Alex’s Reviews > Lectures on the French Revolution > Status Update

Interestingly, he was not a fan of Carlyle's work.

Nice beatdowns of Blanc and Michelet, two leftists.

Not quite happy with his comments on the liberalism of the Revolution. Didn't he say its progenitors weren't liberals? Then why does he sound later like he thought that the Revolution started out with liberal demands? Or does he only mean the issues with taxation? If so, I understand him.

Generally, he paints a less bleak picture than EvKL, who talked about it in less space and thus had to condense it, of course.

Inspiring how the crew of the sinking Vengeur was saved by its enemies, the English.

He says that the case for the French Revolution was stronger than the one for the American Revolution. Which brings me to how he calls it a revolution, not an independence war. Clearly, Lord Acton and Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn have some strong underlying differences, but I can't yet tell which.

Not a word on the Colonnes Infernales? I am disappointed.

Guyot, the false bishop, was a fraud, but still a war hero.