What is the concensus on pic related? Did his rule ultimately benefit France or did it leave it worse off than before?

Hitler at least was true to his ideology, Napoleon just killed millions of people out of vanity and now french serfs worship him

Napoleons wars were justified and were mostly not aggressive.

>Napoleon ends the barbarism of the republican terror
>Rest of yurop makes coalition's against him
>He defends himself
Unlike Hitler in WW2 napoleon was not the aggressor of the conflict.

Napoleon literally ruined France.

>Napoleon was an aggressive conqueror
They were all defensive wars up until the 2 invasion of Russia, over a decade after Napoleon first took power.

Napoleon guaranteed the spread of the ideas of the revolution, as well as the birth of nationalism and imperialism, both ideologies playing a huge importance in the rise of the West to global dominance.

He saved his country and revolution.
>millions
please stop embarrassing yourself
Why do anglos know so little about this great man?

Are you retarded or is this bait? Ever heard of the code Napoleon?

Greatest European to ever live, don't believe the anglo lies, and the Napoleonic Code heavily influenced civil law.

Also, his rule not only benefited France, but allowed the kickstart of revolutions in Latin America to be free from Spain.

This, he was not an aggressor for the majority of the wars he fought.

at the beginning maybe, when he was defending France from inviding forced.
But then he went overboard and conquered half of Europe, like Hitler.
And like Hitler, Napoleon lost because he decided to invade Russia

Nah, Hitlers actions at the beginning were justified, just like Napoleon.
And then, both of them went too far

Arguably saved France from falling apart, but he could have left France in a way better state if he wasn't so overambitious and expansionist

>Face it, both Napoleon and Hitler were agressive conquerors who were only successful because of their ruthlessness

You're an uneducated retard
Napoleon's conquests happened in wars he didn't start

That's funny way of typing Robespierre.

And yet he did continue the wars after he sucessfully defended French territory.
Same with Hitler, he started wars to get back the territory that Germany lost and then he went overboard

No he saved France in its moment of peril and guaranteed the revolution to become one of the most important moments of history

This is illogica

Name 2 wars in which he was the aggressor
As well, explain where and how he went "too far"

This is the ONLY correct answer for somebody criticizing Napoleon

>As well, explain where and how he went "too far"
Too much agressive expansion, which united the whole continent against him. Same as Hitler

Wrong Napoleon.

Didn't know Danton and his cronies could be written like that.

>aggressive expansion
when

and stop saying "like hitler" when you're not stating ANY examples just broad statements

when he turned half of Europe into his puppet states

He wasn't that bad
Great statesman
Terrible at wars

At least he tried ;__;

Funny way of spelling Philip VI

They tried to overthrow him and he beat them

Why is this wrong, they posed a threat to France and the revolution and he did what was required to keep them safe

Half of Europe was hellbent on overthrowing him and forcing monarchy upon France.

The revolution was inherently wrong to begin with.

until he won the war.
had he accepted a surrender with minor concessions, other countries would have accepted Napoleon as the new emperor of France.
But he was too ambitions and went too far, just like Hitler

t. fat monarchist

No, feudalism and the ancient regime were inherently wrong to begin with

The revolution liberated Europe and Napoleon allowed this to happen

No they would have just tried again, just like they did when he was weakened, except they would have succeeded earlier
If you beat an opponent why would you give them space for a second punch after they've been humiliated? You do the minimum of what's required to stop potential disaster, which even what he did obviously wasn't enough

>Despises monarchy
>Loves Napoleon

Frogs confuse me ever so much.

When Napoleon returned from exile he was content with just ruling France. So ya no.

> you will never be conscripted in the levee en masse

Napoleon overcame the monarchy of the ancient regime
Napoleon's rule and the rule of the ancient regime are two very different things

This is such a fucking obvious Anglo it's ridiculous.

Yes. Napoleon killed an awful lot more people for less valid reasons.

>defensive wars
>not valid reason
HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Seriously

>until he won the war.
And then those same countries tried to overthrow him again on six other occasions.

yeah, it was a little bit too late by then

had he shown that he is a reasonable ruler and offered acceptable terms to the losing countries, European powers would have accepted him

We saved Europe from two great tyrants. Show some fucking respect

>Two great tyrants

More than two.

Napoleon wanted to rule over Europe and like everybody that wants to rule Europe: fails.
The romans were by far the best attempt and the most successful.

Treaties were signed and then the coalition powers would ignore them only to once again declare war on France. How was Napoleon not the reasonable one in this scenario?

>had he shown that he is a reasonable ruler
The French thought he was.

>offered acceptable terms to the losing countries
He did this with Russia and Prussia and in the end they both turned on him.

European powers would not have accepted him because he was threat to their existence. A man, not of royalty, leading a country to prosperity and victory. This proved that monarchy was unnecessary, and as such most of Europe's polities clamored for Napoleon's removal via force since the monarchs feared being overthrown themselves.

Nigel trying to take credit for the work of other nations. Truly Albion never rests.

>had he shown that he is a reasonable ruler and offered acceptable terms to the losing countries, European powers would have accepted him

But that's false, tard
Napoleon conquered Austria shitton of times, and each time he gave back their sovereignty to Austrians when he could easily have annexed them
It didnt stop them from attacking him again and again
Same for Prussia, after he conquered the country in 19 days, he withdrew his troops and let them have their sovereignty. All he did was liberate Poland from them

>And yet he did continue the wars after he sucessfully defended French territory.

You can't win if you care only about defending your borders
Look at France in WW2
When a country declared war on him, Napoleon invaded that country to crush the threat
That's still self-defense, since he didnt initiate hostilities, but that's also conquest

Monarchists are even more pathetic and delusional than fascists

These people speak the truth
Anglos are deluded if they really believe Napoleon was a tyrant or even comparable to Hitler

>try to live up to Napoleon I's legacy as a brilliant military man
>get so butthurt at seeing the combat of the Italian campaigns that he drops all support for the nationalists and makes peace with Austria

Still makes me just stop and scratch my head every now and again.

Who even began this meme?

More than anything, the French Revolution gravitated around a refusal of feudalism, and most hoped that the king would aid in this, as the King had been slowly tearing down the power of nobles for centuries. It even surprised the revolutionaries that it had to come to the execution of Louis XVI.

I'm french, and I know that with those constant strikes the workers berate us with, we look like "monarchy-hating protesters", but really we aren't.

The french don't mind a strong leader, and it's by strong leaders that France prevailed. Hell, the Fifth Republic has a constitution that bestows on the president an insane amount of power when contrasted with what german chancellors have.

If you can't see how Napoleon wasn't an "Ancient Regime" ruler, then you're hopeless. He litterally catered to the common man the most, and would name his marshals on quality rather than birth rights. And that was all the revolution was about for the french.

It wasn't about "muh democracy" or "muh spread the wealth" bullshit.

>just like Hitler
Is this some kind of tic you have? Do you frame always your arguments by fulfilling Godwin's law from the beginning?

>defends against 6 coalitions of monarchs
>agressor

>He litterally catered to the common man the most, and would name his marshals on quality rather than birth rights

Like that time he named his brother to be King of Spain?

That was his way to appeal to the monarchists to appease both parts of the nation (republicans and monarchists)