The conquest of the Bastille and the ear of Donald Trump

Today is the anniversary of the Great French Revolution. On 14 July 1789, the people of Paris captured the Bastille, a medieval castle that was a symbol of the oppression of the monarchy.

When I think of this event, my neural network immediately suggests an image-symbol. Eugene Delacroix 'Liberty leading the people to the barricades' (above).

At the same time, today a different image is scrolling everywhere in the media, both traditional and social media. Donald Trump with a bloody face raising his fist in the air. I saw a post today where today's picture is juxtaposed with another famous picture: the US Marines raising the star-spangled banner on the island of Iwojima.

In the Delacroix painting, a woman symbolising Liberty holds high the tricolour French banner. On the wounded Trump, his bodyguards hold an American flag.

One would like to say: Donald Trump is leading the people to the barricades.

I had a plan for another column today, but the assassination attempt on Donald Trump has moved me greatly. In many ways. To be absolutely clear: I absolutely condemn taking attempt on anyone's life, political opponents in particular.

I am in the middle of reading the latest book by Fareed Zakaria, one of the world's best-known foreign affairs commentators, 'Age of Revolutions, from 1600 to the present'.

Zakaria begins his story with the Dutch Revolution, the Civil War in England, the American Revolution.

Each one propelled the next one ideologically. But you could say that these were all liberal revolutions, where the bourgeoisie, who were the predecessors of today's middle class, revolted for economic reasons. It was about expanding their own economic freedom.

The heavy taxation imposed by the Spanish crown to finance its wars and the economic policies that favored Spanish interests at the expense of local economies led to widespread economic discontent.

The prosperous merchant class in the Low Countries, particularly in cities like Antwerp and Amsterdam, sought greater economic freedom and protection of their commercial interests, which were threatened by Spanish policies.

In England, Charles I's methods of raising funds without parliamentary approval, including forced loans and other financial measures, were deeply unpopular and seen as illegal by many.

In America did really part with the metropoly. Colonists felt economically exploited by British mercantilist policies, which restricted trade and manufacturing in the colonies to benefit the British economy. The colonies had no representation in the British Parliament, leading to the rallying cry of "no taxation without representation." Colonists resented decisions being made in Britain without their input.The imposition of taxes and trade restrictions by Britain, such as the Sugar Act (1764), the Stamp Act (1765), and the Townshend Acts (1767), angered colonists who felt they were unfairly burdened without their consent.

In contrast, the capture of the Bastille was the work of the poor. Since the medieval peasant wars, it was the first successful attack on human inequality and poverty. It was not about economic freedom. It was about bread. And about equality

The centralized and autocratic rule of the Bourbon monarchy, particularly under Louis XVI, faced growing criticism. The lack of political representation and participation for the common people and the increasingly ineffective governance contributed to widespread dissatisfaction.

But the misguided policy of centralist fiscalism, as well as the cost of Louis XVI's failed wars, resulted in increasing financial oppression (in taxes and tributes) for the poorest: the peasantry and the urban poor.

One can talk about the French Revolution from two sides. It is a story of many civilisational achievements.

It abolished serfdom. It introduced the notion of human rights. It put emphasis on public education. It introduced the notion of secular state.

But it is also a story of Jacobine Terror and probably first organised, planned mass murder.

Based on the ideas of the revolutionary left from the Great Revolution, 50 years later Karl Marx and Friedriech Engels published the Communist Manifesto. And while it is difficult to blame these two intellectuals for Soviet communism, Maoism or Nazism (National Socialism), they provided the intellectual fuel for a series of revolutions, let's call them illiberal.

One can talk at length about the impact of industrial revolutions on social revolutions. The steam boiler produced the Luddite movement. Electricity created the factories. And with them the working class. Fossil fuels strengthened the working class. In the post-war world on both sides of the Pond.

Social media created populists like Donald Trump. And at the same time, the fanaticism that led to today's attempt on his life.

Zakaria's book takes the side of the 'liberal'-Anglo-Saxon revolutions. As the example of the French Revolution shows, revolutions, let's call them working-class 'egalitarian' revolutions, also produce good results for humanity. Like the famous French "liberty, equality, fraternity", for which the French stood firmly in the elections a week ago.

Trump presents his "Make America Great Again" as a liberal revolution. But he is voted in by the poor masses rendered jobless by the digital revolution.

Across the Western world, a populist revolution is in sight, and it is unclear what will come of it. But rather nothing good. Plus it is supported by anti-democratic countries like Russia and China.

And you know what? There will be a bit about technology at last :) For me, the hope is in AI. AI allows us to be better creators and even if we don't see a unicorn in our lifetime (and I believe we will) there will be a new creative class. A very independent one. Like the Dutch merchants, or the American pioneers. And she will not buy populism.

I hope you will read at the break of the match.

Have a good evening,

Maciej