The world without Napoleon.
- Thread starter MrHola
- Start date
If no Napoleon, the U.S. would be screwed. The Brits would pwn us in 1812.
So Poland, Latin America, the US, and may be Germany, owe something to him??? Vive l'empereur Napoleon, alors!
The Portuguese court fled in November 1807. Without the king in Rio, we wouldn' have permission to trade directly with Britain and the USA, making Brazil poorer than OTL. And, when and if Brazil becomes independent, then we surely wouldn't be a united country, but every region would be a different nation.
NapoleonXIV
Banned
If no Napoleon, the U.S. would be screwed. The Brits would pwn us in 1812.
No impressing of American sailors and no other British war abuses and why do we have 1812? Even AFTER 1812 the first thing the Brits did was to establish a "special relationship" with the US. We and they both made lots more money that way.
No Boney and we don't get the Napoleonic emphasis on agriculture in economics, as the Durants posit in "The Age of Napoleon". A more industrialised France, also not bled white by war, is going to be a very serious rival to England for dominance thoroughout the 19thc.
We also have Republican France both surviving but also not pushing itself by war. This might turn out rather strange, "Democracy in One Country" maybe?
President Talleyrand? I dunno, it has a nice ring but didn't he like being behind the scenes, maybe he's Cheney to Fouquet's Bush
Last edited:
In Poland besides being in national anthem, Napoleon was subject of "Napoleon cult" till end of XIX century his figure was almost of mythical Saviour-like status.
Yes, I understand, but, ...why "
"??? His actions did help those nations to come into existence, directly or indirectly. And, for me, that's something good, ...given the fact that I am from one of those (Argentina).
This is totally independent of what I may think of his politics or the way he governed France.
In the US case, of course, his actions didn't enabled them to come into existance; but they may have helped them go through the 1812 war (if you assume it was bound to happen even without him).
Max Sinister
Banned
@Hurgan: In nationalist 19th century maybe, but was there Germanization before 1800? Nationalism wasn't invented yet.
Susano
Banned
Hurgan is fortunately banned, but you are wrong in that nationalism wasnt "invented" yet. National identity has always existed. The Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars just made national identity a point of focus, something people actively cared about. But it existed even before.
In General, the WI is too broad. How and why is Nappy prevented? And indeed, does another General take his place?
Fhaessig: All th egenerals might hav eabjhorred secessionism, but that could be a de facto outcome, if struggles bewteen several of them lead to an early form of warlordism.