Talk:Bonapartism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Bonapartism is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses. | |
Additional Marx material is good. Is article still a stub? Rlquall 03:00, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Why were the first two paragraphs cut?
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)
- I can't see any reason why. I restored them. --Jfruh 18:28, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
It would be good if the article gave a lists of Bonapartist claims to the thrown the same way it does for the Stuarts and Bourbons.--Gary123 23:45, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Merge?
Maybe this article should be Merged with Bonapartism?
- Support --Michalis Famelis (talk) 00:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Added a "mergeto" tag for the Marxist section only... Churchh 02:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Questionable assesrtion
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)
[edit] Succession
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)
[edit] Epithet?
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)
