To our fellow muricans

[Prpavi]

Listen to the lyrics:

(click to show/hide)

"I'd have all the cars made in the Carolina's, And I'd ban all the ones made in China!" Yeeeehaw!!!

I'm scared to ask what would he do with all the blacks living in the south.

[Gnjus]

I'm scared to ask what would he do with all the blacks living in the south.

I recon he'd give 'em some work to do as a measure of cutting down unemployment. 

[Molly]

Well, if they'd ban all cars except those made in the USoA, nobody of them could afford to own a car, they'd walk around town instead of driving everything higher than 10 meters and the whole population is cured from obesity!

Masterful plan! 

[Prpavi]

I recon he'd give 'em some work to do as a measure of cutting down unemployment. 

Ah yes the good ol' " arbeit macht frei " tactics. Certanly fits the character.

[Kafein]

The internal struggle was largely bloodless. Sure, there were small scale conflicts between militias and aristocratic fixtures, but to say that it was a civil war is a stretch. Day to day life was not shattered as it was in the Former Yugoslavia, or Syria right now. If anything, it was civil war lite. The wars of the French Revolutions were successive invasions by foreign powers bent on reinstalling the French aristocracy, because they realized that if the French Republic stood it would foster similar anti-aristocratic movements in their own lands (the if-they-can-do-it-we-can-do-it syndrome). I wouldn't call that a civil war either.

Furthermore, the aftermath of the French revolution led to the eventual demise of European aristocracy, which would make this so-called civil war the best civil war that happened in history; hardly the most horrible.

To call the French Revolution the most horrible civil war is such an extreme exaggeration, especially if one considers that in Rwanda up to 1,000,000 civilians were slaughtered in a matter of just over 3 months. But I suppose those dark skinned folks don't matter as much as the enlightened French of the late 18th century did.

Considering the total population of France at the time, "La Terreur" was something quite horrible, yes.

[Swaggart]

Considering the total population of France at the time, "La Terreur" was something quite horrible, yes.

Considering Rwanda lost 20% of it's total population, the French Revolution was a slight inconvenience, and still quite far from a civil war.

While I have no doubt it was quite horrible for the intelligentsia of France as well as the aristocrats, there are far worse examples of political repression throughout history. The communist purges of both the Soviet Union and China dwarf the so-called terror of the French Revolution, both in scale and in suffering.

The fact that the French want to call it "La Terreur" matters little. In the context of history, it was quite mild when you consider other, far more horrible internal conflicts.

[Kafein]

Well I guess it's true worse things have happened more recently. It's one of the first cases of massive and systematic executions based on denunciation, for the sake of the revolution, hence why it was called terror.

[Oberyn]

 "Revolution" is kind of a tricky term here, depending on how you mean it. In no way was it the first civil war (and it was a civil war, depending on region the feeling could run from republican to royalist extremes) in which the goal was change of government or government policies. The ensuing chaos and abuses is not rare either . Have you ever heard the expression "Here comes the new boss, same as the old boss"? Duci novo, similis duci seneci. There are examples of many greek city-states mobs advocating a republic/democracy that ended up as a despotic tyranate or ruled by an oligarchic elite, not to mention the many upheavals of the roman empire. Probably tons of examples in other cultures as well.

[Xant]

"Revolution" is kind of a tricky term here, depending on how you mean it. In no way was it the first civil war (and it was a civil war, depending on region the feeling could run from republican to royalist extremes) in which the goal was change of government or government policies. The ensuing chaos and abuses is not rare either . Have you ever heard the expression "Here comes the new boss, same as the old boss"? Duci novo, similis duci seneci. There are examples of many greek city-states mobs advocating a republic/democracy that ended up as a despotic tyranate or ruled by an oligarchic elite, not to mention the many upheavals of the roman empire. Probably tons of examples in other cultures as well.

Every previous revolutionary movement in human history has made the same basic mistake. They’ve all seen power as a static apparatus, as a structure. And it’s not. It’s a dynamic, a flow system with two possible tendencies. Power either accumulates, or it diffuses through the system. In most societies, it’s in accumulative mode, and most revolutionary movements are only really interested in reconstituting the accumulation in a new location. A genuine revolution has to reverse the flow. And no one ever does that, because they’re all too fucking scared of losing their conning tower moment in the historical process. If you tear down one agglutinative power dynamic and put another one in its place, you’ve changed nothing. You’re not going to solve any of that society’s problems, they’ll just reemerge at a new angle. You’ve got to set up the nanotech that will deal with the problems on its own. You’ve got to build the structures that allow for diffusion of power, not re-grouping. Accountability, demodynamic access, systems of constituted rights, education in the use of political infrastructure.

[Clockworkkiller]

I think you're all just jelly of my awesome new flashlight!

[pingpong]

I think you're all just jelly of my awesome new fleshlight!

yeah bro we totally are! good for you, +1!

[Casimir]

Debate about the French revolution, although interesting, is not what the topic is about.  I think most Europeans (and other nationalities) think that US military action, without a UN mandate, is unacceptable.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

Debate about the French revolution, although interesting, is not what the topic is about.  I think most Europeans (and other nationalities) think that US military action, without a UN mandate, is unacceptable.

I don't support intervention in Syria against Assad, but I'm just gonna go ahead and state that the UN is a shit organisation and can go fuck itself.

[Xant]

Debate about the French revolution, although interesting, is not what the topic is about.  I think most Europeans (and other nationalities) think that US military action, without a UN mandate, is unacceptable.

Hahah, what does "unacceptable" even mean in this context? What a pompous word to use when the only thing you're going to do is whine on forums if US does this "unacceptable" thing without a UN mandate. Newsflash, might makes right.

[Kafein]

Hahah, what does "unacceptable" even mean in this context? What a pompous word to use when the only thing you're going to do is whine on forums if US does this "unacceptable" thing without a UN mandate. Newsflash, might makes right.

Might doesn't change opinions