A few things worth noting here though: 1) The "reinstatement" of slavery wasn't really a reinstating - when the Revolutionary government abolished it back in the early 1790's, they really didn't have a way of enforcing the abolition, so many colonies just kept on enslaving people as if it never happened. France couldn't afford to send an army to faraway places to stop this at this point, so it just kept happening. Of course, Haiti rebelled, and eventually broke their chains, so they're exempt from this. But I'll get to that in a bit. When Napoleon came around in 1799, he initially didn't reinstate slavery - he actually stated that he "didn't want to deprive the blacks of their liberty." However, upon seeing that slavery was happening anyways, and also realizing that France wasn't profiting from it (since it was technically illegal), he changed the law to ensure that France was maximizing its benefit from an institution that wasn't going away anyways. It made sense in this context. Edit: Also worth noting is that he abolished slavery completely during the 100 Days between his exile to Elba and St. Helena. 2) About Haiti itself - Napoleon had to attack Haiti, for two reasons - the first was simply that he needed money. France was being attacked on all sides by all of Europe, and couldn't sustain herself without ample funding. This is also why Bonaparte sold the Louisiana Territory to the USA for dirt cheap around the same time. Haiti, as a vital colony of France, was defying it and Napoleon believed he could crush the insurrection and get Haiti (and her assets) back under complete control. It's worth noting that his aim was not the reinstatement of slavery, but at the same time, he probably would've done that if he had won. Secondly, it was also about making an example of Haiti - if other colonies saw the Haitian Revolution, and began getting ideas, France might begin losing them - and the revenues and investments tied to them as well. Furthermore, foreign powers such as Great Britain could seize those opportunities and try to destabilize France - by supporting such uprisings. Bonaparte couldn't let this happen - so invading Haiti seemed to make sense at the time. It's also worth mentioning though that, at St. Helena, he actually said he regretted invading Haiti, and suggested that if he had another chance, he'd have tried to ally with them against Britain in the region. In hindsight, this would've been a better move, but hindsight is 20/20. Hope this presents the issue you've raised in a new light for you!
@@happyvalleykid6324How does any of this contradict what OP said? He thought he had a right to exploit their black flesh and he operated accordingly. Also, what somebody does in times of desperation and pressure isn't the best test of their integrity or character.
Idk but Napoleon was a jacobin during the revolution, he ordered the execution of the royalists in Toulon and greatly admired Robespierre. He was also proclaimed savior of the revolution by the convention because he used canon against the royalist mobs. He was also a friend of the brother of Robespierre….
@@thetireless1812 cuz ur not French so u can’t have access to the direct data. But what I can tell you about is that Napoleon will continue supporting Robespierre even during his napoleonic empire by writing letters in favor of Robespierre. He will say that Robespierre was just the scapegoat of the terror and that the real monsters have survived the terror, aka the thermidoriens, aka the so called moderates. These so called moderates (ex- jacobins) are responsible for the worst period of the reign of terror in which had the most number of people gu*llotined. Indeed, it was not under Robespierre but under the thermidorien rule that the terror was the worst of all… Which Napoleon will use his famous quote : history Is written by the victors. This quote will later on be hjacked by Winston Churchill when he talked about Napoleon.
But one would think, unlike women’s rights, anti monarchy is the fundamental principle of the French Revolution? So in that sense, yes he stabbed them in the back but they seemed to be okay with it because everyone was still high on victory
Great channel.
Nice to see subscriber numbers increasing.
I think Napoleon's stance on Slavery and Haiti is certainly a break from the direction the revolution was traveling in.
A few things worth noting here though:
1) The "reinstatement" of slavery wasn't really a reinstating - when the Revolutionary government abolished it back in the early 1790's, they really didn't have a way of enforcing the abolition, so many colonies just kept on enslaving people as if it never happened. France couldn't afford to send an army to faraway places to stop this at this point, so it just kept happening. Of course, Haiti rebelled, and eventually broke their chains, so they're exempt from this. But I'll get to that in a bit. When Napoleon came around in 1799, he initially didn't reinstate slavery - he actually stated that he "didn't want to deprive the blacks of their liberty." However, upon seeing that slavery was happening anyways, and also realizing that France wasn't profiting from it (since it was technically illegal), he changed the law to ensure that France was maximizing its benefit from an institution that wasn't going away anyways. It made sense in this context.
Edit: Also worth noting is that he abolished slavery completely during the 100 Days between his exile to Elba and St. Helena.
2) About Haiti itself - Napoleon had to attack Haiti, for two reasons - the first was simply that he needed money. France was being attacked on all sides by all of Europe, and couldn't sustain herself without ample funding. This is also why Bonaparte sold the Louisiana Territory to the USA for dirt cheap around the same time. Haiti, as a vital colony of France, was defying it and Napoleon believed he could crush the insurrection and get Haiti (and her assets) back under complete control. It's worth noting that his aim was not the reinstatement of slavery, but at the same time, he probably would've done that if he had won. Secondly, it was also about making an example of Haiti - if other colonies saw the Haitian Revolution, and began getting ideas, France might begin losing them - and the revenues and investments tied to them as well. Furthermore, foreign powers such as Great Britain could seize those opportunities and try to destabilize France - by supporting such uprisings. Bonaparte couldn't let this happen - so invading Haiti seemed to make sense at the time.
It's also worth mentioning though that, at St. Helena, he actually said he regretted invading Haiti, and suggested that if he had another chance, he'd have tried to ally with them against Britain in the region. In hindsight, this would've been a better move, but hindsight is 20/20.
Hope this presents the issue you've raised in a new light for you!
@@happyvalleykid6324How does any of this contradict what OP said? He thought he had a right to exploit their black flesh and he operated accordingly. Also, what somebody does in times of desperation and pressure isn't the best test of their integrity or character.
An excellent explanation by Dr Priest. Is nice to hear an expert on the subject than just a random opinion.
The Piano music is amazing, what is the name of the piece?
Living by Borrtex
Yes
Idk but Napoleon was a jacobin during the revolution, he ordered the execution of the royalists in Toulon and greatly admired Robespierre. He was also proclaimed savior of the revolution by the convention because he used canon against the royalist mobs. He was also a friend of the brother of Robespierre….
Do you have something to prove his involvement in the executions? As far as I’m aware, there is no evidence he was directly involved.
@@thetireless1812 cuz ur not French so u can’t have access to the direct data.
But what I can tell you about is that Napoleon will continue supporting Robespierre even during his napoleonic empire by writing letters in favor of Robespierre. He will say that Robespierre was just the scapegoat of the terror and that the real monsters have survived the terror, aka the thermidoriens, aka the so called moderates. These so called moderates (ex- jacobins) are responsible for the worst period of the reign of terror in which had the most number of people gu*llotined. Indeed, it was not under Robespierre but under the thermidorien rule that the terror was the worst of all…
Which Napoleon will use his famous quote : history Is written by the victors.
This quote will later on be hjacked by Winston Churchill when he talked about Napoleon.
But one would think, unlike women’s rights, anti monarchy is the fundamental principle of the French Revolution? So in that sense, yes he stabbed them in the back but they seemed to be okay with it because everyone was still high on victory
Sir he betrayed or not what is the conclusion