Go ahead. I would be fascinated by the insights of someone who can't finish his research on the guilt of guards in a mostly empty prison, whose commander was negotiating over breakfast with the mob leaders, whose cannon were withdrawn and shut up, and whose commander eventually capitulated, before he was dragged into the street and hacked to death. Because they totally deserved to get lynched for holding a job in a bad economy.

Not really sure what you mean by this - with a minimum of creativity you could link both every bad thing and every good thing that has happened since to the French Revolution, just like you could do with the Crusades or the fall of the Roman Empire, regardless of whether you view those events as (mostly) positive or (mostly) negative at the time they happened. I see no valid reason to look only at the bad and ignore the good, though - you're not even British so it can't be their misguided obsession with Wellington and Waterloo. What the fuck was good about that disgusting orgy of murder and degeneracy? What good came out of it, except in the eyes of those arbitrarily prejudiced against monarchy, and of course, the eternal anti-Catholicism of every good leftist pseudo-intellectual...

As far as Tom's claim, there is the destabilization of the order in Europe, and the rise of Napoleon, and his subsequent actions. The excesses of both the Revolution and the dictator so horrified the sane world that republicanism and constitutionalism were given a dirty name in Europe, which couldn't help but delay needed reforms and impede legitimate movements for increased freedom. The French Revolution inspired most subsequent revolutionary movements, and most reactionary excesses of the 19th century could be attributed to reflexive & legitimate fears of another Reign of Terror. The Parisian communists of 1871, and Lenin both drew inspiration from the Revolution (Lenin even asked "Where are we going to find our own Fouquier-Tinville?" - a needless concern as it turned out).

The Revolution also helped sell Europe on the notions of universal conscription and total war, and Napoleon's innovations in organization reshaped military thinking over the next century, leading to the general staff methods that helped propel the reluctant monarchs into World War One.

And that's just the cursory connections.

But even if it had no legacy, it was a period of national evil which exceeded the Holocaust in depravity and scope, lacking only the technical accomplishments of Shoah (though arguably, the latter could not have happened without the French pioneering the modern atrocity state & dictatorship). Even had a true constitutional republic come about instead of Napoleon, it would not have justified what was done by the Revolutionaries. For someone who affects such moral indignation over the Nationalists' actions during the Spanish Civil War, these questions are rather disingenuous. If nothing else, the most recent Spanish episodes of national pride were in Napoleon's invasion, and their people's resistance. The members of Nationalist coalition were unquestionably aware of the resemblance of the two so-called Republics, and the Spanish Republicans didn't help their cause by committing so many of the same atrocities and clerical persecutions.