THERE were two “Reigns of Terror,” if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the “horrors” of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror—that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves.
She was a Hapsburg trained from birth to maintain and expand Hapsburg domination of Europe. She knew what she was doing.
Yeah, sending a child to be married to the French king is shit, and she had a bad time in her early years, and there were misogynist lies spread about her (mostly by the aristocracy of opposing factions.
None of that changes the fact she was executed for treason against the French republic, not for spending a bunch of money. And she was undoubtedly guilty of that, as her own letters show her conspiring with Austria and Prussia to return absolute monarchy by force.
EDIT: Also, she was acquitted of the charge of incest, a fact Natalie gently omits.
So, during Marie's trial, her son was under guard by supporters of Hebert, a radical to Robespierre's left who was a key leader of the Sans-Culottes. He coached the kid to accuse the Queen of having engaged in incest. Natalie uses it as an example of how the envy of the French public enabled terrible libels against the Queen and argues she "Did nothing wrong" and that only the expedience of removing the royal family could be considered a reason for execution (if so, how come they protected and cared for the Prince?)
What she doesn't mention is that The Queen appealed to the women of the gallery rather than answer the charge, and their enraged response to the clearly spurious accusation convinced the court to drop the line of questioning immediately. But of course, the fact the women of the lower classes could show compassion to her while also seeing her as a traitor to the French People would dismantle Natalie's argument.
What I don't get is why she'd use that example rather than literally a thousand other libels dragged up by the gutter press.
I feel like a lot of drama could be avoided if breadtubers would be at least somewhat honest. Like Contra admits she doesn't actually believe that a restructuring of the classes is possible. She jokes at the start with the "am I rich" thing, but like, yeah, she lives in one of the wealthiest areas on the planet, comes from a wealthy family and pulls in more money each month than most working class families do in a year.
So the stuff like her sympathizing more with Marie Antoinette than the peasants makes a lot of sense, but all this crap is wrapped in so much faux radicalism and psychoanalysis it throws people for a loop.
Like Contra admits she doesn’t actually believe that a restructuring of the classes is possible.
what does she mean by that?
She rejects the idea that there could be a revolutionary change that upends the existing ruling class and instead thinks the best that can be done is incremental reforms. aka she's a pretty bog standard liberal.
Yeah, when she said turning people from fascists to leftists is an improvement but still not good, I lost all respect I ever had for her. That's a pretty horrifying statement to make.
Because she can imagine herself in the shoes of a monarch who just sold all of France to be massacred by her class/people Austria, than she can to say the Sans-Culottes and their ilk.
Also yeah Herbetists are awesome
I dunno, grooming a kid to accuse his mother of incest to score a political point that doesn't even need to be scored is a bit cringe.
Robespierre shouldn't have merced him, but other leaders of the radical sections to Robbies left had consistently better takes and were less addicted to stochastic violence.
They all allowed for that though. The violence doesn't detract from the Hebertists for me. they existed to light a fire under the ass of everyone else with the understanding of what the Sans-Culottes would do if betrayed or ignored
She really was the original Anastasia. People LOVE to feel bad for her, but wont ever pay mind to the peasant unless you mention their suffering
