The article was a fantasy describing the Shangri-la world of an independent Quebec in the year 2020 and was incredibly funny in a perverted sort of way.
A lot of our bilingual readers mentioned the piece in comments section with 'adski' summing up the article perfectly.
"This whole "article" reads a bit like a page from some fascist/communist manifesto. It conjures up images that we see on rare footage that trickles out of North Korea, where happy people march holding hands, singing happy songs...."I couldn't have made a better snide remark, so decided to pass on writing a piece
But in light of these intriguing references made in our comments section, I received a couple of requests to translate the article for the many readers who don't have French.
For those who have already read the original piece, I beg your indulgence and apologize for the imperfect translation. To tym_machine, no nit-picking over typos!
Again, if you read French, read the original article here.
"Fall 2020; the Quiet Revolution is now 60 years old, Events of October1 now 50 years old , the first referendum, now 40 years old, the second referendum, now 25 years ago and yes, Quebec got rid of the Charest government in 2012 and the link to Canada in 2016.
Indeed, in 2016 the coalition party of independence, the Separatist Parti Quebecois of Solidarity (PIQS,) after taking power with a strong majority and a decidedly pro-independence platform convened its constituency, the 63 members of the Bloc Quebecois in Ottawa and the the 85 PIQS deputies in the National Assembly to declare the unilateral independence of Quebec.
The first law passed after consolidating the independence of Quebec was Law 201, the Charter of the French language of an independent French Quebec.
In summary, Act 201 provides that:
1. Finally, French is the only official language, national language, common language, working language and language of education in Quebec.
2. The Supreme Court of Quebec, which replaced the Supreme Court of Canada and the Charter imposed by Trudeau, now interprets the laws, in the best interests of French Quebec.
3. The primary and secondary schools, colleges and universities have become French, as it should, all except for about 8%, for the benefit of the historical Anglophone minority . Private schools, as elsewhere in the world are no longer subsidized by the state. This new legislation and other major changes allow the government to make public education a successful model where the dropout rate is the lowest among nations. Learning a second, third and fourth language has become natural for many citizens.
4. Quebecers are now proud of the place of honour that French is accorded in our institutions, in communications and the public domain. Our political representatives, including our leaders make their speeches and answer questions from journalists in French only. The growing number of tourists, including American and Latin Americans are amazed to find themselves in such a cozy country with a French face.
5. The new Quebecois2 in Quebec are settling mostly in the regions, the number of them arriving each year is now 20,000, rather than 50,000 when Quebec was a province like the others. They are happy not only because they are well integrated into Quebec society and have acquired a good knowledge of French, but because they have increasingly found jobs where they can put their talents to good use. Quebec's new government is recruiting more people from Western Europe and Eastern Europe, Latin America and Asia, immigrants that generally integrate easily with the traditions and customs of Quebec, including the concept of gender equality and a secular state.
Past abuses of "reasonable accommodations" have been resolved. To get their citizenship and Quebec passport, the 20 000 immigrants welcomed annually to Quebec must not only know French, but also solemnly pledge to respect the fundamental values of Quebec. The new Quebecois are pleased to join the independent French Quebec, egalitarian and secular, because they feel uncomfortable with Canadian multiculturalism and tensions related to accommodations. In addition, complimentary registration upon arrival at the Center for orientation, training and integration of new Quebecers (COFINQ*), greatly facilitates their life in Quebec. All Quebecers who have not yet learned the national language also benefit from free services. Some, who choose not to learn the national language, quickly find that their place is better in Canada than in Quebec.
6. The Office de la langue Francais plays a much more important role and now benefits from greatly increased funding while watchdog agencies like the Mouvement Québec français now receive grants to continue to fulfill their caretaker mission.
7. The two mega-university hospitals in Montreal of which, only the English one was built, has become a French institution under the name of the 'Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montréal et McGill' (CHUMM) as the historical Anglophone minority now receives fair and equitable funding, proportional to its demographic weight. The savings accrued are now used to improve the health system, especially in the regions.PRICELESS!!!!!!!!
All these arrangements have brought a sense of quiet pride to Quebecers, whether native or immigrant. There is broad consensus on the acceptance of the Charter of the French language in an independent French Quebec (Act 201). Quebecers are proud that their government has dared to adopt the Charter despite the threats of some Anglo-Quebecers and Canadian hotheads. Quebecers now sense that they have dropped their colonial yoke.
* COFINQ (Centre for orientation, training and integration of new Quebecers) centres, established in all major regions of Quebec and Montreal operate with full programs preparing new Quebecers to smoothly integrate in Quebec by adopting our language and our common values and are afforded the opportunity to showcase their skills at work and elsewhere in society. These new centres and programs are much larger than the programs of the former province of Quebec and include not only the integration of immigrants on a larger scale in the regions, but also the Francisation of all Quebecers not yet Francisized ."
I am reminded of those old POPULAR SCIENCE magazines of the 30's, 40's and 50's, that made lame and fanciful predictions, like the one that presaged that by the year 2000, we'd be driving our cars to Europe under the ocean!
I'm moved to hum that old song by Zagar & Evans; ............."In the Year 2525"
A thousand thoughts come to mind here but lets just look at section five;
ReplyDeleteWhy would the immigrants suddenly be settling in the regions instead of in the Montreal area? If there was any attraction there they would already be doing so. On the other hand I am firmly convinced Canada would be much better off without Quebec (the only losers would be the Anglos in Quebec which probably explains my lack of popularity for my views on this blog). So if this is what they think an independent Quebec would be like and it encourages them to do so, that's fine with me. Its funny though. The article criticizes high levels of immigration and multiculturalism both of which were created by the Liberals and P.E.T. who Quebec so zealously supported. Indeed neither policy would have been viable without Quebec's support for Trudeau and company. The Toronto guy.
For those who've argued French is Quebec's
ReplyDeleteonly official language note point 1:
"Finally, French is the only official language...in Quebec."
Also note that in separtist moron dreamland,
repression (OLF) will be increased and
Quebecers will somehow have become proud of
their new nazi style concentration (sorry
reeducation) camps.
LeGal needs to put down the pipe - it is
frying his brain.
DD
"The article criticizes high levels of immigration and multiculturalism both of which were created by the Liberals and P.E.T. who Quebec so zealously supported."
ReplyDeleteSeparatists don't see Canadian multiculturalism as a desirable means or end. Most believe that it is a failed doctrine which diminishes the number of francophones, since statistically it's an idea propagated more within English Canada than Quebec. Their prevalent ideal is that you settle here, you learn French, and you're loyal to ALL our values du jour (kind of similar to the scary and misbegotten thing we saw the Knesset do this past Sunday). This leaves little room for variety or true bridging to the rest of this continent. Indeed, our self-professed culture hawks say you can immigrate here and be as different as you like, as long as you speak French, are "secular" (whatever that really means), and adhere to the nationalist view of the peuple's struggle. You also forget about “l’argent et les votes ethniques, essentiellement”.
"Indeed neither policy would have been viable without Quebec's support for Trudeau and company."
What's your point? The Liberals aren't zealously supported by Quebec today. Separatist politics have succeeded in implementing in the minds of French-Canadians (much more than francised allophones, not so ironically) that immigration weakens "la race" (of course they wouldn't be caught dead calling it that). It was because a large group of immigrants wished to send their children to English-language school in a comparatively French-language area of Montreal that we saw the first backlash which led to Quebec's first language law. It didn't take long for the Quiet Revolution to draw a line in the sand between French Quebec's perennial fear of extinction and Trudeau's Canada of "inclusiveness" and "multiculturalism". I personally think neither doctrine is specifically right for our province and country. We ought to properly articulate an open, middle-of-the-road policy which neither opens the floodgates nor socially criminalizes immigrants' differences before they ever even get here. This should be maturely coordinated on a federal-provincial level, so that even the highly educated amongst them don't come to our shores and were deluded into thinking they'd be doctors, lawyers, and engineers once they landed.
"...if this is what they think an independent Quebec would be like and it encourages them to do so, that's fine with me"
ReplyDeleteAnd then you wonder why you have few friends on this blog. It's NOT fine with me, nor is it with the silent majority of federalists in this province. When you’re fed a steady diet of overt doublethink, newspeak, and subliminal memory hole, you can do either of three things: believe it, become numb to it, or fight it. If you’re cocooned up in Richmond Hill or even over in Scarborough, chances are you don’t realize to what extent this is an ideological war of attrition that continues to be waged daily on the streets of a city you’d rather soon forget you eclipsed. A fair number of Quebecers like me, franco, allo, and anglo, have chosen to fight the separatist polity either indirectly or directly. We know firsthand how dangerous genteel groupthink is, particularly in the context of nationalism. And we’ll probably foresee any of its effects before you even knew to read between the lines. The rest of you don’t care or don’t get it.
That the separatists continue to spew such “idealistic” drivel is a sign that their movement continues to be more about the adolescent road trip getting there than concrete answers about things they know they can’t control. This is why they don’t bother. Spoiled child? Much. It’s also why even many nationalists keep voting NON; they haven’t been convinced that they’d get a better deal (not just economically, but also in terms of institutional and cultural stability) out of an independent Quebec. A careful observer wouldn’t let either side dream too much, lest we need longer to recover from the ensuing nightmare.
Alas, the experiment/war continues.
"...repression (OLF) will be increased and
ReplyDeleteQuebecers will somehow have become proud of
their new nazi style concentration (sorry
reeducation) camps."
Our servile francophone media will either completely ignore it or ensure compliance by packaging it as a patriotic or historic necessity. Witness the way the "gateway schools" issue was handled, or how the October crisis is being softened (and the abductors humanized) by our most important, mainstream, French-Language outlets. Notice also the insidious practice of our French-language media commemorating "anniversaries" of specific events as epic milestones; particularly ones that are significant constitutionally and/or politically. Or the practice of nearly canonizing our dead politicians, and our nationalist ones even more. Who pays for this airtime? It's not just on my news junkie dish package; it's over the air!
I can't help but step back sometimes and wonder whether we're all paranoid friends of the hookah in one way or another, federalists and separatists alike, or if we're looking at firsthand overt/covert nation-building efforts in progress.
If only there were a way to tell...
Thanks for the translation.
ReplyDeleteWhat a beautiful, racist, anti-English language rant that was.
Same old, same old...bal, blah, blah. These language bigots, these language Nazis are everywhere across this country. Its sad that we don’t have a party for the English speaking majority in this country. One that will put a stop to this racist frenchie only “bilingual” crap in Quebec, NB, Ontario, Ottawa and spreading all across Canada. They have control of the money and funnel it wherever there is a frenchie. A great money laundering scheme concocted by Trudeau and his gang and expanding ever since. What an expensive scam.
People wonder why Quebec and the country is so far in debt? This traces back to all this language BS, billions upon billions wasted yearly.
Poor Canada, poor Kebec, what a mess.
"Quebec in 2020 : A Veritable Paradise!"
ReplyDeleteThe only think that happens in Paradise is that one gets cast out!
If you’re cocooned up in Richmond Hill or even over in Scarborough, chances are you don’t realize to what extent this is an ideological war of attrition that continues to be waged daily on the streets of a city you’d rather soon forget you eclipsed.
ReplyDeleteThe separatist ‘project’ has always been an idyllic dream for some and a colossal nightmare for others. The project has never been promoted in realistic understandable terms we can all debate and decide upon. As far as I’m concerned, Georges Le Gal’s article is just another absurd expression of the nationalist’s flimsy ideology. They offer no substance or tangible advantage, just nationalist dogma wrapped in Franco-supremacist imaginings. Naturally their racist drivel does not resonate with ‘the others’ in Quebec and is completely lost on the ROC.
Based on what I’ve seen over the years, Canadians don’t care all that much and Quebec Anglos do indeed fight alone. No one in Canada knows the full extent of what’s going on in Quebec, with this destructive and surreptitious ideological war that the nationalist wage right under our noses. I imagine that Canada will lose this war and Quebec Anglos will be sacrificed and forgotten. In the end, Canada will be better off without the inconsolable Quebec, and I suspect Canadians intuitively know this to be true. I figure the nationalist will eventually win the war, because they care more than Canadians and are far more single-minded in their pursuit of happiness. The nationalists want the Quebecois to leave Canada far more than Canadians want them to stay. Tic, tic, tic…
Wow is this Le Gal guy out to lunch. The whole thing stinks of some Sci Fi novel where everything seems perfect at the beginning but you soon realize that nothing at all is good (Farenheit 451, Big Brother, The Time Machine……).
ReplyDeleteI just wanted to touch on a few points I found particularly interesting. And by interesting I mean laughable. Americans are supposed to be impressed by a French speaking country. WTF? Has Mr. Le Gal never met an American before? Americans cannot stand it when people don’t speak their language. They make fun of Brits for calling the bathroom the lou! If you ask an American these days who their mortal enemies are, they will list 3. North Korea, The Muslim World and most of all France. I can guarantee you that no Americans will come to Quebec if they need to speak French.
So Immigrants to Quebec are going to be very happy about dropping all their culture and traditions to adopt the “Quebec culture?” If I understand this statement correctly, Mexicans who move to Quebec are going to stop speaking Spanish amongst themselves, drop Cinqo de Mayo and trade in fajitas for poutine? Unlikely.
If you’re going to dream up a fantasy land why not go a little bit further. For example, “The Habs and Nordiques, with only Quebecois players who only speak and broadcast in French, compete every year against each other in the Rene Levesque Cup finals.” At the same time “Celine Dion gives up the bright lights of Vegas and sets up shop at the Montreal Casino.”
If you’re going to dream, dream big. The Muslims have it right. 72 virgins for everyone! Now that’s a good fantasy land!
Oh, and how are they going to pay for all of this? I bet Le Gall thinks Canada will still have to make transfer payments based on some notion like “to make up for past injustices”!
Again with a party for the English speaking majority! What would the program of such a party be? Will it be as divisive and argue for English-language equivalents of the French Language Charter? Do we want to do the work required to become a be a truly and functionally bilingual country, or are there two languages on all the Federal buildings and the stuff I buy for ornamental purposes only? If you don't learn from my own personal example, which might be unfair because I actually do straddle both solitudes and three different "language worlds", at least take a cue from the bilingual anglos in Quebec who didn't leave and who don't plan to go anytime soon.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure it looks like a giant money laundering scheme to you, Federal transfer payments coming to Quebec to teach new immigrants French only appear doubly so to me. Many of those immigrants eventually realize how precarious their "third wheel" situation is and learn both languages, no matter which group they assimilate into.
Institutionalizing bilingualism as a language policy isn't easy, but I still believe it's worth it in the long run. Our "healthcare" and social safety net to cover millions are doubtless more expensive than translating and changing a sign or a report ONCE. That's what both the fed and provincial governments get for supporting a welfare state.
What's interesting is that the English-language "reactionaries" and the French-language supremacists in Quebec hate being forced to speak the "enemy's" language. Most Federal jobs give you a chance to learn the other language, and people still complain. Then again, we've seen ridiculousness from the other side as well. Many Quebec nationalists and virtually all separatists by definition think Canada is an anglo scam concocted to rob Quebec of its riches and keep its people down.
The image of the rich, distant, anglo business tycoon oppressing the vulnerable "everyman" French-Canadian worker who lives with his huge family in third-world urban slum conditions is an enduring metaphor because it is convenient and eloquent in its simplicity. It is even more convenient politically regardless of how faithfully it represents reality now.
We're still far from having an equitable distribution of both language communities across the country, and maybe that's partly to blame for the creeping resistance to the OLA, at least from readers on this blog. To resolve the distribution disparity, it would be great in theory to encourage French speakers westward and English-speakers to Quebec, so that the solitudes would better know each other, and potentially realize that their neighbor isn't as evil as they thought. Tangibles are often easier to appreciate than the abstract. This could explain in part the urban/rural divide on things like cosmopolitanism and comparative homogeneity.
Willing *internal* population transfers as a way to promote cultural and linguistic harmony? Needs tweaking to avoid terrible side-effects (à la divide and conquer) if implemented as policy, but maybe worth a try if done right. Of course, when a group is so terrified that anything that makes it a "minority" causes it to adopt a siege mentality, all bets are off.
Might work out better than the forced population transfers we've seen to promote or secure the demographic dominance of one group over another, with conflict on both sides of the border resulting ever since. (India/Pakistan; Israel/Palestine; Turkey/Greece)
Apapratchik: "It’s also why even many nationalists keep voting NON; they haven’t been convinced that they’d get a better deal (not just economically, but also in terms of institutional and cultural stability) out of an independent Quebec."
ReplyDeleteGood point by Apapratchik.
I’ve said it before but I’ll say it again. These Quebec nationalists-federalists are the biggest problem Canada has today. The separatists are not the biggest problem. The separatists are dreamers and racists and deluded paranoiacs, but these problems are mostly their own, and certainly do not affect people living outside of Quebec. Their separatist project is actually a blessing to people living in ON, BC, and AB (T.O guy is definitely not alone in his views). For people west of Quebec, dropping the spoilt brat would be a dream come true. No more money wasting, no more Ottawa, no more OLA, no more blackmail, just 5-6 provinces, 3 of them the richest in Canada, cohesive in values and language, having a good shot at creating a prosperous country that would be an alternative to the profit-obsessed US and unsustainable and exclusive “social justice but only for Francophones and their lackeys” Quebec.
Quebec federalists-nationalists are the reason why this won’t likely happen. It’s because of these cynics, who defend and apologize for the separatist movement, who nurture it and protect it, who join it in many undertakings, at go-time will cast a Non vote. They will do it because at decision-time, they will think with their wallets, not with their language. They might not even care about their language to begin it, but only use the language/separatist movement to extract favors and concessions from Ottawa. As Apapratchik pointed out, these people think in terms of a "deal" and will stop at nothing to get the "better" one. These people have no moral backbone, unlike SOME separatists who do believe in a socialist paradise (albeit ethnically divisive and completely unrealistic and un-implementable.)
These cynics are all about power and this whole federalist/separatist nonsense is nothing but a game to them. They like the money that is flowing to Quebec form the RoC, but they also love to see the RoC on its knees. Like during the 1995 federalist rally, or last week when all 4 federal leaders joined forces in criticizing the Maclean’s article just because it had the gull to pick a bone with Quebec. It’s the kind of victory for Quebec that these “federalists” feed off of it.
Solution? Pay no mind to separatist threats. On the contrary – encourage them. You want to leave? Bon voyage and good riddance, we’ll be better off without you. With that attitude, the nationalists-federalists might back off, and the separatist movement would turn from a mainstream movement into a fringe one
For that to happen though, the provinces would have to find a way to override Ottawa. Because it’s Ottawa that turns tail at the mere mention of “separation”. And it’s Ottawa that is infested with nationalist-federalist types who need to be neutralized.
Quebec is of course very welcome to stay, but only if it accepts the principle of equal treatment and moral equivalency. Same rules must apply to everyone within Canada. And being distinct and unique (which Francophones are on account of their language and culture) does NOT make one special. And it certainly does NOT entitle one to any special treatment.
Take it or leave it, Quebec. The people of the RoC have had enough. The blackmail/appeasement cycle must come to an end. You either stay in the 4th best country in the world, or try to build a better one, with Georges LeGal, Bill 201, and 20,000 of “happy” ethnics forcefully displaced to the regions every year to do manual labour for their new masters.
Quote "...Nicolae Ceauşescu, the former hungarian dictator.."
ReplyDeleteRomania (Roumania), not Hungary.
Une chose est certaine est que le Québec aurait beaucoup plus de chances d'obtenir un siège au conseil de sécurité de l'ONU.Le Canada n'est plus le pays respecté qu'il était jadis.
ReplyDeleteAvec un type comme Harper a sa tête,ce pays a perdu beaucoup de respect au niveau international:La guerre en Afghanistan,sa position face a Israel,ses politiques environnementales,le traitement injuste envers Omar khadr,la perte de sa position en tant que pays pacifiste,l'investissement a outrance dans le militaire,l'élimination du contrôle des armes a feu,etc.
Ce "pays" est de moins en moins attrayant et les raisons pour vouloir le quitter sont de plus en plus évidentes.Les valeurs Québécoises et canadiennes sont plus que jamais en contradiction.
Est-ce vraiment les valeurs québécoises et canadiennes en contradiction, ou le résultat brut d'un gouvernement minoritaire qui ne ressemble pas à une majorité de Canadiens?
ReplyDeleteÇa m'agace moi aussi le fait que depuis quelques années on perd des plumes à l'échelle internationale. Et j'en ai honte.
En même temps, je ne peux qu'en vouloir un peu... beaucoup à mes propres compatriotes québécois qui depuis maintenant deux décénnies gaspillent notre poids démographique quand même considérable aux communes lorsqu'il est question d'élire des gouvernements et non pas de simples députés qui seront sempiternellement condamnés à l'opposition. Ce n'est pas en votant Bloc que le Québec allait stopper la montée de Stephen Harper, donc notre stratégie, tout comme le gouvernement qui s'en est ensuivi, laisse beaucoup à désirer.
La prétention que nos "valeurs" sont défendues mieux par un parti qui n'aspire même pas à former ni même participer à un gouvernement fédéral s'est incrustée dans le psychique d'un nombre trop élevé de Québécois et il est temps de s'en départir. Il faut se départir de cette idée parce qu'elle ne reflète pas le "red-tory" Canadien moyen. Il s'agit de se retrouver dans des partis *proprement fédéraux* qui oeuvrent pour nous autant que pour tous les Canadiens. Or, vingt ans d'histoire politique prouvent que notre auto-ségrégation nous nuit autant qu'elle nuit au reste du pays.
D'autant plus honteux est-il que nous détenons la force démographique et les tendances politiques pour permettre à ce pays de connaitre un sort complètement différent (meilleur?) de celui proposé par Harper, mais on est d'abord préoccupés par enjeux linguistiques et culturels qui sont et seront toujours ce qu'ils ont été, peu importe que nous fassions partie du Canada ou non.
En extrapolant ta dernière phrase, je considère qu'il soit bien question de faute de la prétendue victime. Plus je lis ce blogue, plus je constate à quel point nous Québécois râtons nos vrais enjeux en nous concentrant davantage sur des distractions ou intrigues passagères. Nous renfermer, ne pas voter pour un parti moins à droite et qui aurait de bonnes chances de former un gouvernement majoritaire et faire rayonner le pays auquel nous quand même toujours sommes liées constitutionnellement, ça reflète une irresponsabilité envers nous-mêmes tout comme envers nos confrères de centre-gauche ailleurs au pays.
@Apparatchik
ReplyDeleteA quoi ressemblerait le canada d'Harper sans une solide opposition?Un dérapage total vers la droite pure et dure.Je n'ose même pas imaginer ce qui adviendrait du Québec.Serait-il seulement prit en considération?
Imaginons un instant seulement sur le plan linguistique que nous adoptions a 100% la politique multiculturaliste canadienne.Dans quel marasme se retrouveraient les Francophones du Québec et hors Québec?
Typique d'un souverainiste, le gros gouvernement remplace le clergé pour la protection des canadien français. La peur de donnée des libertés au individu, quel marasme en effet, mais pas celui que tu cites. Je prendrais harper bien avant les Layton et ti-clin de l'Uqam. Ça fait 30 ans qu'on les endures, avec leur doigter inverse de celui de Midas tout ce qu'ils touchent tombe en ruine. et les québécois on de moins en moins de liberté. C'est pas maître chez nous, mais maître chez moi qu'il nous faut.
ReplyDeleteAh j'oubliais, le déséquilibre fiscal est encore la, le Québec a trop de pouvoir, il doit en délester vers les citoyens.
ReplyDelete« A quoi ressemblerait le canada d'Harper sans une solide opposition?Un dérapage total vers la droite pure et dure »
ReplyDeleteUne bonne opposition, c'est en principe une composante nécessaire dans une démocratie forte et vibrante.
Mais comment bien décortiquer "solide" et "opposition"? Quoique centre-gauche, l'opposition aux communes est actuellement fracturée entre trois partis qui hormis leurs différences sur la question nationale se ressemblent de près ou de loin quant à leurs grandes orientations. Je te parie qu’il n’y aurait ni dérapage vers la droite, ni même un gouvernement de droite si les députés des deux plus gros partis de l'opposition appartenaient à un seul. Les réalités démographique et géographique actuelles font en sorte que l’Est du Canada détient un pouvoir déterminant quant il est question de l’élection d’un gouvernement fédéral. Le Québec occupe le deuxième rang parmi les provinces canadiennes en termes de sièges aux Communes. Or, si on n’aime pas Harper et on ne veut pas qu’il continue sa dérive vers la droite, force est de constater qu’il faut élire un député néo-démocrate ou un libéral. L’heure n’étant pas aux coalitions, voter pour le Bloc n’augmente en rien les chances d’avoir un gouvernement qui reflète les tendances des Québécois. Quelle ironie que de constater que le parti qui se dit prêt à tout faire pour (et seulement pour) les Québécois nous vole depuis vingt ans tout pouvoir décisionnel quant à la formation d’un gouvernement. Un pouvoir qui nous appartient de plein droit, comme à tous les Canadiens. Plus triste encore, ce parti qui se dit prêt à tout faire pour nous et qui nous empêche d’occuper de vrais postes ministériels a même l’audace de nous répéter que c’est le système fédératif canadien qui nous empêche de nous affirmer.
« Je n'ose même pas imaginer ce qui adviendrait du Québec.Serait-il seulement prit en considération? »
Le Québec doit mettre ses culottes. Nous sommes moralement responsables pour la conduite nombriliste qui a mené à notre propre mise au rancart au parlement fédéral. Nous nous sommes battus pour cette limitation qui a fait que notre voix en soit toujours une d’opposition. Si l’Ouest canadien continue à élire des gouvernements (minoritaires) qui nous ressemblent de moins en moins, personne n’est à blâmer à part nous-mêmes.
« Imaginons un instant seulement sur le plan linguistique que nous adoptions a 100% la politique multiculturaliste canadienne.Dans quel marasme se retrouveraient les Francophones du Québec et hors Québec? »
Le multiculturalisme n’est pas incompatible avec le fait d’être francophone et ne l’a d’ailleurs jamais été. La Francophonie, organisme de promotion la langue française par excellence, atteste au nombre étourdissant de cultures à travers le monde où les gens ont des échanges en français. Je me dis que si ces gens-là peuvent dialoguer en français dans leur propre pays, ils peuvent le faire tout aussi bien dans le nôtre. L’avantage d’être francophone en Amérique du Nord, c’est la proximité à la culture anglo-américaine. Il est grand temps qu’on mette à profit cette proximité, plutôt que de se soucier de taux d’assimilation qu’elle engendre, de la grosseur des caractères anglais sur des affiches, ou de la longueur d’un hijab. Le Québec peut exporter un modèle proprement francophone et bilingue au reste du pays jusqu’aujourd’hui « English-only ». On se montrerait francophones d’abord mais très ouverts à la langue des échanges mondiaux. Il faudrait simplement arrêter notre bitchage revendicateur et nous comporter en Canadiens exemplaires. Imagine donc le progrès qu’on pourrait faire faire au français et au Canada avec une telle attitude.
To Apparatchik:
ReplyDeleteMy rebuttal...
Firstly I don't wonder why I have few friends on this blog. I am well aware that my views are not generally appreciated (but I do respect the author of this blog for posting them). Believe me I don't come here looking for "friends".
What was my point about immigration and Trudeau?
Basically that the French-Canadians didn't appreciate the consequences of their political choices. I can argue that just about any immigration to Canada is bad for Francophones because it weakens them demographically by lowering their share of the total Canadian population. The overwhelming majority of immigrants and Allophones eventually become English-speakers (or their descendents do). From a demographic and political point of view Quebec should have desired an immigration-restrictionist party to preserve their 'weight' in the Canadian confederation. Instead they overwhelmingly voted for the Liberals and Trudeau IN PARTICULAR who opened wide the floodgates to Canada. In short they did the exact opposite of what they should have done. Look at the impending thirty new seats in the commons all due to immigration. Immigration, especially diverse immigration just makes Francophones just another ethnic group by promoting multiculturalism or worse yet just another bubble in a melting pot. Many French-Canadians still don't get this...
I also FIRMLY BELIEVE and have believed for a long time that Canada would be a lot better off without Quebec. BUT YOU WOULDN'T BE BETTER OFF. That's not my problem. It is a little bit like Northern Ireland. Great Britain would have been better off in every possibe way had it quit Ireland altogether in the 1920's. It couldn't because of the Ulster Scots in the north. That was good for THEM but not the people of Britain as a whole.
By the way your other comments about population exchange are absurd. People prefer their own kind and free people are not robots to be moved about on some kind of language chessboard for the benefits of social engineers. You are a lot like Trudeau in your thinking. His hijacking (see the book LAMENT FOR A NOTION) of the original, very limited, recommendations of the Bilingualism and Biculturalism committee were designed to get the Quebecois to see Canada and not their tribal-province as their political expression. Didn't work. The OLA has done nothing to reduce the cultural and spatial divide between the two language groups. It gets worse every year. Francophones who move out of Quebec are eventually assimilated like Italians in Toronto or Ukrainians in Saskatchewan. Anglophones have little reason to move to Quebec. I certainly wouldn't live there. Nor would I expect special treatment if I did, anymore then Francophones who come here should expect it.
The Toronto guy.
“I am well aware that my views are not generally appreciated […] Believe me I don't come here looking for "friends".”
ReplyDeleteIt’s not that I don’t appreciate your views. You represent the fed up English Canadian who’s sick of the whining and expects it’ll go away once Quebec does.
“From a demographic and political point of view Quebec should have desired an immigration-restrictionist party to preserve their 'weight' in the Canadian confederation.”
Maybe. But we like “leaders” that we perceive as strong. That’s why we voted for Duplessis and Drapeau. That’s also why we voted for Trudeau and Lévesque at the same time. It’s part of the political cultural DNA. My argument is that we approach politics more as a blood sport than as a tool of good governance. Often this works to our own detriment, as I have stated here in the past.
“Look at the impending thirty new seats in the commons all due to immigration”
Okay, but nobody’s having kids anymore. Much of our population growth therefore HAS to come from immigration.
“Immigration, especially diverse immigration just makes Francophones just another ethnic group by promoting multiculturalism or worse yet just another bubble in a melting pot. Many French-Canadians still don't get this...”
Actually they do. And it’s exactly what they’re afraid of. And it explains their drive to francise as many immigrants (all, ideally) as possible. And I find this tack even more misbegotten than you find the OLA. Instead of promoting bilingualism so that we can better interact with the sea of Anglophones around us, our provincial government justifies keeping us a captive population by playing the language/culture card every chance they get. Francophones account for about 2% of the population in North America, but our wise leaders say it’s time to dig our heels in, adopt a siege mentality, and “affirm” ourselves. My sense is that it’s high time we learned how to carry on a conversation with our neighbors around us in Shakespeare’s tongue because our numbers won’t be growing by leaps and bounds anytime soon. Especially if we don’t start in-migration based colonies ;-)
“I also FIRMLY BELIEVE and have believed for a long time that Canada would be a lot better off without Quebec. BUT YOU WOULDN'T BE BETTER OFF.”
I appreciate that you get where I’m coming from. I certainly understand where you’re coming from too.
Some days I think it would be easier to deny and repress my anglo and allo personas just because it would make things really convenient for the French-language supremacists around me and for the English-Rest-of-Canadians like you who are sick of them. But guess what? I’m allowed to exist too, damn it. I’m allowed to express my belonging to all three possible identity groups. I’ve made it. I’ve reached the top in terms of cultural belonging and now I’m supposed to bend over because others haven’t succeeded (or didn’t even try)?! I’m sure as hell not going to repress who I am to placate the idiots around me who are truly the insecure ones undergoing multigenerational identity crises. Hell, I shouldn’t even have to think about it. If anything in this picture doesn’t belong to me, it’s this “national struggle for survival” rhetoric. Belonging to all three culture groups comes with both challenges and opportunities. And nobody helped me overcome those challenges but me.
“By the way your other comments about population exchange are absurd.”
ReplyDeleteA thought experiment. I also said it needs tweaking. Don’t take it personally; you can stay in the 416/905.
“You are a lot like Trudeau in your thinking.”
Thank you. I’ll be sure to tell Justin you said so next time I see him. Not that it matters; I’ve been compared to worse.
“His hijacking […] were designed to get the Quebecois to see Canada and not their tribal-province as their political expression. Didn't work.”
Not sure. This is the stalemate I was mentioning earlier, where nobody ever loses at this chess game, but nobody ever wins either. What IS toxic is the idea that we are justified in sucking English Canada for all it’s got to make up for centuries of oppression.
“Francophones who move out of Quebec are eventually assimilated like Italians in Toronto or Ukrainians in Saskatchewan. Anglophones have little reason to move to Quebec. I certainly wouldn't live there. Nor would I expect special treatment if I did, anymore then Francophones who come here should expect it.”
It’s unsurprising to me that someone who isn’t in the middle of the action would think this way. Maybe my thinking is conditioned by belonging to all majorities as well as by being a minority within a minority within a minority all at the same time. Maybe your ambivalence (or hostility) to multilingualism is a side-effect of living in a more linguistically homogeneous environment, but I can’t imagine wanting to live in a place where multiple cultures aren’t simultaneously and actively promoted. A multicultural Montreal in a strong Quebec in a united Canada indirectly fostered that opportunity for me. Maybe you’re somewhat right to compare me to Trudeau – I’m more of a lofty citizen of the world than loyal to a narrow view, and I believe wholeheartedly that this is part of what makes me a good Canadian.
Ironic that I could make it everywhere but ideally wouldn’t move anywhere, isn’t it?
Apparatchik:
ReplyDeleteI could spend a lot of time 'Fisking' your posts but to be brief;
I don't know why we need "population growth". In any case my reference to immigration and the thirty new seats is that they are ALL being created OUTSIDE Quebec. You seemed to not grasp that. Consider, Quebec had 65 of 181 seats in 1867 (35.9%). Now it has 75 of 308 (24.3%), soon to shrink to 75 of 338 (22.1%). This is all due to population growth OUTSIDE Quebec. All caused by immigration. Preventing this should have been the Quebecois number one priority. They (perhaps unwittingly) did the opposite.
I would also like to suggest something else to you which I hope you will not take as an insult or a smear. You claim to belong to several communities and cultural groups. I would say the exact opposite is so. In my view you do not (probably) really belong to any of them. Human identity is not something you can slice up like a pizza. The Toronto guy.
Let's them do mental masturbation.
ReplyDeleteI had no idea that John McCain joined the Coalition Contre la Loi 103. Or that he was fluent in French.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYzaEibxP_4&feature=player_embedded#!
Anglos on welfare have a very good reason to move into quebec. It should be facilitated and encouraged. Especially into areas where balance of voting patterns would change.
ReplyDeletedada r baap
Adski said: "The separatists are dreamers and racists and deluded paranoiacs...". Really? They are all like that? Sorry to say, but it is exactly at the same level as Georges Le Gal.
ReplyDeleteHe forgot the part where Montreal separates from Quebec (because geographic borders and nation status have become meaningless at this point) and the rest of Quebec crumbles without their economic centre.
ReplyDelete