Publications

Working Paper

In this article the author reassesses the myth of Napoleon Bonaparte, not so much from the standpoint of battles and conquests, but more from the point of view of justice, particularly procedural justice. This approach allows to define the righteous leader as one who applies procedural justice.

Using this concept, the author aims to demonstrate that General Bonaparte could be considered as a just leader, although, in the guise of Emperor, he will be qualified here as the antithesis of that. The inevitable conclusion is that the Empire came to an end as a predictable consequence of Emperor Napoleon's unjust leadership.

The author recognizes that the revolutionary aspirations of Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité were in themselves noble, but that they required for their implementation a system of procedural justice central to the resolution of the inevitable tensions and contradictions that these precepts would generate.

The author concludes by highlighting and examining how the notion of procedural justice is vital to the proper functioning of the modern European Union. In contrast, the difficulties presented by Brexit, or the Trump presidency, can be seen as the tragic, but also predictable consequences of an unjust leadership.

The author revisits the urgent need for fair management and debate; debate that can only take place when guided by righteous leaders. The imperial failure was a consequence of the drift towards injustice in the management of Empire. The violation of the three fundamental principles of the Republic was not the primary cause of the Empire's demise, but the consequence of a leadership and rule that had become unjust.

Download PDF