Emmanuel Mounier : Feu la Chrétienté. (Éditions du Seuil, - jstor
https://www.jstor.org › stable
by J Lacroix · 1950 — La mort de la chrétienté n'est pas la mort du christianisme. ... ne peut être extrinsèque, ou même secondaire, pour une religion de l'incar nation.

so

feu la democratie = death to democracy

?

Critias was a leader of the Thirty Tyrants, who took power in Athens after its defeat to the Spartans in the Peloponnesian War. Although the Thirty were defeated at Munychia, they didn't die there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Munychia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Piraeus

https://iep.utm.edu/critias/
[...]
A memorial was later erected to Critias and the Thirty depicting a personified Oligarchy carrying torches and setting Democracy on fire. An inscription on the monument’s base, as recorded by a scholiast, read: “This is a memorial of those noble men who restrained the hubris of the accursed Athenian Demos a short time” (scholiast on Aeschines, Against Timarchus 39). The price of this “restraint” was the lives of at least 1,500 Athenians (Aristotle, Constitution of the Athenians 35.4).

As Plato admits in his Seventh Letter, the extreme behavior of his second cousin Critias-along with another cousin, Charmides, the leader of the Ten who governed the Piraeus during the rule of the Thirty-effectively ended any thoughts he had previously entertained about a future political career (Plato, Seventh Letter 324d).



--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 11 ώρες (2022-07-17 19:35:33 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

THE FIRST ANARCHIST, ATHEIST AND REBEL AT THE TIME AND MUCH MORE THAN SOCRATES HIS TEACHER (For those who love and withstand to read about Classic Antiquity)
In Critias' view, “A time there was when anarchy did rule / the lives of men” and the laws which were created by men to control society simply were ineffective. So “some shrewd man first, a man in counsel wise / Discovered unto men the fear of the Gods / Thereby to frighten sinners should they sin” and so the gods came to be the higher authority which would reward or punish people for what they did “secretly in deed, or word, or thought” (Baird, 47). There is no God to Critias, no divine will, no universal plan; there are only the strong who control the weak, and religion is the most effective tool the ruling class can use to maintain power and drive their agenda.
The following fragment comes from Critias' play Sisyphus, one of the few pieces of his works to have survived. If it were a letter from the man himself or an essay it would easy to conclude that he was an atheist, but the piece seems to be a speech of one of the characters in the play, and so it is less clear what Critias' actual views were. The charge that he was an atheist comes from later writers who still had access to his writings or contemporaries (like Xenophon, another of Socrates' students) who wrote about him. The following translation comes from Kathleen Freeman's Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers:
There was a time when the life of men was unordered, bestial and the slave of force, when there was no reward for the virtuous and no punishment for the wicked. Then, I think, men devised retributory laws, in order that Justice might be dictator and have arrogance as its slave, and if anyone sinned, he was punished.https://www.worldhistory.org/Critias/