In 1797, two brothers brought an unusual case to the French legislature. Their niece, the daughter of the famous martyr of liberty Michel Lepeletier, had been “adopted by the nation” in 1793. Now officially emancipated from her relatives’ tutelage, she wished to marry a debt-ridden young Dutch man. Unable to prevent the marriage through more traditional means, Suzanne Lepeletier’s uncles demanded that the state fulfill its duties as father. They insisted that the legislative assembly oversee the establishment of its adopted daughter, and with her, the fate of its revolutionary patrimony; Suzanne must be stopped from “denationalizing” herself through her planned marriage to a foreigner.
l'exemple de la Fédération protestante peut-il être utile?
Le titre donné à mon intervention peut surprendre. Qu'est-ce que ces deux groupes ont à voir ? La Fédération protestante a été créée il y a cent ans. Le projet naît en 1905 au moment de la séparation de l'Église et de l'état, mais elle n'a vraiment fonctionné qu'en 1909 avec la première Assemblée générale du protestantisme, et les baptistes n'y sont entrés qu'en 1916. Elle regroupe aujourd'hui de nombreuses dénominations et a intégré des petites églises protestantes de différents endroits de France : elle représente donc largement les trois quarts du protestantisme français.
Pierre Laroque's Search for a Democratic Corporatism
Pierre Laroque, the architect of French social security, emerged during the 1930s as an advocate for the corporatist management of industrial relations. Laroque's corporatist views were an outgrowth of his educational background and his experiences as a young civil servant. A member of the Conseil d'État, he came under the influence of the main doctrines of French public law. During the first half of the twentieth century, legal thinkers such as Léon Duguit and Maurice Hauriou elaborated theoretical justifications for the growing interventionism of the state. As a student of the law, Pierre Laroque became concerned with maintaining the balance between the necessity of state intervention and the preservation of individual and collective rights, thus explaining his interest in administrative decentralization. By the mid-1930s, after being assigned to the Conseil National Économique, he became interested in industrial conflict and applied a similar approach to the issue of collective bargaining. Impressed by the social achievements of Fascist Italy, Laroque advocated the corporatist management of industrial relations, an objective that he promoted in a succession of political and intellectual forums associated with the nonconformist movement. A new collective bargaining mechanism would bring together the state, business, and labor in order to mediate and resolve industrial disputes. Unlike the Fascists, however, this form of corporatism did not break with democratic or republican principles; rather, it was a decentralized administrative structure that compensated for the weaknesses of the collective bargaining process while providing a new forum for the cultivation of social solidarity.
Un nouveau regard sur les migrants (post)coloniaux (1945–1985)
Auboiron, conseiller travail à l’ambassade de France à Alger, 1967. Les photographies d’hommes hagards débarquant de bateau à Marseille résument bien souvent l’histoire des Algériens 2 en France dans les années 1950 à 1970, pour ensuite céder la place à l
Napoleon, Slavery, and the French History Wars
On the front cover of Claude Ribbe’s Le Crime de Napoléon is a photograph of Hitler surrounded by a bevy of generals looking down at the tomb of Napoleon at the Invalides during his visit there after the fall of France in 1940. The message is clear: the author is thus directly associating Napoleon with Hitler and, as we shall see as Ribbe develops his argument, with the Holocaust. Napoleon, Ribbe claims, is guilty of a “triple crime” against humanity: the reintroduction of slavery in 1802; the deportation and killing of large numbers of Africans (or people of African origin); and the massacre of blacks that took on a “genocidal nature” and that prefigured the policy of racial extermination carried out by the Nazis during the Second World War (12 13). “Le crime est si impardonnable”, writes Ribbe, “qu’il a provoqué plus de deux siècles de mensonges. Car les faits sont bien connus des historiens, mais volontairement passés sous silence” (13).
In 2004, fifty-one documentaries obtained a theatrical release in France. This new record represents a measure of the success enjoyed by the wave of documentaries that has reached France’s silver screens since the turn of the century. Tackling a variety of issues, these documentaries have been remarkably successful at home; in terms of domestic admissions, fifteen of the top seventeen performing French documentaries have been released in the last ten years.
Do you know what a “bobo” is? If you are French or an American who has spent significant time in France, you probably do, but if you are an American without much experience in France, it is likely that you do not, even though the term was originally
Reflections for an American Audience
Since the relationship between France and the United States is going through a difficult period, we must find opportunities to talk things over.
It is true that it is not always easy to broach the subject of this relationship between the US and France in a balanced and reasonable way. We idealize its past and blacken its present.
Naomi J. Andrews and Jennifer E. Sessions
Scholarly attention to the history and legacies of France's overseas empire is a welcome development of the last two decades, but the field of modern French colonial history has become overly focused on the “tensions” and “contradictions” of universalist republican imperialism. This introduction argues that we must recognize the ideological diversity of the French state and the complexity of the relationships between colonial and metropolitan histories in the modern period. The articles in this special issue show the critical role of the non-republican regimes of the nineteenth century in the construction of the modern French empire, and the ways that colonial entanglements shaped processes of post-Revolutionary reconstruction in France under the Restoration (1815–1830), July Monarchy (1830–1848), Second Republic (1848–1851), and Second Empire (1852–1870).
In recent years, surveys have consistently shown relatively high levels of racism and xenophobia in France. In particular, a 1999 Harris poll conducted for the Commission nationale consultative des droits de l’homme revealed that 68 percent of the respondents in a national sample declared themselves somewhat racist; 61 percent believed that there are too many foreigners in France; 63 percent believed that there are too many Arabs (up 12 percent compared with 1998); and 38 percent believed that there are too many blacks (up 8 percent compared with 1998).1 Against the backdrop of a long, difficult, and partly repressed colonial past, a full 28 percent of French voters have, since 1983, voted at least once for the openly racist and anti-Semitic Front National.2 These results clash with the popular image of a Republican France, where the dominant political ideology affirms that the ascribed characteristics of citizens are irrelevant to their participation in the polity.