Assignment: In Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong, read the chapters assigned below. Write a response, following the Reader Response Guidelines. React to and comment upon at least 2 of your classmates responses.
Chapter 6: What is jusqu’au-boutisme?
Chapter 6 deals with this idea of jusqu’au-boutisme which basically means until-the-bitter-end-ism. In other words, the French are very prideful and when it comes to certain situations they are willing to go extreme measures for said action. They do not care whether it may be wrong or right in any way, they want their way and they will accomplish it. I guess you can say they are a bit stubborn. But, surprisingly their method works wonders when it comes to difficult situations. Because of this mentality they have made a statement of being known for willing to go as far as possible to gain the upperhand, in their country as well as in their surrounding continent. This does not differ from America’s mentality of wanting to be the biggest power out there. Just like France, we want to gain the upper hand with no fear as to what it will take. Due to this, France’s community was built as in intention of a waging war. All their buildings, caves, etc. were built to have hiding places in case of invasions, because of the constant invasions it would go through from neighboring countries. Not only does the physical characteristics show this upper hand, but so do the mentalities of the people. For example, Americans are used to seeing employees try and find initiative to gain power and move upper ward on the spectrum. On the other hand, you will not experience this with workers in France. They tend to not care about being interested in finding initiative, they could care less about gaining a place in the “upper hand”.
ReplyDeleteI really like your comparison with the US because the authors don't talk about that much. I can see the difference with France as a country doing whatever they can to be more powerful but in the US we do it individually to one up ourselves.
DeleteNice response. I still found it interesting how the authors found this quality within the actions of people in all situations. Just shows how widespread this behavioral belief seems to be. Brandon Aspan
DeleteI like the way you provided examples and made the concept easy to understand. It is also interesting to only hear the author's perspectives.
DeleteI really like how you compared France's struggle for power with the US', it really tied the concept together.
DeleteYes. France has had a large power struggle for years. This may play into the psychology that France has a nation now though..I mean being invaded on numerous occasions, and going through so many wars, may make you believe as if you have something to prove.
DeleteThis chapter talks a lot about France’s government history. One of the terms used to help describe why the government was always changing is jusqu’au-boutisme. The authors describe this as until the bitter end-ism. This means the french are hard headed people who are willing to fight for what they want until the end, no matter what, even if it means losing everything that they have. In the french government though it might be hard to do this. When the authors were in France, they were there during the longest period of cohabitation. In politics this is when the president and prime minister don’t come from the same party (ex. left and right). When this happens it limits the authority each position has. Most of the french people complain about this all the time but when it comes to voting time, no one does anything different to change the situation from cohabitation. This is why jusqu’au-boutisme doesn’t really fit the government aspect of France because there is not one party dominating house. More than one party has a say which means that the people from each party aren’t so willing to do whatever they can to get their party to have full power.
ReplyDeleteDavid Gibson.
DeleteI agree with your introduction about how the chpt talked about the French history of their government. I was especially glad to hear of France determination for a country of brilliance and the meaning of "jusqu'a boutisme" which means until the bitter end ism.Considering the French and the intruders trying to take their fine custome and class.They are known as fighters.First amoung themselves and then other nations.
That is a great perspective and way to think about it because i was thinking they were just selfish people but maybe they are just fighters.
DeleteI agree that with having conflicts in the party, at this time, the government is not really experiencing jusqu'au boutisme.
DeleteThat was a nice focus on the aspect of the cohabitation from the text. Compared to the other time when I read of this, it seems much different. Of course, maybe the UK's political system is more suited for it. Or this happened to be the hardest period, all things considered.
DeleteIt seems like a mismatch for France's system in general. Brandon Aspan
A unique term describing the actions in France, the authors called it jusqu’-au-boutisme, a type of drive. This term was chosen to describe their drive since other similar terms such as extremism have… implications. A separate type of cultural trait, in addition to the draw to grandeur previously stated, also influences the actions of the French.
ReplyDeleteIn the section that follows, we find out just how the past left an imprint on the actions in France now, for all types of people. It’s in these sections that Barlow et al. start making it clear that France’s history absolutely needs to be known, and its impact to greater extents. On a related note, it seemed like a guide to France’s history would be needed for this section. All through France’s history of conflict, which shaped the building of France’s environment. “What’s left standing in France today looks quaint and charming, but most of it was built with the intention of waging war. “ (Barlow, Nadeau 77) Aggressive behavior is what the authors claim to see in all of French life, which isn’t what I expected. Essentially, to be able to be at the point France is now, various parties engaged in power struggles, whether it’s the nobility or other groups.
But, it managed to be resolved in spite of it. In regards to this section, it could use more concrete sources and examples, but it gets the message across. This may be what causes the change in how both U.S. and French cultures are viewed and their actions.
Interesting how both cultures are viewed on and generalized as two opposite positions in terms of military power, all due to which group is being viewed. Brandon Aspan
I agree on you saying that prior knowledge of France's history might be needed to fully understand this chapter. My only background of France's history is from Les Mis so some of it was confusing. I do like your point is that no matter how much struggle France gets in they figure out a way to resolve it.
DeleteI agree with you about the French's history. Their history has a huge impact on their country. I also like how you explained jusqu'-au-boutisme as a drive. I do agree with you about that because the authors explain it to be fighters who fight no matter what happens, so I found that interesting.
DeleteFighters not only fighting no matter what, but also believing in an either sided outcome. There can be no compromise with the French...
DeleteDavid Gibson
ReplyDeleteIn France jusqu’au-boutisme or until the bitter end ism is a common thing that is defined as "hard- liners who are willing to fight to the end, no matter what the costs, even if it means losing everything." The French are not people that are into compromise or a middle ground its always a win- lose instead of a win-win like in America. if a compromise was reached it was hidden very well or kept hush hush from others not involved. France's history consists of much war and division of their own people. they fought over land and influence or power and back then the only way to gain these was either war or marriage. The French do not like cohabitating with each other especially when it comes to sharing power and influence. They have fought over literally everything down through history. The French were very supportive of absolutism until the revolution. France has a kind of tradition though, when the constitution was disagreed upon they either dissolved it or they resigned. Many French politicians only use their political liberty to serve themselves and not the people of the country. France seems to be a very selfish country.
ReplyDeleteI liked how you put it into simple context with saying they are much more of a win-lose than a win-win. It definitely shows the culture differences.
DeleteI agree with you about the French not liking cohabitation with each other when it comes to power and influence. They take their power very seriously. I also explained about how the French history has a huge impact on their country. They love learning about their history. France is much different from America, so it's difficult for us to see how their country is.
DeleteI think you showed cultural differences well while explaining the topic. It is also good to show the differences between America and France.
DeleteRachel M. D'Andrea
ReplyDeleteJusqu’ae-boutisme is a term that translates to “until-the-bitter-end-ism” (76). This term is introduced by the authors when trying to find an appropriate word to describe the French people’s disdain for compromise. Jusqu’au-boutisme is used by the French to “describe hard-liners who are willing to fight to the end, no matter what the costs, even if it means losing everything” (76). The authors point out that in reality, all of the French are just a bit jusqu’au-boutisme: it is a part of their culture. In the style of traditional French thinking, gray area is often completely overlooked. Problems tend to be viewed as “win-lose” situations, even when they are not really so (78). Stemming from the concept of grandeur, the French are prone to taking power where it is granted leading to acting in self-interested and self-serving ways. To compromise, then, is to sacrifice a chance to get the upper hand, to demonstrate one’s power. In the chapter, the authors point out that the “French have actually shown a talent for dividing themselves into opposing camps throughout most of their history” (77). For example, the authors’ stay in France happened to coincide with the country’s longest period of governmental cohabitation with officials being of both the right and the left of the political spectrum. Rather than taking proactive steps to prevent this from happening, the French resolve to stick it out to the end. Throughout history, the French have tried to find a solution to this jusqu’ae-boustisme, and ironically, that solution seems to be the very thing they avoid: compromise (76).
compromising is the very thing that the french tried to avoid but for some reason they always came up short and seeing all the turmoil from Revolutions and changing of power from monarch to simple Frenchman. either way though the french in this chapter of the book tend to blame everyone else besides themselves. and yet they want change for their people but are too big headed to standout and admit that they are wrong.
Deletein chapter 6 jusque Au boutisme means until the bitter end-ism, when translated in English. throughout this chapter that phrase represented a lot of the way france works and their attitudes towards pride for their country and simple fact of never changing there stubbornness to build a democracy. the french are the way they are because they fought invaders and their individuality and now 800 years have built up this aggression that for some might come off as stubborn and rude. in a way they are callused from kings,religion, the pope, and revelations to the point they will fight to their individuality but there tends to be a downfall to such a phrase trust and self-interest are deemed as negative because everyone is every man for themselves.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that due to the french's past, they have adopted a harden attitude against people they are not familiar with
DeleteThe idea of jusqu’au-boutisme is defined by the authors as ‘bitter end-ism’ and as a type of drive or motivation for completing an action. The French are greatly influenced by outside forces which then affects their actions. The French are often thought of as fighters that will defend whatever they need to no matter what could occur. Compromise is not something that is common in the French culture, but instead situations are often win or lose. This idea has become part of their culture and a part of every French person. Throughout history, the French have often fought for everything they have earned through their support of absolutism up until the revolution. This also helps explain the thought that French people often exude aggressive behavior in all French life. The people have been able to compensate for this through repeals and reforms to important aspects of their lives like the Constitution.
ReplyDeletethe sad part is that the generation gap between the older french and younger french is obsserving the fact that the amount of times the constitution changed has made this confusion of what is sticking to your guns or not willing to change for the better to improve the quality of all lives rather than just trying to fix one person's.
DeleteI like your point about how the French are able to compensate for their aggressive behavior through repeals and reforms such as the constitution. Though it doesn't justify, it does compensate.
DeleteIn chapter 6, they begin the chapter explaining how the French did not like cohabitation. They said cohabitation made it impossible to exercise with power. In France, cohabitation made the Republic "ungovernable ". They found a way out known as, jusqu'-au-boutisme, which is "until-the-bitter-ism". They used this term to describe hard-liners who are willing to fight to the end, no matter the outcome of it, even if they would lose everything they have. They found this solution to be a compromise in their country. Their government structure includes extremism without repressing it. Some of the things that are built in French were meant for waging war. Aggression is a common thing known in France's history. I found it interesting how they made the building look charming and interesting, but meant for something else. In France, landowners and nobles sought to enlarge their property. Self-interests describes well how Americans are when they act upon self-interest ways that end up being good. Americans usually believe upon talking of finding "win-win" solutions to problems. The French are the opposite because their solutions are usually "win-lose". The authors explain how empowerment was starting controversy in France in France while they were there. Usually, federalism is a way for countries to accommodate differences among the populations, but not their way. The French solution is absolutism and centralization. French's attitude about power has been the same for generations and hasn't changed. Even if powers overlap with each other, they don't try to solve the conflicts by going against each other. Because of their moto about, jusqu'-au-boutisme, they aren't very moderate or wanting to compromise. Their system has worked for them for about two centuries. I would be interested into learning more about the French history and the times during World War II.
ReplyDeleteDavid Gibson October 16,2016
ReplyDeleteMrs. Leal French 101
Response 6
The question is that for chpt 6 what does "jusqu'au-boutisme means. It means until-the bitter-end-ism for the French. France had a revolutionary war in which "jusqu'au-boutisme" was about inside the nation and to fight other nations. The French Revolution unleashed a new brand of violence that was opposite of republicains to the aristocrats, monarchists and Catholics. Jusqu"au-boutisme gives French pride but it also can back fire in monopoly. The capitalists used that motto to control French economy. The moral of the motto can stands for pride in France in which its history comes from. From tradition and liberties much like in America only that they used it to publish pamphlets and newspapers.To call out left wing politicians and Jews. America is France allies and should be very proud of the French and its until the bitter endism.The French uses its motto not only for national pride but for its economy. To build employee and employer manufacturing and laboring. France politics was built "jusqu" au-boutisme. The government is much like a democratic government but deals with capitalist and more one man rule thsn America. The French win-lose attitude can be costly but bring confidence and discipline to their citizens. Unions brought comprise to the French upon the treatment of capitalists in the 19th century. Capitalists refused to make concessions and the super rich outruled the voting rights of the working class. Until 1936 the Front Populaire voted on the promise of reducing the work week to forty hours and grant two-weeks of paid holiday.The French had a civil-war-again nearly.The French kept their jusqu' au boutiste from 1870 to 1940. The country was built on jusqu' au boutiste and gain its character because of it.
In this chapter we learn more about the world of France, in particular the way that their government was ran in the past. The history of France’s governmental body has been in constant flux throughout the years, leading to the phrase “jusqu’au-boutisme” simple means that the French people are trulystuck in their ways or until the bitter end-ism. Due to this, the France are willing to go to any lengths in order to get there way with can be a negative and a positive trait. Their stubbornness leaks over into their democracy as a result to the years of fighting invaders and trespassers from their country. One could not blame the French from their stern and superiority complex when seeing how the last 800 years has treated them. This heightened sense of pride and caution against those who are not like them are because of how the unknown has played a part in not just their lives but their culture as well. From this information, I can see why the French have been so shut off from others, because without trust how can you build a relationship? The simple answer is that you can’t and that felling is a product of history. The very same history that continues to affect the people of France till this very day.
ReplyDeleteI do agree to much been written. France has stuck to its tradition and "jusqu" au boutisme".They have fought civil and world for its culture.
DeleteThe term jusqu’au- boutisme literally means until-the bitter-end. It is described by the French as hard-liners who are willing to fight to the end, no matter what it costs, even if it means losing everything. However, the concept behind it holds a much more complex meaning. The French are known for their disregard of compromise, which is exemplified not only through politics, but also through most common conversation, history, business, and labor relations. As stated by Barlow and Nadeau, the French have a proclivity for being obdurate, or pretty narrow- minded in terms of reconciliation of any kind; “someone always wins and someone always loses,” (Barlow and Nadeau, 76). This is where jusqu’au- boutisme ties in- this attitude embodies the tendency of the French to divide themselves during most situations. Not only is this prevalent within France today, but the French have been shown to demonstrate this tendency throughout most of their history. Barlow and Nadeau make this comparison by their description of the Wars of Religion, during which Catholics and Protestants in France “killed each other off in staggering numbers, and continued doing so even during the relatively peaceful seventeenth century,” (Barlow and Nadeau, 77). This shows that the concept of jusqu’au- boutisme had been widespread in France throughout its history. This concept is also present within labor relations in France through the constant struggle between the Right and the Left, which subsequently led to the Paris Uprising of 1871 as well as quasi civil war over the Dreyfus Affair. Through this, the authors also support their claim of France’s predominantly aggressive behavior in everyday life.
ReplyDeleteMathew Dumay
ReplyDelete10/16/2016
Dr. Leal
FRN 101
Reader Response 6
In reader response 6, the chapter is mainly focusing on the term “jusqu’au-boutisme” (until-the-bitter-end-ism). The chapter explains how all French seem to have this sense of tenacity- as the last eight hundred years of their history have been the effort to try and contain it. “It’s hard to avoid thinking of war when you’re traveling in France” (Barlow, Nadeau p.77). The authors describe how everywhere you walk, either if it’s museums or castles, the intention when they built these structures was for war. When we look on history, the French have had to deal with a considerable amount of invaders: Vandal, Moor, English, Turk, Spanish, and German. To add, when the authors asked the French how they felt about the Canadian form of government. They referred to it closely resembling “anarchy”. “The French opted for absolutism long before the existence of the modern French State” (Barlow, Nadeau p. 82). The authors then go on to say that the system requires moderation and compromise, but the French are too jusqu’au boutiste for that. Throughout history, the king of the land had to deal with power that was coming from the church. Then by the seventeenth century, the king’s power was greater than his, causing absolutism to come into play. “An absolute leader knows no judicial, constitutional, executive, or legislative restraint on his power” (Barlow, Nadeau p. 82). The chapter finishes out explaining that through different revolutions and wars, even if there was a compromise to be made, the reflex of winning, always overtook the trial at peace.
In a business interaction can you think of an threatening action that this aggressive ideology can detroy any compromise between clients.
DeleteReader Response 6
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 6 it is talking about the term jusqu’au-boutisme. What this term means is until-the-bitter-end-ism. The French like to have a lot of love for power. The book also talks about how the French are very much divided about almost everything. In the book the authors on page 70 state, “The French use the term themselves to describe hard-liners who are willing to fight to the end, no matter what the costs, even if it means losing everything.” From this I got that the French are very stubborn and if they don’t get their way, they will find a way to make sure their way gets accomplished. In this chapter it also talks about the term cohabitation. Which essentially means “living together under the same roof” (Page 75). The French do not like doing this at all, which I found interesting. What I found interesting was that the French do not like cohabitation, they actually despise it a lot. It was interesting to find that they believe that it prevents the government from governing. I found this whole chapter really interesting and I learned quite a bit. I would definitely recommend this chapter to someone else.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteChapter 6 discusses the way the people of French are locked in to the mindset of either winning or losing and variety of aspects this mindset reaches from political power to social interactions. For instance, their stubbiness between each other is what lead them to have a Right Wing Parliament and Left wing president sharing the power between them. The theory behind this kind of action stems from their lover of power. In French culture, the betterment of the individual against another is very important. So important in fact they coined the term on “jusqu’au-boutisme,” meaning until the bitter endism. As sad as it sounds this characteristic flaw somehow works for their kind it’s even enrooted in their agriculture. For instance, the Périgord, was built not only for protection against the environment but also their neighbors, of which they were cautions of their power of invasion. However, the French weren’t united as a people and they consistently fought among themselves using any leverage they could like marriage and money. In contrast to American culture, democracy worked for our kind because we view society as a way of self-interest that ends up benefiting the whole. In France the conflict between Unions and Capitalist again stems from this ideology. Even if a union comes to compromises with a company depending on the situation the outcome will be viewed as either a win or a lose with no settlement feeling of comprise. In America the belief of “Fordism” is when owners pay their employees well and had a share of rights they would create a working class that can appreciate the products their very same company produces. Whereas the French have a conflict because their belief in power prevents capitalist from sharing the same amount of rights and privileges compared to American capitalists.
ReplyDelete