Marxist analysis of peasant counterrevolution?

[Nial Fossjet]

I was reading an interesting discussion on the War in the Vendée (http://alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=180897). A quote-


The Vendean Wars are far more complicated than that. There was a counter-revolutionnary movement led by Royalists and opposants to the nationalisation of the clergy but there was also a feeling of "anti-revolution".

It's true that the revolution was supposed to please the Peasants. However, the Vendean peasantry didn't get much wealth from the Revolution : when the Clergy's properties were sold, few peasants were able to buy some because it was too expensive for them. Plus, the revolution was going too fast about its reforms : the people got angry and got fed up with the Republican Regime. In 1793, when the War of Vendée first began, most of the region was hostile to the French Republic.

How accurate are those statements? And more important, between this, the Chouannerie, and the Tambov Rebellion, what is the Marxist analysis and stance on counterrevolutions undertaken by proletariats?

[ComradeMan]

As I understood it was connected to issues of Breton autonomy too.

[La Comédie Noire]

It also has to do with religion, many of the peasants in that area were Roman Catholic and they didn't like what the revolution was doing to the church. It just goes to show you can't frame all of history in the materialist conception, or as Bertrand Russel pointed out Marx didn't set out to explain "all the little niceties of culture".

There was also a lot of anger at the conscription that the army was levying on the population of young males, which lead to the Vendee and Chouannerie wars. Royalist factions took advantage of this popular anger and religious temperament. Kinda like how the Tea Party is taking advantage of popular anger today.

[Dean]

It also has to do with religion, many of the peasants in that area were Roman Catholic and they didn't like what the revolution was doing to the church. It just goes to show you can't frame all of history in the materialist conception, or as Bertrand Russel pointed out Marx didn't set out to explain "all the little niceties of culture".

There was also a lot of anger at the conscription that the army was levying on the population of young males, which lead to the Vendee and Chouannerie wars. Royalist factions took advantage of this popular anger and religious temperament. Kinda like how the Tea Party is taking advantage of popular anger today.

How is this in any way non-materialist? The republican revolution in France was a Bourgeois revolution. Like all non-proletarian revolutions, it may have some scraps for the peasants or working class, but it will have provisions for bourgeois or other ruling classes.

Churches are social institutions which are important organizational structures. In a lot of ways, it is what the worker collective should be replacing. For this reason, I fail to see how working class loyalty to the church or similar structures flies in the face of materialism.

[La Comédie Noire]

Churches are social institutions which are important organizational structures. In a lot of ways, it is what the worker collective should be replacing. For this reason, I fail to see how working class loyalty to the church or similar structures flies in the face of materialism.I'm saying for the peasants in the vendee at least they were motivated by more than material consideration and actually felt loyalty towards their parish priests and were sincere Catholics.

It certainly doesn't invalidate materialism.