INTELLECTUALS AND POLITICS
605
public. Conscious of the failures of the Vichy government and the
pitfalls of appeasement (references to Daladier, Chamberlain, and
Petain are frequently heard), the postwar anti-Americanism pre–
sently is equalled by an awareness of Soviet expansionism. That
may well be why I was told in Paris, that the posters]'
aime la vie,
announcing the forthcoming peace conference in June 1983,
were put up by the Communist Party. "Every Frenchman is
aware that they are the only ones who gain from this initiative,"
stated a socialist friend. Like other countries with a strong Com–
munist Party-a party that maintains its influence through the
control of bureaucratic and academic jobs even when it has ques–
tionable motives and receives fewer votes-the French, who
only lately have become aware of Gulag, Stalinism, and the var–
ious means of repression, do not question the need to defend
social democracy, whether they have a socialist or Gaullist gov–
ernment.
Liberti, egaliti, fraternite
remains meaningful, and
they would rather be dead than red. This does not mean that the
French are cold warriors, but that they perceive deterrence as the
only way to keep the Soviets at bay, and to get them to negotiate
arms reductions.
Nevertheless, the French have not abandoned their anti–
Americanism in cultural matters: they continue to attack our "cul–
tural imperialism," which allegedly ranges from Dallas and the
Lone Ranger
to
the long defunct Congress for Cultural Freedom,
and from Coca Cola to blue jeans. (In response, they now produce
their own soap operas, soft drinks, and jeans, and have increased
their budget for cultural initiatives so as to make any American
intellectual envious.) That the French exert both economic and
cultural influence upon the Third World, which contradicts this
stance, is not lost upon some of their thinkers. But, politically,
they see themselves as the third force, as aligned with the
NATO they have no intention of joining-as a sort of backup
force, should anything go wrong, should America not want to de–
fend them. (They have maintained all along that we, and the pres–
idents we tend to elect, are indecisive, but many of our statesmen
have failed to take note.)
This " idiosyncratic" world view, which seemingly is
aligned with Reagan politics in Europe and attacks American
"culture," tends to be misunderstood by Americans of all stripes.
Those on the right like the antipeace position, but are put off by
