It's sort of interesting to compare the attitudes of French people versus Americans here regarding the election. By and large the French obviously don't like Bush, but I haven't heard much about the election one way or another since it happened. The Americans I know, on the other hand, with typical hysteria (since they're 95% Kerry supporters, or rather Bush opposers, which I guess is about as close as you get to a Kerry supporter), moan on an on about the end of civilization, blah, blah, blah. Intersting to note also that when French people do express concern or disapproval regarding Bush, it's usually about something major, like the war (actually, almost always about the war). The Americans I know, on the other hand, seem to be more worried about piddly shit like abortion and gay marriage. Just another thought to chew on.

I meant Bush opposers in that sentence. Correction, please?

I can say almost the same thing for Hong Kong. Lots of anti-Bush feeling, especially among the folks at HKU. Yet once the election was over, everyone sort of shrugged and moved on.

Same story in Oxford.In fact, interest in the election was quite low from start to finish.

errr...why are you surprised? it's not their election!

errr...why are you surprised? it's not their election!

My point wasn't that, at least in France, people weren't suitably indifferent to the election, because many of them were (all the news channels broadcast from America on Election Day), it's just that they neither broke down in panicky hysteria afterwards, like most of the Americans I know, nor did they become suddenly militant, which both demonstrates the default American tendency to exaggeration and hysteria, and puts the lie to a lot of the fear of some unstoppable, irrational tide of anti-Americanism engulfing the globe, which in my opinion has largely been invented by panicky, hysterical Americans.

curt, speaking of, i wonder if you have read Jean-Francois Revel's book, _Anti-Americanism_ (aka, L'obsession anti-américaine)? i just stumbled on it in the library yesterday...it has been a pernicious distraction from pressing obligations ever since.

I haven't read the book, but I have read a number of articles that Revel has written. It's true that Revel is a good counter-example to the idea that anti-Americanism is largely a bogeyman invented by Americans, but at the same Revel comes from pretty rarified circles (I think he's a member of the Académie Française), where declinism is almost de rigueur. In Ravel the idea seems to have become doubly self-indictive, in the sense that his perception of France's decline is accompanied by the belief that French criticism of America, or its cruder manifestation as anti-Americanism, is itself a symptom of French decline rather than, as many in France seem to believe, a way to escape from it.

All of which is to say that, while I definitely find the main thrust of his arguments compelling, and he's definitely quite astute and non-hysterical, it should be noted that his principal concern is on reforming French society, and this phenomenon that he describes is, I believe, exaggerated, at least in terms of its effect on Americans, partly because it is based on a notion of French decline which is itself often exaggerated here. However, one point that Revel is absolutely right about, and something to think about for those in America who believe in the unlimited virtues of "multilateralism" and making friends with all the nations of the world, is that anti-Americanism, at least in France and to the extent that it exists, has a lot to do with envy of American power, even when it comes in the guise of ostentatious concern about Iraq, or Africa, or whatever else, and hence is in a sense unappeasable. In other words, it may be futile trying to figure out just the right way to exercise American power to make everyone happy, when the mere existence of American power is itself the source of discontent.