The prevalent belief in major western capitalist democracies is that a major revolution which completed transformed the political system is unrealistic in our lifetime. Was this view also prevalent in the years and decades before the French, Russian and American revolutions?

by BaoJinyang
DonaldFDraper

In respect to the French Revolution, I would argue that it was generally seen that a a Revolution wasn't possible. The French had strong support of Louis XVI based on the absolutist principles of Divine Right of Kings, Louis was chosen not by luck or the people but by God to rule France. This was strongly supported by the Church and thus most of France as France was still a very devout nation.

When Revolution came, it was still very much seen as being a a Revolution with the King, not against him. The Jacobin extremism was minor with moderates pushing for the major reform and a Constitutional Monarchy, showing that the King was still seen as an important part of French government.

Things would sour because of the King vetoing many legislative acts and trying to escape France for friendly nations for the rather explicit purpose of bringing foreign troops to reign in France. The small Jacobin strain would slowly grow larger and the people of Paris would be angry at the Kings flight. This is where the Revolution goes from a Constitutional Monarchy to a Republican and eventually turn the events to kill the King, which even this wasn't as wanted by everyone.

So, for France, the Revolution was a growing process that would change over time. It wasn't expected and sort of happened by chance. The chance here was the King fleeing the nation.