News Please no Bush-bashing, America bashing

[Joel]

Do you not find the change of topic interesting? This thread had pretty much died (while on-topic) already, anyway.

As a warning example, yes. As constructive, no.

As I said in responce to Vanech, you can not combat real prejudice if you start comparing 'how does more bad things'. Maybe it would have been better not to post such a provocing article to beggin the discusion, but still... For example, Paul Johnson's second point about cultural prejudice may not be so far fetched, I can sertanly see the seeds for this myth. But based on the newspaper article's evidence I can not say if it actually holds any merit. This kinds of avenues would be worth to explore further.

 

[Joel]

Again, I don't think that this was - despite its name - a thread on prejudice TOWARDS americans. It was a thread based on PERCEIVED prejudice towards americans, by americans. And now we're back into the analysis of the prejudices Americans (not all of them, but those that perceive this anti-american prejudice) hold.

Ok, it is possible. But do we really know that? Wouldn't you say anti-americanism IS a worthy topic to explore further, whatever the actual intention of this thread was?

My thesis was: this perceived anti-american feeling from the part of European intellectuals is in fact nothing else but specific criticisms formulated by them.

I agree on the finger pointing towards European intellectuals, as you can see from my first post in this thread where I tried to separate the different uses of anti-americanism.

However, there's a fraction of Americans who (I repeat myself) are so much convinced of their own infallible god status as a nation that they perceive any criticism of it as blasphemy (= anti-americanism).

Again I agree, as you can see from the same erlier post about different meanings of anti-americanism.

Now, you can say that this is just my opinion, but I have been reading quite some material from the intellectual french left (probably the most targetted group), and they WARN all the time NOT to fall into the easy trap of anti-americanism.

Good, very good. And as said, this is very righfully and eloquantly pointed out by you and others.

I think that if you want to look for true anti-americanism, you'll have to look ELSEWHERE than with a majority of european intellectuals. I think you'll find it.

As a collective entity, sure. But if the french intellectuals warn about the dangers of anti-americanism, some have fallen to the dark side, no? Even if Europe isn't any nest of anti-americanism, I don't think it can be denied that it still exists here, even if it is to a lesser degree.

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

I appologize in advance, I will get out order here:

Get your asses back on topic! NOW! If anyone bothered to read the OP, you'd notice it was about anti-americanism, not anti-semitism, anti-french, or anti-russ oppinions. ARRRR!

No, Joel, the TITLE of the thread was anti-Americanism. The OP contained a link to an article that was anti-European from the get go. It particularly focused on the French. Furthermore we're discussing the meaning of racism in general and how it compares to being 'anti' a nation or disliking a nation, so has value when talking about both anti-Americanism and anti-Europeanism. This is essentially a debate on ethics and semantics. So in relation to the OP, we're not being as irrelevant as you think.

 

[vanesch]

But if the french intellectuals warn about the dangers of anti-americanism, some have fallen to the dark side, no? Even if Europe isn't any nest of anti-americanism, I don't think it can be denied that it still exists here, even if it is to a lesser degree.

Of course, but I think it is much more present in popular layers of the population than in the heads of intellectuals.

Here's an old article http://www.rfi.fr/actufr/articles/042/article_22297.asp from 2003.

La cote américaine n’a pas fléchi dans les seuls pays musulmans. En Europe aussi, la perception de la politique internationale américaine n’a pas été du goût de tout le monde. Si c’est à George W. Bush qu’est attribuée au premier chef la responsabilité de cette situation, l’hostilité rejaillit aussi sur la population. Et les relations entre les Etats-Unis et certains de leurs alliés traditionnels ne sortent pas indemnes des événements des derniers mois. Les Français ne sont que 43 % à avoir une opinion favorable des Etats-Unis, les Allemands 45 %, les Espagnols, don't le gouvernement s’est pourtant engagé clairement aux côtés de la coalition américano-britannique, 38%. Réciproquement, les Américains n’ont pas apprécié l’absence de soutien de la France et de l’Allemagne qui ont pris la tête du clan des anti-guerre. Les personnes sondées aux Etats-Unis n’ont été que 28 % à déclarer avoir un sentiment favorable à la France (contre 79 % en février 2002) et 44 % à l’Allemagne (contre 83 %).

Essentially it says that although most people take Bush as principal responsible for the Iraqi situation, some negative feelings are projected towards the American population in general.
The question was: do you have a FAVORABLE opinion of the US, and, this gave, in France: 43% favorable ; in Germany: 45% favorable, in Spain 38% favorable.
However, in the US, a favorable opinion of France dropped from 79% to 28% before and after the Iraqi dispute, while a favorable opinion of Germany dropped from 83% to 44%.

That said, not having a favorable opinion does not necessary imply an anti-X feeling.

cheers,
Patrick.

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

Need this be ALL French people?

Well, how many French people are covered by the collective 'the French'? Are there any that aren't? If not all French people were intended to be in the scope of Russ' statement, then the English way of saying this is 'some of the French'. This is not what he said and I very much doubt it is what he meant.

Again, this would not (in my opinion) be a pre-judgement.

Well, I really do not know what else you'd call an opinion about someone you have not met based on your appraisal of others of the same race that you have other than racial prejudice. But you're entitled to your opinion. ;o)

Let's say, of all the aligators that I have met in Florida, all of them were very mean. I will then generalize and conclude that alligators are mean, and I will stay away from them. I really do not care if there is a particularly domesticated and nice alligator.

Absolutely. If you see another alligator, regardless of how friendly it is, you have already decided he/she is mean based on your experience of others, NOT based on experience of that particular one. In other words, you have PRE-judged that alligator. And yet no-one has a problem with this. But then you're generalising about prejudice! Just because one form of prejudice is bad, does not mean another is. You cannot be totally unaware of the historical reasons why racial prejudice is frowned upon. As far as I am aware, no such reason for not prejudging alligators exists. I doubt the alligators care either. I'm not damning prejudice, or bias, in general - this is about racial prejudice, and negative prejudice in particular.

1) Germans are great engineers
2) Italians make great artwork
3) The Portugese make great seafaring vessels
4) Mexicans make wonderful, spicy food

Is anyone offended yet? I guess I can't make any of these statements because they would presumably include ALL of these people in one group?

What do you mean by "I can't make any of these statements"? Are you back on freedom of expression again? Must I remind you no-one here is being censored? Or are you asking about the validity of your statements? It would with great certainly be incorrect to claim Germans are great engineers, since there will undoubtably be many, most even, who are not. But I guess you're asking if it is morally wrong to say Germans are great engineers. See the above response to your alligator argument.

So now you will claim that Italians can't make good engineers, or that Germans can't make good artwork? No, of course not!

How does this follow? I don't get you. Are you saying that by stating that Germans are good engineers, this means that Italians can't also be good engineers? This is absurd.

For example, try expressing the statement "Joe dislikes taxes" in mathematical logic. It's not really clear what this means - does the statement mean joe dislikes all taxes? or only some of them? does there exist a tax that joe does not dislike?

If so, then the statement is incorrect. In English we would say "Joe dislikes some taxes".

swimming pools have water, so does everything with water have to be a swimming pool? by the same reasoning can I say "russ dislikes the french" and yet there be a french person that russ does not dislike? YES.

These are not remotely equivilent statements. The statement 'swimming pools have water' only tells you about swimming pools, not things in general that contain water. The only things covered by the term 'swimming pools' are swimming pools. There are no swimming pools not covered by this term. The statement "I dislike the French" refers to the French. Not some of the French, but everyone who would fall under the category the French. There are no French people not falling under this category. You have a logic problem.

I was referring to superiority here, not prejudgement. And btw, I happen to love St. Paddy's day

And I was talking about prejudgment, not superiority.

Indeed, your expression is protected by the same mechanism as Russ. I am not insinuating that you should be thrown in jail or silenced or something, merely that your accusations of racism, in my opinion, are unmerited in this case.

Not just that, but that you would have me stop expressing my opinion ("Let's drop this silliness, shall we?") ;o) That's not my point. My point is that you are defending Russ' opinion from my own with freedom of expression, and at the same arguing against mine in the same way I was arguing against Russ'. You are not applying the right equally.

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

In short, racial groups getting a "bad reputation" is not necessarily a bad thing since this can promote improvement. If you silence these criticisms it only makes things worse (by removing a natural source of pressure) and creates a victim-mentality among the races, and ultimately class warfare. It is unfair to expect people not to generalize and pretend that there are not certain patterns when it comes to racial problems in a society.

So... what you're saying is that it is a good thing that Hispanics have a bad reputation because it improves the lot of the Cubans? Or, more generally, racism is a good thing because it inclines its targets to form a new race that will not be covered by the racist behaviour and in the process improve themselves. I guess, then, the English view of native Americans as sub-human scum with no culture worth preseving was a good thing because it improved the lot of the English and then, later, the Americans. Okay... good to know where you're coming from.

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

I have the impression that the dispute over the Iraq war created far more generalized anti-french and anti-european sentiment in the US than the other way around!

Excellent point. I don't really see how any American can complain about anti-Americanism after the knee-jerk anti-French and anti-German response to their governments refusal to aid America in starting a war with a country for arguable reasons. Like I said, dual-standards.

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

Ok, it is possible. But do we really know that? Wouldn't you say anti-americanism IS a worthy topic to explore further, whatever the actual intention of this thread was?

HANG ON! You were the one complaining about people exploring things you considered to be off-topic, even though they weren't. Now you're saying we should explore anti-Americanism, despite the fact the OP is really about anti-Europeanism and anti-intellectualism? Sheesh!

 

[quetzalcoatl9]

So... what you're saying is that it is a good thing that Hispanics have a bad reputation because it improves the lot of the Cubans? Or, more generally, racism is a good thing because it inclines its targets to form a new race that will not be covered by the racist behaviour and in the process improve themselves. I guess, then, the English view of native Americans as sub-human scum with no culture worth preseving was a good thing because it improved the lot of the English and then, later, the Americans. Okay... good to know where you're coming from.

That is NOT what I said, and you are twisting my words. Go back and read what I actually said.

I said that Cubans, wanting to counter social criticisms of being uneducated, pushed especially hard for their own education and therefore improved their own standard of living, much to their credit.

I am going to withdraw from this conversation now, since we are no longer communicating.

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

"We can live in an imaginary, ideal world where racial judgement doesn't occur, but this simply is not a feasible reality.

For example, Cuban-Americans were very smart in handling this. Not wanting to be lumped into the generalization of Hispanics in the general public's eyes, they actively pushed for their own education and professionalism - despite facing great poverty and persecution. As a result, Cuban-Americans are very successful (whoah - a generalization, better throw me in jail), while some other racial groups go on crying about how unfairly they are treated.

In short, racial groups getting a "bad reputation" is not necessarily a bad thing since this can promote improvement."

Excuse me if I misunderstood you, but I don't know how else to interpret this other than 'racial prejudice is good if it promotes improvement for one lot of people'. Maybe I'm being slow. Maybe you're not explaining right. Maybe we'll never know now you're in a huff. Poke it.

 

[Smurf]

Excuse me if I misunderstood you, but I don't know how else to interpret this other than 'racial prejudice is good if it promotes improvement for one lot of people'. Maybe I'm being slow. Maybe you're not explaining right. Maybe we'll never know now you're in a huff. Poke it.

I think his point is a theoretical "Survival of the fittest" and "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" sort of thing. Unfortunatly I don't think he understands just how bad racism can be and that, even in the case of hispanics, it does kill, and they don't have the opportunity to become stronger.

 

[Andy]

I can't believe you guys are still arguing. tsk tsk tsk.

Am i racist if i don't like the french nation but i like french people? I have only been to france once but for some reason i don't like france, what's that all about? Could it be that the media's representation of france has clouded my vision somewhat? Do you suppose that other people that watch television, read newspapers etc, aren't somehow biased by the media towards not liking a nation? I reckon it must be the media's fault, because i have never met a french person that i don't like. So i propose that we ban all sources of media so that we can all get along nicely without these petty arguements.

 

[PerennialII]

Au contraire, think this has been a good thread ... stuff like this pulled out in the open can perhaps eliminate some of the general deterioration of threads under 'politics & world affairs'.

 

[Art]

Au contraire, think this has been a good thread ... stuff like this pulled out in the open can perhaps eliminate some of the general deterioration of threads under 'politics & world affairs'.

I wholeheartedly agree. By virtue of this discussion of what constitutes racism and bigotry we should in the future be able to have discussions which don't immediately degenerate into accusations of anti-Americanism. So I see this as time well spent.

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

Am i racist if i don't like the french nation but i like french people? I have only been to france once but for some reason i don't like france, what's that all about?

It isn't the physical country that makes a nation - it is its people.

I think the debate (as opposed to argument) has been interesting. If you disagree, fine.

 

[Andy]

From what i have read it just appears to be people trying to justify slagging off america and its people.

 

[vanesch]

Am i racist if i don't like the french nation but i like french people?

That's a very strange statement I have difficulties finding out what it could mean: I don't like nation X, but I like X nationals ?

 

[Andy]

Yea i know, tis strange isn't it.

But the french people i have met through foreign exchange have all been very pleasant. But for some reason i don't like france. I don't understand it myself but i can only assume its down to the endless barrage of assault france gets in the UK tabloid media. Should stop reading it really.

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

I wholeheartedly agree. By virtue of this discussion of what constitutes racism and bigotry we should in the future be able to have discussions which don't immediately degenerate into accusations of anti-Americanism. So I see this as time well spent.

Anti-anything, I'd hope.

 

[vanesch]

I don't understand it myself but i can only assume its down to the endless barrage of assault france gets in the UK tabloid media. Should stop reading it really.

Or maybe it is genetic ? Maybe you've been naturally selected to dislike France ? Does disliking France give you higher survival and procreation chances over the pond ?

 

[Art]

Anti-anything, I'd hope.

Yes of course but until this thread I don't think there were accusations of people being anti-european or anti-anything else other than anti-American.
.

 

[Art]

Yea i know, tis strange isn't it.

But the french people i have met through foreign exchange have all been very pleasant. But for some reason i don't like france. I don't understand it myself but i can only assume its down to the endless barrage of assault france gets in the UK tabloid media. Should stop reading it really.

I wouldn't beat yourself up over it. From my experience the feeling is fully reciprocated When I was in Paris the folk I met practically snarled at me when they first heard me speak until I informed them I wasn't English afterwhich they couldn't have been more charming.

 

[Andy]

Sounds about right, you americans think you have it bad just try living as close to them as we do!

Hopefully it's genetic, that way i would be able to carrying reading the smut in the tabloids without thought of being brainwashed.

 

[Art]

Sounds about right, you americans think you have it bad just try living as close to them as we do!

Hopefully it's genetic, that way i would be able to carrying reading the smut in the tabloids without thought of being brainwashed.

? Vanesch and me American? Have u read any of our posts?

 

[Smurf]

Yes of course but until this thread I don't think there were accusations of people being anti-european or anti-anything else other than anti-American.
.

yeah you MUST be new

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

...i would be able to carrying reading the smut in the tabloids...

There's your answer then. What would even compel you to read the British tabloids in the first place if not brainwashing?

 

[Joel]

Of course, but I think it is much more present in popular layers of the population than in the heads of intellectuals.

Absolutely, I also think education and public visibility tends to weed out anti-x sentiments. However, I think all myths has some support in every layer of our society, they are just more or less frequent or more or less visible. For example, there was a few years ago a heated debate in the Swedish press about anti-semitism, where some prominent intellectuals where accused. (Note the difference between an intellectual, as in someone visible with a lot of opinions, and a researcher in his own field).

Here's an old article http://www.rfi.fr/actufr/articles/042/article_22297.asp from 2003.

I don't know a word french.

Essentially it says that although most people take Bush as principal responsible for the Iraqi situation, some negative feelings are projected towards the American population in general.
The question was: do you have a FAVORABLE opinion of the US, and, this gave, in France: 43% favorable ; in Germany: 45% favorable, in Spain 38% favorable.
However, in the US, a favorable opinion of France dropped from 79% to 28% before and after the Iraqi dispute, while a favorable opinion of Germany dropped from 83% to 44%.

That said, not having a favorable opinion does not necessary imply an anti-X feeling.

cheers,
Patrick.

That's an interesting poll, and I agree that unfavorable opinions do not necessarily imply anti-x feelings. I think that anti-x sentiments are rooted much deeper and that they are not born out of single political events. However certain political events may trigger already existing, altough 'sleeping' anti-x feelings, such as MAY have been the case with the Iraq war(s) and anti-americanism, or the creation of Israel and anti-semitism.

To get some less flamatory background material, I did search and came up with a bunch of references. Here is a selected few:

http://www.extenza-eps.com/extenza/loadHTML?objectIDValue=51582&type=abstract

http://www.extenza-eps.com/extenza/loadHTML?objectIDValue=51588&type=abstract

http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/publications/books/antiamer.html

So, I guess I'm only saying the same thing as the French intellectuals; watch out for anti-americanism, it lurks in many places. *Jaws music*


Joel

 

[Smurf]

However certain political events may trigger already existing, altough 'sleeping' anti-x feelings, such as MAY have been the case with the Iraq war(s) and anti-americanism, or the creation of Israel and anti-semitism.

That may be the most ridiculous thing I've heard all day (granted it's just started, but still). Yes, Anti-Americanism is an alien technology that has been 'sleeping' since it's deployment many years ago and is only now emerging to destroy the world!

 

[Joel]

No, Joel, the TITLE of the thread was anti-Americanism. The OP contained a link to an article that was anti-European from the get go. It particularly focused on the French. Furthermore we're discussing the meaning of racism in general and how it compares to being 'anti' a nation or disliking a nation, so has value when talking about both anti-Americanism and anti-Europeanism. This is essentially a debate on ethics and semantics. So in relation to the OP, we're not being as irrelevant as you think.

Quite right, as I already said in my response to Vanesch, I the anti-european sentiment in the article was rightfully pointed out. What I disagree about, is that anti-anti sentiments are discussed in the same thread, but I think I've already said that a couple of times.

I see this debate as two folded: First, as theoretical discussion of anti-x sentiments, where questions like, "what is prejudice?", are relevant. And second, as the unique historical myths, associated with each type of anti-x sentiment that are part of the cognitive component of prejudice.

I found a an interesting article about anti-europeanism, but I better post it in a separate thread. Maybe the discussion about anti-europeanism could move there?

Ps. And I also want to appologise again for my harash words. I regret being so blunt.

 

[Art]

That may be the most ridiculous thing I've heard all day (granted it's just started, but still). Yes, Anti-Americanism is an alien technology that has been 'sleeping' since it's deployment many years ago and is only now emerging to destroy the world!

I fully agree, that is nonsense! In fact I think it is the other way around. For many years europeans were inordinately fond of America and it's culture.
Certainly in the English speaking parts of europe we were raised on a diet of thoroughly enjoyable american comics and films and any homegrown programs we saw waxed lyrical on how well America had done since becoming an independent state.
If anything our deep-rooted liking of America and all things american kept us too quiet for too long about the dangers and threats inherent in America's expansionist policy.

 

[Joel]

That may be the most ridiculous thing I've heard all day (granted it's just started, but still). Yes, Anti-Americanism is an alien technology that has been 'sleeping' since it's deployment many years ago and is only now emerging to destroy the world!

Yay! I got your attention! I tried to use the citation marks to point out that I was using a figure of speech. A more factual way of putting it would be, "common parts of various myths (that are components of prejudice) can be found through history and they can be more or less salient, depending on, for example, real-political circumstances." If you're interested, Ruppert Brown has written a good introduction to a socialpsychological approach to prejudice, called (surprise!) Prejudice.

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

I fully agree, that is nonsense! In fact I think it is the other way around. For many years europeans were inordinately fond of America and it's culture.
Certainly in the English speaking parts of europe we were raised on a diet of thoroughly enjoyable american comics and films and any homegrown programs we saw waxed lyrical on how well America had done since becoming an independent state.
If anything our deep-rooted liking of America and all things american kept us too quiet for too long about the dangers and threats inherent in America's expansionist policy.

I agree. In the run-up to and start of the Iraq war, the targets of objection were fairly well spread between Bush, Blair and the other leaders of the coalition. This was most pronounced in Spain. While the public protests in New York and London were impressive, the Spanish seemed the most dedicated. Endless posters, graffiti and people wearing t-shirts adorning the slogan: "Bush, Blair, Aznar - no a guerra" (or whatever the spanish is for 'no war' - I don't speak the tongue and haven't seen that slogan for a while) did suggest a pecking order of blame, but certainly no racist sentiment aimed at a particular country. Indeed, the leaders alone were seen as to blame. Now America does seem to be the sole target - not even Bush alone. Quite possibly this has something to do with the figure 52%?

 

[Joel]

Regarding prejudice and real-political circumstances:

http://gpi.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/7/3/221

Two broad distal causes of prejudice are past history of intergroup contact and general political predispositions. Two studies investigate the extent to which these effects are mediated by emotions directed at the outgroup, as proposed by Intergroup Emotions Theory (Smith, 1993). In both studies, past intergroup contact and Social Dominance Orientation predict prejudice. as measured either by a feeling thermometer or the Modern Racism Scale. Furthermore, for both studies these effects are significantly mediated by intergroup emotions, above and beyond measures of stereotypes (stereotype endorsement in Study 1 and stereotype knowledge in Study 2) that were entered as alternative potential mediators. Stereotype endorsement also plays a significant mediational role in one case. Increased attention to the role of emotions in intergroup relations, including in the mediation of such powerful and well-known effects as those of intergroup contact and political predispositions, appears to be warranted.

Regarding anti-americanism in Europe before and after the second Iraq war broke out, I disagree in the sense that it was clearly america who took the initiative and this was in my opinion understood by those opposing the war as well. The critique against Uk and Spain was, "Do not support the war", while the critique against USA was, "Do not suggest a war". Furthermore I've seen many demonstrations where Bush and America where compared to Hitler and Nazi germany, which in my opinion can not be called 'rational critique' even with good imagination.

 

[Smurf]

I fully agree, that is nonsense! In fact I think it is the other way around. For many years europeans were inordinately fond of America and it's culture.
Certainly in the English speaking parts of europe we were raised on a diet of thoroughly enjoyable american comics and films and any homegrown programs we saw waxed lyrical on how well America had done since becoming an independent state.
If anything our deep-rooted liking of America and all things american kept us too quiet for too long about the dangers and threats inherent in America's expansionist policy.

Yeah, I remember when I first moved to France before all this Bush crap started. People there were very fond of America. Not that they're negative and prejudiced towards America now, but the old fascination seems to have disappeared somewhere in all the politics.

 

[Evo]

Yeah, I remember when I first moved to France before all this Bush crap started. People there were very fond of America. Not that they're negative and prejudiced towards America now, but the old fascination seems to have disappeared somewhere in all the politics.

I guess no one remembers France during the Nixon era when they hated Americans. Sentiments go back and forth. But most Europeans held that sentiment then.

 

[Smurf]

I guess no one remembers France during the Nixon era when they hated Americans. Sentiments go back and forth. But most Europeans held that sentiment then.

Hated Americans or hated Nixon and his government?

 

[Evo]

Hated Americans or hated Nixon and his government?

I traveled there and had to conceal the fact that I was American. The masses cannot seem to separate the hatred toward a government, or leader or the people. It's sad, but for the majority, it's true.

 

[Art]

I traveled there and had to conceal the fact that I was American. The masses cannot seem to separate the hatred toward a government, or leader or the people. It's sad, but for the majority, it's true.

What was it Nixon did to alienate the French? I thought the major issues of his tenure were all domestic with social unrest in the USA? In fact didn't he actually revive US - French relations following his meeting with French President de Gaulle in Mar '69 shortly after his election in '68?

 

[Evo]

What was it Nixon did to alienate the French? I thought the major issues of his tenure were domestic with social unrest in the USA? In fact didn't he revive US - French relations following his meeting with French President de Gaulle in Mar '69 shortly after his election in '68?

The Viet Nam war. Anti-American sentiment was at an all time high in the early 70's.

 

[quetzalcoatl9]

What was it Nixon did to alienate the French? I thought the major issues of his tenure were all domestic with social unrest in the USA? In fact didn't he actually revive US - French relations following his meeting with French President de Gaulle in Mar '69 shortly after his election in '68?

actually, the love-hate relationship between the French and the USA goes back several hundred years, all the way to the formation of the USA.

The US has screwed over France many times, and France has screwed over the US many times. (Notable examples: US declaring neutrality when the French went to war with the British, the French undermining post-WWII US interests in Asia leading to Vietnam, etc.)

 

[Art]

The Viet Nam war. Anti-American sentiment was at an all time high in the early 70's.

I'm not contradicting you but I am surprised the French were protesting over American involvement in Vietnam seeing as how the Americans originally went there to help the French in their efforts to maintain French control of the territory as part of the larger French Indochina. As far back as 1950 the US was shouldering half the cost of France's military expenditure in Vietnam.
The shock at home following France's ignoble defeat at the battle of Dien Bien Phu at the hands of the communist forces led shortly afterward to a full scale French withdrawal after 7 years of war leaving the US to spearhead the military campaign against the Viet Minh (later Viet Cong) forces.
Thus it seems very hypocritical of the French to criticize a war which they themselves started.
No wonder most members of the EU doesn't trust them

 

[selfAdjoint]

The "Events of 1968" were not carried out by the conservative French, who might have responded to these considerations, but by the students and leftists, who were responding to the bombing of Cambodia.

 

[Art]

The "Events of 1968" were not carried out by the conservative French, who might have responded to these considerations, but by the students and leftists, who were responding to the bombing of Cambodia.

I don't believe Vietnam played a very big role in the "Events of 68", this was certainly one of the things the Paris students demonstrated about initially but the major student led protests (the Movement of March 22nd) had a far greater domestic agenda than protesting over American actions in Vietnam. For example some of their key complaints were overcrowding at the universities, the lowering of entrance exam stds and dormitory rules. Following fights with the police and numerous arrests the unrest spread to unions and other left wing groups resulting in numerous strikes and further fighting. The common purpose then though was simply to bring down de Gaulle's right wing gov't.
When de Gaulle called an election to gain a fresh mandate the French elecorate voted overwhelmingly for the right wing parties increasing their share of parliamentary seats massively to 385 out of a total of 487.

 

[Evo]

I'm not contradicting you but I am surprised the French were protesting over American involvement in Vietnam seeing as how the Americans originally went there to help the French in their efforts to maintain French control of the territory as part of the larger French Indochina. As far back as 1950 the US was shouldering half the cost of France's military expenditure in Vietnam.
The shock at home following France's ignoble defeat at the battle of Dien Bien Phu at the hands of the communist forces led shortly afterward to a full scale French withdrawal after 7 years of war leaving the US to spearhead the military campaign against the Viet Minh (later Viet Cong) forces.
Thus it seems very hypocritical of the French to criticize a war which they themselves started.
No wonder most members of the EU doesn't trust them

The French had a strong antiwar movement. I remember seeing graffiti scribbled on walls "Nixon Assassin". "Kill Nixon" American flags being burned, effigies of Nixon being burned. I can still sing the little song that two puppets on tv were singing "Kissinger, Le Duc Tho" "Kissinger, Le Duc Tho" and the puppets dancing around, really bizarre.

You also missed were I specifically said early 70's.

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

Better they burn flags than live sheep.

 

[Joel]

Is osmeone burning live sheeps?

 

[Art]

Is osmeone burning live sheeps?

The French set fire to British trucks exporting sheep to France.

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

The French set fire to British trucks exporting sheep to France.

Some French farmers and political activists, that is. I'm sure the French were as disturbed by it as we were. At least, I hope so, or else you can shove a freedom fry up my a--- and call me Russ.

 

[Art]

Some French farmers and political activists, that is. I'm sure the French were as disturbed by it as we were. At least, I hope so, or else you can shove a freedom fry up my a--- and call me Russ.

I thought it was the French prosititutes. They thought their livelihoods were being threatened by the sudden influx of the Welsh farmers' mistresses.

 

[Art]

The French had a strong antiwar movement. I remember seeing graffiti scribbled on walls "Nixon Assassin". "Kill Nixon" American flags being burned, effigies of Nixon being burned. I can still sing the little song that two puppets on tv were singing "Kissinger, Le Duc Tho" "Kissinger, Le Duc Tho" and the puppets dancing around, really bizarre.

I wasn't disagreeing I just said it was hypocritical of them given their 100 year military occupation of Vietnam

You also missed were I specifically said early 70's.

? Are you referring to my response to selfAdjoint's post? My reply there was specific to his reference to the 'Events of '68'