Pros And Cons Of Napoleon Bonaparte

348 Words2 Pages
Also a valid point Napoleon had accomplished is the complete renovation of the banking system in France. The system established a new currency and line of credit that helped the government finance various military actions and enforcement of comprehensive legislation. Historian Ellis notes that “a prominent feature of the whole system was stability of service at the top of the key financial departments” (67-68). Capital had been a key feature Napoleon had to deal with in order to financially support the multiple invasions and blockades around the European continent French troops were responsible for. On the opposite end of the spectrum, Napoleon’s adversaries believe all those good deeds can not overshadow the crimes against humanity Napoleon committed for the hunger of European dominance. Formerly a skilled general he was responsible for a constant state of war in Europe that had benefitted France for only a short term.
Bonaparte couldn’t rest until he had control of the whole continent and all he knew was fighting. He tried to enforce a European wide blockade of Britain, invading any country that didn’t comply and launched more wars to hold on to his gains. (Gendler)
Many modern dictators such as
…show more content…
Many citizens also feared Napoleon’s secret police that enforced loyalty to the First Consul and it grew tension as many citizens were learning to trust in each other again. Censorship is the last reinforcement Napoleon had used to secure esteem from the French citizens because, “whatever its limitations, official propaganda became an important function of an Empire almost constantly at war” (Ellis 170). Napoleon had not provided this liberty of free speech and information while at the time of the revolution it had been one of the important goals of the
Open Document