Napoleon was a great man who could have united Europe Watch

FriendlyPenguin
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
Edit: Sorry, wrong thread
0
reply
Fenice
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
lol
0
reply
Vesniep
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
(Original post by Mathemagicien)
Vesniep Cato the Elder


This is really more of a question than a statement. You guys probably know more history than I do, so what do you think?
Cato is banned ... I did expect that
Nah I don't know more than you
I have to do some research. I'll answer it tomorrow properly.

Here's my ignorant answer : I'm not in favour of any United Europe.
I wouldn't like a Nazi Europe. It would be a dystopia for me.
BUT a French Europe is not that bad. Ideally Europe will be a mixture of French and German culture perhaps British as well if they ever want to take the European integration project seriously. I'm a fan of Renaissance, Enlightenment and ancient Greek culture ... in a sense they can culturally unite Europe.
I have to think about it give me some time.
If I'm convinced that it would prevent ww I and II and that eventually the establishment could become more liberal and less authoritarian,
then I could blame the British for everything that went wrong and will go wrong in the future.
Britain wants to divide us Europeans. Oppose them ! Hmm.. tempting.
A question for you now: Should the EU/ Federal Europe demonise Britain ? I'm indecisive.
This will probably lead to an even more Eurosceptic Britain but perhaps a more United Europe with 'a common threat trying to divide us'.
0
reply
paul514
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
(Original post by Mathemagicien)
Napoleon came very close to uniting much of Europe. Imagine if he had managed to unite the majority of Continental Europe; we would have overthrown the old, feudalist order, and replaced it with republican meritocracies.

If he had survived the nationalist uprisings in Europe, we would not have seen the "World" Wars that caused Europe to lose its place in the world.

Napoleon was a good leader, even in peace. The years as first consul, from 1799 to 1804, were extraordinarily peaceful and productive. He also created the educational system based on lycées and grandes écoles and the Sorbonne, which put France at the forefront of European educational achievement.

He consolidated the administrative system based on departments and prefects. He initiated the Council of State, which still vets the laws of France, and the Court of Audit, which oversees its public accounts. He organized the Banque de France and the Légion d’Honneur, which thrive today.

He also built or renovated much of the Parisian architecture that we still enjoy, both the practical—the quays along the Seine and four bridges over it, the sewers and reservoirs—and the proud, such as the Arc de Triomphe, the Rue de Rivoli and the Vendôme column."
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/histor...955298/?no-ist

Napoleon was an extraordinary governor. Many of his reforms are what the rest of Europe based their institutions on, only much later.

If Napoleon had remained emperor of France for the six years remaining in his natural life, European civilization would have benefited greatly. The conservative Holy Alliance of Russia, Prussia and Austria would not have been able to crush republican movements in Spain, Greece, Eastern Europe and elsewhere; the benefits of meritocracy over feudalism would have had time to become more widely appreciated; encouragement of the sciences would have been better understood and copied; and the plans to rebuild Paris would have been implemented, making it the most gorgeous city in the world.

Yea well hitler tried the same then the eu did in 1992


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Vesniep
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
(Original post by paul514)
Yea well hitler tried the same then the eu did in 1992


Posted from TSR Mobile
Cause we all know that a united Europe will be extremely powerful.
Hitler, Napoleon and Churchill all knew that; all of them being charismatic leaders.
0
reply
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
A strange view of history indeed by the OP. Even on the matter of Paris, much of which was built in the Hausmann era.
0
reply
Farm_Ecology
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
I agree.

While there were several times in history Europe could have been united, Napoleons campaigns were probably one of the last time it could have been done so successfully.

Nationalism was still in its early years and in many ways the concept of a nation.state was still mutable. Had Napoleon and his successors held onto the conquered territory, Europeans may well have developed a distinctly European identity rather than one of the individual nations.

While there would of course be movements of independence, they would be akin to Scottish or Catalonian movements, and would likely only spring up in times of hardship. But with a strong united europe, those days would be further away.

I love conceptualising alternate history, but I wonder what would have happened as far as colonial possessions. The scramble for Africa was after Napoleon's defeat, and if France took the British isles I couldn't imagine them taking the commonwealth with it, or at least not india.

There is also the question of Russia and the USA,
0
reply
paul514
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
(Original post by Farm_Ecology)
I agree.

While there were several times in history Europe could have been united, Napoleons campaigns were probably one of the last time it could have been done so successfully.

Nationalism was still in its early years and in many ways the concept of a nation.state was still mutable. Had Napoleon and his successors held onto the conquered territory, Europeans may well have developed a distinctly European identity rather than one of the individual nations.

While there would of course be movements of independence, they would be akin to Scottish or Catalonian movements, and would likely only spring up in times of hardship. But with a strong united europe, those days would be further away.

I love conceptualising alternate history, but I wonder what would have happened as far as colonial possessions. The scramble for Africa was after Napoleon's defeat, and if France took the British isles I couldn't imagine them taking the commonwealth with it, or at least not india.

There is also the question of Russia and the USA,
Well we could have done it to at the time of napoleon we had beat him in Spain, Portugal, France and we had the empire.




Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Farm_Ecology
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by Mathemagicien)
A little off topic, but what do you think would have happened if the Great Schism (Catholic vs Orthodox) never occured? What if the Eastern Roman Empire never fell? It seems like history has conspired to divide Europe.
There is a theory about how the fall of Constantinople led to the renaissance via the influx of refugees, which also led to things like the search to the new world.

The real question would be about why the schism never occured, if Charlemagne had done things different without the power being places in the pope or considering his empire the successor to the western Roman empire, a whole set of differences might have occurred in western Europe.

But ultimately, would the lack of a schism make much of a difference? The differences were ultimately political, and we might have just ended up with a situation like today but replace turkey/Ottomans with the Roman empire/Greece.
0
reply
Cromwellian
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by Vesniep)
Cato is banned ... I did expect that
He isn't anymore
0
reply
Cromwellian
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
(Original post by Mathemagicien)
Napoleon came very close to uniting much of Europe. Imagine if he had managed to unite the majority of Continental Europe; we would have overthrown the old, feudalist order, and replaced it with republican meritocracies.

If he had survived the nationalist uprisings in Europe, we would not have seen the "World" Wars that caused Europe to lose its place in the world.

Napoleon was a good leader, even in peace. The years as first consul, from 1799 to 1804, were extraordinarily peaceful and productive. He also created the educational system based on lycées and grandes écoles and the Sorbonne, which put France at the forefront of European educational achievement.

He consolidated the administrative system based on departments and prefects. He initiated the Council of State, which still vets the laws of France, and the Court of Audit, which oversees its public accounts. He organized the Banque de France and the Légion d’Honneur, which thrive today.

He also built or renovated much of the Parisian architecture that we still enjoy, both the practical—the quays along the Seine and four bridges over it, the sewers and reservoirs—and the proud, such as the Arc de Triomphe, the Rue de Rivoli and the Vendôme column."
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/histor...955298/?no-ist

Napoleon was an extraordinary governor. Many of his reforms are what the rest of Europe based their institutions on, only much later.

If Napoleon had remained emperor of France for the six years remaining in his natural life, European civilization would have benefited greatly. The conservative Holy Alliance of Russia, Prussia and Austria would not have been able to crush republican movements in Spain, Greece, Eastern Europe and elsewhere; the benefits of meritocracy over feudalism would have had time to become more widely appreciated; encouragement of the sciences would have been better understood and copied; and the plans to rebuild Paris would have been implemented, making it the most gorgeous city in the world.

Napoleon is my no 1 hero along with Cromwell, and has been since I was 10. I wish he had succeeded and conquered all of Europe and defeated Britain. If I had been alive in Britain at that time I would have defected and welcomed a French invasion.

Read Napoleon the Great by Andrew Roberts. It's amazing.
1
reply
Vesniep
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 year ago
#12
(Original post by Mathemagicien)
Damn it my reply got nuked by network error

I liked Cato's threads. Both entertaining, and with a good point hidden somewhere in the, eh, rambling.
They are entertaining you're right.
Sometimes he gives me the impression that he'd be the ideal leader of 18th century Europe ... but I'm not sure if he is ideal are relevant today.
Some of his ideas (the most entertaining I have to admit) are a bit absurd ; like encouraging homosexuality in military so that soldiers have tight bonds. I think he is just having fantasies of being in such a military
He is also in favour of monarchy which is a bit meh.
But he has some good points I agree + he also knows A LOT about European history.

British culture? Not sure how much good the new, Americanised British culture would be for Europe now. British humour is great, and our literature, but there are lots of things to dislike about it - work culture, drink culture, obsession with animals, loving a monarch and many other backwards ideals, taking politeness far too far, Americanised music, American celebrity culture, American obesity culture, two-party political culture. Nah.
What I want from British culture: elite universities, British sarcasm, British literature, philosophy and language (i think we should use English as an official language but British English with British pronunciation and spelling; fine anyone who writes center or color (just look at them they are terrible ) instead of the obviously superior centre and colour !! ) British science and intelligentsia is great... although Germany is slightly better.
British music is great as well. I just checked my playlist and about 90% is British music. I'm not sure what you mean by Americanised music. Pink floyd, The Beatles, Radiohead, King Crimson ... list goes on are truly British not American and I LOVE THEM ALL ! I think Britain was the best country in the world for music for many decades now it's crap and fading away.

Work culture is problematic but that's not only a British problem.
In Greek the word work is δουλεια which is etymologically derived from δουλος ie a slave ; it's the activity that slaves have to do.
I think the model of Ancient Athens regarding work is ideal for Federal Europe :
stuff that should be done by our mechanical slaves, while we humans enjoy our lives free from all those chores that only a lame slave would do.
However STEM, philosophy and the arts should be promoted.
That's what we're meant to be doing in our superior civilisation, not cleaning roads and working in an office for some bank that is inhumanely boring.

Drinking culture and obsession with animals meh I don't care about that perhaps it's because I'm corrupted

I think that when the queen dies Britain should abolish monarchy... but most British like the idea of monarchy which is just awkward. Even my Cambridge friends are like : well the queen helps with some diplomatic stuff and we don't spend a lot on her so what's your problem. To me theocratic monarchy is absurd but how can you change that?

British have a weird form of politeness. They fake it a lot and you can clearly see that. I got a supervision report last term :
Vesniep has a direct personality ,it's not that he's rude, but some supervisors might have a problem with his behaviour.
I was like FU you are a mean lil bi*ch if you had a problem talk to me directly!
... it might be Greek rudeness idk

Honestly I don't think there is any country in the modern world with healthy celebrity culture. Germany is better (as always ) but it's still not great.

Two party political system what are you talking about ? UKIP Tories and Labour
That system was the rule in most European countries (centre and conservatives) but today people want to experiment with far right and left (in Greece our government is left-wing ... but Tsipras is not a great pm)

Obesity culture is problematic. Propaganda against obesity is necessary.
It is degeneracy and at least we shouldn't promote it.
We should demonise fast food chains tax them more, tax unhealthy food ...

I am directly against the Americanisation of Britain. In a sense  Britain = \frac{ Europe + US }{2} I think it's our responsibility to
 Britain \leftarrow Britain + \frac{Europe-US}{2}
ok I know I'm really funny let's move on
Should rEU demonise the UK? Perhaps. I'm not sure.

I suppose there is a mood for a Fortress Europe, especially after Russia's aggression, Turkey's aggression, the flood of migrants, and now a maniac across the Atlantic. Yes, I agree that the idea that we are surrounded by enemies would help Europeans feel closer to each other.

Then again, we do have a lot of sympathiseres with Brexit, and we don't want to alienate those people (far too many of them!) by looking like the bad guys.

Perhaps if there is demonisation, it should be attacking the Americanisation of Britain; it builds upon the idea that Britain is now an American puppet, and it doesn't antagonise the British so much, so that they might some day once again be open to the idea of a union with the rEU.
I like that. We should also go against British politics.
British politicians are responsible for everything that goes wrong in Britain.
They divided Britain so that they get elected they are not responsible (they simply quit when things get hard) help me with that...
If only Federal Europe was more populist, humorous and post things like the one you posted : titanic success. A pro-EU Farage is what we want.
Britain desperately needs a scapegoat. US and British politicians should take that role NOT THE EU ! All we need is some British humour.

P.s sorry I didn't post a proper answer to your thread's question I just spend all my time with my libtard friends.
0
reply
Vesniep
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 year ago
#13
(Original post by Cromwellian)
Napoleon is my no 1 hero along with Cromwell, and has been since I was 10. I wish he had succeeded and conquered all of Europe and defeated Britain. If I had been alive in Britain at that time I would have defected and welcomed a French invasion.

Read Napoleon the Great by Andrew Roberts. It's amazing.
Welcome back.

I'm glad you said that.

Would you be in favour of a more conservative Federal Europe today ?

If yes what changes are necessary ?

Do you think Federal Europe can be a promising superpower surpassing the US ?
0
reply
Cromwellian
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 year ago
#14
(Original post by Vesniep)
Welcome back.

I'm glad you said that.

Would you be in favour of a more conservative Federal Europe today ?

If yes what changes are necessary ?

Do you think Federal Europe can be a promising superpower surpassing the US ?
I would support a united Europe, but not a liberal, globalist one like the EU is today. I would prefer it to be led by a heroic leader like Napoleon or Charlemagne, and not run as a democracy.

I think we certainly would have the potential to surpass the U.S., which looks like it is now in terminal decline, a decline that is going to be hurried by the election of Trump.
0
reply
Vesniep
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 year ago
#15
(Original post by Cromwellian)
I would support a united Europe, but not a liberal, globalist one like the EU is today. I would prefer it to be led by a heroic leader like Napoleon or Charlemagne, and not run as a democracy.

I think we certainly would have the potential to surpass the U.S., which looks like it is now in terminal decline, a decline that is going to be hurried by the election of Trump.
I love you.
We'll talk when I return.
I'm not sure what you mean by liberal though.
1
reply
Fujoshi
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 year ago
#16
(Original post by Cromwellian)
Napoleon is my no 1 hero along with Cromwell, and has been since I was 10. I wish he had succeeded and conquered all of Europe and defeated Britain. If I had been alive in Britain at that time I would have defected and welcomed a French invasion.

Read Napoleon the Great by Andrew Roberts. It's amazing.
Why is Cromwell your hero?
0
reply
Cromwellian
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 year ago
#17
(Original post by Fujoshi)
Why is Cromwell your hero?
He rose from being a humble English squire to ruler of all three nations. He conquered Scotland and Ireland for the first time in British history. With no military experience he became the greatest general of the civil war. He seized power and overthrew the corrupt Rump Parliament, stacked with money-changers and speculators and self-interested lawyers, and instituted a new regime with a godly Puritan elite at its head, working to remake English society. He made England more powerful than it had ever been at any previous time in its history. He also supported religious liberty and stood up for the independent sects who didn't want to be forced to worship the way the religious conservatives wanted.
0
reply
Vesniep
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 year ago
#18
(Original post by Mathemagicien)
A monarchist? Eww :puke:
I strongly dislike it mainly because of its authoritarian nature...but as you said you like authoritarianism.
What do you dislike in monarchy ?

Now, I actually generally prefer American English, even though I don't use it because I am used to British English. But it is generally spelled more sensibly, rather than being incredibly inconsistent, and often makes more sense (e.g. trailer vs caravan, apartment vs flat, movie vs film). But many things are of course completely unnacceptable, e.g. calling football ""soccer"" :puke:
I'd say I don't really care about how 'sensible' the official language would be.
Federal Europe could use things like that to attract British. We want the British version of English not the American. We are your real friends.
I always liked British English more than American English.It has more culture embedded. American English kills that for simplicity and practicality.
It is a more rational language but that is actually a drawback.
Esperanto is probably the most simple and rational language but it was a huge failure.
What is your opinion on that 'artificial' language?

I wonder how much this is just because we speak English. OTOH, while Germany is generally better here, they do have a really bad start-up culture. That is certainly something we do quite well.
I was thinking of that as well. How much of a Great country Britain would be should it speak another language.
I also think that Europe should have an official language taught in schools(as a main subject), in universities everything should be in English in all European institutions and that language should be British English.
Europe especially France would be much more appealing to the rest of the world.
Europeans should be bilingual; they should speak English fluently.
Haha, I'm about the opposite. Most of my music is either instrumental, or in a language I don't speak very well (or at all).

It's REALLY GOOD ! What do you suggest ?
Not sure either. I think I too often assume something is Americanised if it is bad, my bad. Just can't see much difference between British, American, and other anglophonic pop these days (although certainly British music used to be very distinct); but I very rarely listen to it, so I'll take it back and reserve judgement.
Yes today's music is not great I'll agree on that.

Oh God, do not tell the Germans that!
After all I'm just a lazy Greek
So you meant exactly the opposite of what I was thinking

But we are still many decades away from that becoming reality. Very tumultuous decades, it seems. What about the meantime?
Many decades ? Not if we increase D&R to 8% of our GDP. Ah ok you might be right. But I don't want to admit it

Apparently, republicanism is still technically illegal in the UK. I really don't understand the love of the Queen. "Oh, she's just a harmless old lady, what did she ever do to deserve your hate?!". Perhaps she does bring in a net income for the UK - but the social effects of the monarchy in the UK is not worth it. Perhaps the obsession with royal babies keeps our birth rate a bit higher, but it promotes regressive conservative ideals, goes against meritocracy, gives power (which MIGHT be used, whether or not most choose not to use it) to a figure of random personality. Royals like Prince Charles promote silly things like "organic" food, and all the related nonsense such as fighting against GMOs. The monarchy diverts patriotism from loyalty to the country and its people, to loyalty to the monarch.
So that's why you don't like monarchy.
Meritocracy should be our top 1 priority for everything.
Many companies would be biased towards women and minorities in order to increase diversity.
Do you think a company or even the government should prefer a woman to a man if they have roughly the same qualifications ?
I think they shouldn't. It's better to consider details in their CV than be biased towards a group of people degrading meritocracy.

Is Germany better though? Recently they had a vote for German President, and during these votes the parties always choose a bunch of celebrities. I'm sure they are thoroughly ideologically checked by their parties, but it is a scary thought to have celebrities voting on such an important matter.
I haven't lived in Germany, but I've been in Berlin this summer.
I really liked that they had posters of scientists writing stuff like ' Nanotechnology is the future of surgery. It can help us all -A famous scientist '.
They were advocating science and scientists more than in any other place I've ever been (apart from Cambridge for obvious reasons).
But what you say is terrible.

UKIP got millions of votes, and precisely 1 seat, and that was the one Tory MP who defected to UKIP.

In each county, there are only 2 realistic options to choose from. It is only with absolutely huge issues like Brexit that a party like UKIP rose, and with Labour having made huge idiotic suicidal blunders, that other parties now has a chance in what were previously Labour strongholds. People don't really know what they are voting for, their families have always voted for X so they will also vote X... except recently with Corbyn and Brexit.
Right now in Greece there is only one realistic option; conservatives.
Left-wing is the second party but it has less than half voters than the conservative party.
Third party (has half the left wing voters) is the cancerous Gold Dawn which is like Britain First not UKIP.

Mention some please. I really don't know how they disappeared.

No, but I rather liked your previous money guy. A Cambridge mathmo graduate iirc. Perhaps I am a little biased though
huh? how could I miss that?

What is Greek humour like?
Hmm Arkas (Αρκας ) is good example of good quality Greek humour.
Spoiler:
Show


Name:  arkas.jpg
Views: 83
Size:  171.7 KB
0
reply
tpizent
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#19
Report 10 months ago
#19
(Original post by paul514)
Yea well hitler tried the same then the eu did in 1992


Posted from TSR Mobile
There is a big difference between those things.
Napoleon, unlike Hitler, didn't start the war at all. Brits attacked France in 1803; Napoleon was the first consul for 4 years and it seems unlikely he would attack anyone. Then, the Austrians and later Russians attacked Bavaria; French ally. Napoleon helped Bavaria and found himself at war with Austria, Russia and Britain. Later, Prussia joined the war against him. What would you do if you were in his place? It was basically 4v1. He had to attack Austria and make them capitulate; same with the others; to try to balance the odds. You can't win 4v1 odds just by holding your ground for eternity. More people would die that way anyway, if he did that. So it looks to me like he actually had no choice.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Where do you need more help?

Which Uni should I go to? (124)
17.92%
How successful will I become if I take my planned subjects? (72)
10.4%
How happy will I be if I take this career? (119)
17.2%
How do I achieve my dream Uni placement? (101)
14.6%
What should I study to achieve my dream career? (67)
9.68%
How can I be the best version of myself? (209)
30.2%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise