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

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

The French overeached and that is to be noted, however the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen is so much more important.

You mean that a couple of words on paper is more important than concrete facts and overeaching consequences?

The guy who wrote that 1789 was the prelude of modern totalitarianism is absolutely right; 1789 was the prelude of the pretty much everything that screwed up the 20th and would screw up the 19th wasn't for the same old "dominant" classes trying to preserve an autocratic structure, that while autocratic, was self-contained and tightly controlled. When they lost control the situation and were finally gone after 1914 then Europe became a boiling pot ready for anarchy and bloodbath in the true style of the Revolution: annihilation, genocide, mass executions and despotism. The still painful difference was that the "Revolutionaries" had smoothbore muskets and cannons while Hitler, Stalin, Franco and the thousand other warmongers and genocidal maniacs of the XX century, petty or big, had modern heavy artillery, machine guns and airplanes.

Seriously, there is no comparison. I ask you to refer to the book The Wars of Louis XIV by John Lynn. War was supposed to be an artificial, "chivalrous" and controlled process - so was pretty much everything else ranging from the administration to the ruling class. That it went out of control before 1789 was a symptom of failure, as opposed to the success of a deliberately annihilating process. It was only after the "Revolution" that annihilation, total warfare, mass indoctrination and all such things became a plausibility.

Alas, wasn't for the very possibility of the utter destruction of the planet in the form of nuclear weapons, the "Cold War" would degenerate into a Third World War very fast. A far cry from the sort of "chivalry" one would expect from a Trianon conflict, where not even half of the male population of a great belligerent would even be mobilized.

[Strike For The South]

You mean that a couple of words on paper is more important than concrete facts and overeaching consequences? .

Yes. Especially as it pertains to today.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Yes. Especially as it pertains to today.

Hah.

[Strike For The South]

Hah.

To just look at France or Europe in this context is where you fail.

1789 was important for the entire world. Nearly every other constitution on Earth is based on the French one and borrows heavily from French ideals

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

To just look at France or Europe in this context is where you fail.

1789 was important for the entire world. Nearly every other constitution on Earth is based on the French one and borrows heavily from French ideals

Of course I am referring to the entire world...

And I am not interested if the doctrinaire ramblings of a Comte made orgasmic success on the mass of literati of the XIX and the XX century. For all good things, the "World" is ran by American business moral, which carries its own "democratic" political morality as an implicit addition. "Liberty, Justice, Fraternity", all these are mere words of little or no relevance in the main scheme of socio-political-economic struggle and dominance.

[Strike For The South]

Of course I am referring to the entire world...

And I am not interested if the doctrinaire ramblings of a Comte made orgasmic success on the mass of literati of the XIX and the XX century. For all good things, the "World" is ran by American business moral, which carries its own "democratic" political morality as an implicit addition. "Liberty, Justice, Fraternity", all these are mere words of little or no relevance in the main scheme of socio-political-economic struggle and dominance.

Those are some very jaded words.

[Ironside]

Of course I am referring to the entire world...

And I am not interested if the doctrinaire ramblings of a Comte made orgasmic success on the mass of literati of the XIX and the XX century. For all good things, the "World" is ran by American business moral, which carries its own "democratic" political morality as an implicit addition. "Liberty, Justice, Fraternity", all these are mere words of little or no relevance in the main scheme of socio-political-economic struggle and dominance.

You mean that a couple of words on paper is more important than concrete facts and overeaching consequences?

The guy who wrote that 1789 was the prelude of modern totalitarianism is absolutely right; 1789 was the prelude of the pretty much everything that screwed up the 20th and would screw up the 19th wasn't for the same old "dominant" classes trying to preserve an autocratic structure, that while autocratic, was self-contained and tightly controlled.

So... the words "Liberty, Justice, Fraternity" are words of little relevance, but caused the horrors of the 20th century?

And you go for a socio-political-economic position and take up the emancipation, yet forget the enlightenment, the demographics, the development of the state control, the development of capitalism, industrialism and probably a few other concepts needed to explain how and why 1914 spawned its many children.

When they lost control the situation and were finally gone after 1914 then Europe became a boiling pot ready for anarchy and bloodbath in the true style of the Revolution: annihilation, genocide, mass executions and despotism.

Seriously, there is no comparison. I ask you to refer to the book The Wars of Louis XIV by John Lynn. War was supposed to be an artificial, "chivalrous" and controlled process - so was pretty much everything else ranging from the administration to the ruling class. That it went out of control before 1789 was a symptom of failure, as opposed to the success of a deliberately annihilating process. It was only after the "Revolution" that annihilation, total warfare, mass indoctrination and all such things became a plausibility.

Alas, wasn't for the very possibility of the utter destruction of the planet in the form of nuclear weapons, the "Cold War" would degenerate into a Third World War very fast. A far cry from the sort of "chivalry" one would expect from a Trianon conflict, where not even half of the male population of a great belligerent would even be mobilized

Same thing here, give me a million men 1650 and I'll command an army of disease ridden corpses within a month. Give me a nation in total mobilization 1700 and I'll be ruling a crippled nation. It was simply impossible to do this before the time it showed up.
The concept of war as an artifical, "just" and controlled process is and was in many ways a myth created during the crusade era and raging in the minds of the people during the 30-years war, WWI and even today.
Annihilation, genocide, mass executions, despotism and total warfare are old concepts and the only new about the mass indoctrination is why you should follow the leader or do this war instead of simply doing the same thing because he's the king.