This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/17/opinion/france-america-thomas-jefferson-race.html
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| The Tenacity of the Franco-American Ideal | The Tenacity of the Franco-American Ideal |
| (about 1 hour later) | |
| PARIS — Perhaps the root of the mutual fascination that binds France and the United States is that each sees itself as an idea, a model of some kind for the rest of the world. This is an immodest but tenacious notion, bound up with the founding articles and myths of both republics. No other countries make such claims for the universality of their virtue. | |
| These are now unfashionable ideas, having their roots in the white patriarchal societies of the late 18th century. | These are now unfashionable ideas, having their roots in the white patriarchal societies of the late 18th century. |
| Beware of fashion. It may overcorrect. I will try to explain. | Beware of fashion. It may overcorrect. I will try to explain. |
| In France, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, adopted in 1789 as the expression of the ideals of the French Revolution, states in its first article: “Men are born and remain free and equal in rights.” The declaration defines these natural rights as “liberty, property, security, and resistance against oppression,” and says that liberty “consists of doing anything which does not harm others.” | In France, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, adopted in 1789 as the expression of the ideals of the French Revolution, states in its first article: “Men are born and remain free and equal in rights.” The declaration defines these natural rights as “liberty, property, security, and resistance against oppression,” and says that liberty “consists of doing anything which does not harm others.” |
| Thirteen years earlier, in its Declaration of Independence, the United States set out certain “self-evident” truths: “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The right to govern stemmed “from the consent of the governed.” Over the ensuing 15 years, these ideas were enshrined in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. | Thirteen years earlier, in its Declaration of Independence, the United States set out certain “self-evident” truths: “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The right to govern stemmed “from the consent of the governed.” Over the ensuing 15 years, these ideas were enshrined in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. |
| France and the United States were intertwined as political allies, but also as twinned sources of Enlightenment principles. Thomas Jefferson, a slave owner, influenced the formulation of the French Declaration and was an author of America’s founding laws. | France and the United States were intertwined as political allies, but also as twinned sources of Enlightenment principles. Thomas Jefferson, a slave owner, influenced the formulation of the French Declaration and was an author of America’s founding laws. |
| The revolutions were sweeping. There was nothing “self-evident” about them. Out with monarchy, in with “We the people.” Out with divine right, in with human rights. Out with rule by edict, in with the separation of powers and the rule of law. So, falteringly, began the liberal democratic experiment, now under attack. | The revolutions were sweeping. There was nothing “self-evident” about them. Out with monarchy, in with “We the people.” Out with divine right, in with human rights. Out with rule by edict, in with the separation of powers and the rule of law. So, falteringly, began the liberal democratic experiment, now under attack. |
| The experiment was as flawed as Jefferson himself. All men are created equal. Sounds good, but what about women? (A Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Female Citizen was written in France in 1791 by the French feminist Olympe de Gouges.) And what of Black slaves, their value set in the Constitution at 60 percent of a free human being? Let’s rephrase the sentence: All white male property owners are created equal. Not much of a ring to it, but has the merit of accuracy. | The experiment was as flawed as Jefferson himself. All men are created equal. Sounds good, but what about women? (A Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Female Citizen was written in France in 1791 by the French feminist Olympe de Gouges.) And what of Black slaves, their value set in the Constitution at 60 percent of a free human being? Let’s rephrase the sentence: All white male property owners are created equal. Not much of a ring to it, but has the merit of accuracy. |
| And what of France, trading in slaves well into the 19th century, ushering Jews to emancipation through the principles of the revolution only to contribute to their mass murder during World War II, fighting a savage colonial war in Algeria between 1954 and 1962? | And what of France, trading in slaves well into the 19th century, ushering Jews to emancipation through the principles of the revolution only to contribute to their mass murder during World War II, fighting a savage colonial war in Algeria between 1954 and 1962? |
| So, a cry goes up. These pretensions of embodying ennobling ideals for humankind were false, reflecting no more than the narrow worldview of 18th-century white males whose talk of equal rights was shot through with exploitative hypocrisy. | So, a cry goes up. These pretensions of embodying ennobling ideals for humankind were false, reflecting no more than the narrow worldview of 18th-century white males whose talk of equal rights was shot through with exploitative hypocrisy. |
| The perfect becomes the enemy of the good. In an age of absolutist moral certainty, the most conspicuous feature of humankind — its fallibility — becomes unpardonable. Can a slave owner be celebrated for penning a liberating sentence? How can a progressive socialist French president, François Mitterrand, have been an official of the Vichy regime? Because the second-most conspicuous feature of human beings is their contradictory natures. | The perfect becomes the enemy of the good. In an age of absolutist moral certainty, the most conspicuous feature of humankind — its fallibility — becomes unpardonable. Can a slave owner be celebrated for penning a liberating sentence? How can a progressive socialist French president, François Mitterrand, have been an official of the Vichy regime? Because the second-most conspicuous feature of human beings is their contradictory natures. |
| “I don’t think any people enjoys rooting around in the unpleasant parts of their past,” Robert Paxton, a prominent American historian whose groundbreaking work helped bring France to a full understanding of the crimes of the Vichy regime, told me. “Denial is often ineradicable. I think on the whole the French came out of it quicker than we did.” | “I don’t think any people enjoys rooting around in the unpleasant parts of their past,” Robert Paxton, a prominent American historian whose groundbreaking work helped bring France to a full understanding of the crimes of the Vichy regime, told me. “Denial is often ineradicable. I think on the whole the French came out of it quicker than we did.” |
| It took more than a half-century, until 1995, for France, in the person of President Jacques Chirac, to acknowledge that the French state, and not some handful of misguided Vichy operatives, had “committed the irreparable” in sending some 76,000 French and foreign Jews to their deaths. It was more than a half-century after France left Algeria that Emmanuel Macron, while a candidate for the French presidency in 2017, called the French colonization of Algeria “a crime against humanity” and later, as president, acknowledged French “atrocities.” | It took more than a half-century, until 1995, for France, in the person of President Jacques Chirac, to acknowledge that the French state, and not some handful of misguided Vichy operatives, had “committed the irreparable” in sending some 76,000 French and foreign Jews to their deaths. It was more than a half-century after France left Algeria that Emmanuel Macron, while a candidate for the French presidency in 2017, called the French colonization of Algeria “a crime against humanity” and later, as president, acknowledged French “atrocities.” |
| The United States has never formally apologized for slavery. President Clinton, in Africa more than two decades ago, managed to say that “we were wrong” to have “received the fruits of the slave trade.” That was all he could muster. | The United States has never formally apologized for slavery. President Clinton, in Africa more than two decades ago, managed to say that “we were wrong” to have “received the fruits of the slave trade.” That was all he could muster. |
| Now, in the midst of another push to overcome America’s original sin, would be a good moment for such an apology. | Now, in the midst of another push to overcome America’s original sin, would be a good moment for such an apology. |
| That, after all, is what democracies like France and the United States are capable of: continuous adjustment, improvement, recognition of past mistakes, atonement, progress toward their ideals. If they are, it is thanks in large part to the flawed brilliance of the architects, direct or indirect, of the two republics. | That, after all, is what democracies like France and the United States are capable of: continuous adjustment, improvement, recognition of past mistakes, atonement, progress toward their ideals. If they are, it is thanks in large part to the flawed brilliance of the architects, direct or indirect, of the two republics. |
| We can and should acknowledge their flaws without denigrating their achievement in spreading the ideas of liberty, free expression and the rule of law across the face of the earth. The words that issued from Paris and Philadelphia between 1776 and 1791 have served the cause of freedom, even if they were the product of minds and cultures foreign to the Great Awokening of recent years, whose own chief flaw may prove to be self-righteous intolerance. | We can and should acknowledge their flaws without denigrating their achievement in spreading the ideas of liberty, free expression and the rule of law across the face of the earth. The words that issued from Paris and Philadelphia between 1776 and 1791 have served the cause of freedom, even if they were the product of minds and cultures foreign to the Great Awokening of recent years, whose own chief flaw may prove to be self-righteous intolerance. |
| The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com. | The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com. |
| Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. | Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. |