Monday, February 20, 2012

Bill 101...and the Slippery Slope to "Poutineism'

From birth we are taught that equality before the law is the hallmark of any democratic society.
And so when a state treats one citizen differently than another, and affords unequal rights based on religion, ethnicity, origins, language or religion, it surely must offend our conscience as it betrays the basic tenets of democracy as we define it.

But somehow in Canada, our highest court has ruled that for a 'greater good' such discrimination is justified and so we are subject to the precepts of the infamous Bill 101, a law that makes a mockery of the term equality.

As a result, citizens of Quebec are imbued with certain rights, or lack thereof, based on an accident of birth, be it the language of their parents or the location of their birth.

My discomfort with Bill 101 is not rooted in any negative experience that I or my family may have suffered under its application.

You see, I am born of the privileged class which enjoys certain rights and freedoms that other Quebecers are denied. I am English.

Like the British royal family, I get to pass down to future generations these rights in perpetuity, a neat benefit that makes me feel superior lucky.

I and those like me, possess a birthright that is unique in this province and if you are Francophone or have emigrated here from another country, my rights trump yours.

I can, as we all know, opt for a publicly-funded English education, while you, my fellow citizens, are told that such a choice is not  available to yourself or your family, because you have been forcibly drafted in the 'war' to preserve the French language and culture, while I am given a deferral.

Yes, Monsieur or Madame Untel, it doesn't matter if your Quebec roots date back to the 17th century, I and my descendants, relative latecomers to Quebec, are afforded more rights than you and what is most puzzling to me is that most of you are fine with it.

This post is not about Ethnics and immigrants who came to this province knowing full well they'll be denied equal rights.
In many respects it's a bargain they made, the rules were clear enough before they made their decision to make Quebec their home.

But the fact that the future rights of two children, one French, one English are unequal, even though they were born side-by-side in the same Quebec hospital, on the very same day, offends my sense of fair play, I can't help it.

Now most francophones reading this piece will argue that this limitation or infringement of personal rights is something that they readily embrace and voluntarily accept and that this opinion is also held by the the majority of their francophone brethren.

Fair enough.

If Francophones wish to limit their own rights for the greater perceived good, that is their right and who am I to tell them otherwise.

Today, some thirty-five years since the imposition of Bill 101, Francophone language militants will tell us that the law was essential in preserving Quebec as a French culture, while other like myself would argue that French in Quebec had flourished and grown for over 300 years without any artificial help.

It doesn't matter, the argument is moot and the law endures, if for no other reason than because it is a source of pride, an everlasting symbol and tribute to the victory of French over English in this province.

But there is no doubt that Bill 101 has had an ancillary effect on Quebec society, it has promulgated the notion that restrictions of all manners are acceptable in defense and promotion of the French language and that not only are these restrictions necessary, but desirable.

Today, Quebecers remain proud that they are free of the once powerful and domineering Church, whose unelected officials ruled Quebec society with an iron fist until the Quiet Revolution of the 1960's liberated Quebecers from the dominion of Rome.
At its height, almost every aspect of the lives of every individual Quebecer was controlled, to the point that the parish priest advised families as to how many children to have, or what kind of employment to pursue.

But this new found freedom was short-lived and barely two decades after throwing off the shackles of the Church, language replaced Christianity as the religion of the masses and a new cabal of unelected and self-appointed  'priests' has arisen, deigned to instruct Quebecers how to live and act with the same force and holier than thou attitude that the church historically demonstrated.

This is the slippery slope that Bill 101 has led us to.
As Yogi Berra said it,- It's deja vu, all over again.

Today Francophone Quebecers are once again instructed on how to live and conduct their personal lives.

The likes of the Societe Saint-Jean-Baptiste, Impératif français, Mouvement Québec français, as well as a plethora of other organizations have elected themselves as defenders of the faith, dedicated to defend and promote their elitist and narrow view of Quebec society by exhorting francophones to adopt a certain comportment and attitude, one perceived to promote the French language and culture, according to a narrow and dogmatic view.

So ardent are these zealots that their exhortations sometimes border on the ridiculous;
"The situation of French in Quebec:  Increasingly, we see young francophone parents giving English names to their children.
Is this just a preview of the future Anglicization of Quebec? These young people who without any pride
, embrace American music and movies and thus could not care less of their origin.
I think we should talk about this publicly, and even make changes to Bill 101.
Merci."
 Submitted by Robert David, novembre 8, 2011" Link{fr}
And so the author demands a law that would force Francophones to give their children good Christian French names, stop watching English films or listen to English music.

Laughable?  Foolish?

Unfortunately, the author above is not alone, far, far from it.

Last week I told you about an outraged citizen in Chicoutimi who was deeply concerned that a local theatre would be showing an original English film one day a week.
The writer was worried that francophones would be allowed to see Hollywood films in their undubbed English versions, a travesty and dangerous invitation to Anglicization.

'Poutineism'- Quebec's latest political dogma
An article in Le Journal de Montreal, by Mathieu Bock-Côté, is typical of the current dogma advocated by leading separatists who like the priests before them, wish to impose their particular view on society.
Mr. Côté, a self-styled separatist intellectual, is the latest wunderkind of Quebec media, someone who has a particular dislike for multiculturalism, believing that all minorities must give up their individualism and be absorbed into mainstream Francophone culture.
For want of a better word, I will refer to this political dogma as "Poutineism" in honour of an African women who before the Bouchard Taylor Commission, asked if she had to eat poutine to be accepted as a Quebecer.

Mr. Côté, complained about a Muslin organization that had started a service whereby Muslims could meet other Muslims seeking marriage within their faith.
Bad! Bad! Bad!
Mr. Côté, complains that Muslims are closing themselves off from mainstream Quebec society by choosing to remain within a 'clan'
I imagine that Mr. Côté would equally disparage J-Date or Marriage-Chretien....or perhaps not in the case of the latter.
And so, according to Mr. Côté, choosing to marry within one's faith is wrong, something to be opposed in the new Quebec.

As for free will, Mr. Côté reminds us that we can marry who we want, but.......
 "The sacrosanct right to be different must be balanced with the duty of similarity of identity. Being a Quebecer is not just about paper. It is also a question of identity. Those who join a society  must learn to integrate with those who welcome them." Link{Fr}
And so everyday Francophones are bombarded by dogma of Poutineism, proffered by idiots in the opinion section of vigile.net or in the mainstream press by deep thinkers like Mario Beaulieu or Mathieu Bock-Côté, all righteously reminding Quebecers, with the fervor of  bible thumpers, that Quebec is on the road to linguistic and cultural destruction.

In 2009, the tiny Quebec village was mocked for creating a "Code of Life" that immigrants were encouraged to adopt before settling in town. Read about it here and see the code.
I can tell you that in comparing the 'Code of Life' to 'Poutinism,' I much prefer the former.

POUTINEISM
  • Abhor religion, but demand that Christian symbols be maintained in public.
  • Don't speak English to Quebec Anglophones, demand that they speak French.
  • Embrace the idea that learning English is unnecessary for success or fulfillment. 
  • Adopt the ideology that multiculturalism and plurality are evil. Accept  that there is room for only one true culture in Quebec. Allow no accommodations, religious or whatnot.
  • Don't attend or allow your children to attend an English cegep or university and demand that other Francophones be denied the choice to do so.
  • Purchase and listen to French music only. Always attend concerts by Quebec French artists, even if you prefer world-class acts that perform in English!
  • Don't watch English television, read English books or magazines or play English video games, even if they are unavailable in French.
  • Always opt for the dubbed or subtitled movie, even if you understand English.
  • Don't speak English at work or accept that sometimes English is necessary in the workplace. Refuse to correspond or publish scientific work in English!
  • Never buy a product that doesn't have French labeling, even if you want it or need it.
  • Always blame the English or Ottawa for any problems that exist and always treat the federal government as if it is an enemy.
  • Accept the mantra that anything that is English in Quebec is a direct threat, be it one English sign, or one English clerk.
  • Embrace  and promote the concept of language paranoia and that French is in mortal danger.
I think the priests were less burdensome.

While Rene Levesque remarked that the imposition of language restrictions was a sad necessity, today's French language militants lovingly embrace the imposition of restrictions, whether imposed upon Anglophones and Ethnics or Francophones themselves and live by the credo that the more control, the merrier.

So what happened to free will in Quebec and what is to happen to those Francophones who don't want to drink the Kool-Aid?

Are Francophones high achievers who want to earn an 'ivy-league' quality diploma in a world class university like McGill to be chastised?

Are those Francophones that choose to make a life with an Anglo and decide to make their family English, traitors?

Are those who choose to attend a Madonna concert instead of Marie-Mai concert to be perceived as sellouts?

Are those Francophones who use every opportunity to polish up their language skills by speaking English to Anglos, contributing to the downfall of the French Quebecois nation?

And most importantly, are these Francophone 'heretics' who pursue English, within their rights to do so, even if it contributes to the downfall of French in Quebec? (Which is, of course, ridiculous)

Perhaps it is now the time to throw off the shackles of the French language supremacists who have taken over from the priests.
Perhaps it is time for a second Revolution tranquille.

Are we there yet? ......Not by a long shot.

206 comments:

  1. An excellent post, Editor, and one that sums up my feelings on the matter.

    The more I read this blog, Vigile, and literature from both sides of the fence, the more I become convinced that the greater evil is nationalist labeling.

    I agree that we need a second Quiet Revolution, but unlike you, I see it coming.

    But much as with the Biblical story of Exodus, we will be condemned to wander the desert until the last of the wicked people of the oldest generation has completely died out. And yes, I'm talking about Laurin, Parizeau, Landry, Marois, Beaudoin, and Lapointe.

    Only once our province has been able to take honest stock of both the good and the bad of the previous Quiet Revolution will it be able to embark upon another. One would hope that this second change would afford all Quebecers the opportunities to proudly and finally join the rest of the continent all while proudly remembering who we are.

    Enough young people are proud of their Francophone culture and heritage and know that it's possible to simultaneously accept English into our lives without being less francophone.

    It's coming. Maybe not in your lifetime. But hopefully in that of your grandchildren.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I dunno, A. I like your analogy of the Hebrews who wandered in the desert for 40 years until the generation who witnessed those who were killed by God as idolators and partakers of lawless revelry were subsequently consumed. Sadly, I don't completely share your optimism of change with the death of the original characters you named above.

      It seems the torch is being passed down from generation to generation by the likes of the SSJB and the birth of other militant organizations like the MMF, IF and others. Perhaps with the swelling of immigrants who don't buy the «pur laine» backward values (thank God), it will still take many, many years for the majority to be thrown off the wagon--far more than 40 years, and to protect themselves, eventually, they will not allow those who are not «pur laine» to vote, or they will strenuously advocate this course of action to protect «pur laine» values. Your grandchildren's great grandchildren will likely still be fighting the good fight because of this torch passing down the line.

      Delete
    2. > It seems the torch is being passed down from generation to generation by the likes of the SSJB and the birth of other militant organizations like the MMF, IF and others.
      FYI: MMF is an offshoot of the SSJB. IF was founded years ago by seppies in the Gatineau area who obviously are allergic to bilingualism.

      > Perhaps with the swelling of immigrants who don't buy the «pur laine» backward values (thank God), it will still take many, many years for the majority to be thrown off the wagon--far more than 40 years, and to protect themselves, eventually, they will not allow those who are not «pur laine» to vote, or they will strenuously advocate this course of action to protect «pur laine» values.

      Orangism used to be quite a potent force in Ontario once upon a time. It was as nauseatingly WASP as could be. It died. Now its French counterpart in the form of modern-day pressure groups needs to die the same ignominious death. Besides, with fewer and fewer of us white frenchies having even ONE child, we're edging closer to demographic doom.

      > Your grandchildren's great grandchildren will likely still be fighting the good fight because of this torch passing down the line.

      You kidding?! The Chinese won't put up with this meshugga. Just look at Tibet! Once they take over the continent and we have to build their tech toys, I have no delusion as to what the "common language" across this entire landmass will be.

      All things said, I maintain that nationalism is the great whore of Babylon. Not just Quebec nationalism (yeeech!) or Canadian nationalism (ughhh), but all nationalism.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  2. Poutineism! lol, that's brilliant!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like poutine and I like doughnuts, but unfortunately, I eat very little of both because, apparantly, they are not good for you if you are trying to eat a balanced diet.

      Delete
  3. Editor, liberties are extremely subjective. I understand your beef with Bill 101 regarding freedom of choice for language of instruction and I have the same beef. However, I have issues with section 23 of the Charter itself because people elsewhere in Canada must meet certain criteria in order to attend French schools. Most English public schools offer French immersion classes in "English Canada", therefore a good portion of francophones in the ROC don't get the chance to attend a French school because the numbers simply don't warrant it in their areas of residence. What are your opinions on that editor?

    Complete freedoms have consequences. If people are given complete freedom of choice, I'm willing to bet that almost no one would attend French schools. Before Bill 101, almost 90% of immigrants went to anglophone schools, now it's the complete opposite. Given that anglophones make up anywhere from 8 to 13% depending on your preferred criteria, don't you think this is reasonable, in the context of a society that feels the need to protect its majority status (or rather, its relative weight in Canada)? You should note that anglophones have more rights than francophones in this regard

    The reason the French language has survived for 300 years without artificial help is because they used to make a ridiculous amount of children and were capable of keeping up with the increasing rate of immigration (and from Britain too!!). In another thread, I pointed the fact that numerous jurisdiction on the globe enact these kinds of laws in order to accomplish similar objective, yet nobody calls them "oppressive", "fascist" and the like. Here's a huge list of global examples of similar linguistic planning
    http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/monde/index_politique-lng.htm

    Having said this, we shouldn't be paying any attention to these hateful groups because it will only increase their popularity and get more followers as a result. What I can't understand for the life of me is the following: if this law is so dreaded by anglophones, why don't they protest on the streets instead of hiding behind their computer screens to express their grief, dissatisfaction and distress? Have they ever thought that if they kept on protesting and not quit without a fight, that this perceived discriminatory law would most likely not be on the books? My guess as an outsider is that anglophones have learned to cope with the new realities and are OK with the current sociopolitical landscape.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For the sake of some mental stimulation, I feel the need to turn some of your bullshit on its head.

      >I have issues with section 23 of the Charter itself because people elsewhere in Canada must meet certain criteria in order to attend French schools.
      Can there not be an equivalent on both sides of the language divide? Can one not "qualify" to be instructed in the language of one's choice simply by virtue of wanting it to be so? Ultimately, should our governments not be encouraging exchanges amongst ALL Canadians by ensuring that our education systems churn out bilingual citizens fluent in both official languages? The fact that nobody has the courage to take this seriously and that true bilingualism in many cases is left "as an exercise to the student" is the part that has me howling shame on both English and French Canada.

      > Complete freedoms have consequences. If people are given complete freedom of choice, I'm willing to bet that almost no one would attend French schools. Before Bill 101, almost 90% of immigrants went to anglophone schools, now it's the complete opposite.
      Why is that so horrible? What good is it to put things like conquered and moribund languages on life support? The natural order of things has it that Egyptian, Ancient Greek, Latin, Aramaic, Sanskrit, and a host of other languages are spoken today by all but a handful of people.

      What "favor" are we doing to conquered peoples by putting their languages on artificial life support and imbuing these individuals with a siege mentality about their imminent destruction? Sure, a language is a window on the world. But why should languages be exempt from market and geopolitical forces while their speakers aren't? I call bullshit on that kind of protectionism. I see the writing on the wall. I realize English and French will be less and less useful for reasons of power and money. I want my kids to be fluent in Mandarin.

      > Given that anglophones make up anywhere from 8 to 13% depending on your preferred criteria, don't you think this is reasonable, in the context of a society that feels the need to protect its majority status (or rather, its relative weight in Canada)?
      You seem to conveniently forget that the only reason French is spoken on this continent is because my ancestors came and conquered it from the Natives. Then my other ancestors came and conquered the French. Given that the British make up 100% of the conquering force of what is today Canada and the United States, don't you think it is reasonable, in the context of protecting historical conquest, for a society conquered by the English to actually BE an English speaking one from top to bottom?

      Delete
    2. > The reason the French language has survived for 300 years without artificial help is because they used to make a ridiculous amount of children and were capable of keeping up with the increasing rate of immigration
      Exactly. My French Canadian ancestors were popping them out at the rate of just under 1 per year for their entire reproductive lifespans because that's what the remaining francophone institution coerced them into doing. And they had nerve: this babymaking was in "resistance" to a capitulation that France had already signed, and following a final treaty between France and Britain on the matter. Once you lose, you lose. No takesies backsies. This was lost on the conquered French-Canadians of Canada.

      Fast forward a few decades to the 19th century; the my British ancestors show up in droves, and pretty much build up Canadian business and make Montreal into a major business center. More immigrants from the British Isles and eventually other parts of Europe flow into the city decade after decade. Having spawned too many children over the course of the generations, my French-Canadian ancestors realized there was no more farmland to bequeath and settling in remote and less fertile regions didn't seem worthwhile. This French-Canadian overpopulation leads people to migrate to Ontario, Manitoba, and beyond, as well as to Montreal and other urban centers in the Northeastern U.S.

      Those French-Canadians who arrive in Montreal are stuck between English bigotry and their parochial French provincialism. Rather than do what all the other immigrants at the time around them were doing (learn English), they decided they were better than that and kept themselves culturally and linguistically isolated (in large part thanks to the Church). French-Canadian nationalism continued to be associated with Catholicism and the French language, and with this oddly traumatic notion that if we assimilated or stopped being either French-speaking and/or Catholic, a fate worse than fiery hell awaited each of us (note: we still believe this notion today - different imagery, same exaggerated trauma).

      With the language of the business elite started out as English, you'd think a lightbulb would turn on and the French-Canadians would seek upward mobility en masse and actively accept reality (and willingly accept English or at least some working bilingualism) and assume some semblance of equality like the Scots, the Irish, and later, the Jews, Eastern Europeans, and early Italians. Some French-Canadians did, but far fewer than you'd expect. Besides, the Church wouldn't have it; the nature of competing institutions would have it that this would have dealt a severe wound to the pride of a lot of Francophones who had these same institutions to uphold. Oh by the way, the French school system routinely refused non-French-Canadians entry into their school systems. I know because every last one of my immigrant ancestors was turned away.

      Delete
    3. What resulted was an underclass of French-speakers resenting the English-speaking bourgeoisie for their own lack of advancement, while tens of thousands of immigrants were just as miserable but figured they'd pick up English so they could feed their families. Immigrants kept flocking to the city, both from abroad and from within, those from within particularly miserable at the fact that they had to pick up English to have any sort of advancement (as if the Conquest didn't mean anything). And just as mullahs prey upon disaffected young Muslims today with the hope of lifting them from despair by imbuing them with radical notions of rapturous revolution, so too did we have our famous religious figures who - all things equal - pretty much did the same with us. Fortunately, not everyone believed everything, including my own great grandparents and grandparents who became very successful -- bilingual -- business people.

      Still, the priests and abbots fueled the flames of nationalist sentiment, and not once did we realize that the entity responsible for our poverty and misery wasn't so much the English, but rather the only remaining post-conquest francophone institution that claimed to keep us safe from the English. This institution that encouraged us to continue living out God's will in poverty and misery -- and keep us so easily under its control. Not once did it suggest that we ought to adopt the ways of the English. Of course not - to do so would spell our ultimate demise -- and more importantly I'm sure, its own ultimate demise.

      Flash forward to the Quiet Revolution and its aftermath, where State replaced Church, and most of the symbols and priorities slid by a notch or two, and French sought to (and ultimately did) replace English as the language of power.

      And then consider this:

      While the rest of the newcomers to Montreal in the 19th and early 20th century shrugged and picked up English, the French-Canadians were either kept or deliberately encouraged to shun it and stay away.

      The language laws and protection we're supposed to take so much pride in today are actually the mark of our very own native institution which did everything it could to keep us obedient and servile and hold us back. It's not the story of resistance to a marauding invader, but rather a failed integration post-capitulation.

      While I am a proud speaker of the French language and always will be, I feel nothing but rabid anger and disgust at the religious authorities who encouraged countless generations of my ancestors to remain poor, barefoot, and pregnant. I feel the same rabid anger and disgust at the provincial government authorities who perpetuate this same notion with our current language laws and have the gall to sell it as "pride", "resistance", and "respect" for what we are. It's a sham from top to bottom, and that's why I reject it wholesale.

      Delete
    4. > What I can't understand for the life of me is the following: if this law is so dreaded by anglophones, why don't they protest on the streets instead of hiding behind their computer screens to express their grief, dissatisfaction and distress?
      I don't know because I'm not "fully" anglophone and I can't remember a time when I didn't speak both languages. But if I had to guess, it's because they don't have the levers of power that they expect would ever bring about an understanding of their cause amongst the majority French-Canadian population. There were almost two and a half decades of English rights groups which are today nothing more than footnotes in our province's history.

      > Have they ever thought that if they kept on protesting and not quit without a fight, that this perceived discriminatory law would most likely not be on the books?
      Are you aware of what kind of rabid nationalism was at work in the 60s, 70s, 80s and even 90s? The nationalist governments in office particularly in those decades wouldn't have heard it. In fact, any anglo protest would have actually helped the nationalist cause because it would be interpreted through the lens of just retribution for the not-so-ambiguously vengeful undertones of the separatist movement.

      My guess as an outsider is that anglophones have learned to cope with the new realities and are OK with the current sociopolitical landscape.
      Guess again. The ones that really couldn't hack it left. The ones that stayed gained a measure of fluency in French that allows them to carry on their daily existence and/or retreated to their West Island ghetto. The pre-1977 immigrants felt completely let down by the anglos who left and were ostracized by the xenophobic French-Canadians who took their place. These immigrants' children children are now largely fluent in multiple languages, though I they suspect feel indifference whereas I, being allo as well as anglo and franco, feel an ever-growing, ever-gnawing, ever-consuming rootlessness.

      Delete
    5. You're a good man, Apparatchik. Sadly, after spending some time on this forum and reading about Canada and Quebec in greater depth, I am coming to the conclusion that, much like my Old Country (Italy), there are a lot of good men such as yourself, but it's the a*holes like Seppie and OQLF and "101 ou 401" that shout the loudest and make the weather. I made it a point of challenging them to spell out what they don't like about my idea of allowing Quebec to democratically split between those who want to be more Canadian and those who want to be more Quebecois, not because I think that it's a brilliant idea but because it's a possible solution, albeit an imperfect one that could do with fine tuning and improving to make it fair on as many people as possible. They never replied. Or, rather, they called me names, they avoided the subject, they made jokes: in other words, they RAN AND HID. And that, I reckon, is because they really don't care about fairness or solutions or even the good of Quebec. They just get a kick out of being the bullies, in the name of retribution of some wrongs that some people who lived in Quebec long before they were a glint in the milkman's eye may or may not have suffered (but they never did...), so no amount of bullying is ever enough for them, no rule is significant enough not to break it if it brings an advantage to the "home team", no amount of outright brazen stupidity is enough to embarrass them, no amount of logical reasoning is enough to make them change their mind. They have a good gig going, and they'll fight to the death anything that threatens to change that.

      We often hear improper comparisons with places like Greece or even Italy. Well, here it's a proper one: in Italy (I'm not too familiar with Greece itself) there are those who have the right connections with the corridors of power that are doing alright, and no one who isn't introduced by another member of the club (normally a blood relation) ever reaches their ranks. It's the rest that toil, suffer, migrate as the stranglehold of the elite is untouchable, and don't be fooled by the news of our last (comically inadequate but) democratically elected Prime Minister being sent packing: that was not a revolution, that was the Palaces of power striking back, while the country as a whole carried on as it always did: unaccountable civil servants throwing their weight around, judges (of the left and the right, because they do have political allegiances) prosecuting representatives of the other side, organised crime doing shedloads of money and the offsprings of Professors getting academic jobs on the back of their surname rather than their abilities.

      Now, I'm not saying that all this is also happening in Quebec, but rather that Power in Quebec is Francophone, and the more insular Power becomes (as it does when all influences of the outside world are stopped at the gates - Italians in Italy are notoriously crap at languages as for most people dialect is their first language) the more you're bound to see things like that: if the Canadian high court (not sure what it's officially called) lets Bill 101 stand, what's standing in the way of some Marois or Duceppe Jr becoming Vice Chancellor of McGill (or is it DeBranchie?) after scraping through a bachelor degree? Not the authorities, that's for sure, as they are all signed up to the "cause". Some internal power squabble will cause more problems to them than the sheer indecency of their actions. But then, they have a good gig going and no one can touch them, so why should they change?

      The irony of it all is that without their British "conquerors", they would have become easy prey to the Americans South of the border and no more Francophone today than the good people of Louisiana, like Shaquille O'Neal...

      Delete
    6. Are you suggesting that the Marois or Duceppe Jr. would turn McGill into a French institution after becoming Vice Chancellor?

      Delete
    7. Anon 10:22PM: "If people are given complete freedom of choice, I'm willing to bet that almost no one would attend French schools. "

      What does this mean though? Maybe it means that numerical majority within some jurisdiction X is not all that counts, and since the nationalist case rests on numerical majority within the province (with ALL the other factors to be ignored), it shows how weak a case it really is (as in people cannot be convinced of the validity of the case, and have to be coerced).

      It also shows that other things count too, and far outweigh the franco majority fact in Quebec. Things like: demographic situation just beyond Quebec borders (no French there) + demographic situation in Montreal (50% non-French), the linguistic situation in the world (English - lingua franca), the world economy operating in English, the soft power of the Anglo American culture, and unfortunately the francophone majority itself (close-minded and reactionary enough to make itself not too attractive an option for integration).

      All of it simply shows that Quebec on its own (as a stand-alone unit, detached from everything else, something that Quebec nationalists want us to imagine) is not used as a reference point by non-francophone Quebec residents (and some francophone ones as well). On the other hand, Canada, North America, and the rest of the world do serve as a reference point.

      Delete
    8. Mike, it was a paradox, but surely if some underqualified Marois or Duceppe Jr can weasel their way into Vice Chancellorship thanks to their relations, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that by then McGill would have already become a French institution... I just wonder how long Bishop University in Sherbrooke will last as the only anglophone University in Quebec outside the island of Montreal...

      Delete
    9. Nous travaillons actuellement sur le dossier Bishop.Cette université est située à Lennoxville,pas à Sherbrooke.

      Delete
    10. If Mcgill became a French institution it would no longer be Mcgill. It would become another low class, mediocre Quebec Francophone university.

      Delete
    11. "it would no longer be Mcgill."

      McGilles Duceppe sera son nouveau nom.

      Delete
    12. Good one, Seppie! LOL

      Mais ca va etre trop comme un McDo.

      And I can just imagine Duceppe greeting everybody wearing his condom hat.

      Delete
    13. Nous travaillons actuellement sur le dossier Bishop.Cette université est située à Lennoxville,pas à Sherbrooke

      Pedantic: Lennoxville is a hamlet of less than 10,000 souls and it is in the Sherbrooke CMA.

      Delete
    14. Correction, it is now a Borough (arrondissement) of Sherbrooke of approx. 5,200 permanent residents, which is to say: it is Sherbrooke, Lennoxville as a town does not exist anymore.

      http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennoxville

      Delete
  4. In addition to responding to Apparatchik's comments, I felt I should also respond to the Editor himself.

    On the one hand, I do recognize I could have stayed in Quebec, married, had chidren and send them off to English school if I and my spouse chose to do so. My elementary English education would have made this possible.

    But why? Why should I have stayed? Perhaps I could have improved my French to the point where I could have functioned at a satisfactory level, but I was turned off by the fact I was then being treated as a lesser citizen than them, and I didn't feel like making my tax contributions to a society that saw me as something lesser than they were, with a government that overtly promoted that phony belief. The result: I left--made the decision to do so while I was still in high school, and I don't regret what I did one little bit.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I believe that one very effective way to have our French Canadian Brothers turn against the minority separatist special interest group, is to expose them to the RoC and to the USA, while separating ourselves from those gross racists!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, I was thinking about something similar. Wouldn't it be nice to have 60 minutes do a follow-up? Maybe Kif-Kif would be the starting point... I am absolutely sure that exposing such radical and idiotic instances would tone down this whole propaganda. No other reason except that no one wants to look ridiculous. Here's another case: someone should also send them Robert David's comment. This is absolutely against the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights! Having the government telling me how to name my child?- REALLY?!!! Effing really?!!! Jeez! I am all for ban naming your child Adolf H****R and the likes, but imposing to name my child in a certain way/spelling is just utterly ridiculous.

      Now, Mr Seppie, OQLF, 101 or 401 can you see why people see you as fascists? Because through your lack of common sense and obsessive whining and fear-mongering make yourself look idiotic, absurd and ... dangerous.

      Delete
    2. "Now, Mr Seppie, OQLF, 101 or 401 can you see why people see you as fascists?"

      Mais nous sommes des fascistes et les anglos sont reconnus pour être de grands humanistes,la planète entière le sait.Rien de nouveau sous le soleil :)

      Delete
    3. Stop playing the victim. You probably can't (it's a collective 'you'). Having a bit of common sense in trying to protect your language would have spared you of being seen as fascists both inside and outside QC. Unfortunately your 'elite' and media has been building over the past 40 years all this fear of 'assimilation' and whatnot and the common 'peasant' buys it. Well, you can now reap what you sowed. How does 'Quebec, the Greece of the North America' sound? Pretty cool, huh?

      Delete
    4. As a out-of-Quebec french Canadian, I can assure you that assimilation is not a myth. There used to be many Acadian communities in Nova Scotia and PEI, now all that is left is the most hick, unconnected areas. There's pretty much only Northern Ontario and New Brunswick that still have relatively strong french communities, and many of those are in the decline too. I've known kids from assimilated families, known people who have become assimilated during my lifetime, and others who are on the path of.

      It's one thing if you don't care that we are disapearing, that you think this happens because we want it to, or that you think it's progress. To the rest of us, it's desperating. If I was a Quebecker, I would want to avoid it if I could.

      Delete
    5. And, while we're at it, let's give Istanbul its old name Constantinople and give it back to the Romans. No, better, rename it Byzantion and give it to the Greeks (that should go down well...), after all, they're the ones that founded it: they came first! Jokes aside, much as I understand your feelings, that doesn't make them right. If the key to a better (make of that what you will: prosperous, comfortable, free from discrimination or resentment...) future lies in assimilation, then assimilation is the way to go. If the culture is strong enough it will adapt and develop (e.g. the Chinese community in Vancouver or the Indian community in Brampton/Mississauga), otherwise it will wither away. But keeping it in aspic is not that different from pronouncing it dead. See, I don't have a problem with French surviving in North America, I often say that it is a selling point for Eastern Canada, and especially Quebec. Now, though, I have to revise my assessment to: it would be a selling point if it was just one of the features of a thriving, original community and not the only distinctive trait of an otherwise nondescript North-American community, and such a divisive one at that. Quebec had a choice: show the Anglos the proper way of dealing with language minorities by embracing bilingualism and freedom, the very freedom that the Anglos unfairly curtailed for so long ("Speak White" and all that), or choose tit for tat retaliation and spite. Sadly, they have chosen the latter, so, instead of giving strength to claims of being the better part of Canada, they have become Albertans (or, for what matters, Alabamans!) with a different vocabulary. And have inadvertently caused a backlash against those very French communities outside Quebec whose assimilation (but it sounds like you mean: passing away) you understandably decry. It's only human that if you think you've been done wrong, it is hard to do the right thing when that does not involve retaliation: that's why we all think Nelson Mandela is on of the Great Men of our time, whereas Robert Mugabe (who found himself in pretty much the same situation, but acted in the opposite way) is, by all accounts, a nasty piece of work. Sadly, the powers that be in Quebec have chosen the Mugabe way, and a fat lot of good that did to Quebec (and Zimbabwe!).

      Delete
    6. To think that I've been done wrong, would be to think that there was someone doing the wrong doing. Ever since the 70's, the old barriers of discrimination have mostly been put down, and it's even an asset to be a francophone in today's Canada.
      I understand assimilation is simply human nature, and people reacting to their environment in a rational way. I would say most francophones in Canada are attached to their language, but they don't breathe eat dream and shit french. If it means meeting the love of your life and raising english kids, many choose to raise english kids. If it means getting to a better job, many people go to a better job. One could just hope that the environment would make it easier to retain one's culture, and not feel like an immigrant in your own country.

      In Quebec, they have the raw numbers with which to preserve their language, and one might condemn their method, but I would not think them paranoid for being afraid of assimilation.

      Delete
  6. Great article. As for the comment "Before Bill 101, almost 90% of immigrants went to anglophone schools", it is not black and white; there are other reasons for it that are never aired. My parents came to Canada in the late 50s. My brothers and I were born in Quebec and when it was time to go to school, we were not permitted to attend French schools, quite blatantly, in fact. Was it lawful? Maybe not. But that's the way it was. As a result, my brothers and I, and all the other 'immigrant' children chose to attend English protestant schools that happily embraced us. Years later, the Francophones complained that we chose English over French. Where did they expect us to go when their schools rejected us?

    ReplyDelete
  7. "French Canadian Brothers" ?

    Vous voulez dire des "Elvis Gratton".C'est le nom utilisé par les Québécois pour désigner ce genre de clown.Une autre preuve que vous ne connaissez absolument rien de notre culture populaire...French canadian brothers...Ayoye!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, Seppie, seems like to you like to make everyone your enemy, even francophones in other provinces.

      Delete
  8. Great post.

    When something like Bill 101 is the best you can do to protect your culture, no wonder that pretty much everything in Quebec is going for the worse...
    Quebec is going down the drain and the separatists, not the English are responsible for it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Poutineism ? We have a BIG huge MYTH written here.

    It's sad that this article is has so much stereotypes. I don't know anyone who's like that. You describe the nationalist the same way, be example, we were describing, the soviets, the germans or the japanese during the war to make the people belive that they are all evil and that the war is necessary.

    More intellectual honesty please.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same intellectual honesty as used by the Nordiques, who keep claiming that they are an oppressed minority, neglecting to mention that, without the backing of their hated Anglos they'd be no more Francophone than their cousins in Louisiana. Same intellectual honesty that the Nordiques use to affirm that Quebec is a French "nation", when for two and a half centuries there have been plenty of Anglophone gracing its lands, doing business and providing the smarter Francophones and, later, Allophones, with plenty of opportunities to get work, business and a better life that did not involve just breeding, farming and trapping. The same intellectual honesty that makes the choice of language in a BILINGUAL Province the matter of enforcement by the state and not an individual choice. The same intellectual honesty that CHICKENS like Seppie, OQLF and 101 ou 401 use in not accepting that if the differences are no longer reconcileable with the Anglos, the Allos and their more intelligent Francophone fellow Quebeckers who bothered learning English and got on in life, then they should just part company, each to their own, and move on (maybe because they secretly hope to STEAL their land and their homes...).

      If that's intellectual honesty, I can't see what you're complaining aboot!

      Delete
    2. The reason Louisiana lost its french character is because they banned education in French in that state in the early 20th century.

      Delete
    3. And how does that contradict what I said? There are still French speakers in Quebec, because the English let them carry on speaking French in exchange of them not siding with the Americans. Had they not done so, the French would have allied themselves with the Yanks, defeated the English, and ended up under the same kind of legislation forced upon Louisiana, thus getting shafted more than they pretend they have been.

      Delete
    4. I see you regret the british' (as you acknowledge, ultimately partly self-interested) act of kindness in allowing a conquered culture to survive. Clearly we'd have been much better off if the population had been ruthlessly assimilated. But francophones who fear that the anglo-Canadians want to see them assimilated are paranoid, of course.

      I'm not convinced anglophones would have succeeded in out-growing the french population of Canada without the exodus of the loyalists following the war of independance. All those anglo-speakers would have spread westward (such as in the Louisiana territories following their purchase) istead of northwards, don't you think? It's warmer down there. I expect Canada to have less developped without having an international boundary on the 49th parallel artificially forcing population spread to follow an arbitrary line.

      Of course it is a matter of opinion.

      Delete
  10. Great post, my sentiments exactly! Except I can't agree with the word "Poutineism". Everyone knows poutine originated in Northeastern Ontario. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, it's NOT from Ontario. Even the Toronto Star agrees:
      http://www.thestar.com/living/food/article/530474

      Delete
  11. "When something like Bill 101 is the best you can do to protect your culture"

    Notre langue et notre culture représentent à peine de 2% en amérique du Nord.Qu'avez-vous de mieux à suggérer?

    J'attend une réponse intelligente...Chef.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Realize that French thrived before Bill 101, get rid of Bill 101, and with goodwill towards others and helping people speak French, the language will do just fine.

      Delete
    2. For every anglo that tells me french thrived before Bill 101, there's another who tells me french is a dead language being kept on by the life support that is Bill 101. Pardon me if I'm not convinced.

      Delete
  12. "These immigrants' children children are now largely fluent in multiple languages..."

    Nous leur en demandions pas tant,le français aurait suffi afin de se joindre à la majorité.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They don't listen to you. There are much more open to the world.

      Delete
    2. Ouvert sur le monde sauf sur le Québec,leur terre d'accueil.Hmmmm...Comme c'est étrange.

      Delete
    3. Peut-etre tu ne comprends pas. Multilingue veut dire parler des differents langues, incluant le francais. La majorite des enfants des immigrants sait comment parler le francais, l'anglais, et la langue de leurs parents.

      La diversite est quelque chose de merveilleux!

      Delete
    4. Nous leur en demandions pas tant,le français aurait suffi afin de se joindre à la majorité

      Majority of what? Don't you always whine about 350 million Anglos surrounding you from all corners?

      Delete
    5. "Ouvert sur le monde sauf sur le Québec,leur terre d'accueil."

      First of all, I can totally imagine how one can be open to everyone except the Quebecois.

      Secondly, la terre d'acceuil? Do you mean to say that the Quebecois show up at the airport to welcome the newly arrived immigrants? What about the fact that you then tax these immigrants to the bone, and treat them very coldly. Do you think they should feel "welcome" no matter what? Do you think that approving someone's entry application qualifies as "welcoming"? What about the benefits you reap, like shoring up of your declining population and adding new people to the economy so everything keeps going and taxes can be collected.
      I actually think there is more selfishness in this whole thing than altruism (as the word "welcome" would imply).

      "Nous leur en demandions pas tant"

      You demand the immigrants do something, but not more than that, not an inch further than you specify.
      It makes me wonder, who do you think you are if you think that you have the right to set limits on other people?

      Delete
    6. "Secondly, la terre d'acceuil? Do you mean to say that the Quebecois show up at the airport to welcome the newly arrived immigrants?"

      Nommez moi un seul pays qui vous accueille à l'aéroport.Sauf que nous,nous vous offrons une carte d'assurances-santé à votre arrivée,quand même gentil,non?

      Delete
    7. Et nous les federalistes offrons a les separatistes de BS - aide sociale. C'est quand meme gentil de notre part.

      Delete
    8. Honey-bunny, we, the immigrants, PAY for the friggin' 'carte d'assurances-santé' and other services. It's called 'landing fee' and it has 4 digits. We also have to have money to support ourselves for at least 6 months. This sum has 5 digits and it is 'per person'. Stop talking about things it's clearly you have NO idea of. It makes you look ignorant.

      Delete
    9. @ Justin le Seppie 01:50 PM

      ISRAEL regularly greets immigrants at the airport!
      During the great Russian exodus in the 80's each plane was greeted by regular Israelis who clapped for the newly arrived as they descended from the plane.
      Social workers took each family to an indoctrination centre where they lived for a couple of months in order to acclimatize and LEARN HEBREW!
      Perhaps Quebec could take an example on how to assimilate immigrants!!!!!
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulpan

      Delete
    10. "Parizeau = Alcoholique"

      Nous savons tous que Jaco aime prendre quelques verres de vin et un petit bourbon à l'occasion mais quand Justin à fait vibrer sa corde indépendantiste,nous sommes tous tombés de notre chaise au comité organisateur de la souveraineté.

      Delete
    11. @ Seppie 03:18 PM

      Well, that lasted for about, what, 15 minutes? Seems like that attraction of separation is not that strong.

      Delete
    12. Justin le Seppie,

      "Nommez moi un seul pays qui vous accueille à l'aéroport.Sauf que nous,nous vous offrons une carte d'assurances-santé à votre arrivée,quand même gentil,non?"

      Canada.

      Vancouver International Airport. After exiting the clearance for new immigrants, there is a counter staffed by volunteers funded by the Citizenship and Immigration Canada to meet and greet new immigrants.

      Google "CANN YVR".

      Delete
    13. Troy, Seppie is totally clueless on many subjects he insists on giving his opinion. If it wasn't so sad, I'd have said it's hilarious how one can act so ignorant and so closed-minded. I'm kind of embarrassed for him.

      Delete
    14. "Social workers took each family to an indoctrination centre where they lived for a couple of months in order to acclimatize and LEARN HEBREW!
      Perhaps Quebec could take an example on how to assimilate immigrants!!!!!"

      I have the strange feeling that, if we did that, you would label us as extremist zealots who want to brainwash immigrants, depriving them of their liberty of choice, to enroll them in a battle which they have no interest in, forcing them to drink our insane Kool-Aid of paranoiac. And we would only pretend to be nice to them but we would do it only to use them at our advantage, because, of course, not only are we racist, we are hypocritcs too.

      You know, the usual stuff.

      Delete
    15. I'm with M.Patrice on this. I'd rather not be welcome at all, then be welcome at the airport with a hug by a complete stranger (that looks "cultish" already), and then put into an "indoctrination" (Editor's term) camp. I know a Lithuanian guy (with some Jewish blood that he used to get out of the former USSR) who moved to Israel in the early 90's and then spent the next few years itching to get out (he came to Canada in mid 90's). His experience was one of a huge state-sponsored mind fuck, basically like a reeducation camp that involved both religious and secular "instruction".

      Quebec is not so far out, but COFI and high school's "class d'acceuil", for my taste, cut too close to a re-education scheme. Maybe that's what Anon meant when he said "la terre d'acceuil". Maybe he meant the state-sponsored indoctrination in FSL classes the immigrants are "encouraged" to take. If that's what he meant, then thank you very much for that. We really appreciate it.

      Delete
    16. adski,

      I am proudly an alumnus of the Francization courses. At least it got me to the point that I can get myself around, I can read newspapers and I can watch Canadiens on RDS. At that point in time I was also looking for a job so the subsidy was certainly welcomed. As to the indoctrination, indeed the course has some elements of it, but for me it was just the price I had to pay to earn the subsidy. However, I always have good chuckle if I remember the days I had with the so-called agents d'integration. Whenever they tried to sell the idea that Quebec was such an independent entity, I poked holes to their arguments to bring down the fact that Quebec is but a province among ten in Canada. Obviously, I was not the favorite pupil for les agents d'integration, but was quite popular among my classmates and for the teachers.

      One thing that bothered me in the courses was how they treated English speakers. There were quite a number of Romanians in my classes. So were Latin Americans. Add a number of Chinese and Russians. However, I had no peer from my home country. The Romanians spoke with each other in Romanian, Latin Americans speak Spanish and so on. The teachers were fine with that. But me, if I wanted to speak to my classmates I spoke English and some of them understood. The teachers took big offense in my doing so and forced me to communicate in French. As well, during the break if I received a phone call in English they asked me to go out.

      With that experience, and with what I see now from the separatists / French hard liners, I am convinced that what is called as protection for French is no more than vendetta against English. Look around in the Plateau. There are plenty of restaurants with ethnic names. Their existence is somewhat tolerated. But they make such a big fuss for Canadian Tire.

      Delete
    17. "Their existence is somewhat tolerated. But they make such a big fuss for Canadian Tire."

      Nous sommes pour la diversité culturelle et les anglos pour l'homogénéité...anglophone bien sûr:Tout le monde mange des Donuts!

      Delete
    18. Seppie,

      Answer me this.

      Up to the start of WWI, French was the main language in Europe. As well, Nouvelle France extended to the vast area all the way to the Great Lakes. How is it that the French language is now all but forgotten in the world outside of the Francophonie?

      Delete
    19. Troy : I assume you're about to enlighten us and say it's because of French/French people's inherent inferiority in the face of superior English?

      What's the point anyway? People in Quebec want to preserve their cultural distinctiveness; what does that have to do with the fact that people in Europe speak less French?

      Delete
    20. Troy,

      In Nouvelle-France, it is simple, the french elite was replaced by an english elite after the conquest. French then became a language of marginalization in North America.

      At world scale, after WWI and WWII, american and british understood, like french understood it before them, that language and culture are instruments of power. And they played their cards very cleverly. Good for them.

      But the first reason that english came to be what it is today might be that, even during the most glorious days of french and when everyone in Europe bought the idea that french was a superior language, the british spoke french when they had to but they never really bought the idea that french was better. Even when their language was a language that no one cared to learn.

      I find their attitude inspiring.

      And about french being a forgotten language, it is puzzling to know that there is now three times more french speakers now than during WWII. The majority of french speakers today are not native speakers (same situation for english), so they learned it, so french attracts new speakers. Today, 112 millions persons are learning french. One out of four second language teachers in the world teaches french. For the last 25 years, one out of five winners of the Goncourt prize was not a native french speaker, so french attracts new speakers. Surprisingly, in Europe, 1,300 national civil servants attended french classes in 2002, and in 2005, 7,400 of them did (even me, ever optomistic, finf these last figures odd).

      It is true that english overtook the world in a half century. So things can change quite rapidly. Looking at the "déclin de l'empire américain", one can wonder how long it will take for Chinese to take over. I might see this in my life time.

      On my part, the rest of the world can speak english, chinese, tagalog or swedish, I will speak french because it is my language and the language of my home land.

      Delete
    21. REWRITE :

      Troy,

      In Nouvelle-France, it is simple, the french elite was replaced by an english elite after the conquest. French then became a language of marginalization in North America.

      At world scale, after WWI and WWII, american and british understood, like french understood it before them, that language and culture are instruments of power. And they played their cards very cleverly. Good for them.

      But the first reason that english came to be what it is today might be that, even during the most glorious days of french and when everyone in Europe bought the idea that french was a superior language, the british spoke french when they had to but they never really bought the idea that french was better. Even when their language was a language that no one cared to learn.

      I find their attitude inspiring.

      And about french being a forgotten language, it is puzzling to know that there is now three times more french speakers now than during WWII. The majority of french speakers today are not native speakers (same situation for english), so they learned it, so french attracts new speakers. Today, 112 millions persons are learning french. One out of four second language teachers in the world teaches french. For the last 25 years, one out of five winners of the Goncourt prize was not a native french speaker, so french attracts new speakers. Surprisingly, in Europe, 1,300 national civil servants attended french classes in 2002, and in 2005, 7,400 of them did (even me, ever optimistic, find these last figures odd).

      It is true that english overtook the world in a half century. So things can change quite rapidly. Looking at the "déclin de l'empire américain", one can wonder how long it will take for Chinese to take over. I might see this in my life time.

      On my part, the rest of the world can speak english, chinese, tagalog or swedish, I will speak french because it is my language and the language of my home land.

      Delete
    22. @Anonymous 02:52 PM

      Troy's point is very simple. When French was the lingua franca, there was no talk of "linguistic diversity". As soon as French was displaced, all of a sudden the French became champions of other cultures and languages.

      The point is the hypocrisy inherent in this. And how obvious it is that it is about jealousy than cultural diversity. Especially in light of the fact that in their spheres of influence, the French put up all kinds of legislative schemes to favor their own language.

      Delete
    23. "And about french being a forgotten language, it is puzzling to know that there is now three times more french speakers now than during WWII."

      The world population more than tripled since then too.

      I would agree with you if you said: "French still kind of counts in the world". But to suggest that it is growing and its influence is growing is false. It's the opposite in fact and is what sparks the nostalgia amongst the French, nostalgia for the times when it was cool to be French, while now it doesn't faze anybody.

      You French skillfully camouflage your behavior as some sort of altruistic push for diversity. But behind it all is vanity and arrogance.

      Delete
    24. "Nous sommes pour la diversité culturelle"

      I'd like to believe it but your record, historical and present, doesn't bear this out.

      Delete
    25. My point is that languages appear and disappear depending on the people who utilize them. Artificial means to force the change will eventually end in futility. Also, in the way those means will infringe on anybody else's rights or wishes.

      Anonymous at 14:52,

      If you want to preserve your distinctiveness, go ahead. But do not encroach the rights of mine or of others like mine. Also, do not encroach the rights of your peers who are not in the same thoughts as yours. Live and let live, that is all I ask.

      M. Patrice,

      If you want to use French 100% anytime anywhere, I have no problem with that. In fact, it is good for you. But please, do not force me to do so. Especially do not force me to do so if there is nothing for me in return.

      See, I am a believer in Adam Smith and Charles Darwin. I believe in the self-regulating nature of the market and in the survival of the fittest. If those who suppose to use French are shying away from the language, what does it say about the language itself and about the value the language has on the welfare of its population?

      Delete
    26. Désolé de vous apprendre troy que c'est vous qui venez empiéter sur nos droits collectifs qui sont protégés par notre État...L'ontario est à quelques pas.

      Delete
    27. "I am a believer in Adam Smith and Charles Darwin"

      Ce moron nous compare-t-il avec des animaux?Tu parles d'un ostie d'imbécile!

      Delete
    28. Anonymous at 19:08,

      In these last 6 years, there is a constant flow of out migration from Quebec to Alberta. It is not as much as it was in 2006 - 2007, but people are still moving out. Significant portion of them are francophones. So much so that you can see community centers and centers of employment for francophones in downtown Calgary.

      What would you say if the government of Alberta told the francophones from Quebec to go back to Quebec if they can not speak English?

      Delete
    29. Seppie at 19:14,

      And your argument is...?

      Delete
    30. Pas d'argument anti-absurdité mais une conclusion : Tu n'es qu'un minable petit libertarien sans morale et sans importance,aucune.Minoritaire au sein d'une minorité.
      La vie ne doit pas être facile pour toi au Québec,n'est-ce pas? :P

      Delete
    31. "believe in the self-regulating nature of the market and in the survival of the fittest. If those who suppose to use French are shying away from the language, what does it say about the language itself and about the value the language has on the welfare of its population?"

      What does it say about it indeed.

      I would say that there is nothing wrong with promoting your language, but a legislation as sinister as 101 (crafted by a sociopath masquerading as a psychiatrist) that drives over half a million people away (neutral or mild legislations don't cause mass migrations) is not a commendable way of dealing with anything. Add to this the never-ending aspect of the legislation, no expiry date on it, and you realize that it did not lead to any resolution, but to a permanent social strife. It served to divide and alienate people from each other, to the benefit of the elites. And it actually sunk so low as to make citizen vs. citizen denunciations a part of daily landscape. That says it all.

      Delete
    32. En passant,Camille Laurin était aussi un fervent Darwiniste,ce qui me porte à croire que la Loi 101 ne cessera d'évoluer et saura s'adapter à son environnement dans les décennies à venir.

      Delete
    33. "Looking at the "déclin de l'empire américain", one can wonder how long it will take for Chinese to take over. I might see this in my life time."

      Anything but English, heh? You French are jealous of them after all.

      But don't hold your breath for any major linguistic shakeups in your lifetime. See, the Chinese will take over the world's economy in English. They know that their language is too complex, they know that the world has a common language WHICH THEY LIKE, as they are anglophiles.

      In fact, some ESL courses in China are held in auditoriums.

      Delete
    34. Seppie at 19:28,

      On the contrary, I live my life quite comfortably in Quebec, in English. Just search this blog for my comments and you will get to know a bit about how I live my life.

      Delete
    35. I see Laurin more as a Trockyist than Darwinist, as in his efforts to apply state power to engineer a new reality. Laurin was a collectivist, preoccupied with a cohort rather than individual. If you like, you can call him a collectivist Darwinist, which to me is a contradiction of terms.

      Darwinism is a libertarian, individualist concept. Laurin, regardless of what he saw himself as, was more a Leninist-Trockyist, as was Levesque's gang in general.

      Delete
    36. Note that Laurin's efforts did not lead to a Darwinian resolution of one side outdoing the other (remember, Montreal s'anglicise despite 35 years of 101). Instead, his efforts led to a confusing social strife. And that is precisely what defines Trockyism. Permanent social conflict with no end in sight, as your "combat linguistique" is exactly.

      Delete
    37. Darwinism is a consequence of the reality of genetics and has no bearing upon social interactions.

      Please, stop anthropomorphizing science. Next I'll be hearing about how the Theory of Relativity implies moral relativism and how Quantum Mechanics allow positive thinking to shape the world.

      Delete
    38. "Next I'll be hearing about how the Theory of Relativity implies moral relativism and how Quantum Mechanics allow positive thinking to shape the world."

      I promise you you won't be hearing that.

      I could tell you though how research on the polio virus led to the polio vaccine. So here you go, science ...errrr.... "anthropomorphized".

      Delete
    39. That's not what I mean. I mean using concepts describing processes in physics or biology to explain social interactions. It doesen't work like that, and as a scientist it's a major pet peeve.

      Besides, if you read in the field, "Darwinism" (or more accurately, Evolution by Natural Selection) is not meant to produce the best individual, but rather to promote propagation of individual genes.

      Take for instance degenerative diseases - since they only occur past (most people's) reproductive age, there are literally no evolutionary incentives to carry mutations that prevent them. It does screw over the individual, to the benefit of the individual genes.

      Delete
    40. "the Chinese will take over the world's economy in English."

      Êtes-vous sérieux?Moi qui croyait que ce serait la pologne.Pfffff...

      Delete
    41. "On the contrary, I live my life quite comfortably in Quebec"

      Alors c'est quoi ton problème?Tu milites ici afin d'améliorer le sort de tes semblables?
      Je ne crois pas.Les petits libertariens sont plutôt de nature mesquine et égoiste.

      Delete
    42. I am back this morning and there is a lot more comments on this thread.

      To Adski and Troy,

      "As soon as French was displaced, all of a sudden the French became champions of other cultures and languages. The point is the hypocrisy inherent in this."

      You could add that when french was the lingua franca, it had become lingua franca because of deliberate actions of the french who understood that language and culture were instruments of power.

      Cultural diversity is indeed a french reaction to the domination of english. You see hyprocisy into this? I might tend to be a little less offended than you by the coldness of our world. I see the french "prêcher pour leur paroisse", I see them lookong for their own interest. And I think that everyone looking for its own interest fits Adam Simth's vision that Troy refers to.

      In response to our linguitic laws, you advocate individual rights. Could you possibly be just a little bit more into individual rights than you normaly would if there was no bill 101 issue. Would your position be hypocrite. I honestly don't think so. You would simply be advocating for your own interest.

      Advocating Darwin, Troy advocates that french should not be defended by laws (laws are a collective action). But collective action is a form of adaptation to survive. Bees and ants are highly collective animals, in the struggle for survival it is their mean of action. Getting together and voting laws to impose your will is simply a possible adaptation among others. Could I argue that, according to Troy's darwinesque view of the world, those who lost ground to french in our environment are simply less fit for survival in our environment?

      Troy advocates Darwin's struggle for survival, yet the very idea that french fights back to defend its territory seems offending.

      "Anything but English, heh? You French are jealous of them after all."

      You have probably already played at Risk in the past. Did you notice how everyone tend to get together against the top player? Because of jealousy? Hypocrisy? No, simply self interest.

      Did you also notice that, despite disagreeing with you on many things, I never told you that you were jealous, hyprocrite, self centered, ethnocentric, intellectualy incapable of so or so, racist or many more other things that I am forgetting? En fait, je ne me souviens pas de t'avoir déjà prêté d'intentions.

      (About the decline of french, you might be interested in : http://www.newgeography.com/content/002387-the-decline-and-fall-french-language. Take time to read the reader comment titled "False from top to bottom".)

      Delete
    43. “But collective action is a form of adaptation to survive.”

      Equally, it can be an excuse for something else. To me, Quebec laws are not a measure aimed at survival, but a measure aimed at domination (maitres chez nous) and punishment of others for past transgressions (having the audacity to win a war between two powers).

      I would be reluctant to accept, but slightly open to accepting, harsh measures if an absolute survival was at stake. But not when it’s a case of petty revanchism and bruised ego, and this is how I see it. You can now bring up the French situation in Louisiana and New England, and I’ll still believe that in Quebec, forces more intricate than simple survival are at play.


      “Did you notice how everyone tend to get together against the top player?”

      There is more than that in this case. French animosity towards English plays a big role here. If the lingua franca was another language, it wouldn’t be so hard to accept for the French.

      Btw, I said that if you weren't able to see a moral equivalence in what we discussed at that time, you'd be intellectually dishonest. You proved me wrong by bringing up interests, with which I agreed. See, I do think that Quebec, like any other state, acts in its selfish interests and seeks to further a group of people at the expense of other groups (what 101 is for). It's that after talking smartly about interests, you slide into the false justification (in my view) of 101 as something designed for survival. Unless you mean survival of privileges, which would be different from survival in general.

      Yes, I do think some French people are jealous of what English has become, and bitter bitter over having been dethroned and knocked off the pedestal. Again, you can say no, no, no, it's being against the top player, it's being for survival of the weakest... but my mind has been made up about this.

      Delete
    44. I understand your logic.

      Linguitic laws are aimed at domination. What happened during the quiet revolution was the rise of a new french middle class who wanted to take over, and it many ways it did. (I am of course simplifying.) One can speculate on the motives, but the goal was to take over.

      To me, it is clear that it is not only something about culture, language and the beauty of Nelligan's poetry, it is about power and, among other things, a better economic situation for then french canadians.

      It can be argued that our survival is not at stake. But in the mind of many (most) quebeckers, it is. It can be argued that we schyzrophrenicaly lost contact with reality, but, if one wants to understand the actions of quebeckers, one has to understand that is what they think.

      (And reading the comments on this forum and many others, seeing the joy of english Canada to finaly elect a majoritary government without Québec, being told daily that our language is dying and irrelevant, you know, the usual stuff, we might consider the possibility that maybe our survival is indeed on the line, just to be safe and careful.)

      If you want to understand a schizophrenic, you have to understand that he hears voices. The voices are not real, yet they explain his actions. (On a side note, I find interesting to know that Camille Laurin was a psychiatrist...so was Denis Lazure.)

      French and english rivality is age old, and it works both ways (in Europe). Today, in North America, francophobia might be the last socialy acceptable prejudice.

      "I do think some French people are jealous of what English has become, and bitter bitter over having been dethroned and knocked off the pedestal."

      These things are much more complex. To me, growing up in Québec, french has never been knocked off the pedestral, it has in fact never been on the pedestral, not during my life time and not during the two and half last centuries of our history. Only later in my adult life have I realized that our language is an international language, I was, for instance, many years ago, surprised to learn that french was widely spoken in Africa. To me, the domination of french in Québec is a recent event in our history. My supposed animosity against english doesn't come from the frustration that french is longer the lingua franca ; growing up, I have never thought it was.

      Anyway, as I said, it is complex, and this is the way I see things and I hope that it sheads a new light on these issues.

      Delete
  13. Good old Louis at it again. No Dogs has even been mentioned in his rant.

    http://ledernierquebecois.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/laccouplement-des-ignares/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lelectronlibre+%28LouisPrefontaine.com%29

    The Last Quebecois.....hmmmmmmm.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess Louis picked a bad day to link to this blog. Those who come over will get a jolt, especially today's artwork!
      Actually, I get to see from where readers come to this blog and there's only been two or three who linked from Mr. Prefontaine's blog.
      Either he has few readers that are curious or his readers can't understand English or probably the most likely reason, he hasn't got much readership.

      Getting called a racist by him is actually a badge of honor. I guess we get under his skin and no, we aren't going away....

      Delete
    2. Actually, in the earlier days Louis had quite a number of commentators on his blog. Quite some of them were in English, poking holes in his logic. He then instituted a 'netiquette' taken from the French Wikipedia. Of course that meant that all comments in English were deleted. Manually by him, I guess since it took some time from the postings to the deletions.

      He then changed the name of that blog and removed all personal references, including his name and picture, for some reason. His blog went downhill ever since. And oh, I think his tipping point was the 02 May election. It was obvious that he took the wiping out of the Bloc personally, and he took some time off after that. After his return, the quality of his writings are far worse that what they were before - not that they were of high quality to start with.

      Delete
  14. Language will not be the eventual downfall of Quebec and the Quebecois language zealots. The economy is the tempest in the teapot...Not some silly language BS...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, the fate of the economy is based on the language laws scaring away head offices to other locations. So the silly language laws are the cause of the downfall of Quebec.

      Delete
    2. Regardons le beau côté des choses...Beaucoup d'anglos quittent en même temps :)

      Delete
    3. I'm so sorry but you are plain stupid, and also extremely dangerous. If you don't see the harm in your words, you definitely have brain damage. So you better live in a Quebec with no economy, less money than in a prosperous Quebec where everybody get along?
      That's why your dream will never be fulfilled...because there are plenty of french-canadians with brains !!!!

      Delete
    4. BigPencil, unfortunately there were too many stupid people that did not think thoroughly and look at Montréal now... look at QC!

      The business exodus will be alive and well should the threat of referendum/separation rise again. It's true, big businesses will have more to lose than the small ones, but even a considerable part of the the small ones would pack up and go. I work in the printing and paper business over the past four years my business grew quite nicely (knock on wood). In Jan, going over last year's records, I noticed that I have provided just one of printers I work with (a small-ish printer I might add), a bit over $120.000 worth of business. Should the threat of referendum become obvious (I won't even wait to see if it comes out yay or nay) I'm wrapping up everything nicely and move to On - taking my clients with me, of course. Now, someone like Seppie will come back with something along the lines that I don't matter and some local will take my place. Keeping in mind that the majority of my clients are from outside Qc, I would say... ummm... I don't think so. The way I see it, gouvernamaman that keeps Jean-Guy on the BS will lose me spending money in QC, will lose my taxes along with the influx of capital from outside QC's borders, part of my printer's taxes, etc. I know, I am just one drop in a bucket, however what happens when there are 10 drops like me? How about 100? And history teaches you that there are. So Jean-Guy, what say you? Should we pack and leave?

      Delete
    5. "If you don't see the harm in your words"...

      ...And teardrops in my eyes.

      Delete
    6. "I work in the printing and paper business over the past four years my business grew quite nicely..."

      Ben oui!!L'impression papier,une industrie en pleine expansion.Pfffff!N'importe quoi.

      Delete
    7. I respect much more somebody who has a business in Quebec and is contributing to the economy than someone who is collecting BS. Please find a job!!

      Delete
    8. "Please find a job!!"

      J'organise présentement le grand concours annuel de chasse à l'anglouille :

      Trouvez et rapportez un anglo fautif et récalcitrant et courez la chance de vous envoler pour Paris sur les ailes d'Air canada (service en français inclus).

      *Maximum de 3 délinquants par client *Certaines conditions s'appliquent.

      Delete
    9. Praise the lawd, OQLF has deemed me worthy enough of a reply. I will unquestionably mark this day in the calendar and celebrate it each year, making sure to remind my children, their children and their children's children of the great fortune bestowed upon our family. We'll all gather 'round the fire and reminisce of the enlightened OQLF's words of wisdom.

      Kidding aside, you are absolutely right - the printing industry has to compete with the ever-emerging new technologies, web and the likes. Here's some food for thought though: in the foreseeable future, the pulp and paper industry and all the collateral trades remain a big part of QC's economy so... yeah, you totally don't need my business.

      Delete
    10. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    11. Right you are, Anon! As it is, Quebec businesses are over regulated right now and as the Editor wrote a few days ago, endless union grievances and low productivity will do Quebec in, separation or no separation.

      An economist hired by the Premier of Ontario came up with a rather rigorous and somewhat austere program over the next seven years to put the brakes on runaway debt. To what tune the Premier will follow it remains to be seen. It only discusses expenditure cuts and no tax increases. The Premier may choose a combination of both, but it seems Ontario recognizes something has to be done or its deficits are going to put Ontario into more financial difficulty. Ontario also recognizes it won't enjoy the growth it has in the past as manufacturing is in for long-term chronic problems, not to mention an aging workforce.

      Quebec, too, has an badly aging demographic as those big families prior to the Quiet Revolution are dying off being replaced with much smaller families. At one point, Quebec's birth rate in the 1980s dropped to the second lowest in the Western Hemisphere, second only to (what was then) West Germany. Quebec can't rely on immigration to keep up its workforce; in fact, it will be much more difficult for Quebec to do so compared to Ontario. Who, other than members of la francophonie would even want to come to Quebec with their children confined to French education with less than 1% of the Americas speaking French (i.e., Quebec, NB to a much lesser extent and some broke or near-broke Caribbean islands like Haiti, La Martinique and Labadie)?

      Besides, the immigrants who do come, especially non-whites, are intimidated by the police and told by potential employers they hire «Québécois pur laine» first.

      Besides all that, a recent Fraser Institute study put Quebec already at a debt-to-GDP ratio of 62%, and showing ZERO poltical Will to do anything about it. Ontario is currently at 37%, but that could grow to 50% or more within four years if Ontario does nothing, and that's still not 62%! Hopefully Ontario will implement some measures to prevent a drop in our credit rating. Now it's wait-and-see.

      Delete
    12. Of course , LOL. So if you take allos and anglos out, the pur-laine quebecois are just a big "family" ... so "too much of you know what " could be OQLF's only way to feel good. 2 of that, 1 referendum to see if it was good, then 2 more, another referendum and so on...

      Delete
    13. Mr Sauga: you make some good points, except for one thing: Martinique (and French Guyana and Guadaloupe) are actually part of France, so they can rely on handouts from the Motherland to keep going (they even have MP's in Paris). Haiti, on the other hand, has to stand on its own shaky legs. The Nordiques essentially want Quebec to change its arrangements from Martinique's to Haiti's... you can see where this is going!

      Delete
    14. "...because there are plenty of french-canadians with brains !!!!"

      Si c'était le cas,nous aurions notre pays depuis longtemps.

      Delete
  15. Bill 101 coming to your town, get ready, read below…scary indeed. State sanctioned and funded discrimination… "First Quebec then the rest of the country..."

    Appeal Court Ponders Russell Township Bilingual Sign Bylaw
    By Pam McLennan
    Epoch Times Staff Created: February 8, 2012 Last Updated: February 9, 2012

    In the latest episode of what some see as a battle for freedom of expression in Canada, judges heard the case of Galganov/Brisson vs. Russell Township in the Provincial Court of Appeal in Toronto on Feb. 2. No date has been set for the court’s judgement.

    Howard Galganov and Jean-Serge Brisson have been fighting the 2008 Russell Township bylaw that enforces both French and English signage on businesses in the four small towns of the municipality.

    Galganov, an Anglophone, argues that the bylaw is yet another example of the creeping imposition of bilingualism on the predominantly English-speaking population of Canada.

    Brisson, a Francophone, says enforcing bilingual commercial signage dictates how a business can market its services and sets up the expectation that service will be available in both English and French, which may not be the case.

    They also argue that it’s not the government’s place to tell businesses what language should be on their signs and that doing so infringes on their right to freedom of expression.

    The language-rights activists are appealing an August 2010 ruling by the Superior Court of Ontario that Russell Township has the right to enforce bilingual signs.

    In her ruling, Justice Monique Métivier dismissed Galganov’s application since he—unlike Brisson—is not a resident of the township. She also concluded the bylaw doesn’t infringe on Brisson’s right to freedom of expression.

    The judge agreed with Russell Township that the bylaw was necessary to protect the survival of the French language in the community, while at the same time promoting the equality of French and English.

    “The decision is excellent,” Russell Township Mayor Ken Hill said at the time, according to The Review. “It was clear from the outset. We live here together next to each other. This decision is now history in terms of respect for language rights in Canada.”

    But Kim McConnell, president of Canadians for Language Fairness, says the case “has very wide implications” for Canada.

    “If that law passes and it spreads—because that’s what Caza (municipality lawyer Ronald Caza) said is going to happen: ‘Once we get this passed we are going right across Ontario and do the same thing.’ That was his boast.”

    Opponents say allowing the bylaw would set a precedent that could affect future judgements should other language laws be challenged.

    “That’s what we hope the judges understand,” McConnell says, adding that the case needs to go all the way to the Supreme Court.

    “What we’re hoping is that at least one of [the judges] will say ‘Yes, this has wider implications and should go to the Supreme Court.’ That’s what we want.”

    The Ontario municipalities of Casselman, La Nation (formerly know as The Nation…), and Clarence-Rockland have adopted similar bylaws, while Moncton, N.B., has a bylaw considered to be equivalent to Quebec’s Bill 101 in that it requires signs to be in both English and French with the added stipulation that the French wording must be ahead of or above the English. ???

    After the 2010 ruling, Galganov wrote in an editorial on his website about the ramifications of losing the appeal.

    “This court challenge against a law that blatantly violates every person’s freedom of expression is no small deal. If we lose, it will mean that every bureaucrat in Canada, including pissant mayors in small towns, will have the right to suspend civil rights and liberties.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, you can see Galganov's response in his blog dated Feb 12th: http://www.galganov.com/editorials/2-12-2012/barack-obama/abraham-lincoln-would-weep/

      Delete
  16. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Always opt for the dubbed or subtitled movie, even if you understand English"
    Little oversight here. If they showed English movies with French subtitles (like they did in France), that would introduce English into the lives of francophones who prefer movies in their original version but aren't that good at English - something that should be forbidden! This, along with Quebec dubbing artists wanting money, is probably why they don't show French-subtitled Hollywood movies.

    With the booming video game industry in Montreal, I'm surprised that companies like Ubisoft aren't forced to publish/develop their games in French and then dub them into English for foreign markets (strictly OUTSIDE Quebec). Speaking of which, I heard from a Wal-Mart worker Saint-Bruno (a francophone town) that they sell more English copies of Pokémon games than French ones - oh the horror! We must impose laws that restrict the number of English copies of video games shipped to stores in relation to French copies!

    Anyway, excellent post. Like I said in response to a post a few months ago, this whole so-called "Poutineism" movement probably isn't for protecting the French language, but for seeing how much power the government can exert over Quebecers' free wills. It seems that the goal is to unite all Quebecers under a single, simplistic mindset, all while getting the faithful to stay in the province and pay the taxes to their beloved gouvernemaman - this is pretty much the current state, and the authorities seem to be trying to perpetuate it by constantly introducing new threats to the French language and Québécois culture.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "If they showed English movies with French subtitles (like they did in France)"

      Movies are usually dubbed in France. We even sometimes get versions dubbed in France but many are dubbed here.

      You might want to look at this map:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dubbing_films_in_Europe1.png

      Delete
    2. I meant that they have French-subtitled English movies in France as an option (even though dubbing seems to be more popular there). Here in Quebec we don't have that option in theatres, and I'm not sure whether non-subtitled English movies are meant to be the "equivalent" to that or not (whether English movies are mostly meant for the "historical Anglophone minority" or whether they're also for Francophones who prefer the original versions, like subtitled movies in France).

      Delete
    3. I think it would be a great idea for francophones to be able to see English movies with subtitles. It would help them learn the language while watching the movie, instead of having it dubbed. The reason why movies are dubbed is because "the intelligentia" of Quebec have wanted for a long time for fracophones to be unilingual. It's a good way for government to remain in control.

      Regardless of what people in francophone media say, alot of francophones want their children to learn English. There was a poll that was done by The Fédération des comités de parents du Québec, where 87% of the delegates approved of intensive English in the 6th grade.

      An English program in the Lac-Saint-Jean region was a huge success. From 2007-2010, students’ performance in French remained the same while success in English jumped to 94% from 65%.

      Do you hear this from the francophone media? NoOoOo They prefer to trot out people from the PQ and CAQ, who are against this.

      Stats come from an article in the National post:

      http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/02/13/graeme-hamilton-plan-for-english-immersion-hits-bumps-in-quebec/

      Delete
    4. "where 87% of the delegates approved of intensive English in the 6th grade."

      Si c'était vrai,vous ne croyez pas que Charest aurait mis de l'avant cette idée lors de sa dernière campagne électorale?Pourquoi ce n'était pas au programme selon vous?

      Delete
    5. Ce n'est pas vraiment a moi de dire pourquoi Charest fait ce qu'il fait. Il est comme Marois ou Legault. Il ne pense pas de la bien-etre de la population. Il veut juste gagner des elections (ou erections comme Harper dit)

      Je pense c'est depuis longtemps qu'il veut ce programme pour que les francophones pourraient apprendre mieux l'anglais parce que je pense que ca fait longtemps qui les etudiants anglophone apprendre bien le francais. Sinon, je ne serais pas contre le fait que l'apprentisage de francais serait ameliorer.

      Delete
    6. "There was a poll that was done by The Fédération des comités de parents du Québec, where 87% of the delegates approved of intensive English in the 6th grade. "

      Thank you. When this story broke two weeks ago, I noted how the media asked everyone (the so-called "experts" - teachers, social workers, politicians, artists, even Mario B. was on the airwaves pitching in his two cents), but noone bothered to ask the parents.
      When someone finally did, the results were not so surprising.

      Delete
    7. Very true, adski. I think the francophone media cares more about bringing you THEIR message, facts be damned. So, they will exaggerate how many people protest against the Canadiens coach for being unilingual (150 anti-anglos max vs 500 in some reports), they will always say that Quebec gets the short end of the stick, not acknowledging that Quebec gets 8 billion dollars from the rest of Canada and bring in Lisee to do some kind of economic gymnastics to show we're shortchanged, and they will bring out some "expert" such as Matthieu Bock Cote or whatever the hell his name is and Mario Beaulieu to tell you that the English are taking over Quebec and that francophones should be insecure.

      Let's get real! These "experts" are just people that the press throws a few dollars to, in order to confirm the message that they want to present to the viewing audience.

      Meanwhile, the silent majority of francophones approve of their children learning English and even approve of the recent presentation of different religions in class (74% in a La Presse online poll).

      But that type of information is typically buried. We only hear about the nutcases.

      Delete
    8. Note that Quebec sends more than 40 billions yearly to Ottawa. Some might say they're being bribed with their own money.

      Delete
  18. Jean-François Lisée is now a member of the Comité sur la souveraineté that was called up by Marois yesterday.

    I can bet all my money that under his guidance the committee will rule that an independent Quebec will be a monument of prosperity, social cohesion, and happiness.

    http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebec/343116/marois-cree-un-comite-sur-la-souverainete-en-vue-d-un-referendum

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Comité sur la souveraineté = political suicide?

      Delete
    2. There is one thing I want to comment on that Sovereignty Committee. In their press release, they say that it will contain politicians, artists, intellectuals, among others. The names mentioned are workers unionist, author, actor, etc.

      Question is, where are the people who actually work for a living? Business people, professionals, even salarymen, farmers and fishermen? Basically those who will face firsthand the economic benefits or drawbacks of independence.

      Delete
    3. They only have people who on the committee who benefit from separation like artists, who will have more carnage to paint and politicians who will be able to embezzle money from the population. Quebec sait faire!

      Marois just doesn't have a clue! She could be talking about corruption or the economy but like other separatists, she doesn't care about the population of Quebec.

      Who cares about the roads? The mafia being involved with construction? Health care with waiting list of months or even a year? Who cares that companies are moving out of Quebec even with subsidies offerred (such as Mabe)?

      She is more concerned with looking down at her fat navel. Did you know she is also creating a commission to discover why former PQ voters are supporting the CAQ? Yes, that's a burning question in Quebec for the population. (Hint: maybe it's because, whether you believe it or not, Francois Legault said he would put the sovereignty option on ice for 10 years. That's why he says he created his party, duh No need for a commission)

      Pauline Marois, keep talking about sovereignty. Jean Charest must be laughing at you. You're digging your own grave.

      Delete
  19. To make the facts accurate, the question was whether the children were Catholic or not. I too fell into this inability to attend French school because all the French schools were within the Catholic school boards. They also had English schools, but the Protestant schools were all English; thus, ergo and therefore, non-Catholics could not attend French schools. The only way around that was private schools, but how many French non-Catholic private schools existed in those days.

    Decades ago, I worked with a Hugonot, i.e., a French Protestant. Despite French being her mother tongue, she had to attend English schools, a phenomenon impossible to fathom today! Similarly, I had a number of French speaking Jewish classmates who too were forced into the English school system as the "Protestant" system really meant «tous les autres», i.e., simply anyone and everyone who wasn't Catholic. Unbelievable in today's Quebec, but true!

    One more interesting corollery to add here was when I was in kindergarten, at the beginning of every day we had to pledge allegianace to the Union Jack and sing the English national anthem. Come to think of it, this Jewish contributor had to sing some hymn that used to start with "Jesus loves me this I know for the bible tells me so." Of course, once I was old enough to realize what I was parroting those recitations (i.e., the Pledge of Allegiance and the hymns), I renounced it all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. THE ABOVE WAS INTENDED AS A REPLY TO PLOWING THROUGH LIFE'S THREAD ABOVE PUBLISHED EARLIER AT 5:32AM. I SIMPLY FORGOT TO PUT IT UNDER HER THREAD. MY BAD!!

      Delete
    2. It's hard to imagine that Ô Canada has only been our national anthem since the 80's, and that while it was used prior to its legitimization, there were many britophile Canadians who refused to recognise it and insisted on the "God save the Queen" instead.

      I'm reminded of this iconic scene during the 70's, at a meeting of (United Empire) Loyalists in Moncton N-B. They start with God Save the Queen, to which all the anglophones stand. Then they sit down, and the francophones get up to sing Ô Canada. A few anglophones get up, realise they're the only ones, and sit back down.

      Unbelieveable in today's Canada! The old generation of britophiles has been replaced by multiculturalist like the shedding of old skin.

      Delete
  20. Take your government to court you have no other option but to charge them with mal practice

    ReplyDelete
  21. @Mr Sauga,

    Ontario and most of Canada in general would be able to save itself if the Canadian dollar collapse to under 70 cents to the US dollar. It seems far fetched at the moment, but the Canadian dollar is a roller coaster currency. From about 50 cents US it went to over 1.10 US and then dipped towards 70 cents and back up to what it is now. Canada is poised for a US style real estate correction and the high defecits might be enough to cause the slide in the Canadian dollar. IF that happens, manufacturing will be stimulated and chinese manufactured goods will start being expensive. In combination with higher oil prices, which cause the cost of canadian manufactured goods to be more competitive. It would really help Ontarios' economy. Tourism would also benefit with the influx of US tourists.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those are a lot of "ifs"! I don't see this happening too soon; besides, we are more of a resource-based country. Ontario, like the USA, is more of an industrial-based jurisdiction and so that will all depend on Ontario's ability and propensity to manufacture under the circumstances of high commodity prices, esp. oil. Sadly, too much of our dollar's current strength is steeped in the oil patch. Riciculous, considering Canada has all kinds of currently valuable commodities besides oil.

      We will inevitably see a housing collapse once interest rates start to rise, and they have no place to go but up. Once people have to start renewing their mortgages at 5, 6 and 7% will we start to see in increase in defaults, and this is nothing compared to what happened in 1981-82 when mortgage rates were about 20%. Lots of people walked away from their houses.

      Delete
  22. The ridiculous argument by that zealot who was quoted (about "people without any pride who embrace American music and movies and thus could not care less of their origin") makes me feel immensely sad for Quebec because it betrays so much insecurity. Pretty much the whole world embraces American music and movies and yet they are perfectly able to retain pride in their own various cultures and care very much about their origins... except in Quebec, apparently.

    I’m from here but have lived in many countries around the world and I have never witnessed the level of insularity that can be found here. I remember throwing a party once and being shocked at how franco friends the same age as me didn’t recognize the same internationally-known pop music I grew up with in the 80s and 90s, whereas a friend who grew up in Peru (and is very proud of his culture and cares about his origins) knew all the music and loved it all. With many francos here, it seems to be all about Quebec, France, France, Quebec, Quebec, France... maybe a little Belgium and Suisse romande thrown in now and then for good measure, but sadly limited to that...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I remember throwing a party once and being shocked at how franco friends the same age as me didn’t recognize the same internationally-known pop music I grew up with in the 80s and 90s"

      Make yourself useful and educate your franco friends. Tell them how many "internationaly-known pop music" songs they need to know (at least as much as peruvians I presume).

      And what if the music was crap?

      Delete
    2. Yes, clearly english music is the only good kind of music. If your friends are delusional enough to prefer non-english music, it's your solemn duty to save them from the cultural wasteland that is living outside of American culture.

      Delete
    3. There are two different things here, the quality or the popularity of the music. Let me give you an example.

      Simple Plan, a Montreal band, has two versions of their song "Jet Lag". First version is English featuring British singer Natasha Bedingfield. Second version is bilingual featuring Marie-Mai. I myself like the bilingual version multiple times than the English version, mainly because of Marie-Mai, compared to Bedingfield.

      The reality is, in the global entertainment world, Marie-Mai has just a fraction of the name recognition and popularity Natasha Bedingfield does.

      Maybe moral of the story is, Marie-Mai will not reach her full potential and super stardom until she starts singing English songs. Just ask Celine Dion.

      Delete
    4. Troy - I agree. Artists have to make a decision whether they want to sing in their own language or in english. Even amongst english speakers, they have to decide whether they want to perform locally, or perform in the United States. The sad fact is that it pays more to sing, act, perform, etc.. in the USA than in Canada. As such, we are woefully underequipped in English Canadian bands.

      It's one of the things that I like about having Quebec in Canada - the different language actually creates a niche market that allows local music/cinema to prosper in a way that local Anglo-Canadian bands/cinema can't. I'm sure artists face a similar dilemma in Europe, but at least over there the problem of one market dominating all others is lessened.

      Don't get me wrong - I like American cultural exports. But it's also very limited. I love our own canadian achievements (I've started watching one of our very own shows - Bomb girls, it's quite enjoyable), and that includes Quebec movies and shows.

      I took offense, because the idea that someone who likes non-american things somehow needs to be "educated". In many ways our canadian (will the Quebeckers take offense for me calling it Canadian?) cultural products are, as you pointed out yourself, sometimes of higher quality than the american exports, even if the american exports can take advantage of the gigantic size of it's relative market size. There are worse things in this world than not listening to Katie Perry.

      Delete
    5. "There are worse things in this world than not listening to Katie Perry."

      Ou Lady caca :D

      Delete
  23. the government of Quebec behaves as if the "mentally challenged" immigrants are oblivious of the fact that it's a discriminatory government.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "the government of Quebec behaves as..."

    Et les immigrants se comportent comme si ils ne savaient pas qu'ils arrivent dans une province francophone.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yeah, a "PROVINCE"... Congratulation seppie, you have made some great improvement in your perspective on the province. You now realize it's not a country

      BTW, Montreal is a different world compared to the rest of Quebec, so they should be entitled to choose whichever language they want...besides, why do you even bother with immigrants not learning french? You don't even accept them with your scornful attitude!

      Delete
    2. Les immigrants dont tu parles ne choississent pas de déménager à Chibougamau ou à Sept-Îles, ils choississent de venir à Montréal parce que c'est une grande métropole internationale qui n'est pas aussi bornée qu'ailleurs. De plus, les québécois anglophones ne sont ni des visiteurs ni des touristes mais font partie intégrale de la société québecoise depuis plusieurs siècles; ils ont d'ailleurs grandement contribués à l'épanouissement du Québec.

      Delete
    3. on dit pas Québec...on dit PROVINCE du Québec, car c'est encore dans le Canada et ça va le rester.

      Il y a pas de québécois franco ou anglo, juste des CANADIENS anglo ou franco.

      Delete
    4. Ah ouais? Mais je suis un québécois anglophone, merci.

      Delete
    5. "Il y a pas de québécois franco ou anglo, juste des CANADIENS anglo ou franco."

      Allez vivre à calgary qques mois en français et revenez nous voir ensuite pour nous dire comment se porte votre "franco canadien".

      Delete
    6. C'est étrange cette insistance qu'ont certains à ce que les Québecois ne s'identifient pas comme québecois. Dans d'autres pays, c'est accepté de se proclamer Basque, Écossais, Breton, Texan, Afrikaner et je sais quel autre identitée régionale, même si l'on est pas nécessairement souverainiste.

      Mais au Canada, si on s'identifie comme Québecois ou Acadien, il y en a qui nous accusent pratiquement de sédition. On doit être exactement comme vous ou rien du tout? Tellement inclusif...

      Delete
    7. Seppie ,the only way that I can make sense of your reply is to equivocate racist with francophone.

      so basically I don't know how it follows ,from the fact that the province is francophone, that immigrants arriving to Quebec should expect discrimination.

      Delete
  25. "ils ont d'ailleurs grandement contribués à l'épanouissement du Québec."

    Ils en ont largement profité aussi.de plus,si on les traite comme des étrangers,c'est probablement parce qu'ils se comportent de la sorte.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pas du tout... pendant que les francophones étaient préoccupés avec les séminaires et les couvents, c'est les anglophones qui ont fait croître le Québec. C'est tellement triste que tu choississes de les traiter comme des étrangers...

      Delete
    2. En plus, ça veut dire quoi ça, qu'ils "en ont largement profité"? Tu veux dire comme toi, qui continue d'en profiter aujourd'hui? Mon dieu, que tu fais honte au Québec!

      Delete
    3. "En plus, ça veut dire quoi ça, qu'ils "en ont largement profité"?"

      Une main d'oeuvre de nègres blanc bon marché,entre autres...

      Delete
    4. and if it was no of those anglo business men, you would have probably starved to death since your own elite held you captive under poverty line, thus not allowing you to start business of your own.

      Delete
    5. Imagine going through life with such a chip on your shoulder... sucks to be you.

      Delete
    6. and then making a reference to a dead FLQ terrorist's misguided nonsense from 1968 to support your opinion... priceless! hahahahahahahahahahahahaaaahhhhaahhhhhahhhhahahahahahhhhhaaaaaaa ooh stop it, it hurts!!

      Delete
    7. Seppie, you forgot to sign!

      Delete
  26. Justin, membre honoraire du PQTuesday, February 21, 2012 at 9:17:00 AM EST

    "I’m from here but have lived in many countries around the world and I have never witnessed the level of insularity that can be found here."

    Une autre de nos spécificités qui fait de nous une Nation tout à fait originale.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Atta boy! Do you realize that you are proud of a flaw? What's next? October 5th as a national holiday? I sometimes wonder if you're actually an anglo supporter... your arguments and comebacks are so asinine, that I am thinking you are seriously trying to depreciate the sovereign concept. If so, you are definitely succeeding. Good job! Less work for the rest of us.

      Delete
  27. For all the editor's preachy lecturing about how anglophones in Quebec have extra rights that francophones don't have, he fails to mention that the same is true of francophones outside Quebec : anglophones in the ROC are not allowed to send their children to french schools. That priviledge is guaranteed by the constitution only to people who have studied in the minority language of their province, or have it as a mother tounge.

    The reason why so many Canadians are unaware of this is that it hardly ever is a problem - anglophones clearly don't even try, or muse about sending their children to french school because otherwise it would be known. About the only time it was an issue is when the government of New Brunswick tried to get rid of early french immersion. Many disgruntled parents tried signing up their children in french school only to learn that they weren't allowed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're worng. Read Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Consitiution Act 1982). Francophone immigrants are permitted to send their kids to French school outside Quebec (ie Alberta) Ref: Affirming Francophone Education (Alberta 2001, page 15).

      Delete
    2. I didn't say they weren't. I said Anglophones did not have the right to send their kids to French schools outside Quebec.

      As to that - francophone is a bit vague here. Section 23 stipulates that someone who has received education in the minority language in Canada, or has French as a mother toungue, will be able to receive instruction in the minority language. Being able to speak the language is insufficient.

      An allophone immigrating to Toronto has no more right to public education in french than an allophone immigrating to Montreal. The only difference is for immigrants whose mother tongue is english immigrating to Quebec - such immigrants would be comming from the UK or the US - but that's not the jist of the article, and it's not who Canadians have in mind when they comment on Bill 101 legislating education.

      You should read more slowly, friend.

      Delete
    3. I was overly specific - that should read "or has the minority language as a mother tongue", in the case of anglophones in Quebec. It's this last bit, and this last bit only, that differentiates Quebec from the rest of Canada.

      But like I said, since it only affects immigrants who's first language learned and still understood is english, that realistically only means Americans and British people - not exactly the bulk of the immigration in Quebec.

      Delete
    4. "An allophone immigrating to Toronto has no more right to public education in french than an allophone immigrating to Montreal."

      Which allophone in Toronto wants to send his kids to a French school? In Montreal, on the other hand, many allophones would want to send their kids to an English school.

      So even though the laws regulating these things are similar between RoC and QC, in the case of RoC the law has almost no coercive feel to it (allophones are not forced to do what they don't want to do, because they want to do, or don't mind doing what the law dictates), whereas in QC the law does have a coercive feel (allophones are forced to do what they otherwise wouldn't do, i.e. the law stands in their way).

      That's the difference between a law that adapts to the people vs. a law that expects people to adapt to the law.

      Delete
    5. You seem to be arguing that it's ok, because when that happens the shoe is on the other foot. I'm very aware of what you wrote about ; it's why something like bill 101 was necessary in the first place.

      If you are to accept that the citizens of Quebec have a certain measure of self-determination, being a democracy, they should have the right to decide on which term immigrants should live on their territory. One of those terms is that they learn the language of the area. It's not an unusual requirement. Sovereign states (such as the Netherlands) require that one learn the language before they can obtain citizenship. Of course, in an officially billingual country such as Canada, Quebec is under no position to do that. About the only thing they can do is make sure immigrants' kids get educated in the local language.

      You could argue that, as part of Canada, the rest of us could just force them to do whatever. I think that would be very opressive.

      You might say, well it's oppressive to force people to learn french. But that's just the deal - no one is forcing these immigrants to move to Quebec. They move there because they choose to. If they were moving to the US, they would accept sending their children to english school. If they were moving to France, Spain, or Germany, they woudn't get to decide to go to a public school in the language of wherever they came from, or to go to public school in english. They would have to go to school in German, or French, or Italian, or a bit of all if in Luxemburg, etc.. If they wanted different, they would have to go to private school. Just like the allophones of Quebec.

      But for some reason people in this country have this idea that Quebec is duty-bound to provide education to immigrants in a language other than the one locally spoken.

      Unfortunately, it's not a right, it's not protected by the constitution. If you would want to change it so that it was, you would need to ammend the constitution with another big-tent attempt like the meech lake.

      But people who have a beef against bill 101 ignore the fact that even without bill 101, the immigrants woudn't have the right to education in english. Even if section 23 of the Canadian bill of rights and freedoms was applied religiously, immigrants would *still* not get to go to english school. Unless english was their first language learned and still understood. It would be interesting to know how many of the allophones would qualify, but I don't imagine there are many british immigrating to Quebec since the 70's.

      Delete
    6. @Anon 2:04AM

      I actually will not argue here what Quebec has a right to impose or not. In a sense, what matters is not a right, but power to do so. Quebec has these powers (Canada is timid and spineless, and international community unaware as Canada shields Quebec from international scrutiny), and until francophones are the majority in Quebec, Quebec will continue to have language laws. I know that you would like an icing on the cake in a form of a wide acceptance of these laws by non-francophones, but you won't get it. So be content with the cake itself - the laws are firmly in place, and allophones, though with gritted teeth, live with it.

      A more interesting question is why. Why does Quebec need to give allophones that extra coercive push to even notice the so-called majority? Why is the majority so unattractive, so obscure, so insignificant that Harel once proposed forced resettlements in order to bring the unwilling immigrants closer to the majority? Why don't the Swedish government, or the Dutch government, or the Norwegian government need to do that, even though English could practically be an operational language in those countries? What makes Swedish, Norwegian, or Dutch more attractive than Quebec French?

      When you answer these important questions, you'll realize that many allophones have a point.

      Delete
    7. Why do immigrants to Rotterdam have no qualms about accepting Dutch as the language of the majority and conforming to it? Why do immigrants to Oslo have no qualms about Norwegian? Why is the process so smooth over there, while in Montreal you need laws to point out what should be obvious, and despite all that so many allophones are still defensive stubborn, and defiant?

      Delete
    8. What the hell, I'll give you a hint: it's not so much about the actual language as about the people who speak it.

      Delete
    9. "Why do immigrants to Rotterdam have no qualms about accepting Dutch as the language of the majority and conforming to it? Why do immigrants to Oslo have no qualms about Norwegian?"

      you have started your comment with a fallacious analogy,there is no immigration program to Oslo,it's a city not a province;Quebec is a province,it's not a country yet.

      also,why dismissing your principle when reaching Quebec;why don't you ask the francophone to conform with the language of the majority of Canada.

      the claim that the government of Quebec is merely interested in defending the French language is as disingenuous as the the claim of the Pharisees that they are defending the Sabbath.Luke 13:10-17

      How many rides there are in Montreal ,compare that to the population and tell me why is Montreal under represented in the National assemble?

      don't compare Quebec to Germany,or Norway;the government in Germany is the defender of equality for all it's citizens ,unlike the government of Quebec,the sponsor of discrimination.

      Delete
    10. According to one of my dutch friends, immigrants to Rotterdam certain don't take to Dutch willingly. I can't comment on Norway.

      When I was bringing up other countries, I was speaking of the schools. In those countries the idea of going to public school in an entirely different language than the national language is simply unfeasable, yet no one takes the streets. I woudn't extrapolate from that that immigrants gleefully join Slovak culture if they move to Bratislava. Actually I would imagine they do it just as reluctantly as immigrants take to french in North America.

      I believe it is very much about the language - it's just so much easier to learn english and send your hosts to hell than it is to pay them the common courtesy of learning their language.

      "What makes Swedish, Norwegian, or Dutch more attractive than Quebec French?" - the lack of an alternative if you move to Sweden, Norway, or the Netherlands. Not any more attractive - just the reality that your kids will have to go to Swedish, Norwegian or Dutch school. In Montreal, a billingual city in a billingual Canada, you get the illusion that you have a choice, and that someone is keeping it away from you, and that makes people feel wronged when they're not being treated any worse than anywhere else.

      Unless you want to go ahead and show me wrong. You can find me a country that lets a majority of immigrants send their kids to school in which instruction is entirely in another langauge than the one locally spoken (except for language classes of course).

      Delete
    11. I'm not sure I'm replying to one or more Anons, but for the record I'm the 6:53, 7:04, and 7:12 Anon.

      Reply to Anon 8:27AM

      "you have started your comment with a fallacious analogy,there is no immigration program to Oslo,it's a city not a province;Quebec is a province,it's not a country yet."

      I never stated that about Oslo, and I agree that since Quebec reaps the benefits of being in the federation, it should be more willing to accommodate with others, including its own minorities.

      "don't compare Quebec to Germany,or Norway;the government in Germany is the defender of equality for all it's citizens ,unlike the government of Quebec,the sponsor of discrimination."

      I think that Quebec is autonomous enough to warrant some of these comparisons. Note that in most comparisons Quebec looks rather bleak.


      "also,why dismissing your principle when reaching Quebec;why don't you ask the francophone to conform with the language of the majority of Canada."

      As I said above, Quebec should be more accommodating on this front, since it does agree to be part of the federation for financial and economic benefits, it should appreciate it and stop acting like it's doing others a favor of graciously staying with the rest of the country.


      "the claim that the government of Quebec is merely interested in defending the French language is as disingenuous as the the claim of the Pharisees that they are defending the Sabbath.Luke 13:10-17"

      I never made such a claim. I think it's more complex than that, and some other major factors hide behind bill 101.


      "How many rides there are in Montreal ,compare that to the population and tell me why is Montreal under represented in the National assemble?"

      Again, it has nothing to do with what I said. I think Montreal should have much more representation than it does. It's a shame that it doesn't.

      Delete
    12. Reply to Anon 8:29AM:

      "When I was bringing up other countries, I was speaking of the schools. In those countries the idea of going to public school in an entirely different language than the national language is simply unfeasable, yet no one takes the streets."

      I don't care about the necessity to go French public schools. As I said, Quebec has the power to impose it, so it's irrelevant if it has a right to do it. What's relevant is how unusual it is that it has to resort to these measures, and what it says about the majority which without that coercion would be ignored for the most part.

      "I woudn't extrapolate from that that immigrants gleefully join Slovak culture if they move to Bratislava. Actually I would imagine they do it just as reluctantly as immigrants take to french in North America."

      I know nothing of immigrants to Bratislava. I don't think there is that much immigration to Slovakia, on the contrary, many Slovaks emigrated to the UK since Slovakia joined the EU in 2004.

      "What makes Swedish, Norwegian, or Dutch more attractive than Quebec French? - the lack of an alternative if you move to Sweden, Norway, or the Netherlands. Not any more attractive - just the reality that your kids will have to go to Swedish, Norwegian or Dutch school."

      Stockholm is a city in which you can live in English. I read an article on this. Yet many expats still take up Swedish willingly. Why? Because Swedish is a cool language, and Swedes are cool and open minded people. So speakers of the language have a lot to do with other people's attitude to it.

      "In Montreal, a billingual city in a billingual Canada, you get the illusion that you have a choice, and that someone is keeping it away from you, and that makes people feel wronged when they're not being treated any worse than anywhere else."

      Note your own words: Montreal is a bilingual city. How can you then say that the choice is an illusion, if you admit that that alternative is real? You're contradicting yourself.


      "You can find me a country that lets a majority of immigrants send their kids to school in which instruction is entirely in another langauge than the one locally spoken (except for language classes of course)."

      I said above that Quebec is autonomous enough to warrant some comparisons with other national governments. However, it is also true that Quebec chooses to remain within another country, and that brings a certain dilution to the matter. So you are not 100% justified in saying: in Germany it's this and this, so in QC it must be so too. Quebec, by agreeing to stay within Canada for 8 billion $ a year, condemns itself to facing immigrants who in their heads will think that they came to an 80% English speaking country, not an 80% French speaking province. This dilution of certainty is the price you pay for the 8 billion bucks a year plus economic benefits.

      You have to consider this fact too when trying to understand allophones, besides the fact that English is an easier language to learn.

      Delete
    13. The indisputable fact the the law 101 is discriminatory.
      Two citizens paying the same taxes,one of them end up with less rights than the other one.

      "I believe it is very much about the language - it's just so much easier to learn english and send your hosts to hell than it is to pay them the common courtesy of learning their language."
      1.I don't know from where you get the idea that it's much easier to learn English,than French.
      2.I think that your are stuck in a False Dilemma that the immigrant has to choose English,or French;you can avoid this Dilemma by introducing another option which is:
      "Both" English and French.
      3.I believe it is very much about the language;I disagree,language is a tool,and just to use it as a goal is already suspicious.
      4.I am not sure how a bilingual immigrant will send Quebec or Canada to Hell.

      " In Montreal, a billingual city in a billingual Canada, you get the illusion that you have a choice, and that someone is keeping it away from you, and that makes people feel wronged when they're not being treated any worse than anywhere else."
      you must be kidding,I've been treated worse than the Anglophone setting 10 feet away,and worse than my other colleague who immigrated originally to Canada,not Quebec while both of them have a choice,I don't.

      "Unless you want to go ahead and show me wrong. You can find me a country that lets a majority of immigrants send their kids to school in which instruction is entirely in another langauge than the one locally spoken (except for language classes of course)."
      this is a contorted argument,if locally actually means locally then,it's very easy to find any immigration center in UK or Lebanon (Armenians) and you will find that the language in the public school, in the area, is different than the locally spoken language(s).
      I think that what you meant by Local is National and this is problematic because English is also an official language in Quebec.

      anyway, you still didn't answer why are the population of Montreal under represented in the National assembly?

      Delete
    14. Isn't it a common thing that the faster growing areas are the ones in which representation lag? You would think that with 10 years of being in power, the PLQ would have added itself more seats if it was a true injustice. But I'm not aware of the details.

      I don't quite mean National languages, but I realise that not many non-nations are in the position to decide what to do with their schoolign. For instance, I expected in today's day and age that schooling in Welsh might be more tolerated than it was before. On the other hand, since they don't have nearly the same degree of control over their own affairs as afforded by states or provinces, I can't imagine that the majority of the schooling in Wales is Welsh. I also don't imagine they force immigrants in welsh schools.

      If you want to argue about teaching both french and english to Quebeckers in general, you're preaching to the choir. Isn't that the idea, that by going to french schools they will at least learn french and probably learn english too, while immigrants going to anglophone schools will only pick up english? Back when bill 101 was first instated, anglophone schools were terrible at teaching french. Today they are quite good at it, but people may still be reticent.

      And are you arguing that english is harder to learn than french? I thought english was much easier myself - no genders, no real need to conjugate verbs, many words are of latin extraction so if you're from a romance language you recognise many of them, etc.. Perhaps it's harder for someone from another language group entirely?

      Delete
    15. @Anon 9:38 AM :

      You can probably survive in every major city of this world in english; that doesen't mean the locals owe your kids education in english, and it doesen't mean that the considerate thing to do if you become a permanent resident is to learn the local language. That's all I'm trying to say.

      You are entirely correct that Quebec not being it's own country (and a majority of the province does not want to seperate) means that they are not entirely free to do what they want, and they don't count the same as Germany. But I'm glad you agree that provinces have the right to some measure of self-determination.

      And yes, Montreal is a billingual city. It's an asset. It won't remain billingual, however, if only english is taught to it's new residents, no? Living in conditions where people can be functionally billingual and learn two languages is a priviledge that is not enjoyed by many on this continent, except for those living at the US/Mexico border.

      Delete
    16. @Anon 01:22 PM,
      I will assume that you have conceded that the law is discriminatory,but seems that this is normal in Quebec.

      I leave the last word to you.

      Delete
    17. I can't talk about every single point raised up. I'm not sure if it's discriminatory or not. Is the extra right francophones in the ROC have to french education discriminatory against englishmen too?

      Delete
    18. @anon 1:31pm

      “You can probably survive in every major city of this world in english; that doesen't mean the locals owe your kids education in english, and it doesen't mean that the considerate thing to do if you become a permanent resident is to learn the local language. That's all I'm trying to say.”

      The locals do NOT owe immigrants anything, but they should neither have the privilege to impose anything on immigrants, which is the point here. If I was an immigrant, I would ideally want the locals out of my way so I can live my life in peace. No help from them and no orders from them is better than some help followed by orders (known as “suggestions” or “guidelines”).

      Is it a considerate thing to learn the local language? Yes. The locals are within their rights to expect the immigrants to learn French, but the point is that they have no right to demand that immigrants live in French. Period.


      “And yes, Montreal is a billingual city. It's an asset. It won't remain billingual, however, if only english is taught to it's new residents, no? Living in conditions where people can be functionally billingual and learn two languages is a priviledge that is not enjoyed by many on this continent, except for those living at the US/Mexico border.”

      Bilingualism occurring spontaneously is good. Bilingualism by way of central planning (the OLA) is not. Unlingualism occurring spontaneously is also good. Unilingualism by way of central planning (bill 101) is not.

      Second, who says that Montreal should be bilingual? What if one day all Montrealers decided they want to speak English and only English to each other? What if they decided to speak only French (and here I mean decided, not had the government impose it). I’m guessing that you would oppose the all English decision but favor the all French decision. I would favor either of the two, as long as it were the free will of the people.

      Third, what do you mean by “taught”? You seem to imply that Quebec teaches immigrants English, when it does no such thing. Quebec does not owe immigrants ESL lessons, I agree with you there, but the point is that it should also stay out of their way and not pressure/bully them in any way (not even in a mild way) if they proceeded to learn English outside governmental programs. Which is what some Quebeckers are doing, i.e. condemn those immigrants who pursue English instruction on their own.

      Delete
    19. Very eloquently put... and as ever, as soon as you rip their argument to shreds, the resident trolls are nowhere to be seen. Hello Seppie? Are you alright?

      Delete
    20. The Quebec Partition :
      1. I can't speak of others, but I don't live on this blog. I answer when I can, and when I am following it at all.

      2. If you really see people who think differently as "trolls", you are doing yourself an incredible disservice. One cannot grow and gain a better understanding of things by not considering opposing viewpoints. It's why I am on this blog, personally, even if I will disagree with what is said, I at least read it and understand it from the mouth of their own advocates.

      Delete
    21. @Anon 6:53
      -I don't expect immigrants to live in French. I don't care. All I see is that the locals (Quebeckers) aren't assholes for insisting immigrants learn french, and the best way to do that is to have them go to the french public schools. Americans aren't assholes for getting immigrants to go to english public schools, are they? Or Spaniards for having immigrants going to spanish public schools?
      For the members of the minority language, there are english public schools available. The same is true of francophone inhabitants in the rest of Canada. Why do you not think this is a good compromise? If things were like in Switzerland or Belgium, anglophones in Quebec would be forced in french school and Acadians in the Maritimes would be forced in english schools, and I think all of us would suffer more from it.

      I disagree with many other provisions of Bill 101. That's neither here nor there - I was discussing schools, and how many think the rights anglophones have in Quebec regarding schools are different from the rights of other Canadians. While it is true of immigrants with english as a *mother language*, that is usually not what is expressed by people complaining about schools in Quebec. If you're going to argue something, at least argue it correctly.

      Note that I would be in favor of immigrants with english *as a mother language* to have access to education in english in Quebec, but that still leaves most immigrants in the dark, and I doubt that would satisfy the malcontents here.

      If you want to argue that Quebeckers are trying to force immigrants to live in french at home: I don't think they should, and I don't know what Quebeckers feel, one way or another. But it would not change my opinion on whether or not immigrants should attend french public schools.

      Delete
  28. Justin, membre honoraire du PQTuesday, February 21, 2012 at 10:32:00 AM EST

    Merci de nous avoir rappelé ce petit détail Anon 7:27

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quebec doesen't get away scott free- while the mother tongue is sufficient throughout all of Canada, Quebec only considers it for people born in Canada. If you move in from the UK, you have to send your kids to french school.

      Though I guess that's not any different than if said brit had moved to Mexico, France, Spain or Germany. But it certainly is a priviledge that francophone immigrants get if they move to Toronto that their quebec anglophone counterparts do not enjoy.

      Delete
    2. Who cares. All this debate is moot. French is a dead language and will disappear, so will the irrelevant backwater province of Quebec, once it is taken over by Ontario and renamed "New Ontario" (to go with New Brunswick and New Foundland).

      Delete
    3. In other words, Quebeckers are right to feel threathened and hang on for dear life?

      Delete
    4. No, just separatists. And by the way you write, you show that you feel threatened.

      Delete
    5. Who cares. All this debate about being moot is moot. The human race is a doomed species and will disappear, so will the irrelevant backwater plant of Earth, once it is taken over by volcanoes, earthquakes, and another world war started by Iran. :)

      Delete
  29. Cobra La?On dirait le nom d'une épicerie thaï douteuse qui vend de la viande de chien en conserve dans un sous-sol crasseux du quartier Chinois.Je me trompe?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. wow, by making such declaration above, it gets me wondering your thoughts and assumptions on minorities. Let's just say it kindda sounds a bit ignorant and racist and it actually shows how much you lack in respect.

      Delete
    2. Que voulez-vous?J'adore les chiens mais pas en sandwich.

      Delete
  30. Frankly, I don't mind if Francophones remain ignorant and clueless when it comes to learning English. Personally, I've moved up in my company (national) career wise because I can speak English well and did my education in English here in Quebec while virtually all the Francophones I started with 12 years ago remain exactly where they started, at a much lower pay scale. Less competition means more opportunities for those with marketable skills. If you want to get ahead, you need to know how to speak with the rest of the world.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "I've moved up in my company (national)"

    Vous êtes dans l'industrie du Donut?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, the guys that can't speak English stay back in the kitchen with the refugees and make the doughnuts.

      Delete
    2. Et celui qui baragouine du globish les vend au comptoir et est payé 1$ de plus de l'heure?

      Delete
  32. Pourquoi y'a juste des allos qui écrivent sur ce blogue?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Elvis Gratton , yeah I would be really proud of my culture !

    ReplyDelete
  34. "You might say, well it's oppressive to force people to learn french. But that's just the deal - no one is forcing these immigrants to move to Quebec."

    BANG!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They are moving to Canada. Quebec just happens to be a part of it. English is one of the languages spoken in Canada.

      BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Delete
  35. "yeah I would be really proud of my culture !"

    Oui nous en sommes fier parce que c'est la nôtre pas celle du voisin amarrricain.

    Et comme l'a écrit mon ami Seppie plus haut...BANG!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I still have to see an example of Quebec culture that doesn't look like something from Alabama translated by Google.

      BANG!!!

      Delete
  36. Below is a link to a story about french schools in Quebec.GDQ "let's destroy them when they are young and vulnerable",enjoy!

    http://lifeinmotion.wordpress.com/2008/09/02/a-story-about-racial-discrimination-in-quebec/

    ReplyDelete
  37. Quebec has turned into the Belgium of North America. I wish I could take credit for this but it was told to me by a work colleague of mine, a French national!

    ReplyDelete