I denounce, in the strongest terms, the project of the French Revolution—its theoretical basis, its intent, its methods.What are some good comfy books for fellas or lasses (unlikely) like myself?
>>24823487haha OP I love froggo XD
>>24823487Joseph de Maistre
>>24823487definitely Taine's History of the French Revolution and The Black Book of The French Revolution (both are despised by the admirers of Robespierre). Cobban's history of france (the first volume) is also good and stands, if i'm not mistaken, as the only patently classical liberal take on the event.most books that explain the revolution are inimical to those figures whom the left loves, to be honest, so it wouldn't be hard at all for you to buy a book which does not state that robespierre and his ilk were totalitarian nuts.i love the fr, the event, that is. I have a huge collection of books about it, its protagonists, and so on.one book i recommend all the time because it amazed me with a legion of unknown facts (and i remind you that I had read more than 5 general histories on the FR before this one) is Stephen Clarke's The French Revolution and What Went Wrong.Start with this one, mate. Then jump to either Taine or the Black Book.
>>24823487Why? Do you think you have anything in common with the aristocracy? The landed gentry? You're a mite. A worm. A low-class little freak with no pedigree.
>>24824237t. cannon fodder for the bourgeoisie
>>24823487The Three Musketeers
>>24824251But so are you. Why so stupid?
>>24824278I can grow potatoes in a bag. The petty squabbles of mortals have no effect on me.
>>24824237Look at societies which never had a French Revolution, like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, etc. Compare how well they are doing with the absolute state of the West.
>>24824237Are you Eminem?
>>24824237I denounce, specifically, the project of rapidly and completely designing a society from the ground up based on rational principles as opposed to gradual change.I am not a fan of any other ideology which wants to do the same either.
>>24823487Mendacious Moldshrug probably
>>24824119This would be the obvious one.>>24824233>most books that explain the revolution are inimical to those figures whom the left loves, to be honest, so it wouldn't be hard at all for you to buy a book which does not state that robespierre and his ilk were totalitarian nuts.Too many negatives in this sentence I think.
>>24823487Everybody else seems to have assumed that you wanted specifically books that elaborate the anti-Revolution thesis, but if you want comfy fictions then historical romances are your obvious bread and butter kino. >>24824258 is actually a pretty broad satire of the Ancien Regime but it still works, Sabatini's books are light as fluff but still worth it for the most part, Walter Scott was always sympathetic to various old systems that were doomed in hindsight, whether it's the Saxons in Ivanhoe or the Jacobites in Waverley.Another good source would be memoirs and chronicles from the 16th and 17th century, they're full of entertaining shit and the French ones are absolutely ironclad in unquestioning support of the aristocratic system since they were all written by men of the court.
>>24823487Little known work called A Tale of Two Cities, or as I like to call it, A Tale of Two Kinos
>>24823487Noooooo you have to love it
>>24824738Is any French revolutionary lit especially moving? Robespierre seems like an autistic and the guy who wrote the constitution too inasmuch as it may have been logically sound (may) but comes off dry and uninspiring. Now all I can picture is an endless line of viva la revolucione heads sitting in a basket. As if it were some sort of National pastime.
>>24823487the open society and its enemies
>>24824345>societies which never had a French RevolutionAnon the Unification wars of the 1901-1934 were the literal French Revolution for the KSA. They were populist, cemented by the opposition to the deeply corrupt hereditary elites, and culturally centered around (Islamic) rationalism and legalism crushing decadent (Ottoman and post-Ottoman) traditions of aristocratic oppression. They just speedran their Napoleon in the form of the House of Saud. The notoriously harsh punishments for things like theft or embezzlement are literal holdovers from Saudi equivalent to Jacobinism, and Saudi economy and society are literally built wholly and entirely on global integration, from petrodollar to active abroad investments, culminating with Saudi government buying out EA just this month. The "society which never had a French Revolution" is currently selling MySims for mobile.
Neechee and George Bat-Eye
Chateaubriand
Napoleon was the greatest man that has ever been born and so I love the French revolutionTo contemplate a world where the French revolution never happened horrifies me
>>24823487specifically on the french revolution there is de Maistre, you can also read other classic reactionary authors like Robert Filmer and Konstantin PobedonostsevI'd also suggest to read the italian elite theorists like Mosca and Pareto, they aren't necessarily trad but they are good at exposing the bullshit that the so called rule of the people is in marxist and democratic systems
He smiles because he won.
>>24825911>Ahh, finally we have ze democratique republique, never again shall we fights wars and starve for these decadent kings.>Napoleon, save us! The republique is lost! Conflict, it never ends. Yes, I will gladly march to Russia and freeze for you!
>>24826053>but French fellow>we said we would never again bow to a French king.>how can you be such a fool? Napoleon is not a king he is Le Emperer.>he is not French, and he does not require one to bow. Just do die in a Euopean war.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91gT68xeDMM
>>24824738This. No theory is smarter than the forces of history.
>>24825350Carlyle's history is uniquely gripping and immediate.
>>24825911Napoleon wasn't a product of the revolution, just an opportunist who exploited the chaos.
>>24823487>I denounce social changeWow, buddy, so revolutionary. I suppose there were never people like you during that time. I wonder what happened to them?
