More Important to Modern Western Liberalism:1776, 1789, 1848

[Strike For The South]

What say you?

Pros:

1776
-First free country in the Americas (In the European sense, the natives had very advanced and complex socities but that's neither here nor there)

-First country to throw off colinial tyrrany

-The United States DOI and constitution are the base for nearly all others (esp in the western hemisphere)

Cons:
-Very much a top heavy revolution, The landless and minorites were swepped under the rug.

1789
Pros
-A true peoples revolution no Bourgeoisie here

-Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen expands on the American one

-First nation with any identity to completley transform itself.

Cons
-No Bourgeoisie because they were all killed off usually after helping those ungreatful Parisians.

-France became a dictatorship soon after and tried to conquer all of Europe, How German of them

1848
Pros
-Laid groundwork for a unified Italy and Germany

-First signs of self determantion in the Habsburg dominion

-Started concessions that would eventually evolve into a work week, min wage, ETC.

-Metternich was put in his place and forced to resign

Cons
-Only truly succesful in Denmark and Holland

-Groundwork is one thing groundbreaking is another

I'm just jotting down thoughts feel free to rip this post apart. I am forced to say 1789 simlpy because I feel the Americans had to make concessions to make our country work. Not there is anything wrong with that it just is what it is.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Out of those, 1776 followed by 1848. The French Revolution may have started out as liberalism, but especially in the end phase and in the Jacobin phase was anything but.

[Aemilius Paulus]

1848. I do believe that had a larger effect on European politics than the US "noble experiment". I could be wrong of course, but this is my opinion. The American Revolution is definitely the second place though. French Revolution was important in its own right, but its effects were very different, even though it had its own role in liberalisation.

[Fragony]

1848, so children what did we learn from 1848. This being 2009.

nothing

[Beskar]

I thought the French Revolution was before the American Revolution.

You learn something new.

[Fragony]

I thought the French Revolution was before the American Revolution.

Depends on which one, there have been 5, unruly bunch these froggies got to love theem

[Kralizec]

I picked 1789. No other event led to such a dramatic change in the relationship between the people and the state.

The American revolution was in itself a major historical event, but as far as the history of liberalism is concerned it's not as significant as the aftermath of the French revolution.

1848... The second French republic regressed back into a monarchy a couple of years later (a rather striking example of history repeating itself), and the German assembly wich was supposed to draft a framework for a new unified state was forcibly dispersed as soon as the "revolution" had lost its momentum. Other than that, nothing significant happened in 1848 that wouldn't have happened sooner or later anyway.

[HoreTore]

I pick.........


1968.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I pick.........


1968.

That wasn't liberalism.

[HoreTore]

That wasn't liberalism.

Not economical liberalism, no, but it sure was social liberalism.

Free sex for everyone!!! Sounds kinda liberal to me....

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Not economical liberalism, no, but it sure was social liberalism.

Free sex for everyone!!! Sounds kinda liberal to me....

It involved social democrats, anarchists, communists, democratic socialists, and so on. It wasn't a liberal thing, and I doubt very many of the participants voted for liberal parties.

[Louis VI the Fat]

1789
Pros
-A true peoples revolution no Bourgeoisie here

-Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen expands on the American one

-First nation with any identity to completley transform itself.

Cons
-No Bourgeoisie because they were all killed off usually after helping those ungreatful Parisians.

-France became a dictatorship soon after and tried to conquer all of Europe, How German of them

I agree with all of what you say, except that none of it is true.


The bourgeoisie seized power in the Revolution. The Third Estate is the bourgeoisie. (Yes, bourgeois has many meanings, nowadays it refers more to the settled classes. In socialism, the bourgeoisie is the possesing class as opposed to the unpossing proletariat)

All of Europe tried to conquer France, not the other way round. Then we defeated them all, several times. Spreading revolution, liberty and human rights from Cadiz to Moscow.
(But reality was far more complex than this simplification. In most states, the lines were divided between pro-French and pro-liberty, and reactionary, anti-liberty, anti-French)

Etc.

[Louis VI the Fat]

those ungreatful Parisians

Yes, merely a spelling mistake, I know.

However, the centre of the universe can not stand for insolence, however unintentional. 'Ungreat' does not do for a city that completely razes itself to the ground every 25 years, only to spring up more beautiful and grand than before, re-inventing Western civilization in the process while the world holds its breath and looks on in awe.


Paris works differently. Paris is the only measure for Paris. What to lesser cities is a mere tool, a mundane object, judged solely by how well it performs this mundane function, is to Paris a means of artistic expression and political contention. See examples below.

There is no mundane in Paris. Nor 'ungreatness'.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

'Rain Pipe'

'Hospital'

'Bridge'

[gaelic cowboy]

Louis your bound to know were did this western liberalism come from 1848 keeps coming up but I always thought that was a consequence of beliefs held before that date.

I don't hold the view america was the first country to institute western liberalism I feel that Englands civil war planted seeds in people that spread through the early settlers from Ulster and Scotland to America

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Louis your bound to know were did this western liberalism come from 1848 keeps coming up but I always thought that was a consequence of beliefs held before that date.

I don't hold the view america was the first country to institute western liberalism I feel that Englands civil war planted seeds in people that spread through the early settlers from Ulster and Scotland to America

Not so much the Civil War as the Restoration and then the Coming of William of Orange. We had a Bill of Rights more than a Century before America. The idea of fettered power was re-invented in England in the latter half of the Seventeenth Century, that idea was then exported to America and France.

[gaelic cowboy]

So would that mean that the earlier Reformation in England was a constituent of the later ideas

[Louis VI the Fat]

Louis your bound to know were did this western liberalism come from 1848 keeps coming up but I always thought that was a consequence of beliefs held before that date.

I don't hold the view america was the first country to institute western liberalism I feel that Englands civil war planted seeds in people that spread through the early settlers from Ulster and Scotland to America

The roots of liberalism run deep. The furthest origins depend a good deal on one's interpretation of 'liberalism'. Since it is so old and contentious, it has meant many different things.

As for America, my recipe:
- mix some dough out of Anglo-Saxon freemen
- throw in Puritanism
- bake both for a lenghty time in the Frontier until it becomes nice and crusty
- cover this with some Locke sauce
- use French enlightenment for cheese
- Scottish enlightenment for topping
- And don't forget to use Dutch herbs at every stage

Which reminds me. The poor overlooked Dutch. They started the conflagration of 1789. Their revolution of 1787 was the template for the French, the first on the continent.

[Meneldil]

Which reminds me. The poor overlooked Dutch. They started the conflagration of 1789. Their revolution of 1787 was the template for the French, the first on the continent.

There were several events in 80's that were just as important as the Dutch Revolution. But yes, these often tend to get overlooked, between the American and French one.

'92 on the other hand was when things got messy. Rabble-rousers such as the Jacobins rode the wave of populist mobocracy to seize power and butcher anyone who stood in their way. '92 and its aftermath was the Terror, the civil war, all the horror stories that one hears from the French Revolution. In the end, after years of bloodletting, Bonaparte took command and another 15 years of war followed.

What? This view that jacobins were "rabble-rousers" and that previous revolutionnaries were nice and what not is silly as hell. The loathed Robespierre started his career in 1789, and so did most of the Jacobins. He never supported a republic (and not many people actually did) until the King repeatedly shown he didn't want to play by the new rules.

The French Revolution became more and more radical as it felt more and more threatened, both from within the country and from outside. The people who begun the Terror, the people who started pillaging Vendée were the Girondins. The Jacobins just took up the job.
In september 1792 the Girondins were still the main political power in the country.
This spiral of self-destruction can hardly be blamed on a single party. It's sad to say but the Revolution probably only "succeeded" (as in maintening itself for ten years) because of it. Had the revolutionnaries decided to play nice, they would have been stomped by the King and his allies. It was a game in which you often had to play dirty, and in which failure meant death.

As for the topic at hand, I'd say 1789 was ideologicaly the most important, as it spread the idea of liberalism in Europe, but that 1848 was technically more important, as this time people took up the arm for freedom by themselves.

[Strike For The South]

I agree with all of what you say, except that none of it is true.


The bourgeoisie seized power in the Revolution. The Third Estate is the bourgeoisie. (Yes, bourgeois has many meanings, nowadays it refers more to the settled classes. In socialism, the bourgeoisie is the possesing class as opposed to the unpossing proletariat)

All of Europe tried to conquer France, not the other way round. Then we defeated them all, several times. Spreading revolution, liberty and human rights from Cadiz to Moscow.
(But reality was far more complex than this simplification. In most states, the lines were divided between pro-French and pro-liberty, and reactionary, anti-liberty, anti-French)

Etc.

You took your best and brightest, stole there ideas and then lopped there heads off. I will admit they the rest of Europe would've been happy squash you (lord knows they tried) but you let the corissican come in and run things for a few years.

As per Pairs. Vastly overated. San Antonio is better

[Louis VI the Fat]

You took your best and brightest, stole there ideas and then lopped there heads off. I will admit they the rest of Europe would've been happy squash you (lord knows they tried) but you let the corissican come in and run things for a few years.

As per Pairs. Vastly overated. San Antonio is better

Where's your sense of fun? Can't have a good revolution without some heads rolling, eh?
How many people died in the American Revolution?

I agree that pairs are overrated.

[Strike For The South]

Where's your sense of fun? Can't have a good revolution without some heads rolling, eh?
How many people died in the American Revolution?

I agree that pairs are overrated.

Not many, less than 50,000 IIRC.

So there was never anythnig between us?

[Louis VI the Fat]

Not many, less than 50,000 IIRC.

Is that all? Amateurs!

Good grief. We managed 50000 on a good day. From now on, I'm going to call yours the 'Pink Pie-eating Yankoweenie Revolution'.

So there was never anything between us?

What can I say? Banquo's got a castle and, more importantly, tickets to all the good rugger matches. He wins.