<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: A new look at France in the colonies
Review: In 1973 Stanford University historian questioned whether or no anything new could be said about Vichy France. In response to his rhetorical question, Wright pointed out the revisionist work of Robert Paxton - VICHY FRANCE - OLD GUARD AND NEW ORDER 1940 - 1944. Paxton challenged the traditinal myths of French resistence and atacked France's edited memory of their collaboration with the Germans. Eric T. Jennings demonstrates that he is an heir to Paxton's revisionism in this work. Through the use of a comparative study of three colonial possessions in the outer reaches of the French Empire from 1940 - 1944, Jennings describes and interprets Marshall Petain's unique brand of colonialism, a subject, according to Jennings, that has been largely ignored by other historians.The gist of Jenning's argument is that in the selected colonies, there was no German presence. With no Germans, he questions why the Vichy colonial officials were so repressive. A recurring theme in the three exampes cited is the underlying rejection of republicanism in the colonies by the French administratin. Jennings demonstrates the points made by Paxton, namely, that the Vichy government, in the metropole and in the colonies went beyond what the Germans required in terms of anti Semitism, ultra conservatism, authoritarianism and anti republicanism and formulated policies and practices that were anti Masonic, anti Communistic and ardently Catholic. Prior to the coming of the Vichy government, colonial administrators, particulary in Guadeloupe advocated assimilation and officially per pounded ideas of "Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity." In Madagascar and Indochina the colonies could anticipate at best an association with France. But at heart of the colonial empire, even before the Vichy government, was a belief in Social Darwinism that saw the indigenous people of the colonies as proper subjects for domination, not citizens of France. True equality had never really been anticipated. So when the opportunity present itself the true colors of the colonial administrators emerged. Jennings argued that the repressive tactics of the French colonial administration back fired on the French. Little did they realize that the tactics galvinized dissent in the colonies and provided unintended fertilizer for the already fertile ground of colonial nationalism. To Jennings, the four years he described mark a crossroads of colonialism and post colonialism. Jennings, however, gives no agency to the indigeous people. It seems to me that there would have been strong nationalist movements even without the pressure from the French. In addition, I think that Jennings gives to much credence to de Gaulle and the Free French. Jennings uses local records to present a part of French history that has been ignored by other historians. The book considers a subject that is in much need or research for its own sake and for its impact on the subject of Vicy France and French mentalities.
<< 1 >>
| 
