My point of view cannot be an "Anglo-Saxon" one since I am a native French speaker with relatives in France. I have met French people from all parts of France, studied with French people, worked with French people, frequented French expat communities abroad (e.g. in Japan), and watched French TV since I was a child like any French person. It's not because I am critical that I am biased. On the contrary, I believe that the only way to truly understand one's own culture is to distance oneself from it by living far away from it and embracing another culture for long enough to see things completely differently once you go back home. I did it several times, since I have lived in 6 non-Francophone countries and learnt the language and culture every time. Each of these experiences brought me new insight into my native culture. I did quote the work of two English writers here, but only because I agreed with these specific passages. It's really not much among all the books I have read, and sometimes English people can be right about the French, especially if like Richard Hill they have lived abroad most of their lives and a long time in France or Belgium.
It also made me realise that Francophone Belgium is really just another region of France, with its small regional peculiarities, but on the whole is overwhelmingly part of the French mainstream culture and way of thinking. In fact, southern regions like Auvergne or Languedoc are less similar to Parisian and North French culture than French-speaking Belgium is. Before living abroad, like most Belgians, I would never have agreed that the Francophone Belgians are so similar to the French, but viewed from a distance (be it India, Australia or Japan), it is painfully obvious.
As for the rest of your comments, it looks like you haven't been much out of France, except on holiday to neighbouring European countries. You keep comparing the French to the Brits, the Germans or the Italians, but I don't see any reference to the Indians, Thais, Chinese, Papuans or whatever other truly different culture. For example :
You are comparing neighbouring countries with a common history going back to the Paleolithic (let's say 40,000 years ago), and that only split from each other in the Middle Ages (about 1000 years ago, although Alsace and Lorraine last switched in the 20th century). From a genetic point of view many North and East French people are nearly undistinguishable from West or Southwest Germans and the Swiss. When you know that a substantial part of the character (including national character) has its roots in our genes, it's pretty evident why the French and the Germans aren't that different, apart from their languages.
Why would you think that I take the USA as a reference culture ? I personally never mentioned the US or Americans once ! (I did quote a passage of EuroManagers comparing the Americans and French, but the author is neither).