Napoleon Bonaparte is history’s only true supervillian. This may seem like a controversial statement, but it is one that I can prove with enumerable facts, a number of which I shall enumerate below. Before I present my proof, however, I would like to clarify something: I am not attempting to argue that Napoleon is the most evil man in history. There are at least half a dozen people who committed more evil acts, killed more people, burned more cities, etc, etc than Emperor Napoleon I. This, however, has no bearing on my claim. My argument is that, alone out of history’s great villains and vagrants, Bonaparte possesses a certain set of attributes that set him apart. Rather than a monster or a demon, he is clearly a supervillain.
Napoleon Bonaparte Makes No Sense (Historically Speaking)
Generally speaking, even the most evil of acts can be aligned properly with their historical context. This does not excuse them, but it does serve to explain them. Take Hitler for example. The antisemitism of the National Socialists is derivative of the philosophy pioneered by the Viennese mayor Karl Lueger and his Christian Socialist Party, and in a broader sense, a tradition of German political antisemitism going back to Martin Luther. Hitler’s short-term aims were the reversal of the Treaty of Versailles and the restoration of German Great Power status. His long-term aims in the East were part of a tradition of German longing for an Eastern Empire that can be traced back the Imperial German policy in the Great War and even further, to the Northern Crusades of the 12th and 13th centuries and the Teutonic Knights colonization of what would become Prussia and the Baltic States.
None of this holds true for Napoleon. Napoleon Bonaparte came from a minor Corsican noble family, one who had been committed to the cause of Corsican independence. As a young man, Bonaparte was a fierce adherent of this cause. He abandoned this in favor of Radical French Republicanism, then dropped that in favor of dreams of Oriental Sultandom, then returned to Earth and became a vaguely classical Military Dictator, and then finally settled on Absolute Divine-Sanctioned Monarchy. All of this would make sense if Napoleon was rapidly acceding to the whims of popular opinion, but this sensible hypothesis is disproved by the facts. When Napoleon was bouncing around Egypt dreaming of converting to Islam and forging an Oriental Empire, this was not a plan supported by either his army, the people of France, the people of Egypt, or any recognized intellectual or political faction. And as for his decision to convert Republican France to a monarchy predicated on an absolutism that most actual kings didn’t believe in! Words escape me.