Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Will England fans really sing the French national anthem tomorrow?



Jan 30, 2008
31,981
I was at the back of the England 'Home End' and the vast majority sang along, or at least hummed. As you say, not the easiest to join in with, but the effort was certainly there.

The England fans last night were a credit to their country, as was the team and the FA.
sounded like a morgue DURING THE GAME apart form that disgrace called the ENGLAND BAND:annoyed:
regards
DR
 




DavidinSouthampton

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jan 3, 2012
16,569
KKK,
That's as maybe, however the overall picture of France in WW2 was not of a nation resisting German tyranny. The French state accepts this fact........

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1880118,00.html

I would also suggest this book (linked below), the author of whom (I understand) was recognised by the French state, despite this damning analysis of France during WW2.

The essential truth being that France embraced many of the consequences of occupation enthusiastically..........tragic but true.

That is not to damn the whole nation and its people as cheese eating surrender monkeys' as you quaintly put it, however if people are going to venerate France as a distinguished ally in WW2 then let's have the full story.

Not too much to ask is it?

http://cup.columbia.edu/book//9780231124690

No, that's not too much to ask. My perception was that you were too far the other way, not giving any sort of nod to any resistance at all. My wife used to teach history, so we are well aware of the horrors of Vichy France.
 






marshy68

Well-known member
Jul 10, 2011
2,868
Brighton
Not really because apart from the Channel islands it didnt happen, I would rather focus on the factual reality.

Having delved into this subject I would rather send time understanding the reasons why so many of the French (particularly its upper/political classes) were so willing to calloborate with a fascist Germany.

The answers are not a revelation, as it has much to do with the shock of WW1 and their own ongoing internal political divisions which were disasterous for national unity. French politics was deep in the shadow of the wider struggle between communism and facism that arose in continental Europe after WW1, and had its own issues of endemic anti semitism.

This is the difference between factual history and empathic history..............I want to discuss the facts you want to discuss with what it feels like.

Not really. It wouldnt take a genius to work out why so many collaborated. No porspect of liberation, people being shot in town centres en mass. That was the reality of occupation. We know the facts as you state. However you are right I am an empathetic person and I dont think we would have faired any better under occupation. Human nature is to survive at all costs. We should also remember that it is widely accepted that throughtout 1940 Churchill and his cabinet were prepared to make a peace settlement with Hitler to save our bacon.
 




cunning fergus

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2009
4,744
Not really. It wouldnt take a genius to work out why so many collaborated. No porspect of liberation, people being shot in town centres en mass. That was the reality of occupation. We know the facts as you state. However you are right I am an empathetic person and I dont think we would have faired any better under occupation. Human nature is to survive at all costs. We should also remember that it is widely accepted that throughtout 1940 Churchill and his cabinet were prepared to make a peace settlement with Hitler to save our bacon.


You continue to miss the point, sure many French people collaborated for survival, but many didn't.

De Gaulle ordered an end to the hair shaving and pillorying of women who took up with Germans and collaborators that took place in France and Paris in particular after liberation. In the aftermath of the first French revolution France entered a period now known as "the terror" as scores were settled and tens of thousands of Frenchmen and women died at the hands of their compatriots, this lesson from history was at the forefront of his mind.......bear in mind France had last turned violently on itself a mere 70 years previous. He knew his people.

France and Vichy France in particular did not just collaborate, it pursued aggressive policies (particularly against its Jews) that the Germans had not requested. In 1940 France was not united, arguably it hasn't been since the revolution......but in 1940 many French politicians feared French communism more than German fascism. That is why the conduct of so many of the French collaborators and Vichy was so shameful.

This dynamic would not have happened in GB, despite huge political differences and sometimes difficult industrial relations during the war GB was much more united politically and socially. The appointment of Bevin to the cabinet by Churchill is an example of this.......genius really. Churchill knew his people.

You are wrong about the 1940 cabinet too, Lord Halifax did favour terms with Germany but he had changed his mind before Churchill gave his speech about this country's island story ending as we lay dying choking on our blood, (or something like that). Remember in those days when Churchill invoked God and referred to the British race people didn't piss their pants about being secular and a country of mongrels.........we were homogenous.

It's not widely accepted we would have folded either, the Germans would never have got over the channel even if they had won the Battle of Britain.

We would have fought on anyway, plans were in place to have waged war from Canada.......facts eh, far better than fiction.
 


Jan 30, 2008
31,981
You continue to miss the point, sure many French people collaborated for survival, but many didn't.

De Gaulle ordered an end to the hair shaving and pillorying of women who took up with Germans and collaborators that took place in France and Paris in particular after liberation. In the aftermath of the first French revolution France entered a period now known as "the terror" as scores were settled and tens of thousands of Frenchmen and women died at the hands of their compatriots, this lesson from history was at the forefront of his mind.......bear in mind France had last turned violently on itself a mere 70 years previous. He knew his people.

France and Vichy France in particular did not just collaborate, it pursued aggressive policies (particularly against its Jews) that the Germans had not requested. In 1940 France was not united, arguably it hasn't been since the revolution......but in 1940 many French politicians feared French communism more than German fascism. That is why the conduct of so many of the French collaborators and Vichy was so shameful.

This dynamic would not have happened in GB, despite huge political differences and sometimes difficult industrial relations during the war GB was much more united politically and socially. The appointment of Bevin to the cabinet by Churchill is an example of this.......genius really. Churchill knew his people.

You are wrong about the 1940 cabinet too, Lord Halifax did favour terms with Germany but he had changed his mind before Churchill gave his speech about this country's island story ending as we lay dying choking on our blood, (or something like that). Remember in those days when Churchill invoked God and referred to the British race people didn't piss their pants about being secular and a country of mongrels.........we were homogenous.

It's not widely accepted we would have folded either, the Germans would never have got over the channel even if they had won the Battle of Britain.

We would have fought on anyway, plans were in place to have waged war from Canada.......facts eh, far better than fiction.

yet Waffen SS troops entered the French foreign legion at the end of the war and fought in Indo china???
regards
DR
 






Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here