2024-01-18 11:04:30
Napoleon’s Waterloo is protectionism and defeat in a trade war
Mark Wagoner, Global Farmers Network*
Photo credit: Charles de Steuben, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
There are more books with “Napoleon” in their title than there have been days since the death of the French emperor and general in 1821.
So reports Andrew Roberts in his magisterial biography of the famous ruler, who rose from semi-obscurity in Corsica and imposed his will on Europe – then lost everything, when he finally fell into the hands of a rival army at Waterloo.
That’s over 73,000 pounds, by the way. Now, his epic story is about to become the subject of a blockbuster film: “Napoleon,” starring Joaquin Phoenix and directed by Ridley Scott, hits theaters Nov. 22, the day before Thanksgiving.
The trailer is impressive: burning cities, smoking cannons, charging cavalry, marching soldiers, terrifying guillotines, and much more.
However, it is almost certain that this film will forget one essential detail: the defeat of the fascinating Frenchman is not so much a question of battlefields as a question of economics.
Napoleon lost everything because of a trade war.
Its history is rich with lessons and warnings about ambition, power and the meaning of statehood. There is also a love story at the heart of this story, with Empress Josephine. This is why we continue to read the books and why Hollywood releases a big-budget biopic.
Napoleon is often portrayed as a tyrannical warmonger. In his 2014 book, “Napoleon: A Life,” historian Andrew Roberts insists that this image is unfair. He points out, for example, that “twice as many wars were declared against him as he declared against others.”
Furthermore, Roberts writes, Napoleon was a great reformer of the state: “The ideas that underlie our modern world – meritocracy, equality before the law, property rights, religious tolerance, modern and secular education, healthy finances, etc. – were defended, consolidated, codified and geographically extended by Napoleon. » He also promoted science, legal codes and local administration.
Furthermore, he was one of the greatest generals in history.
However, even the best military commander cannot win a trade war. Napoleon made the fatal mistake of adopting the protectionism of Jean-Baptiste Colbert, the 17th-century French finance minister, whose commitment to government interference in markets is sometimes called “Colbertism.”
Roberts sums up the result for Napoleon: “It was therefore Colbertist protectionism which brought him down, much more than the bloodthirstiness and egocentrism of which he is so often accused. »
Napoleon should have known this.
After all, he once read a translated edition of “The Wealth of Nations” by Adam Smith, a Scottish philosopher credited with the invention of modern economics (and whose tercentenary is being celebrated this year). the birth). Napoleon nevertheless rejected Smith’s vision of free markets and free trade. It encourages industrial subsidies and attempts to limit the exchange of goods and services across borders.
In 1806, Napoleon created the Continental System or continental blockade, which prohibited all commercial activity between the European continent and Great Britain. Napoleon believed that this economic pressure would force Britain to negotiate.
Although French protectionism harmed Britain, it harmed Europe more. Within months, Napoleon had to approve special loans to keep French businesses afloat. Smugglers thrive, although repeat offenders face the death penalty.
Napoleon also had to approve a series of exceptions: because European industry was unable to supply the shoes and clothing the French army needed, for example, British manufacturers were granted special trade licenses. Napoleon allowed the export of French wheat to Britain when prices were high due to a poor harvest.
The continental blockade even led to the public burning of imported foods and demands that people replace coffee with chicory. Napoleon’s “plan to make cotton from thistles,” Roberts reports, “did not come to fruition.”
The emperor probably should have consulted French farmers. They might have informed him that while agriculture can generate wealth, it cannot produce miracles – and that everyone is better off when farmers can sell to customers in other countries.
It turns out that Napoleon was just another civil servant who failed to speak to the men and women who work the land. We see the same neglect today, to the detriment of farmers and consumers who need what the former grow.
Ultimately, Napoleon’s trade war became the shooting war that ended his reign.
The new film about his life probably won’t touch on that subject, and maybe that’s a good thing. Who wants to watch a film about economic policies?
Yet Napoleon’s life conveys a timeless message: protectionism always fails and no one wins a trade war.
_______________
* Mark Wagoner
Mark Wagoner is a third-generation family farmer in Southeast Washington who produces alfalfa seed for four major seed companies. Mark works with the National Alfalfa and Forage Alliance and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ensure that safe and effective insecticides are available for use during bee flight. Mark is a volunteer board member of the Global Farmer Network.
Mark is a volunteer member of many other boards dealing with water and land use issues. He was appointed to the Washington State Department of Ecology’s Walla Walla Valley 2050 committee, a planning group aimed at improving water availability in the valley. He works diligently to develop and implement coexistence strategies for the production of conventional, organic and genetically improved alfalfa.
Source : Napoleon’s Waterloo Was Protectionism and a Trade War Lost – Global Farmer Network
1705655147
#Napoleons #Waterloo #protectionism #defeat #trade #war