About the well-known "anti-Semitism" of the French
Once again, the New York Times in its permanent anti-French campaign, ran a story (Jan.17, 2018) on its favorite subject : the anti-Semitism of the French. If I remember well, the definition of racism is to attribute a general negative trait to a group constituted on an ethnic basis. You have to understand that being anti-Semitic is bad but anti-French is good. Why ? Because what is scandalously unfair against the Jews, according to all reasonable human beings, is perfectly fair against the French, according to the NYT.
One thing is very typical in this very long article (on two pages) : the word « Islam » is absent. In other words, the champions of « objective journalism » did not do their homework about who is anti-Semitic in France. Let me help them. First question : take the last clearly anti-Semitic acts in France (for example, the murder and sequestration of a young man called Illan Halimi or the attack of a cascher grocery shop in Paris) : what was the religion and the geographical origin of the murderers ? In these cases like in all the others, the answer is : muslim from a family originating from North Africa or West Africa. Second question : please cite an anti-Semitic attack in France for which the perpetrator has been identified and is NOT a Muslim. You can’t find one ? This is normal and the reason is the following. Unfortunately, anti-semitism has a long story in France (not only in France, but for the NYT only France counts). Since the 1970s, anti-Semitism has been fed by the war in the Middle East and the Palestinian situation and is shared by a huge majority of young Muslims.
This is a very sad situation and we should regret it but if we forget to mention this HUGE fact and keep propagating the image of today’s anti-Semitism as a modern form of the Dreyfus affair, this is very misleading news. A fair report would say : 1/ anti-Semitism in France does exist, 2/ the perpetrators are NOT neo-nazi Caucasian French people, 3/ but they are young French Muslims. In the US press, I have read many articles about « the anti-Semitism of the French ». Most of them recall Dreyfus and Vichy but they NEVER link it to the anti-Semitism of the Muslims. Is this ignorance or deliberate unfairness ?
(Winter 2018)
(Read about the Jewish community in Paris) Back to top
of the page.
On
French anti-semitism : reinforcing stereotypes : the same day, 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. |
|
Socialized
medicine? Give me a break! Sometimes the US political
debate looks totally unreal to an European. When I hear Rudy
Giuliani saying " The American people do not want socialized
medicine " followed by Hillary Clinton saying " We
don't want bureaucrats to make decisions for our health ",
I can't believe it. Here in France, I can choose my doctor (I
am free). He gives me whatever treatment seems appropriate (he
is free). The Social Security system reimburses 60 to 70% of
the cost and my private insurance covers the sum above that according
to the choice I made (and the premium I paid). The key-point
: if the illness is serious or chronic, the SS reimbursement
is 100% (it's free!). An example ? Every six months I go to one
of the best hospitals in France for a cardiology check-up. I
am followed by the Head of Department himself. Last time, the
cashier apologized : they had been forced to raise the price
they charge and I now had to pay Euros 7,80 ($11)! Except for
fraud, the SS system NEVER refuses to cover an expense. Everything
is computerized : no paperwork, no mean bureaucrat in the way,
no letter to claim a reimbursement, no lawyer, etc... It is against
the law NOT to be covered. However the system is efficient and
globally, the cost for health care in France is 30 to 40 % BELOW
what it is in the USA (and we live longer!). Where is the mean
communist state in all this? (For once) which country is the
most reasonable and creates better life conditions for its citizens
: the USA or France?
More on health
in France and a personal view about it. (Winter 2008) Back to top
of the page.
|
History : leave it 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 colonialism.
- 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.
|
|
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 and a PhD in History. 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 !
(2016) 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. |
Gauls : 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 immediately. "Gallic" is a typical stereotypical way of refering to the French, seen as arrogant among many other defects. 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 Algeria, what if... Arizona ?: 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.
|
|
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 the 35-hour week : it 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)
- In 2008, Right-Wing president
Sarkozy passed a new law which, practically speaking, puts an
end to this 35-hour week but without killing it formerly.
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...)
|
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. If you hate my comments read about "Americans and criticism". See also my resume. Philippe ROCHEFORT
To related pages : other editorial pages USA and Americans, Franco-American relations, Europe and the rest of the worldand France and the French(2), to speeches by Philippe Rochefort, Paris Diary, about the webmaster, my family website
and its genealogy pages |
To table
of contents
To top
of the page
Back to home
page
|
For more on intercultural
differences, order Harriet Welty Rochefort's books :
- "Joie de Vivre", Secrets of Wining, Dining and Romancing like the French, St.Martin's Press, New York, 2012
- "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..)
|
To
email
me |
If you like this site, please bookmark it or create
a link! |
|