FRENCH ARE RUDEST, MOST BORING PEOPLE ON EARTH: BRITISH POLL

LONDON May 20, 2006 (AFP) - The French have been voted the world's most unfriendly nation by a landslide in a new British poll published. They were also voted the most boring and most ungenerous.

A decisive 46 percent of the 6,000 people surveyed by travellers' website Where Are You Now (WAYN) said the French were the most unfriendly nation people on the planet, British newspapers reported.

WAYN's French founder, Jerome Touze, told the papers he had been stunned by the thumping condemnation of his compatriots and sought to blame it on Gallic love-struck sulking.

"I had no idea that the French would emerge as such an unfriendly country," he said. "I think our romantic 'moodiness' is misunderstood and I will be sure to pass on the message to my family and friends back in France to be a bit more cheerful to tourists in the future."

To add insult to injury, British newspaper The Daily Telegraph put the boot in on Saturday by saying in an editorial that the French stank.

Pave regulars may recall earlier posts on French rudeness (and here and here).

As for French boorishness, well, most any post will do. This one for instance. Or this one (and this and this). Or this one. Or this one. Or this one (and this). Or this one. Or this one. Or this one.

Most any post.

PFFT (What is this?): Living up to stereotype 4 | Rayonnement français 0

(The Daily Telegraph... enough said).

19,000 more people questioned would beg to differ in this different poll, and Brits don't visit Switzerland that much.

But now you bring up the subject, dear Damian, what's really relevant in these "polls" is that while the French are consistantly viewed as "rude" (I conffess there must be some truth to that), Americans are as consistantly viewed as notoriously "ignorant"...

Is that true too?

Ah, M. Zmx, first "tu" and now "dear", but insincerity is the sister of arrogance, a self-celebrated French trait.

Now let's take up this ignorance claim. You seem to present yourself as Exhibit A for France giving America a run for its money.

(The Daily Telegraph... enough said).
Posted by zoomerx at May 21, 2006 03:43 AM

Well, no. Enough not said. What exactly are you disputing here? The Telegraph did not conduct the poll. The poll was conducted by WAYN, a part-French creation. The Telegraph has only reported the findings and given the pollster, a Frenchman, an opportunity to comment. Do you mean to imply that The Telegraph has misreported the poll findings or the pollster's comments? If so on what grounds would that be?

An uninformed airy brush-off seems a rather ignorant response.

Next, we see you hurriedly Googling for some counter. And you come up with a report on a national brand index poll conducted last November by a marketing firm named GMI and published this past February.

M. Zx, did you actually look at the GMI poll? Well, we did. Those "ignorant" Americans have the highest brand rating (AA-), better than top-rated UK (A), or France (BBB+). "Ignorant" Americans also have a greater per capita brand value ($60,063) than either top-rated UK ($58,492) or France ($48,714).

M. Zmx, did you bother to look at GMI's poll methodology? Were you aware that GMI admits to a global cultural bias in its poll where America is concerned?

As ignorance here is a perceptional value, let's take a look at the panel countries’ perspicacities. Out of the 35 panel countries only one correctly ranked its overall position (UK, No.1). Another 16 countries ranked themselves No.1. No country ranked itself below 15. Yes, well, these folk seem to have a firm perceptual grasp on things.

Given the statement,"This country is a good place to study for educational qualifications", the panel countries ranked America No.1 (UK No.2, France No.6). Rather an unexpected ranking for a perceived nation of ignoramuses.

And you obviously skipped over our earlier post here, where “ignorant” America is reported to hold 168 positions of the world’s top 500 universities, of which 20 are in the top 100 and 8 in the top 10 (the other two belong to the UK). France has no top 10 position, 4 in the top 100 (the highest at 46th), and 21 overall – two less than Canada.

Then there are more concrete, more widely recognized measures. For example, “ignorant” Americans have won 160 of the 776 Nobel Prizes awarded to date, the vast majority of these in physiology, medicine, and sciences. The UK has been awarded 69 and France 44 (including J-PS’s declination).

Then there are those odd singular accomplishments of the “ignorant” Americans: the cotton gin, the McCormick reaper, the telegraph, nylon, magnetic recording , the transistor, putting a man on the moon, the space shuttle, ARPANET, CSNET, NSFNet, Scotch tape, liquid paper, et al.

So, M. Zmx, to answer your question Americans may be called "ignorant" yet their investment in education and research, and their out-sized achievements, belie the claim, which we understand to be more cultural insult than informed opinion. The French are rude not only by reputation, but by admission. You, however, seem ready to win the "ignorant" title for France. Another rayonnement français.

DGB

I see Mr Bennett is offended by stereotypes, neither does he get Irony that easily.

(As for the invention of the Telegraph, perhaps he's never heard of Claude Chappe).

Oh, yes, getting the irony, M. Zmx -- perhaps not easily in your case. Did you somehow manage to fail to trip over ours?

We were not aware that an optical relay system qualified as a "telegraph" (fancifully, le télégraphe aérien). That being the case, the watch-fires described in Aeschylus's Agammenon outdate M. Chappe's system by some 2,249 years. And the Greeks trump the French télégraphe aérien as their system was operational both day or night. What M. Chappe invented is more commonly known as the semaphore. And, alas, M. Chappe was not original in this concept as the English scientist Robert Hooke described such a system in detail to the Royal Society in 1684.

But, of course, you are, as a Frenchman, rightly proud of the invention and short-lived implementation of a French system of limited utility.

What we were referring to was the first practical electrical telegraph system invented by Samuel Morse in 1838. We regret the confusion. How glad we are that you have forborne offering M. Méliès as the French challenge to the American man on the moon.

DGB

But, of course, you are, as a Frenchman, rightly proud of the invention and short-lived implementation of a French system of limited utility.

Countless precursors did not see their inventions fully implemented during their lifetime. Unfortunately for you, genious, this one happened to be.

"Claude Chappe (December 25, 1763 – January 23, 1805) was a French inventor who in 1792 demonstrated a practical semaphore system that eventually spanned all of France. This was the first practical telecommunications system, and Claude was the first telecom mogul"

"The system was widely copied by other European states, and was used by Napoleon to coordinate his empire and army."

"Metz- 1830. L'inventeur de ce nouveaux moyen de communiquer est un certain Claude Chappe, physicien (1763-1805) originaire de Brulon dans la Sarthe. L'invention est baptisée tachygraphe, puis "télégraphe", du grec thle grajein, TELE - loin, et GRAPHEIN - écrire.

As for Samuel Morse, you should be equally proud of his invention.

That, and the fact that he was a notorious racist bigot of course.

How glad we are that you have forborne offering M. Méliès as the French challenge to the American man on the moon.

(Would the opposite make more sense grammatically?)

I happen to greatly admire Mr. Neil Armstrong by the way. And despite your paranoiacal resistance in crediting any great French inventions, I commend you for mentioning Georges Méliès who, as you know, was famously ripped-off by none other than the great Thomas Edison who pirated copies of the Voyage Dans La Lune , taking the film and pocketing revenues after showing it in New York for the first time.

Ahead of his time, indeed.

We don't like you either and we don't need to run a poll to know that.

You came 60 years ago to liberate us from the nazis, you died by packs of ten on the beach of Normandy and WE STILL DONT LIKE YOU ! SUCKERS !

Nowadays we have to endure the pathetic view of drunk white trash, crooked teeths, white socks bozos, every years in the south of France and you would like us to be friendly with zee english ? Stop dreaming.

Your poll claims : the French are boring ? Funny a few months ago a world wide poll claimed that the brits were the most boring people on earth. There are numerous people (celebrities) describing the brits as dull, boring.

Your poll claims : the French are ungenerous ? If i consider the number of donations given by French to local or international organizations, this claim is rather stupid.

I see that this text on 'daily telegraph' also speak about 'cuisine'. Let's talk about 'cuisine' : most people in the world will not make the difference between a plate of shit and a plate of english cuisine.

Countless precursors did not see their inventions fully implemented during their lifetime. Unfortunately for you, genious [sic], this one happened to be.
Posted by: zoomerx on May 21, 2006 11:07 PM

The very point we made about the English scientist Robert Hooke, whose theoretical system predates M. Chappe's by over a hundred years. Regarding your M. Chappe, you have changed sources on us. Here is what your first source says:

Le succès du télégraphe optique s'estompa et Bonaparte réduisit en 1800 les crédits aloués à leur construction et entretien. Claude Chappe ne supporta pas ce désaveu et désespéré se jeta dans un puits en 1805 à l'âge de 42 ans.

Well, I think you can see how Bonaparte's actions and M. Chappe's subsequent suicide tricked us into thinking the system was not a lasting success. In the future, please send us your preferred version of the facts first time out.

As for Samuel Morse, you should be equally proud of his invention. That, and the fact that he was a notorious racist bigot of course.
ibid.

Why, M. Zmx, would we be proud of Mr. Morse's racism? Do you say this because you esteem Mr. Morse's racism? Your post mentions Napoleon, but we have not rushed in and said, "Oh, in addition to his employment of the Chappe semaphore, you must be proud of the fact that he betrayed the Republic a second time by reinstituting French slavey." (Napoleon's success in dragging the whole of France back into the slave trade being, we think you would agree, something more than Mr. Morse's personal failures as a racist.) No. We have not said this.

DGB

Lede: "The French have been voted the world's most unfriendly nation by a landslide in a new British poll published. They were also voted the most boring and most ungenerous. "

You came 60 years ago to liberate us from the nazis, you died by packs of ten [sic] on the beach of Normandy and WE STILL DONT LIKE YOU ! SUCKERS !
Posted by: frank on May 22, 2006 04:42 AM

EXHIBIT A, Trifecta; Frank

Pave is an American enterprise. But we understand that you do not like us. Thank you.

DGB

I know that you are an americna.

But I was answering with the French >> british angle and a 'little' bit with the French >> american angle (so many targets so little time).

ps : pave or not pave, you are right we don't like you either.

In the future, please send us your preferred version of the facts first time out.

Here's a concise version and here's another one. Please feel free to ask for additional sources, there are many. It was the fist practical telecommunication system, named Telegraphe by the inventor himself.

Something tells me that, had Chappe been anything but French, you would be accepting the facts as they are, wouldn't you?

Do you say this because you esteem Mr. Morse's racism?

Why would I call Morse a "racist bigot" if I held the man in "esteem"? I find your puerile tantrums quite amusing, actually.

...Napoleon's success in dragging the whole of France back into the slave trade

For a brief period in Haiti. But pointing fingers on the issues of of Slavery in context of the times is too easy.

Peharps you ought to remind us, again, how long did segregation - a direct result of slavery - drag on in the United States?

And unlike that pathetic genius Samuel Morse, who viewed Slavery as some kind of higher religious calling, Napoleon - who was no angel himself - was not a fire-and-brimstone racist. Big difference.

[Napoleon] was not a fire-and-brimstone racist. Big difference.

Really? Like what?

M. Zmx,

We are not contesting the facts in M. Chappe's case. We just want to know which set of contradictory sources provided you wish us to settle with.

Why in the context of the post you would mention Mr. Morse's racism much less suggest anyone should be proud of it is beyond us. Oh, unless it slipped by you in a moment of pique.

As for segregation in the United States, oddly enough it ended in practice at about the same time as French colonial rule was challenged and overthrown by the colonized aboriginal peoples.

We are glad to learn that Napoleon was not "a fire-and-brimstone racist", though we doubt that the distinction meant anything to the slaves under French suzerainty. Your "brief period" was 46 years, more than a lifetime for many slaves. But then what is actual slavery compared to printed pamphlets? Where we offer no defense for Mr. Morse's racism, here you are brushing off French slavery. M. Zmx, we suggest you revisit your May 10 meditations.

DGB

As for segregation in the United States, oddly enough it ended in practice at about the same time as French colonial rule was challenged and overthrown by the colonized aboriginal peoples

The battle of Dien Bien Phu happened in 1954 while segregation officially ended under Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

No, I do not brush-off "French slavery", but I do not recall seeing "Colored Only" signs in French establishments even during colonial rule, nor do I recall France establishing internement camps for "suspected ennemies" in times of war (and I'm not refering to Gantanamo) , do you?

M. Zmx,

The above is your most laughable/pathetic post to date. In such a hurry to huff and puff and spank America you've given no thought to what you've posted.

Apparently you believe that societal dynamics are governed by some big switch that turns on, that turns off, at a precise moment in history. This is rarely the case.

In the United States, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) explicitly outlawed racial segregation of public education facilities. This provided the foundation in law for Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Before any of this, President Truman had signed Executive Order 9981 (1948), ending segregation in the United States Armed Forces.

Now, let's take a look at the crumble of the French colonial empire.

1945 - Laos declares its independence, France re-asserts control; 1950, granted semi-autonomy; 1954 full independence granted

1953 - France grants Cambodia's independence

1954 - France grants Vietnam independence

1954 - Algerian War of Independence begins; a beaten France grants independence in 1962

1956 - France grants Tunsia and Morocco independence

1958 - France grants Guinea independence

1960 - France grants independence to Benin (then Dahomey), Upper Volta (present-day Burkina Faso), Cameroon, Chad, Congo-Brazzaville, Côte d'Ivoire, Gabon, the Mali Federation (split the same year into present-day Mali and Senegal), Mauritania, Niger, Togo and the Central African Republic (the Oubangui Chari) and Madagascar

1975 - Comoros declares its independence ahead of an agreed 1978 date, France acquieses

1977 - France grants French Somaliland, the present Djibouti, independence

That's some long crumble and we didn't include the colonies Vichy France gave up. Then there are the present day DOMs and TOMs. Former colonies that are today...[Pause]...well, today they are no longer called colonies.

...nor do I recall France establishing internement camps for "suspected ennemies" in times of war (and I'm not refering to Gantanamo[sic]) , do you?
Posted by zoomerx at May 23, 2006 03:55 AM

Your recall is conveniently faint. France established quite a few internment camps during WWII and loaded them up with an assortment of undesirables most of whom were Jewish refugees, Jewish nationals, and Jewish nationals stripped of French citizenship as a formality so it wouldn't look as if the French state were murdering her own citizens. And the Jews France didn't intern she interred by shiping off to points east where others did the dirty work. America did not strip its interned citizens of their citizenship. And needless to say, America did not murder or collaborate with a foreign power to murder any of its interned citizens.

...I do not recall seeing "Colored Only" signs in French establishments even during colonial rule...
ibid.

Now you are arguing that segregation was a greater evil than slavery. And you seem to believe that the absence of "Colored Only" [sic]* signs makes France an exemplar of integration. If only your recall extended as far back as, say, oh, last autumn, when France was put to flame by the segregated "coloreds" of the Republic. M. Zmx, in France the segregation sign you are looking for is "Banlieue". It's quite prevalent. Don't know how you missed them all.

Next time try some of that "nuanced" French thinking before posting. You won't look quite so ridiculous.

DGB

* The common designations were "Whites Only" and "Colored(s)".

Mr. Bennet,

I must say I admire your skills in dissecting the rancid corp of reasoning that engulfs your foes. You, sir, have been added to my favorites simply based on your last comment in this thread, an unbelievable display of logic combined with just enough smarminess to deliver a considerable slapdown. Bravo, my friend. Bravo

The topic is institutionalized segragation , I'm not sure what this has anything to do with the crumbling of French colonies , whose subjects, by the way, were not segregated in their land, nor in France.

As for the deportation of Jews in WW2, I can accept your point and you were right to point it out, but while Jews returned to France after WW2 (France still has second largest Jewish population in the world outside of Israel), African-Americans were still segregated at home, many of them moving to France as a matter of fact.

Regarding French banlieues, you've obviously and wisely never ventured in the worse - dare I say "segregated" - neighborhoods of Miami, Los Angeles, Detroit, Chicago etc.. that make French banlieues look like country clubs. People just don't die there everyday.

By the way (and sorry for straying away from the actual topic), what happened to "praising" a deserving French national (Pave's equivalent of a politician "photo-op"), as you once said you would occasionally mention?

Do these two dead French soldiers deserve your praise as well as Mr Kempasky "prayers", or are you just too thick to acknowledge it?

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0,36-774274,0.html

M. Zmx,

We believe you know as little about the "neighborhoods of Miami, Los Angeles, Detroit, Chicago" and that great American city "etc." as you do about the French banlieues. We do not believe your dreamy French country club banlieues exist. Certainly not on the reports of our informed French correspondents nor on the evidence of the country clubbers themselves, who put France to flame to show their appreciation of French country club living.

Having botched your arguments on ignorant Americans, telegraphy, slavery, and segregation, you switch to faulting Pave because it doesn't suite your sympathies. M. Zmx, we remind you, as you seem to have forgotten where you are -- not surprising for someone who confuses les zones with country clubs -- that Pave is a site where we mock France for her perfidy and pretentiousness.

That said, skim the current posts and you will find out of the last 15 posts we have paid compliments to Jean-François Revel, Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier, and Jean-Baptiste Carpeaux. That's 20% of recent posts complimenting the French. If you wish to fawn on France, we invite you -- as we always do -- to launch your own blog to your tastes, for your purposes, with your rules. Please stop pretending disappointment here.

Your sanctimony might play better had you ever once suggested to your pal M. AB/AY that he abandon or moderate his signature sign-off "Good luck for [sic] your country in Irak", by which he means us to understand his glee at the death and difficulties there. Perhaps you are just too thick to grasp your hypocrisy. Or perhaps with no winning arguments, flailing hypocrisy is your weapon of choice.

DGB

Do these two dead French soldiers deserve your praise as well as Mr Kempasky "prayers", or are you just too thick to acknowledge it?

This question from zoomer, who I believe at one time called the US troops “trigger happy”.

Why do the French not understand that in Afghanistan and in Iraq we are fighting the same enemy? So, it is only noble for your brave soldiers to be fighting in Afghanistan?

Well, I hate to make this post, and politicize the death of the two brave French soldiers.

The internment of 120,00 japanese-americans and japanese living in the US was ill-advised at best. Japanese citizens, yes. The American japanese could leave to take jobs outside the west coast and thousands left to go to college or into the Army. None went to gas chambers and ovens. Their financial losses were repaid after the war. Shameful, perhaps, but not extremely shameful.