I disagree. You're wright when you say that France was ruled by an
absolut monarch, but helping the Americans against the British just for
their agenda is not all the way true. There was really this motivation
of hurting GBs colonies, but the main thrust of help that the US was
getting didn't come from the King.
If you dig in deeper, you'll find out that it was mainly businessmen
like Beaumarchais who were interested in selling weaponry to the US,
around 1760/1770. It's true that french troops were used, but France had
many colonies around the area, so it wasn't such a big effort.
Those same businessmen were the spear of the intellectual revolution of
1789, as in they were the ones who established the basis of the new
post-kingdom society. So there truly was an interest in democracy,
especially since the US were the first colonies to arise against an old
type of society, like the one ruling France at the time. Of course, the
French Kings, Louis XV and Louis XVI after that, weren't really
interested in democracy

Finally, you're totally off the spot (;D) when comparing the rivalry
between France & England and the one between USSR & the US. At the time,
both kingdoms were from the same type, whereas the US & USSR were
completely different, and I think it changes things a lot.


Keith Willshaw wrote:
In this case he's pretty much spot on.

The French motivation for helping the fledgling US
was scarcely a love of democracy, France
was govened by an absolute monarch.

On the other hand France was at war with Britain at the
time. France and Britain were global rivals in pretty
much the same way the USA and USSR were after WW2.

Keith




--
Guy Wastiaux
aka FauCon PoiLu
visit me @ http://guy.4002.org/
mail me @ faucon.Wastiaux @ laposte.net