Google| Subject | Re: Queen mother (of Britain) has died |
| From | Arkady |
| Date | 2002-04-03 21:19 (2002-04-03 19:19) |
| Message-ID | <a8fkj4$h46$1@paris.btinternet.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | alt.fan.tolkien |
| Follows | paulh |
| Followups | ?jevind L?ng (17h & 23m) > Arkady |
"paulh" <paulh@fahncahn.com>wrote in message news:hs5mauguibo1qfoi0h8jmu3urvdn9qdd7f@4ax.com...
paulhme
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:32:53 +0000 (UTC), "Arkady" <Redarkady@hotmail.com>wrote:ACArkady
Well, maybe Brits won't have to worry about the Monarchy much longer. The Windsors will be replaced by a bunch of vampiric Eurocrats and Continental judiciaries, finally completing Napoleon's invasion of Britain a couple of centuries late.
Paranoid Europhobia aside, studying Napoleonic history actually brought
Quite so. However rule by Code Napoleon was preferable in my eyes to the absolutist rule that preceded and succeeded Bonapartism.to the conclusion that Bonaparte's defeat was a historical tragedy.paulh
I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion. Seeing as its impossible to determine the outcome if he hadn't been defeated... would the world be a remarkably better place? No one will ever know.
Boney was not particularly evil or good.Quite. He was flawed, just like any man.
He was just a man.Arguably more talented than average.
His empire would probably not have lasted beyond his death anyway..Difficult one that. Perhaps. But perhaps people would have said that of Caeser if he had been defeated? There were plenty of Bonapartes to suceed him, and many at the time argued that Napoleons death and replacement by Joseph would remove the militaristic and ambitious element from its position of dominance in the Empire, thereby increasing its chance of survival. Playing with history of course, but no less interesting.
Arky
2002-03-30-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
