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

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

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

FacePalm That Trick Never Works
08/05/15 6:04 am

1) The USA is relatively isolated and France is a small part of a continent of competing interests both within and without its borders.

2) The United States *is* very young, not just in terms of how long it has existed but how long it has been

FacePalm That Trick Never Works
08/05/15 6:07 am

populated and the type of connections it has to the rest of the world. It is too far away to be an easy target, and by nature of its founding, more likely to unite against a common aggressor, than to be divided.

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.

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.

knetzere Illinois
08/04/15 4:46 pm

The French just like to riot every now and then

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

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

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.

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

Mattwall1
08/04/15 9:39 pm

Opposition to it, as well as to a revolution)

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

Mattwall1
08/04/15 9:41 pm

Valid, would it not have to be universal?

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...

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

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

And a partridge in a pear tree!

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.

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

Because France is shite 🇫🇷

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

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

cognocity
08/04/15 2:23 pm

Makes sense that the answer comes from you. 😂

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 🇫🇷

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.

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

Thats why its the stereotype

bringstheeagle Colorado
08/04/15 3:08 pm

Interestingly Mr. Churchill was a Francophile - at least he was in the last volume of his biography that I've finished leading up to WWII. He may have changed as things got difficult with the French as the war started. Lol

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