/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"I ain’t driving twenty minutes to riot"

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. Join the Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/+leftychat:matrix.org Visit the Booru: https://lefty.booru.org/

(242.11 KB 1200x1200 napoleon-i-9420291-2-402.jpg)
Would you say Napoleon was good or evil? Anonymous 09/16/2020 (Wed) 15:37:48 No. 873215
Was he a historical hero or historical villain?
>>873438 Exactly, I don't even know what the dispute really is. If the question is was Napoleon a progressive historical force, the answer has to be yes. He was less radical than the Jacobins, but the Jacobins decisively lost. That was a fact of history, complaining about it is just moralistic resentment. But Napoleon undeniably changed the legal order of western Europe to be favorable to bourgeois society. That means he was a progressive historical force under the Marxist conception. It is just a matter of fact. I mean I think Napoleon is a really interesting and obviously exceptional person, but I don't really get the need to cast him as good or evil here. He did disagreeable things, but overall he spread the conditions of bourgeois dominance.
>>873436 >Napoleon recreated an aristocracy after the Jacobins went to all the trouble of cutting all the aristocrats' heads off. Fuck Napoleon forever. Historic materialism. Progress cannot be achieved by decree. Jacobin period, like any revolutionary romanticism, ended only in defining boundaries for pragmatic politics.
>>873279 this, he is a faggot for declaring himself emperor, he is based for smashing other monarchs
>>873225 /thread
>>873215 We are beyond such notions.
>>873463 based Nietzschean communism??
>>873443 Not really, during the revolutionary period he only helped in Italy but it was already during the directory reactionary period and the setup as a sister republic wasn't really revolutionary. Then he lost all of his army in Egypt and abandoned them. He also won most of his political power by crushing a proletarian revolt in Paris. Truth is Napoleon was a fuck up who knew his way around propaganda and palace intrigue.
>>873215 He turned the republic into a monarchy so greater evil.
>>873428 socialism was built under one of them faggotnegger
>>873442 Electoral systems are not democracy.
>>873540 >2020 >paying attention to the superficial exterior facade of the state instead of the relations to the means of production ishygddt
(15.80 KB 488x305 Achievement.jpg)
>>873570 >reintroducing the aristocratic ruling class after its relationship to the means of production had been eradicated is superficial
>>873598 It makes absolutely no different what form the state takes. Under capitalism an aristocrat is just a inheritable bureaucrat. In practice most of our politicians and bureaucrats come from families that have been doing it for generations anyway
>>873560 Napoleon destroying the vestiges of feudalism across Europe and instituting rational government/free-market capitalism was essential to allowing Socialism to develop in the first place. You can't go straight from A to Z, the productive forces need evolve. It's Marxism 101.
>mega-imperialist Bad
>>873221 >The French revolutionaries were reactionary and obsessed with antiquity. They wanted to go back to some ancient Greek ideal as embodied in Sparta You're way off the mark. Read Lefebvre. By your logic, Marxists & other revolutionary socialists are ultrareactionaries because we want to build an egalitarian society whose ideals were embodied in neolithic hunter-gatherer communities.
>>873772 >Khmer Roguetard flag checks out
>>873789 I'm not way off, the French revolutionaries worshipped Spartan like poverty. Socialism and capitalism both at least have in common that they value prosperity, socialism is just better at making it available to all. The French Revolutionaries thought it was more "virtuous" to be frugal and lead a "Spartan" existence. Peak reactionaries
>>873800 Personally, I think that if they had stayed in power they would have created some pseudo-"virtuous" agrarian society
I think questions of good and evil are irrelevant when you´re talking about history on horseback
>good or evil? lawful neutral
>>873813 Launching multiple coups disqualifies you from Lawful, maybe true neutral
>>873233 we dont because those things dont exist either
>>873821 He was definitely true neutral. He was not motivated by desire for goodness and virtue any more than he was by greed or hunger for power. None of those things affected him. He was a fucking force of nature
>>873225 OP BTFO
(269.56 KB 840x1080 20200819_232946.jpg)
>>873438 I’m a communist because communism is heroic and communists were actually heroes
>>873444 I’m not French, like 90% of this board
>>873875 Based
>>873233 how benefitial a certain action is to humanity btw ppl who reject morality are just children
>>873606 >just an inherited bureaucrat See: The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte
>>873973 I haven't read it yet, so can you just say what your point is?
(74.04 KB 1366x768 Morality.jpg)
>>873970 Yes, because morality only justifies kind and predominantly beneficial actions.
>>873991 Man was put on this world to help one another :)
>>873997 I agree friend :)
>was bonapartism a necessary historical moment? >where the results of bonapartism progressive or conservative? >did it ultimately go us closer to communism? heroes and villians are archetypes that don't translate perfectly into reality but answering this questions can at least justify supporting certain individuals as tools of the colective
>>873991 what did he meant by this bros?
>>873800 They were idealists but they were not reactionaries. Human beings have a tendency to look to the past for a model of the future, as I said before even scientific socialists did this. If they idealized the immediate past (the Capetian order, the reign of Louis XIV, etc.) and sought to reinforce the strength of the monarchy or the aristocracy, they would've been reactionaries.
>>873238 Thou art based.
>>873239 also he built modern paris
>>874310 With his bare hands?
>>873340 Are you saying Napoleon hated artillery or not? Cause if the former youd be a brainlet as Bappy started off as an officer in the artillery corps and made innovations or deepened those already adopted by the republican military
>>874317 With his bare penis actually.
>>873340 hate to be the akshually guy but Napoleon's maneuvering was done before armies even reached the field of battle, and one of his innovations was the grand battery where all available guns in a certain region would be redeployed to fire en masse at a portion of the enemy line, he would've loved Zhukov and Katyushas and shit
>>873487 The Italian sister republics were actually pretty successful, despite having to pay tributes to France. They were led by Italian jacobin factions who introduced lots of enlightenment and centralizing reforms across northern and central italy. They were the first taste of a unified and well run italian state
>>874329 Also Napoleon put down a royal uprising not a proletarian one to protect the directory from a reactionary revival after the Terror slackened with the Thermidorean reaction. Nappy’s whiff of grapeshot BTFO them https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/13_Vend%C3%A9miaire
>>873570 The means of production didnt really change under napoleon, some parts of norther and eastern france did develop industry but nothing like England was experiencing at the time. France would remain a peasant country until the 20th century
>>873800 No they didn't. Only Saint Juste did. Robespierre did not admire it as much and his famous speech on political virtue said that he did not want to model France “in the Spartan mold”. The Jacobins had lots of different ideas and influences outside antiquity and to hone in on this fact is a caricature. You sounds like Benjamin Constant in his “Liberties: Ancient and Modern”
>>873832 He was obsessed with Glory though. An ideological trait of Bonapartism is love of individual and national glory as embodied by Bonaparte’s military victories
>>873867 Was Napoleon rural gang?

Delete
Report

no cookies?