davidaugust
71946
1928
36
alt text: love a graph that's dropping a hint
[2 graphs comparing wealth distribution: France (1760–1790) vs. US (2016), showing top 10% holding majority wealth, with sources]
slackboy722000
It wasn't so much the wealth distribution in pre-revolution France as much as the fact the clergy and nobility paid no taxes and had a stranglehold on political power over the masses.
ChickenChickenBurningBright
don't forget the tens of thousands of regular people who also got the lop after often flimsy accusations of being enemies of the revolution. it wasn't called The Terror for nothing.
kurvarVillain
InflationEnjoyer
Any particular reason this graph is from Obama's last year in office?
Hypothesist
The next four years I fully expect it to continue into further extremes
tsterling00
So are they gonna let us eat cake?
J3lek
BeaverOnFire
dannnen1
You need to change the "no" button to a "too bad, your finding out anyway" button
daychilde
dancing.guillotine.emoji
TheN8
GenStrike
The wealth of the top 10% (iirc) doubled since 2019. So that graph should be even more stark. Would love to see it updated for 2025.
sambaah05
This needs current wealth distribution in France to mean anything. If it's pretty much the same, then nothing changed.
pfunk81
And it's all the illegal's fault.
pfunk81
Forgot /s...
HapilyDamaged
Hurch
Ronnie Ray-gun's plan is all coming together nicely. 90% are fucked, 9% are middle-class, and 1 % own the whole board. Wait...that's Monopoly. But still...
TheSilverSeraph
Even this chart is misleading. By far the majority of that tallest bar in the US is just the Top 1%
historycat
The wealthy just learned to pay their protective services enough not to sell them out.
DemoEvolved
Maximum Lethal force was much lower in that age. Now a gunman shoots up a country music festival and we don’t even act surprised
Abizuil
No one acts surprised because it happens constantly and nothing is ever done about it. It'd be national (potentially international) headlines and questions in Parliament in an actual first world country.
wagsd67512
The problem is that most of the population has been convinced that someday they will be rich too. Sorry, nothing is gonna change the human species is stupid as f*ck and wants to be ruled.
thedarklord187
Sadly we're more the year before Hitler became chancellor timescale currently he won the government in 32. In 33-34 he consolidated his power and removed all his enemies were in 32
StellaMatutina
Let's keep guillotines outside every public office. As a reminder. /Threat, we need dit normals
MissSiesta
Americans will never riot. Too beaten down. I admire the individuals who do, but the majority just don't dare to rock the boat. They would rather just walk to the gallows themselves.
GermanSausagesAreTheWurst
You know which other country had citizens who didn't want to rock the boat? This is why I am saying that this graph may be more relevant than the OP's.
bippityboppitybuttsex
ffffennek
Makes me wonder if potential time travelers focusing on killing Hitler really have the right idea.
RevolutionOnHerLips
god I hate this fuck
Wor3q
Why does he get all the credit, when all the charts start to go sideways on Nixon's turn?
bippityboppitybuttsex
Because he turned it up to 11...
TBH, I used to worry about my country, I no longer do, I just don't care... people keep voting for the US to be destroyed, who am I to try to stop them?
rusrsdude
So far, the drugs have won. It's almost like they keep winning for some "odd" reason.
Xander77777
Reposting so that I can find it in my comment history:
KileyBarker
While I agree with the overall point, the prison population graphs here should really have been done as a percent of total population instead of by total number. It makes it easy to brush off as "Of course the number of prisoners goes up as the population goes up" which weakens the argument. The graph wouldn't be as pronounced but it would more accurately depict the problem. For reference since 1950 the US population has roughly doubled, but the incarcerated has increased roughly 8x.
KileyBarker
Also fuck Ronald Reagan. May he burn in the worst whatever hells he believed in.
IjustsaywhatIthink
Sad thing is, MAGAt's think Reagan was a sell out to Liberals.
bippityboppitybuttsex
Only because of his 1987 amnesty...
FudgeLicense
kunjava
Just wait a few years, Trump will fuck up so badly that Reagan will start to look like a saint!
bippityboppitybuttsex
He will not... Trump is just continuing what Reagan started, stealing as much money from the working class, as he can, to funnel to his oligarch friends.
ghettobutter
Oh … fuck
qazxswedcvfrtgbnhyujmkiol
Kinda like we all thought Bush was such an idiot at the time/wondered how he ever made it that far... and now he just seems like a somewhat likeable, somewhat harmless old dude compared to the evil shit show we have now.
bippityboppitybuttsex
There was nothing harmless about W... he is responsible for the deaths of 600,000 Iraqi civilians... if he really believes in hell, he should live in absolute fear of his own death for the eternal judgement he will face.
Vancouvering
But everyone LOVES Reagan!
bippityboppitybuttsex
They really don't.... TBH, he should have died in prison for funneling weapons to terrorists and funding death squads in central America.
CornwindEvil
The big problem is that in 1760, France's population was listed at being less than 25,000. There's a REAL big difference between that number and nearly 350 million. Not to mention the U.S is 18 times the size of France. And, you know...how much the world has changed since then and how damn sneaky the rich overlords have gotten with their 'nine meals away' factors.
wandermanspacebot
Nine meals away?
SoundBites
https://internationalman.com/articles/nine-meals-from-anarchy/
wandermanspacebot
Thanks.
GriffinMann41
I, uh, think you missed a set of 0's there, my friend. France's population in the 1760s was around 25-26 million
CornwindEvil
You are correct sir! Still, it's still over 10x larger on a country 18x larger. Plus the overlords, as said, have gotten so damn insidious with how they deny people bread by giving them circuses.
drakkaris12718
Ok, but the French revolution led to very dark times in France, so, beware revolutions, they tend to burn like wild fires, and like wild fires, the burn out of control and burn everything.
txchief11
Don’t worry, Americans won’t revolt, we won’t do shit except lick boots or complain.
Heavenissize17socks
It did. The reason that it did is because the people who were revolting did their business and then went back home. This nation's people need to let the politicians know where their fucking paycheck comes from, and they expect a ROI.
DukeDarkwood
This is what keeps people from revolting. Until it doesn't. Until it reaches a point where they decide that it can't be worse than the life they're living.
If we get a second Civil War, it's going to be messy. I don't know if it'll be long or short, but it WILL be messy. And the aftermath, more so. But it CAN lead to better conditions for those who come after.
When France came out the other side of those 'dark times', the average Frenchman's life was much better than it would have been before.
ThaneofGlamis
Fair, but the French Revo led to the napoleonic wars, which set the stage for ww1. And our own civil war was followed by the hyper-violent 1860s-1880s.
drakkaris12718
True, but for those who live it can be hell. Bad people arise from that chaos, also good people, but mostly bad. All you can do is keep true to yourself, your community, your values.
DukeDarkwood
True. We won't be doing this for ourselves. But we may need to do it, for those in the future.
The alternative is letting the gap continue to grow. I wonder how the distribution of wealth graph will look in forty more years.
GriffinMann41
Strictly speaking that's not entirely true. It sucked for *quite* a while, in pretty much every post-revolution government. Even France
DukeDarkwood
And would it have been better had nothing changed? When do you figure the kings and queens would have gotten around to improving living conditions for the people?
GriffinMann41
That's not what I'm saying. My point is moreso 'The improvements take quite a while to begin to show, which is *why* we don't see Revolutions very often. Because rarely do any benefits manifest earlier than a whole generation or two later, which is a *long* time'
DukeDarkwood
And I acknowledged that above. We're not going to see the results, but people a generation or two down will.
But don't get me wrong. I still hope it can be avoided. I am not even sure what role I could possibly be capable of in such a conflict, if it came to it. I'd be a liability, or a casualty. But at some point, it's no longer about what I want. I don't want a war. But an unchecked fascist rule would be deadlier by far. And for those who live, all but a few would suffer greatly.
ImAGrower
Lol! You act like people in the US have any balls like the French did/do. Not even close. We wouldn't stand up to our own government. Lololollololololololololololklllol *takes a deep breath* lololololololklollljllkl I lo.....
TheFastpaws
Americans do not have the spine or they'd already have done it.
TheWisdomCube
OK but.. we already did once.
TheWisdomCube
Well, not the current we, so yeah. I don't see it happening either.
PhooBar
Americans do not have the IQ or they'd already have done it. FIFY.
RichardNunez
wandermanspacebot
The people who most often post this belong to a demographic that votes at around 30% or less. I doubt the billionaires are afraid of anything remotely resembling a revolution from people who can't even get off their asses and to the polls every so often.
GiantFlyingLabia
The difference is that 76 million Americans think the billionaires rightfully earned every cent
happiesthedgehog
Yuuuuuuuuuuuuup.
nightripper
Temporarily embarrassed millionaires. They don't want to end the exploitation. They think one day they'll be the exploiter.
Markuspsyches
Pokegeologist
Or think if we're good little pets, they'll take care of us.
greentights
I think this is more on the nose than the temporary embarrassed millionaires. A lot of folks don't want to think and want to just follow whatever rules they are taught blindly. Even when it hurts them
huffnpuff72
And all the nutjobs that are armed to the teeth have been brainwashed so much they don't understand its the billionaires that are the problem, not the immigrants.
Heavenissize17socks
For 76 million Americans pay went up by 20%.
The cost of basic necessary items doubled.
They're not fascist, they're desperate.
Why does a 12 pack of coke cost $4 more than it did 4 years ago? Why does a coke at Olive Garden cost $3.89? We were supposed to have government agencies that handle price gouging. Where were they?
GiantFlyingLabia
Your inflation numbers are off, the average total price increase is under 20 percent since the pandemic. “The economy” was the top issue for only a handful of Trump voters. For the majority of them the main motivator was still the racist nativism
ArcaneEyes
As long as a single party don't hold all three instances (for the US), you're not going to see a lot done. Now that the republicans hold all three though, good luck winning back your country before they turn it into Singapore.
onlyhalfghost
dismantled by the same fucking people they voted for. Party of personal responsibility should take some.
happiesthedgehog
Not to diminish from anything, but I love that the baseline is Olive Garden.
Gaelwyn
I get that they're desperate (we all are) but they're the ones making bad voting choices that make it impossible for anyone to fix the issues. And just wait until Trump's tariffs, then we'll all get to pay even more for no fucking reason becaus he's an idiot who doesn't understand how things work.
Huor
Obviously the bottom 90 are just stupid for not embracing joy
wandermanspacebot
*for not embracing coherent policies instead of decades-old trickle down nonsense and xenophobia
Huor
You think Democrats didn’t embrace trickle-down decades ago? You actually think that?
wandermanspacebot
I think that you were referencing the most recent election, not talking about a time before you were even born. Also, Reagan introduced modern trickle down about 40 years ago and Democrats as a whole were not in favor of it.
Huor
They stopped being “not in favor of it” after the Democratic Leadership Council took hold of the DNC in the lead-up to the 1992 election, after which Clinton announced “the era of big government is over” and Reagan’s policies became default policy. Next time try not to be clueless when you’re patronizing.
wandermanspacebot
So you weren't referencing the most recent election?
TheNamiKage
Yeah but I reckon it was probably easier to mob up, march into a rich shits mansion and lop their head off 250 years ago though.
MyVerySmarterUserName
When you’re starving it is
cutepandabutts
Yea cause through the internet we got sold individualism. Everyone just cares about themselves so it's hard to get people together to agree to even entertain the idea of eat the rich.
RawSuger
really not, it just takes enough ppl doing it at once..its far easier today,we even have a poll every 4 years to see if everyone is on board
eggmuffin
Not, really. The hard part is still just getting the mob up and running.
ProppaGanda
Always. That's why you all need to organize. https://iww.org
mlang11
With programmable drones carrying explosives over 20miles?
Taltos111
Nah, all those employed by the billionaires are also poor. Nobody becomes rich as a bodyguard. Just gotta find their mega yachts and bunkers.
borocanuck
Gotta do UT before those robotic security guards take over.
TheSecondPiewackit
Robots are easier to make than you think... Praise Adafruit.
borocanuck
But are they easier to beat in freeing the billionaire from their "captivity"?
TheSecondPiewackit
Well... Unless they're hardwired in, a broad spectrum radio jam will keep them from getting network updates. If they're hardwired, just cut the wire. After that you'd just have to worry about onboard computing having last known orders. In which case... Their fuel source would be directly proportionate to their threat level. Big robot => short op time. I'd recommend against outright destruction of one lest a big non-organic comes in handy later.
Leaps
Pretty much, they did not have machine guns back then.
damogen
A civilian mob has never and will never stand any chance against a professional army. The type of weapons is irrelevant.
So, two questions remain:
1) Will the government use the military against civilians?
2) Will the military accept being used against civilians, or will they join the revolution.
The French Revolution was supported by the military.
modis
No, but we can hang out near swanky hotels and open fire on the next billionaire to step out. It’s not the government that holds the levers of power. Not really.
ProppaGanda
Also, if we stop the military factories, we stop the military action. We need the working class to unionize.
SoberAndBored
"A whiff of grapeshot" - Napoleon on how he dispersed a Royalist mob. Over 100 fatalities.
AbsoluteThunderMuppet
Unless it’s belt fed l, it’s gonna run out pretty quick and we out number them quite a bit.
theultimatrix
Explosives also exist though. My recommendation is tunnel under the and cause a sink hole
AbsoluteThunderMuppet
I think the revolution will involve drone swarms with pipe bomb and will be pretty effective.
Unclescam
Mobs aren't....organized and disciplined. Drop the 50 in the front and you're very unlikely to see people climb over the bodies to get in.
Rongeong
Well you can take your place in the front to take some of the ammo for the rest of us.
AbsoluteThunderMuppet
Thinking it’s going to be an Omaha beach style frontal assault is a mistake. This is going to be guerrilla warfare.
VinnieJonesDiary
Again, you go first, if you've got it all figured out.
Strategicgnomer
They had muskets, but not many people has access. Compared to America where everyone has access to a gun now.....
damogen
AR-15's are great at shooting up schools. They don't do well against tanks and drone strikes
Strategicgnomer
If you want drone strikes, just do what Ukraine does, buy a drone, attach explosives, fly towards enemy. Plus, ground troops are very effective if they massively outnumber armor. Plus, you can always borrow armor from your local police department. But honestly, none of that matters if half the population refuses to participate in the regime. People underestimate their importance to the systems that need them. Without tax money, how do you think trump would fund his war on America?
damogen
Ukraine can do that because they are a country with an organization level and international trade, to make such production at scale. a revolution is not likely to have access to such things in big numbers. Also, US military is more than 10x better funded than Russia's. What works against Russia won't necessarily work against USA.
but yes, it all comes down to people. If the military support a revolution it will likely succeed. If not, then it will likely fail.