|
|
Post by twoheadedragon on Jul 14, 2009 9:27:35 GMT
On July 14th, 1789, a great victory was won! The poor triumphed over the super-rich, good triumphed over evil, liberty conquered tyranny... I call on the French (or part-French) on this forum to celebrate! I'm singing "La Marseillaise" the whole time I write this post.   |
|
|
|
Post by Hildor on Jul 14, 2009 10:15:40 GMT
At school I learned that the event was quite a lot less glorious than imagined now. But still it was an important happening ofcourse. I'm not spoiling the fun ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jul 14, 2009 10:25:28 GMT
...You want to celebrate the descent of one of Europe's most civilised peoples into the horrors of utter barbarity? Which I am aware is an insult to barbarians...
The storming of the Bastille was a nightmare of blood and horror, followed by worse. But to each their own, I guess...
France needed an emperor to emerge from their national nightmare. Says it all, really.
|
|
|
|
Post by twoheadedragon on Jul 14, 2009 15:13:18 GMT
...You want to celebrate the descent of one of Europe's most civilised peoples into the horrors of utter barbarity? Which I am aware is an insult to barbarians... The storming of the Bastille was a nightmare of blood and horror, followed by worse. But to each their own, I guess... France needed an emperor to emerge from their national nightmare. Says it all, really. Ah, I was just making the usual "dramatic opening speech." ;D Honestly, I guess there was the good, the bad, and the REALLY ugly about that day. And the original guys who took over after "ceremoniously" beheading the King and Queen were MUCH worse than any rulers of France before them! But that set the stage for Napoleon... In any case, the main way I celebrate it is as the day my Family arrived in this city (Medan) 8 years ago. 8 years of visiting orphanages, helping the poor, the ill, the handicapped, etc. That's what I celebrate on this day. As for everyone else, I guess it's just a holiday of some sort (a "Bon Fete" perhaps). |
|
|
|
Post by The Sonar Chicken on Jul 14, 2009 15:32:12 GMT
Oops I posted without seeing your post, THD.  Sorry! Was this perchance the start of the French Revolution? I've heard quite a few sides of the French Revolution and many of the accounts were horrifying and spine-chilling. What fairness? What democracy? It just seemed more like a period of sheer insanity where anyone labelled the "nobles" and the "government" was beheaded, no matter what contributions they put in for the country and people. And oh, that was BEFORE the people started turning on others 'cos they ran out of "victims" to kill. I think: the others included "members of various political parties", writers, artists, etc. During those years, it was very dangerous to hold certain beliefs, political, sexual, etc. and I've heard of many incidents where people took to hiding out in barns, farms, etc., in order to evade capture 'cos it was likely death for them. |
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jul 14, 2009 16:35:00 GMT
Around 97% of people guillotined were ordinary people, not nobles at all. It all got very out of control. You could end up beheaded for using the wrong word for 'you', wearing the wrong clothes, being suspected of royalist sympathies, or just because someone who didn't like you reported you. Completely indiscriminate murder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jul 14, 2009 16:58:58 GMT
...You want to celebrate the descent of one of Europe's most civilised peoples into the horrors of utter barbarity? Which I am aware is an insult to barbarians... The storming of the Bastille was a nightmare of blood and horror, followed by worse. But to each their own, I guess... France needed an emperor to emerge from their national nightmare. Says it all, really. That is a rather crude shortening of events.  The events in July 1789 were much less bloody than you insinuate - though not peaceful, conceded. In August 1789 the declaration of rights of man was published - a historical date often forgotten. From then until 1792 the Jacobines were still fighting for supremacy against a less violent majority which would have been quite happy with a constitutional monarchy (established with 1791 constitution). Before becoming emperor Napoleon already was the 'strong man' as First Consul. OK, that would make him a dictator, which is even less reputable - but then, he actually was voted into office and confirmed by plebiscite. Which, after the events of the terror, which really were human power politics at their worst, was not really surprising. It is an interesting 'what if' mind play to consider what France would have become, if the restlessly dynamic Napoleon had died after establishing interior order around 1800 instead of waging war on the rest of Europe because there was 'nothing else left to do'. (That the other European nations feared such strong France is quite conceivable. Of course that 'waging of war' was not a one sided affair, even if the later victors tended to claim the noblest of motives). |
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jul 14, 2009 17:18:23 GMT
At the time of the reign of terror (1793/'94) there were hardly any nobles left to execute...
According to archival records, at least 16,594 people (Out of a total population shortly under 30.000.000) died under the guillotine or otherwise after accusations of counter-revolutionary activities. A number of historians note that as many as 40,000 accused prisoners may have been summarily executed without trial or died awaiting trial.
The latter is not really relevant, as 'due process' certainly was not the norm in those days.
The royalistic uprising in the Vendée (A southern region of France) cost about 170,00 lives - in what should be considered a civil war.
(the War of the Roses in England or the American one (both much longer though)?)
I'm not contradicting any atrocities of the time - but they tend to cover developments in the period 1789 - 99 which ultimately had a much longer lasting effect, and as such more historic relevance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jul 14, 2009 17:35:00 GMT
May be short, may be crude - but it's not wrong is it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Galadriel on Jul 14, 2009 17:39:53 GMT
The painting that is the most famous about La Révolution Française is this one (contians some nudity) from the artist Delacroix, Eugène Ferdinand Victor (1798–1863).
I know my father celebrates today too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jul 14, 2009 17:47:59 GMT
No, per se it's not wrong - nor have I said so, or? It's, in my mind at least, just one facet, a relatively short period of the whole - a very popular one, or maybe rather a conspicuous one in peoples' minds.
Reducing the entire French revolution period of ten years to the 2 years of reign of terror may distort the overall picture - and that to people who are less knowlegeable about the historic period than we are.
And that would be wrong, I believe, hence my comments.
(I concede that I studied the French revolution in some detail, and that in France on top of it - I may be biased)
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jul 14, 2009 19:58:11 GMT
You were kind of hinting that I was at the least ungenerous, Glance. I don't believe I was. The storming of the Bastille was the event that really kicked off the whole thing, after all. I mean, 'Reign Of Terror' says everything that needs saying, doesn't it?
I fail to see why any nation would celebrate such a horrendous descent into the Pit - nor why they should seek to glamourise it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jul 14, 2009 22:07:27 GMT
Well, it's the French national holiday, so it's up to the French - and they do see the Reign of Terror as a specific episode (namely that under Robespierre) - an abomination, an aberration, certainly - but not of lasting effect. Of lasting effect to them however is the Declaration of Human Rights, the start of their republican tradition, the administrative structure of today's France and the legal system, among others. And there is 'la gloire' - to an extent questionable glory for an outsider, certainly. It's also their end to absolutist, centralist monarchy - of which they had a strong tradition, stronger than any in Europe (Mind that both Napoleon I as Napoleon III originally came to power through the parliamentary system). The whole is ambiguous, contradictory even, but the fall of the Bastille was a deep cut, and the storm that resulted did not only give birth to the terror, but also instilled a sense of pride in the common man - it were republican, originally amateur, armies that defeated, or at least withstood, the professional armies of the European establishment. Careers could be, and were, made, that were unthinkable before, not only in the military. Those who suffered through those times, namely the French, see it with the eyes of the surviving - seeing something positive deriving from chaos. It is their history, and it is their call what and how they value it. You're not ungenerous, just English!  You wouldn't want the French or the Germans as judges of your history, would you? {Well, you, personally, actually would possibly appreciate an outside opinion...} |
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jul 15, 2009 1:11:04 GMT
You'd be right - I, personally, would indeed! I'm well aware that Britain (and England before) did not always cover herself in glory and that my nation is definitely not without fault. Sometimes we did great things (Like sweeping the seas of pirates and slave traders) and other times we did bad things (Too numerous to list). Like pretty much every other nation, only usually with more brutal thuggery.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jul 15, 2009 22:00:53 GMT
Well, the English have one historic deficit - history being written by the victorious, they simply failed - to lose. Or, as I use to say on England after WW II, when the Empire crumbled - they won themselves to death...  |
|
|
|
Post by The Sonar Chicken on Jul 15, 2009 22:22:26 GMT
Huh? How'd they win themselves to death?
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jul 15, 2009 22:59:07 GMT
Pretty true Glance, it has to be said |
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jul 16, 2009 8:00:24 GMT
Huh? How'd they win themselves to death? One of the reasons for Germany's strong and fast economical recuperation after WW II is having lost the war. Everything was scratch and had to be rebuild - in the Eastern part, what industrial equipment had not been destroyed was physically dismantled and brought to Russia. So the switch from 'war time industry' to 'peacetime industry' was smooth and driven by 'we need to (re-)build'. By the 1950s Germany had rebuild an industry equipped with state of the art machinery - whereas in England a lot of the old equipment was still running, as the need to invest in new one was not so pressing. Now one could say that France had the same problem, which is true but to a lesser extent, having been occupied and fighting zone, or the USA, which compensated part of the loss in production through helping Europe, mainly Germany, rebuild. But the English have a strong penchant to tradition - I mean, you simply don't scrap a machine that still runs - after all 'we won the war with it'! {This is a simplification, of course - but always being with the victors doesn't prompt a change in minds in many fields as much as being forced to re-think everything because you lost.} |
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jul 16, 2009 11:33:13 GMT
More than that. Being the winners meant that we still had to wind up our own empire, administer a lot of overseas territories until they got back on their feet AND pay for our own war. We lost a massive number of our people and were completely bankrupt as a nation into the bargain and no-one helped us get back on our feet because we had won.
France was fine as it had opted out of most of the war (Polite version) and got a lot of help rebuilding. Japan was built pretty much from the ground up by the US (MacArthur, IIRC, did an amazing job) which was what led to their own period of huge prosperity. Germany is as Glance said, of course.
Britain was sent into a deepening spiral of debt and mounting problems that was only finally dealt with in the 80s by Margaret Thatcher. Until she turned everything around, we were considered 'the sick man of Europe' and everyone thought we were in terminal decline.
Great to be the winner, huh? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Alrik on Jul 16, 2009 17:28:04 GMT
Shall we celebrate Oliver Cromwell ? ;D
|
|
Sorry! 
.com
You wouldn't want the French or the Germans as judges of your history, would you?
