French and American attitudes toward government: some observations and questions

[warren pease]

It’s generally said that, in France, government is afraid of the people while, in the US, the people are afraid of government. I’m inclined to agree with that statement; certainly many Americans are afraid of “this” government, although not necessarily government in general. But the French seem to have turned disdain for government into an art form. EU newspapers are full of reporting on actions taken by the French to limit the scope of their national government to serving the people, not the other way round.

So I’m wondering what it is about the French national character – if there is such a thing as national character – that causes this dynamic. I’ve been there a few times, but only on business or as a tourist, so I’ve gained few insights into the issue. Plus, I don’t speak the language at all well, so I’m not able to discuss these kinds of things with the person on the next bar stool.

I can come up with a few guesses at the reasons for French contempt of government (listed in no particular order):

- WW II and the Nazi occupation: Which taught them to detest fascism in a way we’ve never learned here – at least not since George III, and memories are notoriously short in the US. At present rate, we’ll get to have our very own fascist experience to hold near and dear and, if we’re not the imbeciles we seem to be, we will learn from our mistakes when and if the iron claw is finally removed from the backs of our necks.

- Strong unions: While the percentage of union affiliation among workers in the US heads into single digits, French unions are large, strong and activist. Watch what happens next time Sarkozy tries to “modernize” French workers by proposing to take away a couple of day’s annual vacation. Mass protests; everybody in the streets; general strike; government backs off. Then watch what happens the next time some chiseling US corporation decides to increase profits by out-sourcing or off-shoring about 10,000 jobs. WSJ cheers the move, investors love it, the dept. of HHS, the SEC and the FTC do nothing to ameliorate the plight of the laid-off workers, nor do they act to prevent this kind of rip off again, and nobody says shit except a couple of non-credible leftist commentators, who nobody listens to anyway.

- Proportional representation: which gives almost everybody a stake in government. Progressives who couldn’t possibly survive in the US two-party system can successfully run for office in France, and can then use that office to advocate for social programs that can never see the light of day under the corporatized US two-party charade.

- The press in the EU is still relatively free and often prints stories on government corruption and malfeasance – articles that would be spiked on sight in editorial meetings throughout America. So while Americans are still blathering about “fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here,” and “they hate us for our freedoms,” and “freedom’s on the march,” and so on, French media has sliced and diced Bushian official lies so thoroughly that as soon as Bushie comes on TV nattering about “terra-ists” and “Al Qaeda in Eye-Rack,” the average French citizen begins laughing uncontrollably at this nasty little idiot and his litany of doom.

- Americans want to be the rich. The French, and most Europeans in general, would rather eat them. The French identified the problem back in 1789 and got rid of most of their parasitic aristocracy. The US was conceived, founded and designed for the benefit of rich property holders. Most Americans would never begrudge a fortune derived through honest work or superior intelligence (even though “honest work” in this case generally involves shuffling paper and living off investments that benefit very few others). The fact that old money stays concentrated through inheritance, not hard work, is lost on most Americans.

- The three-hour dinner: No kidding. It’s not only indicative of a society that refuses to be rushed or bullied by the demands of 24/7 business; it’s also a format that allows for extended discussion, argument, contention and resolution. This would be in sharp contrast to the American way of dining out, in which grease, speed, caffeine, gluttony and sugar toxicity play equal roles. There’s even a chain called Lyons (similar to Denny’s) that decorates – if you can call it that – its restaurants in orange and pink because some color consultant told them those colors make people want to finish up quickly and leave.


Anyway, these six things came to mind. I’m sure there are dozens more, and I’d like to read your take on how this all fits together. And what’s Sarkozy doing in power in France? I thought they had more sense than that.


wp

[Selatius]

1. About the Americans want to be rich idea.

It's not that people don't want to be rich. Everybody has fantasized about being master and lord of one's own domain. The difference comes elsewhere.

In France, they celebrate something different than what Americans celebrate. In America, we celebrate the winner. The winner just happens to be conflated with being wealthy as well. He who dies with the most toys at the end wins, right? In France, they celebrate the most charismatic, not the winner. They want somebody who has passion for life, for love for hate, for all the good and bad in life. Napoleon just happened to kick a lot of ass at the same time as winning the hearts and minds of the French people, an example where the most charismatic was the winner at the same time.

[warren pease]

2. That's a great point, thanks...

and do you think that the linkage between winning and wealth stems from the old protestant ethic, which essentially says labor is rewarded on earth with money as well as in the afterlife which whatever the coin of the realm might be in hebben?

Or do you think it's all wrapped up in business as warfare, hyper-competitive MBAs, the myth of the rugged individualist and all that stuff that serves to alienate people rather than draw them together?

MBAs being, as a group, perhaps the most uncharismatic bunch I can think of -- with the possible exception of insurance industry actuaries -- do they then compensate for lack of charisma with raw aggression? And is this similar to what drives little non-entities like Bush to thump his chest and howl for more blood at every opportunity?

Obviously fishing here...


wp

[warren pease]

3. Sinking like a cement overcoat...

still, I'd like to explore this issue a bit. Maybe I'll post it over in the international forums.


wp