Filed under: Culture Shock, France 0 - America 1 | Tags: American presidential election 2008, French presidential election 2006, McCain concession speech, Royal concession speech
I admire the unique ability of the American people to always move on, whatever the circumstances. And I admire John McCain’s concession speech. After a year of mostly negative campaign, I was amazed hearing the defeated candidate – in an heartfelt speech – urge all Americans to support the new president of the United States – once called an “un-American, terrorist-tied socialist”. Alakazam! Forget about the bad words. It’s not a game anymore, let’s move on! Seriously my friends: we have a country to put back on track!
By contrast I can’t remember a French defeated candidate not seeking revenge, from the very minute he realizes that he lost an election. “The fight continues!”, “I’ll be back!” and “Stay tuned on my political show!” are the underlying messages of any concession speech in my country.
Bottom line, guess which president gets the wider consensus to keep the country moving? The French or the American? “Status quo” is the French word for “compromise” and “consensus” in politics.
I wish the French politicians could one day also put their “country first” and “concede” an election, for the sake of democracy. Unfortunately, the French well-accepted concession rhetoric does not help. Have a look at the video below: a French concession speech sounds very much like a French victory speech!
Filed under: Culture Shock, France 0 - America 1 | Tags: Brigitte Bardot, first amendment, justice, racial hatred
Chris asked me today how far does France infringe the freedom of speech. At first, the question seemed terribly offensive to me. How dare anyone suspect France of flouting the most basic right brought by democracy? Do I need to remind her that my country is the author of the Declaration of Human Rights? As a precautionary measure before the charge however, I tried to figure out what led her to ask such a ridiculous question.
Actually, Chris was referring to the former film star Brigitte Bardot being recently prosecuted in France for her controversial remarks about Islam. While complaining in a letter to the French President about the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha and the the slaughter of sheeps that it involves, Brigitte Bardot, a vocal animal rights campaigner, stated: “I am fed up with being under the thumb of this population which is destroying us, destroying our country and imposing its acts.” Prosecutors are seeking a two-month suspended prison sentence and a $23,900 fine against the actress for having said that. “What is this country where the courts are entitled to prosecute people for their opinions?” Chris tells me.
Incitement to racial hatred is punishable by law in France, as in most European countries. Until now, I have always considered that it was a step forward in the fight against racism. I was even convinced that a country that respects human rights, like the United States, proabably adopted a similar bill also! As a matter of fact they did not. And if Chris has reacted that way, it is not because she is a racist but because she was surprised that a country that respects human rights, like France, does not have a law similar to the First Amendment of the American Constitution, which protects above all the freedom of speech and the freedom of worship of American citizens.
We could discuss for hours whether it is legitimate to limit the freedom of speech for the sake of the fight against racism. Bottom line, I ended up changing my mind on the subject and here is why. The French law is aimed at punishing the incitement to racial hatred. And it sounds fine when you put it this way. But the trial of Brigitte Bardot shows that it may ends by judging the racial statement for itself, rather than the incitement to hatred. Bardot made her statement in a letter to the French President, and I doubt that her intention was to encourage Mr Sarkozy to hate Muslim voters. Plus, Islam is not even a race. So virtually all the French who might occasionally express exasperation with respect to a particular community practice may now be sued based on Bardot’s trial.
Yes, Chris’ question is legitimate: to what extent is it now forbidden to express one’s opinion about race in France? And the most scary about it is that I did not even notice there could be anything wrong about that law before she asked about it…
Filed under: France 0 - America 1, Politics, anti-Americanism | Tags: Afghanistan, anti-Americanism, France, USA
It seems that anti-Americanism has never been so strong in France that since Nicolas Sarkozy – the newly elected French president – unashamedly demonstrated his solid pro-American views. Not that there are more “anti-Americans” in France than before, but it has forced them to speak up, and louder than ever before!
Thus, as Sarkozy recently announced his intent to strengthen French military presence in Afghanistan, anti-Americanism entered the French parliament. Arguing that the decision to send new troops (in addition to the 2,000 soldiers already involved) was “more political than military”, the socialist opposition called for a non-confidence vote against the French government. In other words, according to the French socialists, one can’t imagine a reason to step in Afghanistan other than just to please the American administration… and pleasing the Americans is disgraceful enough to censure the government! I may add that the same congressmen argued a few years ago that the only legitimate fight against terrorism was taking place in Afghanistan, not in Irak. Obviously for them, the only “legitimate” stand is to stay away from America, whatever it takes.
It’s a French specialty to look away from actual issues for the sake of ideological conservatism. There might be good reasons not to further involve French troops in Afghanistan. But the French socialist party has spoiled a “legitimate debate” with its basic anti-American ideology.
Of course with such poor arguments, the motion against the government fell short. “The opposition accuses us of ‘Atlanticism’, a pleasant way of saying we are in the pay of George Bush. Everyone understands that their aim is to surf on one of our most questionable failings: basic anti-Americanism,” Prime Minister François Fillon told congress.
Let’s stay positive after all. A country where the Prime Minister remains popular after having deliberately stated that anti-Americanism was a “failing” of its people must be a true pro-American country!
