| Author |
Message
|
| Faron |
 Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:34 am Post subject: Was Napoleon same as Hitler? |
 |
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 62
|
Hello,
I'm wondering, would you say that Napoleon was just like Hitler? Or was he actually a hero? What were his beliefs?
Thanks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| sunshinewarrior |
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 2:56 am Post subject: Re: Was Napoleon same as Hitler? |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 1019
Location: London
|
| Faron wrote: |
Hello,
I'm wondering, would you say that Napoleon was just like Hitler? Or was he actually a hero? What were his beliefs?
Thanks! |
1. No they were not the same.
2. They were both slightly short egomaniacs, but there the similarity ends.
3. At least Napoleon had some style (albeit occasionally scatological). Allegedly, looking for some comfort after the disastrous Winter in Russia, Napoleon had a messenger run to Paris with a missive for Josephine. It said just: "Back in three days. Don't wash!" Respect! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| marnixR |
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 5:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Isotope
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 2587
Location: Cardiff, Wales
|
just think : would you rather be called a little napoleon or a little hitler ?
neither are very flattering, but if forced to choose, i'd go for the first one
_________________
if you find this place too crowded or too confrontational, how about trying Philosophorum,
the amicable forum where small is beautiful and even the trolls are intelligent
biology without evolution is but stamp collecting |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pendragon |
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Moderator
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
Posts: 1160
Location: Nederland
|
Until World War 1 Napoleon had the same kind of reputation as Hitler in many parts of Europe. People who had collaborated with the French during the Napoleontic Wars carried a strong stigma for a long time, comparable with WW2 collaborators (but not that strong). Don't forget that Napoleon caused death and destruction all over Europe, setting back the economic development of many European countries by decades.
But ideologically I think it's a totally different picture. I think nobody will claim that Hitler's ideology was in any way noble or moral: even if you look beyond his racism, he was also a very egoistic, aggressive nationalist.
For Napoleon you could still make a pretty strong argument: he was nationalistic but not racist; autocratic but still a believer in the fundamental equality of human beings. The French swept over Europe with a genuine wish to take down feudal inequality, and in many places they brought positive change. After the French were pushed out of the Netherlands we largely kept their system of law, because it was simply far superior to anything we ever had before. It's a pity we got our monarchy back, a real French-style republic would've been a lot better (we had neither during the French occupation, a kind of semi-monarchical republic).
Hitler only brought misery, there's no other way to say it. Napoleon brought some good and some bad, maybe 50-50. But in the 19th century, at least in Northern and Western-Europe (including Britain), Napoleon was certainly percieved as a person just like Hitler. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Faron |
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 62
|
I see.
Thank you very much for your replies. I guess what I'm thinking is, since Napoleon at that time probably would be looked upon as a hitler, right? And today, people or most people are interested in him and look up to him, but not Hitler. Then in that case, would you say in the next 100 years people will take interest in Hitler and look up to him as well? Don't know.
But I agree, Hitler was much darker than Napoleon. He wanted to expand French empire. Hitler wanted to wipe off humans who were outside of his race, right? Like a one world race and all.
Hmm. Definitely little napoleon, marnixR lol.
Again, thanks for the replies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| marnixR |
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Isotope
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 2587
Location: Cardiff, Wales
|
also, there's a french brandy called Napoleon (or was that after his 1860s successor ?) - i don't see anything named after Hitler
_________________
if you find this place too crowded or too confrontational, how about trying Philosophorum,
the amicable forum where small is beautiful and even the trolls are intelligent
biology without evolution is but stamp collecting |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pendragon |
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Moderator
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
Posts: 1160
Location: Nederland
|
| Faron wrote: |
Then in that case, would you say in the next 100 years people will take interest in Hitler and look up to him as well? Don't know. |
I don't think this will ever happen. As you say Hitler was much 'darker', his ideas can still inspire hatred (as they do in some people, neonazi's). The ideals Napoleon fought for are mostly mainstream now, it's not offensive or extremist to call for non-feudal, non-monarchical states as most states have ofcourse achieved this already. Another difference is that WW2 is just too well documented for people to forget what it was like, while we mostly hear about Napoleon in stories and 'adventure movies'.
At some point artifacts from the Nazi era may become funny rarities. For example last year or so there was an exposition of Hitlers paintings, and I've seen pictures of cheap 'fan articles' from the Nazi time being showed in an exposition (like a clock with Hitler's face on it or so, really cheap stuff). But I think Hitler as a person will always stay a symbol of 'evil', which I guess is a good thing.
| marnixR wrote: |
| also, there's a french brandy called Napoleon (or was that after his 1860s successor ?) - i don't see anything named after Hitler |
Yea good point. Well a couple years ago someone opened a restaurant in India or so named after Hitler (or something related), the owner thought it was just a 'funny' publicity stunt. Well he got the publicity he wanted, but a lot more than that  I don't remember how the story ended, but I think they changed it very quickly after they found out that people in the west were not amused.
edit: I just remembered this story, last year.. http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=2889568&page=1
Some Croatian sugar company put Hitler's face on their wrappers  Again the reactions to this show that it's clearly not accepted behaviour, but for some reason it still happens.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Faron |
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 62
|
I see. I agree with you there.
You know what I also thought? I don't understand why country "Germany" still exists after what all happened back in those years ago. Yes, I know it was tore in 4 pieces but united later. I mean, whenever I hear a word, "German people" or "Germany", I sometimes see them as "nazis people", or "defeated nazi germany". I've never been to Germany, but I may feel scared inside of myself if I go there, lol.
I mean, those who live in Germany, could they not have changed the name of the country, or whatever that's for the better, after all what happened? What do you think about that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pendragon |
| Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Moderator
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
Posts: 1160
Location: Nederland
|
| Faron wrote: |
You know what I also thought? I don't understand why country "Germany" still exists after what all happened back in those years ago. Yes, I know it was tore in 4 pieces but united later. I mean, whenever I hear a word, "German people" or "Germany", I sometimes see them as "nazis people", or "defeated nazi germany". I've never been to Germany, but I may feel scared inside of myself if I go there, lol.
I mean, those who live in Germany, could they not have changed the name of the country, or whatever that's for the better, after all what happened? What do you think about that? |
After WW2 there was a plan to dismantle Germany, by chopping it up in several smaller countries and turning each of them into completely agricultural societies (without the necessary industry to wage a war). In the end they did divide Germany in East and West, but that wasn't really the plan. And with the wartime alliance gone and the Cold War beginning, neither Nato nor the USSR was willing to dismantle and deindustrialize their part of Germany. Actually they rearmed their parts of Germany as a buffer zone against eachother.
But I guess it's a good thing that Germany wasn't dismantled as planned, as it would've been an economic disaster for Europe. A strong German economy is a crucial part of Europe's economy, without it we'd be set back many decades of economic development.
About the name of Germany, well they did change it from "German Empire" (Deutches Reich) to "Federal Republic of Germany" (Bundesrepublik Deutschland), which sounds a lot less threatening and expansive. And some parts of the national anthem were changed, like "Germany above everything in the world" into something like "Germany for freedom in the world". Maybe 'Germany' still sounds threatening to you because it's almost identical to 'Germania', the capital Hitler planned for his third reich. And in Nazi rhetoric the Germans as a pre-medieval people played a central role. In the German language such names don't exist, the language is Deutsch, the country is Deutschland, and not a single German would call himself Ein Germane (spelling could be wrong). So in a way the English name is simply weird. If a German would say "Ich bin ein Germane" then this would have racist connotations, it would remind people of WW2.
I live next to Germany and I've been there many times. To me Germany is a normal European country, but with a very dark history. The present generation of Germans inherited that past from their grandparents, and they're working hard to restore their country's image. They're not personally responsable for what happened in WW2, but they are doing every thing they can to compensate for it. That's all they can do, and I respect it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| icewendigo |
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Senior
Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 379
|
The men were quite different and even more so when you place them in their respective historical context.
Unlike Hitler, Napoleon was a tactician that gained rank with his own military victories
Napoleon was a statesman instrumental with respect to several achievements such as the Civil Code, which is almost the opposite of Nazi legislature and was exceptional in its time.
Napoleon made people of diverse background (including jews) full citizens of the republic, where as Hitler put people of diverse origins (gypsies, jews, etc) in concentration camps.
There are many negative aspects to Napoleon specialy when viewed through the prism of modern times, but taken in context you see some of theses negatives were also shared to various degrees by various Kings Emperors and Monarchs of the general era who are seldom blamed to the same extent for being autocratic despots waging imperial wars(british empire, russian empire, austrian empire, ottoman empire).
In both cases however, Napoleon and Hitler lost, and we all know that it is the victors that write(and distort) history. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Faron |
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 62
|
Thanks to both of you.
Well then, I guess that every emperors or dictators rise and fall, including the empires. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| MikeDev |
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 05 Apr 2008
Posts: 7
Location: Los Angeles
|
neopolean will never be the same as hiter was .neopolean didn't try to wipe out a whole ethnicity like hiter tried to do to the jews
_________________
infoaddict.com is THE source for strange, weird, or just plain wacky web news. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ishmaelblues |
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 90
|
| people are always wanted to group these two men together as like minded midgets because we want to make sense of them, belittle them and then opack them away neatly under a label...all wrong, just bad history |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Holmes |
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 09 Feb 2008
Posts: 58
|
| saw some dvds on nap about him going to russia -what a fool he was |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Skiyk |
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Junior
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Posts: 203
Location: Canada
|
Well Hitler was a complete and utter nut while I believe Napoleon had been driven mad by power but overstepped the mark in a sense.
_________________
A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
