|
Grex > Agora35 > #199: French Hegemonist Imperialism in North America? | |
|
| Author |
Message |
bdh3
|
|
French Hegemonist Imperialism in North America?
| 
Dec 11 06:24 UTC 2000 |
As part of whats-her-name's recent research in an attempt to 'map'
Internet users with geography (for 'marketing research' purposes, yes
children 'they' are watching) she came upon an interesting factoid.
There is to this day french colonies in North America. And here I
thought we kicked the last of the frogs out during the mexican
revolution (after buying most of it last century). But no, the frogs
maintain two colonies, both of whom actively engage in 'trade wars' and
generally piss folk off to this day. But you never hear about it. Just
one of those odd facts.
Anyone care to hazard a guess?
|
| 14 responses total. |
scg
|
|
response 1 of 14:
|
Dec 11 07:32 UTC 2000 |
St Pierre and Miqueon (sp?) right? I've been under the vague impression that
they are full fledged parts of France (just off in distant locations) rather
than colonies, but I could be wrong.
|
bdh3
|
|
response 2 of 14:
|
Dec 11 07:51 UTC 2000 |
Yes (what search engine did you use out of curiosity?) and they aren't
even mere colonies? The frogs *actually* claim part of NA as french?
Its worse then I thought. Where is NAFTA on this?
|
scg
|
|
response 3 of 14:
|
Dec 11 07:55 UTC 2000 |
This was pointed out in my eighth grad French class, and I remembered it for
some reason. I didn't use a search engine.
|
scg
|
|
response 4 of 14:
|
Dec 11 07:56 UTC 2000 |
And, of course, since I'm just remembering something from eighth grade French
class, please don't assume anything I've said about hte governmental structure
of those islands is accurate, without checking with some other source.
|
bdh3
|
|
response 5 of 14:
|
Dec 11 09:00 UTC 2000 |
Ah, so it may yet still simply be a colony instead of sovereign
territory? Yetch, and yucky-poo either way. What happened to the
'monroe doctrine'? Obviously before we do anything else over in the
balkans we gotta get rid of this cancer on North American. Kick the
bloddy frogs out, or at least trade it for the Malvenas or something.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 6 of 14:
|
Dec 11 12:22 UTC 2000 |
even worse, there are french *enclaves* out there,
and we DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE THEY ARE.
|
scott
|
|
response 7 of 14:
|
Dec 11 12:29 UTC 2000 |
Scary! Just to be safe, we need to tattoo a barcode (I like the UPC, as
there's a hidden "666" in each one) on everybody's forehead. ;)
|
gull
|
|
response 8 of 14:
|
Dec 11 15:31 UTC 2000 |
Does her research have anything to do with that Internet company that was
making a lot of people nervous by tracerouting their domains?
|
danr
|
|
response 9 of 14:
|
Dec 11 17:31 UTC 2000 |
The Dutch still own a piece of the "New World," too. Take a peek at
http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/nt.html.
|
aaron
|
|
response 10 of 14:
|
Dec 11 20:28 UTC 2000 |
St. Pierre and Miquelon. They had a rip-roaring good time during prohibition,
and caused Canada some headaches in trying to protect its fisheries, but
they don't really have much significance.
I believe that their official status is as a French territory, somewhat
analogous to what the U.S. might call a "protectorate."
|
happyboy
|
|
response 11 of 14:
|
Dec 12 00:16 UTC 2000 |
whew, at least they don't live in ypsi.
|
bdh3
|
|
response 12 of 14:
|
Dec 12 07:27 UTC 2000 |
re#8:No
re#9:That is not 'north america'. (I've been there, have you?)
|
danr
|
|
response 13 of 14:
|
Dec 12 16:43 UTC 2000 |
I didn't say it was part of North America. I haven't been there, but I've
listened to shortwave radio stations from there.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 14 of 14:
|
Dec 14 07:22 UTC 2000 |
I gave serious thought to visiting St. Pierre et Miquelon when I was
travelling around Newfoundland for a while a few years ago but decided
against it because of the expense of the flight to St. Pierre.. I'm
sure my time was better spent on the parts of Newfoundland I visited,
but from a trivia standpoint it would have been an interesting place
to have visited..
|