Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
In June of 1848, France experienced a revolution careening out of control. The
French National Assembly voted to abolish an idea proposed by French Socialists and held
dear by the organized working class of Paris: The National Workshop, a guaranteed job
for every man. Within hours after the declaration abolishing the National Workshops. the
streets of Paris were filled with 20,000 workers throwing up barricades and arming for
civil war. The government declared martial law and unleashed the regular army on the
working class sections of Paris. In three days of savage street fighting known as the
“Bloody June Days,” the army suppressed the revolt. French society had a taste of class
warfare in the Marxist sense of the term and the results were a shock to everyone: 10,000
people, including the archbishop of Paris were killed. The army commander General
Cavaignac also decided to punish the ringleaders of the trouble by deporting a further
11,000 men to hard labor in Algeria.
The government restored order but it would be an expensive victory because
French society was bitterly divided along class lines. The workers were confirmed in their
hatred of the middle class—it was during this period that words like “Capitalist,”
“Proletarian,” and “Communist” entered everyday usage. As the editor of one Parisian
newspaper put it: “Every Proletarian who does not see and feel that he belongs to an
enslaved and degraded class is a fool” On the other hand the propertied classes were
more impressed by the specter of revolutionary violence. One Parisian factory owner
wrote:
Every manufacturer lives in his factory like the colonial planter in the midst of his
slaves, one against a hundred. The barbarians who menace society are neither in
the Caucasus nor the steppes of Tartary; they are in the suburbs of our industrial
cities.
Louis Napoleon Bonaparte (18181873)
It was a traumatized, polarized, and frightened nation that went to the polls in
December of 1848 to elect a new President of France, the first ever to be elected under the
principle of Universal Manhood Suffrage. The winner of the election was Charles Louis
Napoleon Bonaparte (18181873). Many shocked political observers concluded that
Louis Napoleon was a nonentity whose electoral success was simply a matter of name
recognition. He was supported by some moderate politicians who believed he could be
used; in the words of one, “a cretin whom we will manage.” Louis Napoleon was
unfortunate in his enemies as well: Victor Hugo called him “Napoleon le Petit,” Otto von
Bismarck called him “a sphinx without a riddle,” and Karl Marx wrote in his sneering and
perceptive way, “Just because he was nothing he could signify everything.” For millions
of French voters, casting a ballot for Louis Napoleon would be their first political act. In
fact Louis Napoleon was the first leader of a major country, outside the United States, to
be elected by Universal Manhood Suffrage. In other words, in the words of E.J.
Hobsbawm, Louis Napoleon Bonaparte’s France, “became a sort of laboratory of a more
2
modern kind of politics, [that anticipated] later forms of political management.”
(Hobsbawm, pp. 99100)
In reality, Louis Napoleon was a clever politician, the first of a new breed of
Conservative leaders, who used liberal and nationalist ideas to bolster their own
authoritarian regimes. In some ways, Louis Napoleon was a transitional figure along the
way towards democratic politics. As Friedrich Engels commented in 1866:
Bonapartism is the true religion of the modern bourgeoisie. It is becoming
increasingly clear to me that the bourgeoisie does not have the will to rule directly,
and so a Bonapartist semidictatorship is the normal form. The great material
interests of the bourgeoisie carry this through, even against the bourgeoisie's own
wishes, but it does not let them have any share of political power. At the same
time, this dictatorship is itself forced to adopt in turn the bourgeoisie's material
interests against its will.
Louis Napoleon summed up his program in these words: “The name of Napoleon is in
itself a whole program. It wants to say at home, order, authority, religion, the people's
wellbeing; abroad, national dignity. Since France has carried on for fifty years only by
virtue of the administrative, military, judicial, religious and financial organization of the
Empire, why should she not also adopt the political institutions of that period?” (S., p.
778) Louis Napoleon believed that he was destined to govern France. He told a friend
shortly after his election that the presidency of the republic was only a beginning: “We
are not at the summit yet. This is only a stop on the way, a terrace where we may rest a
moment to gaze at the horizon.” (Spielvogel, p. 778) He was popular with the peasantry
and with the Church and with those people who wished a strong “Law and Order”
government. He liked to portray himself as the opponent of both left wing and right wing
extremists.
For three years he worked to win popularity and to gain the support of the
Catholic Church and the French army. The Constitution provided for a single term
presidency, and many began to suspect that Louis Napoleon had no intention of giving up
office. An acquaintance, the great political scientist, Alexis de Tocqueville doubted that
Louis Napoleon would ever return to private life and tried to dissuade him from
establishing a “bastard monarchy.” When the national assembly rejected his proposal to
revise the constitution and allow him to stand for reelection, he carefully planned and
executed a coup d'état. On December 2, 1852 Parisians awoke to find troops loyal to
Napoleon occupying government buildings and newspaper offices and the city was
plastered with sheets announcing that the assembly had been dissolved and that universal
suffrage was restored and that the French people were invited to the polls to endorse or
reject Louis Napoleon's actions.
In private, he admitted his cynicism. He told one Spanish friend that he drew a
distinction between election as the “source of power” rather than as the “habitual basis” of
government. “I don't mind being baptized in the water of universal manhood suffrage,”
he joked, “ but that is no reason for living in the water.” Many French democrats and
radicals tried to oppose Napoleon's Coup and he responded by a wave of arrests—nearly
27,000 political opponents were rounded up and imprisoned. Liberals in Great Britain and
Germany denounced Louis Napoleon as a modern tyrant and newspaper editors and
historians termed him a new Caesar. He kept his promise and compelled the French
3
people to vote yea or nay in a plebiscite. With opposition voices silenced or in exile and
fear of reprisals in the air, the result was guaranteed. By an overwhelming majority, 7.5
million yes votes to 640,000 no votes, the French people agreed to Louis Napoleon's
actions. “There has been terror,” wrote the novelist George Sand to the Italian
nationalist Giuseppe Mazzini, “but the people would have voted as it has without this.”
In 1852, encouraged by his genuine popularity, Louis Napoleon proclaimed himself
Emperor of the French and held another plebiscite to confirm the people's support. This
time he won with a 30 to 1 margin of approval.
His new government, called the Second Empire was clearly authoritarian in a
Bonapartist sense. As chief of state, the Emperor controlled the armed forces, police, and
the civil service. Only he could introduce legislation and conduct foreign policy. There
was a body called the Legislative Corps elected by the nation, but it had no real authority;
in fact it was the first of a long line of “rubber stamp parliaments” to enact a sham of
constitutional government to adorn the regime of a dictator. But Napoleon III was no
ordinary dictator, but rather a subtle politician who recognized that the great mass of the
French people really cared very little about the specific form of the Constitution. What
France really wanted was stable government, economic prosperity, and international
respect. Henry Kissinger used to say that the French electorate talk like communists and
vote like conservatives—Napoleon III recognized this contradiction and based his
government upon it. In some ways, his government anticipated the tactics of Charles de
Gaulle in the twentieth century.
Napoleon III was also fortunate in his timing. The first five years of his reign were
also a time of spectacular growth in the world economy and the French people shared in
the great economic boom. The discovery of gold in California in 1849 and in Australian
brought about an increase in the money supply, which had a mildly inflationary effect. The
steady rise in prices contributed to a booming stock market. Napoleon III realized the
importance of diverting “the attention of the French from politics to economics.”
Napoleon's policies did contribute to the economic boom. As a young man he was
influenced by the ideas of the Socialist Henri de SaintSimon (17601825) a leading
advocate of state economic planning and general prophet of technocracy. Napoleon
organized an economic policy that anticipated State Socialism. Napoleon used to joke
that he was “The Socialist Emperor.”
The basis of Imperial economic policy was a program of easy credit. His
government floated public bond issues to finance great construction programs, provided
state guarantees for governmentsponsored credit companies like the Crédit Mobilier to
promote large scale industrial expansion: railway building, installation of gaslighting in
French cities, and harbor construction. Louis Napoleon’s economic advisors raised the
capital to build the Suez Canal. French engineers actually completed the project although
Great Britain reaped most of the benefits. Napoleon boasted to the French people:
We have immense territories to cultivate, roads to open, harbors to deepen, canals
to dig, rivers to make navigable, railroads to complete. That is how I interpret the
Empire. Such are the conquests I contemplate; and you, all of you, who wish our
country's success, you are my soldiers.
All of this economic expansion stimulated the demand for iron and coal and labor
and unemployment disappeared as a political problem and a potential source of
4
revolutionary agitation. Napoleon also proposed measures legalizing Limited Liability
Corporations, legislation granting labor unions the right to organize and go out on strikes,
and even signed a free trade treaty with the old enemy Great Britain. In the first decade of
the Second Empire, French foreign trade tripled. Since the French population was in
decline, this new wealth was not simply swallowed up by more mouths. During the
nineteenth century, the savings of the French people was one of the great sources of
worldwide investment capital.
The New Paris
The centerpiece of this great boom was Napoleon's rebuilding of Paris. Under the
direction of Baron Haussmann, “The Attila of the straight line,” in the words of one
critic, the medieval face of Paris was transformed into the broad boulevards of modern
Paris. Those broad boulevards made it all the more difficult for revolutionaries to throw
up barricades. As Karl Marx put, “Liberté, fraternité, egalité has been replaced by
artillery, cavalry, and infantry.” Paris received a gaslight system to illuminate its
streets, underground sewers and public services like clean water. Napoleon boasted that
he found Paris smelling of excrement and left it smelling like a rose. Paris began to be the
city of light, a city known for fashion, department stores like the Bon Marché, the great
new Opera house, and, for tourists who enjoyed a more risqué form of entertainment, the
newly opened Folies Bergère. Just about everyone, capital and labor alike profited.
Stock speculators and bankers made enormous fortunes and about one Parisian worker in
five was employed in construction.
By 1860, Napoleon felt so secure in his personal popularity that he began to
experiment with a liberalization of the system. He offered a political amnesty to his
enemies in exile, he allowed the Legislative Corps to debate the Imperial address, and he
even submitted the national budget for approval. In 1868, Napoleon relaxed the
censorship of the press and allowed criticism of the regime. But by then, cracks were
appearing in the facade of the Second Empire. The economic boom was showing signs of
collapse. French Silkworm disease and the attack of the phylloxera plant louse damaged
the French silk and wine industries (most French grapevines were destroyed and replaced
by new plants from California). The American Civil War and the Union blockade deprived
the French textile industry of the raw cotton in needed and made Napoleon III a lukewarm
supporter of the Confederacy. But the worst problem facing the regime was a financial
crisis. The Empire was founded on credit, and the economic downturn attacked the
political basis of the regime. The threat of war brought on by Napoleon's foreign policy
adventures helped to dry up credit. As one banker put it, “the economy was deprived of
100 million francs that went on strike.” The collapse of the Crédit Mobilier and the
Suez Company also indicated that bankers were beginning to lose faith in the government.
Napoleon decided to try to attract a new political base. The regime decided to try
and attract the support of radicals and socialists. The emperor called in Emile Ollivier, the
former leader of the radical opposition as Chief Minister. Ollivier was instructed that the
Emperor wanted his assistance in "organizing liberty." One result of the economic
downturn as well as retreat from the Bonapartist dictatorship was the fact that the
emperor was powerless to enforce a modernization program for the army to match the
recent modernization of the Prussian army. The legislature regarded the army as a tool of
repression with good reason, and cut the military budget every year during the 1860s. The
5
army was equipped with an effective new breech loading rifle, the Chassepot, but there
was no money to modernize the artillery. Napoleon had to choose between the ambitious
public works projects and the need to modernize the army, there simply was not enough
money for both.
Napoleon III: Foreign Policy
Napoleon's foreign policy would eventually lead to disaster, but initially, during the
1850s, it seemed that he had succeeded diplomatically, where his uncle had failed
militarily; that is in making France the arbiter of Europe. His desire to live up to the
Napoleonic image undoubtedly led him to commit the French to a number of conflicts,
most of which were fought for questionable purposes. He declared war on Russia, he
committed French troops to fight the Austrians in the name of a unified Italy, and he sent a
French army to Mexico to establish Maximillian, brother of the Austrian Emperor, as
Emperor of Mexico.
Napoleon realized that if he were to gain the glory associated with the name
Napoleon and if he planned to break the diplomatic restrictions imposed on France by the
treaties of 1815, he would have to improve relations with Great Britain and somehow
reduce the power and influence of Russia. The British Prime Minister Palmerston feared
that Napoleon might be planning “to strike a stunning blow”—perhaps even invade
Britain. British fears of the mere name of Napoleon were echoed elsewhere in Europe.
The task might have been insurmountable if Napoleon had not been fortunate in his timing.
He believed that fear of Russia probably overshadowed fear of France among the states of
Europe. Because of this, he believed that it might be possible to make some bold foreign
policy moves, if he chose his targets carefully.
He chose to make his move in the east. One of the great, unsolved diplomatic
questions of the nineteenth century was what came to be known as the “Eastern
Question.” It really came down to this: who would be the chief beneficiary of the
disintegration of the Ottoman Empire. As Turkish control of Southeastern Europe waned,
European governments began to take an active interest in Balkan affairs. Russia’s
proximity to the Ottoman Empire and the religious bonds between the Greek Orthodox
Christians and the Russian Church gave the Russian state an excuse to demand a special
sphere of influence over the entire area. Other European nations not only feared Russian
ambitions in the area but had ambitions of their own. The Austrians wanted more land in
the Balkans, while France and Great Britain wanted commercial opportunities and Naval
bases. The British in particular wished to see that Russia remained backwards and bottled
up in the Black Sea without access to the Mediterranean. Napoleon III calculated that the
British would be willing to fight Russia and accept France as an ally to keep the Russians
out of Constantinople.
War erupted between the Russians and Turks in 1853 over the question of
Russia’s right to protect Christian shrines in Palestine. When the war began to go against
the Turks, Great Britain and France declared war on Russia. The war itself is remembered
largely for incredible incompetence on both sides. The British and French landed a large
army on the Crimean peninsula where it was allowed practically to starve to death because
of inadequate supply support. The French army, on the other hand, equipped with new
percussion rifles shot the Russian formation to pieces. The French and British victory over
Russia in the Crimean War revealed that Russia was now truly a backward nation unable
6
to compete with the modern, industrialized nations of western Europe on the new
technological battlefield of the midnineteenth century. The Crimean War also seemed to
indicate that France could once again claim the status of the most modern and powerful
military nation in Europe. The Russian Czar Alexander II was forced to sue for peace. It
was a stinging blow to Russian power and prestige. (Spielvogel)
Napoleon III and the Concert of Europe
The Crimean War broke up the Concert of Europe: Russia and Austria, the two
chief powers intent on maintaining the Status Quo and harnassing in France in the first half
of the nineteenth century were now enemies because of Austria’s unwillingness to declare
war on France. Russia adopted an isolationist policy for the next two decades. The
Russian Foreign Minister Prince Gorchakov explained: “Russia is not sulking, she is
quietly gathering her forcesRussia will be back.” (Rich)
France was the nation that gained the most: the international system of 1815 was
broken and the French Second Empire had supplanted Russia as the most important nation
in Europe. Napoleon III announced to the world that he recognized the forces of
nationalism and that he intended to pursue a foreign policy that would champion national
movements. Napoleon announced in 1854, in words that anticipated Woodrow Wilson:
The era of conquests is over, and cannot return; for it is not by extending her
territorial boundaries that a nation in our days can be honored and powerful; it is
by placing itself in the lead of generous ideas, by causing everywhere the rule
of law and justice to prevail. (Osgood)
The breakdown of the Concert of Europe opened a new phase of international relations
and prepared the way for the Italians and the Germans to establish unified national states.
The big loser ultimately, would be France.
Even now it is hard to imagine what he wanted to accomplish by this Mexican
adventure. Perhaps he wished to curry favor with French Catholics by overthrowing the
revolutionary regime of Benito Juarez. Perhaps he wished to establish a French zone of
influence in the western hemisphere and take advantage of the American Civil War to do
so. At the end of the Civil war, the United States forced Napoleon to withdraw French
forces from Mexico. His humiliation was complete when his French Empire in Mexico
collapsed and Juarez's troops executed Maximillian in 1867.
“There are no mistakes left to commit,” said the French monarchist Adolphe
Thiers, but he was wrong. In 1870, Napoleon mismanaged a diplomatic crisis with Prussia
over the issue of whether a Prussian prince should be allowed on the throne of Spain.
Although the Prussians initially met French demands, Napoleon gave in to public opinion
and declared war on Prussia. The French Prime Minister Ollivier remarked, “We go to
war with a light heart.” The war was national disaster. Poorly led and poorly equipped,
the French army was no match for the Prussian forces. At Sedan, on September 2, 1870,
the French army was pounded to pieces by German artillery. The entire army, including
Napoleon III, surrendered. Napoleon lived out the remaining three years of his life in exile
dying of kidney stones and prostate cancer. The collapse of his army led to Civil War
within France at the very moment that the German army surrounded and bombarded Paris.
Paris finally capitulated and a peace treaty was signed that forced France to pay a huge
7
indemnity (5 billion francs or one billion dollars) and cede the provinces of Alsace and
Lorraine to Germany. On January 18, in the Hall of Mirrors in Versailles, the victorious
Prussians declared the German Empire. Napoleon III left France with better railroads,
new harbors and beautified Paris—and with two new great powers, Italy and Germany on
its borders.
Louis Napoleon is among the most ambiguous figures in French history. The
historical consensus about his foreign policy is that Napoleon III was outmaneuvered by
both Cavour and Bismarck and his attempts to live up to the Napoleonic image led him
down the road to the bizarre Mexican adventure. It would be a mistake to see his foreign
policy as an unbroken record of failurecertainly contemporaries did not regard him in
that light. His diplomacy placed France in the forefront of international relations, helped
to break down the old Metternich system, revealed the weakness of the Russian empire,
and his decision to intervene in Italian affairs led directly to Italian unification. He was
horrified by the results of the battles he fought to secure his reputation—he was not a
militarist or aggressive although his regime did annex Nice and the Riviera for France. In
the words of Victor Hugo, “Monsieur Louis Napoleon, you are ambitious, you aim high,
but you must be told the truth. You are but a rascal. Not everyone who wishes to be a
monster attains his wish.”
Modern scholars have been more impressed by Napoleon's particular form of
political manipulation. Theodore Zeldin has written, “The Liberal Empire was an attempt
to break the vicious circle of revolution and reaction in which France had been caught
since Louis XVI.” Napoleon III should be remembered as a transitional figure along the
road to democracy even if his regime ended up on the scrapheap of governments tried
and discarded by the French. Napoleon pioneered a new form of mass politics in which
authoritarian politicians could employ nationalist and populist tactics, before his time the
program of the Liberals, to achieve genuine popularity. Otto von Bismarck may have got
the best of him in the arena of diplomacy, but he was Napoleon's student in the art of
domestic politics as German liberals found. “Many politicians of the twentieth century
nationalist, populist, and in the most dangerous form, fascist—were to rediscover the sort
of relationship which he pioneered with the masses.” ( Hobsbawm, p. 102)