It is time for everyone to finally realize that the French system is radically different from the American system and that the latter will never make the former disappear, because it remains the only coherent alternative to the American system, and this since the very beginning of the formidable American adventure.
The opposition between the two systems resurfaced recently with attacks by the American press against French society, through the New York Times and the Washington Post about the Samuel Paty affair. These attacks have just been reinforced by the instrumentation of the Traoré affair in Times Magazine.
The coverage of Samuel Paty's assassination by the New York Times and the Washington Post has aroused, and that's good, a lot of indignation in France, because the reaction of intellectuals such as Jacques Attali, a friend of the United States, sending a tweet "Shame on you, New York Times!!! "showed everyone, Americans, Germans or Chinese, the strong will of resistance of French society.
In fact, the article in the New York Time, which appeared on the evening of October 16, a few hours after the assassination of Samuel Paty, was titled "French Police Shoot and Kill Man After a Fatal Knife Attack on the Street," which presented the case as if the central issue was that of a supposed police blunder, when the major fact was, blindingly for French opinion, that a college professor had been beheaded for blasphemy, according to the "religious" conception of the assassin.
Thanks to this title, the New York Times confirmed its hostility to the values of French society. Some, however, want to deny the newspaper's hostile intention because it reveals the hostility of "enlightened" American opinion towards French society; others are surprised or pretend to be surprised in order to preserve the "friendly" ties between France and the United States.
However, when Emmanuel Macron protested to the New York Times for the content and orientation of his articles on the murder of Samuel Paty, the newspaper went on to insinuate that Macron "seized" the "symbolic nature" of Samuel Paty's murder, "taking up anti-Islamist themes.
This American reaction to the French counter-attack means that France is summoned to align itself with the positions of the American left, which never uses the term "jihadism", because for them, in Washington, therefore in the United States, and therefore in the rest of the world, the priority is to protect minorities, following the Black Lives Matter movement.
For the American left, anxious to preserve the fragile equilibrium of American society, Muslims are part of the Bipoc (Black, Indigenous, Persons of Color) that must be protected or even privileged, because they are by definition victims of the majority. According to this approach, if some commit criminal acts, even assassinations, it is only a question of defensive reactions that one "can understand". The American left does not question the origin of the fragility of American society, which is the result of its intentional fragmentation, from the very beginning of its construction.
This is what led the New York Times to point out, in an October 21 article about France, that "the country was swept away by nationalism after the assassination of Mr. Paty", confusing nationalism with emotion, while the Washington Post published an analysis of the French situation under the headlines "Instead of fighting systemic racism, France wants to 'reform Islam'" or "France mourns teacher Samuel Paty as government mobilizes against Muslim groups".
Then, on November 1, the Associated Press news agency launched "AP explains: why France incites such anger in Muslim world", justifying this supposed anger against France, which it encourages in an underhanded way, by "its brutal colonial past, its firm laws on secularism, and the outspokenness of its president, seen as lacking respect for the Muslim faith".
Finally, on December 11th, Time Magazine's feature story of Assama Traore as "Guardian of the year" confirms this declaration of war by the American media against French society, the goal being to contribute to national disorder by making Assa Traore a heroine fighting against racism within a xenophobic nation, France.
All these media bites confirm the willingness of the American elites to oppose the inclusive French model. It is in fact the opposite of the model of society they know, support and promote in the United States, a society where each person is entirely responsible for his or her own economic and social success, knowingly obscuring the collective determinants of individual success.
Moreover, American messianism, which is consubstantial with the very creation of the United States, makes the promoters of this model incapable of accepting that there can be a competing model that also works. They must at all costs discredit it before destroying it and scattering its ashes.
But the French model also works. Its principle is based on inclusion, which therefore claims, contrary to the American model, to exclude no one, school and social security being two major pillars of this principle.
It escapes many that the French system was fought by the Americans even before the official constitution of the United States, because of the messianism of the Pilgrim Fathers who wanted and still want to transform the world for their benefit. They did not want to include the French but to drive them out, they did not want to include the Indians but to exterminate them. Since that time, any competitor is considered not as an adversary but as an absolute enemy ("the empire of evil") that must be eliminated and its ideology destroyed.
Following the collapse of the European powers during the twentieth century, the United States was able to extend to the entire planet its project to carry out the work that God commanded it to do, which is a global society where the losers are excluded, whether they are Americans, Chinese or French. As one can imagine, this is not a very popular goal except with the "winners" and they have had to advance in disguise, yesterday under the guise of economic efficiency, today in the name of protecting minorities.
On the other hand, the French inclusive society has a clearly popular logic, which has allowed it to resist the American model everywhere, even in Quebec, so visibly different from English Canada. Also, while recent American media positions clearly highlight the destructive aims of the American ideology vis-à-vis French society, one should not be overly concerned.
For the war between the American system and French society has been going on since the mid-eighteenth century, and since then no one has ever succeeded, from the outside, in modifying the fundamental principle that animates French society.