English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

A motto of the French Revolution was "equality, liberty and fraternity." Did Napoleon's rule more nearly fulfill or betray these ideals? What evidence can you give for each side of the argument?

2006-12-03 22:16:46 · 3 answers · asked by Jake 2 in Arts & Humanities History

3 answers

I believe he fulfilled the ideals of the French Revolution for the poor, although one could argue that his rule as emperor did not meet the aims of the Revolution insomuch as it largely removed democratic rule. If one reads and agrees with Rousseau however, one can see that the rise of Napoleon was, in fact, an inevitability.

Bonaparte usurped the power of the French revolution as the aftermath of the Thermidorian reaction against the revolution. But he was also the son of the revolution in the sense that he was the arch-foe of the previous feudal ruling class headed by the Bourbons. Napoleon had no intention to restore the past, to restore serfdom. On the contrary, his rule rested on the bourgeoisie and he epitomized the fact that society now had a new ruling class, the capitalists. The wars against the rest of Europe (with the exception of England) were wars of conquest to strengthen the French bourgeoisie but, by the same token, they were wars of defense against the coalition of feudal nations attempting to restore the Bourbons and feudalism in France. Through the Napoleonic wars, the French revolution struck a deathblow at feudalism everywhere in Europe. Serfdom remained longest in Russia precisely because Napoleon failed to conquer there. Thus, while Marxists view the role of Napoleon as reactionary inside France, his role outside was progressive. The serfs everywhere hailed the coming of the French armies because it meant their liberation. This, as much as anything else, aided Napoleon in his victories. The armies of his enemies were already undermined wherever they included serfs.

2006-12-03 23:11:59 · answer #1 · answered by the_lipsiot 7 · 0 0

It was a betrayal, but then the Revolution itself had so degenerated from the vision of a just society that it reallt did not matter much. He only brough order out of chaos. But dictators usually do.

2006-12-04 07:22:58 · answer #2 · answered by Isis 7 · 0 0

yesssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss#

2006-12-04 06:23:58 · answer #3 · answered by liparna r 1 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers