Guillotine watch: Louis XVI's final chateau, never occupied by royalty, is for sale, just in time for the next revolution

Originally published at:


Gotta get ready for this thread.


Don’t you mean this:


It was not built for Louis XVI to live in. It was built to give the owner of the estate a house grand enough to impress the king.

The elegant crescent-shaped castle you see today was built mostly in the 18th century – and funnily enough, it all started with a one comment from the peanut gallery. One day, Jean-Frédéric invited his pal King Louis XVI to visit him in the south of France. “But there’s no château to welcome me!” he said of his friend’s then modest home. So Jean-Frédéric started working with a hip architect on plans that would blow his socks off.


Depressing that some people conflate the Terror period of the Revolution, in which the revolution was basically consuming itself (Danton, etc.) via the guillotine as well as ridding the country of these aristocrats with the incredibly high democratic ideals of a prior phase.

I’m not saying capitalism good, but the fact that the upheaval and internal purges of the Terror weakened the Revolution and opened the door wide for Napoleon shouldn’t be forgotten either.


It’s a historical building that should be preserved so someone has to own it. I suppose you could argue that it should be government property, but I’m not sure what the government could do with it.

It sounds perfect for a hotel or conference center. The problem in Europe is that there are too many old fancy buildings that no one can afford to take proper care of.

1 Like

Nah, it’s just an under-performing property. Burning it to the ground is a common neo-liberal solution.

Then there’ll be space for modern development. And that’s better for the ol’GNP, right?


New condos, with more banks and pharmacies and coffee shops on the ground floor. That’s the neoliberal way!

Might as well add this link before the easily shocked “moderate centrists” show up to scold Cory about his “incivility”.


Raze it to the ground. Then name an investment vehicle in the shape of a building after it.


“Too soon!”

Since the owner of this building was literally guillotined, maybe they’ll complain about the article itself and how teaching about the actual French Revolution may be misinterpreted as making unwise and reckless commentary on our own political landscape, needlessly provoking fringe actors with easily misinterpreted tales of run-down real estate.


It’ll be fine.


Only if you can make the cost of living prohibitively high for the people previously living in the area, in the hopes of attracting trust fund babies and tech bros.


The neo-liberal solution is for a billionaire to buy it and leave it empty just as an investment object. You are thinking about an older, more rational form of capitalism.


Think of all the employment it provides in guard dog companies and police patrols.


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.