 |
| |
| |
|
Our Oldest Enemy: A History of America's Disastrous Relationship with France
|
|
|
Average Rating:  out of 96 Reviews
|
|
Manufacturer: Broadway
|
|
EAN (European Article Number): 9780767917551
|
|
Number of Items: 1
|
| |
|
|
|
Binding: Paperback
|
|
Author: John J. Miller::Mark Molesky
|
|
Publisher: Broadway
|
|
Dewey Decimal Number: 327
|
|
Publication Date: 2005-10-11
|
|
Reading Level: 304
|
|
|
| |
Description: Liberté? Egalité? Fraternité? Or just plain gall?
In this provocative and brilliantly researched history of how the French have dealt with the United States, John J. Miller and Mark Molesky demonstrate that the cherished idea of French friendship has little basis in reality. Despite the myth of the “sister republics,” the French have always been our rivals, and have harmed and obstructed our interests more often than not.
This history of French hostility goes back to 1704, when a group of French and Indians massacred American settlers in Deerfield, Massachusetts. The authors also debunk the myth of French aid during the Revolution: contrary to popular notions, the French did not enter the war until very late and were mainly interested in hurting their rivals, the British. After the war, the French continued to see themselves as major players in the Western hemisphere and shaped their policies to limit the growth and power of the new nation. The notorious XYZ affair, involving French efforts to undermine the government of George Washington, led to an undeclared naval war with France in 1798. During the Civil War, the French supported the Confederacy and installed a puppet emperor in Mexico.
In the twentieth century, Americans clashed with the French repreatedly. The French victory over President Wilson at Versailles imposed a short-sighted and punitive settlement on Germany that paved the way for the rise of fascism in the 1930s. During World War II, Vichy French troops killed hundreds of American soldiers in North Africa, and diehard French fascist units fought against the Allies in the rubble of Berlin. During the Cold War, Charles DeGaulle yanked France out of NATO and obstructed our efforts to roll back Soviet expansion.
The legacy of French imperial power has been no less disastrous. The French left Haiti in a shambles, got us into Vietnam, and educated many of the world’s worst tyrants at their elite universities, including Pol Pot, the genocidal Cambodian dictator. The fascist Baath regimes in Iraq and Syria are another legacy of failed French colonialism.
Americans have been particularly irritated by French cultural arrogance—their crusades against American movies, McDonalds, Disney, and the exclusion of American words from their language have always rubbed us the wrong way. This irritation has now blossomed into outrage. Our Oldest Enemy shows why that outrage is justified.
|
| |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
Customer Reviews
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
Review Summary: Is It Possible To Be Unfair To Perfidious Gaul? Surprisingly, Yes! |
Date: 2008-04-12 |
|
| |
Details: Our Oldest Enemy: A History of America's Disastrous Relationship with France was the first of several France-bashing books to come out in the aftermath of France's most recent stab in the back over Iraq, including: The French Betrayal of America, The French War Against America: How a Trusted Ally Betrayed Washington and the Founding Fathers, Vile France: Fear, Duplicity, Cowardice and Cheese, and The Arrogance of the French: Why They Can't Stand Us--and Why the Feeling Is Mutual, which was probably just as well because as an overview of the complete history of Franco-American relations rather than a dissection of a particular incident, it makes a good starting point for the rosy-eyed novice to the concept of Gallic treachery.
As the authors render in excruciating detail, the myth of Franco-American friendship is just that, a myth. For most of our shared histories France has been at best an unreliable friend and ally, at worst a murderous enemy, and the most practical way to curtail the next round of French-bashing following the inevitable next example of treacherous backstabbing is to disabuse Americans of the silly expectation of anything better. So long as we remember the worthlessness of French promises and assurances, we won't make the mistake of relying on them and thus again exposing our backs.
However, as I read along mostly nodding my head in agreement, I was somewhat astonished to find myself thinking more and more something I never expected to think:
"That's not fair!"
In the process of proving their point, over and over and OVER, IMHO the authors in too many cases go a step or two too far, tossing onto an already towering mountain of evidence the occasional unfair dig. For example there seems little point in mentioning that so many treacherous French Great Men also treated their women badly. After all it is not as if the behavior of American Great Men was noticeably better, and in some cases it was noticeably worse; Woodrow Wilson and Bill Clinton come to mind. In addition it is unfair to pin the blame for the catastrophe at Versailles and the failure of the League of Nations entirely on the arrogance and treachery of France's last effective wartime civilian leader, Georges Clemenceau, because Woodrow Wilson's arrogance and treachery were almost as much to blame.
For another it is frankly ludicrous to suggest the following after poor mouthing Lafayette:
"A cynic might wonder whether Vergennes had planned it that way: For more than two centuries, whenever tensions arose between the United States and France, the French rarely missed an opportunity to invoke the memory of Lafayette as a way of shielding their true motives. It has proved an exceptionally effective ploy."
Oh, PUH-LEAZE! One needn't be one of those America-hating Francophiles posting one-star reviews of a book they haven't read and don't want you to read, either, to see this as bordering on lunacy!
Finally, it is hardly surprising that France should have been our enemy when she was an absolute monarchy, a revolutionary tyranny, or a Nazi puppet state; the surprise came when she remained our enemy or at least went out of her way to be a problem when she was a sister democracy.
Still despite the occasional overdoing, it is an eye-opening read and a useful counter to Francophile delusions. |
| |
|
Review Summary: Fun, Interesting--A great read! |
Date: 2008-04-12 |
|
| |
|
Details: This book was a lot of fun. I was impressed by its thoroughness and how well it was written. There are plenty of details, insight, and interesting events. The book has a natural flow that just seemed to agree with me. A great read! |
| |
|
Review Summary: propaganda at its fullest |
Date: 2007-03-06 |
|
| |
Details: As an American living in France for the third time, I have to admit... I couldn't stomach this book enough to read the entire thing. At the end of each chapter I kept asking myself "Are they writing in this tone to get the reader's attention?" So I finally jumped to the last few chapters to find that I was, unfortunately, wrong. While I don't doubt the historical facts in this book, it was so one-sided with blatant french bashing that I finally just said "No way am I going to finish reading this!" I don't want their writing in any way to affect my behaviors towards the french, especially not in the way that they are hoping to.
I'm not even goingto bother to re-list this on amazon because I don't want another copy of it going around. It already went straight into the recycle bin.
Relations are already strained enough between americans and the french. If you are interested in understanding the history of why our relations are strained, its because of propaganda like this that sets the American mind so forcefully against the French. I suggest going elsewhere for a more objective approach to the Franco-American history. |
| |
|
Review Summary: A thesis based on resentment and bigotry |
Date: 2007-02-17 |
|
|
| |
Details: Bottom line is, the USA would not even exist if it had not been for France. Our founding fathers got the schematic for the constitution from a Frenchman named Montesquie, and 3/4 of the troops fighting the redcoats at the crucial battle of Yorktown were French.
One can make a similar case for historical US relations with Germany, Italy, Russia, Spain, certainly Britain. Miller says France was only pursuing its own interests in events like the Revolutionary War and the Louisiana Purchase? Come now, doesn't everyone? |
| |
|
Review Summary: Not Bad, Not Great |
Date: 2006-09-29 |
|
| |
Details: I learned a lot form this book, but it is rather one-sided (I guess that's its point) and would have liked more debate. Hoever, it IS very interesting the long history of antagonization between the USA and its "Ally". Perhaps not THAT far beyond the normal tiffs friendly nations have, but still pretty telling. I don't know, however, how much of the long-past history is applicable to our current mutual animosity, but it's worth reading, nonetheless.
|
| |
|
| |
Similar Products
|
|
|
| |
This Product is similar to and may be found in the Following Categories:
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
