American Reacts The French Revolution: Crash Course European History

Подписаться 73 тыс.

Просмотров 4,5 тыс.

50% 1

👉Original Video: • The French Revolution:...
👉Discord: / discord
👉 Patreon: / mcjibbin
☕Buy me a coffee!: www.buymeacoff...
📦P.O. Box info (NOT accepting ANY perishable items)
For any clothing: l'm a Men's size large
McJibbin
P.O. Box 447
Bristol, Rhode Island 02809
USA
Hi everyone! I'm an American from the Northeast (New England). I want to create a watering hole for people who want to discuss, learn and teach about history through RU-vid videos which you guys recommend to me through the comment section or over on Discord. Let's be respectful but, just as importantly, not be afraid to question any and everything about historical records in order to give us the most accurate representation of the history of our species and of our planet!
Having a diverse perspective is crucial to what I want to achieve here so please don't hold back! I want to learn about all I can! Keep recommending and PLEAESE join my Discord :) ( / discord )
#american
#mcjibbin
#americanreacts
#reaction
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

Опубликовано:

13 окт 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 159

@VlogMusique День назад

8:50 you're right. in france, state is free from religion. means you can practice any religion you want, but no religion can interfere with state.

@Lottaquizzes День назад

Marie Antoinette didn't actually say cake or brioche, it's a myth, started as revolutionary propaganda.

@jv-collects6252 День назад

Yeah I believe the phrase originated in a novel from around 100 years prior where it's said by a fictional duchess. Can't remember the exact details though. It was then attributed to Marie by the revolutionaries.

@donaldb1 День назад

@@jv-collects6252 It's been traced to Jean Jaques Rousseau, who, as you say, ascribed the remark to a different lady.

@cireenasimcox1081 День назад

I'm so glad you said that. While I value the 'Net for putting so much information at our finger tips, I hate that it also puts so much misinformation at our fingertips.As you'll know, the Marie Antoinette thing was discounted years ago, the "Dark Ages" of British history never happened, and the "Slaves built the Pyramids" is demonstrously myth, because the village where the workmen, the accountants, the architects & their families lived was also found. But all over the 'Net this, these and hundreds of other such stories have come to life once more & given new leases of life. And "I saw it on Internet" will come to pass as 'proof'.

@olivierrocat3932 День назад

In fact, they could neither make bread nor buns. They did not have enough wheat. They were dying of hunger.

@StewedFishProductions День назад

CORRECT; The phrase "let them eat cake" is often conventionally _(and conveniently in history books!)_ attributed to Marie Antoinette, although there is absolutely NO evidence that she ever uttered it...

@ironberg0043 День назад

French here, I will answer you for the question on the place of religion in France, here religion is an exclusively private domain, no religious sign in any official institution, no distinctive sign is authorized (kippa, Christian cross, tattoos explicitly religious etc), the government is totally secular and makes no difference between religious people and does not interfere, the population is mainly atheist

@Roz-y2d День назад

But am I right in thinking that before your revolution, religion was an integral part of society? I’ve read about the tension between Catholic and Protestant people, and the Protestants having to flee the country. 👍🏻

@ogribiker8535 День назад

The population is not atheist but agnostic, there is a big difference. Also most of our holidays are religious days, obviously not including summer holidays!.

@thierrysanchez3161 День назад

@@ogribiker8535 Ils sont peut être agnostiques, mais ils courent tous à l'église pour baptiser leurs enfants, se marier jusqu'au jour de leur mort ...

@micade2518 День назад

The Bastille was stormed by the revolutionaries because it was then not only a state prison, but also an arsenal: The revolutionaries were after arms and gun powder, which they seized, and at the same time, they freed a handrul of long forgotten prisoners who were rotting there. The assault of the Bastille has become the symbol of the French Revolution because it was the first major burst action that sparked the ensuing general revolution. Its demolition was decided soon after because the fortress represented the royal absolutism: up until 1785, anyone who displeased the Power could be incarcerated there without a trial.

@ugrvdt9511 День назад

2'30" : to answer your question: yes it would have happened. In 1783/1784, there was a very important volcanic eruption in Iceland that caused a famine all over the Europe. That's when it started

@xenotypos День назад

It's probable a revolution would have happened in France even without the American Revolution (which is called the "American war of independance" in France), but not at the same time, probably later. The American Revolution almost surely influenced the French Revolution, but both happened because of the political philosophy of the Enlightenment (Rousseau, Voltaire etc...) in Europe, which changed the way society was seen in the 18th century. So France was intellectually ready for a Revolution, you just needed a little push. The America Revolution and then bad harvests (which led to hunger, I mean more than usual) were that push.

@Quessir День назад

Bizarre that they kept up the myth about Marie Antoinette suggesting that the peasants eat cake (or brioche). As Queen she patronised various charities that she gave generously to and at one point she had her children give away their Christmas toys to the children of local peasants because in her eyes, "they had enough". Yes she spent enormous sums of money, but the reality is that was the world she inhabited. The French court was a protocol-driven nightmare - she wanted to get away from that (for which she was criticised), so she spent time at the Petite Trianon where she could live a less rigid life (for which she was criticised), spent money building her peasant-inspired village she and her friends could be away from the court and all it's demands (for which she was criticised) and she spent enormous sums on fashionable clothing (for which she was criticised). Yet that was the direction the court had gone in - Louis XIV had forced all the nobles to join him in Versailles where he could keep an eye on them, and this meant interminable boredom for many. So they gambled and amused themselves as much as they could in that environment, and that meant spending money. All of them spent ridiculous sums on anything that could keep their interest for some time. Louis XVI's brothers racked up enormous gambling debts that he paid for, yet it was the Queen that was criticised and hated. The stupid sums of money she spent on clothes was actually expected of her as Queen - she drove the fashion industry forwards in France. Whatever she chose to wear, nobles would follow suit, and so on. When she switched to much simpler clothing - closer actually to what the peasants wore - she was, of course, criticised. Why was she the object of all that criticism? Why was she made into the scapegoat for all of France's problems? Because she was foreign. More than that, because she was Austrian. Austria and France had been deadly enemies for many centuries, and it was only because Prussia and Britain suddenly allied one day that the two were forced into an alliance of convenience, which they had to do in order to survive. And a royal marriage was the keystone of this alliance - Marie Antoinette as a 14 year old girl was married to the Dauphin of France. She was hated by the nobility on arrival, so with that and the incredibly stuffy court, of course she tried to get away from it and have a more private life. For which the nobility hated her all the more, and this filtered down to all of the other classes. She was a girl way, WAY out of her depth. Always accused of pulling the strings behind the scenes, the one time she tried to get anything done in government was when the King had fallen into depression. And of course she was entirely ignored, because the Queen of France had no business running the country as far as the nobility were concerned.

@donaldb1 День назад

The guy in the tub? I think you may be recalling Jean-Paul Marat. He did not actually stay in his tub all the time, but he was memorably murdered in it, a scene recorded by Jaques-Louis David in one of the most famous images of the revolution.

@BlueDusk95 День назад

And his murderer was Charlotte Corday. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlotte_Corday

@loicrose9916 День назад

Hi, i'm French. In France religion is considered a personal thing : you can believe in whatever you want, but no religion must be promoted by any public servant more than another religion (except in Alsace-Moselle, a part of France that still has some old german local laws). It means that you can absolutely wear a religious sign, but not if you're a cop, teacher, minister, president... or any state worker you can think of. Recently there has been more and more push from the government to ban religious signs in school, even for students (but not in college since they are adults). For example, the religion of a politician will almost never be discussed here, and using a religious book in a political debate/to make laws would definitely end in strikes and outrage.

@TelManothHexperax День назад

i was going to write pretty mutch the same thing here so just here to second your post . just to add that it didnt become like that from the revolution alone, but more 100 years of constant fighting between the left and the church, the fight "end" in 1905 with a law for secularism, a very important law that completly cut the states with the religion .

@graadlon День назад

Hi! French here... The difference in religion between France and the USA is that when you are pledging something for exemple in court in the usa you pledge on the bible whereas in France you do not

@nedludd7622 День назад

One does not have to swear on the Bible in court in the US.

@olivierbioret5206 День назад

@@nedludd7622 i know but the possibility to do it would be inconcievable here

@CROM-on1bz День назад

@@nedludd7622 In France, we commit ourselves on our honor.

@11bigj0j0 День назад

In France, in 1905 a law was enacted. It's called the law of separation of church and the state. The spirit of this law is that church stuff is separate from French state. Then in 2004, a new law stipulate that when you are in a public building such has school, or town house, you have to apply a neutrality of religion. Ex : students and people who work among the school (such has teachers) are not allowed to show austentatory religious signs. The goal, in accordance to the revolution spirit is that everybody is equal in school and nobody has to be bothered because of his belief. Public servants have to respect this rule to. Other exemple : in swimming pools this rules is enforsed to. The "Burkini" has been banned from swimming pools (and from beaches). The other goal is to fight against communitarianism (that violated the principle of the french revolution) and that can be assimilated as sectarism and bad stuff. Sometime communitarianism has led to terrorism attacks in France. A saying say that freedom begins where the freedom of others stops. Here this law is enforsed to protect liberty of belief, and equality and fraternity.

@a.gachette5019 День назад

Right. The perfect example of submit something to random people that was something related to people of power first. Since 10 years ; intolerance and hate is at the most... My opinion... Not here to change your mind I just wanna show another shade to stranger people. I understand you have different opinion but it would be very difficult to speak about it only texting. I agree with facts you told about 🙏

@lsmerlier День назад

Just to clarify several points Religious symbols are allowed in our universities, except for the full-face veil The burkini, on the other hand, is allowed, because I quote, "The rule is clear: a mayor is prohibited from banning the wearing of religious symbols in public spaces" except in cases of public order disturbances.

@domitiusafer День назад

@@lsmerlier The 1905 law of separation of church and state, called on laïcité, is often misunderstood by foreign states, especially in Anglo-Saxon countries where it is confused with secularism. The French republican leader Gambetta in 1875 said that "laïcité is not an export product to characterize the particular character of this rule in France".There is no translation of the word laïcité into EnglishThe 1905 law aims to prevent the domination of a religion over the state, initially the catholic religion which has been for centuries state religion in France, it is both the legacy of the 18th century Enlightenment philosophers who inspired French revolutionaries like Voltaire who proclaimed "It’s not in God that I don’t believe, it’s in religions because they are always done by men." and it is to impose by the State religious communities to live together in peace after the terrible religious civil wars between Catholics and Protestants that have bloodied France at the end of the 16th century and early 17th century, the State in France by its neutrality is a guarantor of peaceful coexistence between religions because France is not a theocracy that claims to impose the law of a God as in Muslim countries subject to the sharia hence the hostility of Muslims to this law accepted by others religions . The law of 1905 also proclaims freedom of conscience which is also not to believe in God and not only the neutrality of the State (It is inconceivable in France to see as in the United States a president swearing on the bible, have the American motto in God of we Trust or a head of state also religious leader like the King of England head of the Anglican church ). , so that belief in God is a private matter expressed only in his home and in the dedicated religious buildings (church, temple, synagogue,mosque) and must not publicly offend the freedom of people to not believe in God, which is proclaimed in the name of freedom of conscience.The prohibition of any public religious expression in daily life in France was pushed very far by the French revolutionaries who replaced the Christian calendar with a revolutionary calendar that began on September 21, 1792 day of proclamation of the First Republic,the suppression of religious holidays and the abolition of Sunday as the day of rest of the lord replaced by Robespierre by the decade week of 10 days while the republicans will abolish Sunday as a day of rest in 1880,so that the French worked 7 days a week. The abolition of the 7-day week and religious holidays provoked uprisings among peasants and Catholic aristocrats, especially in western France in Brittany and Vendée (Pays de la Loire) who also wanted to restore the royals against the Republican government and were repressed in blood. Gambetta said "Clericalism is the enemy." For the French republican revolutionaries, it is a matter of laïcité to combat the political expression of religion and the will of certain religions to impose their rules on as many people as possible . Everyone is free to believe or not to believe in God, it is his personal conviction but he must not in daily life bother by his religious convictions his neighbors and other people who do not share his religious beliefs, nor want to impose them as for ex his way of dressing (hence the prohibition in France of wearing ostensible religious signs such as the Islamic veil in schools and administrations and this prohibition for officials because they would be for them to get out of their obligation of reserve and neutrality).The 1st world war of 1914-1918 where the French Catholics fought to defend the secular French Republic led the French republican government in a goal of national reconciliation after the trials of the war (France, which enrages the largest number of soldiers after its ally Russia 8.3 million French soldiers for a population of 39 million inhabitants against 16 million Russian soldiers for a population of more than 100 million inhabitants, but with a loss rate of more than 1.5 million French soldiers killed against 1.2 million Russian soldiers killed and 2 million wounded, gassed many of whom died in the years following the war, the victorious country already in demographic decline has suffered a real bleeding of young men, France is a war-traumatized country, a country of widows and orphans and cover themselves with monuments to the war dead in every city and village wanting to honor its inhabitants who died for France where the pacifist opinion will then dominate "Never again" or we want to consider the 1st world war as the the last of the wars "La der des der") to relax the laws on secularism, notably by reverting to the prohibition of private religious schools, the right to make processions, and for priests and religious to wear a priestly habit considered by the French Council of State as a work habit and not religious because of the existence of a clergy which is not the case for example of Islam where there is no Muslim clergy hence the prohibition of religious clothing and veil in some public spaces.

@marieadriansen2925 День назад

@11bigj0j0 You are making a serious mistake, it is absolutely necessary to correct your comment because it will mislead and can have serious consequences! Religious symbols are allowed in our universities, with the exception of the full veil The burkini, on the other hand, is authorized, because I quote: "The rule is clear: it is forbidden for a mayor to prohibit the wearing of religious symbols in public spaces" except in the event of a disturbance of public order. In France, the wearing of religious symbols is allowed on beaches and in municipal swimming pools, provided that they comply with health and safety rules In summary, as long as the religious symbol does not pose a threat to safety or hygiene, it is allowed (For example, the Council of State has invalidated several municipal decrees prohibiting the wearing of the burkini on beaches, stating that these prohibitions must be justified by a current and proven risk to public order)

@marieadriansen2925 День назад

You are making a serious mistake, it is absolutely necessary to correct your comment because it will mislead and can have serious consequences! Religious symbols are allowed in our universities, with the exception of the full veil The burkini, on the other hand, is authorized, because I quote: "The rule is clear: it is forbidden for a mayor to prohibit the wearing of religious symbols in public spaces" except in the event of a disturbance of public order. In France, the wearing of religious symbols is allowed on beaches and in municipal swimming pools, provided that they comply with health and safety rules In summary, as long as the religious symbol does not pose a threat to safety or hygiene, it is allowed (For example, the Council of State has invalidated several municipal decrees prohibiting the wearing of the burkini on beaches, stating that these prohibitions must be justified by a current and proven risk to public order)

@kerouac2 День назад

It is interesting to note that France decriminalized homosexuality in 1791. Unfortunately, things did not always stay that way.

@CROM-on1bz День назад

Let's say that in the USA religion is a commercial matter and that in France it's like sex or political opinions, it's private.

@palupalu5647 День назад

Well, the revolution effectively replaced the dominant social class, namely from the aristocracy to the bourgeoisie. Throughout the 19th century, these two classes fought each other, and it took the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71 for the republican bourgeoisie to prevail (narrowly) against the supporters of the aristocracy. Today, we see that the bourgeois behave like the aristocrats of the old regime (before 1789), monopolizing all the powers (political, economic, cultural) and seeking to channel the rest of the population by all means (moral , movies, tv, armed forces, etc.). I tell you, one day it's going to really blow up, and you shouldn't be surprised. The episode of the Paris Olympic Games only served to temporarily mask the fact that the current power is illegitimate. But the austerity decreed by a minority which exempts itself from it, will amplify anger against the big business despite the divisions of the people.

@AnthonyWilkinson-jw6hn День назад

Connor' ive followed you for a few years now and you become more and more savvy with every video. 👏👌

@LizzieJaneBennet День назад

I was going to say the same. Bless be his willing to learn, 'cause we see him becoming more and more intelligent. And yet always so modest ! (I don't know if I use the appropriate english words).

@ganikus8565 День назад

Actually, queen Marie Antoinette never said this famous sentence " if you don't have bread, then eat brioche " It comes from a book of Jean Jacques Rousseau written 4 years before the revolution... in its story a rich princess said that when seeing starving peasants A century later with the republic government which wanted to give a bad image of the past monarchy , all sort of false stories were taught , such as this legend about the queen, or the king saying lets go hunting... Plus many more false stories, nobles never bathed,, they shit on the floor of the palace, they didn't wipe their butt...etc etc all fake history that is still taught by people who haven't been updated to new knowledge.

@aimdeka7023 День назад

Fun fact is that guillotine was create by a military surgeon after a propostion from a politician named Guillotin ( he was a doctor too and had greatly regreted the creation of this machine). The goal of the Guillotine was to replace the public executioner and that every one had the same sentence of death. During royalty death penalty was different according to social class. So with it even in death Men were equal.

@thierrysanchez3161 День назад

La Guillotine fut le premier pas vers l'abolition de la peine de mort. Pas seulement parce qu'elle était égalitaire dans l'exécution, mais surtout parce qu'on va cesser de torturer les condamnés pendant des heures avant de les achever. C'est cela que la guillotine a changé profondément dans les esprits. Lors de la 1er exécution à la guillotine en 1792 (un certain Pelletier) la foule a été déçue ... Comment c'est déjà fini ? Mais on a rien vu ! On a rien entendu ! Et oui ...

@Lolubellule 19 часов назад

I think Guillotin didn't create the guillotine, it was already used before him, but he made it better by making the blade oblique, so that it was not blocked easily by the spine, as it was before.

@thierrysanchez3161 17 часов назад

@@Lolubellule En réalité c'est le docteur Louis qui a mis au point la guillotine avec un fabricant de clavecin. D'ailleurs au début la guillotine s'appelait la Louisette . Le nom de guillotine est venu à la suite d'une cabale des girondins contre Guillotin. Jamais Guillotin n'a assisté à une exécution, il n'a pas été exécuté, il a passé sa vie à travailler sur le vaccin de la varicelle et il est mort dans son lit ...

@Flobyby День назад

8:50 French here. The French republic being unattached to any church or religion is in the very first words of its constitution nowadays. However, the constituons also grants both freedom of religion and forbids oppression/discrimination because of religion. The method by which France tries to guarantee the rights of its citizen to practice any religion but not recognise or favour any of them is called "laïcité". It's been mostly constructed at the end of the 19th century against the influence of the Catholic Church (Pope unwilling to recognise the legitimacy of the Republic and trying to foment a counter revolution). The most impactful measure of this being the creation of a mandatory and free (of charge) public school system, to prevent church from endoctrinating the youth. Post 2001, the principle of laïcité has been changed (or some might say, derailed) to especially fight against Islam. Extending the realm of forceful religious neutrality to not only public servant but citizen benefiting from public service.

@marie-claudeguegan3219 День назад

@Flobyby Love your comment, gave you a 👍. Just incidentally: having lived in the United Kingdom for a long time, may I suggest the English equivalent to "laïcité": "secularity". It may not be the best translation (since it's not a concept they have in anglophone countries) but that's the one they used over there in TV programmes on the subject. Hope I'm not soubding too pedantic, as I say, I loved your comment.

@Flobyby День назад

@@marie-claudeguegan3219 I didn't venture into trying to translate it because I wasn't confident I could find an equivalent. Secularity might indeed be a good one for the UK specifically but I'm not sure it generalises well to other contexts (the same way laïcité has varying meaning across francophony). I'm pretty sure it's also a false friend with Secularité in French where "séculaire" power is opposed to "temporel", where the first one refers to the power of the church and the second one to the power of the state

@Flobyby День назад

@@marie-claudeguegan3219 also thank you for your feedback, this topic can be difficult to tread, so I was unsure if I expressed my point of view well

@thierryf67 День назад

you have an recent exemple of crowd action, when Trump's partisans attacked the Capitol. It was an insurrection, and could have finished very badly.

@marieparker3822 День назад

Recommended: a U-tube channel called 'The rest is history'. This is just two historians talking to each other. I particularly enjoyed their series (4 talks) on the Roman occupation of Britain.

@LizzieJaneBennet День назад

Oh yes, it would be great, I love their talks.👍👏

@PytheasFidus День назад

@McJibbin 8:23 French here. You are absolutely right. The French state prohibits religion in the political and public space in France with the law of 1905. Religions must remain in the private sphere or within the strict framework of religious communities. Sorry to talk politics (but that's the point here), but it's one of the reasons for the crisis with the emergence of Islam in France. As much as Catholicism has since become accustomed to this functioning, this is not the case for Islam witch is a new religion in France. The most representative place for this tension is at school. Because yes, as the school is public in France, control by the state. Private schools obviously exist, but they are a minority in the country (and also controlled by the State XD). So in public school, religion does not have to be mentioned, promote, including through religious symbols worn by the students. A Christian student will not be allowed to wear a cross that is too visible (a small cross will be okay). A practicing Muslim student will have to remove her veil when entering the school. If the subject interests you, look at the law of 1905 and French “laïcité” (secularism). It was also a moment of great tension in the country at a time when the Church controlled a large part of society. Just clarify that you can perfectly be religious in your life. You can perfectly walk down the street with a veil or a big cross or a yarmulke. It's just that in institutions controlled by the State, religion has no place, even when it is carried by a simple citizen.

@jonochristian2256 День назад

you need to hear stephen fry debateing freedom

@emiliopandini1195 День назад

yes,in France,crosses are not on display in offices,religion is in church only

@thierryf67 День назад

the changes (before the Revolution) in France against absolute monarchy was in progress before the American insurrection. But, may be it has an impact on the writings (constitution, or universal declaration... ?).

@stephenbes8575 Час назад

Hi Connor, I have been following your channel for some time now. You are getting better and better trying to understand social and a countries behaviour as to why wars and influences abroad were paramount to a countries survival. Many thanks from the UK 🇬🇧

@olivierbioret5206 День назад

Hello, A lot of french people simplify here what the "laïcité" means, by saying religion is prohibited in public space. That is not true. Religion and religious signs are forbidden for the state and its representants. The idea behind it is that in france, religion was seen as an oppressor to escape from About your 13'00 question : my opinion is yes, in a simply "free" regime, groups (interest groups more than friend groups, like groups of landlords) will rebuild the pyramid and the responsability of a state should be to prevent this. I don't think the tendancy to rebuild a pyramidal society is a natural one either, it is on other institutions (heritage, capitalism, money, war...) that are in no way natural. the selfishnes of human is certainly no more natural than the generosity of humans. thinking that humans are by nature selfish is not backed up by science, and is used as a political justification... About violence : the revolution was violent for sure, but its level of violence is at par with the violence of monarchy before it. It's just that with time you end up being so used to a regime's violence, you don't see it anymore, and a new violence is only "seen" more than an old violence and appears more shoking. about your 31'00 question : freedom of speech was way worse before the revolution than before, so no, revolution in no way hiders freedom of speech by essence I'm quite curious about your specific interest for freedom of speech, because you mention it way more than a lot of other essential freedoms...

@estranhokonsta День назад

The definition of a laic state is correct. But i disagree with your other points. Hierarchy is a natural outcome. All if what you mentioned as not natural, i see as natural. And that includes all those social groupings at one ocasion or another. I think here that the main disagrement is the definition of what is natural in humans. And i certainly disagree to say that the violence of the revolution was on par with the previous system. The label of Terror was not all based on propaganda. To me, what you said is like saying that the violence of those classic police state dictature is on par with the violence of a civil war.

@olivierbioret5206 День назад

@@estranhokonsta if you think hierarchy is natural, you'd have to prove it and explain how come the levels of inequality in societies vary so much in time and space. i never said the terror was not violent, i say public executions were a common sight before french revolution (as an example), and the terror is not the revolution. Exactly, police state dictature is as violent as civil war, only hidden and "legal", in the cells of a police station

@estranhokonsta 23 часа назад

@@olivierbioret5206 Man. This is youtube comment section. You made your comment. I made my comment. I do not agree with some of your arguments as i understood them. You do not agree with some of my arguments as you understood them. I do not have to prove anything. There is no condition or motivation to prove anything to anyone in a youtube comment section. Any tentative in that direction is just trolling or ranting. never proving. I could say that 1+1=2 and there is a good chance that there will be someone that will say that it is not true. And i could spend 3 years trying to convince him unsuccessfully until i finally realize that i was just talking to myself. That is why people that want to have a more extensive talk about something, have to normally do it in person. Not using a keyboard or touchscreen. Feel free to also totally disagree with this whole comment by the way.

@olivierbioret5206 23 часа назад

Let’s agree to disagree on what a comment on YT should be, then.

@gutzberzerk7925 Час назад

Now our country is "laics" a french word who means it is free from religion. For us is unthinkable to swear on the bible or having religious sing in the public space or even at school (if it was public you could have religious private school) We are the only one in Europe in the past turkey also claim to be one. You have the rights to have freedom of religion but it need to remains in the private space.

@StewedFishProductions День назад

The concept and idea of a 'guillotine' contraption for execution by decapitation was used in Yorkshire, England with the 'Halifax Gibbet' around 1280... The 'Halifax Gibbet' looked very similar to the French guillotine apart from the blade which was axe-shaped instead of angled. It was also never sharpened which meant it relied on the weight and drop to sever the head by tearing, whereas the French blade 'sliced' through the neck...

@LeSarthois 21 час назад

About freedom of religion and Laïcité in France, it's important to note that even many French people and politicians misunderstand it. Basically you got the gist of it right; the French State cannot endorse a specific religion (many exceptions applies*). That mean things like not displaying crosses or religious symbols in public spaces (public as in, government buildings, schools, public hospitals). This applies to the French government and civil servants, NOT to every Frenchman. French citizens and tourists are absolutely free to wear religious symbols (as long as they do not infright on other laws, such as concealing your face or wearing weapons). *exceptions exists mostly for historical reasons : Alsace was under German control in 1905, and when it became French again in 1945, the region chose not to adopt the law and thus, the older rules applies and Alsace recognize officials religions and have region-paid priests and public schools with religion classes; same thing with the oversea region of Guyane. Until 2010 the island of Mayotte was a French territory with more autonomy, and the main religion being Islam, polygamy was legal since the island of Mayotte had local laws that included several Shariah laws; new unions were banned for the processus of making Mayotte a French "département" (less autonomy but other advantages) (older existing unions remain legal). In mainland France, churches and religious buildings dating from before 1905 usually belong to the State (because those dating from before 1789 were all nationalized, and those built between 1789 and 1905 were built using State funds). Their historical and religious uses are recognized so those are cases where the French State "sponsors" religion, in the act of funding the maintenance and restauration of historical religious buildings (Notre-Dame-de-Paris belong to the French State, and the money to repair it that don't come from donations is from the French budget directly). Another application of Laïcité is the French Army; since the army is a special thing with lots of restriction, laïcité in fact dictates that soldiers must have access to priests so they can exercise their freedom of religion. So the French Army do pay priests. In short : unlike what some US medias would like you to believe, no, you wo'nt be thrown in jail in France if you wear a tiny cross somewhere. Hey in fact, Mormons exists in France and are perfectly in their right when they do preaching door-to-door.

@derpeek День назад

At 20:35 on the huge change for Europe not having a king ruling a country was not a new concept. The micro state of san Marino had it before and also the Netherlands was a Republic. The Dutch declaration of indendence was the inspiration for the declaration of independence of the USA. It strange that after the French occupation the Netherlands became a kingdom after several centuries being a Republic.

@domitiusafer День назад

France is not the 1st republic in Europe nor the 1st constitutional monarchy because there was already England since 1688 and the Glorious Revolution or the declaration of the rights of citizens proclaimed in the United States in 1776;The essential and decisive change that is changing the state of western societies of the time and will make the French revolution a founding event in world history because its example will be followed then in Russia and China, it is the people’s irruption into political life and their demand to see rights proclaimed on paper translated into concrete reality in their daily lives.The English revolutions of 1688 and the American revolutions of 1776 were institutional revolutions led by elites of the owning class who wanted to reclaim political power from the aristocracy and control the tax vote. The French revolution begins, as with the English and American revolutions, by the alliance of the liberal aristocracy and clergy with the bourgeoisie during the 1789 States General to control royal power and vote taxes through the adoption of a written confirmation.But the irruption of the people as a revolutionary and political actor changes everything. As the French member of parliament Condorcet said, "It is not enough to proclaim on paper that all men are equal; we must also make men our equals in reality.The affirmation of the principle of equality between men will lead the French revolutionary republicans to proclaim in February 1794 the abolition of slavery in the colonies which is a first in the world. Britain and the USA, although proclaiming equality of men in their declarations of rights, did not abolish slavery until much later in 1833 in Great Britain and in the middle of the 19th century after a bloody civil war in the USA.The emergence of the people as an actor in political life also calls into question the representative function of the deputies, the deputies have an imperative mandate and risk the disqualification during the mandate or even the guillotine if they do not respect the mandate of their electors.It horrifies the British MP Burke when he sees that his French colleagues are risking their lives in every vote or speech trying to reconcile their deep convictions with the need to stick as close as possible to the demands sometimes It horrifies the British MP Burke when he sees that his French colleagues are risking their lives in every vote or speech trying to reconcile their deep convictions with the need to stick to the most contradictory of their voters They must not be displeased at the risk of their lives.The French republicans with Robespierre proclaim the constitutional right to insurrection allowing the people to rise in order to overthrow a government that does not govern in the sense of its interests (Robespierre himself overthrown in July 1794 will pay the price). All this will also generate a chaos, a permanent anarchy which the coup de Napoléon in 1799 will put an end to . Napoleon will say "The revolution is frozen."Napoleon will establish what historians have called a democracy without freedoms. Napoleon said "I want to be baptized by the water of universal suffrage but I do not want to live with my feet in the water."France will experience a great number of political regimes during the 19th century and the republic will have difficulty in establishing itself because of the memory of the period of chaos of the French revolution; The writer Victor Hugo, who became a Republican deputy during the 2nd Republic in 1848 and who voted for universal suffrage, will try to reconcile the popular demands of the 1st Revolutionary Republic with those of the 2nd Republic by declaring "Universal suffrage abolished the right to insurrection." To which the socialist MP Blanqui replied, "elections are a golden trap in which the propertied elites seek to manipulate opinion in order to keep themselves in power. Only the permanent threat of the people’s insurrection ensures that governments operate in the interests of the people and not of the possessing classes, calling V.Hugo a "bourgeois revolutionary"

@lexywackess День назад

French and american freedom are kinda different in the sense that french freedom, like religious beliefs and speach are not that you can say and do ANYTHING, like in america, but that "freedom ends where the others freedom begins", in this matter you can't do or say something that would hurt another one's life basically. In the end, both looks alike, especially far right politicians often says stuff i wouldn't put in french's liberty, and for sure equality, even more Brotherhood 😂. A good example of that would also be : you can't do too noisy stuff like doing hammerwork during midday or night, to not disturb your neighbour's rest

@daviddelannoy8570 День назад

French here : you are right about religion : we have a concept here called "Laïcité" which means the State is independent from any religion and has to be neutral toward religions. Let's say it's a separation between the temporal things and the spiritual things. State agents, for example, don't have the right to show any obvious religious signs, so as the students in schools. This concept is misunderstood today, and challenged (by Islam for example), but we should remember it has been the best way to end all the religion-related conflicts France has known : repression of the Jews in the middle ages, wars against Protestants, persecution of the Church during the Terror, etc. On the other hand, it can be seen sometimes as a disrespect of religious views.

@NM-ys1wu 21 час назад

To awnser your question nothing religious should have an impact in public matters, that's the way we see it in france ( but the first part where you can practice the religion that you want is also implied ).

@NM-ys1wu 21 час назад

also there are places such as schools where it is forbiden to showcase any form of believes such as a cross or a hijab also if a religion has a rule or something against the laws it will not be tolerated and banned such as the niquab where in this situation it hides the face of the person and it is forbidden to go out in the streets with something that is hiding your identity.

@gutzberzerk7925 2 часа назад

So you ask if the Independence of USA don't happened will the french revolution not happen or postponed. My first think is not but it's certainly happen in a different way because their was lots of meeting in bourgeoisie who speak about liberty and freedom so without your inspiration we will be lest ready and have certainly other figures so other way of development. After if France don't participate to USA independence the country and the royalties will be less bankrout So this fact could led to not surtax pepoles so this could led to postpone the revolution or to make it not happen. Exactly how if Brittan was not in the same state after the 7 year war the boston tee party will not happen. Now we could call them the call for freedom but at the time it was a more desperate movement for juste surviving and eventually hope for better tomorrow..

@Nekoala День назад

French here. 8:45 That's a bold way to put it, but yeah you basically nailed it. Everyone is free to have and/or practice the religion of their choice, but since 1905 and the passing of the so-called "Separation of Church and State Law" you can't express it in public, in order for the french Republic to stay neutral and treat all of its citizens equally. Same goes for freedom of speech, in a way, as you can't express racism or any form of hatred, which is considered a "délit" (I am no jurist but I would position it between misdemeanor and felony, maybe?). In theory it serve a similar purpose: preserve human dignity and public order.

@olivierbioret5206 День назад

you can express your religion in a public space...

@Nekoala День назад

@@olivierbioret5206 I made a shortcut. Public servants can't express their beliefs at all, citizens can't either when it comes to schools (law of march 15, 2004), and proselytizing is strictly forbidden.

@markmuller7962 18 часов назад

The American revolution was definitely very important for the European politics of the time and it was a huge precedent of the establishment of a democratic republic

@antoinebeaulieu2017 15 часов назад

Hi Connor, french here ! I see that your question about religion was answered already but I feel I have to add something : France's interpretation of "freedom of religion" goes a little more hardcore than the anglo-saxon way. For instance, any state representative or public institution or administration HAVE to display a total religious neutrality in order not to influence anyone or promote any belief over any other. It is also a way to ensure that no citizen will feel treated differently by a representant of the state or functionnary (in practice it is of course way more complicated :p ). However none of these restrictions apply to regular citizen with no public mandate or authority, and it doesn't apply to state functionnaries when they are off duty (so a police officer may wear whatever religious sing they want in public when they are not on official duty. So in public schools for instance, teachers and school personnel may not wear religious outfit or distinctive signs (or they have to be concealed under the clothes), and this applies to the students too. However, private schools can go by their own rules in that matter (so for instance a catholic/jew/muslim school may have teacher and students wearing the signs of their religion). The core point here, regarding every state representative or personnel carrying the authority of the state is that they cannot have another "allegiance" than the French Republic when on duty : so no belief, wether it be religious or political, may stand in the way. That's the theory anyway !!!

@faridboulegheb2927 День назад

The most important thing that you shoud be certain is that '' you can't jugde a Revolution , its the Revolution which judge you ... '' ... During the French Revolution and use the guillotine against the '' ennemies of the Nation '' , each day people were sent to the guillotine and foreigners citizen did not do exemptions ( in the city of Lyon more than 6000 persons had passed under the guillontine and in the number , there was English people , german people , ...and of course a lot of French people considered as '' nobles '' , priests , '' Royalists people '' , '' counter-revolutionnaries '' , ... After a decade of fights on several battle fields in Europe out of French Frontiers ( Spain , Italy , Swiss , '' Low Austrians Countries '' , in the myriade of small German States ) the peace came in year 1802 with the '' Paix d' Amiens '' between France and England which had financed ( with the '' English Gold '' ) the two '' coalitions wars against France '' ( 1792-1797 and 1798-1802 ) . At this time , English have less money to pay his allies ( Spain , Piémont-Sardaigne , Brunswick , Prussians , Austrians , Russians , ... ) to fight again and again against France armies which tumbled and beat coalitions on all the battle field in Europe ... British economy collapse because of the wars on the continent , their textile manufactures among others could not sell their goods on the continent and his large population ( at this time France was the most important country by his population in Europe with 27 millions of people ... ) . But because the French armies were everywhere in Europe , all European countries at that time traded mainly with France and England saw the continent's markets close to its economy ... so a few months later , English navy attacked without declaration of war many of Netherlands , Spain , Danish and French ships and sank them in ports or at sea ... At this point it was a declaration of war and Napoleon Bonaparte first Consul undertook to have to beat England which was the last nation in Europe which still refused to make peace with France ... so Napoleon concentrated an imposing army in the North of France near the city of Boulogne ( French Departement of Pas-de-Calais ) in an area called '' Camp of Boulogne '' ... this army scared the English because they were now fighters seasoned by 10 years of wars of the French revolutionary armies in Europe ... the English undertook to finance a new coalition ( 3rd coalition ) by financing Astrians and Russians to fight another time against France ... so the Austrians attacked Bavaria ( which was an independant State at this time ) which was allied with France ... considering this menace for France and to support its allied , Napoleon caused its different army corps to move in the direction of the Rhine to face Austrians ( batlle of Ulm ) and purchase them and their Russians allied to Moravia ( actually Historic Region in Czech Republic ) and beat them at Austerlitz ... All the following coalitions ( 4th to 7th ) against France and Napoleon only arise from the fact that since years 1802 and 1803 ( unilateral breach of the Peace of Amiens by the English ) it was England which financed them with its gold for pure economic and mercantile reasons ... Napoeon said : I did not wage war, I did it only because they waged it against me ... ''

@Roz-y2d День назад

In a nutshell, Napoleon tried to starve certain nations into submission. He had to be stopped.

@chrismackett9044 День назад

I don’t know why they have to ruin these videos with childish cartoons: it looks like it’s been made for five year olds. Why not just speak directly to camera throughout or illustrate the talk with contemporary pictures?

@robz7678 День назад

Another French here. And yes you're right, here everyone working for the state has to fall under laicism ("lai" as in laymen). It dates from after 1789 though. It's between 1872 and 1905 that France removed entirely religion from republican offices. At the time of the revolution, all the schools and hospitals were held by the Church so it wasn't going to change. What the revolutionary tried to change though is the allegiance of the clergymen for the Pope. The revolutionaries created a "civil constitution of the clergy" that made them the direct subordinate of the state (they would be paid by the state and follow the state's political choices). This constitution was badly received and half of the clergy refused to follow it, which resulted in massacres in some places. And the reason why the state is free from religion nowadays comes from the politics of the end of the 19th century. At that time, our parliament was divided into a left wing of Republicans and a right wing of Monarchists. The Catholics followed the monarchists, so the Republicans removed them entirely from the education system to put Republican teachers, and then ultimately in 1905 removed religion entirely from any public affairs. It might sound harsh, so I should also precise that a lot of Monarchist wanted to take power by force. Even in the 1920s, France had a LOT of Monarchist and they were very aggressive. Some people even say it was the starting point for the far-right movements in Europe.

@micade2518 День назад

As for Marie-Antoinette having said "But??? If they have no bread, why don't they eat brioche?" (if someone cannot afford to buy bread, they certainly cannot afford a more expensive cake, whilst the nobility had the choice), today's historians are not certain that she ever did say that. But she could have, as royalty then was effectively shielded from reality by, notably, their court who were afraid of displeasing them ... or afraid that their profiting from "their" own people, peasants, ... if revealed, might be frowned upon by the King and/or Queen.

@marieparker3822 День назад

Recommended: a fascinating book about The Committee for Public Safety, called 'Twelve Who Ruled', by R R Palmer - I don't know if it is still in print.

@marieadriansen2925 День назад

In 1905 a law was passed to prevent all discrimination, in particular religious discrimination. Every French person is free to choose and exercise his religion as he wishes. The state has become secular, it represents all French people regardless of their religion. It was a very good law at the time because it fought against all religious discrimination. Unlike the USA, the French president never talks about God in his speeches. Representatives of the French state must not represent a religion and wear ostentatious religious symbols. Public schools in France that are free are secular, that is to say that students must not wear ostentatious signs of their religion, they can wear small signs such as the hand of Fatma, a Star of David, a small cross or a medal. Religious diets are respected in school canteens because they are religious obligations. The Islamic veil is not a religious obligation, i.e. Muslim students can remove it while respecting their religion. The Islamic veil and other religious symbols are obviously freely worn outside of school and at university (because all students are of age at university). In France, private schools are subsidized and very cheap. Muslim students who want to keep the veil on can go to private schools.

@chakibougedela День назад

24:30 as a french i know that for having your rights you nees yo protset, even if during those protests there are people who just want to burn trashes. everything comes with a price

@CROM-on1bz День назад

As a French person, I know that to have rights I must also do my duty as a citizen.

@guillaumegrosjean6327 День назад

The United States helped us French two times during the 1st and the 2nd World War so thank you too 🇫🇷🤝🏻🇺🇸 About the religion, in France, it’s completely separated from any government’s decisions. We call it "the separation of church and the estate" (in French : "la séparation de l’église et de l’état").

@nedludd7622 День назад

That is so in the US too under the 1st Amendment.

@ricomyxledeuxieme1657 День назад

@@nedludd7622 "In God we trust" on every dollar bill doesn't really sound neutral to me... Freedom of religion and Laïcité are not the same thing

@djmath День назад

separation of church and state, secular country

@CROM-on1bz День назад

Why do you say "you hated the English" in the past tense? It's still relevant.😊😊

@maxxie84 6 часов назад

Hi, French here :) Yes, totally right, the way we see the society and government and all is secular. There can be no involvement or control from religion into the affairs of the state or the public. This is why there is (largely) no funding of religions by the government or taxes, there cannot be any sign of religious belief in public life (gov, public schools, public offices, administration (anyone working for the government), etc... There is a weird unfairness to this principle however, where there is a clear focus on attacking muslim religion signs such as the veil, and other focuses to protect signs such as the kippa (so disproportionate actions from arabs to jews). There is no clear and easy answer to that question, and for most "christian" french, it is hard to understand as much, as for us we mostly don't care and don't believe in god, and we care more about freedom of a women or the more cultural aspect of being able to see the eye of someone we are talking with, but I do understand how this can be difficult and unfair to some. I feel like we should either prohibit all religious signs ever, for everyone, equally and fairly; or allow whatever signs equally and fairly. There may be also an element of safety and being able to identify someone doing something bad, but I think that as long as we could finally all agree on one way or another, it will be a struggle... funnily enough, french people all agreeing on something is the hardest thing you could ever get. This is why we have a very strong position for president otherwise nothing can be done (as we proven during the 3rd and 4th republics...)

@thierrysanchez3161 День назад

Vous avez posé la question de savoir si la Révolution française aurait eu lieu ou aurait été retardée, sans la participation de la France à la Guerre d'indépendance. Je trouve votre question très pertinente. Tous les Français se glorifient d'avoir aidé les patriotes américains à se libérer des Anglais lors de la Guerre d'indépendance, mais peu d'entres eux sont capables de mesurer le cout de cette guerre. Elle a représenté 5 années du budget du royaume. Il est difficile de comparer avec l'euro aujourd'hui mais il a fallu construire une flotte navale, il a fallu fournir des armes (des fusils avec des baïonnettes) le tout nouveau canon Griboval. Le premier traité prévoyait 6 millions de livres aux patriotes. Aujourd'hui, on peut raisonnablement estimer cette guerre pour la France entre 10 et 15 milliards d'euros empruntés à 14% car les caisses étaient vides. Pourquoi Louis XVI a fait cela ? Il pensait que les étasuniens libres deviendraient des partenaires privilégiés de la France ce qui aurait fait de la France la première puissance européenne du XIXe siècle. Malheureusement, les étasuniens ont continué a commercer exclusivement avec les britanniques et c'est tout le contraire qui s'est produit.

@thierrysanchez3161 День назад

Pardonnez moi, j'ai oublié de préciser que le champs de bataille ne s'est pas résumé à l'Amérique. En effet, la France a déployée des navires dans les Antilles, les comptoirs indiens des britanniques, des millions de livres ont été versé aux corsaires qui ont harcelé les navires de commerce anglais dans l'atlantique (400 attaques en 4 ans, 2 par jour) Ce fut le 1er plus grand champs de bataille de toute l'histoire de la guerre car il s'étendait pratiquement sur tous les océans. Les Anglais ont du tellement mobiliser de navires qu'ils perdirent le contrôle de l'Atlantique. Louis XVI a intelligemment compris l'erreur fatale qu'avait commise Louis XV lors de la Guerre de 7 ans qui fut la 1er guerre mondiale de l'histoire) La victoire de la bataille navale de Chesapeake par les Français fut un miracle qui ne se reproduira une fois seulement (bataille de Port Royal) car les Anglais étaient invincibles sur mer. Ca a servi à rien lol ... Quand à la bataille de Yorktown, il y avait plus de Français que de patriotes américains sur le champs de bataille ce qui a fait dire à Jefferson "Tout homme à deux nations, la sienne et la France" Merci, on est bien content de l'apprendre ...😁

@dominique8233 День назад

Connor at 12:00 the question you pose is an interesting one. I suppose there is something in our nature that needs leaders, for one reason or another. Maybe for protection or strength ? What came to mind is the rest of the animal kigdom. If we look at a pride of lions they have a dominant male and female. I think its a pattern that is seen repeatedly. Also I am sure you are aware of the quote, sorry can't remember by whom, about power corrupting and absolute power corrupting absolutely.

@staygoldponyboy8881 День назад

The dude in the bath was Jean-Paul Marat

@nedludd7622 День назад

There are some erroneous statements in the comments. Under the Constitution, the US has separation of church and state too. He had his faults, but Robespierre has gotten a bad rap. He wasn't the sole person responsible for the Terror, there were different factions in the period that disputed the course to follow. This is not a "great" episode as there are many approximations. The aristocracy and the church had been running a system of terror against the people for centuries while accumulating wealth. Maybe a symbol of the extent of the change was a book by Baron D'Holbach who is sometimes considered to be the first openly atheist writer with his books particularly "The System of Nature" which had been banned by the King who had it publicly burned. Incidentally, Dr. Guillotine did not invent the instrument. He was against capital punishment but realized that it was impossible to end at the time, so he supported it as a more humane way to execute someone than what was being done, things like drawing and quartering. There is a lot more that could be clarified in this presentation.

@ganikus8565 День назад

Indeed France is a secular state, it separate religion from governement. The law ensures freedom of religion but religious practices can't influence public policies. Public institutions, schools are neutral. Religious symbols are forbidden in these spaces to maintain neutrality.

@rasmusn.e.m1064 День назад

Yup. For those who like terms: Laicism or Laïcité in French 😁

@NicolasMaramotti День назад

The question you raise about religion in the USA and France is extremely important and would require hours of explanation to grasp all the nuances. To simplify, France has a very unique relationship with religion. Historically, it was known as the "eldest daughter of the Catholic Church" for hundreds of years. However, the relationship between the State and the power of the Church has always been marked by rivalry. For example, starting in 1295, a significant conflict erupted between the pope of the time and the King of France (Philip the Fair), leading to French troops being sent to Italy to capture the pope, who had to flee, etc. I will skip over the arrival of a Protestant king in France following the rise of Protestantism, as well as the religious wars (eight religious civil wars that took place in France from 1562 to 1598), which caused hundreds of thousands of deaths. In 1905, to protect the State from Catholic domination and to allow other religions to live in peace, free from that dominance, a group of influential men (atheists, Protestants) succeeded in passing the first law separating Church and State. This was a revolution at the time, and it has since become a foundation of French society to this day. This is what we call laïcité: a secular state that neither recognizes nor funds any religion. The idea is that all public places, as well as all individuals working for the State, must remain neutral and cannot display any religious affiliation. As for society, it remains free: free to believe or not, free to practice a religion, etc. This concept of laïcité is upheld nearly at the same level as the national motto (Liberty, Equality, Fraternity) and has its roots in Enlightenment philosophy, which rejected any form of domination that would infantilize the people. Laïcité is therefore founded on the principles of culture, freedom, and critical thinking. In 2004, a new law prohibited the wearing of religious symbols or clothing by students, in keeping with the idea that school is a place of knowledge, meant to foster critical thinking, and should be free from any ideological or religious domination. The goal is to create enlightened citizens, not against religions, but open to the world. This notion of enlightened citizens, capable of critical thinking through education and the State, is often challenged by orthodox or extremist religious currents and is not well understood globally, as it is a historical French specificity that stems from centuries of ideological and financial domination by religion over the State.

@Kaxuria 4 часа назад

9:15 Yeah, every state-representing institutions can't display any form of religious symbolism/imagery/discourse.

@LetsChillPage День назад

Hi from South France, McJibbin, 🌴🌞 Well, we must be clear, this video is caricatural and multiplicate the shortcuts. No, Marie-Antoinette didn't ask why they don't eat brioche ? It's a urban legend destinated to break her image. But what she did was worst. She multiplied orders for overpriced dresses and jewelry, lost colossal fortunes gambling every night, always digging a little deeper into the ongoing financial disaster. In short, she behaved like an idiot while peasant women saw their newborns and children die of hunger before their eyes. It is indeed important to know it was women who started the very first revolts leading to the revolution. 2:23 You're right, It's unlikely that the revolution of 1789 would have taken place if France hadn't helped America to free itself from the English yoke. Two primary factors triggered this revolution. The first, the two exceptionally harsh winters of 88 and 89 led to almost zero harvests and grain stocks were emptied. The second, the financial aid, military personnel, and equipment chartered by ship to America was considerable and therefore extremely expensive. The empty coffers had to be filled to cover this abysmal deficit. Louis XVI, known for his indecision, successively appointed two finance ministers with diametrically opposed visions to work out the right method to recover funds. The first suggested that faced with the anger of the starving people, children were dying of hunger by the thousands, it was time for the nobles to finally participate in the effort to straighten out the finances and they be taxed like the others (the end of privileges). "Les Lumières (the Enlightenment, 17th century French philosophers)" had begun to penetrate the noble classes of the backyards of Versailles, enlightening some of them (including Lafayette) on the need to recognize the equality of men and to accept the universalism of the human being. The other, however, didn't see it that way, he advocated increasing existing taxes, and above all, inventing new ones. The nobles had to keep their privilege because they were the ones who defended the country when it was at war. And war, in France at that time, almost never stopped. Faced with a catastrophic political and financial situation, Louis XVI was forced to convene the Estates General (May 4 and 5, 89). An assembly of the three orders - clergy, nobility and third estate - who alone could decide to raise new taxes and initiate the reform of the country. It's the second that wins the case and leads to the king's response to the representatives of the third estate who are scandalized by such a decision. The latter then decide to create a constituent assembly by doing without the clergy and the nobility, were the people would become sovereign, finally. We then know where all this will lead...July 14, 1789, storming of the Bastille. Peace, folks. ☮👈😎

@tylersdog День назад

So much for accuracy: the guy in the video lost me the second he started to talk about Marie Antoinette and her 'let them eat cake". Didn't happen, so why bother to believe him?

@KebradesBois День назад

Religious proselytism is forbidden in France, the fine can go from 10.000€ assorted of one year in jail up to 20.000€ and 2 years in jail if perpetrated in public... that is the law; now, it being applied is another question. Religion is considered a personal matter and expected to be treated as such. For example, you could, technically, sue Jehovah's Witnesses/Watchtower for trying to sell you their crap, but I've never heard of that ever happening.

@estranhokonsta День назад

You cannot sue someone because he is an evangelist of its religion and tries to sell you some religious bibelog. A laic state is about the governement that cannot promote any sort of religion. The individual is free to do as he whish as long as he respect the freedom of others in the constraints of the current law.

@bigmikem1578 15 часов назад

Jean-Paul Marat was the guy in the bathtub

@marieadriansen2925 День назад

Talking about the French Revolution is complicated because I'm not a historian. The excesses of the revolution were at first committed by the people, but soon it was the revolutionary courts that made the decisions, it was no longer the people. I think that when they saw foreign monarchies waging war to put the French monarchy back in place and give back privileges to the aristocrats, people got scared and executed the king and some aristocrats who were in danger of fighting. Personally, I obviously regret all the excesses. The monarchy has not been sufficiently aware of all the problems and has not been able to make the right decisions. The French Revolution influenced other countries and pushed them to evolve. I don't quite agree with you Connor. I think that even if nothing is perfect, French society is free and egalitarian. School and public university are free. The health system is universal, every French citizen benefits from it regardless of his or her income, etc

@StekTM1 День назад

The french revolution is the best thing France gave to the world

@antoinegulbol6171 День назад

yeah, the french revolution was trying to end inequalities, yet they've never been stronger than today, it's just that the standard of living as dramatically increased so most people in the west are not dirt poor, but maybe that should tell you something about what we need...

@maxxie84 6 часов назад

After watching the whole thing, great video, I like your insights, and I agree that there is always a power vacuum after a revolution, leading to another power to raise and fighting amongst those who want it, so yes human nature is ultimately the reason why no system will ever be perfect. In the end, the concept of freedom is also something philosophers theorised that ultimate freedom is not something that anyone really wants, once they understand the consequences of it are to everyone being free to do anything to anyone else. This would be the closest to wildlife, but then again us humans only go as far as we did in the wilderness thanks to our social abilities. It's just a question of who we allow to get into a position of power. Education and safeguards are the only ways to ensure prosperity. As well as acceptance of others and their way of life, and respect of your peers. Sadly we will never reach a point where the entire world all at once reaches that understanding.

@micade2518 День назад

In France, in 1905 a law was voted to strictly separate the Church from the State. Freedom of religion is perfectly respected for every citizen, but in their private sphere. We couldn't even tell what religion the President or any elected member of the government is ... and we don't care as that belongs to their private life! Unlike in the USA where, even on $ bills, "In God we trust" is printed, which I find profoundly indecent, or in every political speech, the word "god" is mentioned dozens of times.

@CobraChicken101 День назад

The French revolution would have happened anyway but maybe later. 1. France wasnt the only place in europe where the common folk were deeply unsatisfied with the way society was run. For example, In 1789-90 north of france there was the revolution of Brabant (or 1st belgian revolution ) against austrians. Just sayint things were brewing and would have spilled over anyway. 2. Not the US , or even France were the 1st republic, it had been done, succesfully before by for example the Dutch.

@markmuller7962 18 часов назад

For that type of totally egalitarian free society we need to wait for an utopian type of Post Scarcity Era that is supposed to happen with tecnology and AI (kinda like Star Trek)

@pscm9447 День назад

What you're referring to is a classic political science polarization between "idealism" and "realism". One try to act upon the world to make it as he wants it to be, and the other is trying to manage it as it actually is. It often creates misunderstanding in debates, idealists often accusing realist of lacking humanity and hope, and realists accusing the idealists of lacking... realism lol. You get the point. The French Revolution was a crazy explosion of idealism, it had to reach its "thermidor" at some point, and a big dose of realism under Napoleon (which might sound pretty ironic, but show how far gone the revolutionaries were...)

@charlotteinfj4412 День назад

French here, true. We have freedom FROM religion as well as freedom of religion. You have the right to worship, but the rest of us are free to say religion is a social construct and be free of it. I dare to say our liberties in that matter are more advanced than the US. "In God we trust" will not fly here, as well as prayer in schools, swear on a bible or religious statement in court's walls for example. You can sue and be sued for this because it will infringe on the rights of the people who don't believe in this pie in the sky. The spirit of the french revolution is enlightement and to be free of gods and kings. Blasphemy doesn't exist in the law. You are equaly right to say XXX is your God as well as saying there is no God. You can mock and caricature the President as well as religion. And it is believed to be a sign of an healthy society. You can't force religion on children in school. They should be free to choose as adults. Of course certain religious people are mad about it and want it to be revered, "worship" by everyone. Hence why France was and is still targeted by islam+st's terror+sts. Liberty equality fraternity : nothing is sacred in the sense that we are all equal. You have to understand the King was the representant of God on earth ; free press and especially caricature put them down, and gave us a free democraty. It's not understand in the US, and I have seen France being painted as anti religion or anti islamist whereas it's a multipot of religion, atheism and multicultural. And it's only possible because we have a very big separation of Church and State. That's freedom y'all.

@MartinJames389 День назад

Yes, the French Revolution was incipient regardless of anything which had happened in the British colonies in America. Whoa ... there's a lot more to come before Napoleon appears. You jumped way ahead there.

@gutzberzerk7925 Час назад

You don't know who relevant yours conclusion was for the french revolution. The bourgeois who are rich (most marchant or skillful artisan) and leads the third estate what they want. They want to became a new estate or even better be anabolize for became aristocrat for some they are even more powerful than sommes but don't have the same rights. Because they are glue with peasant and poor they will lead them for a better for them. That why in the rights of men is more about to own and inerrant a propriety than freedom.

@the16shirtbenyo97 День назад

The main difference between the French Revolution and all the others, is that the changes stuck. In every other case they just swapped one autocrat for another autocratic system..

@tubekulose Час назад

16:24 Jean Paul Marat? 🙂

@FabriceLEQUEUX День назад

c est tres bien

@ganikus8565 День назад

The revolution part was quite cut out in this video though its important to understand, the 1789 revolution was not about destroying monarchy, nor killing the king. They forced him to live in Paris to see how life was difficult there. Peasants life was much better, they lived far away and cultivated thier food. Parisian and major cities, due to various situations didn't receive the food, veggies and flour from the peasants so they starved. A kilo of bread in Paris would be equivalent of today 60 dollars. So they wanted the king to be close to their life and solve their problem. To prove it, the 14 July 1790 , for the first anniversary of the revolution, Louis XVI offered a festivity, called the federation day, that's what we celebrate the 14 July national day in France. Leftist media recently make it become the celebration of the revolution and the bastille day. But actually, originally the national day celebrate the 14 July 1790 when the King offered a parade with his army in Paris in front of 100 000 Parisian who had a free food, music etc etc This day was for the Parisian and the King, the symbol of reunification.

@jamespatagueule4599 День назад

25:30 not for Lavoisier...

@xVinyCole День назад

11:28 No we are too dumb. I know I could develop my point but we know, you know what I mean. Edit : And selfish

@louispedretti9592 День назад

The worst thing that happened to us ! Vive le Roy !

@Tyu-f1s День назад

A bas la republique !

@paulozavala3232 День назад

It is correct that freedom of religion also means freedom to be free from religion. You have to remember that King and Church where in many ways equal in powers! The church had immense power over the people and almost never in a positive way! So to be free from religion holds the same meaning as to say free from oppression!

@markmuller7962 18 часов назад

People were so nasty in general in the past jeez

@melaniezette886 День назад

🇨🇵🖐

@choconoisette9737 Час назад

"Human Nature". That's a nonsense

@NormandieDiexAie День назад

FCK THE REVOLUTION, GLORY TO GOD AND LONG LIVE THE KING ✝️⚜️⚜️⚜️

@the16shirtbenyo97 День назад

Cosplaying being poor. Spot on. Lots of Toffs still do that.

@williambranch4283 День назад

Oo la la ... sudden mic cut out ;-( Hindsight is a bitch.

@Tyu-f1s День назад

L'evenement le plus immonde de l'histoire entiere de l'humanité !

@pracharm5094 19 часов назад

French Revolution would have happened even if USA revolutionary movement didn’t take place. I think this because USA revolutionary movement was led against British colonialism while French Revolution was a country inner struggle of French citizens fight against royalist state to become a republic( we can hardly call what happened in USA a revolution it’s just a movement of independence against a invader Brit’s). USA should stop thinking that every important thing happened to any country in Europe was purely influenced by them😂🤣💩.Present USA is a country created by invading nations of Europeans and European mass immigrants stolen from the poor native Americans so it’s Europe who always influenced USA not the other way around 😂. And Marie Antoinette saying that was a pure myth that is called a journalist cliché don’t know why the video maker didn’t do his homework. France is a secular nation where 51% of the people identify themselves without a religion( me included 😂🤣😇).