In theorizing about the counter-revolution, men have too often assumed that this counter-revolution should and could be solely the result of popular deliberation. ‘The people fear,’ they say, ‘the people want, the people will never consent, it does not suit the people, etc.’ What a pity! The people count for nothing in revolutions, or at most count only as a passive instrument. Four or five persons, perhaps, will give France a king. Letters from Paris will announce to the provinces that France has a King, and the provinces will cry ‘Long live the king.’ Even in Paris, all but a twentieth of the inhabitants, perhaps, will learn some morning that they have a king. ‘Is it possible?’ they will exclaim. ‘Isn't this a strange turn of events? Does anyone know by what gate he will be entering? Perhaps it would be wise to rent windows in advance, for there will be crushing crowds.’ If the monarchy is restored, the people will no more decree its restoration than they decreed its destruction or the establishment of the revolutionary government.

I beg that my reflections be considered carefully, and I recommend them particularly to those who believe counter-revolution to be impossible because there are too many Frenchmen attached to the Republic and because a change would cause suffering for too many.

Scilicet is superis labor est! Whether or not the Republic has the support of the majority is certainly open to dispute, but whether it does or not makes no difference at all. Enthusiasm and fanaticism are not lasting phenomena. Human nature soon tires of this kind of ecstasy.