Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Anti-English Rally Less than Impressive

The first thing young political organizers are taught, is to accurately predict the number of people likely to attend a certain political meeting, so that the hall size or venue can be adjusted in consequence. This means working the phones for hours and hours, getting commitments and tallying up the numbers.
The rule of thumb (one that all political parties follow) is that the hall should be sized just slightly smaller than that which could accommodate the anticipated crowd. That way, the place will be packed  and the event will appear successful beyond predictions. Nothing plays better on TV than a full house and nothing is worse than the appearance of empty chairs. 

If by chance there is a miscalculation and there are too few people, a backup room, smaller in size may be pressed into service. Sometimes the organizers are forced to 'stack' the room with students or old people who they pay at the last minute in order to make a room appear full.
This was the first lesson taught to me by an experienced and wily political campaign manager, who as my mentor, impressed upon me that to - "KNOW THY ROOM" is the first rule of political organizing.

It is a lesson that organizers of Saturday night's separatist love-a-thon celebrating the French language, held in Montreal, understood very well.
Although the militant web sites and separatist organizations have been hyping the event for weeks and scheduled it perfectly on a Saturday night when nothing much was going on in town, they accurately calculated from the get-go, that they wouldn't be pulling in Celine Dion numbers.

You'd think that by the sound and fury emanating from the thirty something separatist organizations that make up the Coalition contre le projet de loi 103, the whole province was ready to explode in a popular uprising against the government's decision not to invoke the 'Notwithstanding Clause' in relation to the Supreme Court's decision overturning Bill 104.

And so, one wouldn't be faulted in assuming that the separatist rally denouncing the Charest government's answer to the Supreme Court decision, Bill 103, could easily fill the 55,000 seats of Montreal's Olympic Stadium, especially since the rally was gratis and provided some free entertainment.
If not the Olympic Stadium, at least they could try for the 22,000 seats of the Bell Centre, or maybe even an outdoor event at the Saputo stadium of 13,000. Wait.....scratch that last idea, I think the Saputo family would rather eat their children than rent to separatists.

No, the organizers set there sights a little lower, well to be honest, a lot, lot lower.

Harking back to the rule of "Know thy Room" this historic display of nationalist outrage was scheduled and held in the massive Centre Pierre-Charbonneau arena, capacity 2,500 people.
Yup....2,500 people!

And guess what, organizers triumphantly announced that it was a smashing success and even trumpeted the fact that a few people had to be turned away! Textbook!

Well at least it was amazing marketing success. I compliment the pros who ran the event, who  knew exactly how many few people were going to show up and turned a complete failure into vaunted success, by controlling the size of the venue.

To put the numbers in perspective, consider that the Montreal indie band Arcade Fire held an unannounced  impromptu practice concert in a suburban Longueuil shopping mall parking lot without any advertising at all  and managed to attract over 10,000 people.

When Montreal Canadiens ex-goaltender Jaroslav Halak (after being traded to St. Louis) made a return appearance at a local Montreal mall to thank fans for their support over the years, the autograph session attracted over 5,000 people!

Let's face it, a decent -sized high school can turn out 2,500 students to an assembly.

There is an overriding reality that militants and language extremists are  unrepresentative of the general population. While it is probably true that most francophones would prefer to see more Quebeckers or francophones on the Montreal Canadiens, it's not going to stop them from cheering and supporting the team. It seems that when it comes to hockey, loyalty to ones team goes beyond language and even talent as well, if you don't believe me, just ask Toronto Maple Leaf fans.

In spite of a week of Montreal Canadiens' language bashing, the Habs opening of training camp was a wildly successful event, with the public lining up in the wee morning hours to secure a seat in the practice facility. By 9:00am, cars were already being turned away.

What lessons did we learn from Saturday's 'massive' language protest?

Well, first Loco Lacass is one piss poor group of rappers. Even for free, not many wanted to see or hear their out of tune and thoroughly grating performance.

Secondly,  Pierre Curzi, who led last weeks language attack on the Canadiens, might very well be tuning up for a run for power in the PQ, considering Pauline Marois's utter lack of popularity. His recital of the thoroughly racist Quebecois poem "Speak White" went over big, just like Luck Merville's recitation of the FLQ manifesto at the Moulin à paroles last summer.

Lastly, the radical language movement is vastly over estimated. While this minority of Chicken Littles run around telling everyone who will listen that the French language is dying and that English schools are to blame, the majority of Quebeckers (66%), still believe in educational free choice. Link

Perhaps the press is starting to see through this smokescreen. An organizer of the event complained that the press was relegating the story to a third class event and not providing it the appropriate level of coverage.
And just to remind all tomorrow's commentators who believe that those wishing to control the language of education are on the side of angels, let me refer them to Article 26  of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights created by the United Nations.

Article 26

  • (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
  • (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
  • (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

43 comments:

  1. Conclusion:

    Le hockey,la télé et les groupes de musique intéressent davantage les gens que la politique et les enjeux sociaux.

    Je vous ferez remarquer que tous les artistes sur scène le 18 Septembre dernier sont des personnes engagées socialement et politiquement.

    Je serais curieux de connaître quelle serait la dimension de la foule pour un énènement pro loi 103 ou anti loi 101.Peut-être serait-ce le moment pour vous anglophones de Montréal d'évaluer le nombre de parents rééllement en faveur de l'école anglaise.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous said...@September 21, 2010 9:13 AM

    "Je serais curieux de connaître quelle serait la dimension de la foule pour un énènement pro loi 103 ou anti loi 101."

    As would we all.

    "Peut-être serait-ce le moment pour vous anglophones de Montréal d'évaluer le nombre de parents rééllement en faveur de l'école anglaise."

    You are assuming only English Quebec would
    attend. You'd be wrong. Current political
    climate in Quebec, considering the low turn-
    out at the "bigotsRus" rally, would seem to
    support (finally) freedom of choice in
    education.

    Wonder if any politician is smart (brave -
    opportunistic) enough to marshall it.

    DD

    ReplyDelete
  3. (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the STRENGTHENING OF RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS. IT SHALL PROMOT UNDERSTANDING, TOLERANCE AND FRIENDSHIP AMONG NATIONS, RACIAL OR RELIGIOUS GROUPS, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

    (2) L'éducation doit viser au plein épanouissement de la personnalité humaine et au RENFORCEMENT DU RESPECT DES DROITS DE L`HOMME ET DES LIBERTÉS FONDAMENTALES. ELLE DOIT FAVORISER DE LA COMPRENHENSION, LA TOLERANCE ET LÀMITIE ENTRE TOUTES LES NATIONS ET TOUS LES GROUPES RACIAUX OU RELIGIEUX, ainsi que le développement des activités des Nations Unies pour le maintien de la paix.

    I think the highlighted section is the part of the charter that the racist language zealots (both sides) should read. Maybe we should request that they include the word “language” to describe a group so that people really get the point.

    Simply remember the golden rule “Do onto others as you would like done onto you.” Seems like the French hardcores have no problem complaining about how bad they have it in North America and then turning around and treating Quebec anglo and alophones like second rate citizens.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Editor,

    It was Pierre Curzi, not Pierre Foglia. Fourth paragraph from the end.

    Foglia is a LaPresse columnist.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dr.Dave: "I think the highlighted section is the part of the charter that the racist language zealots (both sides) should read."

    What do you mean by "both sides"?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Paris Guy Monsieur l'Éditeur, vous faites fausse route, le poème ''Speak White'' dénonçait l'oppression faite par une minorité anglophone sur une majorité francophone. La même oppression (racisme ?) que subissait les Irlandais et les Écossais en Angleterre. Vous faites du révisionnisme ! Petite question: Combien d'entre-vous l'ont lu ? Nier cette ségrégation qui a eu cours jusqu'aux années 1960, démontre bien votre méconnaissance de l'histoire québécoise et canadienne française !

    ReplyDelete
  7. Peut-on m'indiquer à quel endroit il est spécifié que le droit à l'éducation dans une autre langue est reconnu au point de vue international ? À l'instar de la Déclaration universelle des droits de l'Homme ? Can I send my children study in spanish and let the bill to the citizens of the state ?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous said...@September 21, 2010 10:24 AM

    "Can I send my children study in spanish and let the bill to the citizens of the state ?"

    If Spanish is an "official language" of the
    state, yes. Contrary to official myth, English
    is still an "official language" in Quebec.

    You'll note bill 101 refers to French being
    the offcial language of Quebec, not "the only"
    offcial language of Quebec. Would have gotten
    bill 101 tossed out of court. Another weasel
    separtist tactic, but I digress.

    DD

    ReplyDelete
  9. Paris Guy dit: Cher DD, je vous signale que la seule langue officielle au Québec est le français depuis l'adoption de la Charte de la langue française (Loi 101) en 1977. La minorité anglophone (soit environ moins de 10 %) a conservée tous ses droits en matière d'éducation et de services gouvernementaux. Pour le reste, l'anglais et le français sont les langues officielles du Canada (Voir gouvernement du Canada) et de la législature du Nouveau-Brunswick, seule province bilingue. L'anglais n'est pas une langue officielle du Québec.
    Lisez donc cet article qui relate la place faite au français dans le reste du Canada:
    http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/294422/place-du-francais-toujours-le-mepris

    Bien à vous !

    ReplyDelete
  10. Paris Guy dit @ September 21, 2010 11:55 AM

    "je vous signale que la seule langue officielle au Québec est le français depuis l'adoption de la Charte de la langue française (Loi 101) en 1977."

    Wrong! The biggest part of the problem here
    is separtist idiots don't read/understand their
    own ignorant laws.

    http://www.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/english/charter/title1chapter1.html

    "French is the official language of Québec"

    Exactly where is the word "only" above. English
    is an official language of Quebec and if you
    doubt it ask the separtist weasel/scumbag you
    voted for to add the word "only" to that
    statement. It'll never happen. Would get bill
    101 thrown out on its' ignorant ass.

    DD

    ReplyDelete
  11. To Adski,
    I was referring to bigots and racists on both sides of the language debate. I am equally offended by racist comments in English or French. I am just as bothered by someone calling a French Canadian a "Pepsi drinking pepper" as I am by a pequist telling me I`m not a real Quebecer.
    I wish people of all faiths, nationalities, races, sexual preferences, hockey allegiances and, of course, languages were respected by all. I wish we could simply all get along.
    I know I`m a dreamer, but I`m pretty sure I`m not the only one!

    ReplyDelete
  12. "I know I`m a dreamer, but I`m pretty sure I`m not the only one!"

    Vous avez raison et votre idéal est noble mais je ne crois pas que se soit réalisable dans la situation politique canadienne actuelle.L'équivalent se retrouve en Belgique par exemple qui est confrontée a des problèmes similaires aux nôtres.

    Il est très difficile de faire cohabiter deux cultures sous un même toît,d'autant plus, si ces dernières sont des descendants de pays colonisateurs.

    Votre dernière ligne me rappelle les paroles d'une chanson d'un certain John.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @Dave,

    You’re confusing a simple-minded, bigoted, trailer park, anti-French ranting, with taking it a step further and turning it into a political and legalistic issue. As in the case of Quebec, where trailer park bigoted blue necks donned suits, sat down in the "national" assembly, and devised ways to debase the maudit langue de Shakespeare through legal measures. Not to even the playing field and create equal opportunities (as some claim), but out of sheer pettiness and jealousy.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Pour le reste, l'anglais et le français sont les langues officielles du Canada (Voir gouvernement du Canada)…
    That’s correct, English and French are the official languages of Canada. So where’s the problem? Quebec is still officially a province in Canada, right? The language laws of Canada still apply, right? Not exactly and therein lays the rub. While Quebec is a province in Canada, the Quebecois (along with our insane prime minister’s consent) have been playing ‘ethnocentric nationalist state’ for some time now at ‘the others’ expense. The Quebecois have systematically stripped the English speaking community (Canadian citizens by definition) of their rights, denigrated their history, and vilified their leaders, and have up to now gotten away with it. One day the tide may turn and a tsunami of Canadian backlash will drown their ethnocentric dream once and for all. Canadians cannot live by two different standards, where one of them is the result on fear mongering propaganda and Anglophobia.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Canadians cannot live by two different standards : dont un est précisément le refus de considérer la langue française comme également dénominateur commun de l'intégration sur le territoire québécois et qui nie cette réalité particulière, à savoir que nous ne sommes que 2% de la population de l'Amérique et que ce faisant, nous avons de bonnes raisons de vouloir protéger notre patrimoine.

    Assimler notre refus résistance à l'anglicisation de la province à de la propagande, de l'anglophobie ou d'un «rêve ethnocentrique» est justement borné.

    C'est quoi votre problème? Vous êtes seuls capables d'ouverture, de tolérance et d'universalisme?

    Vous niez que l'on puisse l'être en français. C'est assez sectaire de votre part : les droits des anglophones sont garantis par la loi 101, par contre toute augmentation démographique ou d'usage de l'anglais se fait forcément au détriment du français. Nous sommes littéralement noyés par les produits culturels, les produits de consommation et les médias anglo-saxon, pouvons nous nous donner les outils pour protéger le français, dans la seule province francophone sans que vous ne vous sentiez persécutés?

    Il faut vraiment avoir le profil colonisateur impérialiste pour écrire le dernier commentaire en faisant systématiquement fi de l'histoire des Québécois, pour négliger que nous fassions partie, nous aussi des minorités.

    Qui a brûlé le parlement de Montréal en 1849?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Mississauga Guy said...

    My response to all this is on yesterday's blog. My entry just submitted should adequately answer all this krapola!

    Same narrow-minded trolls, same cast of ignoramuses, same fascist state. Unless and until enough of the real Canada's population DARES Quebec to separate, nothing will change. Since nothing is being done to change Quebec from the inside or the outside, it's status quo. Put up and shut up!

    ReplyDelete
  17. "the real Canada's population" Hein?

    Pourriez-vous élaborer sur cette affirmation?
    Le canada est un faux pays disparate et sans aucune cohésion.C'est en quelque sorte L'ornithorynque (a bec de canard) des pays industrialisé.Un pays étrange cruellement en manque d'identité.

    Un pays (les anglos) qui représente un parasite pour la culture du pays voisin.Bref,des américains de deuxième et troisième classe inculte et incolore.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Avant de dire que «le real Canada's population DARES Quebec to separate», il aurait peut-être fallu laisser le Québec décider de son avenir sans l'intervention intempestive du fédéral? Que dire du scandale des commandites, je trouve que pour des gens qui prônent le mépris envers notre incapacité à nous brancher, vous êtes pas mal prompt à faire des «love in» quand vous voyez qu'on pourrait effectivement faire un pays de notre côté.

    Ensuite, la contestation n'est pas «contre l'anglais directement», mais pour la loi 101 et contre la loi 103. Le statu quo, c'est justement votre Cour suprême qui l'a bousculé et qui nous force aujourd'hui à nous défendre, puisqu'elle a invalidé la loi 104.

    Voyez-vous, vous (vous étant les anglos victimes du sentiment de persécution) avez déclenché cette contestation.

    Et enfin, dans les droit de l'ONU,trouvez-moi le texte qui justifie que «kind of education» doit être entendu au sens linguistique?

    En définitive, les anglophones ne perdent rien avec la contestation de la loi 103, celle-ci nous permet par contre d'intégrer correctement les immigrant en leur permettant d'apprendre le français, la principale langue d'usage et la langue officielle du Québec.

    On ne touche pas à «vos« droits alors où est le problème?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Et enfin, pour l'auteur qui se réfère au Droits de l'homme, la déclaration en français, au paragraphe 3 de l'article 26 stipule que : «Les parents ont, par priorité, le droit de choisir le genre d'éducation à donner à leurs enfants.»

    Genre en français n'est pas assimilable à autre chose que des catégories (libérale, conservatrice, humaniste, catholique, juive, etc.)
    Assujettir la langue d'enseignement à la question du «genre» demanderait toute une plaidoirie et ferait en sorte de rendre dissidents bien des pays occidentaux.

    Vous pouvez hurler tant que vous voulez, il est tout à fait légitime de légiférer en matière de droit linguistique pour la province. Si Madame Saint-Pierre ne le fait pas, c'est par couardise, mais ça n'a rien à voir avec le sectarisme, ethnocentrisme ou le fascisme d'une application musclée de la loi 101.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Remember Hitler's brown shirts started off the same way, people laughed at them and thought they'd never gain support. They were an obscure, radical bunch of extremists, they didn't represent the general population. They were just a bunch of loonies, no one would listen to them.

    Well, I don't need to explain what followed. History repeats itself if we don't learn from our mistakes.

    The French separatist movement is potentially as dangerous as the Brown Shirts. And often equally as hateful towards Jews and Anglophones, or anyone who isn't "Purelain". I know where the future is headed in Quebec.

    ReplyDelete
  21. There is no probleme. let them go...as in here is a dime, now call someone who cares. Canada would be much better off without the hothead, narrow minded, bigotted (by laws their politicians have enacted towing the line of the siren song of the language zealots). The most indebted province in Canada, the province who has brought the most problems to the country, the province with the one of the lowest gdp per capita productivity in North America.. There is really nothing to lose and everything to gain...if they leave. Why try and tell them anything different...let them go and live in their republique du banane. ha ha... The sooner the better.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Mississauga Guy said...

    Ye gad! I have to respond to these trolls again.

    Here is Lengagé touting his «French is the official language» blah blah blah that has been going on for over a third of a century. Canada has two official languages, and Quebec is still a province in Canada, but that hasn't stopped Quebec's anti-English (and everything else not French) agenda, and we have a federal government that is too chicken chested to do anything about it.

    The Real Canada as I put it is Canada excluding Quebec. We don't have a problem with French. In fact, English speaking children have been forbidden to board French school buses in fear of English polluting French kids' minds in Eastern Ontario. There is a clinic in the Cornwall area that turns away non-French speakers and the Government of Ontario hasn't so much as said "boo" about it. Seems Premier McGuinty's motto is live and let live, notwithstanding the fact municipalities can make by-laws forcing their residents to post signs in French. 97% of Ontario doesn't even speak French! Ontario has far more French schools than Quebec has English ones.

    Despite fanatical fascist laws in Quebec regarding the French language, over 60% of French-speaking parents in Quebec would still desire the option to choose French or English schooling for their children, but the Quebec Government seems to be smarter at making choices for those parents as opposed to the parents themselves.

    It's far easier to get into French language CEGEPs than English ones, and many French speaking kids desire and have the right to apply to and go to those schools. Same for university in Quebec. McGill was recently recognized as a top-25-rated institute of higher learning in the world! THE WORLD! Eat your hearts out U de M, U de Q, Laval and Sherbrooke! Incidentally, with the exception of the U de Québec à St-Jean-de-Who-Knows-Where, I still believe Quebec has fine French language universities. That these halls of learning don't bring in the endowment money McGill does is not McGill's fault. It's up to the alumni and top university officials to contribute, and canvass for funding, but the mindset is for cheap and free tuitions in the French instruction universities. Don't make McGill the scapegoat. Then again, Quebec makes everything not of its language or ilk the scapegoat for all that is wrong in Quebec.

    This hickish, country bumpkin way of thinking is why I'm not begging Quebec to stay a part of Canada anymore. For all their beefing and bellyaching, Quebec is JUST NOT WORTH IT! NO JURISDICTION IN CANADA IS WORTHY OF SPECIAL TREATMENT, AND I WANT MY CANADA BACK...AND I SHALL FIGHT FOR IT, AND I SHALL HAVE IT!

    Québécois and Québécoise: Separate if you will, and jolly good riddance to the whole stinking lot of you! Canada can better use the $8.5 billion of equalization payments plus countless billions in other monies sent to Quebec can be better spent in the real Canada, and the rest of you can drown on your sinking ship! Your debt levels will see to it!

    ReplyDelete
  23. AMEN, JUST F'ING LEAVE ALREADY. Puis, nous sera libre de vous et votre lois raciste. There is no room for Quebec in Canada with your mafia capital and crooked politicians. You and they deserve each other. au revoir si vous obtenez la chance que j'espere. Bien sortez a le refuse que vous etes.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "In fact, English speaking children have been forbidden to board French school buses in fear of English polluting French kids' minds in Eastern Ontario"

    Et quel est le problème?Que diriez-vous si ce n'est que pour éviter certains conflits.Nos enfants n'ont pas intérêts a fréquenter vos "kids".Ils doivent se concentrer a l'apprentissage d'un bon Français.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "McGill was recently recognized as a top-25-rated institute of higher learning in the world!"

    Vous oubliez de mentionner qu'elle a de très gros problèmes financiers présentement.Quelques millions dans l'rouge.

    ReplyDelete
  26. "Despite fanatical fascist laws in Quebec regarding the French language, over 60% of French-speaking parents in Quebec would still desire the option to choose French or English schooling..."

    Je ne vois aucun moyen de pression...ce ne doit pas être si important.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anonymous said...@September 22, 2010 7:13 AM

    "Et quel est le problème?"

    The problem is the cancer (ethnic nationalism)
    has spread to Ontario. Hey Canada,see what
    happens when you ignore it?
    Of course separtist trolls don't recognise it, they're already infected.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Mississauga Guy retorted...

    Well, whaddaya know? Here comes the troll...

    If McGill is having financial problems, it's the Quebec Government's fault for not funding them to the tune it does the French universities.

    Your 7:30AM comment: No surprise there.

    Your 7:13AM comment: The problem is more school buses are on the road than is necessary. If the French and English kids are headed in the same direction, pooling the kids onto fewer buses saves money--money that can be better spent on supplies, equipment and other apparatus for educational purposes. Fewer buses means less air pollution, too, and I'm sure the kids would get along fine. Too, it would be an informal means of second language immersion...for both languages.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anonymous at 07:21 said regarding McGill:

    "Vous oubliez de mentionner qu'elle a de très gros problèmes financiers présentement.Quelques millions dans l'rouge."

    While it is true that McGill posted a loss for 2009, let us compare McGill with Universite de Montreal and see their financial statements. All figures are in million dollars.

    McGill received 389 from Quebec government compared to UdeM's 490. Yet McGill managed to gain 957 in revenue. UdeM's revenue was 880. Notable on the revenue is gifts and donations. McGill's was 84 while UdeM's was 18.

    Here where I question the commitment of the Francophone community. Do you not care about your education institution?

    Now if we go to the expenses side, McGill spent 1080 that made its earnings to be (123). UdeM's expenses was 936 and its earnings were (101) after additional losses.

    It is true that McGill's loss is bigger. But then we can look at fund balances. McGill fund balances after the loss is 1640 compared to UdeM funds of 466.

    Now let us see the endowment. For 2008 McGill had 802 in total endowment and $27 260 per student. UdeM had 143 in total endowment and $3 764 per student.

    Conclusion, even though McGill receives less government subsidy than UdeM, McGill still financially much healthier. Add to that the fact that McGill's rating is way above, it is suffice to say that the Anglophone universities in Montreal are better managed than their Francophone counterparts. I know it is a generalization, but I can also compare Concordia and UQAM.

    My final note, please explain to me how is it that English universities are over-funded.

    http://www.mcgill.ca/files/vpadmin/742041-McGill-University-Client-09.pdf
    http://www.recteur.umontreal.ca/pdf/documents-institutionnels/rapportannuel/Annual-report-2009.pdf
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_universities_by_endowment

    ReplyDelete
  30. "Il est très difficile de faire cohabiter deux cultures sous un même toît"

    This is an anachronistic statement. Quebec is not made up of two cultures. The economic heart of this province is shouldered by immigrant populations that number in the millions. Italians, Lebanese, Greeks, Armenians, Syrians, Portuguese and a host of others who are conveniently excused from inclusion in the above statement as they are consistently excluded as a voice in the Quebec political scene. This roof houses many cultures, but only one that refuses to acknowledge the existence and the rights of others. It's a convenient euphemism that allows for the continuation of the racist political and educational spectrum that legislates an illegal and immoral status quo of first and second class citizens.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "scratch that last idea, I think the Saputo family would rather eat their children than rent to separatists."

    Well, they did not seem to mind to be helped by the PQ government via La caisse de dépot to make sure that the Vachon famous little cakes would remain Québecois.

    Money has no odor they say...

    ReplyDelete
  32. «this province is shouldered by immigrant populations that number in the millions. Italians, Lebanese, Greeks, Armenians, Syrians, Portuguese and a host of others who are conveniently excused from inclusion in the above statement as they are consistently excluded as a voice in the Quebec political scene»

    Vous venez précisément d'expliquer la raison pour laquelle nous désirons que l'éducation des immigrants soient faite en français, de la même manière que dans le ROC, elle se fait en anglais de manière à les faire participer à la culture commune.

    Quant à McGill, c'était déjà une très vieille université lorsque le Québec est entré dans la révolution tranquille, et en tant qu'instrument de pouvoir des anglais, depuis «La clique du haut château», il me semble que les anglais fortunés voient un avantage indéniable à faire des dons déductibles afin justement de concentrer leur richesse.

    Les Québécois n'ont une véritable élite financière que depuis l'apparition du «Québec Inc.» depuis le début des années 70, ainsi faire intervenir Mcgill dans le débat me semble fallacieux, mais qu'importe.

    La hargne que l'on voit ici me semble assez claire : nous avons deux nation et des représentant du plus nombreux voient dans les gestes d'affirmation du moins nombreux des signes de nationalisme, de racisme et de sectarisme, sans penser que la pensée qui anime un tel discours est elle aussi le fruit d'un nationalisme qui se croit malheureusement vecteur d'universalisme.

    Auriez-vous l'ouverture de vous montrer fier de défendre un peuple qui cherche simplement à assurer sa pérennité, n'êtes-vous pas capable d'apprécier que votre pays supporte une minorité en Amérique du Nord?

    J'aime bien Atwood et Martel, ne pouvez-vous pas apprendre un poème de Miron ou une chanson de Leclerc?

    Vous avez presque tout le Canada, ne pouvez-vous pas accepter que l'on veuille vivre en français et surtout que l'on veuille inciter les immigrants à vivre également en français avec nous?

    ReplyDelete
  33. "Vous avez presque tout le Canada, ne pouvez-vous pas accepter que l'on veuille vivre en français et surtout que l'on veuille inciter les immigrants à vivre également en français avec nous?"

    Inciter n'est pas obliger.

    Et en tant que francophone, je veux le choix d'envoyer mes enfants a l'école anglaise. Je veux pas qu'ils soient prisonnier du Quebec.

    Translation:

    To incite is different from making it mandatory.

    As a french speaker, I want the right to send my kids to an english school so they have a chance to leave the Quebec "prison".

    ReplyDelete
  34. Take a step back and look at Quebec and what it has become and what it has cost Canada in both dollars and internal stife with regards to repeated separatist demands. Quebec has contributed nothing to Canada from a fiscal (or for that matter cultural) point of view and is in fact a ball anc chain attached to a Canada which would soar without their continued drag. To all those that want to antogonize the troll separatists on this blog...you should be encouraging them in their quest. At the end of the day you will be the winner if the parasitic and underperforming province of Quebec takes the exit. Your standard of living would increase by double digits. Just think of all the benefits.

    No more welfare payments.

    No more OLA and its huge costs with no tangible results.

    No more destabilization of our economy or currency due to the radical separatist elements.

    No more French CBC across Canada which has huge costs and has very limited application.

    Now think about:

    What are the benefits of keeping Quebec in Canada. I can't think of one. Oh, I know, we don't have a culture without Quebec, which is a favorite Quebecois attitude. Tell this to the Germans, Ukrainians, Slavics, Chinese etc etc who have integrated well and worked hard to make this country as great as it is.

    Time to say goodbye. As I said, no longer try to be contrary to the separatists. Agree with them (although it may be a lie). In the end you will be better off as it may help rid us of the most negative influence in our great country.

    ReplyDelete
  35. "Vous avez presque tout le Canada, ne pouvez-vous pas accepter que l'on veuille vivre en français et surtout que l'on veuille inciter les immigrants à vivre également en français avec nous?"

    I was born and raised in Quebec, as are millions of immigrants. I'm a Canadian. As such, I have no problem with you living in French. I expect the same courtesy/right in return. Anything less reeks of passed on colonial attitudes and racially motivated arguments which are the day to day politics of this particular provincial cesspool of intolerance and perpetual whining. If my rights as a Canadian have to play second fiddle to yours, then piss on you, yours, and the legislative body that makes it a crime for me to speak my language at my place of employment, or put up signage in any damn language I please at my place of business.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "Et en tant que francophone, je veux le choix d'envoyer mes enfants a l'école anglaise. Je veux pas qu'ils soient prisonnier du Quebec."

    Qui vous empĉhe d'éduquer vos enfants en anglais et qui vous retient au Québec? Personne!A moins que vous n'ayez pas les moyens financiers et c'est la votre problème.Non?

    ReplyDelete
  37. For L'engage:

    "Quant à McGill, c'était déjà une très vieille université lorsque le Québec est entré dans la révolution tranquille, et en tant qu'instrument de pouvoir des anglais, depuis «La clique du haut château», il me semble que les anglais fortunés voient un avantage indéniable à faire des dons déductibles afin justement de concentrer leur richesse."

    Funny that you wrote that. As I wrote in another thread, one of McGill major benefactors is a gentleman named Marcel Desautels. He has the Faculty of Management named after him. He is a French-Manitoban. Now should you not ask yourself about the rich French-Quebecers? P.K. Peladeau, Guy Laliberte, Jean Coutou?

    "Vous avez presque tout le Canada, ne pouvez-vous pas accepter que l'on veuille vivre en français et surtout que l'on veuille inciter les immigrants à vivre également en français avec nous?"

    If only that is what you want, fine. Nobody has any problem with that, I think. Let us be us and you can be all you can be. The problem is that you are forcing your ideals to "the others". Anywhere else in Canada, French communities are free to use their language if they wish to. Why can we not just let people follow their free will as long as they do not bother each other?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Mississauga Guy retorted to 9:20AM:

    In the early 1990s, then-American President George H. Bush lost to Bill Clinton in the 1992 on the basis of one statement that became the mantra of the campaign: "It's the economy, stupid!"

    Move forward 18 years to this day. The simple fact of the matter is, English schools still exist notwithstanding all the French language shenanigans (yes, shenanigans) that have manifested for the last 40+ years. Why is Quebec consistantly moving backwards like the American Southeast (Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas and the Carolinas, amongst others)? It's the level of racism and ignorance, stupid!

    2:53AM hit the nail right on the head! I cannot believe how Premier Goldilocks is handling the language and immigration issues in Quebec as successfully as a wide receiver with a greased-up football--fumbling and bumbling it like an amateur! Come to think of it, Premier Goldilocks IS an amateur!

    ReplyDelete
  39. "English schools still exist..."
    De moins en moins...Malheureusement.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Quelqu'un a écrit :

    «To all those that want to antogonize the troll separatists on this blog...you should be encouraging them in their quest. At the end of the day you will be the winner if the parasitic and underperforming province of Quebec takes the exit. Your standard of living would increase by double digits. Just think of all the benefits»

    Et je pense que l'on vous aurait effectivement dit au revoir, gentiment, sans animosité si ce n'avait été des efforts canadiens pour précisément éviter l'indépendance.

    Quant aux droit des anglophones, ils sont historiquement protégés et d'ailleurs encadrés dans par la loi 101.

    Je suis absolument estomaqué par la hargne, le mépris et l'animosité des participants anglophiles ou anglophones, assimiler la défense du français à du racisme ou du sectarisme traduit une méconnaissance profonde de l'histoire du Québec ou des francophones au Canada et surtout témoigne d'une ignorance de ce en quoi nous sommes outrés par la loi 103.

    Pourtant, le Canada a malheureusement été lui aussi un terroir pour «l'orangisme» et le mépris continuel qui consiste à refuser de constater que le Québec est assujetti à une constitution qui lui est préjudiciable, avec un pouvoir judiciaire fédéral outrepassant constamment les volontés de notre Assemblée nationale est affligeant. Vous ne connaissez ni notre histoire, ni notre droit, ni notre littérature et encore moins notre culture, comment pouvez-vous alors comprendre que nous nous sentions menacés?

    Est-ce si dure à comprendre, qu'à l'extérieur du Canada ou qu'au sein de de ce dernier, que nous voulions survivre et nous épanouir en Amérique du Nord et garder un visage français, que cette mission est impossible si nous institutionnalisons le bilinguisme à l'échelle de la province?

    L'anglais est la langue dominante, dans le monde, dans le commerce, en science et dans la culture de masse, c'est de surcroit la langue majoritaire au Canada. Si nous n'intervenons pas politiquement pour privilégier le français et faire en sorte qu'il soit possible de vivre et travailler en français, si nous ne faisons pas du français au Québec la langue d'intégration économique, sociale et culturelle, nous nous condamnons à une assimilation tranquille, ce qui arrive dans le ROC et ce qui est arrivé en Louisisane.

    Regardez votre propre réaction épidermique, alors que votre langue n'est même pas menacée, et imaginez comment nous devons, nous qui sommes si petit en Amérique, nous sentir.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Well, I was going to respond to the last poster of 11:42 but its a waste of time. He can be right in his own assertions and I won't change anything.

    Suffice to say. If one compares the existing condtion as a medical analogy.

    Quebec is a Cancer in the body of Canada. The best way to treat this is to resection and remove the tumor by surgery in order to contain the spread of the disease. If treatment is not started the disease will spread with obvious terminal results. I fear, however, that the disease has already mestatized and is spreading to other parts of the body. Treatment by Chemotherapy (removing transfer payments to Quebec and removing political weight) might be somewhat effective in arresting the disease. If left untreated the condition will be terminal for the ROC. Elective surgery to remove the tumor is likely the best option at this time.

    ReplyDelete
  42. "Regardez votre propre réaction épidermique, alors que votre langue n'est même pas menacée, et imaginez comment nous devons, nous qui sommes si petit en Amérique, nous sentir."

    Desole, mon petit l'homme ou ma petite dame. Vous etes deja l'louisien du nord. Ta langue est mort en nord amerique et dans le monde. Comme vous dits, le anglais est premiere avant le francais. Tu as une bonne journee.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Anglo-Montrealer here. Just a few things:

    1) Legally speaking, it is true that the official language of Quebec is French only. The official language of Canada is English and French. There is however a nuance to be made in that the "legal" languages of Quebec remain English and French by reason of the 1867 Constitution. Any person may speak and be heard in the provincial legislature and in the courts in English or French. Further, all provincial laws adopted here must be in both languages and both languages are equally 'official'.

    2) In many countries actually the school system is not restricted to the national or official languages. In fact, in many countries there is no official language. There is no official language, for example, in the US, the UK or any Canadian province save NB (by virtue of the Constitution 1982) and QC. I would say that making a language "official" is a reactionary approach for a society to enshrine an aspect it feels threatened, or because of old colonial links (many former French colonies still have French as an official language even though 99% of the population is, let's say, Arabic or African).

    3) Quebeckers are free to regard themselves an ethnic nation if they so deem it. I, as a resident of Quebec for the past 20 years havign been raised here, am a proud Montrealer, a proud Canadian residing in this province, but I do not feel part of this Quebecois nation. It however should not mean I have less rights than someone who does.

    4) I have no idea why Quebeckers feel so frightened by the prospect of Louisianization. I mean whenever I think Louisiana, I think Blues, Cajun food, Bourbon Street, festivities, Mardi Gras, passion and humanity, and a very fascinating history. Seriously, cuisine alone Louisiana beats Quebec hands down. I really don't see how them speaking English destroyed their culture - if anything, it catapulted their culture to a national level. Think about it, they're quite the small state yet we hear more about Louisianan culture than say Floridian culture :).

    5) The concept of Quebecois forming a nation is brand new, before the Quiet revolution in the 60s the Quebecois were simply part of the greater French Canadian people. Quebec, when it signed the 1867 Constitution, did so not under the pretence that it was a French nation - but rather that they were distinguished through their Catholic heritage. I'd say half of Canadians at that time were catholics so everything seemed rosy. It was only in the 60s that Quebec suddenly changed the rules of the game by saying it wasn't Catholicism that defined them, but their language. I'm sorry, but why didn't you speak sooner... like in the 1860s you might have been able to negotiate better terms then to safeguard your language! Since the 60s, Canada has moved at a remarkable pace, quite frankly, to accommodate this newfound Quebecois reality.

    6) Before we discuss French or English schools, how about we make sure we have proper schools to begin with? Back in high school, and I was in a French semi-subsidized high school by the way, one of my French teachers who also doubled as a Geography teacher seriously thought Alexander the Great conquered Eastern Europe (thinking the Persian Empire is somehow in Europe!), further when I asked my civics teacher what is the form of government of Canada - a republic or a monarchy - she couldn't answer the question and simply said 'democracy.' Further, many Quebecois kids are taught that Quebec never signed the Constitution of 1982 – fair game. However, they seem to think that the Constitution of 1867 - the REAL constitution that founded Canada and created the provinces - was scrapped or replaced! Lower Canada freely signed the 1867 Constitution and that document remains in effect and is the real keystone of the federation, the 1982 document is merely a supplementary that included the Charter and some procedural nonsense like the amending formulae - big deal!

    ReplyDelete