No, I didn't. You should study the origins of the French Revolution (Montesquieu, Voltaire, Encyclopedism, the parlementaires, Freemasonry, Jansenism, the rebellions throughout the reign of Louis XV, the Huguenots, intendants, Gallicanism, Anglophilia, etc.) before you make public statements implying that it wasn't a triumph of Northern European and Protestant culture in France. Such statements make you look ignorant.
I just find you to be a hypocrite.
Is this akin to the point you frequently imply that it is okay for Protestants and Mohammedans to persecute Catholics because Catholics have suppressed their false religions historically ? I am not a hypocrite because my standard is not "national pride" or something petty like that, but the Catholic Faith and the divine mission of France (I refer you to Sainte Jeanne d'Arc, St Louis, St Rémi, and so forth). If I were only opposed to the influence of Northern Europeans because they are not French or Latins, I would indeed be a hypocrite. On the contrary, I take my opposition from perceived deep cultural and religious dissimilarities with a view to protect the stability of the Holy See and the Catholic nations so that we can peacefully send missionaries out to convert the whole world to the order that can only come from the Kingship of Christ (something you apparently do not believe in, since you apparently think pagans and Protestants and Mohammedans can achieve peace sheerly through the maintenance of material order). Also, I believe in the divine mission of the King of France, protector of the Church. This is something much older and more serious than the nationalist mythologies that were created in the modern era.
You can be as proud as you want about France but if I was to defend Germany oh that's evil nationalist Nazi rhetoric!
I have frequently defended Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party from what I thought were unjust and unmeasured attacks against them. You want to paint me as a liberal so you can dismiss what I say, but the fact of the matter is that I am no such thing, certainly one of the furthest posters from Liberalism on this entire forum. I call something nationalist when I perceive it to be nationalist. And, yes, the I do think that the nationalism of the XIXth and XXth centuries, which you have recently decided that you agree with, are evil. They are evil because they are a species of liberalism and are opposed to the rule of the international body of the Church under the direction of the Roman Pontiff over nations.
Well you French have nothing to brag about.
No, all of our strengths are thanks to the mysterious designs of Providence rather than ourselves, praise God.
You have the French Revolution, you have the stupid decision of declaring war on Germany, you have the French counter-terrorist tactics of torture and reprisals against the Algerians, you have the decadent French fashion, you have Muslims right at your doorstep, etc. Need I go on?
You can drone on as much as you want. Your emphasis on recent failures and mistakes on the part of the French doesn't do any damage to the glories of France's historic past and divine mission born with the baptism of Clovis in 496 AD. You should include the Quiet Revolution in Québec and the outrages wrought by Philippe le Bel against Boniface VIII while you're at it.
No I have no problem with you being proud about France PereJospeh because France did bring civilization to the conquered peoples of their empire...
Civilisation... a word from the Enlightenment -- does that mean you are a liberal because you use it, or are you using it in the strict sense that the Popes have used it (though I think it was short-sighted for them to do so) ? We certainly brought the Catholic Faith to those peoples who were incorporated into the empire of the King (though in North America this incorporation was accomplished chiefly through traditional oaths of fealty and cemented through inter-marriage with the indigenous population, much like the Roman veterans before us, who took Gallic wives). I can't say the same for the conquests of the Republic, though I think exposing those conquered people to French culture will ultimately be turned into a good thing.
...art and architecture like the Chartes Cathedral, and writers like de Maistre, I just happen to have a problem with you slandering Germans.
Criticising is not slandering. I criticise the Germanics chiefly because of their historical enmity to the triumph of Catholic and Roman culture throughout the world and their disruption of the peace and stability of Christendom, from the time of the Ottonian and Hohenstaufen dynasties onward to the late mediaeval, early modern, and modern periods. This is a battle of cultures and mentalities, not of nations except secondarily, insofar as nations have gradually absorbed their entire identity (or most of their identity) in choices they have made that are inimical to the integral reign of Christ the King in a united Christendom.