"A Conservative MP introduced a private member's bill yesterday that would require Canadians to show their faces before they vote, reviving a debate first sparked more than three years ago.Steven Blaney, who represents the Quebec riding of Levis-Bellechasse, said the bill would fix a "gap" in the electoral system and is not meant to discriminate against religious groups, such as Muslims." LINK
One can only wonder what Steven Blaney's real motive was in proposing such a Bill, it certainly doesn't affect his riding of Levis-Bellechasse, which is among the most racially pure ridings in Canada.97% of the people living in Levis, the largest city in the riding are white francophone Catholics.
Leave town and head south towards the American border and that racial purity percentage creeps right up towards 100%!
Of the riding's 35 parishes, 25 are named for Catholic saints and one for the Virgin Mary herself (by my rough count.)
 |
| Click to enlarge |
In fact, it's highly unlikely that there's one woman in the entire 100,000 person riding, who wears a veil!
Perhaps Mr. Blaney should consider that over 250,000 Canadians voted in the last federal election via mail-in ballots and not one of them were required to 'show' their face. The special ballot, can be filled in at home without any 'identity' control whatsoever.
So what's up with Mr. Blaney's obsession with this non-issue concerning veils that requires him to waste political capital on a private members bill?
Is this really an issue in Levis-Bellechasse?
Is the truth rather that Mr. Blaney has chosen to make political hay by gratuitously bashing immigrants? It seems that as of late, immigrant bashing has gone mainstream, as Quebec politicians of all stripes have found safe ground in railing against the newly arrived.
A few weeks ago, the security detail at the National Assembly disallowed several Sikhs from entering the Quebec Parliament while wearing a kirpan.
Fair enough, it was a security issue to them and it was a case of doing their job. When the alarm went off as the Sikhs walked through the metal detector, they were faced with the choice of letting them through or not and I really can't find fault in their decision to disallow them entry into the building. It was a security issue and nothing else.
The story made headlines for a short time but soon petered out as the disappointed Sikhs chose not to make a federal case over the incident.
Fair enough, it was a security issue to them and it was a case of doing their job. When the alarm went off as the Sikhs walked through the metal detector, they were faced with the choice of letting them through or not and I really can't find fault in their decision to disallow them entry into the building. It was a security issue and nothing else.
The story made headlines for a short time but soon petered out as the disappointed Sikhs chose not to make a federal case over the incident.
But the Quebec Parliamentarians chose not to leave well enough alone, and decided to further embarrass the Sikhs by enacting a special law that bans kirpans in Parliament, officially.
It seemed like an unnecessary provocation, a cheap shot that was unfortunately, enormously popular with the public.
And finally there is Quebec's resident evil bitch, Louise Beaudoin who hissed to reporters that multiculturalism is a Canadian, but not a Quebec value. LINK
In Quebec, the latest policy de jour is Interculturalism
Madame Beaudoin can say what she likes, about how to properly assimilate immigrants but it seems that Canada and its multiculturalism is a lot more successful in assimilating minorities in the great Canadian mosaic than Quebec is in assimilating their immigrants.
A couple of generations down, one only has to look at the immigrant descendants in Quebec versus those in Canada to see the obvious differences.
Quebec minorities, subject to Quebec's 'enlightened' interculturalism remain disconnected and apart from francophone society, while the opposite phenomenon is observed in Canada where the descendants of first or second generation immigrants have adopted Canadian values almost completely.
And finally there is Quebec's resident evil bitch, Louise Beaudoin who hissed to reporters that multiculturalism is a Canadian, but not a Quebec value. LINK
In Quebec, the latest policy de jour is Interculturalism
Whaaat??? Does anything above, actually translate to the real world?"Multiculturalism is the ideology that postulates that all cultures and civilizations are of equal value and should be treated and promoted equally within the same nation.Interculturalism is a political ideology that does not place a priority for all cultures to be on the same level as a basis to organize a given society. Its main objective is rather to develop a common civic culture based on the values of freedom and liberty, and of human rights, as derived from the Western civilization, while encouraging interaction between the communities living in the same country."
Madame Beaudoin can say what she likes, about how to properly assimilate immigrants but it seems that Canada and its multiculturalism is a lot more successful in assimilating minorities in the great Canadian mosaic than Quebec is in assimilating their immigrants.
A couple of generations down, one only has to look at the immigrant descendants in Quebec versus those in Canada to see the obvious differences.
Quebec minorities, subject to Quebec's 'enlightened' interculturalism remain disconnected and apart from francophone society, while the opposite phenomenon is observed in Canada where the descendants of first or second generation immigrants have adopted Canadian values almost completely.
If Quebec really wants to assimilate immigrants they could start by treating them with respect. Instead of focusing on the differences, perhaps concentrate on what we have in common.
Bashing immigrants needlessly is an aggressive sign of resentment.
It is that resentment that remains the real problem, it is what keeps immigrants flowing to the English side of the language equation where they feel respect and acceptance.
Recently news broke that Canada and Quebec had accepted a record number of immigrants last year. If history repeats itself, less than 25,000 of the 280,000 new arrivals will assimilate to the French side of the language equation, thus eroding the francophone demographic even further.
Perhaps Ms. Beaudoin should ask if Quebec's special brand of interculturalism is the right formula. She and Mr. Blaney should understand that people, especially the immigrants listen to what is being said and make their own decisions in consequence. They may be new to this country, but they know when they are being disrespected.
Bashing immigrants needlessly is an aggressive sign of resentment.
It is that resentment that remains the real problem, it is what keeps immigrants flowing to the English side of the language equation where they feel respect and acceptance.
Recently news broke that Canada and Quebec had accepted a record number of immigrants last year. If history repeats itself, less than 25,000 of the 280,000 new arrivals will assimilate to the French side of the language equation, thus eroding the francophone demographic even further.
Perhaps Ms. Beaudoin should ask if Quebec's special brand of interculturalism is the right formula. She and Mr. Blaney should understand that people, especially the immigrants listen to what is being said and make their own decisions in consequence. They may be new to this country, but they know when they are being disrespected.
Another slam dunk by the editor. While immigrant bashing may be in vogue politically in Quebec at the current time, it's consequences will be devastating for the province and her economy down the road. Immigrants and their taxes are necessary to prop up the social security pyramid scheme that we here in the West have created. Without them and more importantly, their kids, pension plans and healthcare funding becomes the burden of fewer taxpaying workers [25-55 Year olds]. And with the babyboom retirement tsunami that will hit us in the next 10-15 years, we need all the help we can get. What the ever endearing Louise Beaudoin and her racist ilk fail to realize is that prospective immigrants to Quebec are listening and choosing to move elsewhere in droves. The competition for attracting Class A immigrants is fierce. The World has changed a lot in the past 30 years. Relative peace and stability has spread the wealth around. Countries that were once third world cesspools are keeping their best and brightest now. Middle classes are emerging in places like China and India thus providing a better quality of life for this new segment of the population. The modern day immigrant is in it for economic reasons. Saving and propping up peculiar fading cultures (i.e. Quebecois) around the world doesn't factor very high in the immigrant's decision making process. The ball really is in the immigrant's court at the moment and sadly, Quebec is becoming a worsening prospect. They get their foot in the door through Quebec and within 5 years move out to another province. We never get the return on the investment because their kids (who become professionals) settle down and pay taxes elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteAnd that's what it's all about, educating and retaining the children of immigrant families. Every-time I'm in Vancouver, Sydney, San Francisco or Toronto I'm surprised. The managers I deal with are the first generation children of immigrants that have made it to the top. They are running the show. While in Quebec, the government, through short sighted and discriminatory policies have pushed away the best and brightest immigrants and instead have decided to focus on attracting criminal and illiterate classes of immigrants. Say what you will about Sikhs, the ones I went to school with are Doctors and professionals now and all of them live in the States. Quebec educated, trilingual professionals paying taxes in another friggen country. Now that's a real shame Louise.
Quote:
ReplyDelete"And finally there is Quebec's resident evil bitch, Louise Beaudoin who hissed to reporters that multiculturalism is a Canadian, but not a Quebec value"
Can you expect anything else from this bottom feeder. She and Curzi are the worst. Just full of hate.
But, your article points out something else. It seems everybody is jumping onto the band wagon on bashing minorities in Quebec. The Mario Dumont show has for too long allowed anti-minority comments on it's show by inviting Gilles Proulx to open his stupid mouth on air. And Mario at no point tries to cut him down. Okay once, okay twice, but he just let's him go on and on. Even Caroline Proulx has thrown a few comments such as immigrants (greeks, italians, etc) choose to speak english at home even though they have gone to french schools. It's becoming a fad in this province to bash minorities. Even on public airways. Where the hell is the CRTC when you need them.
I dunno. While I agree with what you say about multiculturalism and interculturalism and Quebec's failures with them, I still think there's a few things that come from certain cultures that shoudln't be brought over. I thought the Kirpan situation was a little blown out of proportion, and I think the law put in place afterwards was a simple means of putting the matter to rest officially. And I'm not sure if Kirpans are still allowed in schools or not; but if they are that's retarded. A child, Sikh or otherwise, is still a child and doens't fully understand the concept of death, and thus should never have access to a weapon. And this isn't even an object that can be USED as a weapon that we're talking about here, its a legitimate stabbing tool!
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm sorry, but I'm not down with the veil over the face thing, not because I have a beef with Muslims, but because it symbolizes an aspect of Islam that imprisons women, which I think is completely incompatible with a society built upon freedom. It may seem like a hypocritical statement at first glance, but the line needs to be drawn somewhere. Or what about female genital mutilation? Is that something you want crossing over and going on in your community? Even it you don't have to hear about it or witness it, is it something that you like the idea of going on in your society? There's so much more that Muslim culture has to offer to enrich our societies, couldn't such practices be left behind? Again, no beef with Muslims. It's just the example I'm going with here.
I'm afraid that we're reaching a point where we're just waiting for the Quebec government to deal with a cultural issue so we could call them racists. When the kirpan issue first arose everyone roared "Quebec is racist agaisnt Sikhs!"; and then the sentiment changed to "You know, now that I think about it, maybe having knives in the NA isn't the greatest idea. Okay, maybe the Quebec government did all right." We don't have to accept something into our society just because we don't want to appear racist. And as anti-seperatists, we don't have to accept something into our society just because the PQ doesn't and accepting it makes us appear like glorious saviors. Quebec politicians may be misguided in MANY aspects, but at least they have the balls to stand up for themselves. Face veils are a symbol of intolerance towards women and allowing Kirpans in the NA or in schools is intolerant of public safety, and I don't think we should tolerate intolerance (ah yes that cliche line). Think about, immigrants come here for a better life because they weren't happy with the lives they lead in their homeland. But to achieve this higher quality of life they aren't willing to abandon a few minor cultural traditions? I know if North America ever became a third world continent under a faschist dictatorship or whatever, I'd gladly abandon Christmas or Easter to live in Japan if they asked me to. I certainly wouldn't practice their religions (and I wouldn't expect Muslims to convert to Christianity to live here) but I'd be willing to make sacrifices to respect the nation that's giving me a chance at a better life.
When you arrive in a country with a different culture, there is some culture shock. Imagine you moved to Morocco for example (just as there are many Moroccans moving here). At first you kind of bottle up the culture shock, then it starts to anger you, and you get short tempered. Someone pushes in at a line-up, and you blow up in anger, not because of this occasion, but because of all the times someone has pushed in since you arrived. The oppressive heat starts making you feel like you cant escape. You cant even do simple things like work our where you need to go to buy a clothes iron since they have no Canadian Tires or Wal-Marts.
ReplyDeleteThere comes a fork in your road at that point, and it comes when you meet the expatriate community (or immigrant community). They are beckoning you over to join them, holding out a pint of Guinness with the offer of easy conversation. And they are inviting you to the Irish pub where they all sit around eating western food, and they understand your frustrations.
Or, you can take the much harder road of learning to know the locals. Learning to speak their language, to negotiate their customs, to understand their sense of civility and manners, to understand the holy-cows in their culture that you can not mention, to make friends, to be invited into houses, etc.
To take that second fork in the road requires that the locals are welcoming. That they are forthcoming with the invitations. That you feel there will be some bounty awaiting you for making the effort. Because it is actually a lot of work.
Obviously in my metaphor the anglophone community represent the expats and the francophones the locals.
The Quebecois in general, and the separatists specifically, get it very wrong in this regard. They pay lip-service to wanting the immigrants to assimilate, but they are like a single-man who in public is all swagger and bravado about his physical endowments and ability to thrill but then never takes a woman home as he worries about his impotence and is shy about the pimple on his ass. It is easy to say you want the immigrants to come across, but when was the last time that Louise Beaudoin held out a real hand of friendship to a new arrival? She doesn't really want them in her home, you understand?
They are so blind that they can't even see it. I once had someone say to me in polite mixed company (completely francophone) over a bottle of wine "You know you are the kind of immigrant we want here: you are white, you speak French, you arrive already with an advanced degree, and you are going out with a Quebecoise". No-one could understand why I hit the roof and started ranting about that. "What is the problem?" my girlfriend asked, "he was saying you are welcome in Quebec!"
"Obviously", I explained, "he said out loud what we all believe to be your attitude. That I did not always speak good French or go out with a Quebecoise, that it took me years to learn." Louise Beaudoin and whoever is the author of that 'intercultural' garbage are also transparent with the same underlying attitude and are actively pushing immigrants away from assimilation whilest paying lip-service to it.
I can't believe how blind they are and that there is no-one in their ranks who is prepared to stand up and say "This is counter productive. If we ever want to fulfill our dream of having an independent Quebec we have to have a position that goes 'We foresee an open tolerant future Quebec where all citizens will be valued.'" Obviously that is not something I can say to a Quebecois at a dinner table and expect to get another invitation, and it is not something that a Quebecois who believes it is prepared to say to others as it is taboo. That is the taboo holy-cow in Quebec that can not be mentioned! Amazing where a culture can lead you, hey?
People shouldn't hate on Quebec for this issue
ReplyDeletehttp://news.ca.msn.com/canada/cbc-article.aspx?cp-documentid=22128929
Are Muslims racist against Muslims? No, because this has nothing to do with racism and eveything to do with gender equality.
Showing your face to vote in Canada is all right. I disagree also with putting a cowboy scarf. Perhaps there is no limit to all this: take off your shoes to go to a store, start praying Allah in the middle of the sidewalk, eating huge worms could be the next step, etc...
ReplyDeleteQuebec always took a distance from all of that...
Fortunately, the country has decided to cut back on the number of immigrants Canada will accept. It's about time.
Nobody has anything to say about the pension the plus 65 years old immigrants are collecting, even if they never contributed. A buttomless feeding policy which is completely disregarded.
The culture in Quebec is upfront. If people are in disagreement, Canada is huge, they can travel where they feel it suits them better. In the meantime I am pleased to see that some people are speaking what they like and what they want to keep. Accepting everything and living in a dump is not me.
Jason the Montreal Anglo said regarding the veil " it symbolizes an aspect of Islam that imprisons women".
ReplyDeleteJason, that is only because you choose to see it that way. The veil is in fact pre-islamic. It is traditional dress. That we have women wearing the veil is not some "symbol of male repression", it only says that we have Sand People living amongst us. Can you imagine if there were a group of people in the Star Wars bar who were enforcing the disrobing of the Sand People?
The veil is simply traditional dress. Sure it conforms to modesty that is part of Islamic tradition, but there should be no reason that we should be pushing immigrants into our uniform of blue jeans and a sweater. Some of own youth dresses with piercings in their noses and lips, torn clothing of any shape it wants to be, sexually provocative cloting and wear what ever they like despite the fact that it offends some people. Should we also be enforcing confomity on these people as well? Or is your proposed conformity just singling out those sand people who want to live amongst us?
Even if the veil were not pre-Islamic, that should not change the arguement, surely. Unless "Islamic" has become a dirty word and a justification for truncating rights. To stamp out that terrible scurge upon our society, just as the separtists would stamp out the scurge of Anglophones.
If you want to talk female oppression, perhaps we should ban the Hasidm from shaving their womens heads. Why not ban sending your daughter to an all-girls catholic school that segregates sexes and forces girls to wear uniforms truncating their individuality? In fact, why not ban school uniforms, say that your world view is the one true "recieved" view and force the rest of the society to conform to what you believe?
As the editor pointed out, the targetting of veils is not really about identifying voters since you can cast a postal vote, it is about targetting the veil and finding a reason to do so.
If you want to ban the veil because of some percieved justice for women, then say so, open the conversation to the women who actually wear them since they know best why they do it, and accept what they say without superimposing the dominant culture on them by saying "they are indoctrinated, brain washed, and we actually know better". Because if you ask the women who wear the veil whether they want to be "emancipated" with your all-enlightened view, you know full well they will say "thank-you for your concern, but I wear the veil by choice. Can you leave me alone now, please?"
Etoile,
ReplyDeleteEventually someone will see that they can get votes from foreign born and minority communities that support immigration. They will try get votes and increase the quota. The will send the surplus to Quebec specifically montreal and within 10 years Pur laine will become about 60 to 70 percent of the population down from 79. After that you will get a taste of what it will be like with the end of bill 101. Already the seppies can't win their referendum because they lost the critical mass of the votes. Every year from 1995 onward got even more difficult.
Also electoral reform as mississauga guy mentioned could mean alot more seats in Federalist montreal. Based on the population and growth on the island. Quebec has a Gerrymandered electoral seating arrangement that rewards the more pur laine rural areas.
The "pure laine" Islamic are doing here what they do at home, with a health system and the old age pension. It is up to them to adapt to our country while in the open. If you don't agree. Fine. I am not speaking against multiculture : French Haitiens, Sénégalais, Congolais etc... they walk in Montréal dressed up very colorfully, and they are a beautiful addition to Quebec. Their French is absolutely beautiful and they are interesting, as they like to share.
ReplyDeleteObviously your tangente on the topic differs from the real argument: keeping a veil on your face. You don't have to.
Perhaps "Anglo-seepies" agree to everything and anything: huge earrings in nose, lips, tattoos, green hair two feet long straight in the air etc.. at the end of your life the great Canadian mascarade will look great pushing on a walker, testing for HIV with no pension, everything, but speaking French. What a great cause you are serving!with great dignity.... yack..... Again your statistics are counting above any philosophy or principal. Well, keep it that way, you will fall in your abyss of numbers, as you know culture in this country since 400 years saw a lot of misery and they will preserver theirs before you OK the whole world to your bedroom.
If Egyptians are proud to be Egyptians, why can't Quebecois do the same !
ReplyDeleteThe Chinese will outnumbered the English Candians one day, that will take care of them !
ReplyDeleteI'm sure the Chinese won't disagree to bill 101. They don't seem to care to preserve the first European Nation vibrant in Canada. For them it represents an interesting culture.
"That we have women wearing the veil is not some "symbol of male repression""
ReplyDeleteIt's not? Ask a Islamic woman what her husband would do if she removed the veil in a public restaurant.
"Can you imagine if there were a group of people in the Star Wars bar who were enforcing the disrobing of the Sand People?"
The Star Wars bar was on Dantooine, not Alderaan. How many bars are there in the Middle East with tons of white people walking around?
"The veil is simply traditional dress. Sure it conforms to modesty that is part of Islamic tradition, but there should be no reason that we should be pushing immigrants into our uniform of blue jeans and a sweater"
As a nation we've sucked it up and made it offensible to say Merry Christmas on signs and while serving clients because we know it might offend some people. Do you realize how huge of a consession that is for a country? Are you telling me that newcommers can't sacrifice a little bit of cloth over their face as a sign of good faith to their new country and countrymen? And I'm not saying wear what we wear. They could litterally keep the entire dress except for the bit covering the face and I think allot of people would be satisfied.
"Some of own youth dresses with piercings in their noses and lips, torn clothing of any shape it wants to be, sexually provocative cloting and wear what ever they like despite the fact that it offends some people. Should we also be enforcing confomity on these people as well? Or is your proposed conformity just singling out those sand people who want to live amongst us?"
People are offended by this because it's a sign of rebellious youth. Rebellious youth isn't oppression of women my friend.
"Even if the veil were not pre-Islamic, that should not change the arguement, surely. Unless "Islamic" has become a dirty word and a justification for truncating rights. To stamp out that terrible scurge upon our society, just as the separtists would stamp out the scurge of Anglophones."
What are you talking about stamping out for? I'm not Hitler advocating extermination of Arabs here. I welcome all to my country. Muslims, Jews, Asians, whatever. We're all human. The veil is perceived as female oppression not just by me but by thousands if not millions of people throughout the world. If it really isn't a sign of female oppression then it's up to the Muslim community to step up and educate the world. And I don't see that. Making cultural sacrifices in the name of cultural peace seems to be a one-way street in Canada.
"If you want to talk female oppression, perhaps we should ban the Hasidm from shaving their womens heads"
ReplyDeleteI'm not aware of this tradition, but if it is a legitimate sign of female oppression, then yes, it doesn't belong in a freedom-loving nation based on equality.
"Why not ban sending your daughter to an all-girls catholic school that segregates sexes and forces girls to wear uniforms truncating their individuality? In fact, why not ban school uniforms, say that your world view is the one true "recieved" view and force the rest of the society to conform to what you believe?"
I'm all in favour of banning single-sex schools as it does segregate sexes. Uniforms are entirely up to the school I suppose. And if someone doesn't like wearing a uniform there's always the option of public school. It's their right as a Canadian citizen to choose. And I think you're exagerating a tad on the whole "my world view" thing a little. Nothing I've written indicates I want immigrants to abandon their beliefs at the door and become "White Christian Canadians".
"If you want to ban the veil because of some percieved justice for women, then say so, open the conversation to the women who actually wear them since they know best why they do it, and accept what they say without superimposing the dominant culture on them by saying "they are indoctrinated, brain washed, and we actually know better". Because if you ask the women who wear the veil whether they want to be "emancipated" with your all-enlightened view, you know full well they will say "thank-you for your concern, but I wear the veil by choice. Can you leave me alone now, please?"
Untill you can guarantee that EVERY woman wearing the veil does so out of their own free will and not the will of their husband or father I'll believe you. But I've met people first hand who have told me their father has slapped their mother publicly in the face for not wearing the Niqab properly. I've played soccer with young Arabs whose mothers have told my mother that they've abandonned the Niqab because they find it a disgusting symbol of male dominance that they'd rather have it as a part of their cultural history than their cultural reality. Some still chose to wear the head scarf though and that's quite all right with me. And the players fathers would tell my mother how they know many people within their own Muslim communtiy that fully abide by the Sharia Law context of the Niqab. What about young Arabs I've spoken to that have said without feeling the slightest bit embarassed to say it to a white guy "Fuck le Quebec! Tous vos femmes devraient porter des voiles. C'est toutes des puttes!" These dudes don't invent this stuff. It's spread through an ideology that's being carried over and passed on to new generations of Canadian Islamists.
If someone isn't willing to make a tiny concession to the nation that has made many concessions for them, then they don't give a shit about any ideology but their own. The PQ is a good example of this.
Anonymous at 1:11pm wrote "If Egyptians are proud to be Egyptians, why can't Quebecois do the same !"
ReplyDeleteBecause Egypt is a nation made up of many peoples. The Arabs, the Bedouins, the Nubians, the Copts, etc. When they agitate for a change in government, that change is for all the peoples of the nation of Egypt, not just one.
When one says for example, "Sikhs arrive in Australia and are happy to become Australians", that means that they are happy to take on citizenship, commit their future to Australia, perhaps wave the flag and support our national sporting teams. It does not mean that they stop speaking Punjabi, take off their turbans or change their culture.
Conversely if one says "Sikhs arrive in Quebec and are happy to become Quebecois" it means a very different thing and is almost an oxymoron. For the "Quebecois" are a people, not a nation. How can a Punjabi speaking turban wearing sikh become Quebecois? He cant, it is impossible. This concept is not really all that subtle, and it amazes me that people here can not see that their self-definition revolves around their race and ancestry.
When the government forces us to wear a number plate on our cars that says "Je me souviens" it grates on every immigrant. That sentiment is for only one race in the "nation" of Quebec. Does the Greek 2nd generation born in Quebec, a home owner in Montreal think "Je me souviens, Que né sous le lys, Je croîs sous la rose."? It is not so difficult to understand surely that the concept of "Quebecois" is exclusive, and it excludes everyone except the Quebecois.
There is no problem with the Quebecois being proud of their ancestry, just as Australians descended from the original settlers (convicts) are proud of being the original Australians. It is a different thing when the flag waving becomes centred on race and starts separating off "les autres" as having a less valuable vote or less valuable opinions on the future of Quebec. And it becomes a problem when forcing immigrants to take off their traditional dress is cloaked under the guise of "Quebecois being proud to be Quebecois" (or "le Québec aux québécois!")
Editor,
ReplyDeleteThis is yet another one of my out-of-topic posts. Where is your promised piece about Arcade Fire? Another accolade, they just won a BRIT Award yesterday, the Best International Group. They even beat The Black Eyed Peas in that category.
And then, another party pooper. This time is the organizer of St. John the Baptist Day.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/arcade-fire-must-sing-french-play-fete-nationale-20110216-132300-327.html
Editor,
ReplyDeleteIf you may, please merge this post with my previous post about Arcade Fire. If you cannot, never mind, just post them both.
Arcade Fire also won Best International Album at the Brits, beating Katy Perry and Eminem.
Also, there is a good article from French media about Montreal linguistic reality. I like it how it takes a shot toward ADISQ.
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/arts/dossiers/grammy-2011/201102/15/01-4370349-victoire-darcade-fire-aux-grammy-montreal-cool-et-multilingue.php
A dozen years ago, "interculturalism" distinguished itself from "multi-culturalism" as a principle which looked ahead rather than backward; that it was not the glorification of centuries-old folk-dancing and other stereotypes which should be the focus of government policy, but the integration (not assimilation!) of various cultural and ethnic groups into the mainstream. Promoting inter-ethnic harmony today means more than learning about ages-old quaint customs: it means being involved with the others at all levels of a society which allows and fosters al groups to have access to all levels... I dunno whether Louise Beaudoin subscribes to this view but that is what the authors of the term meant.
ReplyDeleteSee: http://www.iim.qc.ca/
"l'Institut Interculturel de Montréal offre depuis 1974 un service de formation interculturelle permettant à ces intervenants de répondre plus efficacement aux besoins de leur clientèle.
Les sessions de formation ont pour but d'aider les participants à mieux s'outiller pour comprendre les personnes des diverses communautés ethnoculturelles et à mieux travailler en contexte pluriculturel en développant des compétences interculturelles. La formation en interculturel veut aussi amener les acteurs sociaux à rechercher des voies alternatives pour amorcer un changement social.
La méthodologie et la pédagogie utilisées pour nos programmes visent à établir une synergie entre la théorie et la pratique. L'approche choisie par l'IIM amène les participants à développer des pratiques interculturelles dans leurs démarches professionnelles, en reconnaissant et en intégrant les savoirs et savoir faire des diverses cultures. "
"Because Egypt is a nation made up of many peoples. The Arabs, the Bedouins, the Nubians, the Copts, etc. When they agitate for a change in government, that change is for all the peoples of the nation of Egypt, not just one."
ReplyDeleteQuebec is a province made of "many people" as well. The French are coming from 11 different areas in France. The new people come as well from Sénégal, Congo, Haiti, Lorraine, Paris, Belgium etc.. it is more complex than you think. They are quite independant, even if they belong to the country where the majority are English.
Jason, I have been spent months and months in the middle east, I even worked in Egypt for a while. As well as the Arab world, I have been to Iran, Pakistan, Malaysia, Sudan, Morocco ... all sorts or islamic places. I can assure you that Muslims like being Muslims.
ReplyDeleteNow you say your mother spoke to some woman at your soccer. My mother once spoke to an American woman at the soccer when I was a kid, and this American woman said regarding the proliferation of firearms in the USA that Americans don't really want to have guns, society forces it on them because of the terrible black ghettos in America that causes high crime, and Americans would rather that all Americans be just like be like Australia and have guns practically illegal. She said America is a terrible place with nothing good about it. Sure, Americans all speak like this ... all talk to strangers about slapping their daughters and how bad their culture is ... haven't you met one?
Now, imagine a new device was invented that was a meter you could plug into a persons head to objectively measure their happiness, satisfaction with life, deep self-love. Imagine then that upon measuring veiled muslims we find that they are happier than Westerners. Would you still want to take their veils from them and force them to be like us?
And on that, you are all for banning single sex schools. What if with this device we measured girls who went to single-sex schools and found both that the schoolgirls are happier, and the resulting adult women who went to single-sex schoos as a child were happier. Does this mean that under your logic we should force all girls to go to single sex schools regardless of the nature of the individual child or the values of the parents? See where I am going here? You can not legislate based on your values.
You see implicit to a market society is that I can choose how to spend my own money to best maximize my happiness. It assumes that I know what makes me happy and don't need you deciding for me. Quebec has told me that I am banned from sending my children to English Language school. Now you tell me you want to ban us immigrants from wearing certain hats that form part of our identity if they dont fit into your values.
Is there anything else we need to know about that we supposedly signed onto when we arrived? Maybe we have to like our hotdogs steamed with cabbage? Have to like eating pate chinois? Hot chicken? Hot hamburger? Do we have to eat nothing but that? Do we have to like our coffee perculated and weak? Have to spend our summer vacations "camping" in some converted field in the Magog area in a roulotte where the women all compete for who can keep theirs the cleanest? Have to take a winter vacation to some drunken all-inclusive in the Dominican Republic where all the guests are from Montreal? What other consumption choices do you want to make for me since your society has these fabulous values meaning you know better than me how to make me happy?
Dude what are you talking about? I've litteraly said like 3 times that people can keep their culture and don't need to abide by mine. I have no interest in continuing this with you. You're just putting words in my mouth and insinuating things that aren't true. Good day.
ReplyDeleteJust like we should beware of religious fanaticism, we should also beware of secular fanaticism. All throughout history those who fought religion always had an agenda. Usually, they had their own ideologies that they wanted to implement. Religion was just in the way, so it had to be removed.
ReplyDeleteBeaudoin is a secular fascist. She doesn’t stand for women’s rights, or against religious oppression. Her only motivation is to push all other ideologies/religions aside, so that the religion of Bill 101 and the cult of Rene Levesque's personality can take their place.
"The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a God or not. The atheist is a religious person. He believes in atheism as though it was a new religion. He is an atheist with devoutness and unction."
Eric Hoffer "The True Believer- Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements" (1951)
Et vous adski votre religion semble être:
ReplyDeleteNo dogmes but anglophones.
The day will come you will be super imposed by China. Ah, that will be the day.....
ReplyDelete<>>
ReplyDeleteAmen.
The English Separatists on the blog are not funny, not creative, not educated, nor polite.
ReplyDeleteYes English Separatists, you are the ones rejecting the others, get use to the glove that fits you.
A lot of people are just about to sign a petition on an independent blog against this blog, it will be in French, so you won't see or understand it. Someone will catch up with it one day.
"The English Separatists"
ReplyDeleteHuh?
"Yes English Separatists, you are the ones rejecting the others, get use to the glove that fits you."
Multiculturalism is a prime Canadian value and the PQ has stated numerous times that it is not a Quebec one. Sopt lying please.
"A lot of people are just about to sign a petition on an independent blog against this blog"
Hmmm trying to get a blog with a different point of view shut down. Well on our way to fashism already aren't we?
"it will be in French, so you won't see"
When did the French language become invisible?
"or understand it"
Pretty sure about 80% of the anglos who post here have a decent understanding of french. Hell half the sources the editor uses are French. Again, stop lying please.
"Someone will catch up with it one day"
And do what exactly? Free country, retardo. Free speech.
Go back to sleep Jason, and start your life again.
ReplyDeleteIt's free speech, free country, free to us to be French ~ too bad if it taxes you.
Take pepto bismol, gravol and lestoil, it's all the same for you.
You assume, you presume, you are without fire nor fume...
"Go back to sleep Jason, and start your life again. "
ReplyDeleteEmpty insults... much like what kids use on the playground. What a shocker...
"It's free speech, free country, free to us to be French ~ too bad if it taxes you."
Are you serious? Ok retardo, lemme explain to you how this logic is flawed beyond repair. Free means freedom for all. Now if I take what you' written, I could easily modify it to : "It's free speech, free country, free FOR us to be English ~ too bad if it taxes you." You can't use a "pro" oriented argument for one side if that very same argument can defend your opposition. By your statement I could legitimately ask you if my free speach is supposed to be less free than yours because I'm an anglo in Quebec?.... and that's a very scary concept to explore. Go read Orwell's "Animal Farm", it may give you some much needed perspective on this topic.
"Take pepto bismol, gravol and lestoil, it's all the same for you."
Why don't you all just write *insert empty insult here*. It would save you all allot of time.
"You assume, you presume, you are without fire nor fume..."
Wow, you've written 4 lines and two of them are direct copies of stuff I've written over and over again in previous posts. By this logic you don't ready my posts. And then you judge me without having read my posts (according to said logic). And by this summative logic, you sir, and indeed the one who assumes and presumes.
Good day, retard.