France Consigns its Own History to the Dustbin

Here in the United States we’re familiar with the deprecation of “Dead White Men” and their gradual elimination from American history as taught in public schools. In a parallel development, we have experienced the elevation of women, people of color, the disabled, and sexual deviants to positions of prominence in our national narrative.

The same process is underway all across the West. Since France is the most Islamized of Western nations, it’s hardly surprising that its history is the most extensively rewritten.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video:

11 thoughts on “France Consigns its Own History to the Dustbin

  1. This is quite sad and disturbing. I am perplexed that the focus on the French Revolution would have been slashed…this doesn’t even make sense from a left wing point of view.

    The French have an incredible and rich culture. It’s amazing to think that a nation of only 60 million people should have throughout its history had such a profound impact on the rest of the world through cuisine, art, philosophy, language, romance, ideal and myth.

    The day that France forgets itself is a tragic day for humanity indeed.

    The madness needs to stop. Whatever past crimes of colonialism were committed by Europe, turning away from their own wonderful cultures and histories will not right wrongs. Europe is the birthplace of science, democracy, human rights, philosophy, the enlightenment, freedom and human dignity. As wrong as some actions of European nations have been, the continent has also been a shining light for this world.

    I say this as a mixed race man, the son of Black and White parents, and a progressive, who thinks that the Euro-left has gone entirely too far and will bring about its own self destruction by throwing out the very societies and values that nurtured its rise.

  2. Naturally the excuse given by the Ministry is flimsy. If the intent of Motapotaas (whatever) is to highlight contributions from important areas from history then why not teach on those areas? There must be plenty of contributions to world history that can be learned from Egyptian, Chinese, and Indian history (I recall Fjordman’s essay on beer here especially!)

    Perhaps there is a double conspiracy at play here. France cannot teach about ancient Egypt as that would anger Muslims. It cannot be that such an important area of the Ummah was once not Muslim, can it?! And the Chinese basically threw their history out with the Cultural Revolution, so why teach to theirs?

    It would appear France is merely marching it’s way to conformance with the scrubbing of it’s history.

  3. @Cyrus said “And the Chinese basically threw their history out with the Cultural Revolution”

    Please stop living in the past. Yes, China suffered through a ten-year period of madness, but that was about two generations ago! Although discussing and criticizing that recent past is tricky, Chinese people are well aware (and very proud of) their substantial contributions to the history of mankind. Although I would be the last person to agree with the suppression of France’s history, China’s history is well worth studying.

  4. Is it possible that we can stop using the term ‘political correctness’, which sounds benign and risible, with another term; perhaps ‘socialist propaganda’; which explains more accurately what is being done to us and our children?

  5. Political Correctness is used to cause the other side to squirm.

    It reflects their correctness is tied to their politics rather than their ideology.

    The terms the left want us to use is “Global Harmonization”… and peace.

    Global Harmonization and Peace…

    … at the expense of Personal Privacy and Freedom, of course.

    No, “Political Correctness” is the correct term for us to use, reflecting the political agendas driving the globalization efforts.

  6. fanfan —

    Your comment was worth reading, but you neglected to follow our guidelines about the use of language in comments. I’ve redacted your text and replicated it below.

    For future reference, please read our commenting guidlines before posting again.


    fanfan said…

    Hello, as French, I’d like to add some information. The recent reform of the history curriculum (like much of French politics since De Gaulle) was decided by the United States.

    C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 PARIS 000058
    Classified By: Ambassador Charles H. Rivkin

    “In addition, we will continue and intensify our work with French museums and educators to reform the history curriculum taught in French schools, so that it takes into account the role and perspectives of minorities in French history.”

    The new curriculum was implemented this year. All major French kings and artists have been erased. They have been replaced by multiculturalist [nonsense] largely about Islam and Africa.

    For more information, search for “rivkin project”.

    The work of the American embassy in Paris does not consist only in rewriting French history, it is also about financing exhibitions all over France promoting multiculturalism and explaining how great Islam is, and setting up Muslim media (, saphirnews, bondyblog etc.), paying journalists to invite Muslim activists trained in the United States (Rockaya Diallo on radio RTL or France’O Tv, Karim Zeribi on RMC etc.), recruiting imams and helping them entering French administration like imam Haidari in the city of Marseille.

    There is a competition between American Jews from the State Department (Rivkin, Berg etc) and the Islamists to control Medias dedicated to Muslims in France. For example, Oumma and Bondyblog have been set up by / are working with the American embassy in Paris. They promote multiculturalism and avoid speaking about the Middle East conflict. On the opposite, Forsane alizza and the Indigenes de la republique are truly Muslim, they do no promote multiculturalism, they do support Palestinians against Israel and they denounce Otan interventions in Muslim countries.

    Concerning the American strategy, a Wikileaks cable from the embassy indicates:

    “Building on our work with two prominent websites geared toward young French-speaking Muslims — — we will support, train, and engage media and political activists who share our values. […] Our aim is to engage the French population at all levels […] implement an aggressive youth outreach strategy […] reform the history curriculum taught in French schools […] bring minority leaders from the U.S. to France […] develop creative, additional means to influence the youth of France, employing new media, corporate partnerships, nationwide competitions, targeted outreach events, especially invited U.S. guests”

    The rewriting of French history is largely a side effect of this competition between force-feed multiculturalism by the American embassy and Muslim countries about who can influence the youth in France.

    Historians like Casali have alrealy written alternative books for parents to continue teaching French history to their children.

  7. fanfan —

    I’ve seen the Wikileaks docs you quote from, and I agree: the USA vigorously promoted Multiculturalism in France. That was what we wanted France to do.

    The big question is: Why did France do as she was asked?

    The French have a long history of resisting policies proposed by the United States, of working against us, of undermining American strategies.

    Why did France act differently in this case?

    Why did she not resist. Why did she instead carry out America’s wishes?

    There’s more to this story than simply American coercion.

  8. Concerning the American strategy, The United States of America v The United States of Europe, the nightmare scenario of American long term forgein policy planning.

    Strong national identities British, French, German and Italian would strengthen a Western European cohort making it a formidable economic and military force in challenging the United States of American.

    American forgein policy in advancing multiculturalism in Europe could be viewed as a disruption tactic in countering the formation of a European cohort.

  9. The opposition between France and the USA was quite strong during the post-WWII period and was mainly due to De Gaulle because he prevented the American plan for France’s annexation, he chose to develop an independent nuclear force, he promoted the gold standard against the dollar (good idea!), he went out of NATO etc. In order to avoid another De Gaulle, the USA set up a policy of targeting and funding young leaders sympathetic to their cause. For example, 30 years ago, the young Sarkozy and Fillon were selected by the USA. Today they are president and prime minister and they have re-integrated NATO. As many French politicians went through the same selection process, it is quite easy for the USA to implement a simple reform of the history curriculum. More recently, people like Rockaya Diallo or Karim Zeribi have also been selected by the American embassy in Paris. Even as nobodies, it gives them a preferential access to mainstream radios, TVs, newspapers and websites of the embassy (oumma, saphirnews, bondyblog etc.). This is how the embassy “creates” people. More generally, the strategy consists in Americanizing immigrants in France and pushing minority leaders sympathetic to their cause to create a fifth column (the same plan was applied by the German embassy during WWII with a Muslim fifth column and new media). There is an obvious convergence of interests between Muslim Africans in France and the United States Department, each of them using the other one to gain influence in French society, the most visible part of the strategy being Muslim Africans minority leaders trained in the United States (Diallo, Lozes, Tin etc.) who are the next generation of American-selected leaders (the previous one being of French ancestry).

    There are other more ideological causes to the French elite’s acceptation of multiculturalism. On the right side of the political spectrum, the financial sector chose decades ago to rely on immigrants as a workforce instead of modernizing its plants. It was also a mean to create competition between immigrants and locals for the same jobs in order to push down wages. Since then the financial sector promote immigration. A cultural difference between France and the USA is that France is more focused on culture (one culture for all whatever the origins) and the USA on race (segregation, multiculturalism). The problem is, assimilation is no longer possible, because in some areas French culture is a minority and newcomers are surrounded by… other newcomers. Multiculturalism is (was) considered a solution to deal with immigration. One the left side, most of the French workforce have abandoned the communist and socialist parties and vote for the far right, asking for a reduction of immigration and protectionism. As a consequence, leftist politicians are turning to immigrants to attract voters. And to do so, they promote their cultures and origins (mainly Islam and Africa) through multiculturalism. Of course, they avoid living in “enriched” neighborhoods and they put their children in white catholic schools.

  10. Osama Saeed formerly employed as an adviser by Scotland’s current First Minister Alex Salmond in the House of Commons, an alumnus of the US State Department’s International Visitor Leadership Program???

Comments are closed.