Show of HandsShow of Hands

Mattwall1 August 4th, 2015 5:31pm

Since 1781, the US has had an international union akin to a very weak EU and a federal republic. In the same period, France has had 4 monarchies, 2 Empires, 5 Republics, and a collaborationist regime. Why do you think there is such a stark contrast?

10 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

Mattwall1
08/04/15 10:46 am

That would make sense of every French government lacked religion (not the case) and if every government involving religious individuals has lasted (also not the case). Seeing as neither are truly the case, that answer doesn't really seem to make

Reply
Mattwall1
08/04/15 10:46 am

Logical sense

Reply
17millionTwats Leeds, UK
08/04/15 10:31 am

Because France is shite 🇫🇷

Reply
rons screw politicians
08/04/15 11:45 am

And a partridge in a pear tree!

Reply
17millionTwats Leeds, UK
08/04/15 2:56 pm

Its true tho, damn snail frog eating garlic wearing "i spit in your general direction" arrogant french speaking surrender monkeys 🇫🇷

Reply
bringstheeagle Colorado
08/04/15 11:06 am

I think it's about the age and history of France dating back to feudalism. America is a very new nation with a relatively short history as a national government. No disrespect to the indigenous nations that existed before the American Republic was

Reply
bringstheeagle Colorado
08/04/15 11:08 am

established. These governments in my view were just part of the natural growth and evolution of their system.

Reply
bringstheeagle Colorado
08/04/15 11:09 am

Lol. I don't agree but I love that answer. Very funny.

Reply
Sentinel Ya ie wa noh
08/04/15 10:41 am

I was estimate that those forms of structured gov. were not working well enough to continue their patactice, or a least did not produce the effects that were expected or wanted.......

Reply
cognocity
08/04/15 2:23 pm

Makes sense that the answer comes from you. 😂

Reply
NotACrook The Watergate Hotel
08/04/15 3:18 pm

Because there have been significantly more wars that the French have been involved in as compared to the U.S.

Reply
NotACrook The Watergate Hotel
08/04/15 3:19 pm

Or they were impacted more by these wars because of their geographic location

Reply
Mattwall1
08/04/15 9:39 pm

In other words, there is a sociological element, not solely the fact we have the constitution we do and others don't (although we are far from the only country that understood why it needs a constitutional change, though like all countries we had

Reply
Mattwall1
08/04/15 9:39 pm

Opposition to it, as well as to a revolution)

Reply
Mattwall1
08/04/15 9:41 pm

Not quite, we did borrow many elements from other sources, ranging from colonial and early Republican practices to Parliamentary practice, Montesquieu (himself building from the Romans), etc but if your argument that it was the Constitution is

Reply
Mattwall1
08/04/15 2:59 pm

I can see that, but that wouldn't explain why when many Latin American republics essentially copied and pasted our constitution as their own, it didn't exactly work out well in terms of governmental and constitutional stability

Reply
17millionTwats Leeds, UK
08/04/15 3:03 pm

Thats why its the stereotype

Reply
knetzere Illinois
08/04/15 4:46 pm

The French just like to riot every now and then

Reply
dfish at home
08/05/15 11:43 am

When freedom is coupled with the idea that it is a right granted us by our creator, that is what is unique. That attitude is what makes the USA the best, sadly it's not as prevalent anymore

Mattwall1
08/06/15 12:11 pm

I'm sorry you can't handle an analysis that was long, but I was not having a conversation with myself. I was responding to your claim.

elianastar Gab.ai FreeSpeech
08/04/15 9:37 pm

Becuz they tried to copy/paste it onto an existing society/political structure. We fought to separate from a political system & understood why that wasn't working, that this was something new, something fought for, something unique. Many layers.

elianastar Gab.ai FreeSpeech
08/04/15 9:38 pm

U.S. Constitution was *born* of something in an organic way. It wasn't like we're doing to ourselves now... trying to copy/paste the old things we left onto the new thing we had.

GildaZ Montgomery, IL
08/04/15 6:14 pm

The French favoritism towards more Unitary systems because of its more compact size, while American's prefer a more Federal system because of its large size.

dfish at home
08/04/15 5:01 pm

I'd say CWest is half right. Add freedom to the mix and you get the winning combination

Mattwall1
08/04/15 9:41 pm

Valid, would it not have to be universal?

Mattwall1
08/05/15 12:59 pm

Except we both know CWest's original basis is already unsubstantiated, adding more elements doesn't help prove an unsubstantiated claim. We aren't the only free country, the only free country that has viewed rights as coming from God, and not all

Mattwall1
08/05/15 1:01 pm

French governments were, and many have had freedom, and the idea of rights coming from a creator (theistic or deist), isn't and hasn't exactly been unknown among the French (let alone exclusive to the U.S.). I would say there are cultural elements

elianastar Gab.ai FreeSpeech
08/04/15 9:43 pm

Yes. The Constitution was the "period" on all the things that led to it. Without the things that came before, it wouldn't have worked for us either I don't believe.

elianastar Gab.ai FreeSpeech
08/04/15 9:43 pm

That so few have any knowledge/comprehension of exactly what/how the Constitution came about has a lot to do with us losing our way...

Mattwall1
08/04/15 7:00 pm

And based on the notion only the U.S. has freedom, which is also not true

Mattwall1
08/05/15 1:01 pm

Involved in this answer. Shooting God and freedom isn't really the answer so much as a veiled (and inaccurate) dig at any non American (and anyone that you would say isn't sufficiently American)

elianastar Gab.ai FreeSpeech
08/04/15 9:46 pm

True. But we put it altogether in a way that was unique to the goals & issues unique to our founding & society. It wasn't the isolated elements, it was how the puzzle pieces were put together to create a specific new image.

Mattwall1
08/04/15 9:46 pm

I'm not saying the constitution doesn't work here. I'm saying we can both acknowledge that attempts to past and recycle it in other republics didn't work, so using that as evidence for our stability doesn't hold up when it didn't bring stability when

Mattwall1
08/04/15 9:48 pm

Applied elsewhere. I also agree that there were elements that work for us that wouldn't work in other places. That gives the argument less universality, not more, given the implication that if the French had followed our constitution, they would've

Mattwall1
08/04/15 9:48 pm

Had a significantly more stable constitutional history

Mattwall1
08/04/15 9:49 pm

While it's absolutely true we have a federal system and they have used unitary systems, not all federal systems are as stable as ours, and not all unitary systems are as unstable as French models have.

Mattwall1
08/05/15 4:59 pm

On the contrary. All the French monarchies were founded by religious people, so was its Second Empire, and it's Third, Fourth, and Fifth Republics. The Third Republic even had an official religion until 1905. All except the Fifth Republic have, for

17millionTwats Leeds, UK
08/04/15 4:28 pm

Don't blame him, the French are our natural enemies, weve fought more wars against them than anyone else by far

Mattwall1
08/05/15 5:01 pm

A variety of reasons, fallen. The countries of Latin America have historically been quite religious-that hasn't stopped instability, whether on Mexico, Argentina, Colombia, etc. all believed in freedom as well. The ancients were all religious-and

slickspin Heart of Texas
08/05/15 7:02 am

The French are a bunch of onion munchin, surrender monkeys.

Mattwall1
08/04/15 6:30 pm

That's ignoring the fact the original premise of CWest isn't substantiated

Mattwall1
08/05/15 5:03 pm

Many Greek states values freedom-just as the Romans did-and they even had a goddess of freedom, and yet, they're not here, either in their polytheistic form or their Christian form (quite devout, if not necessarily free). Imperial Russia was

Mattwall1
08/05/15 5:06 pm

Incredibly religious (though not free). Still fell. Ataturk, at least according to himself (and it's safe to assume he'd know), was a Muslim, and devout at that. Again, it's safe to call him pro freedom, along with his followers. Yet, Turkey has

bringstheeagle Colorado
08/04/15 3:00 pm

Given my readings of history especially WWII history I'm not surprised you'd say that but most history I've read leaves that response predictable.

dfish at home
08/05/15 4:38 pm

Looks like you're making some unsubstantiated assumptions yourself

Mattwall1
08/05/15 5:09 pm

Faced coups and instability. On the other hand, the very religious and autocratic Ottomans lasted centuries (as did Tsarist Russia), so no, the claim that religiosity (combined with freedom or not) is not the cause here is more than provable. On the