It wasn’t about France. The question was about how the American war was going to which Franklin would reply, “ça ira ça ira.” And it caught on throughout the war and up to the end of the American revolution after Franklin left.
There's a slightly different version in AC Unity, as that one has lyrics about hanging aristocrats from lampposts this one does not. La Guillotine permanente was probably my favorite, musically. It flows a little better.
This is also the regimental march of the Yorkshire Regiment of the British Army. This arises from the battle of Famars in 1793, when the ancestor regiment of the Yorkshires, the 14th Foot, came up against a French force whose band was playing 'Ca Ira'. Colonel Doyle of the 14th ordered his band to strike up the same tune, exclaiming "Come along, my lads, we'll break them to their own damn tune". The 14th were successful and the march was adopted as the regimental march. As far as I know, the only regimental march in the British Army to have been gained on the battlefield.
Why, do brits have to fucking take our anti-monarchist marches, 2 years after? That's pretty insulting. I mean, they lost, in 1793 britain lost. It's like if Nazis, would sing Smuglianka, or Polyushka poyle. Wtf.
@@hmidou386 didn't lose in 1815 tho 😉 and particularly didn't lose in Spain lmao, of the Nile for that matter. And rather notably off a section of coast called Trafalgar.
@@josephelliott2613 nah 1815 is more of an allied victort than British, the only british units that saw actual action are Picton's Division, The Foot guards and the Union brigade. The rest of the troops were Dutch, Hannoverians and Brunswickers for the most part
Le couplet le plus connu en France est beaucoup plus violent (il a été ajouté ensuite ) : "Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira ! Les aristocrates à la lanterne. Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira ! Les aristocrates on les pendra. Si on n’ les pend pas On les rompra Si on n’ les rompt pas On les brûlera. Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira," The most famous couplet in France is much more violent (it was added later): "Ah! it will be fine, it will be fine, it will be fine! The aristocrats at the street lamp (it means "At the gallows") . "Ah! it will be fine, it will be fine, it will be fine! The aristocrats will be hanged. If we don't hang them We will break them If we don't break them We will burn them.
Corrected lyrics : (FRENCH/FRANÇAIS) Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Le peuple en ce jour sans cesse répète, Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Malgré tout les mutins tout réussira ! Nos ennemis confus en restent là Et nous allons chanter " Alléluia " Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Quand Boileau jadis du clergé parla Comme un prophète il a prédit cela En chantant ma chansonnette Avec plaisir on dira : Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Malgré tout les mutins tout réussira ! Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Pierrette et Margot chantent la guinguette Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Réjouissons-nous, le bon temps viendra ! Le peuple français jadis à quia L'aristocrate dit : "Mea culpa !" Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Le clergé regrette le bien qu'il a, Par justice la nation l'aura. Par le prudent Lafayette Tout trouble s'apaisera. Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Réjouissons-nous, le bon temps viendra ! Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Par les flambeaux de l'auguste assemblée, Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Le peuple armé toujours se gardera Le vrai d'avec le faux l'on connaîtra, Le citoyen pour le bien soutiendra. Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Quand l'aristocrate protestera, Le bon citoyen au nez lui rira, Sans avoir l'âme troublée, Toujours le plus fort sera. Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Le peuple armé toujours se gardera Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Par les flambeaux de l'auguste assemblée, Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira Le peuple armé toujours se gardera !
From 0:43 to 1:21, the background picture shows Lamartine in 1848 refusing the red flag ( that wanted the revolutionnary people who did the revolution ) 😉
@@hansmorgental9864 Ouais 'fin le mec écoute une chanson de la révolution française. Je préfère 100 fois avoir un égyptien comme lui dans mon pays que ceux qui crachent dessus. 🤗
Once again, I didn't new this version... in french school and culture, the song is far more agressive towards the priviledges aristocrates and clergy, we sing Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira ! Petits comme grands sont soldats dans l’âme, Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira ! Pendant la guerre aucun ne trahira. Avec cœur tout bon Français combattra, S’il voit du louche, hardiment parlera. Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira ! Lafayette dit : « Vienne qui voudra ! Le patriotisme leur répondra ! » Sans craindre ni feu, ni flamme, Le Français toujours vaincra ! Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira ! Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira ! Les aristocrates à la lanterne, Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira ! Les aristocrates on les pendra ! Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira ! Les aristocrates à la lanterne. Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira ! Les aristocrates on les pendra. Si on n’ les pend pas On les rompra Si on n’ les rompt pas On les brûlera. Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira, Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira, Nous n’avions plus ni nobles, ni prêtres, Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira, L’égalité partout régnera. L’esclave autrichien le suivra, Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira, Et leur infernale clique Au diable s’envolera. Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira, Les aristocrates à la lanterne ; Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira, Les aristocrates on les pendra ; Et quand on les aura tous pendus, On leur fichera la paille au c..., Imbibée de pétrole, vive le son, vive le son, Imbibée de pétrole, vive le son du canon.
@Jean Sanchez Ok, you'ree going way overboard. There is a reason why Burke got disgusted at the mere mention of the French Revolution. You thought that you could simply erase the past, all your traditions, all your previous ways and start from a blank slate. Instead of doing what the British did, namely forcing a parlamentary monarchy up the Royals' collective butt, you decided to take down the whole system. And what good did that do you? France spent over 200 years forzen in time, in coups and counter-coups, failed revolutions and now an islamic invasion. No wonder why, you did erase your previous self.
@Jean Sanchez Ok. You are still proving my point. The french were arrogant enough to say that you can simply change the entire french psyche in one sweeping event, that it is possible for a group of ideologues to storm the government, take it down and introduce a new, pre-made system that all will have to pledge allegiance to or else. Second. Even if the king fled, there were other ways in which you could resolve the situation. He had family members that were still in France, call the next in line to be king. If he refuses, call the next one. Someone would accept eventually even if there were restrictions to their power. If they felt like wasting money, give them a scare in the form of the people and the army in front of the palace. But no, a complete break with the past and tradition is the answer. And thanks to that France is now so stable and definetly not at the brink of civil war right now... again. Third. You say that the eternal back-and-forth of France is the fault of Napoleon, and I can sort of agree, but there is a twist. Napoleon is the closest thing the French Republic has of a founding father, he is the one who saved the regime and applied the principles of the revolution to some extent, after all. So France is always looking for somebody similar to her adoptive father. Add to that the fact France is tainted with the idea that overthrowing the government wenever she wants is normal, and you got the secret of Frances stagnation: one government comes up, people don't like it, there is another revolution, somebody tries to become a new Napoleon, the people approve at first but don't like it later and there is another revolution, then you have somebody who wants to restore the monarchy and bring stability to france, but nobody wants a king so there is another revolution, and so one government comes up... France is eternally stuck in a state of provisional government. This will not stop until they get rid of the romance of revolution and just do as England did.
@@leonardonascimentopires3043 I have to congratulate you on your English (I get the impression from your profile that you are Brazilian), but I can't congratulate you on your interpretation of history or your understanding of the current situation in France or elsewhere in Europe for that matter. I am English by the way. Firstly, your reference to an "islamic invasion" of France; this is simply a false narrative trumpeted by right wing populists who have latched on to the fact that, just now (these things go in cycles) xenophobia is a vote winner with a lot of people. France no more has an "islamist invasion" than Britain does; in both countries, the muslim population is about five per-cent of the total; in both countries there are, sadly, occasional terrorist outrages committed by muslim extremists - but those constitute neither an invasion nor a civil war. The vast majority of muslims in both countries are, for want of a better expression, good citizens. The French Revolution; are you seriously suggesting that if you have a system of government where the vast majority of the population are governed, taxed and exploited without representation by an hereditary elite then the only legitimate way to improve the general lot of the people is not to change the system, but to ask the head of government (the king) nicely to step down, invite the next in line to step up and hope that he is an improvement on the one before? Utterly incoherent - or, as we say in England, complete bollocks. You imply that "a complete break with the past and tradition" is always wrong. Really? From the 11th to the 14th centuries the system of government in England was feudal: should we have stuck with it forever? You seem to think that England moved from absolute monarchy to parliamentary democracy by some kind of smooth, peaceful transition. I'm sure you don't really think that, but, just in case, the facts are that that we had a civil war that began in 1642 and didn't fully resolve until 1651; in the course of this war (1649) we beheaded our king. If Charles II accepted constitutional monarchy on his return it was probably not because of some philanthropic change of heart, but because he feared for his life. The overall impression I get from your posts is not that you dislike revolutions so much as democracy. Mind you, if democracy can place an idiot like Bolsonaro in power, then maybe you are right.
@@adolforodolfo6929 Ok, let's go by parts. To begin with, thank you for eulogising my English, means my effort was meaningful. Now, to the real topics. To begin with, the islamic invasion of France. As I already said, there are neighbourhoods in Paris where the laws of France no longer apply. The only law there is Sharia, enforced by gangs of migrants and their descendants on anyone who is unfortunate enough to live/work there. I don't really think that's a sign of normality. On to the Fench Revolution: You are distorting my point, what I said is that, should the king run away to avoid being bound by a constitution, the people should interpret that as a sign that he doesn't agree with the principles of the Revolution and so he abandoned his post. The obvious procedure is to call the next in line and see if he accepts being bound by a constitution. If he refuses, call the next one. Do that until somebody submitts. I never said the Ancient Regime was justified, that is a given. Hell, I am a whig liberal (in the american sense of the term), private property, individual rights and tradition, while it mantains stability, are non-negotiable. I would not be against the Revolution if it stopped at the establishment of a constitutional monarchy. I start to have an issue when the radicals led by dictator/cult leader wanna-be, Robespierre, try to erase traditon and restart society. You correctly got my point, ending tradition is a bad thing. But I am not saying everything that is old is good and needs to be mantained, that is the reactionary position, not the conservative nor the whig one. As Burke Said, sometimes you need to modernize in order to conserve, like when digital currency showed up. The concept of money didn't change, but it was renewed, just like England did with her monarchy in, 1215, 1688 and and during the Civil War, they asserted what aspects would be dominant, not weather monarchy would be a thing or not. (Yes, king Charles would comply due to fear for his life, that is not an issue. I never said changing a system is easy, the americans fought tooth and nail to have another one when Britain stabbed them in the back). As to your last paragraph, if you define democracy as "power of the people" or "government of the majority", yes, I'm against it. At least direct democracy, since it's mob rule, and mob rule means you're free until you go against the will of the majority, meaning there was no freedom in the first place. Representative "democracy" is good, the developed world is proof it works if paired with strong property rights and the maintenance of tradition.
the number of radical monarchists who have the right to use the cheap Internet only thanks to the destruction of absolutist regimes and the introduction of full-fledged capitalism is simply absurd! constitutional monarchy is one thing, but seriously supporting absolutism and not understanding the need for the French revolution in the 21st century is simply the ultimate measure of ignorance
@@stadtrepublikmulhausen4121 there is an opinion that they are sure that at that time they would have been nobles or merchants! they think that everyone who was unhappy at that time is just losers and, in principle, believe in the concept of divine right that denies the rights of the people to the constitution and participation in the governance of the country
>Paris, in a shop >American customer is angry >American: “Do what I say; the customer is king!” >Employee: “Monsieur, this is France. We decapitate kings.”
if i can correct abit : in the 18th century speaking french "ça ira" meant : it will go like, or, it will happen. in this case the Revolution will happen. except that good translation.
@@MasterJawa_ eh les génies de l'histoire.... notre langue a évolué depuis le 18ème "ça ira" à l'époque ça voulait dire "ça va se passer" . Vous croyez aussi "qu'un sang impur" c'est pour parler des ennemies dans la marseillaise... ?
@@octavianeandracles5868 "La langue française a évolué depuis le XVIIIe, donc cette expression aussi, forcément. Et d'ailleurs je suis le seul habilité à l'expliquer." Un raisonnement d'une rare fulgurance. J'ai été sot de croire que l'on pouvait attendre moins d'un tel génie. Mais plus sérieusement, quand on ne sait pas on se tait. Cette expression vient de la bouche d'un Benjamin Franklin cherchant à rassurer ceux qui lui demandaient des nouvelles de la guerre que menait son pays. Il le disait donc évidemment sous le ton de l'optimisme, et pas de l'oisiveté. D'ou la traduction "it will be fine".
@@guts145 laisse moi deviner .... wikipedia ? PS c'est une hypothèse parmi d'autre et ça ne contre dit en rien le commentaire initial. "Et c'est pas parce que vous êtes français que vous connaissez bien votre propre histoire"
@@mikelcali6364 What tax raise happened before the revolution? And how did it serve Versailles considering a major budget cut happened under the ministry of Calonne?
@@guts145 a tax cut that was immediatly rescinded because the First and Second Estate didn't like it, Calonne was fired and taxes were raised again while the people were starving thanks to a famine
a pour aller, ça va, les riches s'enrichissent, les pauvres s'appauvrissent, comme disait Voltaire; "tout va pour le mieux, dans le meilleur des mondes"...
