Should the French have kept their monarchy like Britain and Sweden kept theirs?

Question

Do you think that france would have been better if the revolution never happend? Neopolion wouldn't have happened atleast.

Answer 1

I'm not sure that, when everything is evaluated, the French consider Napoleon a bad thing. But the French had a monarchy that was unresponsive to the people, and unwilling to change or evolve. They are better off without them.

But I love Elizabeth II! God save the queen!

Answer 2

The Monarchy namely the Royal families in England, Sweden, Netherlands, etc are just doing nothing except to drain the government funds, massively! France has escaped!

Answer 3

Britain doesn't have a true monarchy, Their queen is more like a press figure with little power. If this is history question no clue.

Answer 4

I think the monarchs tried hard to keep their heads on.  Napoleon III was lucky to get away from them, good thing the Prussians caught him.

Answer 5

Hard to keep your monarchy when you cut off their heads.

Answer 6

We certainly could have done without the revolution, and the bonapartes.

Now, as to keeping the monarchy... given the degree of inbreeding and degeneracy prevalent among the Bourbons (Louis XVI was distinctly above average when compared to his grandfather and brothers, but in spite of being a good and honest man, was still terminally unfit to be any sort of king), I'd say it's better to have an elected head of state than some kind of useless puppet.

Our presidents from 1870 to 1958 were very much like classic constitutional monarchs. They had virtually no role in governing the country, appointing as head of government whoever the parliament could agree on, and being restricted to mostly ceremonial functions... "inaugurating the chrysanthemums" as somebody said. Frankly, no country needs somebody that useless. Even the emperor of Japan has a more significant religious role than that.

Answer 7

In answer to your first question, I don't think it would have been possible for the French Monarchy to have survived the revolution.  Things like the Magna Carta had not brought government in which the people shared in laying out their destiny.  The French aristocracy was too autocratic and too distant from the people.

I am not sure a lack of revolution would have prevented Napolian.  With his ego, perhaps he himself would have been the revolution.

Answer 8

In France,the royals had treated the poor like dirt for centuries.  If the royals had made themselves more accessible to the people ,especially in times of war,famine,or  disaster,then the people would have looked up to them. But when you spend exhorbitant amounts of money  and treat the national treasury like your own bank account while your people suffer,then I don't blame them for revolting.

Answer 9

I think some of the reforms introduced by the Revolution were very good things, like allowing the Third Estate (the common people) a say in the government of the country.  And making the taxation system fairer. And there were some reforms that benefited women, like allowing them to divorce abusive husbands for instance, and pensions for widows and unmarried mothers.  And they abolished slavery in the French colonies.

However, I do think it would have been better if the French had kept their monarchy, as they did in the beginning, when they made France a Constitutional monarchy.  And then they would never had had the ghastly Napoleone, who established a repressive and deeply misogynistic regime in France.