Our Debt to the French
I know that it’s not fashionable in America these days to say anything nice about the French. Republican web sites are still promoting bumper stickers that advocate the bombing of France by the American military, as a matter of fact.
However, it’s a simple matter of history that the American people owe a large debt of gratitude to the people of France. It is, after all, the French who presented the Statue of Liberty to the American people as a gift. Even though (and perhaps especially because) George W. Bush has used the War of Terror as a pretext to refuse Americans the right to enter the famous landmark, the Statue of Liberty is a symbol of how people can work across international borders, and even across oceans, in the name of liberty.
Our debt to France goes back further than that, however. Who could forget the way that the Marquis De Lafayette came to the American colonies to support our fight for independence? Well, apparently, the Republicans can, but that’s not the point. The point is that the French helped us Americans gain our very nationhood, not to mention our liberty.
So, at this time when so many Republicans are busy threatening attacks on the French, and executing attacks on the liberty guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, in the First Amendment to the Constitution, I think that it’s appropriate to reflect back in history upon the words of the Marquis De Lafayette himself, and what he had to say about America and its liberty. The words of the Marquis:
“If the liberties of the American people are ever destroyed, they will fall by the hands of the clergy.”
It is interesting that the French originated the “liberty Tree”. True, Napoleon had them planted wherever he went as a “liberator” but they were uprooted and replaced with a cross.
I have a Bill Mauldin cartoon which shows the statue of liberty, torch upraised, giving light. Outside the light is a monstrous, menacing creature. Crouched by the figure of Liberty is a person labled “Hysteria” which is saying, “Maybe it will go away if we put out the light.” That was published 1 May 1961. I guess nothing really changes.
It is interesting that the French originated the “liberty Tree”. True, Napoleon had them planted wherever he went as a “liberator” but they were uprooted and replaced with a cross.
I have a Bill Mauldin cartoon which shows the statue of liberty, torch upraised, giving light. Outside the light is a monstrous, menacing creature. Crouched by the figure of Liberty is a person labled “Hysteria” which is saying, “Maybe it will go away if we put out the light.” That was published 1 May 1961. I guess nothing really changes.
Oh, to be sure, the French are not perfect. I merely wished to show another perspective on the French relationship with America, in a way that is associated with current events in the USA that tend toward anti-liberty promotion of religion, even to the extent that one of those judges that Bill Frist is trying to push through the Senate has declared that she regards America’s fundamentalist cullture as at war with secular America - and she openly said that she is a partisan in this war, on the side of the fundamentalists.
Talk about activist judges! I am tempted to ask the rhetorical question: Why in the world would the Democrats NOT approve of putting such a person in a lifetime position in the federal courts?
Okay…Let’s be reasonable about this: Are the French our enemies? No. They may be arrogant and often obnoxious (Quite a bit like us,eh?) but they are not now nor have they ever been our enemies. In fact, they’ve always been among our staunchest allies.
Question: If they are really our allies, then why are the Neocons in such an uproar about their behavior? Easily answered: They committed the one BIG sin–They DISAGREED with the NEOCONS! (Gasp!)
Question: Why does everybody who disagree with the Neocons get labeled as the enemy? Answer: Because, in any police state, disagreement with the current Party Line is a Capital Offense.
Question: Sinc when do we live in a Police State? Answer: Give ‘em a bit more time…..
But they disagreed purely over money. We used their intelligence as a reason to go to war. The only reason they did not support us was because they were making money off of Saddaam. They were even giving him intelligence on us…providing him with opinions as to wether we would atack or not…and they were wrong. Does that sound like an allie to you?
Hoosier Texan, President Bush and his team made up their own “intelligence” - they didn’t need the French to give them bad intelligence. Even a year after the invasion and occupation turned into a quagmire, Dick Cheney was saying that he had “secret evidence” he couldn’t tell us about that proved that the Iraqis had weapons of mass destruction.
The main point of this article is that the Republicans’ violent fury at France is irrational, and that if we look back in American history, some French voices have had some very prescient things to say about the kind of theocratic attack on American liberty that we are currently witnessing.
Truman,
Will you stop being unfair to Hoosier Texan? He knows what he knows because he personally heard it from Jacques Chirac. He and Jacques are best buds — to Hoosier, Chirac is known as “Jacques, le petit jambon” — and they talk about the reasons Chirac does things all that he does. So it must be true. Hoosier has the inside line on what the French really think.
Well, okay. The logical force of your argument compels me to comply. But I want to know just one thing. What is an “allie”, and why should I be concerned about whether or not France is an “allie”. I had a friend named Allie once, and she had gone to Paris when she was young, but I didn’t regard this as a problem. Was I missing something?
H. T., one of the things that “mah fellow amarkins” (fellow Texan of yours used to talk that way, was president when I went in the army)forget is that France and the other European countries, are small. They have finite resources, and if you would real Le Monde, Figaro, or many other French literary organs, you found a very interesting question which was asked, “Who is going to pay for this, and what do we get for our centime?” This is, of course, a paraphrase, but this was the question which the “demos”, people who actually live in a sort of functioning “democracy” ask, and expected answers. Didn’t hear this from any of the Pompous Fart’s Roundtables on any of the news shows from either Right or Left. Didn’t hear ANYONE who asked that question, and they were as scarce as rockinghorse shit, get any answer at all. I guess for our upper crusts, democracy as a concept is noble, pure, but not to be sullied by removing it from it’s box.
Nice one, Sarge. I agree: sometimes democracy can be messy — it means that people will piss us off and say rude things, but that’s the price of true freedom, not the trite all-march-together “freedom” Bush tosses out as a throwaway line in some speech.
HT one of the many things that you don’t seem to get is the fact that sometimes our alleged “leadership” has it’s own agenda…and, often it isn’t until MUCH later that we find out the truth. By then, of course, the damage is done, the “leadership” is long gone, and the citizenry is left to pick up the tab. We went through this same game 30-40 years back in a little country in SE Asia…an had the same results. When will people like you get it? This fiasco NEVER NEEDED TO HAPPEN! There were no terrorist training camps, no WMD’s, no aggressive actions, no Saddam-Osama alliance (Osama considered Saddam a “wicked person, and a sinner in the eyes of Allah”) The French knew this, and they tried to tell us that all we would succeed in doing would be to completely piss off the entire Islamic world…and that is exactly what has happened. Yeah, they made a lot of money off Saddam…so did we, in the 1980’s when they were at war with Iran. Go read a history book.
Mike, what you SUGGEST is not fact, only what you think…sorry. It also appears that JM thinks HE knows what everyone is thinking instead of the other way around. In fact, when JM can’t answer to something, he starts down a path of attacks without addressing issues brought up by the other side. Truman, well he/she lost the religion argument they tried to make and won’t address facts presented either. Now R-42 and Sarge (and Mike), I can respect you because you make me think and research…thank you for that.
No, Hoosier Texan, the point is you can’t know what “the French” think. The point, however, is so obvious that I tried to dilute it with a bit of humor.
How is “le petit Jambon,” anyway?
Bleh. The French are fine. Having a bit of a hard time what with their government and police force being moronic and all, but the French people I’ve met have all been pleasant and friendly people.
And Hoosier; America still has trade links that support some of the dictatorships in Africa, and if that’s not just for money then I don’t know why.
Why are you asking about my little ham anyways you sick bastard JM!!! I don’t care WHAT the French think. I know what they have done. It’s fact. Here’s another fact. The day progressives take over is the day I kiss your Jambon…cause it’s never gonna happen in my lifetime!
Oooh, JM, hit a sore spot!
What the French have done… Well, quite a history of overthrowing former power…
Americans have… Owned slaves… Killed black people… Opposed civil rights… Opposed women’s rights… Attacked Vietnam… Attacked Iraq… Sponsored African dictatorships… Killed Americans… Been general cheap skates for hundreds of years…
Hey! Who cares what Americans THINK, that’s what they’ve DONE!
Let’s ignore the individual differences of how some of them had fuck all to do with it and act like they’re traitors as a country! Woo!
Not that you’re generalising at all there, Hoosey.
Hoosier T. - you are being ridiculous! I know! I am French. The people here are showing a more sane attitude, unlike your president. Truman, thank you for a very articulate, solid and reasonable presentation.
Hoooweee! Somebody is feeling a little insecure tonight in Texas. Or Indiana. Can’t figure out which.
A little French singing, n’est-ce pas?
J’aime la jambon et la sausise!
J’aime la jambon, c’est bon!
J’aime encore mieux, les cuisses d’la grosse Alice,
J’aime la jambon, c’est bon.
No, HT, what I stated is not a matter of my own personal opinion. And, if you watched something besides Faux News, perhaps you would know this. Fact: No WMD’s, no overt acts of aggression (if someone had placed the sanctions on the US that were placed on Iraq,we would have shot at the foreigners patrolling in our airspace!), no Osama-Saddam link…and the conclusions I reached and expressed, came, not from my fertile imagination, but from a long observation of political power as it manifests itself here in the USA. Like I said, go read a history book. If you do, you’ll find that we have here a long and well-documented history of our leaders telling us one reason for their actions, when, in fact, there were other ulterior motives in play. Really, there is nothing new under the sun.
Eee, again with the calling Hoosey HT; that time I thought it was for me… Bleh.
Excellent thoughts in this article, Truman. Religion - “the clergy” is a threat to democracy because it is almost always undemocratic.
I often wonder why people disregard what is said right in front of them. Bin Ladin wrote a very detailed manifesto as to what he wanted to do, why he wanted to do it, and so far it is working perfectly. He was quite wrong, of course, that the Islamic world would unite against the infidel, he was wrong that they would “win”. Millions of people will be effected, ruin and suffering for everyone involved but the neocons and folks like bin Ladin.
HT, I can tell you, be very careful about what the higher ups say they want. Before his death my father told me a very interesting story. He was a counter intelligence officer (I once told him maybe he was so good at his job that it rubbed off and that was the reason for my poor scholastic performance. Dad was NOT amused.)and in the early days just after WWII when we lived in Germany, his unit was tasked with finding and bringing to justice many top nazis and war criminals. Claus Barbi was one of these. He, and many others could not be found. People were disciplined for this failure, and a couple who went off the beaten track on independent investigation wound up dead. Turned out that the US, including the people who were sending people like my father after these guys already had them. Knew exactly where they were, in safe houses, and even in the American embassies here and there. Or there was simply a “hands off” policy, they were going to be useful against the next enemy de jure. My father’s political and social ideas make you, HT, look like simpering “commie dupe” as he would have put it, but even he thought that was a bit much.
So, that, coupled with my own life, and especially military experiences kind of makes me wonder anytime authority, right or left, says anything about reasons, motives, etc. They “can’t find” bin Ladin? Well, I wonder.
Oh, yes, in the Balkans, are the Taliban Freedom Fighters still abroad in those lands, or are they now something else, for the sake of administration?
That and my own life experience tell m
Remember what I said in another post about moving towards our ideal nation, Hoosier? History in our country moves to the left, because those ideals are ridiculously left-wing. Sorry, hon, but our future lies that way. We move backwards when we move right.
Wow, and people thought “Wag the Dog” was about Clinton.
With all due respect, that is your minority view of an ideal nation. Don’t worry, I was a left wing college student who had just graduated college at 23 and I grew out of it…
Oh and JM, you didn’t hit a sore spot. I was laughing the whole time I was responding to your post.
Our Debt to the French
Did someone notify the authorities:…
I don’t think that history is a unified thing that moves all in one direction or another. We need to pay attention to the eddies and counter-currents to really talk about culture in an adequate way.
That said, when we’re talking about political power in American society today, there’s a monopoly that is trying to extinguish all counter-currents. That applies to religion, as well as to public policy. So, I agree that Lafayette’s comments are extremely relevant to current events.
The question at the center is whether religious groups can be trusted to be given the keys to political authority over American liberty. The Republicans seem to think that they can - I don’t trust them for a second.
You sure that wasn’t the media socialising you into false consciousness, Hoosey?
And it took you a while to answer on this, didn’t it? The article’s nearly off the main page, now.
Minority view of an ideal nation? Equality and freedom for all, regardless of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation? What? Hasn’t that been the way we’ve been interpreting the, you know, Constitution over the years? Just saying, is all.
We have been getting closer to the ideals that were set down back in the day. Things are a hell of a lot better for everyone who isn’t a rich white guy now than they were a hundred years ago. I was talking in a very general way.
I worry every day that I’ll allow myself to fall asleep and forget the plight of people who are less fortunate than I am, Hoosier. Here’s hoping I don’t lose my youthful idealism.
Yeah… These “founding fathers” sound like smart guys, but it’s a shame they underestimated the stupidity of people and didn’t make the constitutions specific enough…
You know, the First Amendment to the Constitution clearly says that there are to be no laws respecting an establishment of religion. Then, the authors of the Amendment went on the record as stating the intention of that statement - government ought to stay out of religion and keep it a private matter. It’s pretty clear, really, but when you have generations of fundamentalists trying to come up with excuses to push their religion on other people using the power of government, it gets easy for them to spread the idea that there is any kind of serious legal debate on the issue, when there isn’t (at least not among honest professionals).
Just like with evolution! Wow, they’re good at this.
Yes, the Republican approach is consistently to claim that something is true, without providing any actual evidence to back up their claims. It’s the influence of religious orthodoxy in Republican politics, I’m afraid. They’re used to authorities standing up and preaching about what’s true without ever bothering to give any facts to justify the rhetoric.