I think he moved what the Revolution had started in to more of a governable place than the fairly anarchical situation it was prior to him taking power.
He brought stability following the revolution, he introduced the Napoleonic Code (Google it).,
he established the metric system, introduced the by merit process, where people were promoted by ability rather than family background (tbh family background was a nightmare then, admitting either way could find you in prison lol).
then he stabilised central backing and currency (yes he wrecked it).
There is a lot of bad, he did do a backstab on the Revolution by going back to monarchy, but it was a start, also if he of established himself as purely dictator it may have had a much longer harm to France.
Then there are events such as Jaffa and the massacre there (Google it).
Napoleon is an enigma, he could have been amazing force of stability and ‘good’ for France with his amazing skills and ability within law and order, however he decided to interfere with Switzerland and exclude Great Britain, which at the time was a new ish Union from the Continent, this resulted in and end to the Treat of Amiens which had pretty much ended the revolutionary wars,
If Napoleon had of stopped meddling after the treaty was signed, then Great Britain would likely have not declared war on France in 1803.
the rest is history,
quotes. The Times - “Upon the whole, Buonaparte will go down to posterity as a man who, having more good at his disposal than any other potentate of any former age, had actually applied his immense means to the production of a greater share of mischief and misery to his fellow-creatures.”
De Gaulle - Napoleon left France crushed, invaded, drained of blood and courage, smaller than when he had taken control of her destinies, condemned to ill-drawn frontiers, the evils of which still persist, and exposed to the distrust of Europe which has weighed upon her to this day. But it is impossible to dismiss as of no account the matchless lustre which he imparted to our armies.
Lord Rosebery (PM) - No name represents so completely and conspicuously dominion, splendor, and catastrophe. He raised himself by the use, and ruined himself by the abuse, of superhuman faculties. He was wrecked by the extravagance of his own genius. No less powers than those which had effected his rise could have achieved his fall.
I'd say he has good when it comes to ideals about freedom and bad when it comes it comes to planning and actual tactics. In terms of long term combat. With his most embarassing combat leader feat is when like 80% of his forces made the same mistake Russia made. Which was leaving like his entire military force to pretty much suffer and or die from the dumbest killer within warfare. And that is FREEZING TO DEATH. O... O its like talk about a boring death XD. Even the Spartan's from Greece would probably call that a pathetic way to die.
they exploit a whole continent or certain countries of Africa, if they exploit not a whole continent but countries of this continent, which are these nations? what exactly are they exploiting? for what reason? and why the governments of these countries do not defend themselves? could he not find alliances that would prevent this?
Look up the Haitian revolution. My people did defend themselves, after gaining independence France and a bunch of other countries also profiting off of the slave trait sanctioned the shit out of my country and threatened to invade again if we didn’t pay for our independence.
You can literally Google search all of the countries that were previous French colonies.
Your questions are actually insane. At this point I think you have to be joking if you have to ask someone what’s exploitative about slavery?
There have been several historical and present resistance to French exploitation, they’ve all been “mysteriously murdered”
Back in World War Two France promised to give their former colonies independence if they helped them win, do you want to know how that ended?
They hired a private militia to kill Algerian civilians (look up the massacre of 45,000 Algerians)
Lawyer Ali Boumendjel also wanted Algeria to have independence and control over resources and policies, the French tortured him - and claimed the cause of death was suicide. It was only up until last year when France admitted to murdering him.
There are countless other examples of the French doing this, these are just the ones I know off the top of my head
Maurice Audible, tortured for wanting Algerian independence. Frances former colonies are only symbolically independent, the truth is France is continuing to pillage, loot, and exploit the African continent using economic and political control
nothing prevents these countries from going to see other countries that are richer or more powerful militarily such as China or Russia, which would make France's threats obsolete
Yes! Of course he made some mistakes but overall I believe he was intelligent and very strategic, and had the best interest for France at heart. He certainly did a better job than King Louis. I myself have lots of French in my blood so my Father made sure I studied up on my French history.
No, simply because he didn't spread the ideals of the French Revolution for the benefit of the citizens of Europe but as part of the political game of Europe. When the Revolutionary ideals no longer suited him, he abandoned them and crowned himself Emperor.
Hard to say since he soon became emperor after taking power. However it was important for France to have a strong leader since all of Europe was against them. I confess I know less about Napoleons domestic policy compared to his military campaigns which it seems he spent more time on. I’m not sure if his rule was more egalitarian then the ancient regime.
18.6K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
Umm he made himself emperor, twice. I don’t see him as embodying the idea of revolution. Maybe because I’m in America where democracy (tries to) reign. Not sure there are good French personalities during those years. Robespierre etc, were pretty bad. I’m just prob not educated enough in French history.
No lol because Napoleon did not create France or independence. No, he was crowned Emperor only once.
But with its civil code, which has been adopted by 40 countries around the world, it has brought civil equality, the non-denominational state, high schools and universities, and many other institutions
Your president takes an oath on a religious book haha.
More seriously certainly because the US was founded by the philosophy of the Enlightenment, and was a state without History.
Suffice to say that in a country like France which is deeply religious, the King of France was the representative of God on earth, and as the historian Jules Michelet (who was an atheist) said, "France is a conquest of the church.
France was a society whose religion had shaped society for over a thousand years when Napoleon took power. Needless to say that making the state non-denominational under these conditions was incredible and not only in France but for all societies in Europe.
For the rest Napoleon had set up a society based on "merit" only the talents and abilities. For example there will be peasants he will make marshals of them, and sometimes even kings.
Workers' wages will increase by 25 percent under his rule.
Remember that when he took power France was economically in ruins, there was civil war and there was war abroad. When he took power, he restored the finances, established civil peace, and concluded external peace with the Treaty of Amiens, which was finally broken by the English. With the resumption of wars, he will make France a superpower, whereas 5 years before he took power, France had become a second-tier nation.
Same is said of Hitler. Easy for dictators to make change in fledgling economies. Doesn’t turn out well though.
I would hit back lightly that American founding fathers made the first governing document to be truly secular. Dispite the enormous religiosity of the colonies.
It is this counter power that will overthrow Napoleon. and he organized referendums on the most important decisions concerning the empire, while all the other countries did not.
How many countries had counter-powers in the European monarchies of that time?
I don't know, I would have to read about the intricacies of his emperorship. But it doesn't sound like a democracy. But I know he spread a lot of liberal ideas to the places he conquered. So did Alexander.
Its the ethics America is facing. War for democracy? Or let people decide in their own counrties. Lybia afghan and Iraq did not work out well.
it is precisely interesting to have the opinion of a foreigner no interest in having the opinion of the French I know him more or less.
Considering Napoleon as a butcher and a dictator often demonstrates a lack of historical knowledge on this subject, and of nuance. history is often complex and cannot be summed up in white or black.
The first impression is fighting with russia. I did not connect him with revolution because I often ignore time and sequence. Basically I dont know him.
Fuck no. Alexander Dumas, the father, not the son who wrote The Three Musketeers, was a better representative of the French Revolution. Fun fact: he was black
He betrayed the revolution by installing a monarchy even though the revolution ought to abolish the monarchy how is anyone supposed to think he embodies the ideals of the revolution?
the word dictatorship is exaggerated! The regime has become increasingly authoritarian. This is completely true in terms of foreign policy. When he got rid of Talleyrand, Napoleon had his hands free. This is a little less true for domestic politics, because the Chambers and their ability to oppose remained. I would add that he had moderating collaborators around him, in particular Cambacérès who kept telling him “You cannot do that, because the law forbids you to do so”. But the counter-powers are always strong when the power is weak. In the present case, power only weakened in 1812, with the Russian campaign, and the Senate ended up causing its downfall.
He just did what Julius Casear did, became king in all but name, and later like Augustus ceasar did declare himself emperor which is now a title above king
Home > Society & Politics > Questions > For you, does Napoleon embody the ideals of the French Revolution and do you judge these ideas and actions as bad?
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
Anonymous(36-45)+1 y
+1 y
