拿破仑的转变：从军事天才到权力的囚徒

昨天说到拿破仑是一个博览群书，而且聪明睿智，特别是打仗手段灵活的人。但自从他称帝之后，就像变了一个人一样，往日的辉煌也渐渐远离了他。在军事上，越来越趋于打呆仗、打政治仗，因此像他早期那样辉煌的军事胜利也越来越少，败仗逐渐变多。

除了军事之外，他做了另一件完全配不上他智慧的事情，就是执行了大陆封锁政策。当拿破仑称帝的时候，也正好是他军事生涯的顶峰，他已经打遍欧洲没有敌手了，但唯独对隔着英吉利海峡的英国没有任何办法。毕竟法国军队再强也只是陆军强，和当时的大英帝国比海军还是差了不少。既然强攻英国没有任何办法，于是拿破仑就想到智取，把他智取的办法竟然和乾隆皇帝一样，那就是闭关锁国。

因为当时的欧洲大陆上几乎所有的国家不是拿破仑的附庸就是他的盟友，比如沙俄。而英国作为一个岛国资源贫乏，完全依靠贸易立国，只要他所控制的这些国家拒绝和英国贸易，自然就可以困死英国，达到不战而屈人之兵的目的。这种想法简直和大清的乾隆、道光皇帝差不多，都认为自己国家富有四海，无所不有，不需要和英国这个小岛国互通有无。但是，拿破仑的这种做法就如同现在中美两国之间的贸易战一样，实在是杀敌八百自损一千的举动。

贸易本质上是双赢的，是双方对自己所持有的商品或者服务、资源有着不同的价值估量，交换可以实现交易双方各自主观价值的增长。如果主动断绝贸易，那么损失将是双方的，特别是对处于相对弱势的一方，这种损失显得更加巨大。虽然当时拿破仑的军事能力盖世无双，但工业革命已经率先在英国发生，所以在国际贸易中英国占有更加重要的地位，能够生产更多的商品。因此，拿破仑的大陆封锁政策不但没有能够打击英国，反而使他自己的基本盘四分五裂，就连他派自己的弟弟去统治的荷兰也偷偷摸摸地和英国进行私下的贸易。

而他的盟友沙俄，在一次皇帝对皇帝的会谈中，沙皇也表示出了对英国人的不满。从个人感情上来说，沙皇和拿破仑都很仇视英国，但俄国对与英国的贸易依赖程度也很高。配合拿破仑执行大陆封锁政策，使沙俄损失惨重，不得不退出与拿破仑的同盟，这才导致拿破仑率军攻打俄国，结果遭受了远超滑铁卢的失败和损失。

之前也说过，拿破仑在年轻的时候博览群书，头脑也是相当聪明灵活的人，居然会采取这种和封闭落后著称的大清皇帝一样的政策做法，实在是匪夷所思。其实在他那个时代，除了法国的启蒙思想以外，还有一派思想就是以亚当·斯密为代表的古典经济学的思想也是非常流行的，这一思想就是主张自由贸易和自由市场经济，认为这些才是给国家和民众带来财富的源泉。博览群书的拿破仑不可能不知道这些，而且就在法国也有思想水平不亚于亚当·斯密的经济学家，此人就叫萨伊。所以拿破仑不可能不了解这些经济学思想，而且萨伊也曾经在拿破仑的政府中供职，为拿破仑所用。

关于萨伊，说一点题外话，经济学上有著名的萨伊定律，大意就是说一个社会上的生产者同时也是消费者，所以在任何时候，总产出和总需求总是相对平衡的，这其实是一个很浅显的道理。大家打工赚钱，提供商品和服务给其他人用，同时赚取的工资也会购买别人的商品和服务。但是这一朴素的思想却在后来被干预主义的主持者凯恩斯给篡改了，他说之所以会陷入经济危机，就是因为总供给，就是因为社会的总体需求不足，所以需要政府提高开支来增加总需求，帮助社会走出危机。而事实多次证明凯恩斯主义根本就没什么用。

说回正题，当拿破仑宣布实行大陆封锁政策时，法国的这位著名的自由市场经济学家萨伊也是坚决反对，而拿破仑的做法是将他撤职了。从军事战略到政策施政上的种种表现，称帝前后的拿破仑可以说是判若两人，被权力所腐蚀的现象表现得一清二楚。其中的原因其实很简单，权力要求的是对方的服从，很多时候甚至是盲从，所以掌握权力的人必须把自己塑造成全知全能，他不能失败，不能承认错误，所以也就不能够接受意见或者做出任何的灵活妥协。所以在某种程度上来说，拿破仑从厄尔巴岛逃回到法国，第二次向权力的顶峰冲击的遭遇了瓦铁奴的失败,其实对他本人来说未必不是一件好事。如果他这次真的又再次成功打垮了反法联盟,登上欧陆霸主,那么很可能在权力的腐蚀和蛊惑下会犯下更多的错误，甚至被人耻笑和嘲弄。他后世的名声可能就只剩下嗜血暴君和战争狂人这一个形象了,而不是像现在这样,在大多数情况下还是被当成伟人崇拜了。

---

It was said yesterday that Napoleon was a man of great reading and intelligence, especially in war. But after he declared himself emperor, he was like a changed man, and the glory of the past gradually faded away from him. Militarily, he was more and more inclined to fight dumb wars and political wars, so that the glorious military victories of his early days were less and less, and the defeats gradually became more and more.

In addition to the military, he did another thing completely unworthy of his wisdom, is to implement the continental blockade policy. By the time Napoleon became emperor, it was the height of his military career. He had fought all over Europe and had no enemies, but he had nothing to do with England across the English Channel. After all, the French army is only strong, and the British Empire at that time than the navy is still a lot worse. Since there was no way to forcibly attack Britain, Napoleon thought of outwitting him, and the way to outsmart him was the same as the Qianlong Emperor, that is, to close the country.

Because almost all the countries on the European continent were either Napoleon's vassals or his Allies, like Tsarist Russia. As an island country, Britain is poor in resources and relies entirely on trade. As long as these countries under his control refuse to trade with Britain, they can naturally trap Britain and achieve the purpose of subduing people's troops without fighting. This idea is almost similar to the Qianlong and Daoguang emperors of the Qing Dynasty, who believed that their country was rich and had everything, and they did not need to exchange what they had with the small island country of Britain. However, Napoleon's approach, just like the current trade war between China and the United States, is really a move to kill the enemy.

In essence, trade is win-win, because both sides have different values of the goods, services and resources they hold, and exchange can realize the growth of their respective subjective values. If the trade is cut off voluntarily, the losses will be both sides, especially for the relatively weak party, the loss is greater. Although Napoleon's military power was unparalleled, the Industrial Revolution had already taken place in Britain, so Britain had a more important position in international trade and could produce more goods. Thus, instead of attacking Britain, Napoleon's continental blockade fractured his own base, and even the Netherlands, which he had sent his brother to rule, secretly traded with Britain.

And his ally in Russia, in an emperor to emperor meeting, the Tsar also expressed his dissatisfaction with the British. Both the Tsar and Napoleon were personally hostile to Britain, but Russia was also heavily dependent on trade with Britain. Cooperating with Napoleon to implement the continental blockade policy, Tsarist Russia suffered heavy losses and had to withdraw from the alliance with Napoleon, which led to Napoleon's army to attack Russia, resulting in defeats and losses far beyond Waterloo.

As I have said before, it is inconceivable that Napoleon, who was well-read in his youth and had a very clever and flexible mind, would adopt such a policy as the Emperor of the Qing Dynasty, who was famous for being closed and backward. In fact, in his time, in addition to the French Enlightenment, there was also a school of thought represented by Adam Smith's classical economics, which advocated free trade and free market economy, believing that these were the sources of wealth for the country and the people. The well-read Napoleon could not have been unaware of this, and even in France there was an economist who was no less thoughtful than Adam Smith, named Say. So it's impossible that Napoleon didn't know about these economic ideas, and Say had served in Napoleon's government, used by Napoleon.

As an aside, there is a famous law in economics called Say's Law, which basically says that producers in a society are also consumers, so at any time, total output and total demand are always relatively balanced. This is actually a very simple truth. People work to earn money, provide goods and services to others, and earn wages that buy other people's goods and services. However, this simple idea was later modified by Keynes, the host of interventionism, who said that the reason for the economic crisis is because the aggregate supply, that is, because the overall demand of the society is insufficient, so the government needs to increase spending to increase the aggregate demand and help the society out of the crisis. And Keynesianism has repeatedly proved useless.

To get back to the point, when Napoleon announced the continental blockade, Say, the famous free-market economist in France, was also firmly against it, and what Napoleon did was dismiss him from his post. From military strategy to the performance of policy and administration, Napoleon before and after declaring himself emperor can be said to be different, and the phenomenon of being corrupted by power is clear. The reason is actually very simple, power requires obedience from the other side, and often even blindly follow, so the person who holds power must mold himself as all-knowing and all-powerful, he can not fail, can not admit mistakes, so he can not accept opinions or make any flexible compromise. So in a way, Napoleon's escape from Elba to France, the second shock to the pinnacle of power met with the defeat of Vatinou, in fact, it is not necessarily a good thing for him. If he really succeeded in defeating the anti-French coalition again this time and boarded the European overlord, it is likely that he will make more mistakes under the corrosion and demagogy of power, and even be laughed at and ridiculed. His future reputation may be reduced to the image of a bloodthirsty tyrant and war maniac, rather than the present, in most cases is still worshipped as a great man.