How is it the crushing of the counter-revolution in the Vendée always gets overlooked in this context? Some authors suggest it was actually a genocide, as the revolutionary government aimed to destroy traditionally monarchist parts of the population.
Sorry for chiming in, but it's always been a curious subject to me how we tend to glorify the French revolution and Napoleon as well.
Of all of the repression against counter-revolutionaries, be the genuine like the Chouans for the fidelity to the King or other groups under dubious reasons, Vendée received the most brutal and bloody one.
A parallel could be drawn with the scorched earths conducted by the British during the Revolutionary war in the Americas, and later during the Secession war, but these are peanuts compared to what took place in Vendée. I don't think "genocide" is the proper term, but that was pretty close to one, yes.
It is mentioned, but quickly, and usually the underlying tone is "well, they deserved it since they supported the King", "they were on the wrong side", etc... The gravity of the violence and exaction carried against the Chouans are overlooked as well, giving the whole thing a very sanitized aspect of one group fighting against another, and that one group lost. Pretty much how some famous Historical battle would be summarized.
But going into the details would imply tackling truly gruesome topics. And we don't want that, because that would be controversial.
As for the glorification thing, I think it is rather a mix of ignorance and romanticism, itself based on ignorance.
The mere premise of the Revolution, as told by those cheering up for it, is based on a falsehood. It wasn't "the people" who rose against the monarchy; but the bourgeoisie that used the people in order to "usurp" the power. It is more complex, though not necessarily complicated, than what is left to be believed.
And the Revolution wasn't just about beheading the King, the Queen and a few other "wrongdoers", as demonstrated by the fact people to be clueless about "The Reign of Terror".
Despite all of the Revolutions, or most of them at least, following the French model: popular uprising (which usually isn't one originally), toppling down of the ruling class, execution of said ruling class, extension to their sympathizers and whoever is deemed one, and then extension to those hosting "counter-revolutionary thoughts".
So yeah, everybody talking Revolution S**t until it's time to do Revolution S**t, without realizing they will be among the first to take part in the purges (as the ones being purged).
Napoléon however... it's a bit different.
I suppose one could argue the bloody purges got replaced by years of wars, however from a permanent cultural impact Napoléon made more lasting things for France than the Révolution.
Another aspect of the Révolution which isn't mentioned often, if ever, is the systematic destruction of sepultures, religious and cultural objects and edifices, lots of which predated the Révolution by centuries. If you visit museums, churches and castles in France you will see countless mentions of "destroyed during the Révolution".
www.breitbart.com
www.telegraph.co.uk
