Talk:François-Noël Babeuf

message: Was he religious or not?
71.253.97.230 (talk) 05:57, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not here for asking feeble questions.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.252.243 (talk) 14:45, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious affiliation? 

message: term Socialist appears in 1738, in the book: Scotch Presbyterian eloquence display'd By Gilbert Crokatt, John Monroe, page 69.  any objection to me correcting this error?   Darkstar1st (talk) 05:19, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You would need to find a book about Babeuf that makes the same conclusions you do.  However you are unlikely to find one because Crokatt and Monroe were not writing about "socialism".  TFD (talk) 12:49, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: the text in the article uses the word socialist, as does the book, not socialism.   i am not making conclusions, rather disputing a good faith error, with a fact from a RS.  proof the word did exist, here it is in print.  Darkstar1st (talk) 13:25, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You need a reliable secondary source, otherwise it is just original research based on a primary source.  TFD (talk) 17:16, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: i am not presenting material to be included, so it cant be OR.  i have proved an un-sourced passage is incorrect by providing a fact.  original research would require some comment on said fact by myself.  the claim is the word did not exist, my RS proves it did, no secondary source needed.  Darkstar1st (talk) 18:09, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I seem to be unable to understanding the sourcing policy to you and anticipate that further attempts will be futile.  TFD (talk) 02:15, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: then i will tag inaccurate unsourced text.  if you have source(i looked and found none) plz revert and add source.  Darkstar1st (talk) 05:28, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Obviously Babeuf couldn't have been a "Communist" in the sense of being a Marxist, but to say he could not have been a "small-c" communist is erroneous. Pretty much anyone would consider Adam Smith a supporter of capitalism even though the term was not used in his day. Similarly, there have been plenty of persons since the 16th century who advocated or at least wrote about abolishing private property in favor of the community producing and distributing goods on the basis of needs. In this regard Babeuf had already been preceded by Étienne-Gabriel Morelly and Gabriel Bonnot de Mably, both of whom he read and both of whom are often considered examples of utopian, pre-Marxist communism. --Ismail (talk) 12:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:   Although the words "anarchist", "socialist" and "communist" did not exist in Babeuf's lifetime 

message: I've made a number of edits using the biography written by Ernest Belfort Bax and also Wikipedia's French language article. Neither are terrible sources, but modern scholarship might be helpful for a number of reasons. The French Wikipedia article, like this one in English, offers very few sources. Bax's work is fascinating but his perspective is more or less the opposite of that of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, for reasons obvious from a historiographical perspective. I don't have time at this moment to hit the library and find more modern sources, but if you know of them and are willing to contribute, please do so! -Darouet (talk) 18:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: I've read it claimed by some that  Philippe Buonarroti deliberately misrepresented Babeuf in his books about him, and distorted how he's viewed to this day.  The main claim comes down to  Philippe Buonarroti wanting to make Babeuf like himself a follower or Robespeirre, while he was really an ally of the enemies of Robespierre like Bonneville and Brisiot.  But I'm unsure about the reliability of such claims.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.29.233.157 (talk) 00:09, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:   Philippe Buonarroti on Babeuf 

message: No mention of Babeufism? SemperBlotto (talk) 15:55, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Babeufism 

message: He was a openly advocating for a complete revolution and the complete changes to social structures, that isn't the case with "utopian socialists" (thats the origin of the term, as marxists thought that a revoluton was required for socialism and communism) the label doesn't fit him The basque savior (talk) 18:59, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was he really a "Utopian socialist" ?