Would the world be a better place to live had Napoleon not been defeated?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 03:46:06 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Would the world be a better place to live had Napoleon not been defeated?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: 1. Title question. 2. Napoleon in general: FF or HP?
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
#3
FF
 
#4
HP
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 11

Calculate results by number of options selected
Author Topic: Would the world be a better place to live had Napoleon not been defeated?  (Read 544 times)
Karpatsky
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,545
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 10, 2018, 01:50:50 PM »

Thoughts on this? I have been reading a Russian history of Europe, and it makes a big deal out of how Alexander I 'liberated' Europe from Napoleon. Considering though that Napoleon brought rule of law and human rights to the European mainstream, I am not convinced that he could have been worse than the reactionary monarchies which replaced him.

Obviously this is just a hypothetical since he never really had the chance to be a peacetime leader, but I can't help but feel that world freedom and standard of living would be better off had Napoleon maintained hegemony over Europe, at least for a little while.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 10, 2018, 08:28:04 PM »

Thoughts on this? I have been reading a Russian history of Europe, and it makes a big deal out of how Alexander I 'liberated' Europe from Napoleon. Considering though that Napoleon brought rule of law and human rights to the European mainstream, I am not convinced that he could have been worse than the reactionary monarchies which replaced him.

Obviously this is just a hypothetical since he never really had the chance to be a peacetime leader, but I can't help but feel that world freedom and standard of living would be better off had Napoleon maintained hegemony over Europe, at least for a little while.

I would tend to agree, but I don’t know if Napoleon could content himself to stop and play the role of the silent tiger. Napoleon II could, should his father die too soon, fall under the sway of Napoleon’s more able advisers: Fouché, Talleyrand, and Cambacérès.
Logged
Cory
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,708


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 11, 2018, 11:25:50 PM »

Everything would be so much better, yes.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,334
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2018, 06:32:16 AM »

Nap did come into many European countries bringing the idea of liberty and freedom, and the locals ate it up.  Then he took their money, food and young men and never brought anything back.

I still went yes/FF
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,768


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 12, 2018, 11:59:24 AM »

Does Napoleon still die in 1821 (just seven years after he was defeated in real life), leading to a massive succession struggle as his sickly 10 year old son is obviously unfit for the throne, leading all the powers of Central Europe to start seeing their chance to seize back all the territorial concessions they had made and undoing their puppet governments? Because that's the most likely scenario I see here.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.03 seconds with 13 queries.