A couple of weeks ago the Minister of Education made a deal with a couple of Hasidic schools whereby they could stay open on the weekend to allow enough time to teach religion as well as the full course load as provided by the Ministry. To accommodate this, she was forced to change the law that banned school from teaching on the weekend. Instead of designating the days on which school must be taught, she changed the formula to that of a prescribed amount of hours and left the schedule to the discretion of the schools.
It seemed like a good idea at the time and the only ones affected were those schools who wanted to benefit from increased instruction time. The Minister unfortunately explained her decision as a step to battle the drop-out rate, when in reality, it was just a cover story used to hide the accommodation she made for these nine Hassidic schools.
When the opposition found out about it, all Hell broke lose, although I still can't understand what it is exactly those opposed are complaining about.
The change to the law affects nobody except those schools and school boards who want to benefit from the new flexibility. Those who aren't interested need not make any changes at all.
The provincial teachers union quickly gathered a 25,000 name petition against the idea and has complained that the whole provincial structure is being changed to accommodate just nine schools, although they don't explain how and what the effect is.
Pauline Marois of the PQ, added fuel to the fire by making the outrageously false statement in Parliament that the law would render Christmas and Easter as ordinary as any other day of the year, a statement designed to raise the hackles of Quebec Francophone Christians (most of whom ironically don't practice their faith.)
Either she is extremely stupid and uninformed or she intentionally is attempting to make political hay by hitching her star to the intolerance movement. You'd think she'd know that Christmas and Easter are statutory holidays, days when schools may not be open, regardless of the Education act.
And so the example of intolerance is being set by those who should know better and this mood has spilled over into the public.
Now a row has broken out in an Anglo minor hockey league over the scheduling of a playoff game on the first night of Passover, a holiday that almost all Jews, practising or not, celebrate at the family Seder table.
A team representing a west island community that is predominantly Jewish and whose hockey team consists of 10 Jews out of the 15 players, has requested that the playoff game be postponed by one day. The team was told by the league that no accommodation could be made, a spokesman claiming that it's an impossible task to schedule 700 games and take into consideration every community's holidays. Therefore no exceptions would be allowed (except Christmas, of course.)
The truth, however is somewhat different. There are only a couple of games left as the league winds down its season and there are only a few teams left in the playoffs. Two other teams still competing offered to switch their scheduled game day with the Jewish team and its opponent. Everybody cooperated in the spirit of sportsmanship and tolerance. There would be no adverse effect on the schedule and the Jewish team could continue their playoff run.
Still the league said no to the arrangement. Play on the original date or forfeit. Nice....
These are the small accommodations that are disappearing with this new wave of political animosity towards minorities, encouraged by those who preach secularism, as long as it doesn't apply to Christians.
The media storm surrounding the debate is unprecedented with the mood of the public shifting rather quickly against any accommodation at all. Yesterday, Premier Charest, usually a firm supporter of accommodations announced that he'd be drafting a law that would effectively bar any woman from wearing the veil in any public or para-public building. This includes hospitals and schools as well as government offices.
A spokesman for the Montreal Muslim Council complained that the measure is a bit of an overkill and reminded reporters that the law would apply to less than two dozen Quebec Muslims who wear the veil. He openly questioned where this would all takes us.
I'm afraid we are experiencing a fateful tipping point.
It's going to get worse and its going to get lot uglier.
I've been saying this for years. If the government officials in power not only promote intolerance, but pass unjust laws against minorities (i.e. Parti Quebecois and Liberals anti-English laws and language police) then it negatively influences the public. You create a society of racists, bigots and xenophobes. Welcome to Quebec.
ReplyDeleteThis has been building up over the past 35 years. I feel like Quebec is a volcano of hate just waiting to erupt! Don't know when it will happen, and of course people laugh and say it will never happen here, but an eruption of violence is going to happen one day. Especially with no one challenging Quebec's attitude these days, either looking the other way or just walking away and giving up. Or worse, feeling like it's a bad thing to stand up for your rights, better to appease them and maybe they'll leave you alone. This kind of thing has happened before in history and it'll happen again....RIGHT HERE!
@Mitch
ReplyDeleteI share your views that violence can happen here. We think that we are immune from it because we live in the western world, but we are just humans nonetheless. Remember that in the 1990s a bloody war erupted and raged for years in the center of Europe where the Croats, Serbs, and Bosnians were slitting each other’s throats. And we’re talking about people who are ethnically the same, speak a common language (Serbo-Croatian) and differ only in religion. And these people lived together peacefully for over 4 decades in one of the most prosperous countries of the communist bloc.
When I see the level of hatred that emanates from people like Beaulieu, Landry, Parrault, Duceppe, Marois, et al…, I cringe. But every society has its cooks – in my country (Poland) there are plenty of nationalists, historical revisionists, separatists (advocating departure from the EU), etc…Britain has its BNP, France had LePen, Germany has Ericha Steibach. But what is different and worrisome about Quebec is that the hate mongers of this province seem to be generally accepted by the population, while they are not generally accepted in other countries. Whereas in Poland nationalist parties oscillate around 5-10% of public support, here the PQ is a contender for power in every provincial election, while the BQ sweeps the province in every federal election. People like the late P.Falaredau are invited to most popular talk shows on tv (TLMEP) and are allowed to spew out hate uninterrupted by the hosts (for example by calling Dr.Suzuki a bearded Jap), all to the applause of the audience.
Also, the opposition to this kind of rhetoric is very timid and seems non-existent. When Gilbert Rozon, a Francophone, suggested last September that Francophones should have more access to English instruction and hinted that Bill 101 might be detrimental to the prosperity of this province, he faced a barrage of insults and ad hominem attacks in the press. And he never stated his view in public again.
The hatred that lingers in this society can one day translate into acts of violence. I don’t think it would be a long lasting war, and the violence would probably be quickly contained, if not by Canada, then for sure by an American intervention (the US would not stand for a military conflict at its doorstep). But a short-term cycle of violence is a plausible scenario, and I can totally imagine people associated with the SSJB, MMF, or Imperatif Francais picking up weapons and sticking it to the Allos, Anglos, and Francophone “traitors”.
''Also, the opposition to this kind of rhetoric is very timid and seems non-existent. When Gilbert Rozon, a Francophone, suggested last September that Francophones should have more access to English instruction and hinted that Bill 101 might be detrimental to the prosperity of this province, he faced a barrage of insults and ad hominem attacks in the press. And he never stated his view in public again. ''
ReplyDeleteGilbert Rozon can say what he wants now, he just start his business with the money of all Francophones ! And finally, it's not because some Francophones say something that represent the view of all. Best example, Québecois wants that the ex-Minister Bellemare testify on the friendly relations between the Parti Libéral du Québec (the base of the party is not the Francophones, just look at the statistics...) and a bunch of enterprises for some illegal donations ! But it's true, it's like in 1995, to resort to drastic measures is find when it's the nation interest ! For answer to your dull argument, I can tell you that Graham Fraser- The Commissionner of Official languages, an Anglophone think that the Anglophones don't learn French enough... Maybe it's only a lack of time or it's a lack of open-mindedness ! Finally, I find that funny your comparison with the Second World War in the other's subject comments ! I'm sure that the English Canada is the moral authority and if it's wasn't there it will be the chaos in Québec ! For sure, you don't have lesson to give to nobody ! « L'indépendance, ce n'est pas une récompense, c'est une responsabilité. » Bourgault
« Toute tentative visant à empêcher ou à limiter le droit des Québécois à l'autodétermination paraît à la fois inopportune et probablement inopérante. » - Philippe Séguin
Frankly I find your reaction to be extreme. The provisions concerning the niquab are sensible. The surprising thing about the Hasidic schools issue was that for many years those schools were not respecting the law. Finally you dont mention that those schools are subsidized by the state (along with other minority, religious and private schools) unlike in most of North America (e.g. Ontario). So who is intolerant.
ReplyDeleteThe issue here is not one between Christians and others but between those who want a secular state and those who think religion has primacy in the public sphere.
"A spokesman for the Montreal Muslim Council complained that the measure is a bit of an overkill and reminded reporters that the law would apply to less than two dozen Quebec Muslims who wear the veil. He openly questioned where this would all takes us."
ReplyDeleteThis is the most ridiculous argument I hear all the time about it and people keep on using it, it boggles my mind that people are buying such argumental crap.
Let's say just for the sake of argument that one would use such a thing for murders let's say (now I'm not equating those two things not to worry). Someone would come and say: Well there is just 12 murders per year in our city, that's not such a huge number so let's leave those 12 murderers alone shall we?
Would that kind of argument work and cut it? I doubt rightfully so.
How come when it comes to burqa and niqab this kind of "so tiny tiny minority" works?
Are we a nation (Canada I mean) of values and principles or are we a nation of cowards, exception and exceptionnal rights for so "tiny tiny" minorities?
@adski,
ReplyDelete"But what is different and worrisome about Quebec is that the hate mongers of this province seem to be generally accepted by the population, while they are not generally accepted in other countries. Whereas in Poland nationalist parties oscillate around 5-10% of public support, here the PQ is a contender for power in every provincial election, while the BQ sweeps the province in every federal election. People like the late P.Falaredau are invited to most popular talk shows on tv (TLMEP) and are allowed to spew out hate uninterrupted by the hosts (for example by calling Dr.Suzuki a bearded Jap), all to the applause of the audience."
Not that I want to defend the PQ and the Bloc, I don't but let's just try to be reasonable and not jump in the curtains to expeditive conclusions about the PQ and so on.
First of all, even though ethnocentric nationalism as played it's fair share in the game of the PQ, these days, it's more like civic inclusive nationalism that takes place. Don't worry, I don't buy into that nationalism either.
Secondly, let's just pretend once again for the sake of arguments that the PQ would be as radical as you pretend them to be (I can't believe I am defending the PQ but that's another story).
Radical nationalist parties have had success even in recent years. BNP has succeeded in electing one or two MPs even if they have been forced by great britain constitution to accept members of other races (a Sikh joined in to denounce and expose them), in 2002, Lepen finished SECOND with 20% of the vote of Frenchmen (which means 14 millions of French in France), Autria had Bjork Heider a few years ago when his Freedom party took part into a coalition government and the list goes on and on so therefore, NO Quebec isn't the only place in the world and our so-called "extremists" are pretty soft when you compare them with Basque separatists in Spain or the IRA in Ireland. When was the last time the FLQ did something? 1970 I believe.
And by the way, Pierre Falardeau is DEAD since past september 2009 so not to worry too much about him these days huh?
You might also want to hear some intolerance branded in French Ontario by the way where there a minority of 4% bullies the rest of the province:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.galganov.com/editorials.asp?id=1214
Segregated (French and English languages) school busses, French only clinic in Russel, stand alone Franco-Ontarian flag in Casselman, mandatory billingual signs bylaw in Russell and what not, it's worth reading and listening to as well.
To those who complain about both bill 101 and Franco-Ontarians, I say (again) Swiss language laws are much better. Both problems would be solved. As far as the niqab goes, these issues should have been addressed BEFORE the government allowed significant immigration from areas of the world where this practice is commonplace.
ReplyDelete@Tym,
ReplyDeleteGalganov is a total whackjob. I have no patience for this guy, and neither for Don Cherry (unbelievable how in this day and age a hockey tv personality can hate Quebecois and European players).
A quick question, however. Has Galganov ever been invited to any popular talk shows in Ontario? I think he is rather ostracized by the mainstream media over there and resorts to internet to spread his hate.
The fact that Quebec media does not ostracize some people it ought to ostracize, and is heavily skewed towards the separatist view point, might project false impressions about the Quebecois people. I’ve lived in Quebec long enough and met enough Quebecois people not to have to form my views about them based what I see on TV. But people outside the province and the “nouveaux arrivants” might base their opinions on what they see on television, hear on the radio, read in JdeM or Le Devoir. And might get turned off from this society and the people. And once you lose them, you might never get them back.
And I do think that the level of nationalism is a tad too high in Quebec, in comparison to other western democracies other than US. In other democratic countries, it varies between 10-20%, in Quebec and the US, it is higher.
So it’s the media that’s not doing its job at tempering these nationalistic leanings. Au contraire, it beats the drum beat for secession, just like the US media beat the drum beat for the Iraq war. And when you have 1/3 of the population inclined towards nationalism, and encouraged by their media and politicians, it might lead to bad things.
The appeals to “militantisme” get louder and louder. No public figure is denouncing them, except maybe for the villified Andre Pratte. And that can’t be good.
"NO Quebec isn't the only place in the world and our so-called "extremists" are pretty soft when you compare them with Basque separatists in Spain or the IRA in Ireland. "
ReplyDeleteWhy do you insist on making these comparisons? Quebec has absolutely nothing in common with these two cases. Quebecers are not colonized or subjugated, nor are they on their ancestral lands enduring such conditions.
An accurate comparison would be the Anglo-Dutch conflict in Africa where the two powers fought for control of the same parcels of land.
This conflict is now perpetually propelled by Quebecois bigots who view the status quo as anathema and has as much moral legitimacy as the French presence in Ghana or Algeria.
The consistent attempts by French bigots to make this comparison to whine and plead their case for independence is disgusting. They usurp the historical plight of the subjugated peoples of North America to further their own racially motivated aspirations at the continued expense of these communities and the communities that have since grown to become part of the identity of this province after the initial waves of colonization.
« Quand nous défendons le français chez nous, ce sont toutes les langues du monde que nous défendons contre l’hégémonie d’une seule. » — Pierre Bourgault
ReplyDelete« C’est à notre existence même qu’on en veut et nous serons d’autant plus attaqués que nous serons plus dignes de vivre. » — Olivar Asselin
@adski,
ReplyDeleteYou are a total whack job yourself.
In 5 years of listening to Galganov and reading his editorials, I have disagreed only ONCE with him and it was because he published some whacko job from BC opinion in his letters.
In a few paragraphs, you managed to enrage me ten times Galganov might have done it in 5 years.
Now, have a look in the miror sincerely today and tell me who is the whacko between you and him.
Regards,
TM
@Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI did not make those comparisons, I took them from Adski, the so-called moderate who dares to compare the PQ to LePen Front National in France and the BNP in England.
And I thought, eh, since we're in right wing extremism, why not add Bosnia, Kosovo and Tchetchenia (Russia) in the package as well and send it as an outrage letter to all our separatist-nationalist friends out there.
Tym: "In 5 years of listening to Galganov and reading his editorials, I have disagreed only ONCE with him"
ReplyDeleteWell, sir, decide where you stand. You bring up Galganov, one of the biggest crackpots in the province of Ontario, as an example of extremism in Ontario, and now you’re saying that you disagreed with him only once?
The main difference between Ontario and Quebec, as I said, is not that there is no extremism in Ontario and there is a lot of it in Quebec. The difference is that extremists in Ontario are kept where they belong, on the fringes and away from the spot light, whereas in Quebec, they get to "preach from the pulpit" of the most popular talk show in Quebec, as one other poster has noted.
Howard Galganov is ultra far right wing and I disagree with much of what he has to say, BUT I think he has made some valid arguments regarding language relations in Quebec and the rest of Canada. He has fought the good fight against French language zealots, which is more than can be said for most other Anglophones.
ReplyDeleteI suggest you to read the statistics, it's seem that the ROC is in favor of the law voted by l'Assemblée nationale.''Presque tous les Québécois (95 %) et huit Canadiens sur dix accueillent favorablement le projet de loi 94 établissant les balises encadrant les demandes d'accommodements, selon un sondage Angus Reid commandé par le quotidien The Gazette.'' For the entire article, http://www.ledevoir.com/societe/actualites-en-societe/285973/voile-le-roc-appuie-charest ! Yours sincerely !:)
ReplyDelete