Explain why your country is better than the US

Can some, explain to me, why we feel it necessary to say one country is better than the other?

Smacks of arragance...

I mean, really, what's the point of this thread?
To experiment and finally prove that our European brethrens are either delusional or just downright envious to OUR superiority!
:trophy:

- fancy words to make trivial things sound upscale and educated
I thought it was the accent that make us swoon over.Who cares about your words and language being sophisticated and smart,we love the accent!:lol:

- when we lose, it's the stuff
of legends
More of a legacy of defeat and "could have but didn't by a long shot.":mischief:
 
past is past. It doesn't matter anymore.

Agree, but it tells something about the general attitudes, they don't change as fasta as laws.

The canton was Appenzell-Innerrhoden and has 18'000 inhabitants, number decreasing... (now this is no excuse, but you can probably state that your mountain peasants are totally over-the-top conservative too ;), compare it to Wyoming or whatever...)

Unfortunately our conservative mountain pesants don't live in Wyoming ;). I remember that in some other cantons suffrage of women was a little late thing too. I'm not dissing Schwitzerland here, just a little bit curios about the mixture of radicailsm and liberty with puritanism there (or more correctly the bipolar impression a foreigner gets of your country).
 
I remember that in some other cantons suffrage of women was a little late thing too. I'm not dissing Schwitzerland here, just a little bit curios about the mixture of radicailsm and liberty with puritanism there (or more correctly the bipolar impression a foreigner gets of your country).
well, 'pretty late' is a pretty relative definition. you can say that all of switzerland was pretty late, women were granted the right to vote only in 1971 on a national level. most cantons either followed shortly after or already had it established at that time (the first had it in 59, I think). the last cantons by far were appenzell-ausserrhoden in 89 and appenzell-innerrhoden in 90, the former being only marginally larger and equally aehem rural...not that this is a excuse of course.

I would say however that it had nothing to do with puritanism, since that movement never had much influence in swiss politics. IMHO it was just plain, old fashined sexism that governed the guys at that time....
 
Actually the US has access to 3 Oceans. ;) (Alaska has access to the Arctic ocean)
And France has access to 4 oceans. :smug:

  • Atlantic Ocean : Metropolitan Western shores, Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana, Saint Pierre and Miquelon.
  • Pacific Ocean : New Caledonia, French Polynesia
  • Indian Ocean : Reunion, Mayotte, Wallis and Futuna
  • Southern Ocean : Kuergelen Islands (French Southern and Antarctic Lands).
 
And France has access to 4 oceans. :smug:

  • Atlantic Ocean : Metropolitan Western shores, Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana, Saint Pierre and Miquelon.
  • Pacific Ocean : New Caledonia, French Polynesia
  • Indian Ocean : Reunion, Mayotte, Wallis and Futuna
  • Southern Ocean : Kuergelen Islands (French Southern and Antarctic Lands).

Now you just need Novaia Zemlea or however it's spelled. :D
 
a good dose of irony and sarcasm (that was part of the "we'll make you a WW2 winner even though you thoroughly lost because you're such a frustrated whiner and I want it to stop" package, thanks FDR!)
It's rather ungrateful to thank Roosevelt for this... that guy has made everything in order to recognize Vichy France as the only France.

The guy who has to be recognized for this is British, and is named Winston Churchill. He's the guy who had to bear the tall Charles and his whinings. Actually, considering that the US forces made everything to put a puppet named Giraud at the head of a France renamed AMGOT (Allied Military Government of Occupied Territories), we can even say that the only guy to thank for all this is De Gaulle himself, and no one else.

No one, not even Churchill, has authorized de Gaulle to take power in France in 1944. De Gaulle did it by himself, and US troops were close to oppose his unilateral move. The only reason why they didn't was that they had to beat a fiercer guy in the neighbouring country, and this faster than another fierce guy coming from the East. As such, they had no time to lose in fighting guerilla warfare against the French resistance.

Actually Masquerouge, what I say is fully right, and the simple fact some doubt it proves exactly how desillusionned French people are, proving how accurate you were.

Personally, I'm not completely desillusionned to be frank. Granted, the country is in bad shape economically speaking, but I'm still proud of what France represents. That doesn't mean I despise any other country, every countries have their proper specificities, no country is like another. France is a country which isn't based on an ethnicity but on a universal conception of citizenship. You may believe those words are empty, but they are actually full of meaning.

The French cancan, oh so typical, has been composed by Jacob Offenbach, a Jewish German naturalised French. Josephine Baker, who is ridiculously and cynically summarized to bananas, was the first world famous black singer, and it's in Paris where she has made her whole carreer. She's been naturalized French in 1937, at a time when France was the only country to allow weddings between black and white people. Blaise Diagne was the first black member of the French parliament, and has been elected there as early as in 1914. His son, Raoul Diagne, was the first black football player to join the French national team, and this happened as early as in 1931, at a time when Brazilian black players had to paint their skin in white in order to play in their own league.

Leon Blum, Jewish, was leading France at a time when Hitler was leading Germany. Edith Piaf, most worldwide known French female performer, had Italian and Kabyle ancestry ; Charles Aznavour, most worldwide known French male performer, had Armenian ancestry. Who are the French scientist we should be the most proud of ? Georges Charpak ? Marie Curie ? They have both Polish roots. Who are the best sportsmen we should be proud of ? Alain Prost, Zinedine Zidane, Alain Mimoun, Yannick Noah, Michel Platini, Raymond Kopa ? They have all foreign ancestries. Who are the painters who made of Paris the capital of the Arts in the early 20th century ? Pablo Picasso, Amedeo Modigliani, Wassily Kandinsky or later Salvador Dali ? All foreign born, all have died in France.

Of course all this is old, some of them became famous even during the 19th century, but that's exactly the reason why they are so meaningful. At the opposite of most European countries, France hasn't experienced a real demographic booming during the 19th century and early 20th century. While citizens of other European countries were leaving their country, France was already massively welcoming immigrants. This is undoubtedly a curiousity for a country of the old continent.

The right-wing candidate for the upcoming French presidential election, Nicolas Sarkozy, has Hungarian roots from his father and Jewish Greek roots from his mother. Despite this, some in the left wing compare him with fascists, and this without even blinking. Where else could this happen ?

When Jacques Chirac declared yesterday his love for France in all its diversity, this had a real meaning. The fact that France is rich of its diversity is not empty words, this is based on our own History.

Of course, French History is tarnished by far darker eras of its History : the collaboration during the Nazi occupation, the fact that French people wanted a French Algeria while refusing the French citizenship to Algerian natives during the 50's, the rise of Le Pen as a dark ghost who dedicated his life to destroy what the tricolore flag represents. Don't count on me to belittle this. This however won't make me forget who I am, and what are my values. I am Parisian, foreign born and raised in a school where a large majority of kids had foreign roots. My life is here, in that wonderful city, and even if I may leave it for a while because of professional reasons my soul will remain here, besides the one of those who made that city, who made my city.
 
That would still make it "younger" than Romania! ;)

How do you figure? Seems to me it wasn't Romania, but rather Wallachia & Moldovia back in the day... and independence wasn't until the late 19th century.

We have a rather fetching potted plant which is a similar age to the US.

Ah, yes... the old man, making fun of the younger one in his prime. I once had an old man tell me, "son, I've got clothes older than you".

Yeah well, I hope you don't actually still wear them! (Of course, I didn't actually tell him that)

Portugal, Spain (because I'm nice), UK of GBR, Sweden, Switzerland, and Russia (polite, indeed)... of all the European majors (I'm not going to bother with the so called 'postage-stamp states') - that's the list. I'm just not sure about France. I can't see how having your entire country stolen out from under you, and "keeping the gov't alive on some island in the Caribbean" for several years while the Gerries troll around your entire homeland meets the requirements. So, the Germans made France 'young' again - I see no way to avoid that.

Austria could be a candidate -see, I have an open, flexible mind- but unfortunately they (mostly willingly) decided to disappear from the map (and sovereignty) for a few years there. I don't think I'm missing anything (though it's not impossible). Everything else in the east was dominated by the Prussians/Germans, Russians/Soviets, Ottomans, Austrian(-Hungarian) at one time or another since 1776. And no, I'm not forgetting Italy. That peninsula was a giant mess until they were unified (by France), thrusting the Sardinia-Piedmont Kingdom into power, and (re)unifying 'Italy'. Greece... same situation as France... WWII. Those damned Panzers, man. What are ya gonna do?

Anyway... Norway. Same as Finland. Sure, the 'nation was there', but they weren't independent. Norweigan ships flew the Swedish flag (they later made a big fuss about it, eventually Sweden gave them everything they wanted). Finland - the Russian bear was sitting on them for some time. So, by my count there are a half-dozen (6) current countries in Europe that are "older than the U.S." And I would say this, even if I were an alien in a flying saucer, looking down on the world (who knows, maybe I am... :groucho: )
 

Ah, since you are counting civil wars and such, wouldn't the age of the USA be "Reset" by YOUR civil war?

I mean, you lost over half of your territory (despite the fact that you won overall, you didn't give France that benefit) and you counted spain and russia, because you were "nice". I suspect that this was because of the civil wars they had.
 
How do you figure? Seems to me it wasn't Romania, but rather Wallachia & Moldovia back in the day... and independence wasn't until the late 19th century.

Only foreigners call it Wallachia. :p It's actual name was "Tara Romaneasca", which means "The Romanian Country"
(tara - country; from Lat. terra - earth, land). And it was independent since 1330, after the battle of Posada, when the Hungarians who tried to conquer it were driven back. It was only under Ottoman suzeranity for something like 150 years. This means we paid some gold and salt to them, and only during a period of 20 years they had the right to impose the king, which still doesn't make it un-independent, as they had no rights to impose anything about governing, army, laws, religion, or anything else than what I mentioned.
 
How do you figure? Seems to me it wasn't Romania, but rather Wallachia & Moldovia back in the day... and independence wasn't until the late 19th century.

Well, to be honest, Wallachia can be seen as a predecessor as much as England is one for Britain or the Union of the Thirteen Places is one for Switzerland. ;)

Oh, and looking at your strict definition, I actually do not want to point at Napoleon and his occupation of Helvetia, so as to not kick us out of the list. Of course, he created a own "autonomous" Swiss puppy state, but if this qualifies for being "constant", then I would say that Austria can be counted to, since incorporating isn't so different from making you a vassal state.

Oh, and on the other hand, I had to think of the 1814 sack of Washington. Does that shorten the live length of the US too?

mick
 
Well, to be honest, Wallachia can be seen as a predecessor as much as England is one for Britain or the Union of the Thirteen Places is one for Switzerland. ;)

mick

True, and as in my post above, its name was not actually Wallachia, its real name was Tara Romaneasca. Only foreigners call it "Wallachia". ;)
 
Anyway... Norway. Same as Finland. Sure, the 'nation was there', but they weren't independent.
Norway as an independent political unit dates back to the Middle Ages.

Norweigan ships flew the Swedish flag (they later made a big fuss about it, eventually Sweden gave them everything they wanted).
I don't know exactly what you are talking about.

Finland - the Russian bear was sitting on them for some time.
Finland was actually reigned by Sweden from the early Middle Ages until 1809.
 
Was this the thing they were celebrating in Clichy sous Bois couple of years ago? Wouldn't ordinary fireworks have been better? ;)
Exactly: people involved were not only black, arab or white, they were from a lot of different ethnicities
 
I just had to make the joke, Marla's text was begging for it ;). To tell the truth, the idealism of her (his?) text is very delightful.
 
Back
Top Bottom