I wouldn't call Zemmour a historian, although I don't mean this negatively quite the contrary, but he exhibits a sense of historicity that is endemic to French political life. Cannot help seeing every aspect of country's struggles in context of the 1500 years of oft tragic and melancholic past. Every serious Frenchman must think this way, and it is symptom of the lack of quality of the pool of public figures today that they no longer exhibit this beyond mere ceremony.
Anyhow, I will continue since you ask so nicely. There is one chapter left for De Gaulle, but I will go back and peruse what other interesting things to bring about. Perhaps chapter on Jeanne d'Arc would be insightful. In this book he doesn't talk about imps like Giscard, merely about those that shaped French Destiny.
I wouldn't call Zemmour a historian, although I don't mean this negatively quite the contrary, but he exhibits a sense of historicity that is endemic to French political life. Cannot help seeing every aspect of country's struggles in context of the 1500 years of oft tragic and melancholic past. Every serious Frenchman must think this way, and it is symptom of the lack of quality of the pool of public figures today that they no longer exhibit this beyond mere ceremony.
Anyhow, I will continue since you ask so nicely. There is one chapter left for De Gaulle, but I will go back and peruse what other interesting things to bring about. Perhaps chapter on Jeanne d'Arc would be insightful. In this book he doesn't talk about imps like Giscard, merely about those that shaped French Destiny.
Thanks again for reading.