Your Opinion of Petain?

[Gurkhal]

To me Petain is a traitor. Sure he was a hero in the Great War but when he got to implement his own policies without supervision then it turned out he was a massive a-hole and either did aweful things or collaborated willingly with people who did aweful things. Among the things he did was that he accepted to turn France from a republic to a dictatorship, which to my knowledge Hitler never asked or demanded from France following its defeat. So in short I could have some understanding, even if I wouldn't agree with it, for doing things that the Nazis demanded from France in order to save French lives, some small nuggets of liberty or what you've got. But considering that Petain and his cronies went further and did it on their own accord looks to me that it wasn't a "lesser evil" choice but an "I want" decision from a band of traitors to France.

But then again I am no expert and don't claim to be one.

 

[yerm]

Well, I thought the Germans murdered those Jews, not the French...

Semantic argument really. My point was Jews in France survived in greater % than anywhere similar except Denmark, which had relatively few Jews (so not a big target). We can and probably should criticize Petain for cooperation etc but also be realistic - his arrangement appears to have saved Jewish lives.

 

[BaronNoir]

In 1940, the Nazis had a major problem. Their popularity amongst the French was at rock bottom, the only supporters they had being various factions of the French Far Right, with several mini-Quislings competing for their favor. Even amongst the Far Right in general, the Nazis were having a PR problem-as the French xenophobes sure hated Jews, Americans, Russians, British, Poles, Italians....etc but they tended to hate even more the Germans.

That was the use of Pétain-either as a figurehead or a genuine leader. Pétain was by FAR the most credible puppet ruler the Nazis managed to find across Europe (and not just for the French, mind you-Washington was very reluctant to break with Vichy)

 

[DoomBunny]

I think it's a bit rich for some people to call Petain a traitor. He certainly wasn't betraying his own beliefs, nor was he betraying France as such (any moreso than Cromwell betrayed England, Lenin betrayed Russia, or Hitler betrayed Germany). One can certainly (and indeed, probably should) criticize his rule, but the accusations of treason are in this case rooted more in the fact that he lost than in a genuine betrayal.

 

[The-Doc]

I think it's a bit rich for some people to call Petain a traitor. He certainly wasn't betraying his own beliefs, nor was he betraying France as such (any moreso than Cromwell betrayed England, Lenin betrayed Russia, or Hitler betrayed Germany). One can certainly (and indeed, probably should) criticize his rule, but the accusations of treason are in this case rooted more in the fact that he lost than in a genuine betrayal.

Yes, quite fair.

"My country has been beaten and they are calling me back to make peace and sign an armistice...This is the work of 30 years of Marxism. They're calling me back to take charge of the nation."

-

At 84 years old he felt obligated to save his country. This is the pretension of everyone who assumes office and attempts a course change. It's not really a fault, so much as a necessary condition for taking leadership.

To call him a traitor is just the petty vindication allowed in the post war settlement that was extended across France and at all levels of society. Suddenly there were far more ardent resistors and non-collaborators after the Germans left. I think it would have been entirely fair to try him solely on what bad decisions his government made

In truth I think that apart from the war France was in real danger of having it's own civil war at some point. That someone had a different view of what was best for France, or what loyalty to it meant at the time is understandable.

 

[AtlanticFriend]

As de Gaulle said : Maréchal Pétain is a great man, who died in 1925.

 

[yerm]

Suddenly there were far more ardent resistors and non-collaborators after the Germans left.

This is an extremely good statement and not just for France. It's easy to look back and judge from safety and say what we (think/hope) we would have done. It's very different when dealing with the bitter reality of occupation.

Which is why I strongly feel he should be judged against his contemporaries, particularly other German puppets, not by raw idealism.

 

[BaronNoir]

Issue is, Pétain did everything he could to discourage, let's be frank, Résistance that would have mattered.

Because while it's heroic, assaulting Germans when they leave Parisian brothels and similar acts were significantly less helpful for the Allied effort than the French Empire and French Navy being at best neutral, at worse helping tacitly the Nazis.

The French military would never have obeyed to Laval. They followed Pétain until november 1942

 

[Arilou]

I think it's a bit rich for some people to call Petain a traitor. He certainly wasn't betraying his own beliefs, nor was he betraying France as such (any moreso than Cromwell betrayed England, Lenin betrayed Russia, or Hitler betrayed Germany). One can certainly (and indeed, probably should) criticize his rule, but the accusations of treason are in this case rooted more in the fact that he lost than in a genuine betrayal.

I'm kind of confused. Of course these men were traitors. You could argue they betrayed their country for a good cause, but there's no doubt that they betrayed them. Any revolution is merely treason for a cause after all.

 

[Gurkhal]

I think it's a bit rich for some people to call Petain a traitor. He certainly wasn't betraying his own beliefs, nor was he betraying France as such (any moreso than Cromwell betrayed England, Lenin betrayed Russia, or Hitler betrayed Germany). One can certainly (and indeed, probably should) criticize his rule, but the accusations of treason are in this case rooted more in the fact that he lost than in a genuine betrayal.

You are naturally free to think what you wish. But the fact that Petain effectively and purposefully ended the Third Republic and replaced it with a presidental dictatorship, to borrow a phrase from Victoria II, points me to saying that he is a traitor. To my knowledge Germany never demanded that the Third Republic be ceased and so there really was pressure to do so beyond Petain's own wish. To me both Hitler and Lennin are traitors because as a principle anyone who abolish democracy in their countries are in fact traitors to those countries and to the people.

 

[pithorr]

Yes, quite fair.

"My country has been beaten and they are calling me back to make peace and sign an armistice...This is the work of 30 years of Marxism. They're calling me back to take charge of the nation."

-

At 84 years old he felt obligated to save his country. This is the pretension of everyone who assumes office and attempts a course change. It's not really a fault, so much as a necessary condition for taking leadership.

To call him a traitor is just the petty vindication allowed in the post war settlement that was extended across France and at all levels of society. Suddenly there were far more ardent resistors and non-collaborators after the Germans left. I think it would have been entirely fair to try him solely on what bad decisions his government made

In truth I think that apart from the war France was in real danger of having it's own civil war at some point. That someone had a different view of what was best for France, or what loyalty to it meant at the time is understandable.

This is an extremely good statement and not just for France. It's easy to look back and judge from safety and say what we (think/hope) we would have done. It's very different when dealing with the bitter reality of occupation.

Which is why I strongly feel he should be judged against his contemporaries, particularly other German puppets, not by raw idealism.

+1
At least he in some kind saved France from sharing Poland's fate...

You are naturally free to think what you wish. But the fact that Petain effectively and purposefully ended the Third Republic and replaced it with a presidental dictatorship, to borrow a phrase from Victoria II, points me to saying that he is a traitor. To my knowledge Germany never demanded that the Third Republic be ceased and so there really was pressure to do so beyond Petain's own wish. To me both Hitler and Lennin are traitors because as a principle anyone who abolish democracy in their countries are in fact traitors to those countries and to the people.

Well, it's a bit childish naive point IMHO.

 

[fredinno]

You are naturally free to think what you wish. But the fact that Petain effectively and purposefully ended the Third Republic and replaced it with a presidental dictatorship, to borrow a phrase from Victoria II, points me to saying that he is a traitor. To my knowledge Germany never demanded that the Third Republic be ceased and so there really was pressure to do so beyond Petain's own wish. To me both Hitler and Lennin are traitors because as a principle anyone who abolish democracy in their countries are in fact traitors to those countries and to the people.

The only other option was to run away. He scarified his reputation to prevent at least part of it from German occupation.

 

[DoomBunny]

You are naturally free to think what you wish. But the fact that Petain effectively and purposefully ended the Third Republic and replaced it with a presidental dictatorship, to borrow a phrase from Victoria II, points me to saying that he is a traitor. To my knowledge Germany never demanded that the Third Republic be ceased and so there really was pressure to do so beyond Petain's own wish. To me both Hitler and Lennin are traitors because as a principle anyone who abolish democracy in their countries are in fact traitors to those countries and to the people.

Which kinda reinforces my "Only a treason because it did not prosper" point.

I'm kind of confused. Of course these men were traitors. You could argue they betrayed their country for a good cause, but there's no doubt that they betrayed them. Any revolution is merely treason for a cause after all.

I wouldn't say any revolution is treason. One may be working against the government, but one is not necessarily working against the country itself, nor is one betraying one's own vision of what is best for the country.

The only other option was to run away. He scarified his reputation to prevent at least part of it from German occupation.

That goes too much the other way. Petain did have options other than collaboration, and he was not some selfless martyr for France (at least, objectively speaking); Vichy had clear political motives and it's not like Petain wasn't trying to remould France in his own image.

 

[olm]

I would say that treason part gets really serious for collaboration after Operation Anton. If after break of Compiegne Petain had hopped into plane, flew to North-Africa, and ordered all Vichy units and territories to join Allied cause, then his reputation would be a lot better. I dunno if it was actually a realistic option for him at the time though.

 

[DoomBunny]

I would say that treason part gets really serious for collaboration after Operation Anton. If after break of Compiegne Petain had hopped into plane, flew to North-Africa, and ordered all Vichy units and territories to join Allied cause, then his reputation would be a lot better. I dunno if it was actually a realistic option for him at the time though.

I'm not sure he would have wanted to anyway. Petain was a traditional Frenchman through and through; nationalistic, exceptionalist, anti-British, etc...

 

[pithorr]

I would say that treason part gets really serious for collaboration after Operation Anton. If after break of Compiegne Petain had hopped into plane, flew to North-Africa, and ordered all Vichy units and territories to join Allied cause, then his reputation would be a lot better. I dunno if it was actually a realistic option for him at the time though.

I think he burnt bridges before and had no choice anyway... But your point makes sense for me.

 

[Arilou]

nor is one betraying one's own vision of what is best for the country.

That is kind of weird, because at that point traitors kind of cease to exist as a category.

 

[Gurkhal]

Well, it's a bit childish naive point IMHO.

You may think so but I think that there are things worth striving for and that there must be, at some point, be a line in the sand unless you want to pragmatize your way into becoming a shadow with a mask of indifference. And I draw the line at democracy since its perhaps the thing that I cherish the most and which I feel myself the least willing to compromisse about.

The only other option was to run away. He scarified his reputation to prevent at least part of it from German occupation.

You make him sound like a martyr, I don't think he was. The abolishment of the Third Republic was to my knowledge never demanded by the Germans and Petain did to my knowledge go beyond what the Nazis asked of him, enforcing his personal political ideas on France rather than trying to preserve what he could of republican values for the French. He didn't need to progress leftist politics for that, mind you.

And we all know how much Petain's collaboration amounted to. When the Germans felt that Vichy France couldn't hold the line, it was a swift occupation also of the "free" zone.

Which kinda reinforces my "Only a treason because it did not prosper" Point.

I believe you have a Point in that if Hitler had by some miracle won the war, then Petain would indeed have been a French hero who could have preserved some importance for France in a new fascist world order. But as it stands he didn't win and I cherish democracy above authocracy as a model for goverment, to a large degree due to this. In another world I would probably think differently but we're not in that other world and thus democracy is dear to my me.

 

[LatinKaiser]

That is kind of weird, because at that point traitors kind of cease to exist as a category.

To quote Ben Franklin from 1776: “Treason is a charge invented by winners as an excuse for hanging the losers.”

 

[DoomBunny]

That is kind of weird, because at that point traitors kind of cease to exist as a category.

Not as such. Acting against one's nation is different to acting against one's government, though often the two intertwine.

I believe you have a Point in that if Hitler had by some miracle won the war, then Petain would indeed have been a French hero who could have preserved some importance for France in a new fascist world order. But as it stands he didn't win and I cherish democracy above authocracy as a model for goverment, to a large degree due to this. In another world I would probably think differently but we're not in that other world and thus democracy is dear to my me.

Sounds like exactly what I said; the reason to brand Petain a traitor is not that he acted against France, but rather because he acted against your preferred France.