Monday, November 8, 2010

Falardeau versus Richler- Who Should be Honoured?

French and English Quebeckers, Montrealers in particular, live with the paradox that public street names honour historical figures that represent heroes to one linguistic group, who may very well be villains to the other side.
No better example is the back-to-back Montreal streets of MONTCALM and WOLFE, which honour the two opposing commanding generals at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham.

Americans who pass through the tiny Quebec town of St. Georges de Beauce are confounded by the sight of the Auberge 'Benedict Arnold.' While it is understandable that across borders, one man's hero is another man's traitor, it gets a little complicated when the phenomena occurs within one single jurisdiction.

While it's easy to accept the dichotomy of honouring two opposites when the historical foundation is buried in the distant past, it's not so easy, when the honouree is a recently deceased personality, a well-known heel or hero, once again depending on a particular point of view.

And so there remains those who are displeased that one of Montreal's most important arteries was renamed to honour René Levesque, Quebec's first openly sovereignist Premier and likewise, Quebec nationalists are none too pleased about flying in and out of Montreal's re-named Pierre-Elliot Trudeau airport.

While other controversies swirl over the appropriateness of allowing street names to continue to bear the names of personalities whose traits or deeds would never qualify them for such honorific today, as in the case of Jeffrey Amherst, an advocate of genocide and Lionel Groulx, a rabid and vociferous antisemite, today we face a different dilemma.

We'd like to believe that we'd support the naming of a street based on the contributions and accomplishments of a candidate, but it's hard not to let political feelings interfere. I'm reminded of what Mark Twain once said, "There is nothing so weak as a virtue untested."

This week, coming up towards the tenth anniversary of the death of Mordechai Richler, the inevitable request to have a street named after him was made by two city of Montreal councillors, who've started a petition to gather support. Link

Although one of Canada's greatest authors, Richler remains a villain in much of French Quebec for his scathing criticism of Quebec society in his book, "Oh Canada! Oh Quebec," a biting indictment of historical Quebec, portrayed as tribal and antisemitic.

His reference to Quebecoise women as 'sows',  forced by the Church to pump out as many children as possible, earned him the undying enmity of the nationalist movement.

Lost in all this, is the fact that Richler was an equal opportunity insulter. In his most famous book, "The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz," Richler's unflattering portrayal of his own Jewish community was typically unkind;

"But though Richler never had a flattering word to say about his central subject, Montreal Jews, or about the estranging environment of Quebec nationalism in which they increasingly found themselves lost—when his deadpan account of Quebec's absurd language wars was published in this magazine, in 1991, it became a literary and political schande* without precedent in his home town—he still became a local legend and then a kind of national landmark." THE NEW YORKER
(*Yiddish for 'shame'...ed)
To many nationalists, Richler was racist and cruel. Although most haven't even read his work and understand little of his caustic and acerbic style, they take it on faith that he is the epitome of evil, a Quebec-basher extrordinaire. Notwithstanding his success or fame, naming a street after such a character, talent aside, is an anathema. Lowbrow nationalists like Mario Beaulieu of the Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste de Montréal, are already howling in protest at the thought of Rue Mordechai Richler. LINK
 
In many respects, Quebec's Pierre Falardeau is a French version of Mordechai Richler. (or vice-versa).

A talented filmmaker who gave us the immortal character ELVIS GRATTON, there isn't any doubt that his artistic legacy remains an important part of Quebec culture.

Sharing not only Richler's artistic talent, Falardeau was also every bit as sarcastic and cruel as Richler.
 
He was a rabid nationalist whose dislike of Canada and anglophones bordered on the hysterical. Mr. Falardeau's extreme political view of the English and his penchant to shoot off his mouth, and his great good fun doing it, was particularly irritating.

Richler was considered by many Quebec Jews as being too negative and cruel. So too was Falardeau, as many Francophones considered him simplistic and uncouth and his rants against Canada and Anglos embarrassing.
Here's a particularly nasty skit of Falardeau making fun of anglos. Link(in French)

But politics aside, nobody can deny both these men's talent and the impact of their art on Quebec society.

While many hated the idea of Quebec as a racist society, Richler helped Quebeckers confront their past.

As for Falardeau, his most important work ELVIS GRATTON decried Quebec federalists as dim-witted, conservative and racist. Although not my cup of tea, his pro-sovereignist message was certainly entertaining and thought provoking.

Should one or the other get a street named after him?

It might be a sweet irony to see Rue Falardeau bisect Richler Street, the ultimate paradox of two cultures sharing a common address.

Perhaps we can rename the Lionel Groulx metro station after Richler and Amherst Street after Falardeau.

Come to think of it, nothing would change, hero or villain, the argument would continue....

53 comments:

  1. It sounds as if you personally would find agreeable for both these men to have streets named after them. This is certainly a more even-handed position than I would frankly have expected from you, and I suspect more even-handed than the commentary it will elicit. (on verra)

    I do however think it's important to point out that casting a self-deprecating regard on one's own cultural milieu in the context of fiction is a common device in the arts in everything from film to novels to stand-up humour. Examples are legion, from Seinfeld to Woody Allen to Claude Meunier.

    It is an altogether different matter, in the guise of presenting *non*-fiction, to defame another group and then try to claim some artistic license, or to assume some license based on one's "stature."

    Mordecai Richler, in an article for which he was paid 40k$, informed the readers of Atlantic Monthly that on the night of the PQ's victory in 1976, PQ youth sang "Tomorrow Belongs to Us", which he called "a chilling Hitler Youth song from Cabaret". The claim was completely false. The song in question was composed by Stéphane Venne, and had in fact originally been penned for the Mouvement Desjardins. It bore no relationship to the Cabaret song. Richler repeated his libel on the CBC. The libel was taken up by fourflusher Irwin Cotler in the rag Commentary. Venne went to great efforts to to show all this, and even after confronted with the evidence, Richler and Cotler retracted nothing. Tous les moyens sont bons, apparemment...

    This "great" Richler, this "towering figure" of CanLit, also claimed, again without foundation, and again in the guise of "non-fiction", (Oh Canada Oh Québec) that an "avowed" aim of the Patriotes was to kill all the Jews of the Canadas and confiscate their property. It was Patriote leader Papineau who supported in the Assemblée législative in 1832 a bill conferring full political and civil rights to Jews, a first in the British Empire.

    And so you see, these were very different exercises than anything in Duddy Kravitz. And many other examples from Richler's "non-fiction" could be given.

    Falardeau was to me one of the greatest Québécois. An original. Even in the bitterest controversies in which he was involved, the source of the controversy was his judgement or analysis of an issue, but not his honour or sincerity. He would simply never have committed the bassesses which Richler did, en toute connaissance de cause et sans le moindre remords.

    You see the difference? There's a quip I once heard which captured it: you're entitled to your own opinion, but you're *not* entitled to your "own" facts.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mississauga Guy weighs in...

    I definitely agree with the Editor. The Lionel Groulx Metro station should DEFINITELY be renamed after Richler. Same for the Groulx constituency (in NE Montreal, I believe?) and the mountain range in Quebec.

    Unfortunately, that sort of thing will never happen. Now there is a French CEGEP in the West Island named after Gérald Godin. I admit I came to like Godin, even if he was a separatist. He learned English and spoke softly and diplomatically. He was not a caustic separatist à la Camille Laurin (who studied at Boston Hospital), or Denis Lazure (U. of Philadelphia) or even Jacques Parasite (London School of Economics).

    But I digress (yet again!) I figure if parts of Highway 401 in Ontario are known as the McDonald-Cartier Freeway, Highway 20 (on the Quebec side) from the Ontario border to Montreal can become the Richler-Falardeau Freeway. Fair is fair! Just make sure that strip of highway is properly paved every year or two, otherwise we Ontarians will ridicule your side of the highway as the one that goes thumpety-thumpety-thump when crossing the border from the 401 to the 20!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Why am I not surprised. For you, and most other racist separatists, it's OK to be a racist, as long as you are a separatist. And it is not OK to be a racist, if the race you’re making fun of is Quebecois. I will be back later with enumerable examples of "Falardeau Racism" based on his opinion which is accepted as fact by many Quebecois. You say facts are paramount, but gloss over them when they don't support your theories.

    The difference between you and the Editor is that the editor can call a spade a spade and you can only call a spade a spade if that spade agrees with Quebec independence. You are shallow minded, which is tragic because you write eloquently. Racism is racism even if it is coming from a separatist. Take your head out of your ass and realize that using the terms Nigger, Spik and Bon-Juif are just as demeaning as Pepper or Frog. You are not the only victims as you are not the only perpetrators. However, the only racist laws in this province, and in this country, are supported by people like yourself against people like myself.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Editor, I don’t think Falardeau and Richler belong in the same post. As you wrote, Richler was an equal opportunity offender. He was at odds with Quebec nationalists, but also with Jewish nationalists and patriotic Canadians. Don’t forget that he repeatedly referred to Canada as a boring country that he had to leave for the sake of his sanity, and he occasionally implied that it would make sense for Canada to become a US state because there was no point to this country. I know for a fact that Canadian patriots were not too fond of Richler.

    So Richler was somewhat of a defeatist, malcontent, and pessimist, whose view of the world might be summed up as: people are shit. Falardeau, regardless of his artistic talents, was a rabid one-way racist with a much more simplistic and infantile view of the world where purely good guys fight purely bad guys, and there is no middle ground. In Falardeau’s world some guys were pure gold, while other guys were pure shit even if they didn’t do anything, because being neutral and staying out of the debate meant being a shit. I remember Falardeau saying in one interview that if you’re willing to fight his battles with him, you’re his dearest friend. If you’re staying on the sidelines, you’re his worst enemy. So either a dear friend, or a mortal enemy. What if I want to be neither? I guess that would automatically make me an enemy.

    Richler understood life much better than Falardeau and was much more mature than Falardeau. Richler knew that one is not meant to have it all in life. Falardeau, on the other hand, behaved like a 5 year old – he didn’t get what he wanted, he would lash out. Or he’d sulk in the corner and refuse to play.

    Next to Richler, Falardeau was a mental dwarf. Putting Falardeau’s name next to Richler’s is an insult to Richler.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree with Adski, Falardeau was a blow hard nationalist of the worst kind, the mind that would call on saving the white french canadian race, like bouchard did in 95 in quebec regions. Richler pegged down everyone equally, society needs people like that to bring them down a peg.
    As for Falardeau masterpiece elvis Gratton, depsite trying to make it not federalist, i allways found it more like a caricature of the deep quebec, with all it's wart for which falardeau proudly claim to be.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @ 'Jock',

    "Falardeau...would simply never have committed the bassesses which Richler did, en toute connaissance de cause et sans le moindre remords."

    Two years ago, when environmentalist David Suzuki said that he was disappointed in Quebecers who voted Conservative, Falardeau called him "a bearded little Jap, another bothersome shit from the west coast." Sounds a bit like defamation to me.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Note that my post at 9:26 is directed @ Jaques.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nothing should be named after Richler. I don't know about the other guy. The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I couldn't stand Richler, nor could I stand Falardeau. Although the latter said in one of his last interviews at Tout le monde en parle (available on YouTube with English subtitles for all of our unilingual Anglo friends) that he didn't care whether you were yellow, brown, white or green (paraphrasing here, could have been other colours), as long as you embraced the sovereignist cause, you were a friend of his and welcome to join in. He might have then tamed his views sensing that his time was coming, I don't know...

    I've always thought it was funny how Richler called Francophones anti-Semitic, when McGill used to have quotas for admitting Jewish students while UdM accepted them freely and when Outremont had a synanogue before Westmount did.

    ReplyDelete
  10. He characterized Suzuki as a «petit japanouille à barbiche, un autre emmerdeur de la côte Ouest». Falardeau has also written of the « Nouille-yorkais » (New Yorkers) on other occasions.

    And what was the context? Falardeau was reacting to Suzuki's sanctimonious sortie in which he expressed his "disappointment" in the Québécois (!) for having "voted Conservative". 10 seats out of 75.

    Falardeau pointed out the hypocrisy of an English Canadian Westerner somehow pretending that it was the Québécois who'd saddled us with Harper, when they'd voted the least for Harper of anybody and he was the West's boy par excellence. It's English Canada who gave us Harper. He also mentioned Suzuki's hysterical pronouncements around Québec's "genocide" of the James Bay Cree. Or Saint David's advice about how we should should put aside the "national question" and work on the environment, like our national question is his business or that he knows shit about it. Btw, did Saint David do or say shit about conditions in Kashechewan?

    He was highlighting the common phenomenon of English Canadian carpetbaggers and colonial faiseurs de leçons who judge Québec by different standards than they judge themselves. Falardeau was saying in effect: put your own house in order, hypocrite, do I go to BC to tell you how to organize your affairs? « Reste donc chez vous, chose, pis crisse-nous patience avec ton mépris colonialiste », he said.

    Falardeau elaborates here:

    http://ww2.coalitionsouverainiste.com:81/Video.aspx?video=FalardeauCassivi.wmv

    And notice that Falardeau's actually quite valid points about Suzuki's hypocrisy led him to this epithet. And it was that, an epithet. Notice he's not trying to pass off a series of defamatory lies as "historical facts" to the English-speaking readerships of "learned" journals or on Canadian state tv. Falardeau wasn't lying about anything.

    Whereas Richler went to his grave knowing his slimy lies had taken on a life of their own, and found that just swell.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I've always thought it was funny how Richler called Francophones anti-Semitic, when McGill used to have quotas for admitting Jewish students while UdM accepted them freely and when Outremont had a synanogue before Westmount did.

    and Jewish quotas were the norm in other English Canadian universities as well. It was also "funny", as in funny-peculiar and not funny-haha, given that he obviously wrote all this with an English Canadian audience (as well as American) in mind, and that Canada had the worst record of all western democracies in the treatment of Jewish refugees from the Holocaust. Its WWII anglophone prime minister was a life-long anti-semite and admirer of Hitler. Canada's policy of refusing Jewish refugees was captured in the phrase the immigration director of the period: "one is too many".

    yes it's pretty rich, English Canadians trying to occupy the moral high ground when it comes to anti-semitism. Almost as rich as their lessons about how to treat the Indians and the Muslims.

    ReplyDelete
  12. To Anonymous 12:41:
    Yo said:
    "I've always thought it was funny how Richler called Francophones anti-Semitic, when McGill used to have quotas for admitting Jewish students while UdM accepted them freely and when Outremont had a synanogue before Westmount did."

    Funny how you missed him dishing it to anglo in the same manner, but i guess you hear what you want to hear? how does anglos being anti semitic make french canadian less so? irrelevant.
    Schools in quebec would not accept anyone that was not catholic, at least protestant school boards accepted them. As for de UdeM accepting jewish students, i could not say.
    Richler was good at showing everyone's wart, shocking them into seing or denying what they were. He was an equal opportunity shit distruber, society needs people like that sometimes, seing ones reflection in the mirror is good, unfortunately not everyone can see it, and you get the knee jerk reaction from it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @jackass typical nationalist smoke and mirror, saying a lie numerous times does not make it true.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anon 1:02PM: "Schools in quebec would not accept anyone that was not catholic"

    The way Quebec nationalists deal with this shameful chapter in Quebec history is the following: "yes, we know, but it was in the past people, hello, we're in the 21st century now..."

    Of course, they apply this "what's in the past is in the past" rule very selectively, as we all know.

    ReplyDelete
  15. In World War Two the Societe Saint-Jean-Baptiste, much beloved by Francophones, was officially anti-semitic.

    ReplyDelete
  16. @ Jacko at 12:47 PM:

    So no one from outside Quebec, such as Suzuki, is allowed to express their opinions about the situation there? Last time I checked, Quebec was still a part of Canada, and the bullshit that is happening there is impacting people across the country. I am not surprised by the reaction of Falardeau, given the low value the Quebecois place on freedom of expression. I'm sure David Suzuki was unhappy that other Canadians voted for the Conservatives as well.

    The attack on Suzuki was more than just an 'epithet.' It was a blatantly racist slur, along the lines of Jacques Parizeau's infamous "money and ethnics" statement.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Falardeau was saying in effect: put your own house in order, hypocrite, do I go to BC to tell you how to organize your affairs?"

    It seems to me that Quebec Francophones had an awful lot to say about language and more at the recent Winter Olympic Games in Vancouver, BC. If the British Columbians were like the Quebecois, they would have just told you to go f*@k yourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  18. It seems to me that Quebec Francophones had an awful lot to say about language and more at the recent Winter Olympic Games in Vancouver

    you mean because so much was made about it being "bilingual" when it was a joke, and because "separatist" taxpayers paid for the athletes' training and lots more too?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Don't bother argueing with Jaques, he won't listen.
    Like most racist Quebecois, they are so racist they can't even tell when they're being racist. They are very good however at telling everyone who has the slightest thing to say about Quebec or French that they are racist. Typical double standard.

    Talk badly about Quebec = Racism
    Talk badly about Canada = Feedom of expression
    Talk badly about French = Racism
    Talk badly about English = The norm in Quebec
    Talk badly about seperation = Racism
    Talk fondlly of seperation = Godliness
    Talk badly about non-Quebecers = Funny
    Talk Badly of Quebecoise = Racism
    Talk badly of bill 101 = Racism
    Bill 101 (racism) = Neccessary for the protection of French
    And so on........

    He's made up his mind and doesn't believe in reality. Let him live in his own little world were Falardeau is a saint and Richler the devil. He is going to be sooooooo pissed when Barney's version makes 60 million $ in ticket sales and wins an Oscar or two.

    ReplyDelete
  20. To Jacques,

    I don't know what planet you were living on during the Olympics, but most announcements were in French FIRST. We all paid for the Olympics, stop your freakin whining. You see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear.

    Anglo Montrealer

    ReplyDelete
  21. I didn't say we didn't all pay for the Olympics. I said francophones did too, and sent athletes there which made them stakeholders so the analogy with Suzuki is pretty inept.

    We all pay into equalization too but I don't hear you trumpeting that.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The attack on Suzuki was more than just an 'epithet.' It was a blatantly racist slur, along the lines of Jacques Parizeau's infamous "money and ethnics" statement.

    well you didn't even quote Falardeau correctly anyway (why don't you define for us a Japanouille?)and I'll bet you didn't even read his piece in Ici, but I'll say this:

    Falardeau didn't sit down and take the time and effort to crank out of series of articles on the Japanese people laced with lies and condenscension, string it into a "non-fiction" book, repeat the lies about them on national tv and never retract them even when he was called out on them. Nor would Falardeau ever have done anything like that, with or without a fat honorarium from a US magazine, because that isn't what he was about. Nor did he live among the Japanese people in a Japanese-speaking society all his life without ever bothering to learn their language and then pose as an expert on their national pysche. That's just not something he would have done.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Although the latter said in one of his last interviews at Tout le monde en parle (available on YouTube with English subtitles for all of our unilingual Anglo friends) that he didn't care whether you were yellow, brown, white or green (paraphrasing here, could have been other colours), as long as you embraced the sovereignist cause, you were a friend of his and welcome to join in. He might have then tamed his views sensing that his time was coming, I don't know...


    That was pretty much always his propos and if you check the excellent interview collection « Québec libre! » (Les Editions du Québécois) you'll see he talks about that at length.

    Falardeau had never had any negative obsession with or animus toward any people of colour and followed the Black Power movement in the US and the Palestinian and other 3rd world liberation movements with a sympathetic interest.

    The propos was simple : this is a colonial situation here. There's unfinished business. If you're new here, you can't be expected to know that, but I'm telling you now, because you're going to hear a lot of fumisterie from a lot of people. I want you on my side. I'll answer any question you like. You can opt for the other side, but that will make us political adversaries. Just so you know. There.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Falardeau urged Anglo federalists in Quebec to leave the province, Jacques. The Anon above you quoted Falardeau correctly, he called Suzuki "a bearded little Jap". "Jap" is very offensive to Japanese people, just in case you didn't know.

    "We all pay into equalization too but I don't hear you trumpeting that."
    That's because I'm a proud Canadian and would gladly give money to provinces that genuinely need the money and actually appreciate what they get, instead of whining and complaining all the freakin time. In other words, provinces that don't continuously betray Canada like Quebec.

    On another note, I'm actually not happy that my taxpayer money went into the Olympics because the entire event was mainly staged on traditionally Native territory, mainly the Lil'wat, Musqueam, Squamish and Tseil-Waututh.

    Anglo Montrealer

    ReplyDelete
  25. Jacques: "Falardeau didn't sit down and take the time and effort to crank out of series of articles on the Japanese people laced with lies and condenscension, string it into a "non-fiction" book, repeat the lies about them on national tv and never retract them even when he was called out on them."

    No, he didn't. But sometimes one word is enough. And if you go on television and refer to someone you disagree with as a bearded "Jap", you don't have to write a series of extensive articles smearing Japanese people in order for me to think that you are a bigot. Because at that point, it becomes crystal clear that you are one.

    ReplyDelete
  26. "The propos was simple : this is a colonial situation here. There's unfinished business."

    Well that's Quebec in a nutshell. A French colony that tries to allign itself with legitimate liberation struggles of indigenous peoples around the world in an effort to continue the colonialist struggles of the 19th century that enslaved these indigenous people in the first place. A farce that's really fuelled by old world white Eurocentric attitudes and modern, homegrown racist xenophobia.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Question to anonymous at 12:53:

    At what time can the Francophones in Quebec stop calling themselves "colonialists"? They have been in Quebec for over 400 years.

    The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Adski:

    Do you really believe just saying the word 'Jap' makes one a bigot? I guess you have never seen any WW2 movies. The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  29. No, he didn't. But sometimes one word is enough. And if you go on television and refer to someone you disagree with as a bearded "Jap",

    You haven't got the slightest idea what you're talking about. This claim he made about Suzuki didn't originate with a tv appearance. He made it in a column he wrote in Ici which you haven't even read. So you're lying right off about the context and you're lying that the term japanouille translates as "Jap." Do you know what the French word is for the "Jap" in the pejorative sense it has in English? "Japanouille" is a neologism of Falardeau's. It didn't exist until Falardeau said it.

    Falardeau didn't devote one moment of his life to hating the Japanese people.

    But speaking of one utterance being enough, should we use that principle on you? Like in your stupid claim that all "our" Glenn Becks are francophones and sovereignists? One strike you're out. Except you come back for more and feed us the same variation on this theme every time you go on the 'net. Just like with Richler, it's a real project for you. Except Richler was important, and you're not.

    ReplyDelete
  30. @Toronto Guy...

    "Jap" is like calling Polish people "Polaks" or "Spiks" for Latinos and "Chinkers" for Chinese people. It's a discriminatory term.

    Anglo Montrealer

    ReplyDelete
  31. At what time can the Francophones in Quebec stop calling themselves "colonialists"?

    When they stop whining that they're a colonized and oppressed people, a state which only exists in their own imagination. When they stop grovelling for sympathy and equating themselves to groups that have really been dispossessed like the Palestinians or the Kurds. And even then, lets not kid ourselves, there are indigenous peoples in this country and they are neither English or French.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I didn't say that it "originated" on tv. I said he "referred" to it on tv. He wrote it first, and then when asked about it on TLMEP, he repeated it word for word.

    As for your continuous attempts to explain the "complexities" of Falardeau, you have me convinced at this point that there are really no depths to which you won't sink.

    ReplyDelete
  33. this is what you said:

    And if you go on television and refer to someone you disagree with as a bearded "Jap",

    and you wrote:

    and then when asked about it on TLMEP, he repeated it word for word.

    He didn't repeat it "word for word" or at all, on TLMEP, so you're lying. Here's the clip:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSkGgZO11VU

    But I'm quoting you right on Glenn Beck, aren't I? Check for yourself.

    Now where were we? Oh, yes, *you* were blathering about the bassesses de Falardeau. What a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  34. @ JAcques..

    A "Jap" is offensive. End of f*&*(*& story. If a federalist said Suzuki was a little "Jap", you'd be all over it. I frankly found it disgusting how Falardeau was criticizing immigrants for going to Dawson and McGill. This is not high school anymore. People are adults at that point and have the right to make choices for themselves

    Anglo Montrealer

    ReplyDelete
  35. Correct. My bad. He talked about it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCFHvNOlraM

    His attempts to excuse himself and conflate the Japonouille comment with New Yorkaise are truly pathetic.

    In the link you provided, go to 8:13 and see how he complains that in some school classes, the only Quebecois are the teachers, the rest being children of immigrants.
    8:37 – he talks about a conference he gave in Ecole Louis Joseph Papineau - “le seul Quebecois qu’il y avait en salle cet matin c’etait moi”

    If he was not a racist, why would that have bothered him? So congratulations, Jacques - if with that clip you wanted to further exonerate Falardeau, you shot yourself in the foot.

    As for all my other “lies”, bring them on. Let’s have it in the open.

    As for Richler being important, yes, he was. If I could have one thing he had, I’d go with the access he had to the American and British press. It’s time someone picked up where he left off and started exposing Quebec nationalism to the Americans again.

    As for being important or not, Jacques, don’t bring this in the debate unless you yourself are someone important. Because until then, we are all anonymous bloggers, with you being more anonymous than me. So if you ever ascribe a non-importance rating to me or anyone else, you are ascribing the same (or lower) rating to yourself.

    ---
    Speaking of Glenn Beck, I have no idea what you are talking about in this particular case. Are you referring to the time when I compared Quebec nationalists to Glenn Beck? Because if you are, then I stand by that.

    ReplyDelete
  36. @ The Toronto guy:

    "Do you really believe just saying the word 'Jap' makes one a bigot? I guess you have never seen any WW2 movies."

    In WW2 the Americans and their allies used the derogatory terms 'Jap' and 'Nip' to refer to their hated and despised mortal enemies, the Japanese. The war in the Pacific was especially brutal, with deeply racist overtones.

    ReplyDelete
  37. So was the European campaign. The GIs referred to the Germans as "Krauts".

    Conflating war realties with any of this is ridiculous. It’s apples and oranges.

    ReplyDelete
  38. @ adski,

    I didn’t say that the European theatre wasn’t brutal. But the fighting in the Pacific was even more ferocious because the Japanese soldiers were fanatical and refused to surrender. With few exceptions, they either fought to the death or committed suicide.

    Here is a quote from wikipedia:

    “In the past, ‘Jap’ was not considered primarily offensive; however, during and after the events of World War II, the term became derogatory.”

    ReplyDelete
  39. @ The Toronto guy:

    "At what time can the Francophones in Quebec stop calling themselves "colonialists"? They have been in Quebec for over 400 years."

    In the grand scheme of things, 400 years isn't a very long time. The native people have lived in Quebec for thousands of years.

    There have been Anglophone families living in Quebec for over 200 years, but many QC nationalists still refer to them as "colonialists."

    ReplyDelete
  40. Anglo Bashers, I didn't mean you when I said that bringing war reality to the discussion in Falardeau’s defense is ridiculous. You weren't the one who brought it in.

    ReplyDelete
  41. The native people lived in a few parts of Quebec, yes. But vast stretches of Quebec - then and now - were virtually unpopulated. And I still say 400 years is a considerable amount of time in terms of how Quebec was altered by the Francophone presence. The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  42. "But vast stretches of Quebec - then and now - were virtually unpopulated."

    What is that supposed to mean? That it's ok to be invaded when you have lots of space?

    "...how Quebec was altered by the Francophone presence"

    Yes, this tends to be the effect of imperialistic colonialism. Oddly enough, it's the Francophones that are whining about being the victims of Anglo colonization, but it's Catholic spires I see on native lands.

    ReplyDelete
  43. To put the record straight: the majority of the French are Catholics ! It is a profound case in history in the linguistics. The English conquest in Canada was protestant. It was for a very long time the road to serfdom, whether you like it or not. They have the right to be different and live them alone !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Perhaps the Editor should collect some money and send you to University so you can get a good look at our history.

    ReplyDelete
  44. TO THE TORONTO guy:
    At what time can the Francophones in Quebec stop calling themselves "colonialists"?
    At what time did the English colonialist gave the real freedom to the French in Quebec ? With you in 2010 who is bitching like an old maid without having been to school ?

    ReplyDelete
  45. To answer the person who claims Quebeckers are racist:
    WHAT IS THE DEFINITON OF RACIST?
    1. A belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determining cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

    2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine;it is discrimination.

    3. Hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

    If Anglophones do not recognize the different interests and unicity of Quebec, their culture, their religion and their language, it does not make Quebeckers racists. If they defend themselves prouving their background and history they are not necessarily racist;

    If Anglophones refuse to admit they are different and should not belong to a common federal base because they have other needs or because they are different, it does not make Quebeckers racist;

    If Anglophones makes fun of their culture, refused in the past to hire them, and if they reproach Francophones to defend themselves, it does not make Quebeckers THE RACISTS, YOU ARE THE ONE WHO WEARS THE SHOE MY FRIENd.

    ReplyDelete
  46. LET ME HELP YOU TO UNDERSTAND DEAR ANGLOS:
    QUEBEC IS NO LONGER PART OF CANADA. WHY ?
    BECAUSE WE HAVE OUR ECONOMICAL INDEPENDANCE, OUR LEGAL SYSTEM, OUR LANGUAGE, OUR CULTURE, OUR RELIGION, OUR OWN TELEPHONE SYSTEMS, OUR SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES, OUR ROADS, OUR LAKES, OUR LAND. Nothing is perfect, yours isn't either, but this is not the POINT. Unless you want to start drilling at your own cost and move an ocean between Ontario and Quebec, at your own cost, we are a NATION. goodbye and amen.

    ReplyDelete
  47. @ 12:31 PM:

    You should be posting your comments in the previous thread dated Nov. 5, where the editor discusses whores.

    ReplyDelete
  48. You are offensive, you want to use my gender and my provenance to a sexual subject to laugh. Thank you Mr. English but I don't bite.I will let you insult other people's intelligence.

    ReplyDelete
  49. I think the author of the blog should promise an important reward to the participant who will come with a constructive comment and a suggestion. I would be nice to see the tone of this blog to change. The francophobic tone is "malsain".

    ReplyDelete
  50. "QUEBEC IS NO LONGER PART OF CANADA. WHY ?
    BECAUSE WE HAVE OUR ECONOMICAL INDEPENDANCE"

    No you don't. Quebec is extremely dependent on transfer payments from the rest of Canada, to the tune of 8.5 billion dollars annually, or 13% of QC's annual budget. Studies by the Quebec government itself indicate that it is becoming poorer and more dependent on handouts from the federal government with each passing year.

    ReplyDelete
  51. 1.- Who started the system ?
    2.- Go to the source !
    3.- Why do you complain to us then?
    4.- Would it make a difference to you if we would be Chineese ?
    5.- Why do you always grow teeth in your rear end lashing your francophobic diarrhea song into a long exacerbating monologue to the whole world ?
    6.- What do you advocate to re-correct the situation ?
    7. - Do you think Quebec is the only state which has financial problems in the world ?
    8.- Do you think tolerance is among you in English Canada ? WHY ? How will you readdress your attitude ?

    ReplyDelete
  52. "It seems to me that Quebec Francophones had an awful lot to say about language and more at the recent Winter Olympic Games in Vancouver, BC. If the British Columbians were like the Quebecois, they would have just told you to go f*@k yourselves."



    It's actually pretty much what they did. I read the forums talking about this back then, and there must have been thousands of posts on differents news sites made by anglos who bashed us. A lot of these posts were completely racists.

    Here, only falardeau bashed suzuki.

    And yet, you dare to give lessons to us.

    ReplyDelete
  53. "I am not surprised by the reaction of Falardeau, given the low value the Quebecois place on freedom of expression. I'm sure David Suzuki was unhappy that other Canadians voted for the Conservatives as well.

    The attack on Suzuki was more than just an 'epithet.' It was a blatantly racist slur, along the lines of Jacques Parizeau's infamous "money and ethnics" statement."




    LOL, check who's accusing others of being racists while writing this: "given the low value the Quebecois place on freedom of expression"

    This comment really represents the ultra-hypocrite attitude of many anglo-canadians when it come to Quebec and francophones in general.

    Falardeau was really over the top, but he was right on something: there is still an old latent colonialist attitude toward québécois (and francophones) among many english-canadians. I have seen it (and heard it) too many times myself after having lived in Ontario and BC.

    ReplyDelete