It has been a while since we did one of these.

Two hundred twelve years ago yesterday, Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier, a brilliant experimental chemist and theoretician, was guillotined for being a tax collector.

NO NEED FOR GENIUSES
Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier. Paris, August 26, 1743 – May 8, 1794 at Paris

M. Lavoisier inherited wealth and studied widely. He was a jurist, an all-purpose scientist, an inventor (plaster of Paris, 1768), a mathematician, an economist, a social reformer, a businessman, and a public servant in various capacities. He seems to have contributed to everything in pre-Revolutionary France and after -- mineralogy and geologiy, meterology, agronomy, munitions, public sanitation, physiology, taxonomy, arts and trades -- but he is best known to us as the Father of Modern Chemistry.

As a chemist he disproved phlogiston theory, though postulating his own erroneous substance, caloric, an elastic fluid associated with heat. He clearly formulated the Law of Conservation of Mass. Recognizing the importance of measurements, he advanced quantitative experimentation and also had a hand in developing the metric system. All these things and so much more than can be adequately detailed here.

M. Lavoisier was of a liberal bent and a Republican. Unfortunately he was also an aristocrat and a stockholder and officer of Ferme générale, a private company that collected taxes and duties for the Crown. Collections are hateful business and, not surprisingly, the Ferme générale was hated. And although M. Lavoisier's integrity was irreproachable, the fermiers were generally understood to enrich themselves off the commonweal. The company was repressed during the Revolution and soon Revolutionary justice came calling.

11.24.1793: An order is issued for the arrest of all the former Fermiers généraux. Four days later M. Lavoisier turns himself in.

11.93-05.94: Over the next five months preparations for trial are made.

05.05.94: M. Lavoisier is transferred to the Conciergerie, the "antechamber to the guillotine".

05.07.94: Trial preliminaries are completed and M. Lavoisier is interrogated. After the interrogation he drafts a note complaining to the public prosecutor that papers essential to his defense have been taken.

05.08.94: The personal property is removed from the prisoners, who, apparently, are made ready for the scaffold before trial. Four defense attorneys are introduced and given a quater-hour to confer with the accused. The trial begins at 10 o'clock with the miserable and pitiless Jean-Baptiste Coffinhal presiding.

The Revolutionary Tribunal tries the 32 former fermiers on charges of defalcation, excessive profits, abusive distribution of bonuses, unjustified delay in payments to the public treasury and, most damning, for increasing profits by introducing excessive water into tobacco and using these profits in a "plot against the French people tending to favor by all possible means the success of the enemies of France." (Archives nationales, W 362, no. 785.) All are found guilty and 28 are guillotined the same day, M. Lavoisier among them.

An appeal to delay his execution to complete scientific work is refused with Coffinhal's withering retort:

"La République n'a pas besoin de savants ni de chimistes."

[The Republic has no need of scientists or chemists.]

Execution is carried out at Place de la Révolution. M. Lavoisier executed fourth. Executioner: Charles-Henri Sanson. Burial: Cemetery of La Madeleine.

Notwithstanding his Republican ideals, his services to the Republic, his contributions to science, to France, and notwithstanding his certain innocence, the Revolution was determined to have M. Lavoisier's head. His colleague, the mathematician Joseph Louis Lagrange remarked:

"Il ne leur a fallu qu'un moment pour faire tomber cette tête, et cent années peut-être ne suffiront pas pour en reproduire une semblable." (J. B. Delambre, "Éloge de Lagrange," Mémoires de l'Institut, 1812, p. XIV)

["It took only an instant to cut off that head, but it is unlikely that a hundred years will suffice to produce another."]

PFFT (What is this?): The sow kills her farrow 5 | Rayonnement français 5/0

Bonjour,

La Révolution a malheureusement coupé le cou de Lavoisier.
Mais la République a fait éclore une pléthore de savants:Chaptal ,Fourcroy,Fourier,Monge ,Berthollet,Laplace,l' Ecole Normale ,l 'X etc, etc,
Et vous Yanks que faisiez-vous à cette époque ?
Vous les défenseurs actuels des Droits de l ' Homme ,vous exterminiez les Indiens.
Vous les défenseurs actuels du Droit de Propriété ,vous voliez leur territoire.
Vous les défenseurs actuels de la Loi Naturelle ,vous hypostasiez la figure de l ' outlaw.
Votre grand Washington , superbe démocrate , frappait ses esclaves.
Etc, etc
Mais quasiment pas de scientifiques chez vous (sauf peut-être le sinistre Franklin)…
Alors vos leçons de morale gardez-les pour vous.

Good luck to (?) your country in Irak !

Plame ,Plame,Plame,Plame.

Let's see what's in the news... the UK is demanding the closure of Guantanamo, Russia is backing Iran's "peaceful" nuclear ambitions while hitting a new low in US-Russian relations. China as usual is turning a blind eye, Bush's approval is at a record 31% while the CIA downward spiral is now linked with stories of illegal gambling and free prostitutes (my my... not so "God-fearing" after all).

But you see, Lavoisier's head falling off during the French revolution 200 years ago is far more important to Pave, who seems to to rather short of French-bashing nowadays...

Ah, M. AB/AY,

Today, why it is Remember French Slavery Day! An important day for every French person or so your government says.

We suggest you take a moment from your clichéd rant and -- as your government enjoins you -- reflect on what France was about both before and after she promulgated La Déclaration des droits de l'Homme et du citoyen (1789). Since La Déclaration has so captured your imagination, we would point out that France only got around to abolishing slavery in 1794. But as French principles are as disposable as French fashions, French slavery was restored as an economic convenience in 1802 and plodded along for another 36 years when it was replaced by a colonial system of slavery in all but name.

So as not to delay your important national meditations we forgo comment on your blasé dismissal of rough Republican justice.

DGB

Pave, who seems to to [sic] rather short of French-bashing nowadays...
Posted by: zoomerx on May 10, 2006 05:18 PM

Franchouille disappointed in fall-off in French-bashing. Noted. More mock! Pronto!

M. Zmx,

Thank you for once again demonstrating that you can Google headlines but read little news. Let us look at the highlights of your latest performance:

the UK is demanding the closure of Guantanamo

Only to someone as uninformed as you is this news. Jack Straw beat Lord Goldsmith at this game back in February. Last I checked Anglo-American relations were intacto.

Russia is backing Iran's "peaceful" nuclear ambitions while hitting a new low in US-Russian relations

Much thanks to France's chucklehead diplomacy, there is little for Russia to lose and much to gain in helping Iran. Again only you would think this some sort of "new low". Let us get you up to speed, this is the benchmark low of American-Russian relations.

Bush's approval is at a record 31%

Well let's see, you have reached back to March for your funny cartoon, but where did you get your funny number? Here is a sourced poll issued today:

Wednesday May 10, 2006--For the third straight day, 41% of Americans Approve of the way that George W. Bush is performing his role as President and 58% Disapprove.

Post back when Mr. Bush has joined Jack in the basement.

Lastly we point out the M. Lavoisier's head did not "fall off". He was not a victim of leprosy. His head was cut off. He was a victim of debauched Republican justice.

But you only have sneers. Even at the honorable French you sneer.

DGB

Bonjour,

Vous avez un sacré culot Mr Bennett ! La France n ' a jamais connu l 'esclavage et le racisme d' Etat sur son sol (sauf quand elle subissait le joug de la terreur nazie) contrairement à vous ,les Yanks …
Rappelez-moi à quelle date les USA ont abrogé l' esclavage ?
Rappelez-moi à quelle date les USA ont abrogé les lois racistes d'Etat US (indication:c' était il y a moins de 50 ans !) Le "busing" ça vous rappelle quelque chose ?)
Et puis quand on vient d'assister dans le Michigan au congrès du Parti Nazi US !!!!!
C' est bien vous les génocideurs d' Indiens ,de Japonais ,de Vietnamiens ,les racistes anti-Noirs …Qui devriez faire des dizaines de journées de repentance.
Mais vous infligez continuellement au Monde votre bonne conscience.
Bush ne comprend pas.:"Pourquoi le Monde nous déteste-il puisque nous sommes bons ?".
Mais le Monde de la Chine au Venezuela en passant par la Russie , comme le note Zoomerx, lui a compris…

Good luck to (?) your country in Irak !!

Plame ! Plame ! Plame ! Plame !

I'm not sure what the Cuban missile crisis and UK-US good relations in general have to do with anything I was refering to but this is some rather typical knee-jerk from Monsieur Je-Sais-Tout.

Well let's see, you have reached back to March for your funny cartoon, but where did you get your funny number?

31%, 41%... it's still a minority isn't it?

He was a victim of debauched Republican justice

True, but how hypocritical. Comical really. As our friend AY/AB points out, I'd suggest looking - if you must - at America's treatment of minorities during those years (at least the French Revolution attempted to abolish slavery).

And that was only the begining.

But you only have sneers. Even at the honorable French you sneer.

Only at you, Damian ;-)

I'd suggest looking - if you must - at America's treatment of minorities during those years

This is nothing but hypocrisy coming from a Frenchman. One has to only look back at France’s treatment of minorities for the past few centuries and they’ll realize that they have a history comparable only to the Nazis.

- France was the main supplier of slaves to the western hemisphere, and continued to secretly practice slavery in its colonies decades after it was abolished in the US.
- Under the orders of Napoleon, over 100,000 Haitians were massacred during a slave revolt.
- France massacred countless civilians in the French Congo trying to maintain control of its rubber plantations which existed until the mid twentieth century.
- France willingly collaborated with the Nazis by voluntarily sending thousands of its Jewish citizens to concentration camps; some of which existed in France and were guarded by French soldiers.
- During World War 2 France massacred tens of thousands of Algerian civilians who were trying to achieve independence.
- Nearly 200 Algerians were killed by French police during protests in 1961.
- France trained militias and provided refuge to the perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide.
- French soldiers in the Ivory Coast have been killing and raping civilians.

at least the French Revolution attempted to abolish slavery

Attempted and accomplished are two different things.

I'm not sure what the Cuban missile crisis and UK-US good relations in general have to do with anything I was refering [sic]
Posted by: zoomerx on May 11, 2006 02:35 PM

M. Zmx, do you ever have a lucid moment? We can only suggest you go back and read your own post where these topics are introduced. Take a moment. Sit back, close your eyes. Now let the correspondences wash across your pebble-smooth cortex.

And what does American whatever during any period have to do with M. Lavoisier's criminal execution by the French Republic? Exactly what do you wish us to compare between these mismatched topics? Do you have an organic attention disorder or are you simply incapable of processional thought?

DGB

Armen, we can play this game as long as you want.

As for massacring Algerians "during World War 2", read your History books, you are two decades off-mark. Note that it all started by Algerians massacring innocent French citizens through unspeakable acts of cruelty, to which France retaliated by indiscriminately labeling everyone "terrorists", ending up in in a long quagmire after "winning the war". Rings a bell?

As for the Rwanda massacres, I suggest you look at how your own admisnistration at the time completely turned their back at the situation (refusing to jam rebels communicatons among other things), if you're even aware of it.

Finally, I'm afraid you know nothing about the IC's long chain of events (hint: ethnic cleansing) and that France, in fact, tried to avoid another Rwanda led by Pave's darling dictator, President Bagbo. Maybe you could explain to us why did France, after the massacre, managed to get a unanimus UN arm embargo against Ivory Coast's regime as well as asking Israel to stop supply them with sensitive radar technology?

Bonjour,

@Armen

D ' accord Armen la France a massacré à tour de bras dans ses colonies…
Mais il y un petit problème ,pourquoi assistons-nous dans toutes les ex-colonies françaises à une explosion démographique ?
(Rappel: Par exemple Algérie où nous avons le plus massacré selon vous:
1830 début de la colonisation: 1.5 millions de musulmans
1962 fin de la colonisation: 8.5 millions de musulmans
2006:35 millions de musulmans)
Curieux génocide indeed ?)
Et il y a un autre petit problème:
Quelle est la proportion d' Indiens dans les USA actuels ? Quelle est la proportion d'aborigènes en Australie , de maoris en Nouvelle-Zélande ,de tasmaniens en Tasmanie ?
Donnez les chiffres !
La réalité est celle-ci la colonisation de l' "anglosphère" EST SYSTEMATIQUEMENT GENOCIDAIRE la démographie le montre.
Au contraire;la colonisation française , sans négliger ses crimes , a été le signal d' une expansion démographique extraordinaire partout où elle s'est implantée.
Bien sûr , si nous avions procédé comme vous nous serions toujours en Algérie à l' heure qu' il est ,mais nous ne pourrions pas nous regarder dans une glace.
Ah oui ! ,Bush peut se demander "pourquoi nous hait-on puisque nous sommes bons ?"

Good luck to (?) your country in Irak !
Plame ! Plame ! Plame !Plame ! Plame !
(Beethoven symphonie n° V)

Bonjour Professor, Zoomer, et al,

Wow, a most rousing joust going on here…much of it ground I have covered with most of you, so I will reserve comment on the "regular" items.

One point I’d like some clarification on however…
Note that it all started by Algerians massacring innocent French citizens through unspeakable acts of cruelty, to which France retaliated by…

I would debate that the problems in Algeria started much before the “massacre”. I have always thought that the colonization of Algeria, in an attempt to reclaim a little of the lost luster of France was what caused the problem. As le Général said in his memoirs “the subordinate role to which we had been reduced abroad…”

So by the time you say the massacre started the problem, “the colonization of Algeria had become a millstone round France’s neck”.

Is this not correct?

Bonjour,

Un petit calcul pour montrer la monstruosité de la colonisation-génocide yanks et les bienfaits de la colonisation française.

1)Colonisation française en Algérie;
1830:1.5 millions de musulmans
1962:8.5 millions de musulmans
Soit un taux de progression de plus de 1.3 % par an sur 130 ans.

2)Colonisation Yanks:
1500: 7 millions de Nord Amérindiens
(Source: Russel Thornton "American Indian Holocaust" (University Press of Oklahoma))
Si l' on appliquait à ce chiffre le taux d' expansion démographique que les Français ont établi en Algérie ,on trouverait sur 500 ans:
2006: 7*(1+1.3/100)^500=4 milliards de Nord Amérindiens !!!
Sans s'attendre à un tel chiffre , (qui est aussi la résultante de percées médicales du XIX ème) de la part de la colonisation Yanks ,on peut quand même comparer avec le chiffre réel:
2006: Environ 2.5 millions de Nord Amérindiens !!!
(Source :recensement US de 2000)

3)Alors vraiment les génocideurs yanks ferraient bien de la fermer quand il s'agit de la colonisation française ,qui n'a rien à voir avec leur monstrueux génocide.Il faut toute la saloperie d' un Roosevelt pour venir s' indigner en 1943 (Anfa) de la colonisation française au Maghreb.

Good luck to your country in Irak !

Plame ! Plame ! Plame ! Plame !

(

Bonjour Professor,

1. We have gone over this before….so again, I shall not repeat my figures about the huge increase in the number of people of color living in the US.
2. University Press of Oklahoma They put out many fine books on the American West/Native Americans. I own about 40 or so, but not the one you mention. University of Nebraska Press also puts out many books of the same genre. Again, we have been over this. You seem to discount the huge number of Native Americans that perished by disease that was brought by Europeans before any settlers arrived at Jamestown.

Alors vraiment les génocideurs yanks ferraient bien de la fermer quand il s'agit de la colonisation française,qui n'a rien à voir avec leur monstrueux génocide.

Well, if it has nothing to do with French colonization, then why, Professor, do you use it to defend French colonization? I did not relate the two...you did.

Good luck to your country in the continuing Islamization of Europe.

Rondot!, Rondot!, Rondot!, Rondot! :)

Bonjour,

Vous n'avez simplement pas lu Russel Thorntorn.Son livre est paru en 1987.
Mais vous avez peut-être des chiffres qui vous sont propres.Donnez-les.
1500:Combien d' Indiens US ?
2006:Combien d' Indiens US ?

Good luck for your country in Irak !
Plame ! Plame ! Plame ! Plame !

PS:Nous savons très bien le jeu infect des USA ,qui visent une islamisation de l 'Europe.Nous saurons y répondre.
Kosovo ,Turquie , et maintenant amis amis avec Khadafi...

Bonjour Professor,

From the US census:
The American Indian and Alaska native population rose by 1 percent or 43,000 from 2004 to 2005. Total American Indians and Alaska natives is 4.5 million.

From the Smithsonian:
Production of the Smithsonian's Handbook of North American Indians has enabled new tribe-by-tribe estimates of North American Indian population size. Collectively these data suggest that population numbered about 1,894,350 at about A.D. 1500. Epidemics and other factors reduced this number to only 530,000 by 1900. Modern data suggest that by 1985 population size has increased to over 2.5 million.

So, Professor, to answer your question:
1500: 1,894,350
2005: 4.5 million

More about diease:
Disease began to kill immense numbers of indigenous Americans soon after Europeans and Africans began to arrive in the New World, bringing with them the infectious diseases of the Old World. One reason this death toll was overlooked (or downplayed) for so long is that disease, according to the widely held theory, raced ahead of European immigration in many areas, thus often killing off a sizable portion of the population before European observations (and thus written records) were made. Many European immigrants who arrived after the epidemics had already killed massive numbers of American natives assumed that the natives had always been few in number. The scope of the epidemics over the years was enormous, killing millions of people—in excess of 90% of the population in the hardest hit areas...

And finally,
most mainstream scholars tend not to use the term "genocide" to describe the overall depopulation of American natives. However, a number of historians, rather than seeing the whole history of European colonization as one long act of genocide, do cite specific wars and campaigns which were arguably genocidal in intent and effect.

Bonjour,

Regarder le négationniste ! Admirez les décimales de la population en 1500 , pour faire plus vrai et dissimuler le crime...
On ne s' étonne plus de l'existence du parti Nazi US !!!
Désolé ,mais votre compatriote Thornton donne le chiffre de 7 millions en 1500.Il est professeur d' Université ,spécialiste de la question , et doit savoir ce qu' il dit quand il parle de l '"American Holaucaust"...
J' adore aussi votre façon de gonfler les chiffres en incorporant l 'Alaska qui était Russe jusqu'en 1867 ce qui lui épargné de connaître votre barbarie pendant 350 ans..;
Vous pourriez aussi ajouter Hawaî tant que vous y êtes...
Evidement, tout cela est gênant pour des gens qui brandissent les Droits de l 'Homme et le Droit de Propriété à longueur de temps.
Gary Becker, Milton Friedman , Reagan ,Bush etc ,sont assis sur le produit d' un génocide et d' une spoliation massive.
Notre colonisation sur laquelle Roosevelt (Anfa 1943) s'est indigné a multiplié par 5.5 la population en 130 ans,la vôtre a divisé par trois la population légitime en 500 ans.

Good luck for your country in Irak !!

Plame ! Plame ! Plame ! Plame !

The exact number is really beside the point. They really do not matter, do they? There is an extreme amount of evidence that the European arrival in North America triggered a drastic reduction in the population of Native Americans. Whatever that exact beginning number was does not matter.

Even if your higher figures are credited, they do not, on the merit of numbers alone, prove the occurrence of genocide.

And any serious examination of the history of this event cannot ignore the huge amount of deaths caused by the contagious diseases which the European brought to this continent. But, Professor, you do not want a serous examination of this history. You want nothing but a one sided exaggeration and indictment of the US. You want to believe nothing but Custer and Buffalo Bill riding on horseback shooting and killing millions of Indians. That just didn’t happen to the large extent that you wish it did. But this is the “History” that you see over and over and over and want to believe.

As Cicero said Consuetudine oculorum assuescunt animi, neque admirantur, neque requirunt rationes earum rerum, quas simper vident [Minds are acquainted by custom of their eyes, nor do they admire, or inquire the reason of those things which they continually behold].

This is why I have not read the books you mention, along with other books written by the likes of Ward Churchill, David E. Stannard, Lenore A. Stiffarm, Phil Lane, Jr and others. They, like you, Professor, are not interested in the history, rather a twisting of any facts to conform to preconceived beliefs. (BTW, have you read any of those books, or do you just mention them?)

I own and have read over 100 books on this subject, so I would consider myself very informed in this part of the US history. As you always tell me that I cannot teach you anything about French History, well, Professor, you can not teach me anything about this subject. :)

Good luck to your country in the continuing Islamization of Europe.

Rondot! Rondot! Rondot! Rondot!

Bonjour,

1) "Europeans" non " Yanks" étaient les criminels !! .Les Indiens le savent bien: le gentil démocrate Custer etc....Vous me rappelez un ultra-libéral de chez nous (=un membre du Parti de l' Etranger yanks).On lui faisait remarquer que "les Américains ,grands défenseurs actuels de l 'Etat de Droit , avaient génocidé les Indiens".Alors il hurle "Pas les Américains ,les Européens !".
Parfaitement grotesque !!!
On pourrait aussi parler des pendaisons de Noirs dans les années 30 , de Cocacollabo , du numerus clausus antisémite dans les facs US en 40 ,du Nazi Lindbergh etc ,etc
Vous prétendez imposer la démocratie au Monde , mais votre Histoire récente est particulièrement répugnante…

2)Vous dites avoir lu des centaines de livres sur le sujet.Mais pas le livre qui fait autorité:
"The american holocaust" Thornton ( University Press of Oklahoma).
C'est curieux...
Good luck for your country in Irak !!!

Plame ! Plame ! Plame ! Plame !

Bonjour Professor,

du Nazi Lindbergh etc ,etc
I think he wanted to fly a plane to Vichy France to visit his Nazi friends…

mais votre Histoire récente est particulièrement répugnante…
Shoot, I forgot all about the spotless record of France!

BTW, you keep getting the books and authors mixed up. Here is what they are called:
American Holocaust: The Conquest of the New World by David E. Stannard

American Indian Holocaust and Survival: A population History Since 1492 by Russell Thornton
Two different books.

Vous dites avoir lu des centaines de livres sur le sujet.Mais pas le livre qui fait autorité: "The american holocaust" Thornton ( University Press of Oklahoma).
C'est curieux...

The biggest reason I have not read his book is because I’m cheap. I buy most of my books used. Unfortunately, this manner of procurement sometimes makes one take what is available, instead of buying what you want. Any new books I purchase are “overstocks”, etc. Again, you take what can be found. The University of OK books I can usually buy from a discount house for about $6.00 USD for a $35 USD hardback book, $4 USD for a $18 USD paperback (all overstocks or out of print). Also, University of OK sends a “sale” catalogue out (I’m on their mailing list) in which I am able to purchase their books for as little as $2.99!
I have only once (maybe twice) seen the book in question, and I guess that I took books that I was more interested in. Not the best excuse, but that’s the way it is :)

As always,

Good luck to your country in the continuing Islamization of Europe.

Rondot! Rondot! Rondot! Rondot!