Who Celebrates Bastille Day?

[Baruch Menachem]

a. The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian. “52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” David Limbaugh Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.”
(From Coulter’s best seller, “Demonic .”)

You have honestly shocked me. You blame the French Revolution on skin color and/or religion?

Unfuckingreal.

I have to believe stupidity at this level has to be feigned. You realize PC is asian, right? She is not going to say what you said she said. You couldn't be this stupid and still able to breathe unassisted.

Her point was the CULTURAL NORMS in Britain were different than they were on the continent, and this was due to post reformation changes in doctrinal views on the relation between the citizen and the state.

She quoted a papal encyclical on the matter. There was discussion that differences in religious doctrine had an effect on state organization. she didn't say brown people are built differently and therefore are unable to comprehend basic logic.

You are a marvelous piece of work.

 

[del]

Allons enfants de la patrie, le jour de gloire est arrive!

Congrats, France. (A bit early) Some excellent philosophical minds and thankfully the English colonists were wise enough to read the works they published before either revolution. The French would have been well-advised to consider those works, too. However, they seemed to be more driven toward mob rule.

Domage.




But, I have to say that guillotine is beyond harsh. Just creepy, really.

actually, the guillotine was invented because a lack of skilled executioners was causing really horrendous situations in which it would take many hacks to behead someone. the guillotine eliminated that agony.

 

[Ravi]

a. The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian. “52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” David Limbaugh Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.”
(From Coulter’s best seller, “Demonic .”)

You have honestly shocked me. You blame the French Revolution on skin color and/or religion?

Unfuckingreal.

I have to believe stupidity at this level has to be feigned. You realize PC is asian, right? She is not going to say what you said she said. You couldn't be this stupid and still able to breathe unassisted.

Her point was the CULTURAL NORMS in Britain were different than they were on the continent, and this was due to post reformation changes in doctrinal views on the relation between the citizen and the state.

She quoted a papal encyclical on the matter. There was discussion that differences in religious doctrine had an effect on state organization. she didn't say brown people are built differently and therefore are unable to comprehend basic logic.

You are a marvelous piece of work.

What does her being Asian have to do with anything?

I realize she only parrots wingnuts, but she did post this little jem:


The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian.

You are free to pretend all you want that it means something different.

 

[Si modo]

Allons enfants de la patrie, le jour de gloire est arrive!

Congrats, France. (A bit early) Some excellent philosophical minds and thankfully the English colonists were wise enough to read the works they published before either revolution. The French would have been well-advised to consider those works, too. However, they seemed to be more driven toward mob rule.

Domage.




But, I have to say that guillotine is beyond harsh. Just creepy, really.

actually, the guillotine was invented because a lack of skilled executioners was causing really horrendous situations in which it would take many hacks to behead someone. the guillotine eliminated that agony.

Yes, I do understand why it was invented. It's still gruesome to me.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

The previous form of execution was the wheel.

I would not advise clicking the link if you have a tender stomach.

 

[del]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yt1vQ81jNWw]‪Scene from "Casablanca" movie‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[del]

Does anyone take PC seriously? This calls for a new corollary to Godwin's Law!!!

no

 

[editec]

The conditions under which the FRENCH people were dealing were so wildly different than anything that the Americana colonialists were facing that to try to compare them is just silly.

But here's something to think about....

The chuch didn't pay taxes and owned much of the nations land and wealth.

The artistos didn't pay any taxes and they owned the vast majority of wealth and they also owned the monopoloy on most means of production, too.

The KING (central government) therefore was BROKE. After all, he could NOT tax the people who HAD all the dough (the artistos and the clergy).

The King was broke in part because of all his foolish WARS OF EMPIRE (that he or his father had lost)

Then the CROPS FAILED and the people were STARVING...

There's a lesson there, I think, for some of us.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You have honestly shocked me. You blame the French Revolution on skin color and/or religion?

Unfuckingreal.

I have to believe stupidity at this level has to be feigned. You realize PC is asian, right? She is not going to say what you said she said. You couldn't be this stupid and still able to breathe unassisted.

Her point was the CULTURAL NORMS in Britain were different than they were on the continent, and this was due to post reformation changes in doctrinal views on the relation between the citizen and the state.

She quoted a papal encyclical on the matter. There was discussion that differences in religious doctrine had an effect on state organization. she didn't say brown people are built differently and therefore are unable to comprehend basic logic.

You are a marvelous piece of work.

What does her being Asian have to do with anything?

I realize she only parrots wingnuts, but she did post this little jem:


The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian.

You are free to pretend all you want that it means something different.

1. The larger font hardly makes up for your lack of comprehension.

2. An earlier post explained, seemingly not down to your level, that the civil law, in France, differs from the common law practiced in English-speaking countries, ...also referred to as Anglo-Saxon by those with a college education. English is a Teutonic, (Saxon) tongue. And that post explaned how civil differed in impact from our common law.

3. A major desire of the French Revolution was to do away with religion, particularly Christianity, which places a fear of God as the way to knowledge and justice, with a civil religion in which the elites (liberals) inform the population what the 'general will' is...and bring down the full weight of government on those who do not conform.

4. Only a fanatic liberal would see the above references as implying race, i.e., skin color.

5. While you are not stupid, you are clearly uneducated. Pick up a book now and then.

 

[Momanohedhunter]

When a new member complained that some thought he was a liberal, one of our members proudly proclaimed: “Welcome from a real liberal.”

The beauty of USMB is how proudly most of the folks here speak right up for their beliefs!

1. So, kudos to our liberals friends, and have a wonderful July 14th, Bastille Day, the day that memorializes the French Revolution, and, since liberals/ progressives are heir to the French Revolution, have a great celebration!

2. Yes, just as an argument can be made that classical liberals, or what would be called conservatives today, are heir to the American Revolution, liberals can trace their provenance to Rousseau, and St. Just!

3. For Rousseau, the “Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen” proclaimed that the ‘general will’ of the people had to be correct, because it was the ‘general will,” the true interest of what everyone wants whether they realize it or not, and he ‘determined’ the ‘general will,’ so, anyone who deviated from same deserved no rights!

a. Although he had written a ‘constitution,’ it became malleable for Robespierre: “How did Robespierre actually interpret these principles? He said: “[W]e must exterminate all our enemies with the law in our hands”; “the Declaration of Rights offers no safeguard to conspirators”; “the suspicions of enlightened patriotism might offer a better guide than formal rules of evidence.” http://www.nationalaffairs.com/docl...hvsthefrenchenlightmentgertrudehimmelfarb.pdf,

Notice the echo in the actions of the early Progressives who suggested that the US Constitution may be shed, ‘like a garment.’ Their views surpassed those of the Founders. http://www.nationalaffairs.com/docl...hvsthefrenchenlightmentgertrudehimmelfarb.pdf

Could there be a better description of the collectivist totalitarian statist?

4. Of course, a minor difference that the astute might notice is that America’s documents did win freedom and individual rights, and France’s Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen led to bestial savagery, followed by Napoleon’s dictatorship, followed by another monarchy, and finally something resembling an actual republic some 80 years later.

5. And just one more difference between the two revolution, mirroring the difference between liberals and conservatives? With the Jacobins in control, the “de-Christianization” campaign kicked into high gear. Inspired by Rousseau’s idea of the 'religion civile', the revolution sought to completely destroy Christianity and replace it with a religion of the state. To honor “reason” and fulfill the promise of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen that “no one may be questioned about his opinions, including his religious views,” Catholic priests were forced to stand before the revolutionary clubs and take oaths to France’s new humanocentric religion, the Cult of Reason (which is French for ‘People for the American Way’).Revolutionaries smashed church art and statues.

a. The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian. “52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” David Limbaugh Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.”
(From Coulter’s best seller, “Demonic .”)

So, to those of the Liberal persuasion, party like it’s 1789!

…But remember, the party will be over in November, 2012.

This describes most who celebrate Bastille day. I have only seen it celebrated in New Orleans.

ig·no·rant
   [ig-ner-uhnt] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned: an ignorant man.
2.
lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact: ignorant of quantum physics.
3.
uninformed; unaware.
4.
due to or showing lack of knowledge or training: an ignorant statement.

 

[Ravi]

The conditions under which the FRENCH people were dealing were so wildly different than anything that the Americana colonialists were facing that to try to compare them is just silly.

But here's something to think about....

The chuch didn't pay taxes and owned much of the nations land and wealth.

The artistos didn't pay any taxes and they owned the vast majority of wealth and they also owned the monopoloy on most means of production, too.

The KING (central government) therefore was BROKE. After all, he could NOT tax the people who HAD all the dough (the artistos and the clergy).

The King was broke in part because of all his foolish WARS OF EMPIRE (that he or his father had lost)

Then the CROPS FAILED and the people were STARVING...

There's a lesson there, I think, for some of us.

Yep, hunger makes people do things.

 

[Si modo]

You have honestly shocked me. You blame the French Revolution on skin color and/or religion?

Unfuckingreal.

I have to believe stupidity at this level has to be feigned. You realize PC is asian, right? She is not going to say what you said she said. You couldn't be this stupid and still able to breathe unassisted.

Her point was the CULTURAL NORMS in Britain were different than they were on the continent, and this was due to post reformation changes in doctrinal views on the relation between the citizen and the state.

She quoted a papal encyclical on the matter. There was discussion that differences in religious doctrine had an effect on state organization. she didn't say brown people are built differently and therefore are unable to comprehend basic logic.

You are a marvelous piece of work.

What does her being Asian have to do with anything?

I realize she only parrots wingnuts, but she did post this little jem:


The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian.

You are free to pretend all you want that it means something different.

I bet this will surprise you, but I will concede that PC's description was a little off, but she is touching on an important point which Baruch highlights - it's a cultural difference more than anything else. I think PC was close, but chose terms that were not exact.

The culture in England at the time we were developing was very different than that in continental Europe. The constant warring is a good example of that deep cultural difference.

Although we were fighting the English, we still adopted a lot of good ideas from them for our new country - common law, for example.

 

[del]

I have to believe stupidity at this level has to be feigned. You realize PC is asian, right? She is not going to say what you said she said. You couldn't be this stupid and still able to breathe unassisted.

Her point was the CULTURAL NORMS in Britain were different than they were on the continent, and this was due to post reformation changes in doctrinal views on the relation between the citizen and the state.

She quoted a papal encyclical on the matter. There was discussion that differences in religious doctrine had an effect on state organization. she didn't say brown people are built differently and therefore are unable to comprehend basic logic.

You are a marvelous piece of work.

What does her being Asian have to do with anything?

I realize she only parrots wingnuts, but she did post this little jem:


The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian.

You are free to pretend all you want that it means something different.

I bet this will surprise you, but I will concede that PC's description was a little off, but she is touching on an important point which Baruch highlights - it's a cultural difference more than anything else. I think PC was close, but chose terms that were not exact.

The culture in England at the time we were developing was very different than that in continental Europe. The constant warring is a good example of that deep cultural difference.

Although we were fighting the English, we still adopted a lot of good ideas from them for our new country - common law, for example.

people with a full belly who feel they are being taxed wrongfully by an entity thousands of miles away will react a little differently than people who are starving to death while the aristos party on and the *princes* of the church tell them they'll get their reward in heaven. this whole anglo saxon, christian meme that PC trots out via ann petty and the heartbreakers is horseshit.

unless someone wants to argue that france wasn't a christian country at the time and the english monarchy felt that its power wasn't a divine right?

i'm sure PC is a nice person, but she's no rocket surgeon

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Editic makes several good points.

One of the huge benefits to the reformation in England and Scotland was it put all that church wealth back into the hands of private citizens and back onto the tax rolls.

And something to learn from France for modern policy is that fully 50% of the arable land was not farmed because the taxes on the produce of the land exceeded the revenue from the land. People were starving and all that farmland was not used because no one could survive the taxes.

Getting all that land taxed at a low percentage was a lot more productive than getting none of it taxed at a high percentage.

And the Aristocracy of the day was unbelievably disgusting.

 

[Si modo]

What does her being Asian have to do with anything?

I realize she only parrots wingnuts, but she did post this little jem:


The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian.

You are free to pretend all you want that it means something different.

I bet this will surprise you, but I will concede that PC's description was a little off, but she is touching on an important point which Baruch highlights - it's a cultural difference more than anything else. I think PC was close, but chose terms that were not exact.

The culture in England at the time we were developing was very different than that in continental Europe. The constant warring is a good example of that deep cultural difference.

Although we were fighting the English, we still adopted a lot of good ideas from them for our new country - common law, for example.

people with a full belly who feel they are being taxed wrongfully by an entity thousands of miles away will react a little differently than people who are staving to death while the aristos party on and the *princes* of the church tell them they'll get their reward in heaven. this whole anglo saxon, christian meme that PC trots out via ann petty and the heartbreakers is horseshit.

....

This is all true, too.

I'm going with answer D - All of the above, except I think religion had not much to do with any difference because the religion was the same in both.

 

[Modbert]

people with a full belly who feel they are being taxed wrongfully by an entity thousands of miles away will react a little differently than people who are staving to death while the aristos party on and the *princes* of the church tell them they'll get their reward in heaven. this whole anglo saxon, christian meme that PC trots out via ann petty and the heartbreakers is horseshit.

unless someone wants to argue that france wasn't a christian country at the time and the english monarchy felt that its power wasn't a divine right?

i'm sure PC is a nice person, but she's no rocket surgeon

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to del again.

In lieu of rep:

 

[Ravi]

Viva La France!

 

[Si modo]

Viva La France!

I congratulate them, too.

To me, it's good to remember how important it is to guard against mob rule, and today is a good day to do that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The conditions under which the FRENCH people were dealing were so wildly different than anything that the Americana colonialists were facing that to try to compare them is just silly.

But here's something to think about....

The chuch didn't pay taxes and owned much of the nations land and wealth.

The artistos didn't pay any taxes and they owned the vast majority of wealth and they also owned the monopoloy on most means of production, too.

The KING (central government) therefore was BROKE. After all, he could NOT tax the people who HAD all the dough (the artistos and the clergy).

The King was broke in part because of all his foolish WARS OF EMPIRE (that he or his father had lost)

Then the CROPS FAILED and the people were STARVING...

There's a lesson there, I think, for some of us.

It has become my perception that many, influenced by the Left, are unable to identify and condemn evil without seeking some 'rational explanation' for same.

One of the most advanced, sophisticated nations of the 18th century kills 600,000 citizens- many of it’s most valuable citizens, plus some 145,000 flee the country. Schom, “Napoleon Bonaparte,” p. 253.

So...exactly which of the items in your post do you see as explaining, allowing, excusing those numbers?

All of them?

Brings to mind this, from Paul Berman's "Terror and Liberalism:"

1. The French Socialists of the 1930’s had impeccable democratic credentials, dating back to the 19th century. They won elections, and in Leon Blum they produced a great leader, a prime minister who had the ability to fuse French patriotism and social justice, and the finest cultural values.

2. Which brings us to Paul Faure, the general-secretary of said French Socialists, and leader of the faction that opposed war- at any cost. While Blum recognized the horror that Hitler represented, the Paul-Fauristes desperately sought to find a description of reality that did not point in the direction of war! ‘Don’t judge Germany too quickly, nor too starkly.’ After all, they had been treated poorly by the Treaty of Versailles. And their people living in Slavic countries weren’t being treated well… shouldn’t we show some flexibility? Conciliate the outraged German people! This is not cowardly, or unprincipled…no, it is simply anti-war. And, therefore, the real dangers were not from the Nazis or Hitler, but from the warmongers, those who would profit from war!

a. While those were the arguments of the anti-war left, the unfocused or philosophical basis which gave credence to those arguments, was that, in our modern world, even the enemies of reason cannot be the enemies of reason. There must always be some rationality behind a movement, no matter how mad it seems. A faith in universal rationality. Can you say “liberal naïveté” of the nineteenth century…a simple minded optimism, the liberalism of a strictly rational world, the liberalism of denial.

b. Paul Faure’s French Socialists refused to believe that millions of respectable Germans subscribed to a political movement whose doctrines were paranoid conspiracy theories, blood-curdling hatreds, medieval superstitions, and the lure of mass murder. For the Socialists, there was always a why.

3. So our Socialist friends listened to the Nazis’ speeches about Jews, and stroked their bearded chins, and queried, ‘what is anti-Semitism, anyway?’ Aren’t there some Jews who we don’t like? And the war-hawks…some of them are Jews…why, even Leon Blum, he is a Jew, and he takes a hard line…suspicious. Perhaps Hitler isn’t entirely wrong.


So, like you, the French Socialists also had a list of reasons why the horrors followed.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

What does her being Asian have to do with anything?

I realize she only parrots wingnuts, but she did post this little jem:


The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian.

You are free to pretend all you want that it means something different.

I bet this will surprise you, but I will concede that PC's description was a little off, but she is touching on an important point which Baruch highlights - it's a cultural difference more than anything else. I think PC was close, but chose terms that were not exact.

The culture in England at the time we were developing was very different than that in continental Europe. The constant warring is a good example of that deep cultural difference.

Although we were fighting the English, we still adopted a lot of good ideas from them for our new country - common law, for example.

people with a full belly who feel they are being taxed wrongfully by an entity thousands of miles away will react a little differently than people who are staving to death while the aristos party on and the *princes* of the church tell them they'll get their reward in heaven. this whole anglo saxon, christian meme that PC trots out via ann petty and the heartbreakers is horseshit.

unless someone wants to argue that france wasn't a christian country at the time and the english monarchy felt that its power wasn't a divine right?

i'm sure PC is a nice person, but she's no rocket surgeon

You might remember the English had gone through this whole issue 140 years earlier. The English were the first nation to kill off the king. And Honovarian dynasty was there by Parlemetary appointment.

In 1688 and again in 1701 the English had made the point that the monarch is there as an officer of the state. Divine right went out the door in England on Jan 31, 1649.

PC's point that tossing out religion is what made the revolutions in France, German and Russia nothing more than exchange of tyrannies is a good one.