Alternate History Question: The History of France Since 1848 Had Napoleon III Died Young (WW2, assassin)

[Futurist110]

Here is another alternate history question about France.

Let's say that Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte (the future Napoleon III in real life) died in 1847 or before for some reason (such as by choking to death on a piece of food).

How exactly would French history since 1848 (or at least, in the several decades after 1848) have turned out in such a scenario? Without Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte, would there have been a realistic chance of the French Second Republic surviving either permanently or at least for several decades?

[Futurist110]

For reference, here is an interesting piece about this topic which I have found:

What If Napoleon III Had Been Executed in 1840 or Assassinated in 1858

[LINative]

Originally Posted by Futurist110

Here is another alternate history question about France.

Let's say that Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte (the future Napoleon III in real life) died in 1847 or before for some reason (such as by choking to death on a piece of food).

How exactly would French history since 1848 (or at least, in the several decades after 1848) have turned out in such a scenario? Without Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte, would there have been a realistic chance of the French Second Republic surviving either permanently or at least for several decades?

Two things stand out to me about Napoleon III:
1. He put a lot of effort into building Paris the beautiful city it is today
2. On the other hand, he was a disaster for French foreign policy.

On the second point, Napoleon III failed to realize that the conservative Austria had become France's natural ally. Instead he weakened Austria and thus helped allow the unification of Italy and Germany. He violated the traditional French foreign policy of keeping Italy and especially Germany divided.

The united Germany replaced France as the strongest power of western Europe. And France had to face the united Germany in both World Wars and had to face Italy in WW2.

[Futurist110]

Originally Posted by LINative

Two things stand out to me about Napoleon III:
1. He put a lot of effort into building Paris the beautiful city it is today
2. On the other hand, he was a disaster for French foreign policy.

On the second point, Napoleon III failed to realize that the conservative Austria had become France's natural ally. Instead he weakened Austria and thus helped allow the unification of Italy and Germany. He violated the traditional French foreign policy of keeping Italy and especially Germany divided.

The united Germany replaced France as the strongest power of western Europe. And France had to face the united Germany in both World Wars and had to face Italy in WW2.

I think that Napoleon III also accelerated industrialization in France.

As for being a disaster for French foreign policy, I agree with you on this, though I also want to point out that he did manage to acquire Nice and Savoy for France (both of which France still retains today) by helping out Piedmont-Sardinia. Thus, Napoleon III's foreign policy wasn't a total loss, though I agree that he did appear to screw up by weakening Austria and by not handling Prussia well.

Finally, though, I want to point out that France's demographics were already relatively poor by this point in time. Thus, even before the rise of Prussia, its position in Europe might have still gradually weakened over time.