The monarchy poll

[Meneldil]

I don't support monarchism in general, as the very basis of this political system seem totally undemocratic to me.
I absolutely loath it in my own country, as it is strongely tied to nationalism, antisemitism, racism, fascism and generally all kind of right-wing nutjobness.

But if people who live under monarchies are okay with it, then I guess that's their own problem. I'm not for the abolishment of monarchy on a world-wide scale.

[Aemilius Paulus]

antisemitism,

Funny you say so, because the tyrant Napoleon "emancipated" the Jews, and not the other perpetrators of the French Revolution who believed in democracy...

[Meneldil]

Funny you say so, because the tyrant Napoleon "emancipated" the Jews, and not the other perpetrators of the French Revolution who believed in democracy...

No. Jews received complete citizenship right after the Revolution, in july 1791 (the discussion on this topic started in july, the law was signed by the king in october). Many well known revolutionaries supported it since the very first days of the Revolution: Mirabeau, Malesherbes, Grégoire, Robespierre...

Napoléon only confirmed the decrees taken by the National Assembly. Napoléon was openly antisemit, never trusted the jews and only let them have their full citizenship to avoid disorder. When he signed the Concordat, he made it clear that catholicism was more trustworthy than judaism.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Napoléon only confirmed the decrees taken by the National Assembly. Napoléon was openly antisemit, never trusted the jews and only let them have their full citizenship to avoid disorder. When he signed the Concordat.

Yes, you certainly have a good point there.

[Sarmatian]

I absolutely loath it in my own country, as it is strongely tied to nationalism, antisemitism, racism, fascism and generally all kind of right-wing nutjobness.

I may as well just quote this as it's the same in my country.

[gaelic cowboy]

Does Norway not count as a constitiounal monarchy

Now that I think some democracy's have president's very close to monarchs. Ireland's President can be appointed by the Dail if all sides of the House agree this has happened three times so far in the last thirty years. Also the Job of our president is broadly simmilar to a monarch no power but still head of state. Hmm time to sharpen up the pikes maybe

[Viking]

Does Norway not count as a constitiounal monarchy

You need to travel no further than to the UK.

[gaelic cowboy]

You need to travel no further than to the UK.

Nah everyone knows the Lizard Aliens are the actually monarchs of England

[Louis VI the Fat]

There's this bar in Paris, what's it called,it has an original guillotine. Still in mint condition, fully functioning. Way cool.


I shall never understand why adults don't want to have the right to elect their own government. Might as well re-install lesser nobility, so you don't need to have any aspirations of getting to govern at the local level either.
Speaking of which, just re-instate feudalism outright. More bosses to kneel down to, for those with a mind for petty grovelling.

[gaelic cowboy]

Agreed

[miotas]

[...]Now that I think some democracy's have president's very close to monarchs. Ireland's President can be appointed by the Dail if all sides of the House agree this has happened three times so far in the last thirty years. Also the Job of our president is broadly simmilar to a monarch no power but still head of state. Hmm time to sharpen up the pikes maybe

I think it's interesting how the president of the US holds more political power within their system, than any one person holds within the political system of our constitutional monarchy. (AP, You may want to reassess which systems you consider more authoritarian )

[...], and inbreeding is always an issue (and that's a serious point as well).

Probably why the danish prince married a tassie

[Louis VI the Fat]

Well I don't need to speak for Meneldil, but I don't get quite qhat got your back up so much. Meneldil gave a pretty good summation of just what, and who, monarchism is associated with in France. He evens grants that other countries may have different traditions, and that he doesn't care much whether or not they have their monarchies. Whatever makes 'em happy and all that.

I don't support monarchism in general, as the very basis of this political system seem totally undemocratic to me.
I absolutely loath it in my own country, as it is strongely tied to nationalism, antisemitism, racism, fascism and generally all kind of right-wing nutjobness.

But if people who live under monarchies are okay with it, then I guess that's their own problem. I'm not for the abolishment of monarchy on a world-wide scale.

As to Napoleon - it is a matter of much debate just what opinion he personally held of Jews. And what effect his policies had on Jewry.

His personal thoughts: neither pro-Semitism not anti-Semitism seems to fit the bill. There was a whole mixture of opportunism, mixed feelings, and traces of both revolutionary equality and old-fashioned 'let's suck dry the Jews' involved. Napoleon is such a splendidly ambiguous figure.

The effects of his policies are a matter of debate too. Napoleon's enemies wanted to keep the Jews in their ghetto's forever, stripped of civil rights. Napoleon offered them full rights, but assimilation. The latter can be explained positively, or negatively.
This is in general a matter of much Jewish debate over the past two centuries - to assimilate, and thus to lose identity, or not. A matter of personal political and cultural preference.


(Me, I'm with Napoleon. And I'm also of the firm conviction that had Napoleon won, all the Jews of Europe would've fled to France, and none of the pogroms and Holocaust would've happened. Alas! The forces that were outraged at the mere thought of Jewish Civil Rights won - that is, the whole of Europe minus France and her allies/territories under her control.)

[Cronos Impera]

Finally a thread rejuvenator.
Thank you Louis for this healing post. Now the river bed is once again open for navigation.

+ rep

Oops, forgot I was at the Org.

[Meneldil]

Thanks Louis for clearing that up.

And as I said earlier, I'm quite found of Napoléon myself. He was a genius, militarily and politicaly, despite the many mistakes he made.
One of such mistakes was precisely his constant hesitancy regarding the jews. He started by discriminating them (he cancelled all debts owed to Jews in Alsace), then openly ghetto-ized them by forbidding them to leave their towns and cities (thus cancelling all earlier laws).

Then, he made a complete U turn, and gave them full citizenship (again), and tried to enforce assimilation on them (as some jews refused the idea of assimilation at first). While doing so, he openly stated several times that he despised judaism, and thought this religion was opposed to modernity and civilization. He stated it during official councils, wrote it on letters and what not. He also openly stated that he wanted to liberate jews from judaism, because he disliked this religion, and also wanted to bring more wealth to France, as he thought that "the j00s r wealthy".

In any case, Jews were granted full citizenship in France in 1791. They kept this full citizenship despite Marat (dunno why you're mentionning him, he never cared much about jews and never had any legal power, and he's not remembered as a great revolutionnary), despite the Terror, despite the civil war. Of course, their right to practice their religion was severly limited at the height of the Terror, but the same was true for any religion (catholics probably had the hardest time). The first man who trully infringed on their citizenship was...guess who, Napoléon himself.

So, you can keep worshipping Napoléon because he saved the j00s, but he didn't. The Revolutionnary Army already emancipated them in Belgium and in Italy before he had any political power. When Napoléon supposedly liberated the Jews of Malta, he was actually only doing what he was told to do: give equal rights to anyone.
The Assemblée Nationale gave them full citizenship and equal rights while Napoléon was still a no-name. The situation of the Jews was one of the first issue raised by Robespierre, in late 1789.
That does not mean I hate Napoléon and consider him a monarch (he certainly wasn't liked by traditional monarchs) or a tyran. I just think calling him a philo-semit is quite erroneous. Most of the work was done between 1791 and 1793, not after 1799. I think Louis pretty much summed up what Napoléons thought about jews (ie. he didn't even know it himself).
You seem to think that my only aim was to bash monarchists through bashing Napoléon, while it wasn't really my attention.


As for monarchy as a whole, once again, Louis nicely explained my feelings. Royalists are usually right-wing antisemit nutjobs in my country nowadays. If it's different in yours, then well, I'm honestly glad for you *shrugs*

[Cronos Impera]

Paix to you, Mendill. If you posted that post instead of the first 2 replies, I would have never called you a Gunbortionist.