If the Bourbon royal family had won the Seven Years' War, perhaps neither commoners nor nobles would have begun doubting France's existing system and conceived the idea of reform.
Without reckless reforms, perhaps the governing methods established since Louis XIV would not have become problematic, and people would have continued down the path of cultural influence built by kings who glorified luxury.
It was precisely because the war had been lost that people saw problems with this approach and began to harbor doubts about rulers who glorified luxury.
A trade war was also a kind of war. France wanted to blockade Britain, but Britain had warships and France did not. Maritime trade allowed Britain's mercantilist system to continue, with the bourgeoisie enjoying privileges. Otherwise, with the Enclosure Movement creating so many social conflicts and provoking violent clashes, the British king would not have turned such a blind eye.
Yet even if one wanted to enclose land, it was not a matter of casually riding around in circles and claiming whatever the horse's hooves crossed. It had to be done according to British law.
If France successfully used a trade blockade to make Britain collapse first, then it would be Britain's turn to wait to be carved up.
If France had a naval blockade line waiting to be broken through, Britain also had one waiting to be broken through.
Once that blockade line was breached, freedom would arrive.
There was a bust of Frederick II on Napoleon's desk. He had been the king of Prussia.
Many later scholars analyzed why France had been defeated in the Seven Years' War. Perhaps it was because Prussia had possessed a great man like him.
Though they were both Prussians, when the army led by Frederick II's son, Frederick William III, encountered the French again