This is a bit off.
1848 was when a lot of communist inspired revolutions took hold and gave us the world we have today.
A good point but somewhat an overstatement. Socialist (not communist) elements were viewed as anti-oligarch and anti-monarchal but the anarchist ingredient was there as well. In response to this movement, in a big hurry, Marx and Engles wrote their flawed formula as to how socialism count be paid for — communism.
All in all the idea of re-examining many of the events around 1848 is a good idea. Here in the US our high school history ignores it.
Maybe. My impression was that the movements were primarily nationalist groups trying to get out from under the thumb of the empires, primarily Prussian and Austro-Hungarian; the Marxists saw the crisis as a terrible thing to waste, and attempted to glom on to the various revolutions, sometimes with success and sometimes not. The Franco-Prussian War 20 years later let enough steam out of the pressure cooker, but it eventually burst open with WWI, and that is when nationalism gets subsumed by socialism, first in Russia, then in Germany, then pretty much everywhere else in Europe.
It’s like 1848 in that people in various countries revolted against their elites. Doesn’t matter that the elites are different today.
Yeah, agree. But you can’t disagree with the number of upheavals/populist movements against the elites going on right now. That is a good sign.
It always scares me to remember mau, Mussolini, Hitler all came to power within a generation of each other.
That couldn’t happen organically.
A series of black swan events. These are unpredicted and apparently unrelated events that seem to occur spontaneously and have disproportionate effect on the balance of order, from local effects to worldwide.
Going from one extreme to the other.