 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
I had heard that there are only two companies in the world that could do the job, Bechtel and a French company. |
For Bechtel's consulting and engineering jobs? Please.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
So, in your terms, the French left sees French idealism and messianism as a colossal failure and opposes American idealism and messianism for the same reason. |
Yes, but it's not the only point. The left mobilizes many people through slogans about the US as uber-capitalist, uber-imperialistic (reputation which isn't helped by the hyperpower status of the US) and fundamentalist. These slogans are in used pretty much in every left-wing demonstration in the world, I assume. The trauma about the repetition of the 'white man's burden' is especially important to me, but I have heard several friends thinking about it too. But I think it mostly adresses to educated people, and hence isn't massively used by the politicians.
quote:
The French right still sees France in the role moving the world toward a better future. |
A bit of that, but the French right also often considers France deserves to be a power, in a Gaullist tradition (De Gaulle wanted to restore France as an independant power).
As such, the attempt to become powerful again, through a European bloc led by France and Germany belongs to the Gaullist tradition.
Right-wingers aren't necessarily nationalists, and even are rarely so (nationalism is mostly a feature of the far-right), I mean, there is little hatred / dislike for other countries, even though many jokes or prejudices exist towards our neighbours.
France's messianism is much more subtle than the US one, because it isn't actively promoted by the State. Rather, it comes from the Revolution + Napoleon legacy, and by an important role of history classes at school (everybody in France knows France has been a major power, that France was a trailblazer in establishing Democracy etc.). These history classes are quite France-centered, except for the covering of ancient times and 20st century. As such, the French sure feel special when compared to the rest of the world. History classes aren't the main reason of anti-americanism, very far from it (rather, they're the most important reason of pro-americanism, thanks to the extensive teachings on WW2), but they partly explain why the French feel so special.
quote:
Thus their leading role in the formation of the European Union for example. They resent that America has taken over the leadership position in spreading "enlightened" civilization to a relatively uncivilized world. |
I think it is indeed one of the reasons why some right-wingers are anti-American. But then again, right wingers are mostly pro-American, and I have witnessed rightwinged Antiamericanism only during the diplomatic crisis. Whereas, all the people I've talked to who say "we should support the US for once, because of what they done during WW2" are right wingers or right-oriented. Here, the few who supported the war did so out of pro-Americanism, and the belief the US were a great Nation that will bring freedom to Iraq.
There is a mistake that you must not make, Ned. The French support towards Chirac wasn't purely antiamerican. As a matter of fact, antiamericanism was far from being even the main reason. The main reason was that, to us, war should have been avoided until all other methods have been exhausted. To many of us, the inspection regime seemed to be working. Chirac and Bush have both tried to get the moral high ground : Chirac was promoting peace, and Bush was promoting democracy. To the French, peace was a higher moral ground, especially since the US motivations were obviously not that noble.
There has been a use of antiamericanism in the campaign though :
- to mobilize the far left and far right (LePenites tend to hate anything out of our borders, even though it is a tad more complex).
- to have the French population think the US didn't give a rat's ass about democracy in Iraq. The emphasis on the links between Bush and christian fundamentalists, as well as the use of the 'crusade' word were used to further the support for peace.
quote:
But most French believe the new "cowboys" in charge of the American government are repeating the mistakes that the French and other Europeans made in the 19th and 20th centuries during their colonial periods. Is this a correct summary? |
I wouldn't say "Most French", because most French don't think about it. But it is true that most people who think about the 'white man's burden' aspect of colonization think it was a mistake, and can link it to what the US is doing.
I personally sure do, and am appalled.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
|
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Spiffor, welcome to the world. The US media has a long history of uncovering the dirty on dirty politics. Right now, FOX and its allied media are on the warpath against the French. There is nothing the US government can do about it, and you should know that. |
Yes, and I assume De Villepin knows that too.
quote:
De Villepin's thesis seem to be that the US government is behind FOX's assault. I really doubt that. But if you or anyone has any evidence that the US government has fed FOX false information about France, I may change my tune here. |
I think De Villepin's thesis is that the US government is collaborating with FOX' smear campain, even if it is not masterminding it. This collaboration takes the form of rumors spread by anonymous sources from the US government (notably the intelligence services), which are denied by the French. An example that has been used in Le Monde's article was the smuggled passports affair.
I'm sure De Villepin would love to shut the FOX up, but knows it is impossible. So, he attempts to end the Gov's collaboration with this smear campaign.
I don't know if these collaborations are proven, and nobody here can know that. However, it is not unlikely that some services within the US gov do give information opposed to France's image to the media. I don't think it is a big conspiracy of the US gov as a whole, but I'm sure there are some anti-French officials who use their services to have anti-French crap spout on TV.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Worthingtons
|
|
Pride Park,Derby
Jan 2002
time: 05:28
|
|
I think it's much of a situation whereby Certain factions of the Media are very much into French Bashing (who blames them?) and while the US are not directly collaborating with them, they are not actively trying to put a stop to it.
I dont blame the US govt for laying idle on this issue though. For France to get away totally scot-free would be an Injustice.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:28
|
|
For all the poele who want to punish France for actively wrking against the second resolution:
As of Today, given all we know, THE FRENCH WERE RIGHT. no, I don;t mean just within their rights, but CORRECT. The US-UK-Spain argument was that the threat form Iraq and its undeclared WMD program was immense, its ties to international terrorism immense, so mcuh so that the international community had tpo call and end to it.The French arguement was that the Iraqi threat could be solved peacefully, with some more time. fast forward 2-3 months. What do we know as of today? That the threat form Iraq's iregular weapons was vastly exagerated, and ties to Al Qaeda remain obscure, if they exist at all (Remember Ansar? has anyone yet stated that they foudn docs. saying there was a tie between them and Baghdad? its been 2 months people!).
"liberating Iraq" was never something that would gain UN approval, since the UN has no power to call for the overthrow of the regime of any member states. The only issue up to the UN was to judge Iraq's relative compliance with UN resolutions, what dsort of threat it was and to act accordingly. The second resolution deserved to be defeated, if only because it was wrong in its assumptyions of the threat. Over 50% of American now say they don;t crae if WMD's are found. But what if the war had had UN backing? what sort of repercussions would this fact have had then? Would not the Us have had to show thse weapons, to justify a war in the name of the UN that it had just carried out?
The French handed George W a huge political bonus: he gets to blame the french for his own diplomatic failures (cause the Us never even got the 9 votes), but now that no WMD's have been found, he can say :"who gives a hoot, it was all about "Iraqi Liberty"! if the French deserve to be punished, it is for that, but not for defeating a resolution that history shows us was wrong.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28.
Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-05-2003 00:39
|