Tag Archives: French Revolution

Social Protest and Radical Chic

“…It’s a tricky business, integrating new politics with tried and true social motifs…” — Tom Wolfe

It would not be surprising if on Monday the “Occupy Wall Street” motif dominated costumes at many Hallowe’en parties in the fashionable world. During the French Revolution, in Parisian salons hosts and hostesses wore Phrygian caps, Marianne dresses and ribbons with the colours of the tricolor. Louis Philippe II, the Duke of Orléans, the father of the future King Louis Philippe, even supported the Revolution – “Philippe Egalité” – before he was guillotined at the age of forty-six in 1793.

From an essay by Tom Wolfe in the June 8, 1970, issue of New York Magazine:
“[The Black Panther] Robert Bay, who just 41 hours ago was arrested in an altercation with the police, supposedly over a .38-caliber revolver that someone had in a parked car in Queens at Northern Boulevard and 104th Street or some such unbelievable place, and taken to jail on a most unusual charge called ‘criminal facilitation.’

“And now he is out on bail and walking into Leonard and Felicia Bernstein’s 13-room penthouse duplex on Park Avenue. Harassment & Hassles, Guns & Pigs, Jail & Bail – they’re real, these Black Panthers. The very idea of them, these real revolutionaries, who actually put their lives on the line, runs through Lenny’s duplex like a rogue hormone. Everyone casts a glance, or stares, or tries a smile, and then sizes up the house for the somehow delicious counterpoint.…

“These are nice. Little Roquefort cheese morsels rolled in crushed nuts. Very tasty. Very subtle. It’s the way the dry sackiness of the nuts tiptoes up against the dour savor of the cheese that is so nice, so subtle. Wonder what the Black Panthers eat here on the hors d’oeuvre trail? Do the Panthers like little Roquefort cheese morsels wrapped in crushed nuts this way, and asparagus tips in mayonnaise dabs, and meatballs petites au Coq Hardi, all of which are at this very moment being offered to them on gadrooned silver platters by maids in black uniforms with hand-ironed white aprons?…”

Louis XVI and the “International Community”

In 1789, the king of France was in an enviable position when he had to deal with activists who had taken the Bastille. He was well connected, as the husband of Marie Antoinette, the daughter of the emperor of Austria who could, and did, mobilize the “international community” to stifle the dangerous activism. Unless stopped, it might actually have toppled every throne in Europe. England’s help to the crowned heads proved invaluable.

No word has, as yet, been coined to describe the current activism in North Africa and the Middle East. Whatever history will call it, it has elements of revolution. In dramatic contrast to 1789, this time the “international community” is on the side of the revolutionaries. It is no longer prepared to tolerate what until recently was a matter of course – that rulers would use force to suppress popular aspirations designed to curtail their powers. Loathsome dictators were tolerable, especially if it was profitable to deal with them, but today they are no longer tolerable if they massacre their own people. There would have been no coalition to enforce a no-fly zone if there was no general sympathy for the activists.

In 1917, the “international community” had no sympathy with activists in St. Petersburg who used force against their rulers. Their purpose was not only to take power at home but also eventually to encourage their fellow activists in other countries to do the same.

The “international community” took action. By the end of 1918 there were more than 180,000 foreign troops on Russian soil, and several White Russian armies were receiving allied money and allied guns; i.e., they intervened directly in a civil war. Churchill was strongly in favour. Canadians were heavily involved, supplying troops for the Siberian expedition and for Murmansk. There was talk of a crusade against Bolshevism.

The reason why so little of this is known today is that the intervention was as ineffectual in 1918–1920 as a similar one had been in 1789.

But this time the intervention is on the other side – on the side of the activists.

It is likely to be effective.

Source: Paris in 1919, by Margaret Macmillan