Napoleon debate (Cameron Wirtz)

The most interesting point of the debate for me occurred when I had to change my attitude towards Napoleon’s revolutionary ideas. Before the debate I sided with the Pro people. I changed my perspective to make the debate more challenging to me. Over the course of my research, I became more convinced that Napoleon’s revolutionary ideas were not so revolutionary. Being familiar with the pro side arguments helped me create more persuasive arguments for the con side. During the debate Tomas stated that the Napoleonic Code was good for all the people and represented revolutionary ideals. Charlie then argued against Tomas’s idea and pointed out that the Napoleonic Code was not fair because women were not part of the code. Leila argued that women didn’t have rights beforehand so it didn’t mater if women had rights then or now. This line of reasoning is flawed because it doesn’t represent the gains of women during the earlier period of the French Revolution as noted by Ben. Ben pointed out that women had a Bread March and put it upon themselves to get more rights. This goes against Leila’s argument because women were already taking the initiative to have an active role in society. Overall, the debate was an opportunity to learn the Pros and Cons of viewing Napoleon as a revolutionary.