OWS Echoes The French Revolution.

[PoliticalChic]

1. The OWS movement reflects several aspects of the French Revolution.
Had they an actual education, we would have seen cardboard signs with
"Liberté, égalité, fraternité."

a. égalité..equality...is the demand that the so-called "1%" be brought down to their level.

2. The OWS folks certainly count as a mob.

a. Gustave Le Bon, in his groundbreaking 1896 book, “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind,” was the first to identify the phenomenon of mass psychology. Both Hitler and Mussolini used his book to understand how to incite a mob.
The administration had hoped to harnass this mob as an ally.

3. In her book, "Demonic," Coulter illustrates how rumors and catch-phrases innervate a mob, and this is clear in that OWS and their supporters believe nonsense such as workers incomes stagnating, or falling, and only some bête noire called the "1%" is thriving, at their expense.

4. The man most identified with the French Revolution is Rousseau, who famously saw man sans government as 'the noble savage,' and some 'general will,' that the group expressed, as the right path. How did that work out in the OWS communes...? An anemic reflection of the French Revolution...without guillotines. Up to now.

a. In France, there was the development of an apparatus of ideological enforcement for ‘reason.’ But rather than necessitate liberty, Edmund Burke was prescient enough to predict that ‘enlightened despotism’ would be embodied in the general will, a formula for oppression as in ‘tyranny of popular opinion’ or even ‘a dictatorship of the proletariat.’

b. Although attributed to Rousseau, it was Diderot who gave the model for totalitarianism of reason: “We must reason about all things,” and anyone who ‘refuses to seek out the truth’ thereby renounces his human nature and “should be treated by the rest of his species as a wild beast.” So, once ‘truth’ is determined, anyone who doesn’t accept it was “either insane or wicked and morally evil.” It is not the individual who has the “ right to decide about the nature of right and wrong,” but only “the human race,” expressed as the general will. Himmelfarb, “The Roads to Modernity,” p. 167-68

c. Robespierre used Rousseau’s call for a “reign of virtue,’ proclaiming the Republic of Virtue, his euphemism for The Terror. In ‘The Social Contract’ Rousseau advocated death for anyone who did not uphold the common values of the community: the totalitarian view of reshaping of humanity, echoed in communism, Nazism, progressivism. Robespierre: “the necessity of bringing about a complete regeneration and, if I may express myself so, of creating a new people.” Himmefarb, Ibid.

d. In this particular idea of the Enlightenment, the need to change human nature, and to eliminate customs and traditions, to remake established institutions, to do away with all inequalities in order to bring man closer to the state, which was the expression of the general will. Talmon, “Origins of Totalitarian Democracy,” p. 3-7

 

[Dragon]

If it does, it's only because today's America resembles the Ancien Régime.

 

[eots]

NEWYORK LIVESTREAM
Occupy Live Streams ~ Easily Switch Between Live Occupy Video Streams!

 

[California Girl]

If it does, it's only because today's America resembles the Ancien Régime.

Then move. No one is forcing you to stay.

 

[Dragon]

If it does, it's only because today's America resembles the Ancien Régime.

Then move. No one is forcing you to stay.

I may in fact do that, as a lot of other Americans are doing. However, there is something to be said for at least trying to fix a problem before abandoning one's country. There is such a thing as patriotism.

 

[Mr Natural]

And how did that French revolution work out for the fat cats?

 

[SAT]

If it does, it's only because today's America resembles the Ancien Régime.

I wondered if she knew where her analogy was leading.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And how did that French revolution work out for the fat cats?

Fat cats?

600,000 were slaughtered in the abattoir.


And it didn't end in France...

...you have no idea, no understanding of the spin-offs of the French Revolution: think Hitler and Stalin and Mao and Che, and millions upon millions slaughtered.

1. From "Demonic:" The killings went on, without reason. Saint-Just demanded that people be guillotined not just for being traitors, but for being “indifferent as well.” And, more than passing interesting, this roving indictment was adopted by key Obama advisors William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn in the SDS anti-war pamphlet called “The Opposite of Moral is Indifferent.” William Ayers, “Fugitive Days,” p. 130.

2. "Rousseau presages the rise of the Romantic movement in art and caused a sensation among the aristocrats of Bourbon France. Later on Napoleon is supposed to have claimed, "If there had been no Rousseau, there would have been no Revolution, and without the Revolution, I should have been impossible." Stalin and Hitler could say the same in recognizing their debt to the concept of "the Sovereign" of Rousseau and its mystical identification with the people. 200 years later we have only millions and millions of innocents murdered in the "name of the people," etc. ad nauseam. "
French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror


You are exactly the kind of individual the Left requires.

Here's an idea: pick up a book now and then.

 

[SAT]

And how did that French revolution work out for the fat cats?

Fat cats?

600,000 were slaughtered in the abattoir.


And it didn't end in France...

...you have no idea, no understanding of the spin-offs of the French Revolution: think Hitler and Stalin and Mao and Che, and millions upon millions slaughtered.

1. From "Demonic:" The killings went on, without reason. Saint-Just demanded that people be guillotined not just for being traitors, but for being “indifferent as well.” And, more than passing interesting, this roving indictment was adopted by key Obama advisors William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn in the SDS anti-war pamphlet called “The Opposite of Moral is Indifferent.” William Ayers, “Fugitive Days,” p. 130.

2. "Rousseau presages the rise of the Romantic movement in art and caused a sensation among the aristocrats of Bourbon France. Later on Napoleon is supposed to have claimed, "If there had been no Rousseau, there would have been no Revolution, and without the Revolution, I should have been impossible." Stalin and Hitler could say the same in recognizing their debt to the concept of "the Sovereign" of Rousseau and its mystical identification with the people. 200 years later we have only millions and millions of innocents murdered in the "name of the people," etc. ad nauseam. "
French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror


You are exactly the kind of individual the Left requires.

Here's an idea: pick up a book now and then.

Take your own advice! You have no conception of the events you're posting about. You don't pay the slightest attention to the condition of the poor in France at the time of the revolution, nor do you have any understanding of the totalitarian regimes you mention.

 

[Mr. H.]

Let them eat Twinkies.

 

[Luissa]

I guess the people of France should have been satisfied with being poor, and just accepted that the lower classes faced most of the tax burden.

I guess our own founding fathers should have just been satisfied with what Great Britain was throwing at us too.

 

[martybegan]

And how did that French revolution work out for the fat cats?

it didnt work out so great for the revolutionaries as well. The Reign of Terror was a cannabalistic feeding frenzy of revolutionaries, leading the way from Ancien Regime, to Revolutionary Republic, to the terror of the Directory, and then to Empire.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And how did that French revolution work out for the fat cats?

Fat cats?

600,000 were slaughtered in the abattoir.


And it didn't end in France...

...you have no idea, no understanding of the spin-offs of the French Revolution: think Hitler and Stalin and Mao and Che, and millions upon millions slaughtered.

1. From "Demonic:" The killings went on, without reason. Saint-Just demanded that people be guillotined not just for being traitors, but for being “indifferent as well.” And, more than passing interesting, this roving indictment was adopted by key Obama advisors William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn in the SDS anti-war pamphlet called “The Opposite of Moral is Indifferent.” William Ayers, “Fugitive Days,” p. 130.

2. "Rousseau presages the rise of the Romantic movement in art and caused a sensation among the aristocrats of Bourbon France. Later on Napoleon is supposed to have claimed, "If there had been no Rousseau, there would have been no Revolution, and without the Revolution, I should have been impossible." Stalin and Hitler could say the same in recognizing their debt to the concept of "the Sovereign" of Rousseau and its mystical identification with the people. 200 years later we have only millions and millions of innocents murdered in the "name of the people," etc. ad nauseam. "
French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror


You are exactly the kind of individual the Left requires.

Here's an idea: pick up a book now and then.

Take your own advice! You have no conception of the events you're posting about. You don't pay the slightest attention to the condition of the poor in France at the time of the revolution, nor do you have any understanding of the totalitarian regimes you mention.

I hate to admit it, SAP, but it's great having you here on the board!

Aren't enough folks who are both as dumb as a box of rocks, AND willing to prove it to the whole world!!!

"...no conception of the events you're posting about. You don't pay the slightest attention to the condition of the poor..."
Not just uneducated, and unread, but a complete maroon!


Pick out any of the French Revolution and/or it's spin-offs, in Russia, Cuba, China, Cambodia, Iran, etc., that

1. didn't result in the slaughter of thousands, or millions

2. weren't promulgated by 'intellectuals,' and/or elites....

3. ...the educated and middle class or better, academics

4. didn't require a submission to a central authority, the total state

5. didn't champion the collective over the individual

Waiting....

Here...let me make fun of your post while I'm waiting.
"...no conception of the events you're posting about. You don't pay the slightest attention to the condition of the poor..."

If you would entertain this question, SAP, which is better...to be poor or to be dead?

Now, write soon...and don't hesitate to prove how stupid you are!

(I'd recommend several scholarly books for you to read, but, then, who would I have fun slapping around?)

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let them eat Twinkies.

Twinkies are definitel racist!

I might sign on if you include Yodels and ya' definitely got me for
Ring Dings!

 

[Sallow]

1. The OWS movement reflects several aspects of the French Revolution.
Had they an actual education, we would have seen cardboard signs with
"Liberté, égalité, fraternité."

a. égalité..equality...is the demand that the so-called "1%" be brought down to their level.

2. The OWS folks certainly count as a mob.

a. Gustave Le Bon, in his groundbreaking 1896 book, “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind,” was the first to identify the phenomenon of mass psychology. Both Hitler and Mussolini used his book to understand how to incite a mob.
The administration had hoped to harnass this mob as an ally.

3. In her book, "Demonic," Coulter illustrates how rumors and catch-phrases innervate a mob, and this is clear in that OWS and their supporters believe nonsense such as workers incomes stagnating, or falling, and only some bête noire called the "1%" is thriving, at their expense.

4. The man most identified with the French Revolution is Rousseau, who famously saw man sans government as 'the noble savage,' and some 'general will,' that the group expressed, as the right path. How did that work out in the OWS communes...? An anemic reflection of the French Revolution...without guillotines. Up to now.

a. In France, there was the development of an apparatus of ideological enforcement for ‘reason.’ But rather than necessitate liberty, Edmund Burke was prescient enough to predict that ‘enlightened despotism’ would be embodied in the general will, a formula for oppression as in ‘tyranny of popular opinion’ or even ‘a dictatorship of the proletariat.’

b. Although attributed to Rousseau, it was Diderot who gave the model for totalitarianism of reason: “We must reason about all things,” and anyone who ‘refuses to seek out the truth’ thereby renounces his human nature and “should be treated by the rest of his species as a wild beast.” So, once ‘truth’ is determined, anyone who doesn’t accept it was “either insane or wicked and morally evil.” It is not the individual who has the “ right to decide about the nature of right and wrong,” but only “the human race,” expressed as the general will. Himmelfarb, “The Roads to Modernity,” p. 167-68

c. Robespierre used Rousseau’s call for a “reign of virtue,’ proclaiming the Republic of Virtue, his euphemism for The Terror. In ‘The Social Contract’ Rousseau advocated death for anyone who did not uphold the common values of the community: the totalitarian view of reshaping of humanity, echoed in communism, Nazism, progressivism. Robespierre: “the necessity of bringing about a complete regeneration and, if I may express myself so, of creating a new people.” Himmefarb, Ibid.

d. In this particular idea of the Enlightenment, the need to change human nature, and to eliminate customs and traditions, to remake established institutions, to do away with all inequalities in order to bring man closer to the state, which was the expression of the general will. Talmon, “Origins of Totalitarian Democracy,” p. 3-7

And the conservative solution is what?

Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands.

Go for it.

See how it works out in the end.

Because historically..that's been the downfall of plenty of nations. But conservatives love to do the same stupid thing over and over and over and over again. Expecting different results.

 

[Sallow]

I guess the people of France should have been satisfied with being poor, and just accepted that the lower classes faced most of the tax burden.

I guess our own founding fathers should have just been satisfied with what Great Britain was throwing at us too.

Unfortunately people will never be satisfied with the conservative forms of goverment like Fascism, Monarchy, Aristocracy, Theocracy and Dictatorships.

Why?

Because they suck.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I guess the people of France should have been satisfied with being poor, and just accepted that the lower classes faced most of the tax burden.

I guess our own founding fathers should have just been satisfied with what Great Britain was throwing at us too.

Time for some remediation.

The choice was not "...poor, and just accepted that the lower classes..." versus slaughering and maiming thousands of their countrymen...

The choice was the French Revolution and coextensive attack on Christianity, or

The American Revolution, infused with morality and religion.

1. While the American Revolution was created by and for ‘classical liberals,’ the French Revolution was by and for what those now called ‘liberals’ or progressives.

a. “The American intellectual class from the mid 19th century onward has disliked liberalism (which originally referred to individualism, private property, and limits on power) precisely because the liberal society has no overarching goal.” War Is the Health of the State

b. The French Revolution is the godless antithesis of the founding of America.

2. Unlike the American version, the French Revolution was a revolt by the mob, and was the primogenitor of the Bolshevik Revolution, Hitler’s Nazi Party, Mao’s Cultural Revolution, Pol Pot’s killing fields, and the dirty waifs smashing Starbucks’ windows whenever bankers come town. Those with the gift of irony see similar actions in the ‘Cradle of Democracy,’ Greece.

3. Contrary to the assertions of Liberals, who wish our founding fathers were more like the godless French peasants, skipping around with human heads on a pike, our founding fathers were God-fearing descendants of Puritans and other colonial Christians.

4. The men behind the American Revolution- the Minutemen, the signers of the Declaration of Independence, the framers of the Constitution- were the very opposite of a mob. For the most part, educated, aristocratic property holders, doctors, lawyers, ministers and other respectable tradesmen with everything to lose should the revolution fail. These were the classical liberals, or, as we would address them today, the conservatives.

a. The modern Tea Party still abhors mob behavior. This from a rally in Boston: “The Obama Hitler sign. Let’s look out for those people, and make sure people know they’re not us.” A middle-aged, out-of-work Republican from Jamaica Plain agreed that it was crucial to police the line between the reasonable Tea Party people and party crashers: “We need to disabuse the public of some of the more exotic rumors out there.” Boston tea parties past and present : The New Yorker

b. A 26-year-old Tea Partier from MIT thought about throwing a copy of the 2000-page health care bill into Boston Harbor…but changed his mind when he found out it would be against the law. Ibid.
A far better exposition of the above can be found in "Demonic," by Coulter.


Wake up.
Wise up.
Grow up.

 

[Intense]

I guess the people of France should have been satisfied with being poor, and just accepted that the lower classes faced most of the tax burden.

I guess our own founding fathers should have just been satisfied with what Great Britain was throwing at us too.

Unfortunately people will never be satisfied with the conservative forms of goverment like Fascism, Monarchy, Aristocracy, Theocracy and Dictatorships.

Why?

Because they suck.

Sallow, grow up. Totalitarianism under any brand sucks and you know it. The concept of Unalienable Rights, including Private Property Rights, foe Each of us, both Rich and Poor, a cornerstone in the Defense against Tyranny. You abandon Property Rights, and it's end game.

 

[Sallow]

I guess the people of France should have been satisfied with being poor, and just accepted that the lower classes faced most of the tax burden.

I guess our own founding fathers should have just been satisfied with what Great Britain was throwing at us too.

Time for some remediation.

The choice was not "...poor, and just accepted that the lower classes..." versus slaughering and maiming thousands of their countrymen...

The choice was the French Revolution and coextensive attack on Christianity, or

The American Revolution, infused with morality and religion.

1. While the American Revolution was created by and for ‘classical liberals,’ the French Revolution was by and for what those now called ‘liberals’ or progressives.

a. “The American intellectual class from the mid 19th century onward has disliked liberalism (which originally referred to individualism, private property, and limits on power) precisely because the liberal society has no overarching goal.” War Is the Health of the State

b. The French Revolution is the godless antithesis of the founding of America.

2. Unlike the American version, the French Revolution was a revolt by the mob, and was the primogenitor of the Bolshevik Revolution, Hitler’s Nazi Party, Mao’s Cultural Revolution, Pol Pot’s killing fields, and the dirty waifs smashing Starbucks’ windows whenever bankers come town. Those with the gift of irony see similar actions in the ‘Cradle of Democracy,’ Greece.

3. Contrary to the assertions of Liberals, who wish our founding fathers were more like the godless French peasants, skipping around with human heads on a pike, our founding fathers were God-fearing descendants of Puritans and other colonial Christians.

4. The men behind the American Revolution- the Minutemen, the signers of the Declaration of Independence, the framers of the Constitution- were the very opposite of a mob. For the most part, educated, aristocratic property holders, doctors, lawyers, ministers and other respectable tradesmen with everything to lose should the revolution fail. These were the classical liberals, or, as we would address them today, the conservatives.

a. The modern Tea Party still abhors mob behavior. This from a rally in Boston: “The Obama Hitler sign. Let’s look out for those people, and make sure people know they’re not us.” A middle-aged, out-of-work Republican from Jamaica Plain agreed that it was crucial to police the line between the reasonable Tea Party people and party crashers: “We need to disabuse the public of some of the more exotic rumors out there.” Boston tea parties past and present : The New Yorker

b. A 26-year-old Tea Partier from MIT thought about throwing a copy of the 2000-page health care bill into Boston Harbor…but changed his mind when he found out it would be against the law. Ibid.
A far better exposition of the above can be found in "Demonic," by Coulter.


Wake up.
Wise up.
Grow up.

Oh bullshit.

The American Revolution was NOT a Christian movement. There is no god in the Constitution. Christian religions are intolerant of other religions.

 

[Truthmatters]

Vilfredo Pareto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Funny you should mention that it echo the French revolution.

It is these very types of historical facts like the French revolution that Pareto studied to discover that there is a breaking point of concentrated wealth in a society.


We have now proved pareto correct yet agin