|
well, ace, that parallel depends on how vague you want to get. the proximate cause for the revolt of the aristocracy was the french crown's default on bonds it had floated to pay for a military adventure in the british colonies. the larger problem was that bond issues were how wars were paid for. so the problem was a lack of centralized taxation which would have provided a rational way to pay for a modern-style military. as for the comptence of louis 16...well...he was a sort of affable dope really. a regular guy affable dope who happened to find himself king. he preferred his hobbies. i dont think the parallels work too well
dudedan: the vendee letter is the center of the mythology. it's not at all obvious that the action it outlines happened.
it's become fashionable, or was for a while, to follow furet off into conservative revisionism of the revolution, particularly the committee for public safety and the terror. but no matter i suppose. furet was at least smart about it. alot of the conservative revisionism less so.
anway much of the dynamism of the terror seemed to follow from the situation---a constitutional crisis that gave way to a crisis of definition for the revolution---and the fact that robespierre et al did not have a clear idea of what the revolution was but did have a clear idea of operating as a faction. so the revolution began to eat itself. the terror has alot more to do with situational dynamics than it does biographical factoids i think. one of the central lessons the left revolutionary tradition drew from the terror was the need for a revolutionary platform, which would enable folk to determine what the revolution is and to avoid the pattern....
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|