Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
was more to his liking for a number of reasons, first of which would be that it was, at root, a bourgeois "revolution," in that it was, as Robespierre might say, a revolt against a king so as to put into its place a new king (or, as would finally evolve, a new president) drawn from the same overarching elite. Zinn's People's History is a good place to see just how the American "Revolution" was very much a revolt of the elite, and as is usual in American history, the elite's interests are served with the blood of the poor and paid for by the lesser gentry, middle classes or whatever the historical equivalent is in context. And, Burke was not the only Conservative to have such sympathies, certainly Louis XVI, in deed, shared them, of course prior to being subject to Robespierre's divine Justice.

1789 Paris was a completely different matter, Robespierre himself distinguishes this revolt not as one to replace a tyrant with another, but to replace it with Virtue. And here, what is meant by Virtue to Robespierre (and others) is the starting point, though it is of no interest to an Edmund Burke or other Conservative commentators of the time (and there were many).

Speaking, of course, as a mere enthusiast of history, of course.


by John Redmond on Thu May 26th, 2016 at 10:55:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series