Posted on 07/14/2024 8:13:54 PM PDT by CondoleezzaProtege
Thomas Jefferson, as the American Minister to the Court of Versailles, witnessed the opening chapters of the French Revolution in the late 1780s. In September 1789, he returned to the United States, but, assuming the position of Secretary of State, he continued his involvement in American foreign policy. The French Revolution, continuing into the 1790s, would have an ongoing effect on Jefferson's career.
When French revolutionaries violently stormed the "Bastille" in mid-July, Jefferson was taken aback by the "astonishing train of events."[7] By August, however, he was ready to defend the actions of the mob...He was certain too that the French National Assembly had proceeded through adversity with "firmness and wisdom," and he maintained "the highest confidence" in the Assembly's ability to govern.[8] Just as the revolutionaries were becoming more radical, Jefferson was becoming more radical as well.
Jefferson returned to the United States when American support for the French Revolution seemed nearly unanimous. John Adams, the Vice President and one of Jefferson's good friends, was an exception and voiced early concerns with the progress of events in France....
When the execution of French aristocrats escalated in 1792, Jefferson remained committed to the cause of revolution: "My own affections have been deeply wounded by some of the martyrs to this cause, but rather than it should have failed, I would have seen half the earth desolated. Were there but an Adam and an Eve left in every country, and left free, it would be better than as it now is."[13]
With the execution of Louis XVI in January 1793, and the French declaration of war against England ten days later, American politicians began openly to split into two camps — Federalists, who were horrified by the violence in France, and Republicans, who applauded the end of a despotic French monarchy.
(Excerpt) Read more at monticello.org ...
Bookmark
Adams was right.
Please explain.
Were it not for the French blockade and defeat of the British Fleet, Washington would not have cornered and then defeated Cornwallis at Yorktown.
Washington’s success over Cornwallis was the direct and strong result of “a foreign entanglement”
Were it not for the French blockade and defeat of the British Fleet, Washington would not have cornered and then defeated Cornwallis at Yorktown.
Washington’s success over Cornwallis was the direct and strong result of “a foreign entanglement”
Honestly, if it were me in Jefferson’s position and I saw the Bastille parade back then, I if anything would state that this was NOT what America fought for, and even go so far as to specifically cite John Adam’s handling of the Brits during the Boston Massacre as what the American Minutemen did. I’d outright denounce it as mob rule, and advocate for a far better way to do reforms.
I would NEVER support the Revolution precisely BECAUSE I’d realize from that it was pure garbage from the get-go from seeing severed body parts being paraded around.
You have to wonder whether the Colonials would have prevailed at all without the French alliance. At the very least it would have been a longer, bloodier affair.
And in large part we have George Washington himself to thank for that alliance, because his screw-up while serving as a Colonial officer to the British Army in the Ohio Valley in 1754 was the spark that began the French & Indian War, in the aftermath of which the French had reason to want to see the secession of the Colonial Americans succeed.
It is my understanding that the USA was founded on a more decidedly Christian (namely Protestant, especially at the time) social and spiritual foundation. With the slavery then racism questions being inherent thorns that required Christian-motivated abolition and activism.
But the French Revolution was fundamentally an atheistic enterprise, not just anti-Church, but anti-GOD Himself - and that the spirits at work laid the groundwork for unleashing the Marxism and Nazism of the 20th Century.
https://unherd.com/2020/09/how-the-french-revolution-caused-nazism/
A good contrast is given in Chapter Four of The Constitution of Liberty by Hayek. He contrasts the French Enlightenment with the English/Scottish Enlightenment and show how Faith is necessary
Pretty much. Though I’d argue the most damaging influencer of the French Revolution wasn’t Rousseau, but Voltaire. Let’s not forget that most of the stuff the French Revolution pushed was pushed by Voltaire (and unlike with Rousseau who was delusional, Voltaire knew FULL well he was spreading lies and did so deliberately all because he couldn’t stand the fact that God was smarter than him at all).
To be fair, English/Scottish Enlightenment was also what brought us David Hume and... well, let’s just say that did incalculable damage to faith and even reason at times. So I’m not entirely sure the English/Scottish Enlightenment really differed in that regard. And that’s not getting into how Tom Paine was originally English and a firm adherer to the Enlightenment and was the biggest cheerleader of the French Revolution and its ideals short of Jefferson.
Another great analysis of the whole strand of the enlightenment thinking is the book regarding these by Gertrude Himmelfarb. She sees not two but three strands: American, English/Scottish and then the French with each have their own unique characteristics.
The Roads to Modernity: The British, French, and American Enlightenments
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.