Question

compare and contrast The functioning of Hitler and Napoleon Bonaparte rate​

Answer 1

Explanation:

Thierry Lentz, in a paper originally presented at the 2011 Consortium on the Revolutionary Era, 1750-1850, takes a look at a particular branch of historiography that grew out of the comparative biography trend of the 1980s: the anachronistic comparison of Napoleon Bonaparte and Adolf Hitler.

Napoleon – Hitler, the improbable comparison

A purely ideological interpretation of history can impel historians to form erroneous conclusions on the nature of regimes and historical fact.

The Napoleonic episode offers a case study.

For a long time, historians were unable or unwilling to avoid simplification. Two sides – those “against” and those “for” Napoleon – clashed on a sterile battlefield where ideological monocausality defined the wars fought by the various European powers.

It is thus that one school of history, in a rather authoritarian step, came to place the First Empire in the category of “military dictatorship” with the aim of enhancing the Revolution's prestige: I sought to refute such a conclusion at the Consortium on Revolutionary Europe just a few years ago, and I shall not be returning to it here.

Answer 2

Explanation:

Napoleon was renowned for his efforts to end discrimination against Jews not only in France but also in his colonies through various laws. ... Napoleon's aims were progressive in nature while Hitler was just trying to enforce the conservative ideas of his era which makes him a hero in many right-wing parties.