France, China

There is no question in the fact that Napoleon Bonaparte was a significant character in France. However, there have been debates among historians for years around the central question: “Was Napoleon Bonaparte a hero or a villain?” The answer here relies on how one looks upon the situation. Was Napoleon Bonaparte a savior to the French, or was he a tyrant to the French? Although many historians’ answers do rely deeply onto perspective, their answers also lie within which stage of life Napoleon Bonaparte was in, as well as the shift in opinions that come as time changes. Paul Stock and Phillip Dwyer analyze Napoleon Bonaparte’s influence and through the analysis, debate on whether Napoleon Bonaparte should be considered a hero or a villain,

Thus, another difference between the constitution between China and the United States is the structure of each government. In China, the power is held in the hands of people, as the first article of China’s constitution mentions that “All power in the People's Republic of China belongs to the people.”, and in those of elected people in National People's Congress and the local

Just about any country that one can name has some history of civil unrest, class issues, rioting in the streets, and outright warfare. These patterns of behavior are common denominators for most civilization in the world. The names, faces, and places may change, but the motivations are generally the same, because of the need for change and the willingness to do whatever is necessary to achieve it. In contrast to the United States, which was in the process of freeing itself from British colonial rule, France was working to free itself from royal absolutism. This period is historically known as the French Revolution. Many scholars do not agree on the chronology of the French Revolution; some scholars suggest that the Revolution took place between 1789 to 1799 while others feel that it did not end until Napoleon lost power in 1815. To better understand the history of the French Revolution it is necessary to discuss the causes, major events, significant figures, and the outcomes associated with these political developments. Without this uprising, that changed the face of the entire country and influenced local political life in many countries in Europe, in all likelihood the France we know today would never have existed.

In France in 1789, A revolution began. The people of France were fighting for their inalienable rights such as freedom from serfdom , equality between the classes. Within this chaos in France, Napoleon, a new thinker, came about and changed France in many ways. Napoleon's policies can be seen as preserving the legacy of the French Revolution by giving equality to the lower classes and creating a governmental system that helped to put the people in charge of their sovereignty, however it can be seen as hurting the legacy by protecting the ideas of absolutism.

During the terror the “committee of public safety” was set up to keep the French people safe and after that one leader from the jacobins name Maximilien Robespierre became the dictator(making all the decisions for the country)of French, and he was one of the worst ruler of French. He killed more than 17 thousand people in the guillotine and people didn't want him as A leader,so he got executed at the end, and then napoleon came to power. Who was a military leader,and he took over most of Europe and made French empire huge but when he, and his army invaded Russia, he was failed to take over Russia, where he lost his army and that's how he lost his power.

Before the Napoleonic Age, France was in a very inconsistent period when it comes to government. In 1789, the people of France overthrew the monarchy and had many types of government to try and replace the terrible monarchy. France went through four different types of government before Napoleon stepped in. There was the National Assembly, Legislative Assembly, National Convention, and the Directory. Napoleon saw this weak government and in 1799, he decided to take over France himself. Although he tried to make some positive contributions to France, Napoleon Bonaparte had more of a negative impact because he was an absolute ruler, did not care about the people, and he did not keep the promises he shared.

The development of the French Revolution was greatly influenced by the philosophies of the French Enlightenment period. Interestingly, disparate to the English and American Revolutions, the French Revolution did not evolve in a linear fashion. Instead, it progressed in a series of conflicting phases, each of which could be considered almost as a revolution in itself. Political theorists – such as Montesquieu, Rousseau and Voltaire – were sources of inspiration for key revolutionaries throughout the Revolution’s three major phases. As the revolutionists occupying the leading roles changed, the principles of the Revolution’s former phase were abandoned in favour of another policy, essentially antithetical to the previous one. Ultimately, in shifting between various Enlightenment philosophers, France was able to subject its government to massive structural change - from being an absolute monarchy (prior to the Revolution), to a constitutional monarchy (1791-1792), then a republic (1792-1804), and finally a dictatorship (under Napoleon Bonaparte).

Since 1789, increasing discontent for food shortage and dire living conditions in France triggered massive protests against the Old Regime. By overthrowing Louis XVI and absolute monarchy, French citizens began to march toward democracy. However, the desire for participating in political decisions became so radical that fueled by internal and external conflicts, people shifted away from the principles they drew up. To restore stability and enforce laws, the government turned more centralized. Unlike what the revolution intended initially, its ending with Napoleon’s dictatorship totally resembled what it was like before. Such turmoil throughout the revolution merely undermined democracy despite its original aim to increase the public voice in politics.

With all the glory and the splendour that some countries may have experienced, never has history seen how only only one man, Napoleon, brought up his country France from its most tormented status, to the very pinnacle of its height in just a few years time. He was a military hero who won splendid land-based battles, which allowed him to dominate most of the European continent. He was a man with ambition, great self-control and calculation, a great strategist, a genius; whatever it was, he was simply the best. But, even though how great this person was, something about how he governed France still floats among people 's minds. Did he abuse his power? Did Napoleon defeat the purpose of the ideals of the French Revolution? After all of his success in his military campaigns, did he gratify the people 's needs regarding their ideals on the French Revolution? This is one of the many controversies that we have to deal with when studying Napoleon and the French Revolution. In this essay, I will discuss my opinion on whether or not was he a destroyer of the ideals of the French Revolution.

Historically, France has had a much harder and rockier road to established democracy than America. France’s government has been through many phases characterized as the Five Republics. The constitution of the Fifth Republic (which is in place today) was drawn up several weeks after Gen. Charles de Gaulle was invested as the last prime minister of the Fourth Republic. The new constitution, which was adopted by an 80 percent vote in a popular referendum held in September 1958, was tailor made for de Gaulle. It contained much of what the past four republics had such as both a president and prime minister, as well as a bicameral legislature in the form of the National Assembly and the Senate(4). It is important to note here that France has both a president and a prime minister thus making the Head of Government and Chief of Staff two separate roles, respectively. This is what makes France a semi-presidential system

Democracy, so essential a feature of European countries today, had had to make a bumpy and potholed journey. Basically in all European countries, democracy was nebulous and uncertain in the 19th century, albeit in varying degrees. In Britain, a parliamentary democracy was very much in full bloom, but the inherent love and pride of the British people for their monarchy pre-empted a switch to a full-fledged democratic form of government. As a result, these democratic institutions functioned under a monarchy that controlled the largest empire of the day. In France, the scene was different. In the absence of democratic institutions of the kind Britain had nurtured, the governance the French

Like Athens and Sparta, were the United States and China drawn into a war neither power wanted because of their alliances?

1. Charles de Gaulle was the dominant political leader and grand figurehead of France during and after World War II. De Gaulle was a career soldier in the French Army who had been wounded and held prisoner during World War I. He rose to the rank of general and was serving as France's minister for National Defense and War in June, 1940, when France capitulated to Germany early in World War II. Charles DeGaulle escaped to Britain, where he made a famous broadcast calling on the French people to resist (earning him the nickname of the "Man of June 18, 1940"). DeGaulle made the free french forces. After the war he was elected head of the French government, but left the post in 1946 and formed a new political party .

Napoleon was a man who had reformed france into something that it wouldn’t have wanted to happen 10 years before he took over in a military coup and ruled by dictatorship. In the eyes of many of the French he was a hero, he

The French Revolution began as an expression of rebellion against centuries of absolute rule in France. After an interim of experimental liberalism under the rule of Jacobins and Girondins and then the infamous reign of terror, the people of French were drawn to a man who promised them a return to stability, and  honor through the expansion of empire. France and it’s people had long yearned for this sens eof honour, it had seemed, and could finally sens eit in a lasting rpesence under the rule of their prodigious, unbeatable general, Napoleon Bonaparte. He would soon take the reigns of civil government as well and become yet another Absolutist ruler, yet this