If you define yourself an ideological enemy of A, I don't think A will take kindly to you, simple as that really. And I'm not ignoring the cold war, if anything I've mentioned it before.
The world was Bipolar, hence the balance of powers. Also, in case of the US, the revolutionaries were underdogs in warfare up until German officers thought them how to fight in line warfare, and pretty much had a giant civil war that split the country into two, as well as France and Russia, and was involved in many wars as well as Russia.
On a side note, when talking about the, balance of power, as in the balance of military power, once should note that it was quite something. Picture is related, and at the time, Soviet era weaponry wasn't WW2 era weaponry, it was quite efficient balancing out Western powers.
As for the French revolution and its origin, I'm not sure about the earlier dynasties and earlier lineages nor do I have any information about the efficiency of the French aristocracy at the time of the revolution, but it's not a system of governance I would subscribe my will to, but I agree that Louis XVI was not indeed a good ruler and paved the way to his demise. I'm sure that some nobles were against his rule and were on the side of revolutionaries but I'm sure they were also among those executed in the revolution. During the middle ages I guess the system was the only possible way to govern things, not saying I support it but I understand it. Even Romans themselves led to many revolts due to overtaxation, mostly stemming from the fact that they didn't pay their governors enough and that they would overtax the local populus, but that's another topic all together.
On on the note of the Soviet efficiency, it had its upsides and merit in the earlier years but given the results I would hardly agree that a planned economy is the way to go. Not saying I'd agree to a free market either, because government regulations are needed to some degree and to some level. But on the whole, Soviet lifestyle, I would not like to see myself to be a part of it, which is I reject subscription to it. The entire large scale agricultural harvesting from the Soviets for example, a key note in their aesthetic imagery, wasn't really that efficient as expected, and I'm not talking about the constant lowering of quotas but the fact that the farms that still managed to retain private ownership often times percentage wise produced more produce than those that are stateowned, even, if the state owned at the time meant that you have the entire system behind you, and supporting you. You could say it comes down to, people being, not so efficient with massive scale farming, lack of infrastructure, lack of coordination, etc. but often times when the harvest was successful, when you have to throw away massive amounts of grain due to not planning correctly and having an insufficient amount of silos to store it is not a good approach to things. Not stating that the free market is perfect nor that i adhere to it, it must have its limits of course nor saying that anything that comes from the central government organized decision making process is bad but I'm not sure that we as humans should comply to the given ideological and economic extremes but base our decisions on a sense of balance and take all examples with a grain of salt first, looking on how achievable they are. Because after all, everything serves human life, ideologies, system, ideals, they come second.
I was talking about
Attached: DINATOWARSAW.jpg (2200x1464, 381.94K)