My Essay on The French Revolution

A while back in college in my history course we had an final essay where we had to fictionally portray ourselves as a person who lived during the times of The French Revolution and to pick which side of history you were on.

Naturally, and perhaps out of a hidden predisposition I picked the side of the non-revolutionaries. Even before I claimed to be a reactionary I always had the embers of one inside of me before it was kindled, and this essay wasn’t even my final form!

Metternich, friend of the fictional Friedrich Von Maxim
Metternich, friend of the fictional Friedrich Von Maxim

—————————————–

Daring Danny

Prince Friedrich Von Maxim

February 25th, 1794

Austria

On the Unscrupulously Trite Outbursts of the Tiers Etat

Such blasphemy of the highest order! I was moved with the great passion to strike upon my servant off the sole basis of looking upon yet another ridiculous piece of tripe from the “French Revolution.” Robespierre is nothing more than a butcher disguised as a quasi-intellectual by wearing the skin of the people as a disguise. I do not wish to digress upon it now upon the exposition of my transcript, but I shall digress upon it very soon. The sheepish herd of the plebeians should do themselves a great service by reading upon Edmund Burke’s work three years prior to the work written now, to see the folly of their ignorance. The uneducated third estate, the masses whom are only skilled in the trades in which they toil, should have want of a higher education and association of the social framework of man and not degradate into a mindless amalgamation of the mob mentality. I cannot bequeath all my knowledge and wisdom which is the righteous privilege of my birthright onto a person whose higher thinking is dominated by their simple minded locomotion which has guided their entire lives, but as I am benevolent and understanding, I shall explain what I can in a minute span of time. I shall state the basic foundations on why the infrastructure of the “Revolution” is built upon a fragile basis, and is not in accordance of the traditional European way, which has efficiently mandated the locomotion of our people for generations. First, it presupposes that the commoners and quasi-intellectuals can remake an entire political and social system and completely nullify the aristocracy whose entire essence is to serve the commoners and maintain order. Secondly, I shall speak of the ambitions and character of those who want to overthrow the traditional order and lastly the insidious and subversive effects it shall reign upon all people in the ensuing centuries after we have withered.

The influx of pseudo-philosophers and charlatan intellectuals are as equally matched in their quackery and blinding sophism as they are in their arrogance. These men believe that mere mortal beings known as humans can be responsible for the casting of judgment for their own ethics, their own morality, and trade the immortal teachings of the divine and incomprehensible, and lower it to the level of the ever-so fallible and irrational man. This audacious secularism believes itself to be capable of dictating what is right and wrong, and lowers the standard of abstract metaphysics to physical, imaginable form which will degrade to the level of man. This in itself is a form of control in which the commoners are so ardent in reprimanding, as who is to dictate how others are to think and determine what is proper way of persisting? The most “exalted” of these momentary whimsical ideological poisons which has already seeped into the minds of the people is The Social Contract, which is the epitome of mediocrity and is contradictory and enervated on its own fundamental base has been the apotheosis of the “oppressed” and is the voice of the philistine masses. The contract seeks to unite man under obligation, which is forced social pressure that no man wishes to endure. Man has the rights which his predecessors have bestowed upon him, ideals which are everlasting, glory which flows through his veins from the past. A righteous and most benevolent monarch, who rules like the others before him, who is constrained by the glories and power of his father, should set the precedent of what is strong, what is the most ideal representation of man, and his vision should be enacted by all in the nation. Why concede the values to that of the collective, the common, the mob, and have those who are born to the few, the aristocracy be lowered that to their level? This is not setting value by example, but by moderation. Man’s nature is immutable, as stated by my fellow prince, and the traditional systems in which have been set must be preserved, in which the revolution plans to warp and recreate in their own perverted image.

All over Europe I hear the shouts of the people and the hushed whispers of the aristocracy on democracy, on the equality of man, and the repudiation of the feudal system and the ancient regime. People on the streets of France rioting, pillaging, and raping on their own home soil which is poorly cloaked in the façade of “liberation” and uprising against their proclaimed oppressors. The most notable figurehead of this movement is Maximilien de Robespierre, whom is both de facto tyrant and slave. A skilled orator, he is the prime example of the tyranny of democracy, he speaks for the mob which is mute due to the irrational rage they have against the higher estates, and the individualism that they so long for is gone as they transgress into a uniform tide of anger and false indignation. Like a court jester, he is a slave as his position is ever-so precarious, and must constantly feed upon the mob with hungers for the heads of their enemies, as they must be sated, and I assure all that his head will soon be parted from his shoulders. There have been those in the upper echelons of the social order whom are sympathetic to the commoners, who think that they are justified in the atrocities that they commit in the name of revolution. Much folly to the ignorant who judge all things by what is explicitly said and shown. It is nothing more than a forefront, an excuse for the ungrateful and the pugnacious to lash out on the benefactors which are hated merely for the position that they occupy, who are ignorant to the social order which has been established since the dawn of time, to reverse the order and take reign, without proper education nor inheritance from their forefathers, who will dash all the successes and greatness of the past. The people forget the previous posterity, the knowledge accumulated by those before, and for what? Temporal glory which only their pathetic, wretched, corporal bodies and senses can feel at the present moment, with no regard to those who came before, and soon after.

For evidence look no further than to the comically ridiculous farce that the Tiers Etat, or Third Estate attempted to rectify at the National Assembly. There were barely any men of high social stature, and they were overshadowed by the masses of the illiterate and the common, and therefore were mongrelized by their watered-down intellect and became subservient to their will. The composition of the assembly was not made of those who are at the apex of their field, but the grunts and auxiliaries, the tools rather than the head. Such undaunted ignorance borne of unfounded righteousness which suddenly sprung forth in their minds in the ensuing chaos, and a mind which has been never developed under the tutelage of the inherited nobles, and shall never reach fruition. A prince whom was raised to lead and instruct cannot be expected to have the dexterity and craft of a tradesman, yet these commoners believe themselves competent enough to dictate the course of a nation! These fools do not wish to improve constitutions and find rational solutions to the social order, but to reap all they can and find ways to spite those whom once instructed them. These chest less plebeians do not even respect their own social standing nor their trade, how are they expected to respect the wishes of others?   

Perhaps the greatest of problems and one that future monarchs will be in great pain to ameliorate is how to return things back to the status quo, after the Pandora’s Box of false progressive ills have already afflicted all whom have the senses to hear. How the compromise between monarch, clergy, and the people have been amalgamated into a mingling into senseless and redundant obscurity. The nature and will of man is hierarchical, and all these blithe and false delusions of an egalitarian utopia in which all people are equal and are capable of soaring to equal heights inhibits those to work in their natural faculty. I point in reference to Britain, which operates upon meritocracy, and all the pieces fall into place as it converges with inheritance, the rulers end up ruling, and the commoners stay common. The wanting of the third estate to be equal to that of the rulers is a vengeful fantasy in which those who are meant to be ruled can will great impulse and reckless abandon, destroy those who rule and profligate their selfish desires and wants. Look to the texts and knowledgeable intellectuals of the past, of the natural hierarchical systems, and of the glories of the past, and abandon these temporal trends which never shall materialize. With our institutions and advancing mechanisms of living, more rapidly developing progressive ideologies will be fabricated but all should be taught of the static in malleability of man.  

  • Haha, you had the fire in you even then! I thoroughly enjoyed reading this. I bet it triggered the professor something fierce.

    Just to let you know, I have finally moved to WordPress. You can now find my blog at:

    http://citadelfoundations.wordpress.com

    • thanks! actually, the professor was so impressed that he is now using my essay as an example for all his future students. We even hung out afterwards and i introduced him to evola.

      • Introducing a professor to Evola must have been an experience.

        • he called it a goldmine, he was very interested in a different perspective on the war and on the state of the west.

  • Lue-Yee Tsang

    As a nonreactionary supporter of true tradition, I think I will not let this go unanswered.