Assignment: In Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong, read
the chapters assigned below. Write a response, following the
Reader Response Guidelines (above). React to and comment upon
at least 2 of your classmates responses.
Chapter 6:
What is jusqu’au-boutisme?
Jusqu'au-boutisme to the French is used to describe hard-liners who are wlling to fight to the end, no matter what the costs are, even if it means losing everything. (P. 76)
RépondreSupprimerIn this case, fighting until the end makes me think of dirty politics. It means winning by any means necessary. I love how the author seemed to shutter at this idea in every form of its use in France.
SupprimerI believe that jusqu'au-boutisme is seen in French conversations. In earlier chapters, the authors described how the people would fight to have the upper hand in a conversation.
SupprimerJusqu’au-boutisme is a term that means “until the bitter end-ism”. This essentially means that the French will always find a way to win. The authors compared the U.S. to France, and said that we have completely different systems. We have a social system based on compromise, and we will typically always find a way to come to a “win-win” situation. We try to find a way in order to have both parties come out on top the best we can. France is the complete opposite. The entire society is based on a “win-lose” situation. A person in France wants to gain the upper hand, sometimes no matter the cost. This is very alarming to think about, and what is even more shocking is that the Republic of France has survived. I knew that France had a rocky history filled with many wars and several civil wars in order to fight for independence, but I did not realize how many civil wars they were on the brink of. The book gives quite a few examples about political changes that people wanted to make that were considered severe enough to possibly split a country. When the United States had our civil war, one of the causes was because of slavery, among many other issues. Our country was fighting for the freedom of all men and women. One example that the book gave was that when one politician tried to bring the workweek down to forty hours, it almost resulted in a civil war. I am really not sure how France has not torn itself apart, but these are just the thoughts of an outsider. France has thrived under this system, and I imagine that they will continue to thrive for many years to come.
RépondreSupprimerThe whole win-lose thing reminds me of capitalism, just saying. France would never be in favor of everyone having the same salary and the same benefits. I would have to say that I agree with that logic because the world does not operate that way. France is just a small representation of survival of the fittest.
SupprimerI also wonder how and why France hasn't fallen apart because of how they operate politically. The way the author talks about cohabitation seems like the French despise cooperation. That's not to say that that is true, but the author does a good job at making the French seem very angry and bitter!
SupprimerBless, I agree, France is it's own representation of survival of the fittest; however, in this day and age, I don't believe it should only be the "fittest" who should be the only ones to survive. I also wonder how the French have not torn each other apart if their so obsessed with winning vs losing.
SupprimerCohabitation, as was described in this chapter seems like a rather odd term to me. In terms of living with someone you are not married to, it seems pretty normal for that culture as well as ours. However, politically it represents compromise and petty dealings. I find it sort of comical that the French hate to see cohabitation in regards to politicians, but they love it in relationships. Politicians represent the people and what they want. Something that I found interesting is that the French are very divided when it comes to the attitudes about politics and war. What you as a French person might consider a poor regime, your neighbor might take to the opposite mindset. Jusqu’au-boustisme is the perfect term to describe these attitudes associated with the people. There is a broad spectrum on beliefs of war, political practices, and democratic government. It is a bit extreme, to be frank. I learned from this chapter that just because France is beautiful and quaint, doesn’t mean it doesn’t have built up aggression. It totally does. There was an intense greed of land and power in history before anyone ever invaded France. France was definitely a dominator historically and would like to remind the world as well as each other about that always remaining the case. The French have adapted well to the idea of “win-lose.” Things are never a fair situation politically or otherwise. There is always a struggle for power among the French and I think that shows just how hungry for power the people really are. We learned in the previous chapter about the power of rhetoric and use of knowledge. It is that same use of knowledge that fuels the need to be put on top. Both World War I and World War ll helped to further develop this power that they wield.
RépondreSupprimerI found it interesting that France was bases on aggression and that the aggression is still present today. If we look at Britain, which most likely saw just as much violence does not have the same sort of aggressive system that France does.
SupprimerI noticed that their "win-lose" mentality can be seen on a personal level, also. I find it outrageous that they would let this go into a political realm, where they could break out in war because of their aggression and pride.
SupprimerThe author describes Jusqu'au-boutisme as “until-the-bitter-end-ism,” which means that the French are willing to risk everything, specifically politically, as long as they do not have to “cohabit” with one another. “Cohabitation” simply means having to live with another person, but in French politics, this means two opposing political parties “working together.” The author describes this attitude as being present throughout much of the history of France, and that it keeps getting more intense. It is interesting that this is such a big issue as far as politics, since the people are the ones who keep voting these people into power, and this has happened quite a few times already. The French have more of a “win-lose” mentality, which is what feeds into the phrase “Jusqu'au-boutisme,” whereas Americans have a “win-win” mentality, and are willing to compromise so that everyone is happy. French people’s way of thinking explains why they are so argumentative and aggressive when having conversations, as they want to be on top without saying “I don’t know;” the author said in a previous chapter that they will yell to get their way of speaking across, even if what they are saying means nothing. This mentality, however, has brought the French on the verge of many wars, and it is interesting that they will continue to think this way, even if it means war. This is not to say that Capitalism is superior, but I do believe that compromise is good, especially in extreme situations.
RépondreSupprimerI like how you connected the previous chapter to this one! And I agree, Capitalism may not be the best; however, compromise is essential for peaceful relations.
Supprimeri don't know why the french dont like to compromise. i guess it's because their ego is too big. I think compromising is very important. with out it you can hurt a lot along the way to finding a winner. With compromising there is little damage.
SupprimerJusqu’au-boutiste translates into, “until-the-bitter-end-ism”, which describes just how far the French are willing to go to get the advantage on their fellow countrymen and women. This is exemplified in France’s history of war. The feeling of aggression is present everywhere you go, all of France is frequented with castles and fortified churches, all of which have seen a number of battles throughout history. Why, one may ask, would the French wage so many wars within their own country? Well, first, the French first were always under threat of being invaded by foreign enemies. Second, so wealthy land-owners could expand their property and influence. Third, the French fought over the pope, the king, and each of their respective powers. As the book says, “The French have fought each other for these and less important questions, sometimes with unfathomable savagery and at a human cost that is difficult to fathom.” Another example of the French’s “until-the-bitter-end-ism” is their concept of self-interest. Many French citizens use their power to only serve themselves, without restraint. This may be caused by their “win-lose” way of thinking. In France, there are no “win-win” situations; there is only the winner and the loser, even if compromise had been reached. Conflicts are a normal part of the French culture; however, they like the sense of competition, the “thrill-of-the-game” so to speak.
RépondreSupprimeri was very surprised about how the french are so selfish. It is amazing the extent to which they go to just so they can be right. they also argued over everything i don't really understand the point.
SupprimerThis chapter was all about “jusqu’au-boutisme” which translates to until-the-bitter-end-ism. This –ism refers to how the French fight until they win no mater what maybe damaged along the way. The chapter talks about many things that go along with the idea. Throughout the history of France there have been many instances where they’re needed to be a winner and compromise I was not the solution. For example, the book talked about the years from 1789 to 1962, “ the French went though five democratic regimes, three monarchies, two empires, and a fantastic dictatorship, all which ended in violence.” The chapter also talks about the how selfish the French are. They also went back the privacy topic and said that compromise is not something that happens in the public eye. If there has to be compromise then it with not be publicized. I enjoyed this chapter. It gave the readers a little peek in to the history of France. This chapter pointed out how far their stubbornness went back. It was pretty much there from the beginning. I enjoyed this chapter so I would recommend to someone who enjoys history.
RépondreSupprimerThe term "Jusqu' au-boutisme" was described by the author as until the bitter end-ism. In other words, you won't stop until you achieve something even if it brings you to your bitter end. It is a mentality that the French have learned to adopt as part of their daily lives. In fact, it has been an adopted mentality throughout the history of France. It would often bring the country very close to and sometimes even waging wars that could have been avoided. Such is the nature of the french though. Aggression is very common in almost everything they do, especially in speech like the author's talked about in the last chapter. They are very different from Americans in that we often try to find a sense of comraderie in our interactions, because it wouldn't make sense to create problems that shouldn't exist.
RépondreSupprimer