I heard a British historian say Napoleon Bonaparte was as bad as Joseph Stalin

I heard a British historian say Napoleon Bonaparte was as bad as Joseph Stalin
Is it fair to say?

Other urls found in this thread:

uccla.ca/SOVIET_GENOCIDE_IN_THE_UKRAINE.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Stop listening to Lindybeige

>Napoleon Bonaparte
>dismantle the HRE
>dies

>Josef Stalin
>want to rid the world of capitalism once and for all
>dies

>Adolf Hitler
>try to recreate the HRE
>kill off religious people
>gets the help of fat-cat capitalists at home and abroad
>exercises absolute power over all people
>gets to retire and chills on a beach in Argentina until dying peacefully at a ripe old age

hmmm

>British historian

Stalin was actually trying to build "socialism in one country." That was his ideology. Lenin and Trotsky were trying to get rid of capitalism across the world. Stalin's goal was to do whatever possible to protect the USSR from being dismantled.

Who is know for killing 50 million + of his own people most of which supported him? Theres ur answer.

Napoleon was more of an Alexander.(killing thousands of people who opposed him)
Great at battlements terrible at leading a nation during times of peace.

The only historians that are more biased than the British are the Chinese, and that's just barely.

I dont get this hate of lindybeige on here. Hes not only well educated and well read on history, but makes really entertaining videos.

50 million is a stretch. That's like half the population of the Soviet Union. He purged about 500,000 people, the rest upwards to 2-3 million died due to famine which was not on purpose.

>famine which was not on purpose

There was about 1 million deaths from the GULAGs+half a million killed in his purges+5 million in holodomor=5.5million deaths. And it was definitely on purpose.

What? Napoleon had several major civil projects and administrative reforms that worked will showing he had the capacity to do things other than being a really really great general and military man. The French civil code for example as just one of those things.

fair enough, but that's still like a tenth of what that other guy said

Why not just say Hitler? What a pussy

people like to call him a brutal dictator to try and ruin his massive administrative and military science legacy

ive never seen anyone saying how exactly did Stalin caused holodomor or what are their source for some claim even when I asked seveal times here on Veeky Forums

Every British author acts like Napoleon was some kind of bad guy. It's pathetic.

>Napoleon was more of an Alexander.(killing thousands of people who opposed him)

He killed "people who opposed him" (or rather people the monarchs who opposed him had sent to die for them) in battle, after said people had declared war on him
How evil of him!

literally this
Napoleon did nothing wrong

Worldwide revolution was a practical impossibility after the failure of western European ones. "Socialism in one country" was simply the choice between giving up entirely or actually doing shit to build socialism. I guess Trotskyists want the latterl since they're useless liberal cultists anyway.

This, the British are even more delusional than the Japanese.

>Great at battlements terrible at leading a nation during times of peace.
the absolute state of the board history on the website Veeky Forums

>British historian
>>/x/

Sure he's entertaining but he's very clearly got pro-Anglo bias which all the continentals on Veeky Forums can't abide.

But Napoléon was also one of the greatest statesman to have ever ruled France..

Don't know how often this one is posted. I always find it a good read for Napoleon newcomers.

>Veeky Forums histories and humanities
>(you) aren't banned

the Holodomor and the Great Leap Forward Famine were both natural crop failures that turned into famines because the government reacted the wrong way, generally by trying to control food distribution and failing rather than accepting that the farmers might get it mostly right and leaving it alone

>wrecks Venice
>wercks HRE
based boney

>who is Andrew Roberts

>203 years
>still butthurt
Never change, Anglos.

So Napolean dindu nuffin?

It was more of local goverment mismanagement than Moscow. Unironically, those local governors where executed during the great purge.

This is the thing that always astounds me. Even if the the low estimates are true (and they're probably false, higher estimates in the tens of millions hold more weight) 5.5 million deaths is not something to shrug off.

Lefties are seemingly always willing to do this unless you bring up indigenous people and then it's a crime.

brits still butthurt centuries later

Why are we butthurt if we were on the wining side?

frogs spam "but u butthurt lol" everytime this autistic manlet gets brought up, its a coping mechanism

Because Britain has never produced a person as glorious as Napoleon, he was the last person in history to take us on a ride that was akin to a Roman conquest, this makes anglos grit their teeth in rage, I think he's very overrated, but he's still a better general than anyone to ever come out of the British isles.

>being this mad
Anglos are a funny bunch.

>50 million

Heres Raphael Lemkin laying it all out for you
uccla.ca/SOVIET_GENOCIDE_IN_THE_UKRAINE.pdf

Also, you really need to actually read up on the holodomor if you dont think it was intentional or that it was just simply a crop failure. Kulaks was a very nebulous term that was applied to anyone the state considered an enemy.

image saved

>this makes anglos grit their teeth in rage
No it doesn't.
>being this mad
I'm not mad though

>I'm not mad
Stop humiliating yourself lad.

>50 million dead
>Russia exists to this day and somehow managed to win WW2
wew

>He thinks I get upset other a 200 year old war

*over
fuck that does upset me

Good question
Care to explain us why you're so butthurt, Nigel?

I wonder what would have happened had Napoleon actually succeeded in making terms with Russia thus negating the need for any invasion plans
There's absolutely no chance, even with the insurrections taking place in areas like Spain, that the brits could have challenged french dominance over the mainland any time soon.

You have to understand that if your post is just quoting and mocking the other one and making no corrections to it you're adding nothing to the discussion and you're part of the problem.