Ladies and gentlemen, Chinese leader Xi Jinping is Napoleon.
But not the cool one.
No, Xi is strikingly similar to Louis Napoleon also known as Napoleon III, the very embarrassing
last Emperor of the French.
This guy is a very different figure from the Napoleon you have probably heard of.
The first Napoleon was the epic world-historical figure who battled all of Europe to a standstill
for two decades before losing it all through the hubris of invading Russia.
Louis Napoleon was a clownish mid 19th century dictator whose international meddling led
to his capture by a foreign army and the creation of the modern German state that did so much
damage to France and the world.
Now Xi Jinping could end up having a much better legacy than Napoleon III.
We won't know for decades, but I am not optimistic.
Back in 2018 Xi turned himself into China's all powerful ruler, which means he gets the
blame if anything goes wrong.
We will see I guess, but it's not anything in Xi's current short record that makes me
think of the shitty Napoleon, it's why he came to power, and what it says about where
China is today, and where France was back then.
In 1815 France had come to the end of an epic struggle.
Napoleon had finally been dethroned, and France had to deal with the fact that despite their
genius leader, and their massive wealth and manpower, they had lost that epic struggle
to the British.
For the next three decades or so, through another revolution, and multiple kings, the
French aggressively tried to copy the British, and set up some kind of successful mercantile
and industrial constitutional monarchy.
I see this whole arc as obviously completely different, but still strikingly similar to
the past half century in China.
Napoleon was an epic historical figure, and so was Chairman Mao.
Oh and to anticipate a thousand comments, yes Chairman Mao was a horrible mass murderer.
But the cool Napoleon was a mass murderer too.
And unlike the much more happily remembered Napoleon, Chairman Mao actually brought about
a successful result for his people.
Chairman Mao' s rise to power and rule was super rough on the Chinese, but he managed
to establish what a century's worth of emperors and more US friendly rulers had not, actual
Chinese independence.
After he died, leaders like Deng Xiaopeng realized that Revolutionary upheaval may have
been effective but getting rich might be nicer.
Like the French between the Napoleons imitating the British, the Chinese imitated the capitalist
and industrial rich.
The Chinese didn't go fully Democratic, but they set up a boring consensus-driven system,
with regular switches of power.
Both the French in the 1800s and the Chinese today found a lot of success with their imitation
of other systems.
Both models created a lot of rich people, but they also left a lot of people behind.
This kind of inequality creates a ton of anger, especially in places like 19th century France
and modern China with such recent histories of revolution.
The left behind want the old revolutionary vigor back, and the winners want to be protected
from the left behind.
The thing about a strongman is that he can do both of those things.
Or at least pretend to.
Different but oddly similar events brought both Napoleon III and Xi Jinping to power.
Europe wide famine and financial crisis brought the revolutions of 1848.
China's response to the worldwide 2008 financial crisis has finally led to economic slowdown
in that country as well.
Both figures rose to power through the established systems, Xi as China's next leader for a decade,
and Louis Napoleon was actually elected French President.
Xi has discarded his term limits, and Napoleon made himself Emperor after a coup.
Both of these figures reconcile the tensions between the haves and have nots in ways that
democracy can't.
Napoleon was initially elected by more left leaning supporters, yet is largely seen by
historians as governing in the interests of businessmen.
Xi Jinping is a representative of the enormously wealthy princeling class that rules the country,
yet he portrays himself as the new Mao and he is bringing back Communist propaganda.
Napoleon was lucky enough to launch his second French Empire at the start of a world wide
economic boom.
It took two decades for him to fall.
The economic headwinds Xi Jinping will face will be much stronger.
On the other hand, Xi Jinping doesn't have an obvious German colussus waiting in the
wings to squash him.
India is much poorer than China, and the United States is currently losing its mind.
Regardless, I think it's worth emphasizing that the Xi Jinping era in China isn't some
permanent repudiation of normal economic development and democracy.
It's actually a phase... very similar to something we have seen before.
After Napoleon III's fall France experienced the 3rd Republic, the most stable and long
lasting period of representative government it has ever had.
If anybody in Washington DC knew any history, I think there would be a lot less panic over
Xi Jinping.
Thanks for watching, please subscribe, and click the bell next to the subscribe button
to get notifications whenever I upload a video.