Estrimbaal wrote:The Situation with Louis XVI is a bit more complicated and frankly should be a completely different thread. Taxes in France were usually raised through the Estates General true, but there was a loophole that the King's of France gladly took advantage of at every chance. If a law was registered with the Parlement of Paris, which is a law court not an actual Parliament, it would become law. However, the Parlement of Paris would regularly reject these laws as the Parlement was made of Nobles and Churchmen who resented Royal Authority, but there was another loophole that could be exploited the King could summon a Lit de Justice where he would force the Parlement to register the law. Another was the Assembly of Notables where leading nobles of the realm would be summoned to accept a law. If they did the Parlement would also have to register it because the leading nobles of the realm accepted the law.
Louis XVI was unwilling to use the Lit de Justice and when he did summon the Assembly of Notables, they were so shocked by the extent of the debt they rejected any plan immediately. His last resort was to summon the Estates General. As for whether or not he was a tyrant, by 1789 everyone in Europe knew of Charles I of England who lost his Crown and his Head. Louis XVI knew that he might be heading down the same road by 1789 and thought that what ended Charles was that he made war on his own people and was therefore unwilling to use the army to suppress riots.
As I said this Louis XVI should be a different thread.
Well, his problem was that the Council of Notables would not approve any tax plan that would put fiscal discretion completely in his hands (they were sick of the vingtieme), but yes, different thread and all.
