Liberalism is a complex word which has variously been interpreted in historical studies and this goes the same with the term autocracy. Historians of political ideology often intertwine complex and interesting accounts, attempting to chain ideology, political activities and philosophical locus into a comprehensible whole. As with many contemporary political concepts and ideologies, liberalism is a profoundly disputed concept, not least among liberals themselves. Be as it may stand, it is the purpose of this essay to discuss the constitutional development of the Second Empire and also to explain the liberalization of the Second Empire up to 1860.
Liberal basically implies widely open to new ideas, willing to depart from established opinions or conventions (Oxford English Dictionary). In light of the French scenario when Napoleon lll came to the throne, his capacity to introduce universal male suffrage for those twenty years of age and above, whether with property or not makes him qualify to be called a liberal. On the same note, autocracy should be understood as a form of government whereby the leader has unlimited authority. It has to be observed that Napoleon lll wanted a return to the “glamorous days” of his uncle, Napoleon 1, (H.L Peacock). More important is that historiographical interpretations are offered in response to why liberalization of the empire took shape the way it did.
As a liberal autocrat, Louis Napoleon appointed representatives of those who had bias towards his reign mainly the head of the police was given to a Bonapartist. Again to demonstrate and fulfill his ambitions and promises, Napoleon lll send General Oudinot to suppress the Roman Republic which had been set up by Garibaldi and Mazzini. In this regard, Napoleon lll had a breach of the constitution by sending Oudinot to the Roman expedition since it was unconstitutional to interfere in the affairs of the Pope and his subjects. Such was the liberal autocrat of the French throne.
In addition to that, for the first decade of his reign, Napoleon lll faced little opposition since the propertied classes had been saved from the “spectre” of socialism and communism and thus the people generally were ready to tolerate dictatorship which seemed to offer room for safety in the nation. Also imperative is that, Louis Napoleon made efforts to implement what he had wrote in his early pamplet the Extinction of Pauperism whereby such efforts were seen in the launching of Public works projects among others. Thus, Napoleon lll was a liberal autocrat who knew how to play his cards close to his chest.
To further demonstrate the notion that Napoleon lll was a liberal autocrat it can be noted he had the capacity to thwart opposition vehemently as evidenced by the French novelists’ writings. Hugo Victor’s work depicted a scenario where he even lived in exile with also other famous Republicans who were either in prison or forbidden in the French penal/disciplinary settlements, (D. Thomson). Hence, as a liberal autocrat, Louis Napoleon consolidated his authority by support from the middle class and the peasantry as well as also the devotional loyalty from the army which lasted for sometime in France.
Also imperative are the differing views on why Napoleon lll liberalised the empire with some arguing that it was a voluntary measure whilst on the contrary, some historians point to push factors in his actions. Napoleon lll wanted to gain support from different opinionated opposition parties and it is along the way that he decided to liberalise the empire. Opposition from Republicans, the Bonapartists who supported his coup but at the same time they did not want or need an authoritarian government. This line of argument clearly articulates that Napoleon lll found himself liberalizing the empire not as a result of his personal voluntarism but rather an awkward circumstance of attempting to satisfy all sides without offending the other too much.
Be that as it may, the constitution launched with the mandate of the referendum of 1851 and 1852 made Napoleon lll even more powerful and authoritarian. The lower house was to be elected for only six years which would then paradoxically sit for three months in a year with its debates published in a censored form and the media under the same restrictions. Thus, the notion that Napoleon lll made a voluntary decision to move from liberal autocracy to the liberal empire requires a close examination and explanation.
However, to demonstrate that Napoleon lll was reluctant to liberalise is the period with which it took him to liberalise the empire. The first few years of his reign, one can observe that he was just interested in maintaining and being the all authority in France.The process that he (Napoleon lll) took has been used to argue for the notion that he was indeed just a victim of circumstances. Again, the same liberal reforms had a boomerang effect upon Napoleon lll since they led to his downfall especially on allowing freedom of expression in the press.
Nineteenth-century liberalism’s typical ambiguities can be appreciated, initially, in its indefinite association with its recent past, to the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. A.S Kahan (2003) notes that the trouble in positioning liberalism between left and right may perhaps be indebted much to this problem. Many of the goals liberals pursued in the nineteenth century had analogies with the aims of eighteenth-century enlightened reformers. However, one of the lessons liberals had learned from the French Revolution was to reject the radical methods proposed by some of the Enlightenment’s leading spirits.
The same scholar further points out that, liberals ‘views of the Revolution were equally fraught with tension. As the Revolution’s heirs, liberals identified themselves with the “men of 1789”. They proudly associated themselves with the “Declaration of the Rights of Man “and the abolition of feudal privileges, and they claimed the early accomplishments of the French Revolution as their own. On the other hand, liberals rejected Jacobinism, the Terror, and all the other aspects of the French Revolution summarized by the year 1793. Liberals sought not to unmake the Revolution, but to tame it so that the enlightened progress symbolized by 1789 could be maintained and carried on, and the Terror and anarchy they feared avoided. Opposing the virtues of 1789 to the vices of 1793 was a hallmark of liberal historiography of the Revolution.
Following the lines of the essay it can inferred from the above that Napoleon lll was a complex personality who made attempts to balance all factional groups which existed in France, challenges mounted on him from the Bonapartists as well as other opposition voices and movements.
References
Aggarwal M., History of France during Louis 18 to Napoleon 3, History of France
Beers F., World History: Patterns of Civilization, North Carolina University, Prentice Hall, 1993 Bodenstein F., Musealizing Napoleon (1837–2011): From Traditional Representations to a Dualistic European Master Narrative, Universite de Paris-Sorbonne, 2011
Cartographia, Napoleon 3 and the fall of An Empire, 29 May 2008 Chrastil, Who Lost the Franco-Prussian War? Blame, Politics, and Citizenship in the 1870s, Yale University, Volume 33, 2005
France under Napoleon 3, Nation Building in Italy, 3 March 2015 King, Experiencing World History, Second Edition, Milestone Publishers, California, 1994
Price P., The Second Empire 1852-1870, University of Abersywyth Price, The French Second Empire: Amatory of Political Power, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2001
Stockwell S., The Rise and Fall of Modern Empire, Volume 3, King’s College, London, 2013
http://e-bookrights.com/2015/05/europe-since-napoleon-2nd-edition-revised-by-david-thomson/, accessed on 30 April 2016
http://www.sparknotes.com/history/european/1871/section5.rhtml, accessed on 30 April 2016.
http://www.napoleon.org/en/reading_room/timelines/files/@napoleonIII_life_august04.asp, accessed on 30 April 2016
http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?ParagraphID=mmt, accessed on 27 April 2016
http://ibatpv.org/projects/france/second_emp/default.htm, accessed on 27 April 2016
http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/samples/cam031/2001025954.pdf, accessed on 27 April 2016
http://www.britannica.com/topic/Second-Empire, accessed on 27 April 2016
No comments:
Post a Comment