|
| The
Editorial page of the Webmaster (1) |
WARNING : On this website, I am trying to give balanced points
of view. BUT : as a Frenchman, I have my own strong personal
opinions. I don't know if they are representative but they are
mine. See also my resume.
Philippe ROCHEFORT
|
|
Other people's opinions I share...
|
 Read Rochefort's "Diary of an old student" |
- On French
anti-semitism : reinforcing stereotypes : on Jan.19, 2007, several events took place : Segolene
Royal, the Socialist candidate, said (once more) something stupid,
a French chef in New York was taken to court by some of his employees
and the President of France organized a huge ceremony in the
Pantheon in the honour of the French "Righteous among the
nations". The U.S. Press (I.H.T. and most likely NY.Times)
commented at length the first two and did not mention the third
one (which was on the first page of all French newspapers). Therefore,
for the U.S. press, it will still be very convenient in the next
twenty years to keep talking about the shameful Vichy regime,
the anti-semitic French people, the cowardly quasi-nazi French,
etc.. ; U.S. readers will never know that France is the country
with the largest number of "Righteous" designated by
the Yad Vaschem Memorial in Israel and who saved thousands of
lives. But it is so comfortable to reproduce, once and for all,
the stereotype on anti-semitic France.... The American press
lies by omission. Read the
whole story. Back to top of the page.
- Leave
history to historians. A controversy in France (Nov. 2005)
about the " positive aspects of colonization " illustrates,
in my view, a succession of mistakes from all political sides.
- First mistake : apologies for
crimes of the past : in 2001 the Left Government, willing to
apologize for slave trade (abolished in 1848...) issued a law
(Loi Taubira, May 21, 2001) which stipulated that " ...slave trade
was a crime against mankind... " and "...school programs
and research programs will give to trade and slavery the significant
importance they deserve..." (Art.2)
- Second mistake : political correctness
: referring to colonization, French textbooks systematically
emphasize the unforgivable aspects ("statut de l'indigène",
forced labor,... ) and hardly ever mention any progress in education,
health and infrastructure
- Third mistake : a stupid law
(February 23, 2005) : under the pressure of "pieds
noirs" associations, the parliament passed a law that
stipulated "...school programs must acknowledge the positive
role of France overseas, particularly in Northern Africa, and
devote the place they deserve to the history and the sacrifice
of the soldiers born in these territories..."
- Fourth mistake : a typically
French controversy : after the riots in suburbs, the Parliament
refused to cancel the above (stupid) law, an Association of French
Blacks was founded, the "Pieds Noirs" said they are
being exiled a second time, etc...
I totally disagree with everything above :
- There is no doubt that colonialism
was an unacceptable domination of European nations, including
France, on other people. See my page on colonisalism.
- Evaluating pros and cons of
an historical event does not belong to the domain of the law
: it is the job of historians. The role of the law is
to fix the rules of social life and establish what is forbidden
(for instance, of course, negationism or racism).
- As far as I am concerned, I
am ready to apologize, if appropriate, only for events which
took place after 1962, the first year I could vote and do
something about them. I do not ask the Italian Prime Minister
to apologize for what the Romans did to the Gauls twenty centuries
ago, whether good or bad (after all, Julius Caesar made maybe
one million slaves, some of them being probably my ancestors...).
(2006) Back to top of the page.
- About Executive Life : it is a
shocking racket, a perfect example of racist and greedy anti-French
strategy, due largely to the political ambitions of a handful
of Californian attorneys, all that made possible by the American
judicial system, which proved very biased and highly subject
to political pressure. It is interesting to observe that, although
the deal involved many American executives, American lawyers
and American companies, not ONE American citizen was prosecuted.
Only Frenchmen were. Very strange, isn't it ? (2003) Back to
top of the page.
- The
35-hour week illustrates
several VERY French aspects. In 1997, the Socialist party won
the majority, quite unexpectedly : they decided to do something
spectacular to reduce unemployment.
- They believed that if you share
the work between more people, you create jobs (first mistake
: labor is not a cake to share ; wrong understanding of economy)
;
- they thought that people would
be happy to enjoy more leisure (second mistake : the working
class lost paid overtime which was made very costly to employers
and therefore did not forgive the Socialists for that ; wrong
understanding of the working class)
- they expected big companies
to implement the law and create jobs accordingly (third mistake
: they implemented the law and increased productivity, with very
few new jobs ; wrong understanding of big business)
- they expected small companies
to create jobs too (fourth mistake : they closed their shops
earlier every day making customers unhappy ; wrong understanding
of math : you cannot hire one tenth of a new salesperson in a
shop)
- they believed that the world
would admire the unique model of a very human, social and efficient
society (fifth mistake : the world thinks that we are crazy ;
wrong understanding of the whole world)
Globally speaking, this reform did not create jobs and made everybody
unhappy (even the civil servants, because many of them already
worked less than 35 hours a week...). And the Socialists lost
in the next elections in 2002 ! (2003) Back to top
of the page.
- About French bashing : Collateral-bashing is associating
something very negative to the French. For instance, you put
in the same article " Jack the Ripper killed nine women.(and
further along) .. Jacques Chirac declares that it is time to
subsidize cheese " : the reader may conclude that Jack the
Ripper was subsidized by France. I give in " Documents
" two examples of this " collateral bashing "
:
- One by William Safire, a renowned
anti-French columnist from the New York Times : in his column
(IHT 7/1/2004) he says (more or less)
1. Jacques Chirac declares that it is not President Bush's business
to declare that Turkey should be a member of the European Union
(may I humbly observe that France never suggested that Cuba or
Colombia should join NAFTA...)
2. Chirac is sure that he is right
3. Being sure of something is always difficult : for instance,
the NYT was sure that massive destruction weapons existed and
they did not : we admitted we were wrong
4. Conclusions (implicit) : the NYT is the best newspaper in
the world and the French are traitors. Please explain to me how
the brain of Mr.Safire works !
- Another example is provided
by two messages
from a visitor (obviously a very nice and warmhearted person)
:
1. First message : "America saved France from Nazism and
they should be more grateful, etc ; therefore I hate the French"
2. Second message : "you have to understand that when you
see the toll of 9/11"
3. Conclusion (implicit) : "the French supported terrorism
and the crime of WTC." Wow.... (2005) Back to top
of the page.
- About Islam : it took
France several centuries to get rid of the Catholic church in
everybody's life and I consider the 1905 law separating the church
from the state as a major step toward peace and democracy in
a secular society : I am ready to fight for it against anybody,
including Islamic fanatics. I respect all religions and I refuse
to let them interfere in the life of our society. When some Americans
say that the French are anti-religious, I'd like to ask them
the following question : in the USA, what would be the socially
acceptable answers if a minority (for instance: African-American,
Poles or Japanese) demanded:
1- sick women to be treated only by women doctors ;
2- the right to polygamy and the official status of polygamous
families with regard to public benefits granted to families ;
3- the right for a husband to accompany a woman student to an
exam, sit at the same table and be with her when she is being
interrogated by the professor ;
4- in high school, no sports and no biology for girls, the possibility
to refuse the program in history for all ;
5- the right for girls to wear an islamic veil in schools ;
6- idem for public servants, including teachers in public schools
and cops;
7- the right to submit girls to excision and infibulation ;
8- special hours of admission, only for women, in public swimming
pools; etc....
Please, just answer "I'd accept" or "I wouldn't
accept" to these 8 questions. To know more : see recent
provocative behaviors
in the name of "religious freedom" and see the mini-bio
of Tariq Ramadan.
(2005) Back to top of the page.
| About
political correctness
: I understand that, now, in the USA,
you have to say Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas not
to offend people for whom Chrismas does not mean anything. At
the same time George W.Bush keeps saying "Let's pray God"
or "God bless America" with no consideration for people
for whom the idea of God has no meaning ; this is not logical...
If I were American, I would feel offended. |
 |
There is definitely TOO
MUCH religious fanatism and intolerance in this world : it
needs more "laicité".
(2004) Back to top of the page.
|
- Which US President would the French like
the best ? Traditionnally,
the French judge US candidates by French concepts. For instance,
if they vote in France for the Left they prefer a Democrat because
they think he is closer to their values. As far as I am concerned,
my preference would be for a US President who has travelled abroad
and knows at least one foreign language. I would vote for the
candidate who knows the best international issues. It would ensure
that, being the president of the most powerful country of the
world, he/she knows that the rest of the world does exist and
he/she has an idea of what other people think. Then he/she would
not invade and destroy a country "to bring democracy"
and fight weapons which do not exist. Regarding US domestic issues,
like health care or energy
policy, he/she could also consider what exists in other countries
and works better than in the USA. Do not say : mind your own
business : your country is so powerful that what the President
of the USA thinks and does is also MY business ! (2007)Back to
top of the page.
- Racist America ? Recently (Oct.2006), I met a young Frenchman who
works in a small town in Missouri. He speaks good English and
graduated from Cambridge. Every day, his colleagues say hello
to him by throwing their arms up in a surrender gesture. They
say it just friendly and there is nothing mean in this gesture
since it is well-known that the French always surrender. Of course,
if he was Jew they would not make a gesture of greediness, if
he was Black they would not make a gesture of lazziness, etc..
But he is French and this is just a "joke" : everybody
knows that Americans are not racists.... On the contrary, they
fight racism everywhere in the world, especially in France where
they constanly lecture the French on anti-Semitism. I am sick
and tired of seeing so many Americans consider French-bashing
just like a good "joke" : it is just pure racism. Calling
it a "joke" is what people used to say in Germany in
the 1920s about the then very common "Jewish jokes"....
More about French-bashing
and the US
press. (2006) Back to top of the page.
- Rankings.... : In " Doing
Business ", the World Bank ranks countries according
to their compliance with U.S. business culture. The World
Economic Forum ranks countries according to their competitiveness.
Every year, the University of Shanghaï
ranks universities according to their publications in English.
These rankings are biased and over-estimate American criteria.
Here is an example of what could be my (very biased!!) ranking
of "The Cultural Level of Countries". Let's say that
my criteria would be Universities, cheeses, French and wine.
The respective ratings are :
| Score : 0 to 5 |
USA |
France |
| Quality of universities |
5 |
3 |
| Understanding of cheeses |
1 |
4 |
| Level of French spoken |
1 |
4 |
| Consumption of wine |
1 |
5 |
Average : USA = 2, France = 4. France wins !
Do you think that my criteria do not adequately cover what is
commonly understood as "cultural level" and that I
elaborated my ranking only to prove that France is superior ?
Really ? I am a very serious person, I have a doctoral degree
in econometry. You should trust me as much as you trust the World
Bank, shouldn't you ?
The next time you see the ranking of countries on anything, look
carefully at the choice of criteria ! (2006) Back to top
of the page.
- About the American press :
when I think of all these moralizing stories I heard over years
about fact-finding journalism, about the independent power of
the press and its contribution to democracy, about the absolute
separation between reporting facts and expressing opinions, about
the obligation of being totally free from any governmental influence,
etc , I just crack up as I watch Fox News or read the International
Herald Tribune. The Iraq War will have been the end of that myth
: there is no longer an American model for the press. The American
press expresses the views of the government and the big business
of its country as much as in any other country in the world.
Regarding the Iraq war, when, later, the US press had to admit
that it had reported wrong facts, it did not apologize for all
the anti-French columns which had been "based" on them
("Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in
re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged - or failed to
emerge", in the NY Times reported by IHT, May 27, 2004).
I remember a student who asked me this question, after a talk
on France : "Is there liberty for the Press in France
?"" (Univ.of Missouri, 2000).... (2004) Back to
top of the page.
- About Algeria : to have
an idea of what Algeria means to France, read the followingf
(factual) story, and then read a fable, transposed in the American
context : In 1830 France decided to conquer Algeria to create
new land to develop for her farmers, open local population to
progress and civilization and put an end to the attacks of the
pirates which made trade dangerous. After a few years of resistance
and ambushes, the Algerians were conquered and Algeria became
constitutionnally part of France. Thousands of French immigrants
developed the country very successfully : farmers, workers, entrepreneurs,
civil servants, Local language, culture and religion were maintained
and protected but the French influence was of course dominant.
After 130 years, a war for independence broke out. It was a very
ugly war on both sides. France won from a military standpoint
but lost politically, due to the support that Algerian insurgents
obtained from many countries, including the USA, and France had
to accept to give independence to Algeria. 100% of people of
French origin, almost a million, most of them having been in
Algeria for 3 generations or more and having never been to France,
had to leave, often with only one bag of personal belongings
and they moved to France where they settled. As part of the peace
treaty, between one and two million Algerian Arabs were allowed
to emigrate to France to find jobs. Discovered by French companies,
the petrol was nationalized by the new Algerian government.
In the fable, just change France for USA, Algeria for Arizona
and imagine... In the 1830s the USA purchased Arizona to create
new land to develop for farmers, open local population to progress
and civilization and put an end to the attacks of the tribes
which made trade dangerous. After a few years of resistance and
ambushes, the Navajos were conquered and Arizona became constitutionnally
part of the USA. Millions of American immigrants developed the
country very successfully : farmers, workers, entrepreneurs,
civil servants, Local language, culture and religion were maintained
and protected but the American influence was of course dominant.
After 130 years, a war for independence broke out. It was a very
ugly war on both sides. The USA won from a military standpoint
but lost politically, due to the support that Navajo insurgents
obtained from many countries, including France, and the USA had
to accept to give independence to Arizona. 100% of people of
American origin, almost five million, most of them having been
in Arizona for 3 generations or more and having never been to
other parts of the USA, had to leave, often with only one bag
of personal belongings and they moved to other parts of the USA
where they settled. As part of the peace treaty, one million
Navajos were allowed to emigrate to the USA to find jobs. Discovered
by American companies, the petrol was nationalized by the new
Navajo government. It looks pretty stange, doesn't it ? Back
to top of the page.
- In the US press, whenever you encounter
the word "Gallic" in an
article, change it into "Jewish" or "Black"
and read the sentence again. If it looks OK, keep reading. If
it looks horrible, you are reading the New York Times or the
Wall Street Journal : trash it. Now, if you want to see what
the Romans wrote about the Gauls, click
here : you could write it about the French! (2004) Back to
top of the page.
- About the war in Iraq : it reminds
me of the Algerian
war in the 1950s and what was called the " Bataille
d'Alger " : the French army won it but lost the war ; never
humiliate people, especially Arabs who have a lot of pride. Unfortunately,
the American war turned the way we had predicted it would : a
total disaster and more hate against America. We too had our
stupid war (and even more than one) and the Americans should
have listened to their French friends... Regarding what the people
of this region might think from bringing democracy and freedom
through an invasion, I'd just like to quote Donald Rumsfeld in
2003 ("contrary to many armies in the world, the US did
not come to conquer and occupy but to liberate"), British
General F.S.Maude in Iraq in 1917 ("our armies do not
come in your cities and in your countries as conquerors or ennemies
but as liberators") or Napoleon in Egypt in 1798 ("we
come to restore your rights and punish usurpers"). Three
years after the beginning of this absurd invasion, we can evaluate
the soundness of this policy. It is always useful to study history...
And now, what about what was said about France and the French
in 2003 (cowards, ungrateful, traitors,...) and all this good
wine stupidly spilled down American gutters... I do not expect
to read in the American press anything like "We should have
listened to the (d... )French instead of insulting them..."
but still, it would be kind of fair-play... An American reader
wrote to the Internationa Herald Tribune (Feb.17, 2007) : "Now
that the majority of the American people have spoken out against
the war in Iraq and Congress has come to the same conclusion,
isn't it about time someone has the courtesy to apologize to
France and President Jacques Chirac ? We Americans were not supposed
to eat French fries or drink Bordeaux, and we were told the French
were traitors. Certainly someone in the government should come
out and say we were mistaken". (2007) Back to top
of the page.
- If you disagree with my opinions and the way I express
them, please email
me ! If you enjoyed
them, read Harriet Welty Rochefort's books on the French : at
the end of each chapter, she interviews me on each subject (French
attitudes, education, food, money, etc...)
- More to come...
|
Some opinions
I share....
- Throwing in the towel... In a very tongue-in-cheek letter to the International
Herald Tribun (July 2, 2005) that I wish I had written myself,
G.Vernet writes : "In response to recent columns by Thomas
Friedman : Being French, I am an enemy of the USA, I am also
an ugly protectionist ; I have delusions of past grandeur ; and
I live in a failed state with an over-regulated economy and closed
borders. We have a totally outdated social system that is not
even a system after all, and certainly not social. I am unemployed,
like everybody else here, but I live in comfort by retrieving
benefits from the bankrupt welfare state. I am not looking for
a job because I am too afraid to find one. I am ashamed when
I read Friedman's column with religious fervor in copies of the
IHT that are left behind by American tourists in Paris. I can
only hope that my country will soon embrace globalization, the
American economic model and adopt English as its mother tongue
and the US dollar as a currency. When I see the benefits of an
American invasion elsewhere, I also wish that the USA could send
a few divisions here (we shall surrender immediately if we are
not on a long week end) and occupy France until it is purged
of its socialist mentality and its encroached racism and anti-Semitism.
Friedman could write a new constitution in which our daughters
would be required to do their homework so that Indian and Chinese
little boys and girls do not pinch their jobs in the future.
Alas, I know that America's war machine has been too busy lately.
I wish the USA every success, but knowing that America won't
be able to come and rescue us anytime soon, my family and I I
have decide to commit suicide by eating cheese without any wine
until we die. Maybe this will set an example and the French will
reform by themselves." Back
to top of the page.
|
- About insular America : In a letter to the IHT Dec.23, 2006, Graham L.
writes : "...I have a modest suggestion for an amendment
to the US Constitution : any candidate for the presidency should
be required to have lived outside the USA for at least 12 consecutive
months. This would ensure, at the very least, exposure to opinions
and attitudes other than those in common circulation within the
USA, and, at best, could lead to the formulation of a more mature
approach to foreign polucy." (2006) Back to top
of the page.
- More to come....
|
|
To table
of contents
To my family website
and its genealogy pages
Back to home
page
|
For more on intercultural
differences, order Harriet Welty Rochefort's
books :
- "French Toast, An American in Paris Celebrates
The Maddening Mysteries of the French",
St.Martin's Press, New York, 1999
- "French Fried, The Culinary Capers of An American
in Paris", St.Martin's Press,
New York, 2001
More on Harriet's books (excerpts, upcoming
events, testimonials, etc..)
|
site still under
construction |
| Please
email
me |
If you like this site, please bookmark it or create
a link! |
To top
of the page |
|