I mean in America but also possibly worldwide with all the bullshit lately

    • GladiusB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Probably because guillotines are still recent history. As soon as the poor realize there are more of us than there are of them and DO something about it, we win.

  • NateNate60@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I don’t think so.

    For one, the revolutionary sentiment isn’t nearly as widespread as it was in 18th century France. Yes, it’s true that many people are discontent with the current economic and political situation but the difference is that 250 years ago, the only outlet for discontent available to common people was to revolt, whereas in the United States and other Western democracies, a second option exists: the democratic political institutions. What this really means is that the right of suffrage and of elections has really sucked a lot of the will to revolt from the populace; it’s easier to get what you want by participating in the democratic process than by revolting, or at least that’s what a lot of people think.

    In order for a revolution to start, you need to hit a critical mass of angry people motivated enough to risk everything to overthrow the system. The presence of democratic institutions like elections and referendums changes the maths and it makes it harder to convince people that they need to revolt in order to get what they want. In turn, it tends to mean that well-established democracies really aren’t prone to violent revolutions from the bottom of the sort that topple totalitarian governments. Rather, the primary threat to democratic states actually comes from the top—that the people in charge will try to exceed their mandate of power and take over the government.

  • Lauchs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    8 months ago

    In that we murder a bunch of people, other folks weaponize the mob to murder specific people so as to take their stuff, eventually descending into a situation so bad that we appoint a successful general as a dictator?

    Maybe?

    • NateNate60@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Napoleon wasn’t “appointed” as dictator by any legitimate government or by the people. He overthrew the Directory and the Constitution of Year III and made himself the dictator.

  • steeznson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    French politics is always on the brink and the French public are almost always protesting. I’m not sure their revolution ever really stopped.