6 ms·

> Perhaps the danger is not 2008, 1999, 1973 or even 1873, but 1789. 1789 was the year of the French Revolution [1]. The rest are years with financial crises.

> Perhaps the danger is not 2008, 1999, 1973 or even 1873, but 1789. 1789 was the year of the French Revolution [1]. The rest are years with financial crises. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution

BurningFrog 4mo ago
The French Revolution was an orgy in mass murder that led to the slaughter of millions in the Napoleon wars. It really need to be romantizied much less!
- IndeanCondor 4mo ago
  It was a coalition of monarchies, so terrified of the prospect of even a single popular republic rejecting the divine right to rule, that began the bloodshed and invaded France. Blaming the Revolution for the Coalition wars is just bad history. In case you didn't notice, the Revolution won. All contemporary republics fundamentally inherit from the French Revolution - you're surprised that the systems of govt honour and romanticize it's progenitors? Aside, if bloodshed prevention is your only barometer for history, supporting the Coalition view of events is even sillier, because the Bourbon Restoration directly led to the Revolutions of 1830 and 1848, which was yet more bloodshed. Almost as if unjust systems are fundamentally untenable...
  - sarchertech 4mo ago
    > In case you didn't notice, the Revolution won. All contemporary republics fundamentally inherit from the French Revolution “Fundamentally inherent from” is such a broad statement that it’s difficult to argue with, but the US constitution predates the French Revolution. > so terrified of the prospect of even a single popular republic rejecting the divine right to rule If the monarchies of Europe were so terrified of a single country rejecting the divine right to rule, why did many of them assist the United States, hinder Britain, or remain neutral in the revolutionary war?
    - Akasazh 4mo ago
      He said inherit, not inherent
      - sarchertech 4mo ago
        It was a typo.
  - Svip 4mo ago
    That is a bit of revisionist history: conspiracy theories gripped the revolution, and a lot of them thought Marie-Antoinette was already organising an Austrian invasion of France (since she is Austrian), so rather than wait for the supposed inevitable to happen, France attacked first. And that's what made the coalitions form. Not that they liked the idea of a Republican France, but before France attacked, they were unlikely to do anything about it.
  - BurningFrog 4mo ago
    The Robespierre regime chopped off ~40,000 heads during the 10 months "Reign of Terror" 1793-1794.
dwabyick 4mo ago
Oh it’s definitely starting to feel like 1789 vibes. The oligarchs have taken too much, too fast.
avidiax 4mo ago
The French Revolution is no longer possible. The surveillance state plus wealth mobility means the wealthy will be in New Zealand before anyone erects a guillotine, and the people that would foment a revolution are heavily surveilled and infiltrated.
- c1sc0 4mo ago
  Are you sure about that? Tech cuts both ways & asymmetric drone warfare has become cheaper than ever … how hard it is it to sink some yachts or down some jets?
  - Henchman21 4mo ago
    Or take some data centers offline.
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
  - hparadiz 4mo ago
    I could only relate to this stuff in my 20s but now I just don't care. Maybe it's cause I went from < 200k net worth to over 1M in that time. I've seen the country I was born in collapse in my lifetime. I saw my grandparents give their entire life to that country only to be left destitute. I saw my parents come to America with literally $0 and after thirty years I watched them become millionares by simply getting up and working hard. This idea that people will rise up and replace what we've got now with better is part of the problem. You literally do not know how lucky you are to live in this time because you are living in the middle of a golden age and don't even realize it. Because when you're in the middle of a golden age it feels normal. And for some reason there's an entire population of folks like you that wanna FAFO while they are living in literally the best time ever to be a human being. I'd sigh but I'm not surprised.
    - Nursie 4mo ago
      > I watched them become millionares by simply getting up and working hard. If it was that easy, every office cleaner or bank clerk would be a millionaire. > living in literally the best time ever to be a human being Sure, but we're also watching the rise of a new oligarchy, and their latest innovation appears poised to put a lot of people out of work, making their lives materially worse.
somenameforme 4mo ago
Inequality and other such issues are universal, the French Revolution was not. What was unique about the French Revolution is not even that the government bankrupted themselves fighting wars and then tried to refill their coffers by sharply increasing taxes in a fashion that disproportionately affected the lower classes, but that this was all paired alongside widespread crop failures that sent the cost of food skyrocketing driven widespread food scarcity. The average person couldn't care less, at least in terms of action, how much money somebody else has. If people have food in their belly and a roof over their heads, you're only going to draw out radicals. And in modern sharply divided societies those radicals will be framed (probably accurately) as being disproportionately made up of one side, and the other side will oppose them all their might and widespread public support behind such opposition. So there will never be a popular revolution in a place like the US in its current divided state. The most probable scenario by an overwhelmingly wide margin is 'nothing', but the only other possibility would be a civil war. And I do think that's possible, but the chances are extremely remote. It would require something very extreme like one side trying to ban the other side from political office. We've probably been closer than some might expect, but we're now probably much further, rather than closer, to those times and outcomes. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=French_Revolution&oldid=923945 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=French_Revolution...
- haizhung 4mo ago
  That’s incorrect, in fact, fairness and equality is one of the few universal social contracts that are valued in every culture on earth (though lived/implemented differently). And I would argue that’s one of the key differences that separates humans from animals. Humans have an intrinsic desire for things to be fair.
  - somenameforme 4mo ago
    Unfortunately, what we have and what we want are not the same thing even if near universally true. E.g. - nobody happens to be a huge fan of murder.
tsoukase 4mo ago
Oh, the good old reflex that is activated in panic situations but never realised. Then the revolution was from capitalists against kings. Now the former are already in power with their servants (CEOs) and there is no alternative. So no change, no revolution.

BurningFrog 4mo ago

The French Revolution was an orgy in mass murder that led to the slaughter of millions in the Napoleon wars. It really need to be romantizied much less!

IndeanCondor 4mo ago
It was a coalition of monarchies, so terrified of the prospect of even a single popular republic rejecting the divine right to rule, that began the bloodshed and invaded France. Blaming the Revolution for the Coalition wars is just bad history. In case you didn't notice, the Revolution won. All contemporary republics fundamentally inherit from the French Revolution - you're surprised that the systems of govt honour and romanticize it's progenitors? Aside, if bloodshed prevention is your only barometer for history, supporting the Coalition view of events is even sillier, because the Bourbon Restoration directly led to the Revolutions of 1830 and 1848, which was yet more bloodshed. Almost as if unjust systems are fundamentally untenable...
- sarchertech 4mo ago
  > In case you didn't notice, the Revolution won. All contemporary republics fundamentally inherit from the French Revolution “Fundamentally inherent from” is such a broad statement that it’s difficult to argue with, but the US constitution predates the French Revolution. > so terrified of the prospect of even a single popular republic rejecting the divine right to rule If the monarchies of Europe were so terrified of a single country rejecting the divine right to rule, why did many of them assist the United States, hinder Britain, or remain neutral in the revolutionary war?
  - Akasazh 4mo ago
    He said inherit, not inherent
    - sarchertech 4mo ago
      It was a typo.
- Svip 4mo ago
  That is a bit of revisionist history: conspiracy theories gripped the revolution, and a lot of them thought Marie-Antoinette was already organising an Austrian invasion of France (since she is Austrian), so rather than wait for the supposed inevitable to happen, France attacked first. And that's what made the coalitions form. Not that they liked the idea of a Republican France, but before France attacked, they were unlikely to do anything about it.
- BurningFrog 4mo ago
  The Robespierre regime chopped off ~40,000 heads during the 10 months "Reign of Terror" 1793-1794.

dwabyick 4mo ago

Oh it’s definitely starting to feel like 1789 vibes. The oligarchs have taken too much, too fast.

avidiax 4mo ago

The French Revolution is no longer possible. The surveillance state plus wealth mobility means the wealthy will be in New Zealand before anyone erects a guillotine, and the people that would foment a revolution are heavily surveilled and infiltrated.

c1sc0 4mo ago
Are you sure about that? Tech cuts both ways & asymmetric drone warfare has become cheaper than ever … how hard it is it to sink some yachts or down some jets?
- Henchman21 4mo ago
  Or take some data centers offline.
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
- hparadiz 4mo ago
  I could only relate to this stuff in my 20s but now I just don't care. Maybe it's cause I went from < 200k net worth to over 1M in that time. I've seen the country I was born in collapse in my lifetime. I saw my grandparents give their entire life to that country only to be left destitute. I saw my parents come to America with literally $0 and after thirty years I watched them become millionares by simply getting up and working hard. This idea that people will rise up and replace what we've got now with better is part of the problem. You literally do not know how lucky you are to live in this time because you are living in the middle of a golden age and don't even realize it. Because when you're in the middle of a golden age it feels normal. And for some reason there's an entire population of folks like you that wanna FAFO while they are living in literally the best time ever to be a human being. I'd sigh but I'm not surprised.
  - Nursie 4mo ago
    > I watched them become millionares by simply getting up and working hard. If it was that easy, every office cleaner or bank clerk would be a millionaire. > living in literally the best time ever to be a human being Sure, but we're also watching the rise of a new oligarchy, and their latest innovation appears poised to put a lot of people out of work, making their lives materially worse.

somenameforme 4mo ago

Inequality and other such issues are universal, the French Revolution was not. What was unique about the French Revolution is not even that the government bankrupted themselves fighting wars and then tried to refill their coffers by sharply increasing taxes in a fashion that disproportionately affected the lower classes, but that this was all paired alongside widespread crop failures that sent the cost of food skyrocketing driven widespread food scarcity. The average person couldn't care less, at least in terms of action, how much money somebody else has. If people have food in their belly and a roof over their heads, you're only going to draw out radicals. And in modern sharply divided societies those radicals will be framed (probably accurately) as being disproportionately made up of one side, and the other side will oppose them all their might and widespread public support behind such opposition. So there will never be a popular revolution in a place like the US in its current divided state. The most probable scenario by an overwhelmingly wide margin is 'nothing', but the only other possibility would be a civil war. And I do think that's possible, but the chances are extremely remote. It would require something very extreme like one side trying to ban the other side from political office. We've probably been closer than some might expect, but we're now probably much further, rather than closer, to those times and outcomes. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=French_Revolution&oldid=923945 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=French_Revolution...

haizhung 4mo ago
That’s incorrect, in fact, fairness and equality is one of the few universal social contracts that are valued in every culture on earth (though lived/implemented differently). And I would argue that’s one of the key differences that separates humans from animals. Humans have an intrinsic desire for things to be fair.
- somenameforme 4mo ago
  Unfortunately, what we have and what we want are not the same thing even if near universally true. E.g. - nobody happens to be a huge fan of murder.

tsoukase 4mo ago

Oh, the good old reflex that is activated in panic situations but never realised. Then the revolution was from capitalists against kings. Now the former are already in power with their servants (CEOs) and there is no alternative. So no change, no revolution.