??297: Chapter 193: The Chaleon is the Emblem of Politics (4K4)_3
297: Chapter 193: The Chaleon is the Emblem of Politics (4K4)_3
“If you are willing to answer, I am all ears for both,”
Talleyrand, with one hand on the card table, sighed, “I wanted to speak of joyful matters at today’s banquet, but since you insist on hearing it, I’ll tell you.
About the Republic, I expressed my views back in 1792—the old monarchical faith had collapsed, but the new ideals of liberty had not been widely accepted.
I saw that France would fall into a sea of blood, an age without justice, only the violence of beasts.”
“Fact has proven my opinion.
I can say to you very seriously that you are able to stand here soundly because you are talking to Talleyrand.
If Robespierre were sitting here now, your head would have ‘moved’ by this ti.”
Great Dumas frowned, “I am a Republican.”
“Oh, are you?”
Talleyrand laughed, “Danton, Marat, Brissot, Ebel, Dumouriez, and so forth, all of them were Republicans, and even Robespierre himself was sent to the guillotine.
Do you dislike
because I opposed their wanton killing?”
Hearing this, Great Dumas fell silent for a long while before finally speaking, “I think with your capabilities, perhaps you could have set them straight.”
Talleyrand simply shook his head: “Perhaps you still overestimate .
I’ve always felt that when making a choice, when taking sides, one must first understand if the side we choose is capable of bringing us victory.
Without such assurance, getting involved is madness.
And at that ti, it was quite clear that everybody was mad, involving oneself in any side ant courting destruction.”
“So that was the reason you fled abroad during that ti?”
“Of course.”
“How then do you explain your betrayal of Napoleon?”
Upon hearing this, Talleyrand responded, “I did not betray Napoleon; it was Napoleon who betrayed France.
I warned him not to embark on the expedition to Russia, but he was determined to do so, leading the entire French nation towards destruction.
Given that, was it wrong for
to seek a way out for all the people of France in advance?”
Napoleon left France with countless orphans, widows, a collapsed national finances, a devastated dostic economy, whereas at least at the Vienna Congress, I secured terms of surrender for France that included no territorial loss, no indemnity, and no return of the previously plundered spoils of war.
I did not want to claim credit for this, but Alexander, if you insist on discussing the benefits Napoleon brought to France, I disagree.”
“However, you are a young man, so I don’t bla you, because you did not experience that tumultuous period.
In the past half-century, I’ve seen too many people claiming they could save France.
But have you truly considered what they ultimately brought to France?”
Those thirty years were filled with fickleness, with countless doctrines of righteousness, yet behind those doctrines lurked an unending and cruel career of slaughter.
Starving people were ignored, families of fallen soldiers received no pensions, city streets were overgrown with weeds, and endless warfare brought victory to no one.
Over those thirty years, France was always ‘saved’ by various people for various reasons, and I had grown accustod to it.
But fortunately, that era is over.
However, Alexander, your next words are very important, and you should think carefully before you respond.
Are you planning to tell
that you aim to beco the next one?”
Reviews
All reviews (0)