Revolutionary Graph

Nov 28, 2024 1:09 AM

davidaugust

Views

71892

Likes

1927

Dislikes

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]

The next four years I fully expect it to continue into further extremes

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Any particular reason this graph is from Obama's last year in office?

1 year ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

So are they gonna let us eat cake?

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

This needs current wealth distribution in France to mean anything. If it's pretty much the same, then nothing changed.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Even this chart is misleading. By far the majority of that tallest bar in the US is just the Top 1%

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

The wealthy just learned to pay their protective services enough not to sell them out.

1 year ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

Let's keep guillotines outside every public office. As a reminder. /Threat, we need dit normals

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

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.....

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

dancing.guillotine.emoji

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

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...

1 year ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

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

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Americans do not have the spine or they'd already have done it.

1 year ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Americans do not have the IQ or they'd already have done it. FIFY.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

OK but.. we already did once.

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

Well, not the current we, so yeah. I don't see it happening either.

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

1 year ago | Likes 64 Dislikes 2

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You need to change the "no" button to a "too bad, your finding out anyway" button

1 year ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

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

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

And it's all the illegal's fault.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Forgot /s...

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Nine meals away?

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I, uh, think you missed a set of 0's there, my friend. France's population in the 1760s was around 25-26 million

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

1 year ago | Likes 385 Dislikes 9

Makes me wonder if potential time travelers focusing on killing Hitler really have the right idea.

1 year ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Reposting so that I can find it in my comment history:

1 year ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 46 Dislikes 0

Also fuck Ronald Reagan. May he burn in the worst whatever hells he believed in.

1 year ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

Howdy, like-minded gent. 🤠

1 year ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

Why does he get all the credit, when all the charts start to go sideways on Nixon's turn?

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

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?

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

god I hate this fuck

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

So far, the drugs have won. It's almost like they keep winning for some "odd" reason.

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Just wait a few years, Trump will fuck up so badly that Reagan will start to look like a saint!

1 year ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Oh … fuck

1 year ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Sad thing is, MAGAt's think Reagan was a sell out to Liberals.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Only because of his 1987 amnesty...

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But everyone LOVES Reagan!

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They really don't.... TBH, he should have died in prison for funneling weapons to terrorists and funding death squads in central America.

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

Don’t worry, Americans won’t revolt, we won’t do shit except lick boots or complain.

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Strictly speaking that's not entirely true. It sucked for *quite* a while, in pretty much every post-revolution government. Even France

1 year ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

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?

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

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'

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Obviously the bottom 90 are just stupid for not embracing joy

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

*for not embracing coherent policies instead of decades-old trickle down nonsense and xenophobia

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

You think Democrats didn’t embrace trickle-down decades ago? You actually think that?

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

So you weren't referencing the most recent election?

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

The difference is that 76 million Americans think the billionaires rightfully earned every cent

1 year ago | Likes 106 Dislikes 5

Yuuuuuuuuuuuuup.

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Or think if we're good little pets, they'll take care of us.

1 year ago | Likes 34 Dislikes 3

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

1 year ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Temporarily embarrassed millionaires. They don't want to end the exploitation. They think one day they'll be the exploiter.

1 year ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 2

Where is our O'Brien to teach us about unions?

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

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?

1 year ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 8

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

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Not to diminish from anything, but I love that the baseline is Olive Garden.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

dismantled by the same fucking people they voted for. Party of personal responsibility should take some.

1 year ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

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.

1 year ago | Likes 227 Dislikes 4

When you’re starving it is

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

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

1 year ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 2

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.

1 year ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

With programmable drones carrying explosives over 20miles?

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Not, really. The hard part is still just getting the mob up and running.

1 year ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Always. That's why you all need to organize. https://iww.org

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Nah, all those employed by the billionaires are also poor. Nobody becomes rich as a bodyguard. Just gotta find their mega yachts and bunkers.

1 year ago | Likes 34 Dislikes 3

Gotta do UT before those robotic security guards take over.

1 year ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Robots are easier to make than you think... Praise Adafruit.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But are they easier to beat in freeing the billionaire from their "captivity"?

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Pretty much, they did not have machine guns back then.

1 year ago | Likes 74 Dislikes 4

"A whiff of grapeshot" - Napoleon on how he dispersed a Royalist mob. Over 100 fatalities.

1 year ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

Also, if we stop the military factories, we stop the military action. We need the working class to unionize.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They had muskets, but not many people has access. Compared to America where everyone has access to a gun now.....

1 year ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

AR-15's are great at shooting up schools. They don't do well against tanks and drone strikes

1 year ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

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?

1 year ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

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.

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Unless it’s belt fed l, it’s gonna run out pretty quick and we out number them quite a bit.

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 17

Explosives also exist though. My recommendation is tunnel under the and cause a sink hole

1 year ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

I think the revolution will involve drone swarms with pipe bomb and will be pretty effective.

1 year ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

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.

1 year ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Well you can take your place in the front to take some of the ammo for the rest of us.

1 year ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 1

Thinking it’s going to be an Omaha beach style frontal assault is a mistake. This is going to be guerrilla warfare.

1 year ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

Again, you go first, if you've got it all figured out.

1 year ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1