Toujours l'audace!

U.S. News ^ | 02/18/2002 | Michael Barone

[Grut]

French military philosophy results in French military successes; their last victory was the Battle of Maubeuge in 1814.

[alcuin]

Good post.

As usual.

[LoisHunt]

The Russian peasants were at the point of a gun under their nobles, constantly. They were slaves. Horrible things like cannibalism happened in Russia when conditions were really bad. Meanwhile, all of the noble families would each keep many houses in states of constant readiness for their turning up to live there, fires burning, larders full, fully staffed with domestic servants. It was an enormous drain on productivity in Russia. Crippling Communism came on top of crippling serfdom.

Also, under Napoleon, the Russians would have had the rule of law, the Napoleonic code being unquestionably more just than what was practiced as law in Russia which was slavery for the peansants.

[SubMareener]

Most of the reaction to George W. Bush's audacious State of the Union message has focused on his virtual declaration of war against the "axis of terror"–North Korea, Iran, and Iraq. And rightly so.

Of course, President Bush spoke of the "axis of evil", so Michael Barone can't even get the premise correct, let alone the conclusion!

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

What an interesting viewpoint you have. Presumably, then, since the Russian Tzar's emancipation of the serfs preceeded America's emancipation of her slaves you believe we could have done with a bit of Napoleonic freedom from the barrel of a gun? Line a few thousand of us Americans up against a wall. A whiff of grapeshot and--poof--freedom and right-thinking takes root in the hearts and minds of the survivors.

It's true. Irony is dead. I mourn it's passing....

[q_an_a]

You frogs are an interesting group. You killed thousands of your own and built an internal spy network that made Hitler's work easy. You have failed to get your unemployment under control AND the Algerians still HATE you.

Your record of military effectiveness can be shown once... Napolean and then nothing. After world war II you have been running and hiding. If not for your historical buildings and art, you would have a 25% unemployment and a military that could not beat a south Los Angeles street gang.

On top of this you have the nerve to suggest that you have a better way of doing everything. If the whole world had your health care system more people would die of disease than of war.

q_an_a The retail republican

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

Father, forgive him, for he knows not what he does--nor what has been done by others, nor from whence he comes, nor which way is up, nor any other little thing.

On second thought, Father......

[Goetz_von_Berlichingen]

Does your view of Russian history under Tsarist rule come exclusively from Communist propaganda, or do you have independent verification? If Russians were in such misery under the old system, how can you explain the fact that there is NO mention of ANY Russian collaboration with the invading French army in 1812. Contrast that to WW II. The Germans were welcomed with open arms when they first arrived, and could have easily assembled several army corps of disaffected Russians, had the Wehrmacht not been hamstrung by Hitler's idiotic racial policies.

I recall reading recently, perhaps in one of Peter Drucker's books, that the economic position of Russia in 1913 was comparable to America's at the same time. Unfortunately, Soviet Agitprop has been functioning effectively in the U.S. for many decades. Even among conservatives.

[LoisHunt]

Maybe the slaves would have been better off? I don't know and not really appropriate for comparison. The Russian peasants could not have been worse off than they were under the Russian nobility. Like slavery and organized crime, the system was run on the fear and threat of physical violence reinforced by actual violence up to and including murder.

[LoisHunt]

Yours is the first commentary I've ever read that the Russian peasants were happy campers.

[Goetz_von_Berlichingen]

"Happy" is not an appropriate word, if used in the modern American sense of frivolous consumerism and mindless debauchery. But, yes, I am willing to go so far as to say that the Russian commons were happy in their Faith and in their traditions. Life was uncomfortable for them, just as life was uncomfortable for everybody -- and still is in most of the world.

But to portray the Russian peasantry as living in a life of incessant horror and violence is simply not borne out by their conduct with respect to the forces of so-called enlightenment as embodied in the Grande Armée. Were the Russians as downtrodden and miserable as you (and the Soviet historians) suggest, then why was there no massive insurrection on behalf of Mr. Buonaparte? Why, in fact, did volunteer organisations spring up to fight the French?

Your view of Russia prior to Communism has been clearly influenced by Soviet Agitprop. I suggest you go read some Solzhenitsyn. Or Tolstoy.

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

"...Like slavery and organized crime, the system was run on the fear and threat of physical violence reinforced by actual violence up to and including murder....

Actually, this is demonstrably untrue. (Although any long-lasting system can be so characterized by interestedparties. Observe the treament our Founding Fathers are getting on campus.) However, Lenin's urban/proletarian vanguard believed it to be true and they went out into the countryside to raise the consciousness of the former serfs and peasants of just how horrible the system had been.

They returned a while later to the safe confines of the city--worn down by the stubborness of the rural hayseeds; their block-headed refusal to abandon their ways. Lenin, being an eminently practical progressive, determined that the "Forces of History" required these bumpkins to be gotten out of the way. And they were.

Something the nasty Tsarist system never managed to figure out how to do. It just wasn't progressive enough--as you point out......

[Publius6961]

The dots; again, the dots; connect the dots.....
Barone is confindent that nobody in America can connect the dots.

It is certainly hoped that should any American accidentally stumble into this obscure "wisdom", that they have the wisdom and experience to give due attention to the context of the difference in time and level of world conditions in terms of travel, technology, communications.
Context is the great illuminator.

[LoisHunt]

Soviet Agitprop??????

Dear Lord. No. Just common sense that Russia was a miserable country for those peasants.

The hope is that our war will make a better life for the Afghans. We're freeing them from oppressive rulers but we had to go to war and drop bombs and kill civilians by accident to do it. But we're not doing it for their interests. The Afghan peasants didn't revolt against the Taliban or join us in fighting the Taliban except when given money to do so. But if we stay there too long, they'll mobilize to drive us out.

[LoisHunt]

I don't think its debatable that the peasantry lived lives of misery. I don't think Napoleon was a sweetheart trying to help the Russian peasants/serfs.

But they likely would have been better off if he'd succeeded, "conquered," Russia and united Russia with the rest of Europe. Then the Russians would have overthrown French rule. Ideas of Revolution made their way to Russia throughout the 19th century.

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

"... It is certainly hoped that should any American accidentally stumble into this obscure "wisdom", that they have the wisdom and experience to give due attention to the context of the difference in time and level of world conditions in terms of travel, technology, communications. Context is the great illuminator...."

Well, whadyaknow? We agree upon something. Context.

And given the difference in time and level of world conditions in terms of travel, technology, communications combined with the spooky similarites in the tidepools of history--which will outlast planes, toys and amplifiers--I am correct to be apalled by the dangerous delight in loose, lazy historical citations. They know not what they do because they know not what was done. (or, more horrifying--they approve of what was done)

And probably they care not. They're rolling, you know........