
A Buffet of French History - pepys
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2017/05/11/histoire-mondiale-buffet-french-history/
======
nawre
Yet another attempt at dismantling any sense of shared identity, and history
of a European country. It has been the same strategies, used over and over
since the 60s.

Zemmour is right, and what's more, him calling out that process has awakened a
whole bunch of people (including myself) from the propaganda we have been
subject to for decades in France. Giving the monster a name, and identifying
his methods makes it so much easier to resist and fight back its attempts at
dissolving our culture into the joyful globalism they so desperately want the
french people to embrace.

In a couple years, the most eminent historians will tell you that there never
was French people in France. In fact, there never was such a thing as France.
The hexagon is just a geographical area in which different individual co-exist
peacefully, and nothing more, not a culture, not a civilization, not a
language. This sort of historical revisionism and the obvious agenda it serves
will only further feed the identitarian right's narrative.

Deconstructionism has been deconstructed by Zemmour, Michéa and others. The
pendulum has started swinging back, in the coming decades you will only see it
accelerate.

~~~
srrge
> Yet another attempt at dismantling any sense of shared identity, and history
> of a European country.

What if the identity is built on (even partially) a set of lies? Lies that
prevent us to see ourselves as who we really are. And therefore, prevent us to
being who we really are and who we really should be.

France's history indeed deserves examination and criticism.

------
dmix
> The book rejects the notion of a French identity that has existed from the
> beginning—a beginning associated with the cliché “our ancestors the
> Gauls”—and that has been refined over the centuries to constitute a distinct
> and particularly rich civilization.

Really? I'm curious what the argument is here. Do they mean it's a modern
invention or mostly an imaginary/idealized concept?

I live in Canada having lived in both francophone Quebec and growing up in
Ontario I believe there is a strong french identity. One they take serious
care in protecting and developing even as expatriates in Canada. This as a
result influences personality/psychological traits as well through things like
parenting and cultural experience.

A lot of people I knew in Montreal were recent immigrants from France and to
me it seemed they equally shared this identity, although they were far less
likely to look up to France in a good light. Although many youths leave France
to seek opportunity in Canada, and french Canadians may hold an idealized view
of France, so that might be why.

This difference between angolophone vs francophone cultures is one of the
reasons I had a lot of difficulty living in Montreal. The differences went
well beyond language. Similar to the east vs west coast (vs south) dynamic in
the US.

Whether or not being so protective of their identity/culture is a positive
thing is a another matter (one I believe is self-destructive to an extent).
But whether or not it exists is doesn't seem any question in my mind.

~~~
plafl
I think the meaning here is that French identity has been formed slowly over
time while interacting with the outside. I would be surprised if a group of
academics, specially if French, denied the existence of French culture. I
suppose some French people find disgusting the idea of having much more in
common with a contemporary German (for example) than with a medieval French.
I'm not French nor do I follow French politics so just guessing by
extrapolating what I know from my own country.

~~~
nawre
This is not the main thesis of the book though. I do not blame you because the
article strawman hard on the book's opponents at the same time it does a poor
job at extracting the actual thesis from the book.

No one says that French culture has been created at a discrete point in
history, and since then never changed. This is the biggest strawman of this
article. They wish their enemies were that stupid. In fact, it is known that
France is a marvelous mix of celtic, latin and germanic influence. The
criticism stems from the book's anachronisms and obvious Multikulti
undertones. It defines France, not as an entity in itself, but as one that
solely makes sense in its interaction with others. Nothing is French anymore,
and the so-called french culture is just a collection of sophisticated
anecdotes.

It's nothing more than a poor attempt at taking away whatever is left to the
French: their sense of culture and history.

~~~
plafl
Yes, I was commenting on what I understood about the book review, not on the
book itself, which I have not read.

------
srrge
One of the most controversial facts of the recent history of France is how the
General de Gaulle came back to power in 1958 through a coup [1]. This isn't
and probably will never be taught in class because the General is the founding
father of our current constitution.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_de_Gaulle#1958:_Collap...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_de_Gaulle#1958:_Collapse_of_the_Fourth_Republic)

~~~
brmgb
That's not a particularly fair presentation of the events of 1958.

There was indeed a coup but De Gaulle became prime minister and was given
emergency power for six months by the national assembly all according to the
Constitution of the fourth republic.

The coup of 1958 didn't happen in metropolitan France. It was lead by generals
in Algeria. It certainly helped the decision of calling De Gaulle back to
power but "through a coup" is stretching it.

The new constitution was then enacted by a referendum, new election called and
De Gaulle was elected again.

By the way, it's hardly not taught. That's part of the official curriculum for
the class of première (at least for L and ES).

As a side note, Mitterrand used to call the fifth republic constitution "the
permanent coup". That didn't stop him from using the large power it gives to
the executive when he became president.

------
bad_hairpiece
Mobile users beware: The website buffers an HD video advertisement, not to
mention additional ads...

