Laptoploon wrote:Are you seriously suggesting you typed your post out slowly so somehow that would be transimmted and that dimwits like me could keep up or did you type that out merely to demonstrate your self belief in your superior intellect.
I would seriously like an answer to that question. Will you/won't you respond?
No, i type very quickly, in fact. The point was that, rather than my usual practice of typing one or a few very long paragraphs, i was going to break up my response into more digestable portions. If you wish to take offense, help yourself. I've always noted that people are capable of taking offense if that is their intent, regardless of the the intent of those by whom they claim to be offended.
Quote:Read my previous post
Read mine.
Quote:The relevance being? Is Nazi germany suddenly to be termed fundie Catholic. Please demonstrate this. Otherwise your point is?
In fact, Hitler was notorious for appeals to christian virtue in his political harangues. I'm not obliged to demonstrate anything. If you cannnot frame a post sufficiently clear in its meaning to demonstrate your intent, don't expect others to make up the deficiency. Your post reads as though Vichy were responsible for the legislation. When your responses (now) make it clear that you seem to think Vichy somehow repealed the legislation or its intent, you are again off the mark, in that there is no part of Vichy policy in the political heritage of contemporary France. I also was at pains to point out that Vichy was a puppet regime, and therefore any "policy" of Vichy was in fact whatever the Germans told them their policy would be, and that writ did not run the length of the country, nor even apply to a majority of the population in occupied France. So my point is that appeals to what Vichy did or did not do, and what they did or did not hold to be political tradition in France are meaningless.
Quote:Which I think probably demonstrates just how little too many know about the French psyche
I taught myself to read French at age 13, simply because i wished to do so. I later learned to speak French fairly well, because i lived among a great many francophones, both from France and Belgium, as well as elsewhere in Europe, and among Africans and Asians for whom French was the official European language of their home nations. I was employed at that time as a bi-lingual secretary by a Frenchman and his French-speaking wife. I doubt that you'll convince me to cede the palm to you on the subject of understanding the French pysche.
Quote:No offence, but get a history lesson. The Vatican studiously avoided either endorsing the Nazi regime or condemning it. They were superb at doing this. On the other hand they openly supported the Vichy governments Catholic position which, for your information, was NEVER anti-semitic....odd don't you think?
Very odd, considering the number of French Jews who were rounded up and transported, and the activities of people such as Klaus Barbi. Note again my comment about how much of the territory of the former nation was under the control (ostensibly) of Vichy. Their writ was imaginary to begin with, and did not run the entire length and breadth of the country. Your comments about the Vatican are not germaine, for precisely the reason that an appeal to what Vichy may or may not have done is not germaine. Vichy was a political and cultural anomoly, and had no permanent effect on the policies of the governments which have succeeded it, which is very much to the point in this discussion. Simply because Vichy was loudly pro-Catholic does not mean that their policy was not promulgated by the Germans, with an eye to exposing and rounding up the Jews, which was precisely what the SD had been designed for. The SD operated in large numbers in France, and their lack of success in rounding up all of the Jews in France stems from the efforts of ordinary Frenchmen and -women who were not anti-semitic, but who were sufficiently courageous to take risks. Ever since Bonapart's Concordat with the Vatican, the Vatican has meant nothing in terms of French political and social policy. Introducing them to the equation is a non-starter.
Quote:Again....get a history lesson. From whom do you think education stemmed from, or one?
Oh what's the bloody point. I've just re-read this and you want to argue that religion wasn't a major factor in peoples lives....fine...whatever.
If you had read one of my posts above, you'd have seen that i wrote that there was no public education in France before the establishment of the Directory, and if your historical education is sufficient, you'll know that "non-juring" priests, i.e., those who would not swear their loyalty and submission to the state, were not allowed to educate anyone. Prior to the revolution, any education supplied to the population by priests was for the children of the bourgeoisie. After the revolution, and the bourgeois counter-revolution which established the Directory, the bourgeoisie were heavily invested in former church estates, via the
assignats issued by the Committee for Public Safety, and therefore had a vested interest in preventing the establishment of Catholicism in France. The most vigorous religious movement which ever existed in France, after the extermination of the Albigensians, was the Calvinism of the Heugenots. With the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, those religiously devout people were driven from France to Holland, Germany and England. The rest of the population subsided once again in to the senescence of French Catholicism, long vitiated by the squabbles and outright warfare which resulted from the Avignon papacy and the schism.
Quote:Laptop - guessing history has been expunged from the curriculum
It would appear to me that it was never a major portion of
your curriculum to begin with.
