戴高乐非常清楚，大部分法国人已经适应了占领。

 

1944年8月26日，他乘车抵达巴黎后，在抵抗组织接受该市德国占领军投降的蒙帕纳斯火车站（Gare Montparnasse）停留，感谢自由法国师的勒克莱尔将军。

从那里，他来到国防部的办公室，在那里他担任副部长整整五天，然后将自己流放到伦敦。

他发现，自从他离开后，没有一件家具，甚至连窗帘都没有被移动过。

戴高乐把中间的四年当作法国历史上的一个省略号。

他在回忆录中写道。

'除了国家，什么都没有了。

恢复它是我的责任。”[60]。

 

After his arrival by car in Paris on August 26, 1944, he stopped at Gare Montparnasse, where the Resistance had accepted the surrender of the German occupation forces in the city, to thank General Leclerc of the Free French division. From there, he moved to the office at the Defense Ministry where he had served as undersecretary for exactly five days before exiling himself to London. He found that not a piece of furniture, not even a curtain, had been moved since his departure. De Gaulle treated the intervening four years as an ellipsis in French history. He would write in his memoirs: ‘Nothing was missing except the State. It was my duty to restore it.’[60]

 

为了象征法国历史的连续性，戴高乐的下一站是市政厅（Hôtel de Ville），因为第二和第三共和国都是在这里宣布成立的。 [61]

 

许多人期待他宣布成立第四共和国，结束在战争中失败的第三共和国。

但这与他的设计恰恰相反。

当抵抗运动的名义领导人乔治-比多（Georges Bidault）询问戴高乐在巴黎访问期间是否会宣布成立共和国时，他毫不客气地回答：”共和国从未停止存在......。

我为什么要宣布它？”[62]

 

他的意图是在宣布其性质之前为法国人民创造一个新的政治现实。

 

To symbolize the continuity of French history, de Gaulle’s next stop was the Hôtel de Ville (seat of the Paris city government), because both the Second and Third Republics had been proclaimed there.[61]

 

Many expected him to proclaim a Fourth Republic, ending the Third, which had lost the war. But that would have been the opposite of his design. When Georges Bidault, the titular head of the Resistance, inquired whether de Gaulle would proclaim a Republic during his Paris visit, he replied curtly: ‘The Republic has never ceased to exist . . . Why should I proclaim it?’[62]

 

His intention was to create a new political reality for the French people before proclaiming its nature.

 

戴高乐在维尔酒店受到了比多和乔治-马伦（Georges Marrane）的热烈欢迎，乔治-马伦是巴黎解放委员会的副主席和共产党的高级成员。

他以一份关于这一天的意义的感人声明作为回应。

 

De Gaulle was greeted at the Hôtel de Ville with emotional speeches by Bidault and Georges Marrane, vice president of the Parisian Liberation Committee and a high-ranking member of the Communist Party. He responded with a moving statement about the meaning of the day:

　　

我们所有人都在这里，chez nous，在为保卫自己而站起来的巴黎，而且是自己站起来的巴黎，怎么能掩盖这种情绪呢。

不! 我们不会隐藏这种神圣而深刻的情感。

有些时刻超越了我们每个人可怜的生命。

巴黎! 巴黎被激怒了! 巴黎破灭了! 巴黎殉难了! - 但巴黎解放了! 它自己解放了，它的人民在法国军队的帮助下解放了，在整个法国，在那个战斗的法国，在唯一的法国，在真正的法国，在永恒的法国的帮助和协助下解放了。

 

How can one hide the emotion that grips all of us, who are here, chez nous, in Paris which has risen up to defend itself and which has done so by itself. No! We will not hide this sacred and profound emotion. There are moments which go beyond each of our poor lives. Paris! Paris outraged! Paris broken! Paris martyred! – but Paris liberated! Liberated by itself, liberated by its people with the help of the armies of France, with the help and assistance of the whole of France, of that France which fights, of the only France, of the true France, of eternal France.[63]

 

戴高乐演说中超乎寻常的形而上的升华，表达了他对自己国家的独特性的信心。

巴黎门口的盟军没有被提及，他们慷慨地让出了位置，允许自由法国人在他们面前进入。

英国和美国也没有提及，尽管它们在战争中付出了巨大的损失和牺牲。

巴黎的解放被视为纯粹的法国成就。

通过宣称它是如此，他在说服他的听众，它是如此：

通过纯粹的意志力创造了政治现实。

 

The extraordinary metaphysical elevation of de Gaulle’s oratory expressed his faith in the singularity of his country. The Allied armies at the gates of Paris, which had graciously stepped aside to permit the Free French to enter before them, were not mentioned. Nor were Britain and the United States, though they had been fighting the war with enormous losses and sacrifices. The liberation of Paris was treated as a purely French achievement. By proclaiming it to be so, he was persuading his listeners that it was so: the creation of political reality by sheer force of will.

 

这种对解放者似乎缺乏感激之情的做法，以及对所谓法国角色的痴迷强调，反映了另一个目的。

戴高乐非常清楚，大部分法国人已经适应了占领。

强调那个时期会暴露出太多的矛盾心理，
而强调美国和英国军队的作用则会阻碍他恢复法国对自己的信心这一最终目的。

 

This seeming lack of gratitude to the liberators and obsessional emphasis on the alleged French role reflected another purpose. De Gaulle was only too aware that much of the French population had adjusted to the occupation. Emphasizing that period would have disclosed too many ambivalences, while stressing the role of the American and British forces would have impeded his ultimate purpose of restoring France’s faith in itself.