|
Why the French hate US(A)
A few days ago wxjames and others asked me why the French had come to hate America. The following is only a catalog of reasons and and not a real article with polishing to make it pleasant to read. -- JFM First "intemporal" causes. World leadership. France has battled England for centuries about world leadership. Suddenly, there is a newcomer who puts the goal completely out of reach. First time antiamericanism reached heinous levels was when America crushed Spain: ie a European nation defeated by the New Workld. It was then when antiamericans proposed an allianxce with Germany! (yes, despite the 1870 war and the bleeding wound that was the loss of Alsace Lorraine) in order to contain America. Americans seen as freed serfs. There are richs and poor in America but no nobility, no people who take off their hat in front of Bill Gates. That displeases the French elites (be they bourgeois, full blooded aristocrats or like Villepin false ones). Not only are those uncouth serf decendants called Americans ruling the world they dare to not look to their betters in European elites for guidance and enligtenment. However there is also contempt coming from the ranks of those whose elders didn't dare to cross the ocean in order to escape old Europe's "caste system". (1) Now some causes ordered in chronological order. American Civil War: Napoleon III needed to shfit Francer's pro-Union public opinion before acting in supoort of the Confederation. Therefore, the French press undertook a masssive effort to depict not merely American policy but American people in the worst possible colors. It was the start of anti-american racism (2) Birth of IIIrd Republic: Until then French Republicans needed USA as a proof that Republican governemnt works. But after that their fear was French looking at it and begin questionning French society and the fact that France was democracy only in name. Contempt towards capitalism: Since America is the beacon of capitalism it is no wonder it is disliked by socialists. Let's however tell to the discharge of the French that the egoism and brutality of their bourgeoisie made that they never never had a positive experience of capitalism. Workers were second class citizens (3) during most of XIXth century. Low salaries and high illiteracy rates (4) prevented them from opening their own shop. French workers never had role models of their likes working hard and succeding IN captalism From despair they turned to socialism. In case you are curious about why illitercy was so high it was because the bourgeois who started the French revolution thought that instruction was bad for the people and closed the free schools who existed during the monarchy. In the mentime protestant churches in America had undertaken a massive effort of providing elementary education to Americans with industry owners praising the benefits of skilled labor. This illustrates the difference between French and American capitalisms Roosevelt: Roosevelt mishandled De Gaulle. He should have either liquidated him politically or made a friend of him. Instead, he supported anyone who opposed De Gaulle however unpalatable (like that symbol of collaboration called Darlan or the symbol of defeat called Georges) and built De Gaulle's rencor. But in case De Gaulle's admirers had not wanted to follow him in his antiamericanism, Roosevelt ensured they would by his attitude towards French civilian casualties and his lunatic projects of partitionning France. D-Day: "The stain of a surrender forever remains and the poison of a cowardly capitulation undermines the efforts of future genereations" Clausewitz. In Mein Kampf Hitler discusses that sentence and tells that a wise victor will present lenient peace clauses (at least at the beginning) in order to get the enemy to capitulate and thus, destroy its soul forever. Hitler knew what he was doing since the poison of the 1940 capitulation is still at work in France. In order to heal France's soul, gaullism tried to have the French believe they had been unanimous in resistance and that they had beasically self-liberated. This implied minimizing Allied role and questionning their motivations. However it was not Gaullism who wrote the history books who are teaching our high schoolers that the guys who died at Omaha did it for America's colmmercial intesrests. This came later with Mitterrand, Chirac and the EU. Communism: The popular and wrong (5) belief in Soviet Union having done all the work ensured that nearly 30% of French sympathised with Communists. De Gaulle had to settle with them. Not only he had to admit Communists in Governemnt but he had to let a communist (Jean Paul Sartre) preside the Comités d'Epuration for writers and this way to place Communist sympathisers at strategic places (eg book reviewers at book publishing companies). This way Communists got a disproportionate share on the means of influencing public opinionn. De Gaulle: At the age of 12, he was writing memos about France being invaded and saved by a such... General de Gaulle. He had a very high, even mystic opinion about France's role in world. He also had an even bigger idea about the role he wanted to play in world and a complete lack of morals in political matters. I think that even without Roosevelt mishandling he would have ended playing Soviet Union against America like he did historically but perhaps he would not have tried to poison French minds. Frustrated intellectuals: Movie authors who see people line for Titanic instead of for their movies. Singers who see people listening rock or jazz. Pseudo-philosophers a la Sartre or 2cnts wrioters a la Hoellebeck. You can be sure they hate America and they have means to influence minds Fear of America contaminating the minds of French people: What is the image projected by that most American genre called the western? A horizontal society where cowboys don't stay in awe in front of ranchers and walk away when they have had enough. A society where people, thanks to Sam Colt, take care of problems by themselves instead of whingeing to nanny state. That is the American ideal, that is not what our elites wants. As an example, even before D-DAY, with Germans still in Paris the future founder of Le Monde was writing about the mortal danger America represnted for French society. BTW, this guy advocated for a model of resistance where the unwahed masses did the dying, shile the elites preserved their precious lives and only surfaced after Liberation to "lead the reconstructions" (his terms) or collect the spoils (my terms). European Union: Even as early as in the 20s it was very clear from reading the texts of its advocates that the dream of an European Union was about Europe regaining world's leadership and going against the "defending champion". As time passed the pro-EU became more openly hostile specially when Soviet Union disappeared and when western europe ceased to be an economic entity and began to became a quasistate. I simply couldn't understand how Clinton and HalfBright didn't notice that the logic of EU would lead to it becoming a rival of America, that its advocates were already in cold war against USA. Our elites are dreaming of ruling the world through the EU. European Union again: How do you get people accepting a non-democratic intrusive super-state like the EU? How do you unite vastly different people who have nothing in common but geography and have fought one another? Through a war against a common ennemy. That was how France, England, Spain or Germany were unified. The EU NEEDS a cold war with the United States. Stockolm Syndrome: Be nice to Soviets and perhaps they will not nuke Germany. That is why you had the massive demonstrations in the 80s against America (better Red than dead was the slogan). Be nice to Islamists and perhaps they will not put bombs in Paris or start massive riots. But it is not dangerous to confront America. Moonbatism: You have no idea of how nutty the French are becoming. From "Fair trade" to "Sustained development", from "Parité" (equal number of women in candidates for Parliament) to "Ungrowth", conspiracy theories, raise of the ultrafar-left (ie left of communism) you name every moonbat theory you have it and with significant number of supporters. France is going in foetal position Conclusion: Can all of this be reversed? Very difficult. When my daughter was four years old I found an educator singing her a song about "an American Boeing bombing people". In high school the official history text books will tell her that D-DAY was about ensuring America's commercial supremacy. Also for 60th birthday of D-DAY Le Point (right wing but also the organ of that pro-EU French technocracy who dreams of ruling the world) spent its issue about such things as rapes perpetrated by GIs. I cannot see how the French could be reconditionned. Also you have to keep in mind that most of the factors of antiamericanism I have described are valid in other countries of western europe and are at work for poisonning minds. With esatern europe nations in EU also means entry of Western Europe antiamericanism in Eastern Europe. Notes: (1) I use the word caste because I have no place for going into details (2)Please I know Americans are not a race but I think it is a very adequate word when you hate Americans (even Italo-Americans or Japanese-Americans) for the alleged crimes of their grand-grand-grand-fathers against the Indians. (3) French workers were not full citizens. By law their testimony was inferior to the one of shop owners. Also by law they had to keep a booklet where shop owners and authorities recorded their observations about worker's behaviour. (4)Before Civil War, litercay rate in America was over 80% with peaks of 95% in New England. In France it was under 50% but much lower in the working class. (5)No, the Soviet didn't do all the work. In 1941 Germany was spending on submarines as much as on its better tank the Mk IV. In 1942 it spent 40% of its resources fighting the allies (basically in beefing its anti-aircraft defences). In other words, without the Allies, Germany would have taken Moscow in 1941 (all Soviet railways converge there) or the oil wells in 1942 and the Soviets would have lost.
Posted by: JFM 2006-07-22 |
|
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=160460 |