Post

First And Only Archive wrote:

[. . .]he helped break down a lot of anti-Semitism that was present in France and the territories he went on to conquer.

Very true. Both Napoleons did a lot to improve the conditions of Jews in France, especially Napoleon I, who also spread reforms to other countries he conquered, for instance removing the gates of the Venetian ghetto and expanding Jewish rights in the city.

First And Only Archive wrote:

In contrast the Third Republic (and I suppose democracy in general) has many villainous individuals and terrible decisions, but that core of accountability to the will of the people is so very important.

I think having hundreds of elected elites make decisions is a far less accountable system. The success of the realm is the success of the monarch. The same cannot be said of a banker or lawyer running for office. A monarch is a symbol of unity, continuity, and the people. The penultimate vessel of democratic expression. The more you put up institutions to separate the monarch from the people, the more corrupt it will be come. If the British had never gotten rid of the Stewarts, I daresay they would be in much better shape today than they are.

First And Only Archive wrote:

You might of course put some of my opinion down to Britishness, and the native bias in these islands against Napoleon.

But Napoleon III was very pro-British! He was Queen Victoria's most prolific partner abroad, despite a certain degree of healthy rivalry. She even stayed at his beach house in Biarritz, in southwest France.