The Trauma of Colonialism?

Two rich, glorious civilizations were humiliated and brought to their knees

Manjari Chatterjee Miller writes of India and China in his New York Times column on The Trauma of Colonialism,

their lands lost and borders redrawn, their people forced to endure barbarous cruelty and suffering. Today this bitter remembrance plays out in subtle but important ways in the international arena. 

All fine and good to speak of Asian (as well as African) "sensitivities," "humiliations," and "bitter remembrance" due to "foreign interference", but stirring our heartstrings should not allow us to forget using our brainwaves and remembering some pertinent facts.

Saying, for instance, that

India and China were victims of an extractive colonialism that drained away national wealth

allows us to forget that whatever wealth those regions enjoyed went to the palaces and to the other playgrounds of the kings, the shahs, the emperors, and other members of the various localities' respective aristocratic élites. The truth is that few among the majority of those regions' citizens — the common Han farmer, the common Mughal peon — suffered, or even saw their daily life change drastically (in one way or another), from the "bitter" and "traumatic" "humiliation" of their overlords being foreign-looking white men born in the West rather than members of their own race.

For much of their history, indeed, recent and otherwise, the Chinese at least have suffered far more at the hands of their fellow citizens and of their leaders in Beijing. Remembering, for instance, the (admittedly shameful) Opium War of the 1840s allows the Chinese to forget the 20 million people slaughtered during the Taiping Rebellion 10 years later at the hands of their fellow Chinese countrymen. Remembering Mao Zedong "proudly" declaring that "The Chinese people have stood up" allows us to forget, or to minimize, that never did more Chinese people lose their lives and liberties, that never did more Chinese people endure more "barbarous cruelty and suffering", than under the helm — and because of the policies — of Mao himself.

Westerners would do well to keep these sensitivities in mind

concludes Miller, the author of Wronged by Empire (Post-Imperial Ideology and Foreign Policy in India and China), but that doesn't mean that Westerners (nor indeed Chinese subjects and Indian citizens themselves) should willingly blind themselves to historical facts nor, in certain cases at least, to the hidden agenda of government officials' "principled" outrage.

• Related — Chinese Outrage: Humiliations' Hidden Agenda

U.S. President Depicted Year After Year as a Chimp, Sometimes Retarded, Sometimes Evil, But Always Sub-Human with Hairy Paws and Tactile Feet

OBVIOUSLY RACIST 

writes Instapundit — with a touch of facetiousness —

Shock: Satirist Depicts the President as a Monkey.

At the link, Bryan Preston proceeds to show which commander-in-chief was lampooned as a monkey — not Barack Obama but Abraham Lincoln (150 years ago). Not Barack Obama but George W Bush (five to 13 years ago).

No Pasarán would know something about depictions of a US president as monkey; over three to four years, NP blogger N-Joe accumulated quite a collection of cartoons from the pen of The Guardian's Steve Bell who did nothing but depict George W Bush as a chimpanzee (or as three or as four chimpanzees), sometimes retarded, sometimes evil (while managing to also mock the Twin Towers, see below), but always sub-human, often with
hairy paws and with hand-like feet, and sometimes quite literally as a chimp or a monkey.

Sample NP post on what Joe called the "throwback propaganda artist":

Guardian cartoonist Steve Bell when not abnormally obsessed with drawing farts, always characterizes President Bush as some sort of sub-human. No matter what the situation, he is cast in the light of a sort of animal without thought or feeling. It isnt even editorializing, its nothing more than hate-baiting of the oldest, most sordid, and pedantic sort.

Unfortunately, although Joe's texts remain, the hyperlinks on the NP posts from 2005 to 2008 are out of date and the cartoons that he linked to are no longer visible. But an idea of Dubya's face, with its elongated monkey mouth, can be seen in Bell's recent cartoon of the opening of the Bush Presidential Library. In any case, Bell's Iraq cartoons and his Dubya cartoons can easily be found through through Google Images…
 
While we're on the subject of the Guardian's Steve Bell, we might as well link to his charming cartoons on the death of Margaret Thatcher. (Oh, but it's all right to demonize a woman when it's one of a conservative bent!)
 
Incidentally, Steve Bell explained the reason for drawing Dubya as a chimp to the Liverpool Daily Post's Laura Davis:

The only reason George Bush as a monkey worked was because he actually looked like a monkey.

I wonder if it occurs to any leftists that just about any human can be said to "actually" look like a monkey, and that no matter what race they are…
 
If you feel so inclined, you can hear Steve Bell discussing his caricatures of US presidents from Reagan to Obama at this link… 

As can be seen in this post's very first cartoon, as well as in the one directly below, bathroom humor, from farts to feces through unbelted pants and toilet paper, is generously laden throughout Bell's pieces of work… (Needless to say, depicting the UN banner as TP is not criticism of the United Nations per se, but of the "disgusting" way that Bushchimp allegedly views the international organization and its ineffectiveness in opposing big bad America…)

"It’s like going on safari": A few pointers for tourists in Paris

I thought I’d give a few pointers for tourists

writes Stephen Clarke.

They’re the kind of things I talk about in my books, especially Talk to the Snail, which has a whole chapter about getting served (or not), and Paris Revealed, my insider’s guide to the city. (You see, the self-plugging instinct needed to express itself somewhere.) So here are some bullet points to help visitors avoid taking a hit or shooting themselves in the foot.

• First and most importantly, begin every conversation in Paris with a smile and a loud “bonjour”. This will eradicate at least 50% of all known problems. In the evening it’s “bonsoir” of course. Even if the other person doesn’t say it, you should do so cheerily and it will show them that you are a well-meaning and self-confident person, and that kind of person usually has a good time in Paris.

• If you want a latte in Paris, and you aren’t in a Starbucks, ask for a café crème bien blanc. If you want a cappucino, you can try, but it’ll cost you, and you might be better off settling for the simpler  and cheaper “un crème, s’il vous plaît.”

• If you want a small beer, ask for “un demi”. This is 25cl, about half a pint. They might offer you “une pinte” – half a litre – yes the French still love imperial measures, whatever they might tell you. Note that there is no such thing as a “grand demi”. A demi is a demi. The waiter will list the beers and you have to watch out for pronunciation. Kronenbourg is “kron-on-boor”, Carlsberg is “karlsss-bear-k”, Heineken is “ay-nay-ken”. The slightly taster beers on tap are Grimbergen (“greem-bear-gain”), Leffe (“leff”) and Affligem (“aff-lee-game”). Worth a try.

• Have a close look at the wine menu. Sometimes, a bottle of wine is the same price as six glasses, in which case you might as well order by the glass.

• Be aware that soft drinks, including mineral waters, cost a fortune. The French almost force kids to drink coffee and alcohol to save money. If you’re offered water and don’t want an expensive bottle just say “une carafe”. They’ll bring you one. And you can ask for a refill at any time. (The same goes for bread, by the way. You can ask for more at any time – within reason, of course.)

• Never break the two rules of a French café. Don’t order a coffee at the bar then go and sit down. There are two different prices, and two different tills, for these orders. And don’t go to a table laid for lunch or dinner and order just a drink. You’re wasting everyone’s time.

• At a café you can go and sit at any free table (while obeying the above rule). In a restaurant, always find a waiter or waitress and ask. There might be a waiting list or reservations.

• Don’t try to order until everyone has decided what they want, or has prepared the key questions that will help them make their decision. Waiters are busy and haven’t got time to stand about while people um and er.

• Don’t mention the word “végétarien”. It will only cause unnecessary panic. They’ll usually have something veggie without realizing it. If not, simply ask for one of their salads “sans le jambon” or “sans le poulet” (without ham or chicken). Just don’t try and be swanky and go off menu. You’ll only annoy the chef.

• Tips. On most French menus there’s a 15% service charge, so tips aren’t compulsory. For a drink at the bar of a café, leave 10 cents. For a sit-down drink, 50 cents or a euro is fine. For a good lunch or dinner in an ordinary café or restaurant, three or four euros is OK. In a smarter place, you’re going to have to leave paper money. Up to you how much you want the waiter or waitress to love you.

So there you have it. It’s like going on safari. You don’t provoke the lions, do you? Obey the rules and you will get excellent service, unless you come across a real rogue beast who short-changes you or brings you two litres of beer when you only wanted 25cl. In which case, avoid confrontation by complaining calmly, as if you’re an old hand at all this; don’t go there again; and make sure via Twitter or elsewhere that everyone else knows about the danger.

The biggest dangers in Paris aren’t the waiters, anyway. They’re the pickpockets and bad drivers. But that’s another story…

In America, We Learn from Le Monde, Most of the 39 Million African-Americans Do Not Have an ID to Vote

"IL Y A 35 ANS, J'AURAIS PU ÊTRE TRAYVON MARTIN."

Quoting Barack Obama is of course (mais naturellement!) how Louise Couvelaire starts her Le Monde article on Racism, the Return of [America's] Old Demons, an article in which we learn that "most African-Americans do not have" an "ID to vote."

Most of the 39 million black individuals in the United States go through life without an ID?!?!

How then blacks — famously — influenced, say, the elections of 2008 and 2012 is not for Le Monde to explain.

While discoursing on the Jim Crow laws, moreover, Louise Couvelaire does not mention that nobody, black or white, is preventing blacks (however many or however few blacks without IDs there are) from getting an ID, nor how easy it is to obtain a simple ID (whether you are black or other, and whether for voting purposes or for other reasons).

Epine dorsale du Voting Rights Act (loi sur les droits électoraux), la loi avait mis fin aux pratiques destinées à empêcher les Noirs de se rendre aux urnes (tests d'écriture, de lecture, taxes, interrogatoires arbitraires dont les Blancs étaient exemptés). Récemment, elle a aussi permis d'empêcher le Texas de procéder à un redécoupage électoral et d'exiger des électeurs qu'ils présentent une carte d'identité pour voter (la plupart des Afro-Américains n'en possèdent pas).

Needless to say, we are treated to a photo of a distressed Obama, profoundly mortified (Barack Obama, qui s'est dit "profondément déçu") with the racist country he must live in.

Howard Zinn, "that fiery author… with an extraordinary destiny… in the service of the oppressed" bla, bla, bla

For the famous author of Histoire populaire des Etats-Unis, writing was a sensible object only insofar that it was put in the service of the oppressed.

Martin Duberman's laudatory biography about Howard Zinn has been translated to French, where Howard Zinn, une vie à gauche (Editeur Lux) receives an equally laudatory book review from the newspaper of record, i.e., Le Monde and Marc-Olivier Bherer — "that fiery-natured author… with an extraordinary destiny… in the service of the oppressed… who was a veritable actor of our times' History" etc, etc, etc…

L'austérité d'un tel personnage pourrait décourager le biographe, d'autant qu'il a pris soin de détruire les éléments les plus personnels de ses archives. Martin Duberman, historien et ami, a néanmoins tenté dans Howard Zinn, une vie à gauche, de raconter l'homme qu'il a connu. Dans la première biographie – en français – de ce bouillant auteur se dessine un portrait de militant au parcours extraordinaire.

 … Howard Zinn, comme le rappelle Martin Duberman, a en effet choisi d'être un véritable acteur de l'histoire. D'abord à Atlanta, où il enseigna, de 1956 à 1963, au Spelman College, une université noire. Il y prit conscience de la violence de la ségrégation et aida ses étudiants à s'organiser. Un engagement qu'il poursuit encore ailleurs dans le sud des Etats-Unis. Mais c'est véritablement la guerre au Vietnam qui sera le combat de sa vie.

 … Ces épisodes forment un palpitant récit que Martin Duberman tâche de compléter en faisant aussi revivre l'intellectuel. Il en dresse un portrait sans concession, rappelant les raccourcis employés par Howard Zinn dans son histoire des Etats-Unis, ainsi que les nombreux oublis commis. L'oeuvre, parue en 1980, n'est pas aussi révolutionnaire qu'on a pu le croire. A la même époque, de nombreux autres historiens ont également choisi de s'intéresser aux oubliés du récit officiel.

"In France, there is an awful economic and social climate": 1.6 million Frenchmen living abroad

In France, there is an awful economic and social climate

says one French expatriate to Elise Vincent as the Le Monde writer publishes a full-page article on the economic crisis leading to 1.6 million Frenchmen living abroad, most of them under 40 and with a good education (five years of studies above the high school diploma), and as the newspaper of reference publishes an editorial, François Hollande's Forgotten Promise to the young.

Solenne a le profil classique des 1,6 million de Français qui vivent aujourd'hui à l'étranger. Comme la plupart d'entre eux, elle a moins de 40 ans et elle est qualifiée (bac + 5). C'est ce profil qui alimente le plus l'émigration . En février, une étude du cabinet Deloitte – l'un des plus grands cabinet d'audit et de conseil – a révélé que 27 % des jeunes diplômés voulaient travailler hors de France, contre 15 % en 2012.

Pour autant, les experts ne parlent pas encore d'émigration massive. Plutôt d'un frémissement. Contrairement aux idées reçues, pour Solenne comme pour beaucoup de ceux partis avant elle, la morosité du marché français n'est pas la principale raison de départ. "Est-ce que je serais restée s'il avait été plus facile de changer de boulot en France ? Non", assure-t-elle. Solenne rêvait d'ailleurs de toute façon. Mais elle concède : sans la crise "sans doute que j'aurais réfléchi autrement"...

"ON NE SAIT PAS SI ON REVIENDRA"

Avant de se décider à tenter sa chance au Canada, Solenne occupait un poste de chargée de communication à l'Institut français. A Montréal, elle sera propulsée directrice de la communication d'un centre de danse. Son salaire y gagnera. Elle aura des horaires plus tranquilles et pourra se loger dans une jolie maisonnette au lieu d'un T3. Son compagnon, ingénieur à la RATP il y a encore trois mois, l'y attend déjà.

\Avec un départ prévu le 5 août direction la Chine, Raphaëlle, urbaniste, et son conjoint, instituteur, sont dans la même situation. Avec les mêmes stress liés au largage des ultimes attaches affectives et administratives : dire au revoir à la famille, aux copains, trouver à qui louer leur T2 bis sur leboncoin.fr. Seule différence, ce couple de Parisiens se lance dans l'aventure avec leur petite fille âgée de 2 ans et demi.

Lire les tribunes : Les jeunes doivent-ils quitter la France pour réussir ?

"On ne sait pas si on reviendra", lâche d'emblée Raphaëlle, 32 ans. Son conjoint a trouvé un poste dans une école franco-chinoise dans le centre de Shanghaï. Elle pense trouver à monnayer d'une façon ou d'une autre ses services d'urbaniste. Là encore, les effets de la crise ont pu être un "accélérateur", pense Raphaëlle, mais le couple avait dans tous les cas des prédispositions à l'expatriation : ils ont passé respectivement cinq et quinze ans de leur enfance à l'étranger.

LES PAYS ARABOPHONES À FORTE CROISSANCE

Effet de génération ? La fragilité de l'économie française est par contre clairement un moteur chez Nadia et Reda, fraîchement diplômés de leur école de commerce. Agés de 23 ans et 22 ans, ils ont chacun achevé, le 13 juillet, deux ans en alternance en entreprise : Nadia au service marketing d'IBM France et Reda dans une start-up spécialisée dans le développement digital. Pour eux, partir est une évidence. Reda dit même n'avoir fait "aucune recherche en France".

  … Mais l'une des raisons qui poussent Nadia et Reda à aller voir hors de France pour une durée qu'ils ont du mal à planifier réside aussi dans les origines marocaines de leurs parents. Même si Reda ne sait pas très bien où classer ce sentiment dans la hiérarchie de ses motivations à l'expatriation, prévue d'ici à l'automne, il résume pudiquement : "Il y a en France un climat économique et social nauséabond..." "Une xénophobie et une islamophobie", ajoute-t-il quand on lui demande de préciser.

Son entourage est un peu désarçonné. Les parents de ce jeune homme d'1 m 80, au bouc et à la moustache soignés, sont agents d'entretien. Ils sont arrivés en France à l'âge de 12 ans et 27 ans. "Pour eux, c'est forcément un peu bizarre de me voir partir, surtout dans ces régions", avoue Reda qui, bon élève, a aussi fait deux ans de classe préparatoire en lettres au lycée Masséna de Nice. Si ses parents avaient des ambitions pour lui, "c'était plus aux Etats-Unis".

My Dad Kept Staring at the Female Teenager

I took my dad to the mall the other day to buy some new shoes (he is 66).

Valerie tells us.

We decided to grab a bite at the food court.

I noticed he was watching a teenager sitting next to him.
The teenager had spiked hair in all different colours — green, red, orange, and blue.

My dad kept staring at her.

The teenager kept looking and would find my dad staring every time.

When the teenager had had enough, she sarcastically asked: “What's the matter old man, never done anything wild in your life?”

Knowing my Dad, I quickly swallowed my food so that I would not choke on his response; I knew he would have a good one!

In classic style he responded without batting an eyelid …………
“Got stoned once and  screwed  a peacock.  I was just wondering if you were my daughter."

The old anti-American strategy looks intact: Germany’s political Chicken Littles have made Snowden's accusations the attention-getting issue in the country’s election campaign

The concern of European allies about American electronic eavesdropping on their citizens is both reasonable and unresolved. What it needn’t be is close to panic-stricken.

Thus opines John Vinocur in his International Herald Tribune column.

France, with its own remarkably effective intelligence services, approaches the question with very controlled and limited indignation. The Dutch treat the issue next to not at all, in line with their model of centuries of success in avoiding controversy that holds no promise of practical yield. 

But here in Germany, the political class is in an uproar. The geschrei is of American betrayal, of a government kneeling before the Yanks, and the forsaken state of the unprotected Deutsche Volk. 

Since Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor, dumped his accusations about the N.S.A.’s intrusive reach into European private life more than six weeks ago, Germany’s political Chicken Littles have made it the attention-getting issue in the country’s national election campaign. 

As a result, politicians have been telling voters they are victims of unlawful scrutiny and taking comfortable, sound-bite roles as accusers of the United States. 

By way of resistance, the country’s second most powerful politician, Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble — in a sly poke that doesn’t exclude Chancellor Angela Merkel — complained that he can’t comprehend the outrage emanating from both the government and opposition. A former interior minister who intimately knows the world of spying and disinformation, Schäuble said, “My European colleagues are not worked up about this. ... How else do you want to track down terrorist networks that operate internationally?” 

Sharper still was Otto Schily, the Social Democrat interior minister during Gerhard Schröder’s time as chancellor. He dismissed the current German fear of the state as “partially lunatic stuff.” 

Still, this is a hullabaloo that went into the streets last weekend with demonstrations against official eavesdropping. The shrillness of the moment was exemplified in a petition from 32 writers sent to the chancellor. Drum roll, solemn music: 

“We are experiencing a historical attack on our democratic state of law that stands on its head one-million-fold the principle of presumption of innocence.” 

That tone works here. Years back, Angela Merkel said that Gerhard Schröder’s opposition in 2002 to war Iraq was electorally motivated, as was his talk then of “German emancipation” from the United States. He ran and won as an incumbent chancellor that year. 

The old strategy looks intact. Sept. 22 is election day. And there’s a ready-made, if shaky, we-know-best rationale for Germans’ acute sensitivity: their experience with state surveillance during the Nazi and East German eras. 

In more incisive and introspective terms, the federal president, Joachim Gauck, was described last year by a Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reporter as seeing the country engaged in a continual search for its next big angst. Now the newspaper refers to “partially surreal” notions and “plot theories” to characterize the country’s mind-set. 

Süddeutsche Zeitung pointed toward a fundamentally deep German problem with America. It wrote, “The star pupil of the postwar years has turned into a know-it-all projecting the worst evil onto their former idol and teacher.”

The language of Peer Steinbrück, the Social Democratic candidate, goes in that direction: “The government is bowing down before the Americans one more time.” And: “Enormous damage to the German people has occurred. That’s monstrous.”

In addition, Sigmar Gabriel, the Social Democratic Party chairman, accused the Americans and British of “massive economic espionage” and said they and their “helpers” should be investigated by the German authorities.

Merkel’s line of defense is not (à la Schäuble or Schily) to scold those who are casting the country as victimized. Strikingly, she has leaned in the direction of alarm, twice paraphrasing Schröder to needle the Americans with the refrain that Germany did not believe in the law of the strongest but in the strength of the law.

It was as if the United States had intruded on Merkel’s version of Germany’s perfect world, described by a columnist in the newspaper Bild as selling cars everywhere while the Americans do the dirty work. In reality, close contact between American and German intelligence services, involving shared surveillance programs and equipment, has deepened since the start of the Schröder chancellery in 1998.

John Kornblum, a former U.S. ambassador to Germany, offered this frame of reference: “Factual and unemotional are rarely used words used the characterize discussions within Germany society. Germany has yet to rebuild a foundation of self-confidence which makes it possible to view challenges as tasks rather than emotional crises.”

“The next emotional outburst against America is probably just around the corner,” he said.

Latest Lefty Rewriting of History: During World War II, "Sex become a way to assert American domination" over France

Just when you thought that World War II was fought by the greatest generation comes a book accusing the American army of racism, of harboring innumerable rapists, of bombing French cities with no just cause, and of being "guests [in France] who have overstayed their welcome", thus meaning the US presence "was not just an experience of liberation." (Oh, and while we're at it, Times Square's VJ-Day Kissing Sailor Turns Out to Be a "Sexual Predator".)

Nothing about the fact that these young men are going into combat, that soldiers everywhere are hungry for the company of women (whether in their own country or on a foreign base), the unfortunate but necessary options that must considered be to wage and to win battles, and what kind of country France would be in had the status quo (continued occupation by a different kind of army, the Nazi one) continued.

No matter.  Of course, What Soldiers Do (Sex and the American GI in World War II France)  is a World War II book that Le Monde must review, by all means, indeed that it must devote a full-page article to, and so it sends Washington correspondent Corine Lesnes to interview the author.

It turns out that Mary Louise Roberts started the book right after the beginning of the Gulf War and, thus, the slightly skeptical citizen (American or foreign) is forced to wonder whether it isn't really but the latet full-blown attack on America and on American history.

"Sex become a a manner of assuring American domination over a secondary power", says the University of Wisconsin professor. "I wish the United States would be less arrogant vis-à-vis France." And the French are correct not to be grateful to Uncle Sam.

Vous avez commencé ce livre juste après les tensions entre la France et les Etats-Unis sur l'intervention en Irak, en 2003. Pourquoi ?

Je voulais voir comment une telle friction avait pu se produire entre ces deux alliés. Du coup, je me suis intéressée à ce qui s'était passé à la fin de la seconde guerre mondiale, notamment après le débarquement. Et là, en consultant les archives, je me suis aperçue que tous les rapports de police montrent la même chose. Il y a eu des viols et des crimes partout où les GI étaient stationnés, à Reims, Cherbourg, Brest, Le Havre, Caen...

Vous montrez d'abord le contexte chargé dans lequel les soldats américains sont envoyés en Normandie.

Il suffit de consulter Stars and Stripes, le quotidien de l'armée. On y trouve tous les vieux stéréotypes. La France est présentée comme une sorte de bordel. Elle est complètement érotisée. Cette image date en fait de la première guerre mondiale. Quand les soldats sont revenus, ils ont raconté des histoires affriolantes. Après, l'armée américaine a "vendu" la guerre comme une occasion de se faire embrasser par des Françaises, et peut-être plus. Ce n'est pas propre à la France, bien sûr. Tous les théâtres de guerre étaient érotisés. C'était l'époque des photos de pin-up accrochées dans les dortoirs, de Rita Hayworth... Mais une image revient avec constance dans le journal de l'armée : les GI entourés par des Françaises. Embrassés par des Françaises. Sur l'une, on voit un groupe de femmes, visiblement réjouies. Et la légende dit : "Voilà ce pour quoi nous nous battons." 

Dans le vocabulaire, Paris est une femme, elle est "belle", elle est "seule depuis quatre ans", nous allons lui "tenir compagnie"... Quand ils débarquent en France, les GI ont l'impression d'être des chevaliers qui viennent à la rescousse de la damoiselle en péril. Ils ont été préparés à l'idée qu'ils seraient gratifiés de certaines récompenses, que les Français avaient une dette à leur égard et que les Françaises s'en acquitteraient.

Il s'en est suivi un tsunami de libido masculine, qui va se traduire par des phénomènes de prostitution à grande échelle. Et il y aura une vague de viols en Normandie, en août et septembre 1944.

Quelle est l'ampleur de la prostitution ?

A la Libération, beaucoup de femmes étaient pauvres, particulièrement à Paris. Leurs maris étaient dans les camps allemands, elles avaient besoin d'argent. De plus, il y avait un sentiment de reconnaissance vis-à-vis des Américains. Mais ce sentiment a disparu après quelques mois, et, à l'été 1945, les GI ressemblaient davantage à des invités qui s'attardent trop longtemps. A ce moment-là, le système français des maisons closes a été complètement débordé. …

Vous y voyez une leçon politique ?

Je me suis intéressée au sexe comme une forme de pouvoir. L'armée américaine a envisagé la question de la prostitution et des viols comme une façon d'établir une forme de suprématie. Souvenez-vous, nous sommes en 1945, les Etats-Unis commencent à s'affirmer comme une puissance mondiale. C'est aussi un moment où la France, humiliée, s'aperçoit qu'elle a perdu son statut de superpuissance. Le sexe devient une manière d'assurer la domination américaine sur une puissance secondaire. L'image romantique du Débarquement permet de neutraliser les tensions sur la souveraineté nationale française et le refus, pendant des mois, de reconnaître le général de Gaulle comme le chef du gouvernement provisoire.

Rewriting History: Times Square's VJ-Day Kissing Sailor Turns Out to Be a "Sexual Predator"

So that's what it has come to: as Claire Guillot explains in Le Monde's Ce que l'on croit voir series, the kissing sailor in the Alfred Eisenstaedt photo at Times Square on VJ Day is attacked for "sexual aggression". "Greta Zimmer Friedman [a dental assistant and not a nurse] … wasn't in the street to celebrate and she did not want to be kissed, certainly not by a hunky sailor who was drunk." So let's get this straight: a man, a fighter, does not have the right to be inebriated, even when learning of the end of the most deadly war in history. As for Zimmer, the "Austrian refuge in the United States [who] lost her father and mother in the Nazi death camps" had no intention of celebrating the end of the most deadly war in history.

Related: Latest Rewriting of History — During World War II, "Sex become a a manner of assuring American domination" over France

On l'a longtemps prise pour l'image la plus romantique du monde, mais la photo d'Alfred Eisenstaedt n'a rien d'une scène d'amour. Dans cette image, tout semble parfait : un marin et une infirmière s'embrassent avec passion à Times Square pour célébrer la capitulation du Japon le 14 août 1945. Lui en uniforme sombre, elle tout en blanc, abandonnés dans une embrassade théâtrale, aveugles à la foule riante, sur la place la plus célèbre du monde. Publiée par le magazine Life, elle est devenue une icône, image symbole du "V-J Day" (Victory over Japan Day) et de l'euphorie qui l'a accompagné.

L'image est si parfaite qu'elle a longtemps été accusée d'être une mise en scène. D'autant que le photographe n'avait pas identifié les protagonistes. Au fil du temps, plusieurs marins et infirmières se sont reconnus. En 2012, The Kissing Sailor, de Lawrence Verria et George Galdorisi (éd. Naval Institute, en anglais), confirme que la scène était spontanée – contrairement au Baiser de l'Hôtel de Ville, de Robert Doisneau. L'ouvrage conclut que les héros en sont Greta Zimmer Friedman et George Mendonsa, tous deux encore vivants. Mais la sortie du livre déclenche une polémique : l'image cacherait... une agression sexuelle.

 … Le marin George Mendonsa, lui, est au cinéma avec sa petite amie (et future femme) Rita, quand une foule en liesse interrompt la séance. Ravi de ne pas avoir à retourner dans le Pacifique, le marin écume les bars, Rita sur ses talons. A Times Square, bien aviné, il aperçoit Greta Zimmer qui retourne au travail. Dans le livre The Eye of Eisenstaedt, le photographe écrit : "J'ai remarqué un marin venant dans ma direction. Il attrapait toutes les femmes à sa portée et les embrassait, jeunes comme vieilles. Puis j'ai remarqué l'infirmière, debout dans cette immense foule. J'ai fait le point sur elle, et, comme je l'espérais, le marin est arrivé, a attrapé l'infirmière, et s'est penché pour l'embrasser."

Greta Zimmer ne connaît donc pas le marin. Son abandon n'est pas une pose consentie mais contrainte. Sur une des quatre images d'Eisenstaedt, on la voit serrer le poing. En 2005, quand on lui demande ce qu'elle a ressenti, Greta Zimmer déclare : "Je sentais qu'il était très fort. Il me tenait très serré. Je ne sais pas quoi penser du baiser... c'était juste quelqu'un qui fêtait une occasion. Ce n'était pas romantique." Les célébrations de la victoire n'ont pas toujours été bon enfant, rappellent Robert Hariman et John Louis Lucaites dans le livre No Caption Needed (éd. University of Chicago, en anglais, 2011). L'article de Life consacré à l'événement en 1945 évoque des scènes de liesse, mais aussi des débordements, des violences. Six images de baisers accompagnent l'article. Mais "à l'exception de la photo du "Baiser de Times Square" d'Eisenstaedt, toutes les autres photos de baisers décrivent des actes plus lascifs ou transgressifs". C'est la plus consensuelle qui deviendra une icône, réduisant l'événement à ses aspects positifs.

 … Quand le livre The Kissing Sailor est publié, plusieurs auteurs, dont le blog féministe "Crates and Ribbons", soulignent "l'agression sexuelle" : Greta n'était pas là pour faire la fête, elle ne voulait pas être embrassée, encore moins par un marin costaud et saoul. Les réactions des internautes sont violentes. Beaucoup jugent cette lecture de l'image anachronique. Il est vrai que Greta Zimmer, la "victime", ne semble pas traumatisée.

How Presidential Can You Look in a Photo Like This?

Many think that the photo of François Hollande in the Thomas Wieder article of his visit to Clichy-sous-Bois makes the president of France look rather ridiculous

Welcome to Detroit!

Just about the only other opinion that Le Monde is willing to give different from its Detroit's-demise-is-all-the-fault-of-white-racists-and-egotistical-conservatives is the reprint of a Nate Beeler cartoon from The Colombus Dispatch:  

Dessin paru dans " The Colombus Dispatch ", Etats-Unis. Un " juge des faillites ", comme on peut le lire sur la mallette est observé par " syndicat " (" Unions ") et " système de retraite " qui dit à son camarade : " Ouh la, le quartier est mal barré ! "

 

Detroit's Problems Presented in France as the Result of White Racists' Egotism

Two full-page articles in Le Monde present the fall of Motor-City as being in large part due to white racism.

One of two graphs in Detroit : la chute de "Motor-City" shows the departure of whites in the last 60 years.

Then we have Philippe Bernard's interview of Thomas Sugrue, in a piece entitled after one of the Pittsburgh University professor's quotes, "Conservatives Do Not Want to Save Detroit".

Les relations entre Blancs et Noirs n'avaient, en revanche, rien d'exemplaire...

D'un côté, Detroit a offert de vastes débouchés pour les ouvriers africains-américains. Beaucoup avaient migré du Sud en quête d'emplois industriels stables. De l'autre, la ville était un lieu d'intense polarisation raciale. Quand les premières familles noires se sont installées dans des quartiers blancs, elles se sont fait attaquer. Detroit vivait alors sous une sorte d'apartheid à l'américaine. Il n'était pas question pour les Noirs de s'installer dans certains quartiers du centre ni en banlieue. Ils vivaient de façon presque complètement séparée des Blancs.

Pas dans les usines !
Non, ils travaillaient dans les mêmes usines, mais les Noirs étaient concentrés dans les emplois les moins qualifiés et les plus durs, comme la métallurgie ou les cabines de peinture.

1943 a été l'année des premières émeutes raciales. Pourquoi ?

On était en pleine guerre, les usines de tanks, de jeeps, d'avions avaient un énorme besoin de main-d'oeuvre et des centaines de milliers de Noirs avaient afflué. Les Blancs craignaient pour leurs emplois. Ils ont attaqué les nouveaux venus dans les tramways, les bus et ils ont saccagé les quartiers noirs. Il y a eu 34 morts, des Noirs en majorité.

Little to nothing about the activities of the unions or the fact that the city has been dominated by the Democrat party for the past five decades. All about white city dwellers' egotistical decision to abscond Detroit 60 years ago and the racist decision of white taxpayers, Michigan politicians, and federal leaders since then (but of course Ronald Reagan is mentioned, as is the current Republican House of Representatives) not to help the black city. (Only the reprint of an American cartoon, deep inside the newspaper in another issue, gives a hint of another point of view.)

De quand datez-vous le début du déclin de la ville de Detroit ?

L'automobile a commencé à s'effondrer dès les années 1950. Entre 1947 et 1963, environ 140 000 emplois ont disparu de la ville dans ce secteur. Ils ont été délocalisés dans des régions aux salaires plus bas, comme le sud des Etats-Unis, puis à l'étranger.

L'impact a été très négatif sur la ville, en particulier pour les ouvriers noirs non qualifiés qui venaient d'arriver. Au même moment, les Blancs ont massivement déménagé vers les banlieues. A la fin des années 1960, le visage de la ville avait totalement changé : les Noirs formaient 40 % de sa population. Conséquences : les investissements de la ville ont chuté, les entreprises et les centres commerciaux ont déserté le centre. En retour, la population noire a de plus en plus manifesté son mécontentement et les conflits avec la police se sont multipliés.

 … Un maire africain-américain a été élu pour la première fois en 1972. Mais l'émergence d'une majorité noire en ville n'a fait qu'augmenter l'hostilité entre elle et une partie des banlieues, dans un Etat, le Michigan, presque totalement peuplé de Blancs.

Cette hostilité reste-t-elle au centre de la crise actuelle ?

Oui, parce qu'à cause de ce fossé, il est devenu politiquement très difficile pour le gouverneur et les élus de l'Etat de soutenir financièrement la ville. Les autres électeurs ont tendance à considérer Detroit comme un lieu de corruption et de délinquance qui ne vaut pas la peine d'être aidé.

La corruption est une réalité ?

La mauvaise gestion de Detroit est évidente, mais elle n'est pas pire qu'à Chicago, par exemple.

Il n'est donc pas question de solidarité financière ?

Dans la conception américaine, les collectivités locales doivent être tenues pour responsables de ce qui leur arrive. Les gens installés dans les banlieues aisées refusent que l'argent de leurs impôts aille aux Noirs du centre de Detroit.

Pourquoi l'Etat fédéral n'est pas intervenu ?

A partir des années Reagan, les aides fédérales ont chuté, entraînant l'appauvrissement des habitants de villes comme Detroit. Or, ils en auraient eu particulièrement besoin, au moment où le système d'aides et les services municipaux se sont dégradés.

 … Pourquoi l'industrie automobile a-t-elle été sauvée en 2009 par des aides fédérales et pas la ville de Detroit ?

Les conservateurs pensent que la ville est responsable de son sort et doit être punie pour l'exemple. Ils ont la majorité à la Chambre des représentants et n'ont aucune volonté de sauver Detroit.

One Le Monde reader objects:  

Dr Stefool il y a 3 jours

Et puisque le Monde semble aimer les statistiques ethniques, au moins quand il s'agit des USA, pourquoi ne pas nous faire une petite infographie similaire sur le 9-3 des annees 50 a nos jours et voir ce que l'etat, contrairement aux administrations de l'affreux Reagan, a englouti de richesse nationale dans ce territoire en voie de delabrement.
 

Dr Stefool il y a 3 jours

On dirait que Le Monde a du mal a s'en remettre. C'est pas dramatique, c'est juste une faillite, comme dit Krugman ca arrive. On comprend de votre infographie que l'affreux Reagan n'a pas voulu soutenir la ville (heureusement!). Rien sur la gestion democrate depuis 1962. Rien sur les syndicats. Rien sur 18 Mds de dette ! et les creanciers: les anciens employes de la ville dont les fonds de pension ponctionnent 40% du budget de la ville en interet. Y'a des banques europeennes aussi. Dexia LOL

Reminder:

Chicago hasn’t had a Republican mayor for 85 years.
Detroit hasn’t had a Republican mayor for over 50 years.

From Normal or Overweight to Fit 'n' Ripped in Only One Hour

It's all smoke and mirrors 

writes Andrew Dixon about the fitness industry. Many of us knew, or suspected, that, of course, but who knew that a before photo and an after photo that look like an interval of "months of hard work and dieting" could be produced in only one hour?!

There is no doubt that we live in a world of manipulation, false promises and exaggerated claims. This is especially true in the fitness industry.

 … The reasons these programs become so popular is because they are presented and marketed very well. These marketing campaigns use testimonials and before-and-after transformation photos. Before I claim it's all bullshit, I want to make it clear that there are definitely some very impressive, genuine physical transformations out there. What I do take issue with are the transformations that are manipulated with Photoshop, professional lighting, postures to degrade or enhance their look, pro tans, sucking in or pushing out a bloated belly or flexing muscles vs. not flexing to obtain an optimal look.
 
I decided to take my own transformation photos to see what was possible with just a few easy tweaks. About six months ago I was around 185 pounds and about 16 percent body fat. I was feeling particularly bloated on the day, so I asked my girlfriend to take a before shot. I then shaved my head, face and chest and prepared for the after shot, which was about an hour after I took the before shot. I did a few push ups and chin ups, tweaked my bedroom lighting, sucked in, tightened my abs and BOOM! We got our after shot.

As you can see [two photos above], I'm no bodybuilder, but I had enough muscle on me to catch some shadows from the all-important overhead lighting.

Just a few weeks ago I took another series of photos in an attempt to be a little more deceptive. I wanted to show a series of progressions that look like a few months of hard work and dieting. I'm about 200 pounds and 19 percent body fat in this photo series. This took under an hour to produce.

Sexual Activity: most people mainly want to prove that they are sexually functioning, and that’s all

FOR a period of my life, from my 27th to my 39th years, I slept alone

writes Sophie Fontanel, the author of the forthcoming book “The Art of Sleeping Alone”:

I had no sex. I wasn’t unhappy. Or frustrated. In fact, I found no sex preferable to disappointing sex.

 … [Back then,] I asked myself, “Sophie, is your sexual life so very stimulating, actually?” And my answer was, “No.” I realized that even when I took pleasure, I was not ecstatic with my sexual life. In fact, I seemed to be going through the motions of lovemaking because, I thought, that’s what everybody did. I decided to take a break, to recover a true desire.

And what a break! Twelve years! 

It was so easy to stop.

At the beginning, I kept the fact that I had given up sex a secret, and nobody around me could guess how untouched I was. I knew perfectly well that people accept all kinds of sexual behaviors, just so long as you are doing something with your body. 

Are you single, married, engaged, “it’s complicated”? Are you straight, gay, a lesbian? All of these categories suggest sexual activity, which somehow reassures us. You are doing something. 

  But I don’t think that’s our true life and rhythm. We are not machines. Nothing is so tidy about our sex lives. We are very alone in how we dream. We are not making love as easily as we boast we are. And when we are making love, it is not always enjoyable. 

We are liars, poor liars trying to mystify one another. Perhaps French people are especially big liars. At the very least, we are full of contradictions. If you visit Paris, you will notice that we are very thin, even if we are the country of bread and cheese. We are also very sexy, but maybe it’s only a show to save our reputation. 

By giving up sex, I abandoned all this pretense. During the 12 years I didn’t have sex, I learned so much. About my body, the role of art in eroticism, the power of dreams, the softness of clothes, the refuge and the importance of elegance.

 … I’ve learned that most people mainly want to prove that they are sexually functioning, and that’s all. Strangely, people are ashamed to admit that they are alone in their beds, which I discovered is a huge pleasure.

Those Who Aren't With Us Are Against Us, Said the President of the USA — 50 Years Ago

Those who aren't with us are against us, said the president of the United States — 50 years ago.

1963 De Gaulle Warned on Allies

FRANKFURT — President Kennedy, in a blunt rebuttal to French President Charles de Gaulle’s concept of an independent Europe, said … that those who would split allies “give aid and comfort” to enemies of the West. “The United States,” Mr. Kennedy promised, “will risk its cities to defend yours because we need your freedom to protect ours. ... Those who would doubt our pledge or deny this indivisibility — those who would separate Europe from America or split one ally from another — would only give aid and comfort to the men who make themselves our adversaries and welcome any Western disarray.” Mr. Kennedy tackled the “De Gaulle problem” in a major foreign policy address in Frankfurt’s historic Paulskirche — St. Paul’s Church.

Did 2 French Aviators Reach North America by Plane in 1927, a Few Days Before Lindbergh Landed in Paris?

Two French aviators had done it, it seemed

writes Scott Sayare in the New York Times

— accomplished the first, near-unthinkable flight between Paris and New York, and on May 10, 1927, newspapers across France proclaimed “the triumph of French wings” and a “golden age of French aviation.”

“Nungesser and Coli have succeeded,” declared La Presse, going so far as to detail their sea landing in New York Harbor and the “cheers that rose up from the ships that surrounded them.”

Those heady first reports proved false. Charles Nungesser, a daredevil aristocrat and top French flying ace, and François Coli, a one-eyed mariner and former infantryman, had not arrived in New York. Their hulking single-engine biplane, L’Oiseau Blanc, or The White Bird, was never recovered. 

They had vanished “like midnight ghosts,” wrote Charles Lindbergh, the American who only days later reached Paris from New York. The Frenchmen were thought to have gone down in the English Channel, or perhaps over the Atlantic, or somewhere between Newfoundland and Maine.

Their disappearance, considered one of aviation’s great mysteries, has inspired decades of hypothesizing. 

A growing body of evidence, however, suggests that the aviators crashed off the tiny St.-Pierre, a craggy outcrop of lichenous rock and boxy, brightly colored houses about 10 miles from Newfoundland. It is a theory championed by Bernard Decré, an obsessive and excitable French septuagenarian who has committed the past five years to a full-time search for L’Oiseau Blanc.

The Return of Françafrique: Without much notice from the French, Hollande is bringing France back into Africa

On Bastille Day this year, African troops from Mali, Chad and other nations proudly marched down the Champs-Élysées as part of the traditional French national-day military parade

writes Pierre Haski in the New York Times.

It has been a long time since Africa was honored so prominently in France. That reflects a significant shift in France’s interest in Africa, created in part by the decline of France’s global influence in a changing world. 

Relations with Africa, and particularly with France’s former colonies, have long been sufficiently important for Paris to merit a French advisory unit in the president’s office known as the cellule africaine (African cell). 

When France gave most of its African colonies independence in 1960, it retained considerable control. French advisers pulled the strings in ministries from Abidjan to Libreville and reported directly to Jacques Foccart, Charles de Gaulle’s powerful chief advisor on African affairs, a man who could decide to overthrow a president or send French paratroopers to rescue one. 

These arrangements, dubbed “Françafrique,” remained almost untouched for nearly three decades, no matter who ruled in the Élysée Palace.

 … In Mali, [President Hollande] tried for months to promote an “African solution” to the jihadist takeover of a territory in the Sahel region as big as France. 

But when the rebel columns began advancing on Bamako last January, Hollande moved in decisively with troops and jets, seeking at the same time to mobilize regional forces to take over from the French as soon as possible. 

Then in May, the French president traveled to Addis Ababa for the 50th anniversary of the African Union, the only Western head of government to do so. And he surprised his audience by inviting all 54 African states to Paris next December for a “summit on peace and security on the continent” to discuss Africa’s failure to deal with its own security issues in the past half century. 

This is the biggest diplomatic initiative taken by France on the African continent in many years. And even if some African leaders felt “summoned” rather than “invited,” they recognized the validity of the issue. 

Without much notice from French public opinion, which is focused more on gloomy economic statistics, Hollande is bringing France back into Africa. President Barack Obama’s recent trip to Africa shows that the United States may likewise be showing a greater interest in the continent.

If the U.S. were to treat Mexican nationals in the same way that Mexico treats Central American nationals, there would be humanitarian outrage

There are many strange elements in the current debate over illegal immigration

writes Victor Davis Hanson (gracias por instapundit),

but none stranger than the mostly ignored role of Mexico.

  … Is elemental hunger forcing millions of Mexicans to flee north, as it may have in the past?

Not necessarily. According to a recent United Nations study, an estimated 70 percent of Mexico's citizens are overweight and suffer from the same problems of diet, health concerns and lack of exercise shared by other more affluent Western societies.

Mexico is a severe critic of U.S. immigration policy, often damning Americans as ruthlessly insensitive for trying to close our border. It has gone so far as to join lawsuits against individual American states to force relaxation of our border enforcement. Former Mexican President Felipe Calderon sharply criticized the United States for trying to "criminalize migration."

Is Mexico, then, a model of immigration tolerance?

Far from it.

Until 2011, when it passed reforms, Mexico had among the most draconian immigration laws in the world. Guatemala has criticized Mexico for initiating construction of a fence along its southern border.

Mexico has zero tolerance for illegal immigrants who seek to work inside Mexico, happen to break Mexican law or go on public assistance -- or any citizens who aid them.

In Mexico, legal immigration is aimed at privileging lawful arrivals with skill sets that aid the Mexican economy and, according to the country's immigration law, who have the "necessary funds for their sustenance" -- while denying entry to those who are not healthy or would upset the "equilibrium of the national demographics." Translated, that idea of demographic equilibrium apparently means that Mexico tries to withhold citizen status from those who do not look like Mexicans or have little skills to make money.

If the United States were to treat Mexican nationals in the same way that Mexico treats Central American nationals, there would be humanitarian outrage.

 … In truth, many thousands of Mexicans flee northward not necessarily because there are no jobs, or because they are starving at home. America offers them far more upward mobility and social justice than does their own homeland. And for all the immigration rhetoric about race and class, millions of Mexicans vote with their feet to enjoy the far greater cultural tolerance found in the U.S.

Indigenous people make up a large part of the most recent wave of Mexican arrivals. Those who leave provinces like Oaxaca or Chiapas apparently find the English-speaking, multiracial U.S. a fairer place than the hierarchical and often racially stratified society of Mexico.

People should be a nation's greatest resource. Fairly or not, Mexico has long been seen to view its own citizens in rather cynical terms as a valuable export commodity, akin to oil or food. When they are young and healthy, Mexican expatriates are expected to scrimp, save and support their poorer relatives back in Mexico. When these Mexican expats are ill and aged, then the U.S should pick up the tab for their care.

Related: "Undocumented Worker" — The Left's Preferred Expression for "Illegal Alien" Is False and Misleading 

No, Senator Rubio (and No, Liberals): There Is Not a Single "Undocumented Worker" in the United States (or On This Planet)

If 2nd Amendment Only Applies to Muskets, Does 1st Amendment Only Apply To Quill Pens?

I'm not going to sit here and let Michael Moore tell everyone on national television what he thinks we should be doing on the Second Amendment

says Former U.S. Navy SEAL Dom Raso.

As if he has any credibility on this issue because he is a celebrity …

In his words, the Second Amendment only applied to muskets where you put the little ball thing in …

If the Second Amendment only applies to muskets, I guess the First one only applies to quill pens and parchment…

There's no logic in following the constitution when you feel like it; and mocking it when you don't.