Jenq,+Kevin

Question/Plan of Investigation: To what extent was the Student Riots of 1968 a homogeneous and unified movement, and what does this say about the nature of the protests and France at the time? Summary of Evidence The 1960s has often been regarded as a time of exceptional change and turmoil in the Western world as the result of youth reaction to events during the Cold War and the standards imposed by a society developed by the events of World War 2. In this regard, France is similar to the United States and Great Britain. Still, her tumultuous journey throughout the 60s was wracked by unrest and fissures that were of a distinctly French nature. Historians often point out the order and mindset of the post-war generation as subjects for youth wrath in the 1960s. In the United States, for example, young men (fathers of the young people of the 1960s) returning from World War 2 had, as a section of society, almost universally been affected by their service in the military. The discipline and organization that had been a part of military training invariably affected the way they led their civilian lives. France, following World War 2, experienced similar events. Certainly, the experience of World War 2, and the mass mobilization of men would influence the mindset of the nation. More noticeably, however, was how much a single figure from the war would dominate French Society of the era (and whose residual influence still carries sway in French politics to this day.) At its core, the Fifth French Republic was, at its inception and core, identified with the character of Charles de Gaulle and his supporters. Its heroes were not so much martyrs of revolution and republic but heroes from the war. It afforded little identity with the republican ideals of the traditional left, even if de Gaulle would admit his admiration for Gambette and Clemenceau. The France as envisioned by de Gaulle was a strong and unified nation. He recoiled at the “Anglo-Saxon” domination in the Western world after the end of World War 2 and was bent of making France an independent and powerful nation. French foreign policy was essentially determined by a single personality, being that of de Gaulle. His legitimacy was established through his role throughout the war as leader of the Free French forces and the liberation of France. De Gaulle would lead France in a transition from the ruins of World War 2 to a new and modernized nation. His heavy handed tactics and force of personality would not, however, be able to stem the tide of unrest that would manifest itself in the 50s. France in the years proceeding the fateful May of ’68 was a France gradually being divided. Wars of decolonization had further damaged French prestige following her humiliating defeat in World War 2. Moreover, the question as to whether independence to colonies (many of which were believed to be true French soil rather than simply overseas colonies) was appropriate had rent the nation apart. But there were deeper rifts at work throughout the decade. Amongst the older war generation was the sense that French youth were disconnected with the history of their nation. Moreover, having grown up in the chaos of World War 2, there was a common perception that the youth were unproductive and unappreciative of the sacrifices of their parents. On the balance, however, most French officials were largely complacent with the situation of French youth. Certainly, it was believed they were better behaved than their “Anglo-saxon” counterparts in the United States and the United Kingdom. It was a false perception. The French student protests of ’68 has been called an extension of the unrest throughout the Western world at the time. Such a characterization is flawed. France and the French is a 700 page book detailing France’s experience throughout the 20th century, starting around the year 1900 and ending roughly at the new millennium. The author, currently an Emeritus professor at the University of Sussex, has several other published works regarding France during the same period and has even won the //Prix de Vianney// in France. Thus, the integrity of his work may be trusted when conducting a historical assessment. Moreover, the broad nature of the book gives a good idea of French society leading to and following the riots. Still, because this same focus of //France and the French// on the 20th century, it is of limited utility when attempting to view the events of May ’68. The student of riots, however compelling, have only about three or four pages dedicated to them. Given the nature of the protests of 1968, it is unsurprising that the whole event has captured the imagination of modern audiences (It has been the subject of more than a few French feature films.) Of just as much use to students of history as any filmmaker is this compilation of posters distributed throughout the month of rioting. The posters are remarkable looks into the nature of the riots. The posters represent the vast array of groups who participated in the riots of 1968, from left wing Marxists to conservative traditionalists in counter protest. Moreover, one can better understand and sense the fury the students felt towards their government in these times by looking at the posters. In spite of this interesting dimension of the student riots, however, the site is limited by the fact that the posters stand alone. That said, they are open to interpretation and are purely qualitative. It can be argued that the engine for unrest throughout the 1960s came primarily from the left of the political spectrum. In this sense, the student riots of 1968 may be viewed as similar to youth in revolt throughout the west during this time period. Thus, understanding these motivations is certainly beneficial to anyone wishing to analyze and assess the riots of 1968. The information provided on Pouvoir-Ouvrier certainly fits this bill. A branch of the LICR (Ligue pour une Internationale Communiste Revolutionnaire or League for an international Communist Revolution) it is unashamedly slanted to the far left. Still, in spite of this, its information concerning the student riots of 1968, particularly in regards to the left in France today is certainly beneficial. Still, its same strength, being, a focus (and a likely biased one at that) that is fixed on the left makes it of limited use in any serious history assessment.
 * Part A **
 * Part B **
 * Part C **
 * France and the French //A modern history// ** by Rod Kedward
 * // Icônes de la Révolution: // http://library.vicu.utoronto. ca/exhibitions/posters/index3. htm  **
 * Pouvoir-Ouvrier ** : **__ http://www.pouvoir-ouvrier. org/histoire/1968.html __**