|
Well I was nervous about making a topic like this since this is my second thread ever on this forum but the "Nixon is the worst leader ever" thread made me think this isn't so bad. I'm an American, born and raised and lived all my life here. Yet I've never once cared an iota about American history with the sole exception of the Civil War. I also never cared about French history until a few years back when I saw a special on the History Channel about the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror. (the special also featured a prominent Marxist leader named Alan Woods who I hadn't thought about in many years. I was surprised to see him on TV of all places) Looking into it, the French Revolution was a lot more intriguing than our own. Also about this time I read Victor Hugo's Les Misérables. All of this was my first real introduction to the fascinating topic of France in the 1800s. Hugo was kind enough to take time out of his superb characterization to write whole chapters on the French history of the time and I got to hear all about Napoleon I and Louis Philippe and a few others. The sheer number of regimes and revolutions France had makes the American Civil War look boring. Also the conflicts inherent in these various uprisings interest me more than states' rights or slavery. But while my interest was sparked on the subject, I'm far from an expert. I've read a few books since then and done research online but I have yet to find something that focus just on this matter. Which was the best government or leader of France in the 1800s and why? God knows if this will get any replies but it's worth a shot I guess. I also don't know if this should go in Ask/Tell....
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 13:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 21:21 |
|
|
That would be Napoleon.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 13:52
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:That would be Napoleon. which one
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 13:53
|
|
|
i really like that for most of that century, the preferred method of changing governments in France was armed insurrection btw
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 13:54
|
|
|
Paris Commune. Dictatorship of the proletariat 
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 14:00
|
|
|
Birdstrike posted:Paris Commune. Dictatorship of the proletariat too soft on the versailles regime imo
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 14:01
|
|
|
Thiers knew to treat the mobs of Paris in the manner they deserved, OP.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
I have a soft spot for the July Monarchy personally. I think it's kind-of weird that both Lafayette and Talleyrand were still alive when Louis Philippe took over.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
emfive posted:I have a soft spot for the July Monarchy personally. I think it's kind-of weird that both Lafayette and Talleyrand were still alive when Louis Philippe took over. If nothing else, Hugo makes Louis Philippe sound like he was a fantastic human being. He sounds like as good and progressive a king can be while still maintaining royal authority. http://www.online-literature.com/victor_hugo/les_miserables/225/
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:which one  Haha. Good one.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 15:48
|
|
|
Napoleon was the "greatest" in a historical sense but he was also a monster caused untold suffering and misery for his personal gain. His nephew Napoleon III had a relatively successful administration but his record is marred by his decision to stir up nationalist uprisings abroad and starting wars he failed to win. Louis Philippe is like Jimmmy Carter of monarchs. My vote goes for Maximilien Robespierre. Yeah he technically died 6 years before the period in question but the century is an arbitrary time period anyway and Robespierre's politics anticipated many of the major political positions and struggles of the next two hundred years.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 16:25
|
|
|
See, I also have had a lot of respect for Robespierre ever since I started researching this topic. (he's often likened to another person I admire, Vladimir Lenin. Although I no longer hold to my teenage Marxist beliefs) It's just generally a bad idea in my experience to admit to this because he's not all that popular in certain circles. And while the unending clash of opinions is the biggest reason I hate getting involved in political and history discussions, this isn't a very subjective matter here. I once defended a lot of Lenin's actions under the statement "what other choice did he have?" The guy faced a wall of opposition every way he turned. I suppose Robespierre and Lenin faced similar situations externally as they were both trying to establish systems that the European Powers of the times absolutely hated and did not want to exist. However, from what I've gathered, the Jacobins did not face anywhere near the level of internal threats that the Bolsheviks did. I guess that might be due as much to the size of Russia as anything else but even still. I think Robespierre went a little too guillotine happy. I know this is off-topic but it was my complete bafflement at the fact that Marxism only took hold in any substantial form in two countries that did not even vaguely meet Marx's own criteria. China and Russia were far too backwards and full of peasants to have proletarian revolutions. Anyway...I admire Robespierre but I don't bandy that about lest I get called out on it was my point that I lost somewhere. NikkolasKing fucked around with this message at 18:54 on May 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
I quite like Napoléon III. In particular, I really love what his guy Haussmann did with Paris.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 13:06
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:See, I also have had a lot of respect for Robespierre ever since I started researching this topic. (he's often likened to another person I admire, Vladimir Lenin. Although I no longer hold to my teenage Marxist beliefs) It's just generally a bad idea in my experience to admit to this because he's not all that popular in certain circles. And while the unending clash of opinions is the biggest reason I hate getting involved in political and history discussions, this isn't a very subjective matter here. I once defended a lot of Lenin's actions under the statement "what other choice did he have?" The guy faced a wall of opposition every way he turned. I suppose Robespierre and Lenin faced similar situations externally as they were both trying to establish systems that the European Powers of the times absolutely hated and did not want to exist. However, from what I've gathered, the Jacobins did not face anywhere near the level of internal threats that the Bolsheviks did. I guess that might be due as much to the size of Russia as anything else but even still. I think Robespierre went a little too guillotine happy. You probably shouldn't play Assassin Creed Unity, then Robespierre and pretty much every other major revolutionary is a comic book bad guy, and the good guys are more or less pro-royalist. I think they are planning a new game with the Bolsheviks as the foil. I guess it is a thing nowadays in big budget games to have really conservative messages in them (Call of Duty in general for example). Ardennes fucked around with this message at 13:33 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 13:30
|
|
|
Isn't AC the series with an evil Pope? It definitely isn't a series I'd look to for moral ambiguity, which was definitely in effect in the Revolution. I don't really have any political affiliations anymore. I can respect both sides in the French Revolution and there are actually a lot of monarchies in history that I think worked quite well. The French monarchy as of the Revolution does not appear to have been one of those however given it was a perfect example of the "1% has 99% of the wealth" cliche. Or so I've been led to believe. Normal people went starving while the nobles and Catholic clergy lived in absolute decadence. It's why people liked Louis Philippe, at least at first.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:05
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:It's why people liked Louis Philippe, at least at first. I just, I see nothing wrong with a king/queen or a hereditary dictatorship as long as there is at least some supervision and the lower classes aren't completely mistreated. Louis Philippe in general was a king that was generally reliant on the gentry and the nascent bourgeoisie, but ultimately many of the central divisions in France still remained during his ruled and more or less were only held together by Napoleon III with political repression. I have no idea why someone would be big into Napoleon III except for irony sake. Once his regime gave up the ghost you had the Paris Commune and the development of a party system that would be far more familiar to someone from the 20th century. ------- The AC series always takes a "side" in history, unfortunately it becomes more awkward with the French revolution and modern history when people start to give more of a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:09
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:I don't really have any political affiliations anymore. I can respect both sides in the French Revolution and there are actually a lot of monarchies in history that I think worked quite well. The French monarchy as of the Revolution does not appear to have been one of those however given it was a perfect example of the "1% has 99% of the wealth" cliche. Or so I've been led to believe. Normal people went starving while the nobles and Catholic clergy lived in absolute decadence. It isn't quite so simple as that. I can't really sum it up and give it justice on my own. But the whole revolution was basically a result of a chain of events emanating from France being a wealthy country with an impoverished state, and the urban middle class, that had grown in economic importance but not in political power, taking advantage of the crown's attempt to raise new taxes and (maybe) revise the system of taxation to redefine how France was governed in their favor. Added to this you had unrest among urban workers and poor who came to add a whole new side to this event, culminating in the Revolution. It's probably best to find a good book or article on the issue as it is quite interesting and difficult to do justice in a short summary. edit: actually, in many ways, things became worse for the working class and the poor as a result of the revolution because the wealthy bourgeoisie who eventually came victorious out of it abolished many old practices of the monarchy such as price controls on staple foods and outlawed the guilds. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 14:26 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Napoleon was the "greatest" in a historical sense but he was also a monster caused untold suffering and misery for his personal gain. His nephew Napoleon III had a relatively successful administration but his record is marred by his decision to stir up nationalist uprisings abroad and starting wars he failed to win. He certainly was the most anime. 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
Leon Gambetta used a hot air balloon to escape a besieged Paris so that he could attempt to raise an army & organize the defense of the country from the Germans during the Franco-Prussian War Leon Gambetta loving owned Bob Ojeda fucked around with this message at 23:18 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
Worst is Charles X. Like holy poo poo reactionary does not cover it. July Monarchy was full of poo poo IMO so maybe someone inoffensive like Carnot. Honestly the options are terrible. Disinterested fucked around with this message at 23:00 on May 5, 2015 |
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
Was everyone from the Third Republic a lovely leader? It would explain how quickly they were blitzed.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Was everyone from the Third Republic a lovely leader? It would explain how quickly they were blitzed. Léon Blum was okay.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Was everyone from the Third Republic a lovely leader? It would explain how quickly they were blitzed. Some of them definitely were, but not all of them. I think the problems came more from the massive fissures in French society and politics. Also, IIRC, widespread corruption, at least in the 19th century.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Napoleon Bonaparte. Best General and best leader.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
Emperor Napoleon I, close thread. Who's his competition, Louis-Philippe? Robespierre? Danton? Louis-Napoleon "I'm a big dumb moron" Bonaparte? None of them compare.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 10:13
|
|
|
Otto von Bismarck and the German occupation force.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 11:00
|
|
|
The most successful leader to emerge from 19th century France was Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte because like ol' Napoleon he started from nothing but unlike ol' Napoleon he ended his days as King by his own hand instead of a prisoner on some podunk island in the middle of nowhere.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 11:04
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:The most successful leader to emerge from 19th century France was Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte because like ol' Napoleon he started from nothing but unlike ol' Napoleon he ended his days as King by his own hand instead of a prisoner on some podunk island in the middle of nowhere. to be fair, he was king of a podunk kingdom in the middle of nowhere which he hated
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 12:11
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:to be fair, he was king of a podunk kingdom in the middle of nowhere which he hated To be fair the bar is set kinda low on this one.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 12:13
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:to be fair, he was king of a podunk kingdom in the middle of nowhere which he hated also was not a very talented general
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 12:22
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:See, I also have had a lot of respect for Robespierre ever since I started researching this topic. (he's often likened to another person I admire, Vladimir Lenin. Although I no longer hold to my teenage Marxist beliefs) It's just generally a bad idea in my experience to admit to this because he's not all that popular in certain circles. And while the unending clash of opinions is the biggest reason I hate getting involved in political and history discussions, this isn't a very subjective matter here. I once defended a lot of Lenin's actions under the statement "what other choice did he have?" The guy faced a wall of opposition every way he turned. I suppose Robespierre and Lenin faced similar situations externally as they were both trying to establish systems that the European Powers of the times absolutely hated and did not want to exist. However, from what I've gathered, the Jacobins did not face anywhere near the level of internal threats that the Bolsheviks did. I guess that might be due as much to the size of Russia as anything else but even still. I think Robespierre went a little too guillotine happy. Nah Robespierre was kind of a wanker. The Jacobins turned the Revolution into a pointless internal witch hunt, it wasn't some political party of get-tough-necessary-hard-choices. He was an ideological purist to a fault and believed in a completely nonsense system of legal thought (Natural Law).
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 12:26
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Which was the best government or leader of France in the 1800s and why? Ceylon posted:Otto von Bismarck and the German occupation force. Also the worst government and leader of France in the 1800s is definitively Charles X. I mean how insanely ultra-monarchist must you be when you think the duke of Richelieu is too left wing for your taste ? quote:Was everyone from the Third Republic a lovely leader? It would explain how quickly they were blitzed. Toplowtech fucked around with this message at 13:27 on May 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 13:04
|
|
|
It really is hard to find a more monumental fuckup than Charles X. He is a master class in having no clue. I'm just gonna appoint Jules de loving Polignac Minister of Foreign Affairs and continuously elevate him, no one will get mad about that right?  I mean, not that Charles X in any way fathomed the notion of caring what other people thought despite the fate of his predecessor. But still.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 13:25
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:I'm just gonna appoint Jules de loving Polignac Minister of Foreign Affairs and continuously elevate him, no one will get mad about that right? "Polignac, you are a genius!"
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 13:36
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:It really is hard to find a more monumental fuckup than Charles X. He is a master class in having no clue. Let's not forget that Charles X is the king who demanded Haiti pay slavery reparations to France.
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 14:07
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Let's not forget that Charles X is the king who demanded Haiti pay slavery reparations to France.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 14:12
|
|
Toplowtech posted:It's not even to France, the reparations went to the former owners of the Haiti plantations. The state didn't even got one centime out of it, a bunch of former slaves owners, most of them nobility, got the money while we postured over Haiti for over a century to make them pay over that piece of poo poo treaty no-one ever considered to renegotiate. Yeah, good correction. He also paid reparations out of the public coffers to expropriated nobles in the Revolution. He was loving bad.
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
British Puppetmaster Pitt the Elder.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 16:24
|
|
BUG JUG posted:British Puppetmaster Pitt the Elder. Do you mean younger?
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 21:21 |
|
|
Disinterested posted:Do you mean younger? No, I mean Elder. Annus Mirabilis put France on the path to the Revolution and loving itself up throughout the nineteenth century. EDIT: Also drinking 3-5 bottles of wine a day practically made him French. BUG JUG fucked around with this message at 16:29 on May 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 16:26
|
|