« Why Does Wayne Thiebaud Love Goop So Much? | Main | She Said »

January 5, 2014

TWO AND A HALF years after it began,

the revolution was widely considered a quagmire, even a disaster.
Rebels had made disappointingly little headway against the forces of the hated tyrant. The capital and the country’s second major city remained under his control. Foreign powers had provided sympathy, but very little real aid. And despite promising to respect human rights, rebel forces were committing widespread abuses, including murder, torture and destruction of property. In short, the bright hopes of an earlier spring were fading fast. Inglorious Revolutions | The National Interest

Posted by gerardvanderleun at January 5, 2014 4:41 PM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.

Your Say

So before clicking over to the article, I figured it must be a quote from chris hays or tourre.

Posted by: ck at January 5, 2014 7:21 PM

In short, it is unreasonable, even rather absurd, to expect revolutions to usher in stable representative democracies that respect human rights virtually overnight. It is condescending and cruel to scold countries for their “failure” to reproduce, within a span of a year or two, what took France, the United States and many other countries decades or even centuries to achieve.

What is actually unreasonable to assume is that people who accept none of the Judeo-Christian boundaries that form the basis of western civilization would create an American-like stable republic that respected individual liberty, personal property and God-given rights. Not if they had a thousand years.

Posted by: mushroom at January 6, 2014 8:53 AM

Of course, Mr. Bell starts with they typical educated misunderstanding of what constituted the 'American Revolution'. John Adams would set him straight:

But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations. While the king, and all in authority under him, were believed to govern in justice and mercy, according to the laws and constitution derived to them from the God of nature and transmitted to them by their ancestors, they thought themselves bound to pray for the king and queen and all the royal family, and all in authority under them, as ministers ordained of God for their good; but when they saw those powers renouncing all the principles of authority, and bent upon the destruction of all the securities of their lives, liberties, and properties, they thought it their duty to pray for the continental congress and all the thirteen State congresses, &c.

There might be, and there were others who thought less about religion and conscience, but had certain
habitual sentiments of allegiance and loyalty derived from their education; but believing allegiance and protection to be reciprocal, when protection was withdrawn, they thought allegiance was dissolved.


This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the
real American Revolution.
[italics in the original]

Letter to H. Niles - 13 Feb. 1818

By that standard, all these other revolutions are just fights over power.

Posted by: Soviet of Washington at January 6, 2014 10:58 AM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)