Wars tend to kill off the most capable men at an uncomfortable rate. Men are half the equation of stocking the next generation. It’s been suggested that Napoleon degraded the quality of the gene pool enough to make a difference.

Men can radically alter demographics in favor of their group using tried and true and eternal methods, that is to say reducing the ‘other’ by a simple twitch of the finger or a blunt object.

As for the Napoleon hate…meh…Envy is the most useless sin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_looting_of_art

“Once the army had been equipped and clothed in France at the expense of the French Treasury, it was expected to be self-sufficient thereafter. And there was nothing new about this approach; it had long been the practice of all the armies of the world. Bonaparte, as commander in chief of the army in Italy, had received the same instructions for his first campaign. However, as might be expected given his character, Napoleon was not content to let an old principle be applied loosely. As with all other areas of the State, he wanted to organise this source of revenue in his own way, to the extent that it was to become one of the decisive elements of his foreign policy.”

https://www.cairn.info/revue-napoleonica-la-revue-2008-3-page-2.htm

Comment: Modern wars seem to be instigated by profiteers. I wonder whether a new Napoleon could arise who could make war without selling his soul to banksters.

What a king.

“The ideas that underpin our modern world—meritocracy, equality before the law, property rights, religious toleration, modern secular education, sound finances and so on—were championed, consolidated, codified and geographically extended by Napoleon.”

Napoleon was a thug, he ransacked almost all Europe, imprisoned the pope, faked a plebiscite to make himself consul (ruler) for life, tried to reinstate slavery in the Caribbean to pay for the wars, etc. Napoleon probably delayed the industrial revolution by several decades.