French to boycott American products ?

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ming
Hmmm... let's see... If all Americans boycott French Products, and all the French boycott Americans Products... They French still lose

I heard some dumbass on Crossfire suggest we boycott German products too... I guess that means we have to boycott all Chrysler and Mercedes products. And all the people working in American Daimler/Chrysler auto-plants are traitors!

In a global society, trade boycotts don't just hurt one country, they hurt everyone.

[GePap]

That sounds dumb enough to be true.

The "magic" of American culture is making something avaliable to the masses, fitting customer tastes as far as they are universal. Men like to see skimpy outfits on women and things blown up: if Americans have the most money and thus are able to do such a thing with better production values, then their goods will be the most popular. The fact is that "culture" is being homogenized world wide, and the US is at best, one big pasteuralization center, where someone like Shakira, a huge seller already comes in and is recycled to fit even more markets. Or look at "Harry Potter", a series about an English boy at an English school written by and Englishwoman, not a single American in sight anywhere, and yet it is the biggets book event of the 1990's. Does that make "Harry Potter" a symbol of British literary imperialism?

[Adam Smith]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler unless you add Pizza and Mercedes imperialism to your book.

Recent joke in Detroit:
How do you pronounce "Daimiler-Chrysler"?
The "Chrysler" is silent.

[Spiffor]

Some clarifications about the language laws in France :

The law doesn't forbid the use of Foreign (read English) words, except in very few occurences. In Summer in Paris, you can still see ads for Disney in English, Spanish or German. Currently, an ad for Evian is airing whose sole words are the lyricis of "We will rock you".
However, the law forces regular speech in ads (not songs) to be subbed in French, even though it can be in small letters. For example, when airbags were a selling factor, the ads displayed "airbag*" ("*coussin de securité" in very small at the bottom of the screen, a word nobody in France uses).

I also think the law forces governments and businesses to use French words in their public communications when there is a French equivalent. The Académie Française (official source of French-speakingness) tries to make French words out of English words, like the laughable "cédérom" from CD-ROM.

Another part of the Toubon defense of French language was to force radio stations to air a given quota of French music. It was softened a bit by the instructions to air new artists (it led to a radical dynamisation of the French musical scene, which really sucked in the 80's) and European music. Of course, there was no quota to air American music

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Ned
And, while you are at it, stop using American inventions such as the telephone, TV, computer, internet, plane, electric lights.

You have to be consistent with your anti-Americanism.

hey but these were all made by immigrants from europe and other places so please don't be so anti-european

and that mcdonald guy sounds Scottish too... don't be anti-Scotish or the Scots will have you for dinner

[Japher]

hey but these were all made by immigrants from europe and other places

That's BS. They were Americans. If we go with your logic than we are all Immigrants from Africa...

[The Mad Monk]

This what I don't understand. As far as I know, America has no set limitations to importing foreign films, or to how much of a given language can go over the air, or to what amount of music from a given culture can be played. We certainly don't require business signs to be in any given language, and we go out of our way to make sure that government documentation can be read by those who don't speak english.

If we were being aggresively culturally imperialist, I would expect to see the opposite, but I don't.

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by Spiffor
However, the law forces regular speech in ads (not songs) to be subbed in French, even though it can be in small letters.

Oddly enough, must german TV ads get dubbed with austrian speakers for the same words here, as the softer pronounciation we are used to sells better. (And no, there is no law requiring that)

Originally posted by Adam Smith
As for "maintaining an agricultural heritage", that's the same argument made in the US by many less productive rural areas. We try to ignore that, and teh subsidies that go with it.

For us the agricultural landscape is a big issue for tourism, and subsidies get moved more into that direction. The latest US subsidies package is more oriented towards benefitting large producers and exporters, is it not....

[Spiffor]

TMM :
No other country or culture has the same amount of cultural agressiveness than yours right now, which explains why there isn't protection to American culture in the US.
However, some people in the south start feeling overwhelmed by Mexicans and by the Spanish language. It is possible the American society remained as multicultural as before, but it is also reasonable to expect these people will make laws to protect their culture they feel threatened by the Mexican "invasion".
The Spanization of southern US is what strikes me as the most similar example you have of a cultural invasion, even thiough it remains quite different. You can understand people and laws can become defensive in such circumstances.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Wasn't it Bush, who said, that the French have no word for "entrepreneur"? Or is that just a legend?

Good one Sir Ralph

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler


Oddly enough, must german TV ads get dubbed with austrian speakers for the same words here, as the softer pronounciation we are used to sells better. (And no, there is no law requiring that)



For us the agricultural landscape is a big issue for tourism, and subsidies get moved more into that direction. The latest US subsidies package is more oriented towards benefitting large producers and exporters, is it not....

It benefits all farmes, but since farms are being more and more corporate owned you have a point. And it's not the farmers who export, it's the exporting corporation.

[Bereta_Eder]

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Spiffor
TMM :
No other country or culture has the same amount of cultural agressiveness than yours right now, which explains why there isn't protection to American culture in the US.
However, some people in the south start feeling overwhelmed by Mexicans and by the Spanish language. It is possible the American society remained as multicultural as before, but it is also reasonable to expect these people will make laws to protect their culture they feel threatened by the Mexican "invasion".
The Spanization of southern US is what strikes me as the most similar example you have of a cultural invasion, even thiough it remains quite different. You can understand people and laws can become defensive in such circumstances.

Absolutely, just as I understand that it's not deliberate on the part of hispanics.

[Japher]

Spiffer:

I don't think that our adversion to the Mexicans and/or Spanish language is an issue of cultural invasion. This may have a part, but is really small. The issue is more along economic lines, and the cost that will entale to have bilingual education in these boarder states.

I have no problem picking up a few words in Spanish so that I can interact better with my friends, but I do have a problem paying for special programs for these ppl who live in CA, have kids in CA, and when those kids are 6 y.o.a. still can't speak english well enough to go to "normal" schools. Then they whine that schools should be in both languages.

It really has nothing to do with the Mexican cultrue, something which I love and enjoy having in my life. It has to responsibility to society and money (as is everything in the US).

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by DuncanK
It benefits all farmes, but since farms are being more and more corporate owned you have a point. And it's not the farmers who export, it's the exporting corporation.

It benefits all farmers, sure, but if it subsidises simple quantity, the bigger ones gain more.