In the year 1860, Napoleon III found himself in a troubling position. Just eight years after an overwhelmingly favorable election, he found his popularity and influence greatly diminished. In the years since Napoleon became emperor, France had seen many military victories. The most notable was a decisive victory in the Crimean War against the Russians. Due to these numerous and very successful wars France saw a great expansion in territory. The only flaw that came with engaging in such a numerous amount of wars in a short period of time was that they were not cost effective in the short term. The treasury's pockets were pinched by the Napoleon’s important project of rebuilding and restoring Paris. Even more debt was amassed by furthering France’s railways and through the modernization banking. These expenditures were very profitable for France in the long run, but coupled with costly foreign ventures and exploits, the public opinion had begun to sway on Napoleon III. Seeing the twilight dawn upon him, Napoleon searched for a way to regain popularity and strengthen his rule over France. In December 1861, Napoleon, against the wishes of his advisors, issued a decree that the legislature would be granted more power. This ushered in an era of liberal reform in France. This is not to say every part of the government was shifted liberally during this era, much to the contrary, as Roger Price writes, most repressive legislation remained intact during this time. “Repression came against the press, even amidst the concessions granted to public meetings and freedom of the press. These were concessions Napoleon III gave up begrudgingly”1. Realizing his folly with finances up to this point, he permitted parliament more control over the budget. Through this reform parliament would be granted the extension needed to move into other sectors of the government. In this portion of French history and of the Second Empire illustrates the duality and complexity of Napoleon III. On one hand he moved himself from President to Emperor much like his uncle, the only other Emperor in the history of French rulers, Napoleon Bonaparte. However, the liberal concessions Napoleon III allowed go against the authoritarian power he wielded and embraced by becoming Emperor. Along with unrestricting Parliament, some of the most progressive reforms ended up in the hands of the people. The two major reforms for the French populace were the right to strike and the right to peacefully organize, obtained in 1864 and 1866 respectively. These were two critical advancements in the realm of free speech in what was regarded as one of the most liberal states in Europe. Also during this Liberal era, Napoleon implemented public education for girls, women, and children. Women were now able to more successfully enter into college if they wanted. His reforms in the school were also a widespread success. The major change that was implemented was a whole new curriculum. For the first time in French public schools, language and other liberal arts were taught. The success of this new curriculum can be found in the drop in illiteracy among boys and girls within france to just 32 percent.2 The Pope and the Catholic church vehemently opposed the reforms in French schools. Reacting in traditional fashion when the Catholic church’s power is receding, they fought tooth and nail against updating the schools. The Pope and the church were up in arms against France even before the school reforms due to Napoleon III’s seizure of portions of the Papal States. The reason the church was so upset with the reforms was they viewed them as tainting the youth and undermining religious teachings starting at a young age. Even through all of his mishaps, it is the Liberal Empire that grants Napoleon III his favorable view by historians. Immediately after this era the French populace polled some of Napoleon’s highest popularity throughout his entire tenure as ruler. There was a second plebiscite in 1870, in which he obtained a similar margin of approval as the first plebiscite. Leon Gambetta the leader of the republican opposition said, “We were crushed, The Emperor is more popular than ever”(370)3. Allan Spitzer writes, “In the past two decades, the standard interpretation of the Second Empire, in Europe and America at least, has become generally favorable”4. His most lasting marks are, of course, the renovations to Paris and other cities, updating streets and lights and giving Paris the look it has today. However, Napoleon III’s biggest folly as a ruler would be his undoing. This was an overwhelmingly foolish war against the Prussians in the Franco Prussian War. If the Liberal Empire was Napoleon’s twilight, the Franco Prussian War was his rule’s dying breath. His greatest fear going into battle was that it would be a long and drawn out war. Never did he imagine it would be a long drawn out war ending in a loss. Initially goaded into the war by the threats of Otto Von Bismarck. This was a tactic to vilify the French, a tactic that Bismarck was very good at, as evidenced by their war with Austria Making France the aggressor in the war highly motivated the Prussian soldiers. The French had a great deal of setbacks in the war from the very beginning. They amassed a massive force of troops, so large it choked all of the roads and separated officers from their troops and made it difficult to muster battalions to a point. They were equipped plentifully of maps of Prussia, but not with maps of France where the battles were actually being fought, giving the Prussians a distinct advantage in combat.5 The Prussians by and large were just better equipped for this war. They had more skilled leadership, better communication, and more advanced weaponry. The most decisive was the German artillery, a new weapon, that could be loaded and fired quicker and more precisely than the French artillery. This new weapon caused massive amounts of casualties on the French side of combat. Karl Marx went out of his way to motivate his fellow Germans in a rousing document asking for the end of the Napoleon reign. But also he illustrates his confidence that the French would lose. “The death-knell of the Second Empire has already sounded at Paris. It will end, as it began, by a parody. But let us not forget that it is the governments and the ruling classes of Europe who enabled Louis Bonaparte to play during 18 years the ferocious farce of the Restored Empire.”6 These words were written by Marx before any fighting had begun.
Marx relished in the opportunity to ignite the German proletariat against the French Bourgeois. One of the most passionate of his cries from the "Communist Manifesto" was that the working class should rise against the middle class bourgeois. In the Franco Prussian war his hopes came to life: A chance to dethrone what he and many Germans saw as a parody and a joke of a ruler in Napoleon III.
Marx's calling Napoleon a parody struck a chord after Napoleon's blunders in battle. He foolishly decided to lead the French troops into battle, as he had done years before in his other military endeavors. But their commander was very ill at the time, often becoming winded or having to withdraw from battle and head to the retreat point. This left the troops without a clear and established leader, making the army more disorganized. It also made the French as a whole look weak, since their emperor could not last an entire battle in combat. This disgraced Napoleon terribly and damaged public perception of the Emperor.
There was no higher point in Napoleon’s humiliation, than being driven back to Paris in an open carriage. Still weak and sick from over extending and exhausting himself in battle, his own troops openly ridiculed and swore at him because morale was at such a low point.7 The war culminated in a France surrender, and Napoleon agreed to terms that ended the Second Empire. Also in the terms of the Prussian treaty, Napoleon III was forced into exile, much like the last Emperor of France and his relative, Napoleon Bonaparte. Unlike the former ruler, he was given choice to where he would spend his days in exile. He decided to reside in the English countryside for the rest of his days alongside his wife and son. Napoleon’s life was one of complexity. Embracing liberalism, granting concessions amidst his dictatorship. He did not need to move France into a dictatorship, elections and polls clearly show he had overwhelming public favor through the majority of his tenure. As proven by the second plebiscite vote, he was almost just as popular as when he assumed the role of dictator over France. But he couldn't let the resemblance to Bonaparte pass him by to achieve and obtain the title of Emperor. He was also a clear nationalist. Evidenced by all of the time, money, and effort he expended in the rebuilding of Paris and other cities during the restoration period. He was a true embodiment of the many "ism's" that shaped and characterized this period of history.

Notes
1. Roger Price, Napoleon III and the Second Empire, London: Routledge, 1997. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost), EBSCOhost (accessed February 18, 2014), 592.
2. Alan Spitzer, “The Good Napoleon III”; French Historical Studies, Duke University Press (Spring, 1962) pp. 308-329.
3. Phillipe Seguin, Louis Napoléon le Grand, France Loisirs, 300-450.
4. Alan Spitzer, “The Good Napoleon III”; French Historical Studies, (Spring, 1962) pp. 308-329.
5. Pierre Milza, Napoléon III, Paris: Perrin, 234-250.
6. Karl Marx, Prussian Occupation Of France, Marx/Engels Internet Archive,1870.
7. Roger Price, Napoleon III and the Second Empire, London: Routledge, 1997, eBook Collection (EBSCOhost), EBSCOhost (accessed February 18, 2014), 618.

Bibliography
Marx, Karl. Prussian Occupation Of France. Marx/Engels Internet Archive.1870.
Milza, Pierre. Napoléon III. Paris: Perrin, 2004.
Price, Roger. 1997. Napoleon III and the Second Empire. London: Routledge, 1997. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost), EBSCOhost (accessed February 18, 2014).
Seguin, Phillipe. Louis Napoléon le Grand. France Loisirs, 1991.
Spitzer, Alan. The Good Napoleon III; French Historical Studies , Vol. 2, No. 3. (Spring, 1962), pp. 308-329.