McCullough on France

Refuting Gene Kim on Slow Apostasy and Perhaps More · What About Bad Popes? · McCullough on France · Three Secret Societies and Catholicism their Enemy Misrepresented

Every leader of France, EVER
J.J. McCullough | 6.VII.2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ppuA4sAmc8

I

"after the fall of the Roman Empire, the Franks organised themselves" ...

O U C H

Don't do this to me! I am sensitive about history!

I hate thunder blunders about as much as scratching a blackboard with something sharper than chalk!

• 1) The Roman Empire did not fall over night. Nor even over just a few years. One can argue it took from AD 410 when Roman Legions left England to 1918 in the aftermath of the First World War matching a Western Emperor Francis Joseph and his successor Karl against an Eastern Emperor Nicolas II.
  
  
• 2) Roman power deteriorated over Gaul before the Franks arrived.
  
  Visigoths, Burgundians, Bretons coming from Cornwall to Brittany all took chunks and had more or less easy or uneasy relations with an actual Roman official, Syagrius, based around Central France.
  
  Together they fought off Attila.
  
  The Franks came as conquerors, and had established themselves outside the limes, North and North-East of Gaul and of the province Germania. They took the chunk of Syagrius after 20 years protracted battle.
  
  
• 3) Once they were in power, which cost Clovis I a Catholic baptism and involved him conquering Burgundian and Visigothic entities North of Pyrenees as new protector of Romans, they extended both in and outside modern France, notably in most if not all of Belgium, Luxemburg and Netherlands, as well as Western parts of Germany, where they were expanding East.
  
  
• 4) After Clovis, the division in Neustria, Austrasia and other entities was not an organisation but a disorganisation, treating royal power as a personal property and therefore as a heirloom to be potentially divided among heirs.
  
  
• 5) Francia was not Neustria, but all of the kingdom or budding Empire (heir of West Rome in 800 AD). Francia was all of it, including whatever of Germany was involved up to Charlemagne, that including Bavarian Duchy from which he separated an Ostmark now known as Austria.

Yes, I think that basically sums up the faults in that comment as well as in the map.

II

2:36 Plus, Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were not decadent.

Previous king, Louis XV had been so and even more the regent while Louis XV was a minor (his father and grandfather having died before Louis XIV, he was very young when succeeding him and had a recency).

Point in case, Louis XV was so decadent that he allowed his mistress Madame Pompadour to bully him into expelling the Jesuits and into asking the Popes or pressuring the Popes for dissolution of the order.

Other point in case, Regency and Louis XV was arguably, as most Pagan period (prior to Revolution), the worst one for black slaves in Louisiana and certain island colonies (Québec never had legal or as far as I known any other slavery, any more than France itself).

III

6:59 Did you mention, later, Louis Philippe descended from the very corrupt Regent of Louis XV?

And for that matter, how opinion about conquest of Algeria changed.

Charles X started Algerian war in response to a diplomatic insult (his ambassador had been slapped by the Dey of Algers), they did conquer Algeria before he was out of power and did hang Algerian pirates (slave hunters) in their own masts - but the news of this only reached Paris by when Louis Philippe was already in power.

Once this happened, one general Bugeaud helped to convince Parliament that conquest of Algeria was not just a good idea, but also worth burning fields of the country folks in Algeria.

So, 1830 sees a Revolution meant to stop involvement in Algeria but eventually (at least by 1840) has a Parliament that makes the Algerian war more brutal than it was under Charles X (more effective too, as one must say in favour of Bugeaud, if efficiency with brutality is a favourable credit).

IV

8:11 "after leading France into a disastrous war with neighbouring Prussia"

Who led two nations into that war is disputed. Some would say that Bismarck truncating the Ems telegram was responsible for the Franco-Prussian war. Anyway, Napoleon III lost it.