago
It's been many years since I read my Kropotkin but I seem to recall him being a gentler soul than this.

IIAOPSW 6y ago

Ice cream isn't really posh, classy, or out of reach.

kyleee 6y ago
technically true, but she was showing off her 2 industrial fridges with probably $200 worth of ice cream. quite garish, really, at a time when the working and middle classes were thrown into chaos due to the pandemic and lockdowns
- tanaros 6y ago
  The richest person in America has more wealth than the median household will accumulate in a million years of labor (literally). Are you sure that two fridges and a lot of ice cream should be the focus here?
  - kyleee 6y ago
    i didn't bring it up, was just commenting on it
PrinceKropotkin 6y ago
The second fridge (freezer?) fully stocked with ice cream is.

MeinBlutIstBlau 6y ago

All revolutions happen because of mass unemployment of the middle class. Not the aristocracy, working class, or decrepit poor. The middle class is the group of people of artisanal or union class. They are secured in either a specialized role or high paying job for a somewhat general labor role. If they lose their job en masse, finding a job becomes very hard. So now not only do they have time to kill, but they have influence in swaths. Aristocrats likely end up backing groups that begin to rise up. Which helps fan the flames of discontent. We've seen it happen France in the 1700s, Germany in the 1800s and 1900s, Russia pre WWI, China in WW2, and Spain during WW2. Imo, the US is far from this happening. The only people who often complain about radical income disparity live in one of the major cities. Granted it has merit, but there is a sizable amount of people that live outside of those HCOL areas. City people forget that there is a very wealthy, affluent, and secure America outside of cities.

Retric 6y ago
Slave revolts have been common throughout history, and while largely unsuccessful they disagree with your assessment. Revolutions start at every level of society from the aristocracy, poor, military, or intellectuals. What sustains revolutions behind the initial conflict is often propaganda.
- barry-cotter 6y ago
  > Slave revolts have been common throughout history, and while largely unsuccessful they disagree with your assessment. Here is a complete list of all historically attested successful slave revolts: Haiti, 1791 That’s it. Revolutions require leadership. Overwhelming that’s going to be the educated or otherwise reasonably comfortable, or those who were recently so and want it back. Peasant revolts fail without leaders, who are either going to be nobles or bourgeois. Those who can’t organize can’t win and a bureaucracy requires literate men, who are very unlikely to be poor. Revolutions win. Slave revolts not so much.
  - Retric 6y ago
    Slaves actually called slaves where relatively uncommon in history. Include peasant uprisings and several more become relevant. However, the important bit for US isn’t the long term results it’s the chaos involved in these civil wars. The Third Servile War for example grew from 70 slave-gladiators to ~120,000 men in 2 years and won several significant battles vs the Roman Army. You really don’t want to see the modern version of that kind of fighting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Servile_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Servile_War

jcranmer 6y ago

> Have folks these days really forgotten why she was so hated? She clearly was unable to perform in the role of arguing for the french people. She was utterly divorced from their problems due to wealth disparity. She was one of the people who was arguing for the reform of the French taxation system under the idea that maybe, just maybe, the clergy and the aristocrats ought to pay some taxes instead of levying it all on the peasantry. Truly a more despotic individual has never walked the Earth. Pre-Revolution, a lot of the ire directed at her was driven by the fact that she was a woman who was actively engaging in politics as opposed to being a dandy who just looked pretty, hosted parties, and made babies. She was also criticized for being too extravagant with the public purse, though, so she might well have been complained about even if she did the proper societal role befitting a queen. Post-Revolution, the criticism shifts to the fact that she sided with foreign countries against Republicanism. In large part, she was made the solitary scapegoat of the failures of the ancien régime to help bolster support for the abolition of the monarchy, as she was already unpopular before the Revolution.

watwut 6y ago
She was also foreigner.
koheripbal 6y ago
It's important to remember that revolutions do not produce justice - they produce change.
- exolymph 6y ago
  As Edmund Burke put it, "Those who attempt to level, never equalize."
PrinceKropotkin 6y ago
None of this changes the situation of what people thought of them during a beheading. I'm certainly not arguing the resulting reign of terror was in anyway justified (though it seems to have worked out well for the french in the long run).
6y ago

coliveira 6y ago

This seems to me a reflex of the times. Billionaires are celebrated as if they're making some great benefit the world, instead of pushing their monopolies around to make as much money as possible without regard for the law, as in the late 19th century. See how people seem to oppose the break up of Google, which would be a benefit for everyone.

dang 6y ago

It's been many years since I read my Kropotkin but I seem to recall him being a gentler soul than this.