Was Napoleon Bonaparte good or bad? What do you think?

Discussion in 'Off-topic Discussion' started by Resilience 16, Sep 22, 2021.

Tags:
  1. Resilience 16

    Resilience 16 Fapstronaut

    Napoleon Bonaparte has done some good things as well as bad things. What is your opinion about him? Just talking about this because today I read about him.
     
    aricking and onceaking like this.
  2. onceaking

    onceaking Fapstronaut

    I'm sure I could find name some good things he did but initially, I can only think of how he brought in the Civil Code of 1804 which did away with the reforms in divorce and family law. I don't think this was good because it took away the freedom that women had gotten by the reforms.
     
  3. MindfulWarrior

    MindfulWarrior Fapstronaut

    He lead many wars, how can causing so much violence, destruction and suffering ever be good?
    I'm sure most warmongers like him hide their own egotistical desires under very good intents though.
     
  4. Resilience 16

    Resilience 16 Fapstronaut

    But civil code removed all the feudal systems.
     
  5. Resilience 16

    Resilience 16 Fapstronaut

    Civil code removed serfdom
     
  6. onceaking

    onceaking Fapstronaut

    But was the feudal system all that bad?

    I should say that I'm fresh off writing an essay on how the French Revolution changed gender roles and the family so that influences my answer. My research didn't cover much of Napolean and my main focus was on the roles of women and the family in the revolution. What I did find out was that the Civil Code did fulfil many of the revolutionary goals (such as creating unified law, establishing private property, and freedom of contracts). Seems to me the reforms to family law were well-intended but poorly executed so maybe it's understandable he did away with them. But I think the Divorce Law of 1792 was a good thing that made society fairer and it seems to me Napolean wasn't in favour of that.

    Having said that my study of history tells me no one is really all good or all bad. Like you said the Civil Code did some good. The fact is Napolean was alive at an extraordinary time in history and nothing he did was as bad as the Reign of Terror.
     
    Perseverance 16 likes this.
  7. onceaking

    onceaking Fapstronaut

    Do you think he would have led so many wars if he wasn't alive during the French Revolution?
     
    Perseverance 16 likes this.
  8. Resilience 16

    Resilience 16 Fapstronaut

    That's right all of us have shades of Grey. And yeah the reign of terror was the second worst thing in the history
     
    Vanquisher12 likes this.
  9. MindfulWarrior

    MindfulWarrior Fapstronaut

    I don't know, but what he would or wouldn't have done is not really the point but rather he's internal state.
     
    Perseverance 16 likes this.
  10. Resilience 16

    Resilience 16 Fapstronaut

    Even Alexander The great lead so many wars but still people call him great that's because war were common in that era
     
    Hadrian3 likes this.
  11. Resilience 16

    Resilience 16 Fapstronaut

    Who told moral categories only make sense in context of religion? I was just wanted to know people's opinion on the things he did.
    Everything needn't be "scientific".
     
  12. Resilience 16

    Resilience 16 Fapstronaut

    According to me the Civil Code was one of the good things he did. But he brought back slavery and monarchy which was really bad. Also he focused more on invading in later times and hence lost the support, got defeated and sent to exile.
     
  13. Resilience 16

    Resilience 16 Fapstronaut

    My question was were his actions good for the society.
     
  14. Akbarmagnus

    Akbarmagnus Fapstronaut

    143
    186
    43
    most of the time he was in the defensive tough, what he can be blamed for is the nonsentical invasion of spain, restoration of slavery and his anti-women stance.(also abandoning his army to die in egypt, like wtf?)
     
  15. HelperX

    HelperX Fapstronaut

    886
    1,500
    123
    As someone already said, he lead many wars trying to conquer as much land as he could, obviously he wasn't good.
     
    Perseverance 16 likes this.
  16. Resilience 16

    Resilience 16 Fapstronaut

    Then what about Alexander The Great
     
  17. Meshuga

    Meshuga Fapstronaut

    Empire creates a strong central government, which can both support and oppress the citizens inside its borders. Empire is bloody and violent on the edges, but peaceful inside. By taking territory and unifying it under central rule, it might be a large conflict that ends dozens of small future conflicts and results in less bloodshed, over time.

    I don't know much about Napoleon. I'm American, and home schooled what's more, so I kind of skipped that world stage of history since America was busy doing her own things. All I know from that standpoint is Napoleon sold the Louisiana Territory to Jefferson before he could get it approved by Congress, but it was a good move so they let it slide, proving laws and principles get us only so far. I'm also a literature guy, and I know Napoleon ran a meritocratic operation, which led to promoting the son of a French nobleman and a Haitian slave, Alexandre-Thomas Davy de la Pailleterie , to the rank of General-in-Chief. His son was Alexander Dumas, who wrote "The Count of Monte Cristo" and "The Three Musketeers," among many others. So, huzzah for a small step in racial equality, I guess.

    Napoleon also invented the Martini, so I suppose from an alcoholic and James Bond standpoint, Good? Yeah, forget all the war and bloodshed and repeal of women's rights. Napoleon was a good guy.
     
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2021
    Perseverance 16 likes this.
  18. Akbarmagnus

    Akbarmagnus Fapstronaut

    143
    186
    43
    all of these *great* conquerors mostly used a period of momentary weakness in neighboring states to plunder and conquer land, alexander might have shown some restraint(for the times) in his conquest of *persia* but he abandoned all that when he got to india/pakistan.
     
    Perseverance 16 likes this.
  19. Akbarmagnus

    Akbarmagnus Fapstronaut

    143
    186
    43
    I finally got around to reading the biography of that guy and napoleon did not really have anything to do with promoting alexandre dumas to his rank in fact after napoleon obtained power for the first time dumas never again commanded the number of troops he once did(napoleon in fact despised him), he issued a set of racist laws that among other things forbid interracial marriage, ended the previous government experiment on color blind education and "in the armies that General Dumas once led, suddenly the very concept of a black soldier commanding white troops was impossible—a black general of division or general-in-chief of an army, unimaginable.”
     
    Meshuga likes this.
  20. Meshuga

    Meshuga Fapstronaut

    Well then. Bonaparte was a worse tool than Beau Brummel.
     
    Akbarmagnus likes this.

Share This Page