>The french revolution is a chance to see what the american

>>2059218
More like a chance to see what the American revolution would look like if it wasn't happening in a colonial shithole.

It would have been an actual revolution?

>>2059218
>Amercia is literally not in contact with any superpowers only other colonials
>Amercia's monarch is literally an ocean away
>Amercia had support from others in its war
Shut the fuck up OP

The Americans had Locke, the French had Diderot. That difference in tone says it all.

French revolution is what would happen if the Shay's rebellion succeeded

>American Revolution

>>2059286
This
the foreign support for the american revolution was an opportunity to weaken england for the other european powers by breaking off one of its most lucrative colonies

Whereas the French revolution was viewed by the nobility of all of europe as a declaration of class war

>>2059344
Most of the french peasants didn't like it either

>>2059218
Wrong and ignorant. The American Revolution was basically a coalition of some of the richest and most powerful men in the colonies drumming up a revolution after deciding that they'd be better off running their own affairs and coating this with a veneer of "muh freedom" (not to say that it was insincere; many of them and their supporters believed in freedoms and rights and whatnot to a degree that was positively radical) to outline their main complaints while the French supported them to buttfluster the English.

It really isn't much of a revolution at all, really, given the proper historical context. The Crown had traditionally kept the colonies on a very long leash because to do otherwise was extremely impractical and offered little return but as the infrastructure and wealth of the colonies grew the Crown started taking more of their shit because it was practical to do so and it both needed the money and felt entitled to it. However, the colonists had basically been living on the rugged frontier and handling almost all of their own problems themselves for ~150 years at this point so to them this was new and unwelcome oppression and were amenable to declaring independence.

The revolution probably couldn't have been averted, really. England over-reached when it colonized North America, but it had no way of knowing that at the time and the only reasonable thing to do is what they did. The outcome, on the other hand, could probably have been quite different if the French hadn't gotten involved to the extent they did.

File: diderot.jpg (18KB, 180x240px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 180x240px

>>2059295
redpill me on Diderot

>>2059218
>The American revolution is a chance to see what the French revolution would look like if Napoleon had never been born

Why did they choose to exile Napoleon both times, rather than imprison or execute him?

>>2059628
You can't kill the Messiah.

>>2059628

Napleon was still a very powerful symbol in France. The other powers just wanted war to end and killing him would turn him into a martyr. Plus Napoleon despite all he did, always respected other heads of states so they granted him the same courtesy.

Exile was basically like imprisonment anyways.

>>2059628
Never make a martyr, that's how you get anarchy

>>2059344
>lucrative
Actually 13 Colonies were a drain.

>>2059554
>The outcome, on the other hand, could probably have been quite different if
If it wasn't for John "soldiers need food?" Burgoyne.

File: RevolutionaryWars.png (281KB, 1638x984px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 1638x984px

>>2059218
The French Revolution went full retard because all surrounding monarchies attacked, which sparked radicalism and paranoia among the revolutionaries

Initially they didnt even want to get rid of the king but to make the country a constitutional monarchy

>>2059628
That's not how war worked back then (or any time other than WW2 and recent ones)
Reminder that Napoleon conquered Vienna three times, yet he never deposed their emperor even once

What was done to Napoleon was already very harsh by the era's standards, killing him would be unimaginable

>george washington single handedly won the war, defeated the british, created the constitution, founded all cities, and created america. if not for this one man in particular america would have been under british rule still

File: Noyades de Nantes.gif (494KB, 1280x540px) Image search: [Google]

494KB, 1280x540px

The French Revolution was totalitarian in its practice and showed the premises of all of the modern totalitarianisms such has Bolshevism and Nazism. It used demagogy and systematic violence on a large scale to fulfill an authoritarian agenda based on the creation of a New Man, in the same fashion as the Nazis did. Whereas the American Revolution stayed faithful to the classical liberal principles of distribution of Power and individual liberty.

The simple fact that it did not end up with the same kind of atrocities the French Revolution has produced should be enough proof that its ideological basis was saner and more honest.

>>2059317
>French revolution is what would happen if the Shay's rebellion succeeded
OH SNAP

Quality post anon.

This is of course the correct answer.

>>2059218
American revolution - struggle of France against Britain.
French revolution - struggle of Britain against France.

>>2060336
>The simple fact that it did not end up with the same kind of atrocities the French Revolution has produced should be enough proof that its ideological basis was saner and more honest.

Yeah, the context ( >>2060294 ) is totally irrelevant....

>>2059599
>Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.
He was a contemporary of Voltaire and was very fiery when it came to his opposition against both the monarchy and church. He was also one of the head Encyclopedists.

File: La Vendée-Vengé.jpg (138KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1280x720px

>>2060445
How did Austria invading France justified cutting a 14 years old girl in half with a saber, tying and drowning hundreds of people, burning people alive and use their fat to make soap, putting women and children in a church and burning it, impaling babies on bayonets, throwing babies in a well... ?

>>2060936
You clearly never had to deal with the Austrians
It absolutely justifies this