A historian comments:
You belled the cat quite well with your post on Fukuyama. The point you've made on a few occasions about France being the kind of "proposition nation" that the neocons claim America should be is also worth reiterating.
In "Americans First," I asked:
Finally, there’s an insidiously Jacobin implication to propositionism. If believing in neoconservative theories should make anyone in the world eligible for immigration, what should disbelieving in them make thought criminals like you and me? Candidates for deportation? For the guillotine?
My reader continues:
Paul  Johnson notes in Modern Times that France has been split since 1789  between the proposition-based "Patriotic France" and the  "Nationalist France" defined both against the principles of 1789 and  by loyalty to place. Others have noted this tension, and part of it is implicit  in having a "proposition nation." What happens to those who don't  accept the proposition?
Massacre. Simon Schama essentially confirmed the old Catholic Royalist accounts  by Guillaume Bertier de Sauvigny and others in his book Citizens, which  describes both the Paris terror that eventually felled Robespierre and the less  well-know story of massacres in the Vendee. This civil war of massacre and  resistance among the French left an open wound that even De Gaulle couldn't  wholly mend, and whichever side has the upper hand at any given time sticks it  to the other as hard as it can. World War I and the Gaullist era mark partial  exceptions, that underline the general rule. Nationalist France remains below  the surface waiting to lash back, unless its rulers solve their problem by  electing a new people.
If Mexico and Brazil offer a cautionary tale about social divisions reinforced  by race, France shows the bitter fruit that "proposition nations"  bring. But then Leo Strauss and Allan Bloom didn't mention that in their theory  courses.
Examples of French v.  French violence in the 20th Century include the right wing oppression during the  Vichy Regime, the leftist reprisals in 1944-46, and the White Terror propagated  by pied noir French Algerians and their Army supporters after De Gaulle  sold them out in the early 1960s. The Dreyfus Affair at the beginning of the  20th Century led to unbelievable bitterness within French society, but  fortunately stopped just short of civil war. The leftist May 1968 riots were so  strong that De Gaulle, thinking the jig was up, fled to West Germany to take  refuge with French soldiers there under his protégé General Massou. Pompidou  and Massou had to talk him into going home and taking a stand by splitting the  Communist workers from the student New Leftists by promising big wage hikes.
French anti-Americanism, especially Gaullist anti-Americanism, is, in large  part, an attempt to unify the fractious French by finding a foreign country for  Frenchmen to resent rather than each other. De Gaulle was a great, great patriot  -- and, because of that, a complete pain in the butt to us  "Anglo-Saxons," but we could afford to, and usually did, put up with  his calculated offensiveness.
The neocons' touchiness about French touchiness is another example of their  amusingly (but deleteriously) French-like childishness. The U.S. is so much  stronger than any other single country on Earth that it's in our interest to  respond phlegmatically toward minor rudenesses from lesser countries like  France. Instead, the neocons act like Peter Sellers's Inspector Clouseau  whenever his hauteur was trifled with.
My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
 
 
 
 Posts
Posts
 
 
 
 
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment