Talk:Bonapartism

message: Additional Marx material is good.  Is article still a stub? Rlquall 03:00, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: As it now reads, the article doesn't meet the Wikipedia style guidelines and also seems to imply that "Bonapartism" began after the abdication of Louis Napoleon, which is hardly the case as almost everyone knows.  Does anyone have any reason why the first two paragraphs were cut or why they should not be restored?
Rlquall 05:03, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't see any reason why.  I restored them. --Jfruh 18:28, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

text: There is a list at Bonapartiste. The articles should probably be merged. Strawberry4Ever (talk) 22:39, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why were the first two paragraphs cut? 

message: Maybe this article should be Merged with Bonapartism?
:Support --Michalis Famelis (talk) 00:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge? 

message: Louis Napoleon Bonaparte assumed the title Napoleon III to symbolize that the members House of Bonaparte had always been the rightful rulers of France. Napoleon II may not have been in power, but he had been its rightful ruler.
I don't think this is true; Napoleon II briefly reigned as Emperor for two weeks after Napoleon I abdicated and before the Allies restored the Bourbons. Napoleon III explicitly said that his numbering reflected that brief reign, and was not a reflection that the Bonapartes had been the rightful French rulers in the interim (indeed, he noted that if that had been his aim, he would have been Napoleon V, as his uncle Joseph and father Louis would've been Napoleon III and IV). See Talk:Napoleon_II_of_France for more info. --Jfruh (talk) 19:16, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable assesrtion 

message: What happens if the lines of Prince Napoleon VII Charles, his son, and his brother go extinct?  Does the succession just die, will the last in line appoint it to someone, does it go to Napoleon's illegitimate lines, or what?  Emperor001 18:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Succession

message: Is it really a Marxist "epithet"?  It's a term used by Marxists to describe certain forms of government.  It's a form of government marxists don't like, but calling it an "epithet" seems POV, as it essentially suggests the term has no analytical value, and is merely an insult.  Although it can certainly be used as such, I don't think Marx's own use of the term falls in that category, nor does that of his more thoughtful followers.  Beyond that, why no mention of fascism?  My sense is that 20th century Marxists have frequently considered fascism to be a manifestation of Marx's bonapartism. john k (talk) 18:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Epithet? 

message: I don't understand the connection between Bonapartism and Gaullism.  If Charles de Gaulle was a Bonapartist why did he not make Louis Napoléon Bonaparte emperor?
2008-10-01  Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
:There's more than one meaning to "bonapartism."  De Gaulle was not a Bonapartist in the sense that he supported the restoration of the Bonaparte family to the throne of France.  Rather, historians have described him as a bonapartist because they see parallels between his policies and those of Napoleon III.  In particular, both Napoleon III and De Gaulle created regimes with a strong executive and which relied heavily on the use of plebiscites to register the popular will.  This was in distinction to the parliamentary regimes of the Third and Fourth Republics which intervened between Napoleon III's time and De Gaulle's.  The term was frequently used polemically, as a way to attack De Gaulle as a would-be dictator, but has also, I think, been used more descriptively.  René Remond's theory on the three currents of the French right - legitimist, orléanist, and bonapartist - is probably the operative concept here.  john k (talk) 18:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gaullism a kind of Bonapartism? 

message: If this article is supposed to more about political ideology and general applications of Bonapartism, then it appears that the whole list of dynasty claimants and their images should go to the article Bonapartiste. Both articles lack sufficient citations and seem more in the line of personal essays than political analysis or history. There does not seem to be a clear distinction between them.Parkwells (talk) 21:00, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Photos belong elsewhere

message: As is obvious and adequately addressed in this article, Bonapartism serves as the name of several different concepts and political philosophies, and continues to be a very malleable construct. However, the first sentence in the article glazes over this nuance; "Bonapartism is the political ideology of Napoleon Bonaparte and his followers and successors."
Of the countless definitions, few relate the term to the ideology of Napoleon Bonaparte as he lived. Indeed, many scholars champion the view that Bonapartism evolved dramatically in the course of the 19th and 20th centuries, whilst characterising it as the co-option of Napoleon's legacy by subsequent liberal and, particularly after the formation of the Second French Empire, authoritarian movements (see René Rémond, Robert Gildea, Stanley Mellon).Rémond, René, The Right wing in France from 1815 to de Gaulle, 2nd American edition (1969 [orig. 1954]), Ch. 4, ‘1848-1870: Bonapartism, “Classic” and Authoritarian Rightist Groups’Gildea, Robert, Ch. 2, ‘Bonapartism’, The Past in French History, (Yale, 1994), pp. 62-78Mellon, Stanley, ‘The July Monarchy and the Napoleonic Myth’, Yale French Studies, 26, 1960
How best can this first sentence be rewritten in order to capture the complexity of the term and escape the contention (or perhaps error?) of characterising Napoleon I as a Bonapartist? Joelj7 (talk) 16:27, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: This article seems very incomplete.  There is no discussion of the contemporary opposition to Bonapartism, either intellectual or political, or any criticism of the "movement". 2.31.162.52 (talk) 13:16, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opposition? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:37, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I have a pdf copy of The Legend of Napoleon   and can't find the quote attributed to him. There are many excellent summaries of Bonapartism but not what is written in this article. I'm hoping someone will take time to edit this section, otherwise I'll cut it out in a few weeks or so. MountainBarley (talk) 09:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation on Sudhir Hazareesingh quote wrong