Was the French Revolution a mistake?

>win the war
>still lose it all

lol youre an idiot

No I think it was deliberate.

Of course.

>ww1 is good
>french don't surrender, and hold on
>ww2 we have nazis in our government that don't want to punish germany
>GB so scared of us they let germany get strong
>have to use niggers in our army
>army wan't to fight but government dosen't give a shit and just surrenders
>now pakis and niggers all in the country
truly sad

Attached: FeelsBaguetteMan.png (112x112, 14K)

every SINGLE FUCKING TIME IT HAS TO BE A FUCKING LEAF

please I beg of you consider leaving this board and learn to speak real french not ur shitty quebecuan or whatever I fucking hate canadians

Attached: RAGE.png (112x112, 32K)

>This goyim actually thought this kosher revolution was about the poor, oppressed, starving lower class like the dumb, dray cattle he is.

Attached: histoire_des_jacobins_1789_europe.png (397x666, 322K)

French civil war. Both sides surrender.

Yes!

Lack of checks and balances.

What I love most about the Napoleonic wars is that after big N's first defeat, the coalition let France keep the Rhineland and Moselland. Without that area Germany would have never been an industrial powerhouse large enough to threaten the Allies. Napoleon literally fucked France and in a way is responsible for the later two world wars by trying to reclaim power and resulting in France losing these territories.

Everything that brings us away from Abrahamic trash is good

It was a mistake from the king.

tl;dr: yes.

Louis XVI was so fucking weak.
>freemason
>cancelled the Maupeou Reform, which would have preserved monarchy for centuries, right when he became king

No. Napoleon losing was the mistake.

a big one, we miss a King

it fucking wasnt, it was for the better good of france. Cause the the absolute monarchy was bullshit.

It's a question that divides this place into the lolbert freedom lovers (and americans) and the actual fascist monarchists. The former says "no" cause muh freedom and muh retarded lineage, the latter says "yes" because any king is better than democracy and the horribleness of monarchies are COMPLETE enlightenment fabrications. Those people also tend to believe that the dark ages were indeed dark, and that Christians are the absolute worst fucking scum to ever live. Redditors!

French absolute monarchy wasn't really absolute, read Bodin you kinglet.

It ended a lot of monarchies and made many republics, so no.

Other than the fact that you should make a distinction between fascism and monarchy, I agree with your post. No other form of government and society has been more attacked by modernity than the traditional form of government that is the monarchy.

I can swear I've seen this thread already, there was a czech and german anons arguing, do we have to report this?

Attached: 1527752280340.jpg (700x717, 106K)

Of course there are distinctions, especially when the fascist is elected through democracy. But I just wanted to point out a general divide here, where the freedom lovers are the new crowd. They are one and all converted liberals that "took the red pill" somewhere after #gg and are now either larping with paganism or moving very slowly to hoppe libertarianism. But if you ask them about monarchy their training kicks in and they start rambling about exploitation and retarded offspring.
>Better to govern ourselves!
and their liberalism is revealed.

Attached: IMG_8381[1287].png (750x1229, 213K)

I find this to be true for the vast majority of what is considered the "alt right". I find myself in massive disagreement with most of the people on here due to that. They're still conditioned to hate the monarchy, despite all of the other conditioning they may have broken. Sad, really.

Don't hate them. When did you come here? Place was flooded after 2014 especially, even more with Trump in 2016. They're just kids that don't lurk and think by memeing they're fighting the good fight.

Monarchy is the ideal, most stable form of government

Attached: friedrich.jpg (840x420, 159K)

Around 2014, actually. I was a full blown stormfag at first, then I went along on the Trump ride and eventually became a lolbertarian/paleocon bordering on ancap. Now after all that ideological revolutionary garbage I've taken up the true calling of being a reactionary and standing for the monarchy and tradition above all. It just so happened to coincide with me beginning to seriously read ancient philosophy and other subjects like history and politics.

I will not be able to quote exactly but one czech person here spilled a lot of through on monarchy on the same thread, this may be even you as I can judge from literacy and level of arguing skill + your flag
>Enlightenment and Nationalism are not what considered to be european values, they were created and spoiled by liberal thinkers of 18-20 century. Monarchy is the most stable form of governance, lasting for thousands of years while socialistic countries ruined over 70 years, dictatorships don't usually last past the life of the dictator and democracies are shaking already

Attached: IMG_8380[1286].png (741x1086, 219K)

truth*

well it was a 3 way revolution, farmers, nobility and bourgeois cucked the royal family

Yep, that's me, thanks for the compliments, though I certainly don't claim to be an expert on any subject. Glad that I'm getting through to some of you guys. Though I have lost much hope for the majority of Jow Forums. It is especially depressing to see so many turn to romanticism and a sort of "right wing" Sorelianism. But there is light at the end of the tunnel, I think.

Then you're one of the few that actually made it through to the later stages of the pipeline in that case. Be careful not to get stuck with neoreaction and their capitalist transhumanist nonsense though. It's probably also not a coincidence that once you start reading older texts (before Enlightenment at least) you find out that Christians weren't lesbian-marrying proddies before, and that the pagan blood & soil nationalism is also a recent invention (same Enlightnment, at least the brand we have now) that does not really work without democracy.

You are one of the people who've helped me to get from a nationalist fork and start thinking rationally, I also started to refer to ancient manuscripts, thank you for what you are doing, this is the true "redpill"

I was practically the same, I was so tired of people lying and throwing dust right into my eyes so I found Jow Forums as the last free speech source on the entire internet, I fought in the so -called "Great Meme War" and can't say I regret it, it was fun. But the childish times are long past and we have to think different once again

You're seriously bluepilled if you still have to ask this.

I haven't looked into neoreaction seriously, I know of its existence but that's about it. From what I've heard I'm in general agreement with them about the utter rejection of the enlightenment, but they're far too libertarian in my view, and really end up being sort of similar to the enlightenment in the end.
You're exactly right about nationalism. I basically find it equivalent with democracy, if we accept the self-determination of all nationalities definition of it, and we definitely should if we are judging by an objective standard.

Franch revolution in 7 steps
>king
>Dictator who believed himself to be a god
>italian dwarf who said he was ceasar
>again the king
>1 commi governarent in the world
>the grandson of the italian dwarf who said he was ceasar
>And finally the Germans brought democracy to France

FRENCH REVOLUTION WAS A MISTAKE

You're welcome, it brings me great joy to see a post like this. However, you must understand that there is no happy ending to this current world order. It will have to die, and die it will violently, in its own denial of having to let go of the control it has held since the American and French revolutions. The thing that we can look forward to is rebuilding civilization from the ground up, this time emphasizing tradition and faith over the materialism that has held it for so long. But that might be decades, even centuries away. Best not to dwell on it too long, and focus on what we can do in the present.

I think one of the problems is that people recognize a country should look out for its interest, and should be ruled by those interested in its interests, and that freedom tends to be better than coercion. These vague notions then get leveraged into "we need to choose our rulers" immediately and we're stuck in democracy land, even if the ruler is supposed to abolish democracy immediately once he has been found (stalin, hitler). It's a difficult thing to consider, how the things we want might only be attainable by trusting in some social/political process, instead of just voting for it. This last mindset is so deeply ingrained into every last inch of media and education that even the worst fascist can't help but see it. Who wants to be ruled by retards? Who wants to be ruled at all? Etc. But just as libertarians think 'liberty' (and markets) will produce habitable order, so too monarchists can put their hopes in hierarchy and aristocracy instead of mob behavior. We had nations and liberty under monarchs too, just no Nationalism or Liberty™.

anglicanhistory.org/charles/charles1.html
>Truly I desire their liberty and freedom as much as anybody whomsoever; but I must tell you their liberty and freedom consists of having of government, those laws by which their life and their goods may be most their own. It is not for having a share in government, sir, that is nothing pertaining to them. A subject and sovereign are clear different things.

You are right once again, all I can say and what my father always taught about is that there is always a light and the end of the tunnel.
>Wir alle stehen dann
Mutig für einen Mann,
Kämpfen und bluten gern
Für Thron und Reich!
>We will all stand together
Courageous for one man
Fight and bleed with joy
For throne and empire!

Attached: Carter-Kaiser-Wilhelm-Trump.jpg (727x960, 122K)

No, unlike you.

No. But it was the metapolitical starting point of the Wests decline. The ideas of the revolution weren't harmful until they were later (((perverted))) and morphed into the abomination that is modern leftism.

Well said. Despite Hoppe's beliefs which I am in definite disagreement with, he has made some great arguments against democracy from an economic perspective.
youtu.be/k12teOokSqM
I'd recommend to all of you to show this video to a friend or two who blindly believes in democracy, and carefully study their reaction. It is a truly fascinating process of indoctrination struggling with reality.
Also, pic related is from a fascist with a surprisingly good understanding of the institution of the monarchy.
Don't worry. I haven't forgotten. You're still welcome on the reconquista of the future Caliphate of Germany.

Attached: monarchyquotecodreanu.jpg (1200x686, 127K)

WTF country is this?

Corneliu Zelea Codreanu was pretty based desu

But God is dead.

Depends what you mean by God.

Yes, read de Maistre.

Well you got more Abrahamic trash instead. Freemasonry is jewish. Amd catholicism has takein in many roman ideals. Also democracy is abrahamic in nature doe to its unversalism

I do not think that NRx is that bad in comaprison to Lolberts, democrats it is better that those too stated.
But as Reactionary future blog stated in last post it still build on enlightment epistemology.
Tl.Dr: it redpilled lots of people.

No. Napoleon was the mistake.

>Freemasonry is jewish

nigga what

Of course

It is.

No.

Attached: Punching+bags+dont+usually+strike+back+twice+as+hard+_110e3e4d84a975d5234e62a6e92d8e55.jpg (1701x2005, 702K)

Well it's posted on an anonymous Mozambique glass blowing imageboard, so it must be true

Except France kicked way more ass with the Royal Army than with the popular levees.
Don't forget their casualties also

Every revolution is.

This painting describes the 1830 revolution.

Freemasonry is LARP for rich degenerates.

freemasons are balls deep in gnosticism and kaballah.

Yes, it was the plan of the Bavarian Illuminati to cause the French Revolution. They were banned but the Revolution happened as was their goal. The Bavarian Illuminati were the Jesuits who had been banned by the Church for manipulating governments.
Interestingly enough the people who benefited the most from Napoleon were the Jesuits who were allowed to return to the Church just months after the Pope was back at the Vatican from Napoleon's grasp. And also the Rothschilds funded all sides in the war, causing them to rise to power.
If you watch V for Vendetta it is about this very thing. As V represents the Jesuits who return from the shadows and take off their masks. And Evey represents the Jews pulling the strings from behind the scenes along side them. And they celebrate with the 1812 overture which is to remember what Napoleon did, wiping out the enemies of the Jesuits in Europe and then destroying his own forces. So that nobody is confused about the history lesson, V is portrayed both as the Count of Monte Christo (Mount Christ) who returns to get revenge. And also of the first attempt to regain the power of the Vatican in the gunpowder plot to kill King James and destroy the house of lords. Which V accomplishes, symbolizing the final victory that the Jesuits gained though Napoleon.

Not really

Yes, just look at the painting and you'll get a picture of french revolution - degeneracy.

The ruling class was worse

Yes and so was the enlightenment

Attached: 12079017124.png (847x401, 170K)

Yes, the liberal nationalism it promoted was what liberated the Jews and allowed them to start running our society.

Plus it got the secularism meme going which just made it easier for Poz to slip in.

No one would consider it a good thing if Napoleon hadn't coopted it.

Read about what the Revolutionary government did in Vendee.

Every (((revolution))) like French, Industrial, American, that English glorious one,protestantism, Enlightenment and its offspring like fascism,liberalism,modernism,nationalism,socialism together with everything that reduces the Emperor's or King's power like magna carta (((libertatum))) and habeus corpus act is a tool of the d*vil to turn good Christians from God.

Nice to see there are still fellow monarchist in this place.

>French revolution good or bad?
>What came after
>Death of culture
yeah bro totally best thing to ever happen

t. radical centrist individual cuck onion lover

no, because it led to a great coldplay song

Yes

fpbp

>are you saying french rev was birth of radical leftists?
>how?
>what is your definition of anglo?

Attached: IMG_2750.png (184x314, 66K)

>wanting super canada

>ID
samefag, nigger
>fpbp
way to fail at using this, nigger

thank you for keeping our aussie shitposting tradition strong

why is no one commenting on any of this?

Attached: IMG_1491.png (1200x1200, 105K)

The french revolution is the birth of modern Western society. Everything today is based off it. The idea that a nigger can come to Europe and become "English" is an idea born in the French revolution.

Yes