# l'anti américanisme Francais



## charlyboy81

Que pensez vous de l'anti-américanisme bien franchouillard qui sévit en ces temps de discorde? Est-ce une mode, pensez vous que cela soit justifié par les évenements qui se déroulent en Irak et autres pays du Moyen orient?

Personnellement je ressens des sentiments partagés pour les Etats Unis... Joli pays, gens sans doute sympas dans l'ensemble (meme si trop influencés par leur gouvernement et ses médias)... En fait ca serait plus l'administration Bush que je peux pas sentir. Je fait donc parti du "mouvement" (notez bien que j'ai pris ma decision tout seul 

J'aimerais votre avis la dessus!

merci

C.


----------



## badgrammar

Alors là, il y a un roman à écrire sur cette rélation "love-hate" qu'ont les français et les américains.  Je n'ai pas le temps d'écrire toute de suite, mais je suis heureuse de constater que, malgré toute l'animosité qui éxistent, je n'ai rencontré qu'une personne qui m'a agressé à cause de ma nationalité dans 13 ans de vie à Paris.  Et c'était un con, et tous les autres se sont rallier autour de moi et l'ont envoyé chi...

Mais le "love-hate thing", c'est très présent et très puissant.  

Ce thread risque d'être intéréssant!


----------



## maxiogee

My French is poor, and my translation tool is not up to much, but I think there anti-americanism of which you speak is not, within Europe, solely confined to France.


----------



## cirrus

I would agree but there is a particular knee jerk reflex against the perceived threat to France and her culture from the Anglo Saxon world.  Look at Chirac walking out of an EU meeting the other day because Trichet had the temerity to speak English at a business meeting.  It was a cheap stunt but indicative of deeper feelings. Link to article (admittedly rather parti pris).


----------



## charlyboy81

> I think there anti-americanism of which you speak is not, within Europe, solely confined to France.


 
I would agree with you on this fact; only France is probably the most engaged country in the anti-american movement. we did not send troops to Irak (thank God). Personally I don't understand how people can still believe in this war... it is bound to failure, like Vietnam was.

Anyway I live in Netherlands and it is frequent that people link my opinion to my origins...I don't care! i think independently


----------



## Agnès E.

What medias show of a country is not always what the whole population is thinking... it is mainly reflecting what journalists think businessmen and gouvernment will like to hear. They just flatter advertisers and powerful men.
Please, please, don't fall into this sooooo old trap!


----------



## Agnès E.

cirrus said:
			
		

> I would agree but there is a particular knee jerk reflex against the perceived threat to France and her culture from the Anglo Saxon world. Look at Chirac walking out of an EU meeting the other day because Trichet had the temerity to speak English at a business meeting. It was a cheap stunt but indicative of deeper feelings. Link to article (admittedly rather parti pris).


The three official languages in EU meetings are English, French and German.
And everyone's speech is translated.


----------



## mansio

I shall never forget the thousands of Americans who gave their lives on French soil in the two World Wars.


----------



## charlyboy81

mansio said:
			
		

> I shall never forget the thousands of Americans who gave their lives on French soil in the two World Wars.


 
I will not forget them either; I never said I was not thankful for the favor... But let's not mix everything; I am talking about the present here.

And to reply to Agnes, i do not fall into that trap. I mostly observed and listened to people around me (ok maybe we belong to the same social group so our opinions are similar); but still, I can feel that there is an anti american movement (it should be called "anti american government" tough ). Many french people are "proud" that Chirac did not send troops in Irak. But once again it is maybe just because Chirac did a "pied de nez" a la premiere puissance mondiale  LoL


----------



## cuchuflete

The egoism displayed by both nations, and their governments,
is a periodic nuisance.  France followed policies doomed to failure in its colonies...Algeria and Vietnam.  Eventually French people and their governments discovered reality, and changed policies.  

What did Americans do?   Why, of course, they ignored the lessons learned by their French allies, and further ignored the good advice from the French.  Result? More doomed policies and loss of life.  

In the latest round of stupidity, an American government decided that it was not sufficient to have an 'intangible, invisible' enemy like al Qaida.   So, they set up a thought(less?) process by which other countries were 'with us or agin' us'.  Stupid, superficial, wrong!   The French government and people were sensible enough to think for themselves, and not be manipulated by Washington. And they were busy making their own errors, as is their right.

So Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Cheney, Bush, and other luminaries made disparaging remarks about the French.   French politicians rose to the occasion and said unflattering things about Americans.   Not very good theatre...just bratty children strutting their egos.

From personal experience, I rest easy in the assurance that most of the people of both countries do not accept this silliness.


----------



## charlyboy81

> From personal experience, I rest easy in the assurance that most of the people of both countries do not accept this silliness


 
Of course not, I still have few very good American friends and i still belive your country has many qualities. I never react like politicians do in my country; so even if Bush and Chirac fightr like crazy i don't give a damn, i still know there good things in US. Unfortunately lot of french people are too chauvinist to do the same...


----------



## Agnès E.

Charly, everywhere in the world there are clever, dumb, educated, illiterate, nice and nasty people. In France as well as in the USA, and in Japan, in Russia (or even in Ireland!  ).

What happens today is that the most powerful nation of the world is engaging in a dead-end, therefore leading many other nations in the same cul-de-sac. That in spite of a big reluctance from the American people, who is much teared apart between normal patriotism and fear to appear coward or acting against the government. 

This situation is too serious to let other countries indifferent or serene. The whole planet is involved.

Misinformation of course plays a jolly role as well, in France like in the US, not to speak about other countries...


----------



## natasha2000

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> The egoism displayed by both nations, and their governments,
> is a periodic nuisance. France followed policies doomed to failure in its colonies...Algeria and Vietnam. Eventually French people and their governments discovered reality, and changed policies.
> 
> What did Americans do? Why, of course, they ignored the lessons learned by their French allies, and further ignored the good advice from the French. Result? More doomed policies and loss of life.
> 
> In the latest round of stupidity, an American government decided that it was not sufficient to have an 'intangible, invisible' enemy like al Qaida. So, they set up a thought(less?) process by which other countries were 'with us or agin' us'. Stupid, superficial, wrong! The French government and people were sensible enough to think for themselves, and not be manipulated by Washington. And they were busy making their own errors, as is their right.
> 
> So Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Cheney, Bush, and other luminaries made disparaging remarks about the French. French politicians rose to the occasion and said unflattering things about Americans. Not very good theatre...just bratty children strutting their egos.
> 
> From personal experience, I rest easy in the assurance that most of the people of both countries do not accept this silliness.


 
First of all to say, I agree with you, completely, but then, after having read the last sentence, a question arises by itself: Then why those people elect these politicians to represent them, if the majority does not think as the abovementioned politicians?

I wouldn't know about France, but I would agree that a great part of the "guilt" for so widely spread anti-americanism in the world (yes, the French are not the only ones, and not the worst ones) has ther US gouvernment, especially the president and the general secretary, whoever they are, because the general politics of US seems to be "I am the world policeman, my duty is to arrange and rearrange the world and countries, to decide who is wrong and who is right, and I am above all laws - I can judge everyone, but nobody can judge me." If not, why don't they accept the jurisdiction of the International Tribunal in Hague?


----------



## GenJen54

natasha2000 said:
			
		

> Then why those people elect these politicians to represent them, if the majority does not think as the abovementioned politicians?


The election process is skewed. Like it or not, it is not a "true" democracy. Instead, it is based upon an electoral college where individual states are given a certain number of electoral votes based upon their population. 

The last election was fairly evenly divided. Approx. 62,000,000 voted for Bush. Approx. 59,000,000 voted for Kerry. Another 400,000 + voted for other candidates. The electoral college results were 286 to 252.

The system is not representational of "all" the people. 

For example, in my state my vote will never be honestly counted because the electoral votes in my state are not divided based upon the populous vote. For example, if 1.3 million people vote for Bush and another 900,000 vote for Kerry (other parties are not allowed in my state), then ALL NINE of my state's electoral votes get put into the Bush column. My vote is effectively useless. Other states weight their electoral votes based upon percentages, but as each state enjoys its own "system," it is scewed.

It is a complicated system. It began as a means of fairly weighting votes among each of the states. The 2000 election proved it does not work.
---------------------

Speaking strictly as a forer@ here, I have to wonder why there is an incessant need to bring up anti-americanism time and time and time again? We already have several "American Bashing" thread and some forer@s even take the opportunity to rant at us in other threads not on the topic.
Have the American forer@s in these forums not proven that there are intelligent, critically-thinking, open-minded people living in this country?

I realize our government is a shambles, but come on. How would you like it if you visited these forums and had to be faced with the continual wordly ire against you? 

We can't help where we come from, but give us at least some sort of break. It's tiresome.

Getting off my off-topic soap box now, and fellow cultura mods (or others) please feel to delete this if necessary.


----------



## gato2

charlyboy81 said:
			
		

> I would agree with you on this fact; only France is probably the most engaged country in the anti-american movement. we did not send troops to Irak (thank God). Personally I don't understand how people can still believe in this war... it is bound to failure, like Vietnam was.
> 
> Anyway I live in Netherlands and it is frequent that people link my opinion to my origins...I don't care! i think independently


 

Contra la guerra de Irak (y otras guerras) estuvo en contra muchisima gente y muchos de ellos no eran franceses e incluso estoy segura de que hubo muchos americanos entre ellos. No me parece objetivo afirmar de que los franceses fueran los promotores de la oposicion a esa guerra.

Ademas creo que Genjen, no quiero ni pensar lo que pensariais si en esta pagina hubiese cada dos por tres foros anti-franceses.


----------



## natasha2000

gato2 said:
			
		

> Contra la guerra de Irak (y otras guerras) estuvo en contra muchisima gente y muchos de ellos no eran franceses e incluso estoy segura de que hubo muchos americanos entre ellos. No me parece objetivo afirmar de que los franceses fueran los promotores de la oposicion a esa guerra.
> 
> Ademas creo que Genjen, no quiero ni pensar lo que pensariais si en esta pagina hubiese cada dos por tres foros anti-franceses.


 
Exactly. 90% of Spanish population was against this war, too. There were also some huge anti-war demonstrations in US, too... As I recall, around million people were at the streets of New York... 

GenJen, you are completely right. I will assume you were not reffering only to me, since I wasn't the one who started this nor any other anti-american posts, although I admit, I participated in a few of them, but rather defending than attacking, and believe me, I have reasons to attack the US. But no matter my personal experiences, I always try to stay objective, and avoid to generalize, since my own people suffered a lot form the same.
 But then, it is so easy to attack the obvious. All the world knows about the bad things about the US (I would limit myself to say US gouvernment). And it becomes a little bit boring to hear again and again the same thing. It's become a kind a fashionable to bash the US and everything that comes from there. Let's bash some other country, just for the sake of change... 
I think if we did this with any other country, we could find a lot of bad and mean things if we look for it good enough. But this is not the point. We should talk here with an aim to know each others cultures better, not to compete whose better. Let's change the chip, people.

I also take my off-topic soap taking chances to be erased by mods.


----------



## natasha2000

> Have the American forer@s in these forums not proven that there are intelligent, critically-thinking, open-minded people living in this country?


 
Yes, they certainly did. The surprise and a real pleasure to discover this was mine.


----------



## Cath.S.

Charlyboy,
tu te demandais dans ton premier message s'il s'agissait d'une mode, je peux répondre, en ce qui me concerne, que ce n'est nullement le cas.

Je sais très précisément ce que je reproche aux États-Unis en tant que modèle de société, pour moi ce pays n'est détestable que lorsqu'il incarne l'ultra-libéralisme économique et social et l'impérialisme idéologique et militaire.

Ceci dit, _jamais_ je ne songerais à mal juger quelqu'un sur la base de sa nationalité, je sais que nombreux sont les opposants au régime actuel et ils ont toute ma sympathie.


----------



## Outsider

Quand je vois le mot « antiaméricanisme », j'ai toujours envie de demander pourquoi on ne parle jamais de l'antigallicisme et de l'antieuropéanisme. Je regrette, mais critiquer les politiques d'un pays n'est anti-rien. Ce n'est qu'un fait de la vie.


----------



## geve

GenJen54 said:
			
		

> We can't help where we come from, but give us at least some sort of break. It's tiresome.





			
				natasha2000 said:
			
		

> And it becomes a little bit boring to hear again and again the same thing.


I couldn't agree more. 

I'm tired too about all this rambling on the so-called French anti-americanism. If France is the land of "no Americans here", why is there so many McDonald's, why do Nike and Levi's sell so many pairs of shoes and pants, why do French film makers rant so much about the French audience's preference for American movies, why are there so many people who dream to visit the USA or even move there? (I realize I'm answering caricature by caricature here...)

I understand that one can not like Bush' government, or that one can be not fond of American culture. But "to be anti-american" doesn't make much sense IMO: does that mean that we'd want to see USA erased from the map? Or does that just mean that we don't like anything labelled "from America"?  

Of course, there might be in France some people who don't like American people in general. There are also people who say that there's only crap on TV ; they're often the same ones who watch TV the most... You shouldn't take what "people" * say for granted.  


_(* I thought I had this word deleted!!)_


----------



## geve

Outsider said:
			
		

> Quand je vois le mot « antiaméricanisme », j'ai toujours envie de demander pourquoi on ne parle jamais de l'antigallicisme et de l'antieuropéanisme. Je regrette, mais critiquer les politiques d'un pays n'est anti-rien. Ce n'est qu'un fait de la vie.


Exactement ! Anti-américanisme, qu'est-ce que ça veut dire ? Je veux bien être anti-guerre, anti-Bush, voire même anti-hamburgers ou anti-films-de-Schwarzenegger (pour la rime) ; mais je ne vois comment je pourrais être anti-américaine (ou anti-américains ?)


----------



## badgrammar

But maybe we're straying because the point of the thread seems to be to examine the particularities of French anti-Americanism, which has it's own special flavor and is generally accompanied by whine...  Sorry, that was too easy.

French people love the things that make people dream about America - I think it all started with the love affair with American cinema, the music, the cars, blue jeans, James Dean, the GI's amazing feats in Normandie, JFK, MLK, the plight of African Americans, the thrill of New York, the exotic call of California...  There's a lot to be admired there, this list is summary, but all of these things conjure up positive images.  

But they also hate the American culture's lack of culture, consumerism, shallowness, bad-food-ils-mangent-n'importe-quoi-n'importe-quand-ism, and they assume, rightly or wrongly, that Americans (in general) consider themselves superior to the French.  And the French have, bless them, somewhat of a national inferiority complex.  Add to that the obvious political disagreements between the two, and the U.S.'s way of pushing everybody around, and you've got grounds for dispute.

It is a tiresome argument, and it is even a touchy point between my husband and myself, because à force d'entendre tout ce qui ne va pas in my country of origin, I may tend to get a little on the defensive.  It has even been difficult sometimes to make any points in favor of the US, because whatever I say will be misconstrued as defending THE U.S....

But you must also remember, there's nothing a French person likes to do more than "râle" (complain, grumble).  Except perhaps say no to things other people say yes to (talking about the constitution here, not the war), and protest/strike when they perceive themselves as not getting what they deserve. 

But I love France, it is my home now.  So while I say these things about the country, it is in the same way you might speak frankly to your best friend about the things that drive you crazy about your beloved spouse.


----------



## geve

Très très bien parlé, badgrammar  


			
				badgrammar said:
			
		

> But you must also remember, there's nothing a French person likes to do more than "râle" (complain, grumble).


If anyone cares for stereotypes on French people for a change, here it is...


----------



## natasha2000

geve said:
			
		

> I couldn't agree more.
> 
> I'm tired too about all this rambling on the so-called French anti-americanism. If France is the land of "no Americans here", why is there so many McDonald's, why do Nike and Levi's sell so many pairs of shoes and pants, why do French film makers rant so much about the French audience's preference for American movies, why are there so many people who dream to visit the USA or even move there? (I realize I'm answering caricature by caricature here...)
> 
> I understand that one can not like Bush' government, or that one can be not fond of American culture. But "to be anti-american" doesn't make much sense IMO: does that mean that we'd want to see USA erased from the map? Or does that just mean that we don't like anything labelled "from America"?
> 
> Of course, there might be in France some people who don't like American people in general. There are also people who say that there's only crap on TV ; they're often the same ones who watch TV the most... You shouldn't take what "people" * say for granted.
> 
> 
> _(* I thought I had this word deleted!!)_


 
Exactly my point... 
the anti american feeling is not some French privilege... I hear about this for the first time in my life... All the world knows about the wrong things in the US, the thing is that only is spoken about the bad things of the US, and I asure you, the very same French or any other "EU" contry have very much in common with the US in many things... But hey, it's always easier to criticize the other, not seeing the "bad herbs" in your own garden...


----------



## badgrammar

geve said:
			
		

> Très très bien parlé, badgrammar
> ...



Well, thank you, Geve, most sincerely.


----------



## nopal

Bonjour , Je souhaite qu'avant toute chose , on puisse avoir un peu de recul , pour constater que ce que disent la presse et les médias généralement n'est que le résultat du choix des dirigeants et des propriétaires des médias et de la presse . Ils ne sont pas indépendants des réalités économiques ,ils se situent dans un environnement commercial ultra-libéral et concurentiel et ne sont que les prosélytes militants de la défense des stricts intérêts qui les rétribuent .Il n'y a plus depuis longtemps d'indépendance de la presse .Les sujets traités sont le résultats de choix .
Croire qu'il puisse exister , un anti-américanisme des français , participe à mon avis -du résultat des manipulations d'une pensée simpliste manichéenne primitive .Je n'oserai jamais croire qu'il y a :Une pensée française opposée à une Pensée US ._Les Français _ça n'existe pas .Je pense qu'il y a actuellement autant d'anti-américanisme , par exemple chez les producteurs de bois canadiens de l'ALENA opposés au protectionsme US que chez les fabricants de Roquefort .Le public français est le public qui a ,avant tout le monde , su donner sa chance au cinéma américain de Woody Allen , Cassavettes ,Altman ...en marge de l'artillerie lourde hollywoodienne ;Dashiel Hammet a été publié à Paris quand il était hors de question qu'il le soit à New-York .
Il faut faire un distinction entre les peuples et les manipulations des gouvernants dirigés par les sociétés qui les financent .Halliburton entrepose ses stocks de Pétrole sur l'Ile Iranienne de Kish quand Bush et Rumsfeld affectent  de  s'opposer à Téhéran avec des poses diplomatiques comiques .L'actuelle dévastation mondiale de Bagdad à Kaboul est le résultat du seul appétit de l'industrie pétrolière et de ses amis intimes fabricants d'armes ou d'avions opposés dans un monstrueux jeu de Go aux intérêts de Poutine ou de Pékin .Les soldats américains morts sont les malheureuses victimes d'un mensonge d'état .
Les peuples ne sont que des épiphénomènes qu'on cherche à manipuler comme des marionnettes avec des flatteries en se cachant derrière des faux-semblants .
_Les français _c'est un ensemble composite d'éléments d'une très grande diversité , tous jaloux de leurs indépendances . De la juxtaposition de ces particularismes résulte une culture avec la langue française pour seul ciment .
Les bretons ont une culture propre comme les basques , les provençaux , les alsaciens , les auvergnats , ils utilisent des langues distinctes avec une grammaire , des vocabulaires distincts , des dictionnaires , des littératures ; ils ne peuvent pas se comprendre les uns les autres dans leurs langues respectives .Tous parlent pourtant le même français mais avec des accents  particuliers  différents .Ils partagent un seul et même territoire situé à la confluence,au carrefour des influences espagnoles , italiennes , suisses , anglaises , allemandes , polonaises et vietnamiennes et magrébines et  africaines aussi  qui ont tous amené des populations d'immigrés au cours de l'histoire et des guerres , sans ghettos , sans communautarisme .
Tout ça , toutes ces différences font que ce pays est culturellement d'une richesse d'opinions strictement totalement impossible à gérer d'une seule voix .
Il ne doit pas exister , deux français d'accord sur le même point de vue - en France .
Cela reste une des forme de la liberté .C'est peut-être pénible , mais c'est bien .


----------



## bernik

Natasha2000: _"Then why those people elect these politicians to represent them, if the majority does not think as the above mentioned politicians?"_

GenJen54: _"The election process is skewed. Like it or not, it is not a "true" democracy. Instead, it is based upon an electoral college where individual states are given a certain number of electoral votes based upon their population."_

It doesn't really matter that the process is slightly skewed as long as it is not skewed in favor of one particular party. Anyway, the reason some people dislike the United States has nothing to do with flawed democracy. One of the reasons that made me like the United States was democracy: both in the institutions, and in people's minds. I think the 19th century Frenchman Tocqueville was impressed in the same way by the American democratic spirit.

_"For example, in my state my vote will never be honestly counted because the electoral votes in my state are not divided based upon the populous vote."_

Where I live, we are not allowed to have our own state, (the French constitution says: "France is an indivisible Republic") and we don't have any local political life. French regions are not allowed to have their own radios or televisions. Politicians are co-opted by the political parties in Paris. They act as representatives of the big political parties much more than as representatives of the local people. When they get elected, most of them obey orders from the party direction. They take no part in making the laws. And we have bogus, mainly powerless regional "assemblies", while the important decisions are taken by the "prefects", civil servants directly chosen by Chirac.

In reply to Natasha2000's question: Why do voters elect politicians they do not agree with ? I think this is because public opinion has changed since Bush was reelected. At the time, most voters still gave him their support over the Iraq problem.

American democracy, especially at the local level, can still be a source of inspiration for many other countries, but I think its quality has been eroding in the last 40 years, as the left-wing ideology took control of the bureaucracies, the schools, the universities, the big-time media, most legal judgment, Hollywood, and the leadership of the Democratic Party. (I borrowed the list from an opinion column by John Leo: www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/johnleo/2004/08/30/12844.html ).

I think anti-americanism is caused partly by America's superpower status, partly by European and American ethnomasochism... In the Middle-East, I see anti-americanism as a foolish way to oppose modernity. And there is also a muslim tradition of attacking Europe. If the United States did not exist, the 9/11 terrorist attacks would have been aimed at other European countries.

In the case of France, anti-americanism has been encouraged by the administration at least since De Gaulle who seemed to bear a personal grudge against the USA. I think that frustrated French imperialism tends to mutate into anti-american spite. One thing I have noticed in France is that the worst adversaries of the United States are also the most ferocious enemies of local democracy and minority languages. The politician Chevènement is a good example. What I find puzzling is that French anti-americanism often comes from educated people who see themselves as intellectuals. You would expect them to know better !

Geve: _"   "to be anti-american" doesn't make much sense IMO  "_

There is such a thing as irrational anti-americanism. It can be seen for instance, when the US is condemned as a whole because someone has a grievance about a particular aspect of American society or foreign policy. The US seems to be on constant trial.


----------



## cuchuflete

Whoever John Leo may be, he don't know diddly! (That's American slang, for John Leo is an idiot who doesn't know what he is talking about.)

In addition to being slightly amusing for it's gross stupidity, his view 





> left-wing ideology took control of the bureaucracies, the schools, the universities, the big-time media, most legal judgment, Hollywood, and the leadership of the Democratic Party...


 is factually incorrect.  The Democractic Party might be considered a center-right party in most European nations.  The big-time media is mostly occupied with talk shows hosted by right-wing nuts, who spend half their time complaining about the non-existent left-wing media.  

French politicians demonize Americans and 
the US to divert French public attention away from the failings of French governments.  US politicians have recently begun to do the same thing, in reverse.


----------



## bernik

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> his view (Quote: ...)  is factually incorrect


 It looked like I was stating John Leo's opinion, when in fact it was mainly my own opinion. What I borrowed from Leo was his list of places where political and cultural change has occurred. But I think what he says is interesting.

_"French politicians demonize Americans and the US to divert French public attention..."_

Sometimes, we should try demonizing someone else, just for the sake of change.


----------



## Bastoune

geve said:
			
		

> I couldn't agree more.
> 
> I'm tired too about all this rambling on the so-called French anti-americanism. If France is the land of "no Americans here", why is there so many McDonald's, why do Nike and Levi's sell so many pairs of shoes and pants, why do French film makers rant so much about the French audience's preference for American movies, why are there so many people who dream to visit the USA or even move there? (I realize I'm answering caricature by caricature here...)
> 
> I understand that one can not like Bush' government, or that one can be not fond of American culture. But "to be anti-american" doesn't make much sense IMO: does that mean that we'd want to see USA erased from the map? Or does that just mean that we don't like anything labelled "from America"?
> 
> Of course, there might be in France some people who don't like American people in general. There are also people who say that there's only crap on TV ; they're often the same ones who watch TV the most... You shouldn't take what "people" * say for granted.
> 
> 
> _(* I thought I had this word deleted!!)_


 
I couldn't agree with _*you*_ more! 

I have lived as a semi-neutral party, a French-Canadian living in France, who nows lives in the U.S. (at least until the end of this year), I enjoyed observer status, but was always annoyed at my French circle of friends for complaining about the U.S.A., all the while eating their McDo, watching the American cinema and TV shows, and listening to nothing but American music. 

France, I am sorry, is very jealous of her loss of status in the world, and to whom did they lose it? Aux États-Unis, un pays ANGLOPHONE, la seule "super-puissance" socio-économique qui existe maintenant.

France for centuries enjoyed a cultural and linguistic advantage over England -- I mean, let's face it, when one thinks of culture, art, romance, sexuality, class, _fine cuisine_ and all that is classy, France _still _rules in people's minds. 

France's decline as an empire, their humiliation during the Second World War, and the emergence (?) of the U.S. as the leading influence in the world after WWII, France's influence is second-rate at best. England can (linguistically and historically speaking) ride on the coattales of the U.S., but France? France blew their chances at a great empire in the Americas, then lost what they had in Asia and Africa, as francophile monarchies collapsed (Czar Nicholas and his family, who were killed by the Bolsheviks, spoke _French_ among themselves, not Russian!), and the world began to change, France can, sadly (and I sympathize -- we're talking a _real culture_ that has suffered!) cling to only her past. Like I said, France's eternal nemesis England (whose influence is no greater than that of France), at least can see their language (to which they attach less importance than the French do to theirs/ours) flourishing thanks to, you guessed it, the United States.

Now, if France would stop complaining about the United States and actually support the worldwide francophonie instead of delusionally pretending they still have some sort of influence in the world, actually could assert it.

Come on! They pass laws to suppress English-language songs and such on the radio (that doesn't work -- I mean, honestly, I never heard a difference -- go to Québec and turn on a French-language radio station, you won't hear any music _en anglais_!) rather than promoting the AWESOME French-language music from Europe (not just France), Canada (they are CLUELESS that almost a million Ontarians are _francophones_ -- not to mention the contributions of Acadians, _Franco-Manitobains_, and other _francophones hors Québec_), Africa, Louisiana...
Nothing. My French friends were amazed, coming to my house, to see I only have like 5% of my music in English (the other music is francophone, Brazilian, etc.).

Same with the movies.

Same with the TV shows. I'm sorry, but I've sat through "Premiers Baisers," "Classe Mannequin" and "Hélène et les Garcons" and _croyez-moi_, I'd rather sit through the annoying "Who's the Boss" or "90210" any day over those lame shows!

So France is right to complain about the overbearing anti-cultural influences of the U.S., but the only way to counteract that is to produce some good stuff to compete with it, and simply to STOP BUYING THEIR STUFF.

But the French don't do this.

We in Canada have been a linguistic minority, yet did we sit there and complain, "oh those evil English are destroying our way of life, boo-hoo..."? Well, many did, but most of my ancestors did not. We fought, we did some great stuff, we were also not afraid to accept and incorporate the GOOD things of this anglo-North-American society, and adapt it to our culture.

Let's be honest -- not everything the U.S. does is bad!!!!!!! 
It's about time France admitted this fact, too.

Now, the United States does acknowledge the brilliant legacy of France and all France's influence on the U.S. and in the world, yet, they have a chip on their shoulder for saving the world during WWII. They have seen themselves as the truest defenders of democracy -- _liberté, égalité, fraternité -- _yet, look at all the contradictions! France feels slighted and is very ready to point out the hypocrisy of the U.S. before actually working on her own faults first.

France needs to stop whining, the U.S. needs to be knocked down a peg. But only a unified Francophonie can topple the anglocentricism of the world.

France needs to realize that the French language is not just for France -- it is all of our language, and the differences only help accentuate how rich it is.


----------



## Markus

geve said:
			
		

> I couldn't agree more.
> 
> I'm tired too about all this rambling on the so-called French anti-americanism. If France is the land of "no Americans here", why is there so many McDonald's, why do Nike and Levi's sell so many pairs of shoes and pants, why do French film makers rant so much about the French audience's preference for American movies, why are there so many people who dream to visit the USA or even move there? (I realize I'm answering caricature by caricature here...)
> 
> I understand that one can not like Bush' government, or that one can be not fond of American culture. But "to be anti-american" doesn't make much sense IMO: does that mean that we'd want to see USA erased from the map? Or does that just mean that we don't like anything labelled "from America"?
> 
> Of course, there might be in France some people who don't like American people in general. There are also people who say that there's only crap on TV ; they're often the same ones who watch TV the most... You shouldn't take what "people" * say for granted.



I agree completely! I compare the French complaining about McDonald's and Starbucks to Americans complaining about Walmart : they pretend to hate it, but keep going back for more.


----------



## emma42

While successive American governments continue to bully the rest of the world, nothing is going to compensate for that.  Not even Woody Allen.

The French (yes, yes, generalising - sorry) will not have it.  Unfortunately, the British will.  Despite the fantastic anti-war (Iraq) demos, what (some of) the British fail to realise is that, having allowed successive governments to castrate the trades union movement, those who rule over us don't give a flying fig about demos.  If we'd had a general strike, they would have had to give a fig.  The French know how to flex their social and industrial muscle.  Chapeau to them.


----------



## bernik

" those who rule over us don't give a flying fig about demos "

I think they do worry about demos.
One consequence of the "fantastic anti-war (Iraq) demos" is that the USA will abstain from a military intervention in Darfur.


----------



## emma42

Sorry, bernik, I meant Tony Blair's government *doesn't give a...*


----------



## maxiogee

bernik said:
			
		

> " those who rule over us don't give a flying fig about demos "
> 
> I think they do worry about demos.
> One consequence of the "fantastic anti-war (Iraq) demos" is that the USA will abstain from a military intervention in Darfur.



I think the lack of any strategic importance Darfur/Sudan could have for the USA is more likely to have influenced any decision to abstain than all the demos in the world.


----------



## lizzeymac

bernik said:
			
		

> It looked like I was stating John Leo's opinion, when in fact it was mainly my own opinion. What I borrowed from Leo was his list of places where political and cultural change has occurred. But I think what he says is interesting.
> 
> _"French politicians demonize Americans and the US to divert French public attention..."_
> 
> Sometimes, we should try demonizing someone else, just for the sake of change.



Ethnomasochism is an interesting word to use in the same breath as a John Leo citation.  It's a word often associated with the American Nationalist Union.  I'm not sure I have a clear understanding of the meaning - if you have a minute, could you give a brief explanation?


----------



## bernik

lizzeymac said:
			
		

> Ethnomasochism is an interesting word to use in the same breath as a John Leo citation.


 Say what's in your mind, instead of insinuating.
I said my point of view was not John Leo's point of view.

_" It's a word often associated with the American Nationalist Union."_

How terrible !
In france, I think the word has been popularized by Guillaume Faye.
But don't look him up in Google, you would probably burst in tears.

_" I'm not sure I have a clear understanding of the meaning - if you have a minute, could you give a brief explanation? "_

I'm sure you do have a clear understanding of the meaning, because the word is really self-explanatory.

A healthy attitude is to be reasonably proud of yourself and your country.
masochism = taking a perverse pleasure in causing pain to yourself.
Ethno-masochism = taking pleasure in speaking ill of your own country and even destroying it.


----------



## lizzeymac

bernik said:
			
		

> Say what's in your mind, instead of insinuating.
> I said my point of view was not John Leo's point of view.
> 
> _" It's a word often associated with the American Nationalist Union."_
> 
> How terrible !
> In france, I think the word has been popularized by Guillaume Faye.
> But don't look him up in Google, you would probably burst in tears.
> 
> _" I'm not sure I have a clear understanding of the meaning - if you have a minute, could you give a brief explanation? "_
> 
> I'm sure you do have a clear understanding of the meaning, because the word is really self-explanatory.
> 
> A healthy attitude is to be reasonably proud of yourself and your country.
> masochism = taking a perverse pleasure in causing pain to yourself.
> Ethno-masochism = taking pleasure in speaking ill of your own country and even destroying it.




Don't use that tone with me.  
I asked a civil question & I hoped for a civil answer.  
I don't find the term self explanatory, neither "ethno" not "masochism" has any source in speech or self-representation so clearly your definition contains information I would need to understand your post.  I Googled the term & found several different cites with such widely differering interpretations as to change the meaning of the entire post.  I could not find a dictionary source so I though I would ask you.  
So - thank you for explaining your thinking so clearly.

-


----------



## zebedee

*Bernik,*

May I remind you of 2 of the principal rules of Wordreference:



			
				WR Rules said:
			
		

> 2. Be helpful not hurtful.
> 
> 24. Always be respectful of other users, the system, and the moderators. We put the system online in good faith. Please use it in good faith.



If you can't use a civil tone in your posts, they will be deleted.

Thank you,
zebedee
Culture Moderator


----------



## rsweet

I agree with most of the posts in this thread: anyone with a square-inch of understanding doesn't assume that individuals from a country are the same as its government or public policy. You don't have to look far to see the incredible number of people against the war and the current administration in the US. Try searching "asshole" in Google.com and see what comes up first in the rankings.


----------



## ceci '79

One thing I noticed being a student in an international environment is that, although the French may not be anti-American, perhaps, those I've seen were very confrontational with the Americans. 

For example, several times I saw Americans talking about non-political neutral subjects or just making small talk. The French students, after a few friendly opening lines, started provoking (probing?): "So what about the government of your country?", "Why did your contry vote for Bush?", "Whom did you vote for?". "So what do you think of your government?", "What do you think of the Iraq war and of Bush"?, "Wasn't Clinton a much better president?" And so on with all these not very diplomatic and very direct questions.

It looked like a test: "If you answer correctly to this quiz (= if you think like me) then I will be gracious enough to accept you as my equal, otherwise you are just another 'ignorant cowboy American' like all the others." So, if the American in question happens to be a Democrat, he/she is safe (but only after this somewhat humiliating test), otherwise they are precluded all kinds of peace of mind.

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I grew up thinking that "Whom did you vote for?" is a tabu question as much as "What is your religion?", "Do you want to have children?", "How much money do you make?", "How much did your house cost?" and "How's your sex life?" So this attitude shocked me a bit.

The French students often put the Americans in a difficult position where they have to answer for their country's political decisions. Besides, it looked as if they had to account for / justify their beliefs and convictions (be they dem., rep. or other). Also, the Republican ones were forced to go through the embarrassment of a disagreeing with someone they hardly knew.

I felt sorry for the 'victims" . I think maybe the French are confrontational, rather than anti-American (although they do seem to think that Americans - and the rest of the world - are less "refined"  ).


----------



## geve

ceci '79 said:
			
		

> I think maybe the French are confrontational, rather than anti-American


I think you have a very good point here, ceci '79!


----------



## emma42

Mind you, it may just have been that those particular French people were confrontational.  I remember when I was rather "rabid" politically - I would confront people inappropriately.  I am ashamed to say that I can imagine having behaved like those French students.  I had good points to make, but I was unfair towards other people sometimes when I made them.

So, is it a French thing or not?


----------



## maxiogee

emma42 said:
			
		

> Mind you, it may just have been that those particular French people were confrontational.  I remember when I was rather "rabid" politically - I would confront people inappropriately.  I am ashamed to say that I can imagine having behaved like those French students.  I had good points to make, but I was unfair towards other people sometimes when I made them.
> 
> So, is it a French thing or not?



As an Irishman - no!


----------



## tvdxer

Personally, I think it's very much a love-hate relationship, based on an inferiority complex.  For many centuries, the French culture and language were recognized as a true mark of civilization.  But in perhaps the last 50 years, the U.S. and the English language gained dominance as the world's language and superpower, through business and military power, as well as through its cultural artifacts (e.g. Hollywood, rap music, etc.) and technological innovations.   Many of these things appear to be very banal and shallow to the French, who see it as all directed towards profit and business rather then as aspiring to something "deeper".  All the French really can do in reaction is complain, detest, and try to act, well, French.  Yet at the same time, beneath their contempt for Americana, they also have a love for it.  I think this is true across all of Europe.  American symbols and media are very widespread there.  Just look at the commercial TV stations; mostly American shows at primetime.


----------



## maxiogee

tvdxer said:
			
		

> Personally, I think it's very much a love-hate relationship, based on an inferiority complex.  For many centuries, the French culture and language were recognized as a true mark of civilization.  But in perhaps the last 50 years, the U.S. and the English language gained dominance as the world's language and superpower, through business and military power, as well as through its cultural artifacts (e.g. Hollywood, rap music, etc.) and technological innovations.   Many of these things appear to be very banal and shallow to the French, who see it as all directed towards profit and business rather then as aspiring to something "deeper".  All the French really can do in reaction is complain, detest, and try to act, well, French.  Yet at the same time, beneath their contempt for Americana, they also have a love for it.  I think this is true across all of Europe.  American symbols and media are very widespread there.  Just look at the commercial TV stations; mostly American shows at primetime.




Has it not occurred to you that they really do object to the quality and quantity of what you export as so-called culture. They feel threatened by it. Hollywood, pop music, and 'American literature' - all are aimed at the lowest common denominator in the capitalistic search to extract the last sou from 'the market'.

To take a prominent example - The Da Vinci Code has been a best seller as a book, both in hardback and paperback and yet, the makers of the film version have felt the need to swamp us with advertising for it. It is impossible to avoid. Are they afraid that there is someone out here who hasn't heard of it? They have also done what Hollywood always does, changed essential parts to 'broaden the appeal'.

Look at Disney… made its name by taking European folktales (not fairytales) which were dark and full of terror and yet wondrously crafted tales with much to recommend them and then they mutilated them, toning them down to 'get the kiddie market' and made them anodyne and bland.


----------



## emma42

Maxiogee, I could not agree MORE.  I suppose a riposte could be "Well, you don't have to watch American films etc etc...".  Sorry, Asda has been taken over by Walmart, and unless I can afford to shop at expensive corner shops, I HAVE to shop at Walmart and be surrounded by Americana (piped music etc).


----------



## cuchuflete

For those who lament the flood of US goods and services to 
France and elsewhere in Europe, take heart!  A large and growing number of those US firms are European-owned.

A&W Root Beer, Miller Lite (supposedly beer), and even Baby Ruth candy bars (owned by Nestle) are all household names in the US. The are produced by European firms. Chrysler is now German owned. France has been a very substantial buyer of US companies that sell to European markets. A good chunk of Hollywood is Japanese owned...I guess the Europeans had to hold their cultural noses and let someone else buy that property. Many of the leading publishing houses in the US are owned by European firms...and sell trashy novels to Europeans.


----------



## emma42

Granted, Cuchu.  And an interesting point about the Japanese in Hollywood.

But I await the day when Clegg's Traditional Corner Shop is on every high street in the globe.  No, I don't, actually - because I'm not a big fat capitalist.


----------



## bernik

tvdxer said:
			
		

> a love-hate relationship, based on an inferiority complex


 I think you are right about the inferiority complex, especially among admirers of the "French State" who keep saying words like "republicain" and "citoyen" (citizen) all the time, people who still like Napoleon and Robespierre, bogus intellectuals, government officials, the news media, the teacher trade unions. All of them intolerant and left wing.



> through its cultural artifacts (e.g. Hollywood, rap music, etc.) and technological innovations. Many of these things appear to be very banal and shallow to the French, who see it as all directed towards profit and business rather then as aspiring to something "deeper"


 I think fifty years ago the French used to be ironic about the material comfort that could be found in the USA or in Scandinavia, as if it was a sign of shallowness. But not any longer. Now, even the French are glad to have a fridge and a shower bath. At one time, the word "americanization" was used to evoke every unpleasant evolution in French society that came along with economic progress. In the same way that the word westernization could now be used in the Near/Middle East.



> aspiring to something "deeper"


 The problem in France, when you  aspire to something "deeper", is that you find too many state-subsidized bogus intellectuals, especially the leftist variety. They are killing intellectual life. You probably have the same problem in American universities, but at least you are lucky not to have a state radio like the French one called "France Culture".



> Just look at the commercial TV stations; mostly American shows at primetime.


 How come the Europeans cannot come up with a funny TV series that will appeal to most people, like for example, the Friends series ? What's so difficult in doing that ?


----------



## emma42

Why on earth would the French have an inferiority complex?  They are an amazing nation of people.  They even have philosophy cafés! And I, for one, am glad if most of the intellectuals are left-wing.  Far rather that than the alternative and what it can lead to (eg Le Pen etc).  They stand up for themselves when, for instance, their wages are threatened, they have a literary and artistic multi-culture second to none.  Their language is beautiful and admired and learned by many...I could go on ad nauseam.

Why on earth should they not aspire to "something deeper"? - this is an admirable trait.

Of course there are problems, but you will find the same problems in most western countries in the new global village.

Sorry, but I can't talk about French comedy programmes because I don't know any.  I do know lots of American ones, though, and some of them are rubbish.

If England counts as Europe, we have some of the funniest TV programmes ever made.  USA remade our The Office because it is so brilliant.


----------



## bernik

_"Why on earth would the French have an inferiority complex?"_

They fail to impress other countries as much as they would like !


_"I, for one, am glad if most of the intellectuals are left-wing."_

The trouble is, most intellectuals in the french media are not very serious.


_"If England counts as Europe, we have some of the funniest TV programmes ever made."_

but English TV programmes probably do not travel as well as American programmes to other countries.


----------



## emma42

bernik, I don't agree with any of that.  Désolée!


----------



## maxiogee

bernik said:
			
		

> How come the Europeans cannot come up with a funny TV series that will appeal to most people, like for example, the Friends series ? What's so difficult in doing that ?



Monty Python
Fawlty Towers
Father Ted
Till Death Us Do Part
Benny Hill

"Friends" was the most boring overstretched set of gags I've come across in a long time. It was formulaic, and ran far past its sell-by date.


----------



## geve

What appeals to most people isn't for you to judge, bernik. There's actually a French show that has been all around the planet: "Sous le soleil". That's not something I'm very proud of, but hey, what can I do?

There are many good shows from the USA, but it's mathematical: there are more shows from the USA, so among all the shows, there are good ones and bad ones. 
I have eclectic tastes, I can watch and enjoy both 'Friends' and 'Father Ted', Spielberg's, Bacri's and Almodovar's movies. I don't feel overwhelmed by American shows, because I choose not to be.


----------



## zebedee

Mod Note:

Lest this thread disintegrate into a long list of excellent European comedies, let me just remind everyone of the topic in hand:



			
				Charlyboy81 said:
			
		

> Que pensez vous de l'anti-américanisme bien franchouillard qui sévit en ces temps de discorde? Est-ce une mode, pensez vous que cela soit justifié par les évenements qui se déroulent en Irak et autres pays du Moyen orient?
> J'aimerais votre avis la dessus.


 (my change of  colouring)


----------



## Isotta

Pour commencer je ne crois pas que le sentiment anti-américain en France soit tout à fait basé sur les événements politiques récents. Il est plutôt un sentiment que date de longtemps. Je crois que la cause est liée au fait que les Etats-Unis et la France sont les deux premières républiques de l'époque moderne, et que leur divergence au niveau religieux, la notion de l'état et la notion de la nation est à l'origine de leur rapport ambivalent.

 Cela dit, critiquer ou même garder une aversion envers les Etats-Unis ne me gêne pas de tout, mais je trouve que les gens n'aiment pas les Etats-Unis pour des raisons malconstruites et peu recherchées au niveau de ce qu'ils perçoivent de la culture américaine. Il existe de meilleures raisons pour se plaindre des Etats-Unis--l'éducation publique, par exemple. 

Since these points have been apparently deemed relevant in the debate, I would like to address them:


			
				maxiogee said:
			
		

> Has it not occurred to you that they really do object to the quality and quantity of what you export as so-called culture. They feel threatened by it. Hollywood, pop music, and 'American literature' - all are aimed at the lowest common denominator in the capitalistic search to extract the last sou from 'the market'.


 James Joyce does a nice job of demonstrating self-commodification with advertisements in Irish newspapers and tabloids, as well as shallow literature from the time in the chapter "Nausicaa." I don't think it is necessarily American. "American literature" to me means Hawthorne, Hemingway, Thoreau, Conrad, Welty, Twain, Williams, Toole... To others and to many foreigners it means Danielle Steele and Dan Brown. That's fine. It means they prefer this kind of literature, that they know about yet ignore the canon of American literature or that they have not had the time or inclination to discover these important American works.

Lowest common denominator doesn't mean much to me in terms of art and literature. Puccini typifies kitsch, simple plots and catchy tunes. Are Puccini fans part of the lowest common denominator? Rossini? Besides, popular isn't bad and should not be a factor in determining what one likes.



			
				maxiogee said:
			
		

> To take a prominent example - The Da Vinci Code has been a best seller as a book, both in hardback and paperback and yet, the makers of the film version have felt the need to swamp us with advertising for it. It is impossible to avoid. Are they afraid that there is someone out here who hasn't heard of it? They have also done what Hollywood always does, changed essential parts to 'broaden the appeal'.


I don't see the the film, its changes in relation to the book or the advertising as reflective of American culture. The above statement to me almost begs the question of whether it was quality literature to begin with, but again that's a personal take. Bad stuff sells. Worse sells better. Nobody has a monopoly on taste, good or bad. Or, whether something sells has little to do with to whether it is good or bad.

Incidentally, a lot of the good stuff produced in the United States doesn't make it out. I hardly recognise any of the American films I see advertised in France. They weren't ones I'd have seen in America. "The Royal Tenenbaums," a film that illustrates youth American humour, was immensely popular amoung the younger generation in the United States, and almost nobody in France had ever heard about it. What you see of American films and books elsewhere would not qualify for a randomly selected sample.



			
				emma42 said:
			
		

> Of course there are problems, but you will find the same problems in most western countries in the new global village.


 Exactly.



			
				emma42 said:
			
		

> Sorry, but I can't talk about French comedy programmes because I don't know any. I do know lots of American ones, though, and some of them are rubbish.


 Every country has rubbish television.



			
				emma42 said:
			
		

> If England counts as Europe, we have some of the funniest TV programmes ever made.


A bit general here. American humor and English humor differ too much in the first place. Even stupid American films are subject to academic study--and they are studied. On the first page of one of his books on sociology and cinema, the well-known sociologist Philippe Corcuff quotes Ludwig Wittgenstein, who says something like, "Les films américains sont souvent considérés bêtes et naïfs. Mais les films anglais, sans naïveté, ne peuvent rien enseigner. J'ai souvent tiré une leçon d'un film bête américain." Question of taste in the end. 

The French don't usually revile me for American films or television, especially as I don't watch television and don't usually know what shows they're talking about. Nor do the French ask me aggressive questions about Bush or the war in Iraq, as they did two years ago. The French seem to realise Bush hasn't much support now. The anit-Americanism in France seems to have gone to status quo again.


----------



## maxiogee

Isotta said:
			
		

> "American literature" to me means Hawthorne, Hemingway, Thoreau, Conrad, Welty, Twain, Williams, Toole... To others and to many foreigners it means Danielle Steele and Dan Brown. That's fine. It means they prefer this kind of literature, that they know about yet ignore the canon of American literature or that they have not had the time or inclination to discover these important American works.



Yes, but… The publishing houses don't promote those authors with even an apppreciable percentage of what they spend promoting Danielle Steele, or Dan Brown, or whoever else is the latest mega-dollar signing.

The people you mention don't know the better authors because they get no exposure to them.


----------



## emma42

Yes, every country has rubbish television, not all American culture is bad etc, but the point is - because of America's immense wealth and military/economic/political power, it does dictate many, many things in our lives, far more than any other country in the world. That is where anti-Americanism comes from. It is not directed (or shouldn't be) at individual American citizens. For goodness sake, it even told my country to bomb Iraq and our Prime Minister did as he was told, because he is terrified of displeasing his master.


----------



## Isotta

maxiogee said:
			
		

> The people you mention don't know the better authors because they get no exposure to them.


 
 Then would it not be "they have not had the time or inclination to discover these important American works?" I know little about Polish literature because I have not taken the time to learn anything about it. I became interested in Irish literature, so I took time to study it.



			
				emma42 said:
			
		

> Yes, every country has rubbish television, not all American culture is bad etc, but the point is - because of America's immense wealth and military/economic/political power, it does dictate many, many things in our lives, far more than any other country in the world. That is where anti-Americanism comes from. It is not directed (or shouldn't be) at individual American citizens.


 
 If you don't like any American culture whatsoever, don't engage in it. It's not difficult to do. The American movies that show all the time at the cinema around the corner wouldn't play if French people didn't watch them.

It's not forced--it's not impirialism. No colonisation involved, and such words baffle me. The United States never had a colonial empire.

 Anyway America will fall in time to make way for someone else's rise. This is all the natural order of things. 



			
				emma42 said:
			
		

> For goodness sake, it even told my country to bomb Iraq and our Prime Minister did as he was told, because he is terrified of displeasing his master.


 
 You would not first blame the Prime Minister?


----------



## emma42

Hi Isotta. The whole point of complaining about Americana is that it is often impossible to avoid. It is not as simple as just not watching American films. Have a look at Posts 46 and 47 for an illustration.

Well, yes, I do blame the Prime Minister as well.

And, I have to disagree on another point. Much of what America does around the globe has many characteristics of imperialism.  This is what I am complaining about.  America thinks the whole world is its colony, England not least.


----------



## cuchuflete

> The United States never had a colonial empire.


 Compared with The British Empire, and those of Spain, France, and other smaller European-owned" empires, that which the US had was quite small, but there was one:

The Philippines, Puerto Rico, Guam and a number of other places were included...Hawaii, now a state, was one.

The modern notion of empire certainly included the Soviet Union, and today there are spheres of economic influence, which, if not precisely empires, share some characteristics.

France still has its reduced colonial holdings, as does the US.

As to the complaints that US firms advertise crappy books and movies, and spend money to do so, this is pretty silly and thin.  All businesses in consumer markets spend money to advertise products.  That includes British and Portuguese and French firms.  Some are more effective purveyors of crap than others, but ultimately, the buyer makes the purchase decision, and bears the responsibility for having made the purchase.  If you are going to blame the seller for putting goods on offer, and alerting the market that they may be bought, then perhaps you should move to a place with no media and very discerning consumers.  

Peugot spent billions of USD purchasing an automobile manufacturer in the US, and advertising their products to the US market.  They failed, and sold out at a loss.  This wasn't imperialism.  It was poor quality execution.  Not only was the advertising badly done, the product was uncompetitive.
Airbus has had great success selling into the US market, because the product is good, and the marketing is effective.
And it has buckets of taxpayer subsidies, just like Boeing, to help out.

If French people didn't buy American made rubbish books and movies, I can only assume that they would by rubbish books and movies made by French or other European firms, as rubbish seems to suit the popular taste of France, just as it does in the US market.  

Tony Blair may have caved in to pressure from W, but the French government, and the Canadian government, and most other governments did not.  That's an internal British failure.
Feel free to blame the US for what it does wrong, but feel equally free to keep the blame at home when that's where it belongs.


----------



## emma42

The fact remains, Cuchu, that I, along with many other people are obliged to shop at "the company store".

I do blame Tony Blair, as well as W, as I have already said.  He didn't "cave in" he said "how high?"


----------



## ceci '79

I hope this is not off-topic, but this discussion brings to my mind a scene from the movie "Le divorce."

A young Frenchman and his American girl are watching French TV together, when they see a commercial for McDonald's. He makes the classical comment about American cultural imperialism and she replies something like "Don't you find it strange that the French feel culturally threatened by a French fry?"


----------



## bernik

I don't believe in total free trade for cultural goods. It tends to destroy cultural diversity. In the end, the local cultural production tends to disappear, everybody on the planet gets to see exactly the same movies, hear the same music, mainly made in the USA. I'm glad we can watch American movies in Europe. But at the same time, I think it is all right to subsidize the unprofitable french movie industry, even though I hate most French movies.


			
				cuchuflete said:
			
		

> but ultimately, the buyer makes the purchase decision, and bears the responsibility for having made the purchase. If you are going to blame the seller for putting goods on offer, and alerting the market that they may be bought, then ...


 I think record companies have agreements with magazines, radio and TV stations. They air the same song over and over for two weeks, and then some listeners will start buying the CDs. With the right amount of advertising, you can sell anything you want. It seems that record companies are able to decide what kind of music we like, instead of us deciding what kind of records they should sell. I don't see advertising as a kind of free expression that should be protected. I would like most of it to stop.
Where I live, what annoys me most is not the record companies, but the CSA, the French equivalent of the American FCC. Thanks to them, we do not have any good radio station, and it is difficult to hear any Breton music on the radio even when you are in Brittany. Now, that's imperialism !


----------



## emma42

Bernik, you are talking my language (literally!)


----------



## ceci '79

emma42 said:
			
		

> Mind you, it may just have been that those particular French people were confrontational. I remember when I was rather "rabid" politically - I would confront people inappropriately. I am ashamed to say that I can imagine having behaved like those French students. I had good points to make, but I was unfair towards other people sometimes when I made them.
> 
> So, is it a French thing or not?


 
Maybe not!  

Could it be then that the French are rather passionate about politics?


----------



## cuchuflete

ceci '79 said:
			
		

> Maybe not!
> 
> Could it be then that the French are rather passionate about politics?



Do young French people behave this way towards all foreign students?  Do they demand to know if an Argentine student is a supporter of Kirschner?  Do they ask if a Spaniard voted for Zapatero or Aznarín?  Would they be polite to a Berlusconi supporter?  Would they care?


----------



## ceci '79

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Do young French people behave this way towards all foreign students? Do they demand to know if an Argentine student is a supporter of Kirschner? Do they ask if a Spaniard voted for Zapatero or Aznarín? Would they be polite to a Berlusconi supporter? Would they care?


 
Well, the U.S. are more powerful and act on a larger scale (a global scale, actually), so I guess they could find their politics more interesting / engaging / indignating ...


----------



## cuchuflete

ceci '79 said:
			
		

> Well, the U.S. are more powerful and act on a larger scale (a global scale, actually), so I guess they could find their politics more interesting / engaging / indignating ...



Of course I fully agree with you, but then the "they are passionate about politics" doesn't explain the behavior. It's specifically directed at the US, for the reason you gave, or it's a generality that includes neighboring countries, or nations in general.  I suspect it's the former, and that doesn't bother me at all.  

If a student were to ask me what I think of Bush, I would simply reply that I hold the same opinion of him that I have of another very right-wing President of a Republic, the co-prince of 
Andorra, Mr. Chirac  With the exception of Iraq, they have some very similar policy positions.


----------



## ceci '79

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Of course I fully agree with you, but then the "they are passionate about politics" doesn't explain the behavior. _Sharp observation!_ It's specifically directed at the US, for the reason you gave, or it's a generality that includes neighboring countries, or nations in general. I suspect it's the former, and that doesn't bother me at all. _Yes, I suspect that too... _
> 
> If a student were to ask me what I think of Bush, I would simply reply that I hold the same opinion of him that I have of another very right-wing President of a Republic, the co-prince of
> Andorra, Mr. Chirac With the exception of Iraq, they have some very similar policy positions.


 
I conclude that you have a greater diplomatic adroitness than me or the American students I observed...  

Berlusconi was the secondary target of their criticism (although to a much lesser extent), probably because he was very much in sync with Bush. The difference was that, when criticizing Berlusconi, they were not inquisitory/accusatory towars me or the other Italians personally. They stated their opinion, and that was pretty much it. They did not "test" us or expect us to take a stand or to make a public apology on behalf of our country and our government...  It was not as "tricky" and inquisitory, like a quiz...


----------



## Brioche

tvdxer said:
			
		

> Yet at the same time, beneath their contempt for Americana, they also have a love for it. ... American symbols and media are very widespread there. Just look at the commercial TV stations; mostly American shows at primetime.


 
A lot of US material is on tv around the world because it is *cheap*.

The American shows have already made a profit on US tv, and are sold to foreign tv broadcasters for less than their production costs.


----------



## Isotta

bernik said:
			
		

> I think record companies have agreements with magazines, radio and TV stations. They air the same song over and over for two weeks, and then some listeners will start buying the CDs.


 I don't think that radio practise is legal in the United States--I think you must formally announce the sponsorship? Perhaps someone knows.



> Where I live, what annoys me most is not the record companies, but the CSA, the French equivalent of the American FCC. Thanks to them, we do not have any good radio station, and it is difficult to hear any Breton music on the radio even when you are in Brittany. Now, that's imperialism !


Je ne suis pas ta référence--d'où vient cet imperialisme ? Le gouvernement français qui ne vous donne pas le droit aux émissions en breton, ou parles-tu des accords faits avec des entreprises américaines ou japonaises ou...? Je ne suis pas sûre de comprendre. 



			
				emma42 said:
			
		

> And, I have to disagree on another point. Much of what America does around the globe has many characteristics of imperialism.


I don't mean to be demanding, but would you please give specific examples?



> America thinks the whole world is its colony, England not least.


This kind of statement makes a productive answer improbable, as it assumes one can know what a country thinks (begs the question). 



			
				ceci '79 said:
			
		

> Berlusconi was the secondary target of their criticism (although to a much lesser extent), probably because he was very much in sync with Bush. The difference was that, when criticizing Berlusconi, they were not inquisitory/accusatory towars me or the other Italians personally. They stated their opinion, and that was pretty much it. They did not "test" us or expect us to take a stand or to make a public apology on behalf of our country and our government...



Well, were they in your country? The French who studied at my American university were much gentler about politics than others I had met the summer before had been. During the recent student strikes, student assemblies met to discuss and vote on whether the school should be closed. One Italian girl spoke against closing down the school, saying it was undemocratic and remedial, and the crowd started yelling things about Berlusconi and calling her a fascist. That was an unsual circumstance though, and the students were rather excitable at that time. 

Bon, en français maintenant comme cette discussion les concerne le plus.
C'est étrange, leur intérêt dans les Etats-Unis, comme 80 pourcent doit être une aversion. A leur place, je ne participerais pas dans une culture que je détestais. C'est possible de s'abstenir des émissions ou des films américains. Je le fais en France actuellement. Les Etats-Unis ont résisté l'influence anglaise au début. Thoreau, Emerson, Webster et d'autres ont lutté pour un nouveau style américain, une façon d'écrire qui montrerait une rupture avec l'Angleterre, comme les écrivains anglais dominaient le champ littéraire aux Etats-Unis à cette époque-là. 

Les Etats-Unis ne souffrent pas du linguicisme autant que quelques autres--à mon avis ils ont une attitude bien moins puristes envers leur propre culture et la langue anglaise--et peut-être que c'est pour cette raison que j'ai du mal à comprendre pourquoi la présence même des films et des émissions à la télé mettent en danger une autre culture totale--et si c'est le cas, pourquoi pas s'en abstenir ?

En tout cas il existe la certitude que chaque empire tombe. La France la connaît. L'empire capitaliste américain, si vous voulez, tombera aussi. Avant longtemps on regardera des films chinois, par exemple, et ce n'est pas une régression. Peut-être que le _vulgare_ anglais deviendra vingt pourcent chinois, comme il est déjà 60% français, et d'autres parties sont allemandes, celtes, vieux norse, etc.


----------



## bernik

Isotta said:
			
		

> I don't think that radio practise is legal in the United States--I think you must formally announce the sponsorship? Perhaps someone knows.


You cannot really prevent the cooperation between the record producers and the radio stations. It works in many different ways. For example, many radio stations want to stay close to what is hot at the moment, and what is hot depends partly on advertising.


> Je ne suis pas ta référence--d'où vient cet imperialisme ? Le gouvernement français qui ne vous donne pas le droit aux émissions en breton, ou parles-tu des accords faits avec des entreprises américaines ou japonaises ou...? Je ne suis pas sûre de comprendre.


Je faisais allusion à la politique du gouvernement français. C'est vrai que je mélange des problèmes différents.
I think that talking about American cultural imperialism is an exaggeration. After all, European countries can take measures to protect their own cinema, music, and cultural life if they want to. On the other hand, in France, we have real imperialism. The government has decided that languages other than French should just disappear. For example, if you live in Nantes or Rennes, the two main cities in Brittany, you will hear almost no Breton language or Breton music on the radio. It is interesting to see that most French people who dislike minority languages are great fans of anti-american rhetoric.

Here is a good sum-up of the situation of indigenous minorities in france. It was written in 2002 by Henri Jeanjean, who comes from Occitania (=South of France).
www.anu.edu.au/NEC/Jeanjean_paper.pdf


----------



## rsweet

Your comments about radio stations in Brittany surprised me, bernik. I thought there was a great renaissance of the Breton language going on. My friend's young niece goes to a school where she takes certain subjects in Breton. (Ironically, she is also learning English in school.) I went to bookstores where most of the books were in Breton. I visited a town (Langonnet ?) where all the signs were in Breton. I know there are music festivals in many cities with Breton music, so I'm surprised it isn't on the radio.


----------



## bernik

We have only one or two percent of the children learning some Breton at school. It can be seen as a great victory, compared to the situation 30 years ago, but it is not enough to prevent the language from disappearing. We need help from the school system because the language has not been transmitted to the newer generations. Now, only old people speak breton. We do have some breton on local radios, but it covers only part of the territory.


----------



## emma42

bernik, I totally sympathise with you about the situation with Breton.  There is a similar situation here with Cornish, a dying language of the south west of England.


----------



## bernik

_" There is a similar situation here with Cornish "_

which by the way, is a language very close to Breton !
I think the government in London is no longer hostile to the revival of Cornish.


----------



## emma42

That is good news.  I don't actually know all about the current situation.  You probably know more than I.  We are going off-topic!


----------



## zebedee

*Mod Note*:

If you'd like to discuss the current situation in Brittany and compare the use of Breton with the use of other minority languages, please open another thread to do so.

May I remind everyone *for the second time* of the topic of this thread:



> Posté par *Charlyboy81*
> _Que pensez vous de l'anti-américanisme bien franchouillard qui sévit en ces temps de discorde? Est-ce une mode, pensez vous que cela soit justifié par les évenements qui se déroulent en Irak et autres pays du Moyen orient?
> J'aimerais votre avis la dessus._


If this thread goes off topic a third time, it will be understood that the thread has worn itself out and it will be closed.

Thank you for your cooperation,

zebedee
Culture Moderator


----------

