Lol it's not even out yet and people are already doing "acshually Napoleon was bad" discourse.
I feel like Napoleon is solidly in the kind of zone where if you have any personal feelings on him that arent analytical of history, you're a freak.
Oh you love Napoleon? Freak.
You HATE Napoleon? Get someone better to hate lmao, freak.
I can understand why Haitians would despise him at least.
Trying to reintroduce slavery is kind of a dick move.
Yeah I mostly meant like, if someone is a westerner and hates him for being a tyrant or doing a lot of wars and other shit like that, cause literally every "greatest king/ruler" of every european country is likely to be the guy that did war the best.
His Haiti takes were shit, but he had good hat game and I'll forgive him a lot for kicking the shit out of Habsburgs and Prussians.
But I wish he'd stayed under Robespierre's thumb (he was close friends with his brother). That corrupt nonce Barras fucked his formative ideology up.
Compared to his monarchist enemies he was a goddamn saint, compared to his revolutionary counterparts he was a traitor and monarchist
How is this difficult
"acshually Napoleon was bad"
His Imperial and Royal Majesty Napoleon I, By the Grace of God and the Constitution of the Republic, Emperor of the French, King of Italy, Protector of the Confederation of the Rhine, Mediator of the Swiss Confederation and Co-Prince of Andorra?
yes he was bad
Deffo. My point is that I don't think Napoleon has a positive image, outside of people who talk about how every man must read the art of war.
fair
i guess i'm predisposed to consider him a scumbag as i am english lmao
it's a reflexDefinitely a scumbag, but maybe critical support for embarassing a bunch of inbred failson noblemen on the continent.
seethe harder yankee
i will persist(this is a joke to be clear)
FUCK
you're the one i did this to on the lifeboat discord aren't you lmao
the english hating napoleon is rich, napoleon only tried to do what britain actually managed to do
normal people dont hate napoleon, they dont really think about him at all. but that's because we dont grow up with 200 year old anti-napoleon propaganda fed to us from the cradle.
Protector of the Confederation of the Rhine, Mediator of the Swiss Confederation and Co-Prince of Andorra
these aren't bad though i agree they never shouldve tried to make italy a thing
I really don't see what about the English people specifically is supposed to be so antithetical to socialism Marx lived in London ffs. Napoleon was a representative of the interests of the bourgeoise interests in France and created one of the first truly capitalist imperial states he was a French national hero nothing less nothing more. He literally installed his relatives as kings of conquered countries how is that socialist or progressive
Europe should be separated the idea of a united Europe is deeply tied to fascism. Literally why is Europe something people think should be a single entity.
A united Europe is an idea that has deep historic ties to fascist movements as well as the fact that the only thing uniting them really being race. It is a move away from national borders and into ethnic borders and would be bad
if Europe had been one big nation it would have been easier for them to form and maintain imperial holdings and would have been bad for pretty much everyone on earth
Slice of life with Robespierre and that bourgeois lady who tried to invite him for dinner non stop and Robespierre just keep sending her random speech that he wrote
They should do an alternate history on the battle of waterloo and just had napoleon straight up win.
And then the post credit will have Caesar as part of the historically progressive universe.
Napoleon is actually a radical who became a centrist because of virgin napoleon falling in love with a rich MILF, and I hope this is the focus of the film.
If Napoleon never meets Josephine then he remains a hero of the revolution instead of crowning himself and reintroducing slavery.
One good way to take a discussion like this is to compare the liberal historical consensus on Napoleon, or Caesar, Washington, or similar "great men" to the liberal historical consensus on socialist leaders like Stalin, Mao, or Castro.
Libs will never come close to demonizing their great men of history to the same degree they demonize socialist leaders, no matter the facts. At worst, your great men were "complicated figures," who were "products of their time," and they are given tremendous leeway for evils on par with anything socialist leaders have been accused of. At best libs will give lip service to criticism while obviously idolozing them.
Basically, they read their history in the most generous possible light, and take the most critical possible view of socialists.
For their history: "they weren't perfect, but..."
For our history: "they did some good things, but..."
I find it weird to complain about people "idolizing" Napoleaon. Literally who cares? It's like complaining about idolization of Ramesses II
not quite as Napoleon is still linked to French nationalism in various ways
that's not that remarkable that's a natural consequence of napoleon setting something up and that thing still existing
Imagine if the Rosetta stone was found before the American revolution and instead the copying the Roman anesthetics the founding fathers copied Egyptian ones.
Actually when this movie is released macron will ascend to merge with Napoleon and become Jupiter, the god of centrism and bonaportism
You know how people point to the USSR and Stalin in particular to why Communism is evil? Napoleon was that for why Liberal Democracies were inherently evil compared to Monarchism and Haiti was the Cuba of its day for the same reason.
Damn, great way to put it in perspective. Even have a form of proto-encirclement (European monarchies constantly attacking).
already make that book about Caesar
