Friday, January 27, 2012

French versus English Volume 45

Political science prize judge quits over French flap
"Judging from the 18-year record of a prestigious prize for Canadian writing on political theory, French-Canadians are not the finest political theorists.
Since its creation in 1994, the C.B. Macpherson Prize awarded by the Canadian Political Science Association (CPSA) has always gone to a work in English, even though it celebrates “the best book published in English or in French.”
But a judge for the 2012 prize has resigned this week, alleging the award is so stacked against francophone writers that most do not bother submitting their work any more." Read the rest of the story

NDP leadership candidates vow support for Quebec rights
"Seven of the eight NDP federal leadership candidates came to Montreal Sunday to express their unqualified support for the party’s declaration of French rights.
Among other things, the Sherbrooke Declaration on Quebec recognizes French as the “language of work” and the “common public language.” It also supports Quebec’s right to secede from Canada on a simple majority referendum vote. 

...The only candidate to trigger a “bravo” from the audience was Cullen. The MP for Skeena-Bulkley Valley in B.C. apologized for the NDP’s support of the nomination of justice Michael J. Moldaver to the Supreme Court of Canada. Moldaver does not speak French.  Read the rest of the story

(Editorial comment- Nathan Cullen MP for Skeena Pukey Valley- There's 'obsequious' and then there's, "Thank you for shitting in my hat."
You are now on my official list of politicians I hate..)

Newt Gingrich's French connection
"In a press conference today, Newt Gingrich admitted that he spoke French "once upon a time," and joked to a French reporter who asked him whether he spoke the language "Do you know John Kerry?" Barely a week ago, Gingrich released this ad which compared Romney to the 2004 Democratic nominee — in part because of his fluency in French." Watch the attack ad

Ex-Hab slams Montreal-"It's a big mess"
"In an interview, former Hab Jaroslav Spacek sounds off on Montreal, the Habs and the language debate. Have a listen.



Yikes!
 Quebecer up for Academy Award
Quebec's own Philippe Falardeau's 'Monsieur Lazhar' has been nominated for an Academy Award for Best foreign film. I haven't seen the film but from all accounts it's a poignant story about an Algerian immigrant, who is hired to replace an elementary school teacher who committed suicide. While the class goes through a long healing process, nobody in the school is aware of Bachir's painful former life. Montreal Gazette Alternate Link
I did see one of his other movies La Moitié gauche du frigo (The left-hand side of the fridge,) which I actually liked a lot, a story about the trials of an unemployed fellow who shares an apartment with a room-mate. By the way, if you're wondering about the title, it has to do with sharing the apartment refrigerator.  

The interesting thing is that Mr. Falardeau, a thirty-something Francophone from Montreal has outstanding English. In a television report from the Sundance festival, he related how busy his life has been promoting the film, from lecturing audiences and giving interview after interview to the American media. When he goes to the Academy Awards, his mastery of English will no doubt help raise his profile and propel his career.
To all the idiots who remind Quebecers that they don't really need English to succeed, meet another successful example of why it's just not true.

Important Conservative fed up with Harper's Quebec snub
“Peter White is about as conservative (and Conservative) as they come. He worked at Brian Mulroney’s side throughout the former prime minister’s nine-year tenure. In 2001, he turned his frustration with Jean Chrétien’s seemingly perpetual hold on power into a book, Gritlock, perhaps best described as a blueprint of how to neuter the then-powerful Liberal brand. In his free time, the former Hollinger Inc. executive has relentlessly pushed the Conservative brand in his native Quebec, both as a riding president and party organizer. And he’s sick of trying.
In a scathing open letter addressed to Canadians in general and the Conservative party in particular, White roundly criticizes the Conservative Party of Canada for ignoring Francophones in general and Quebec in particular. “Today the voice of Quebec is virtually absent in Ottawa’s halls of power, or if present, it is a voice grown mighty small, and mighty easy to ignore,” White writes in the letter dated Jan. 12. “Since the election of May 2, 2011, many Quebec observers have concluded that Mr. Harper has consciously decided to ignore Quebec, now that he has convincingly demonstrated that he can win a majority without it.” Read the rest of the story in Maclean's & see the letter

Patrick Roy advises Canadiens to tank season
I wonder if Patrick Roy scuttled any chance of becoming head coach of the Montreal Canadiens by going public with his idea of tanking this lost season and aiming to finish as low as possible in order to secure a premier draft choice.
It is a concept that everybody thinks about, but nobody in a position of responsibility would ever dare say it out loud.
After all, losing a game on purpose is about the biggest crime one can commit in sports. Any coach or general manager who admits to doing so would certainly face a long suspension by the league if not an outright ban.
Is Patrick really that stupid?    Link{Fr}

Conservatives rise in Quebec poll
These last months we've heard nothing but pissing and moaning from Quebec politicians and the entire French media over the fact that Stephen Harper is ignoring Quebec and shortchanging the province in every department.
You'd figure that the Conservatives polling numbers would take a dive, even from the horrific 16% level that they garnered in the last federal election.

But take a look at the latest numbers, which I pulled off of Mario Dumont's news magazine show, last night.


WOW!
The Conservatives have increased their popularity by over 50% since last May!!!
My only explanation..........TOUGH LOVE!

Hydro-Quebec backs down on English
Last week I told you about an international scientific conference that Hydro-Quebec was hosting in Montreal that was to be held in English (as are all these scientific conferences.) After intense pressure from the usual suspects, the utility has now agreed to pay for simultaneous translation, which absolutely nobody will use. Original story{Fr}

In a letter to Le Devoir Professor Robert Emery Prud'homme, a chemistry professor at the University of Montreal, sets the record straight about science and French .
"Without making a thorough investigation, I can say at least 95% - and probably 99% - of scientific articles published by Quebec researchers working in francophone institutions in chemistry, physics and engineering, are in English. It's the same in France and Belgium.
...the question of the use of English in science and in scientific conferences, even in Quebec, has been settled for several years, scientists have de facto chosen English.".

If you read French, this article about the subject of French and English in science, is extremely interesting   Link{Fr}


PQ updating independence plans 
The Parti Quebecois has announced that it is updating 148 studies concerning the subject of sovereignty and independence. I'm not kidding.

Here's a hilarious quote from the article in La Presse. Link{Fr}

"When the PQ was in power in 2001, the government gave a  mandate to Claude Corbo, at that time professor at the University of Quebec at Montreal (UQAM), to review these studies, sort and update them as needed.

"For Pauline Marois, the PQ leader, the purpose of the new "Committee to Study Sovereignty" is to support arguments in favor of  sovereignty.
 

However, if we rely on the previous studies by Corbo, there is no indication that the data collected along the way will go in that direction at all.

This is why the party reserves the right to publish or not to publish the results of the work." 
Yikes!

At any rate, it's like thinking about what you'd do if you won the Lotto...
It's fun to daydream.... a yacht?.....a mansion?... sovereignty?

Leading up to next MONDAY'S POST entitled-'The Ignominious End of Gilles Duceppe,' here's a quick primer of the Gilles Duceppe scandal and it's possible outcome, meant for the reading impaired and those with a distinctly low attention span.


 Further reading;

French versus English Volume 44





113 comments:

  1. Peter White should shut his trap. What Harper is doing to Kweebec is poetry. Imagine a spineless liberal in charge? Kweebec (for reasons I cannot decipher) would still be calling the shots in Canada.

    Harper puts Kweebec firmly in its place, on the sidelines beside the Yukon and one of those Maritime provinces.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Relax, Mr. Marco. Politicians will do anything and everything including bending over backwards and swallowing their pride and themselves whole for the sake of a vote. 7 of 8 NDP wannabe leaders will never dis Quebec because too many of the votes came from Quebec. By alienating Quebec, they'll never be the official opposition again (forget winning)!

      Harper gave up on Quebec because despite trying to appease Quebec in the two prior elections, few candidates were sent to Ottawa. It was far more worth it to appease Ontario as Ontario got him his majority. 107 vs 75 seats--do the math! On the other hand, right now it looks as if the NDP's losses are the Tory's gains--but it's still far too early to call it a trend.

      I think the next Quebec election will be far more interesting, esp. if Leggo has any traction.

      Delete
  2. Un peu de nourriture pour votre blogue.

    Vous avez omis (volontairement ou pas)un beau lien cher Éditeur.

    http://www.angrypequistes.com/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know French well enough to play. I assume this is a parody of the "Angry Birds" game poking fun at PQ politicians?

      Delete
  3. A great comment on Prud'homme's article. Press 9, take note of this.

    Jacques Saint-Cyr
    Inscrit
    jeudi 26 janvier 2012 10h00
    Bravo M.Prud'homme
    Votre exposé est fidèle à la réalité et vos suggestions fort pertinentes. Mais vous savez bien que certains ne voudront rien entendre, voyant là l'ouverture d'une nouvelle brèche dans une forteresse québéco-gauloise assiégée de toutes parts. Il n'existe pas de vaccin contre les fièvres obsidionales.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "forteresse québéco-gauloise assiégée"

    Loi 101 = Potion magique...On va les avoir les anglas!

    Héhé!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As the commenter said: "Il n'existe pas de vaccin contre les fièvres obsidionales." Unfortunately.

      Delete
    2. Do you actually want violence on the streets?

      Delete
    3. "Do you actually want violence on the streets?"

      C'est une idée intéressante,nous avons déjà une certaine expertise.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    5. "Té tu si cave que ça dans vrais vis ? parce-que t'a pas d'l'air Fitté en tant qu’individu"

      Un outaouin?Bravo!Votre français est impeccable.

      Delete
    6. peut-etre que tu te moque de mon francais, mais au moins je suis Fitté dans tête

      Delete
    7. "peut-etre que tu te moque de mon francais, mais au moins je suis Fitté dans tête"

      C'est l'évidence même :)

      Delete
    8. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  5. Editor,

    Is Philippe Falardeau son of Pierre Falardeau?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Philippe actually is good and successful, as for Pierre, well you decide :)

      Delete
    2. very true, at least Philippe is building is way up to a career on an international level, while Pierre, on the other hand, never actually made an effort to become famous outside of the province, in fact, he didn't even think wide enough for that matter.

      on a side note,he even stated in a song or poem, that he had no interest whatsoever in place such as New York, London and Paris. he also said that matane,chibaugamau and gaspe were more intriguing and attractive.

      Delete
  6. "Do you actually want violence on the streets?"

    Vous êtes un immigrant?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Qui fout la merde en Europe?

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. Dude, are you crazy? Really, are you that ignorant?
      Did the immigrants killed Pierre Laporte ? Did we try to bomb stores ?
      I don't believe how you tend to forget your actions !!!!!

      We have paranoiac behavior? Look at yourselves and your paranoiac language laws and talk shows about how OQLF should punish some grocery store in Laval and so on !

      It's mesmerizing how we cannot control our aggressiveness and yet you are kind and peaceful.

      Hey guys, is this dude for real?????

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    5. Froggy! mark what I am about to tell you, you should always be aware that there will always people like him in the world and moreover, it is sad to see that fly coming back over and over laying his damn eggs on the blog, thus giving life to maggots swarming all over the message board

      Delete
    6. "Look at yourselves and your paranoiac language laws and talk shows about how OQLF should punish some grocery store in Laval and so on !"

      Nous ne faisons que faire respecter la loi.Dans notre pays les lois sont importantes et tous,sans exception,doivent s'y conformer,même les Lavallois.

      Delete
    7. "Look at yourselves and your paranoiac language laws and talk shows about how OQLF should punish some grocery store in Laval and so on !"

      Que faites-vous ici...Sans indiscrétion?

      Delete
    8. and what are you doing here if you hate English so much, shouldn't you be circulating resumes right now???

      Delete
    9. "it is sad to see that fly coming back over and over laying his damn eggs... thus giving life to maggots swarming all over ..."

      Êtes-vous africains?

      Delete
    10. "and what are you doing here if you hate English so much"

      Je suis né ici et mes ancêtres d'origine Bretonne se sont installés en Nouvelle-France en 1609.

      Delete
    11. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    12. well guess what?New-France no longer exists, get that right through your thick skull..

      Delete
    13. "New-France no longer exists..."

      Elle se nomme maintenant Québec et porte fièrement un des 3 plus beau drapeaux d'amérique.
      Nous sommes pratiquement un pays.

      Delete
    14. Just for the record,Quebec was formed when the British was established. So basically,the place which you refer as Quebec, is totally irrelevant to New-France in today's world.

      The province is also a part of Canada and never will be freed according to your standard of your expectations, considering that it already is.

      Delete
    15. C'est comme ça que vous remerciez le Québec pour vous avoir accueillis?

      Delete
    16. I live in Montreal, Canada. The place you call "Nation Quebecoise" doesn't exist to me ... alors merci ne m'"accueille" pas s'il te plait.

      Delete
    17. "I live in Montreal, Canada. The place you call "Nation Quebecoise" doesn't exist to me"

      On en apprend des choses sur ce blogue.C'est peut-être pour cette raison que vous n'existez pas pour la majorité des Québécois...Vous êtes pratiquement invisible.Si les médias ne parlaient pas de votre minorité de temps à autre,vous n'existeriez tout simplement pas.

      Delete
    18. "We are the English. Lower your charter and surrender your language. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your Quebecois culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."

      Delete
    19. @ The Bork
      "We are the English. Lower your charter and surrender your language.

      As the editor of this blog, I swear I don't know what half these comments mean....

      Delete
    20. Imaginez pour un francophone :D

      Delete
    21. @ Editor Jan 27, 2012 08:41 PM

      C'mon, it's funny. Reference to Star Trek - the Borgs.

      Delete
    22. Anonymous4:17,

      The place referred to as Québec has nothing to do with Nouvelle-France? Québec was, if I get you right, formed when the british settled here. It was probably formed out of emptiness ; there was nothing and the british said "let there be light et there was light". Maginificient.

      Perhaps you could elaborate on this intriguing idea?

      Many of you will probably be offended, but I have the idea that the canadian identity (and/or canadian nationalism) is built, in part, on the negation of the identity of Québec and quebeckers. Your surprising instance of historic revisionnism is an interesting example of it.

      Delete
    23. Editor,

      It is a parody of the Borg Collective, from the TV series Star Trek: The Next Generation and the movie Star Trek: First Contact. The real quote from the movie is:

      "We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."

      Delete
    24. > Nous ne faisons que faire respecter la loi.Dans notre pays les lois sont importantes et tous,sans exception,doivent s'y conformer,même les Lavallois.
      Encore une fois deux poids, deux mesures.

      À l'image de votre démo, vous brandissez votre "il-faut-respecter-la-loi" à vos adversaires tout en lamentant bruyamment l'humiliation supposée que subiraient quotidiennement tous les Québécois. Autrement dit, l'état de droit serait tout à fait juste lorsqu'il est compatible avec votre fantaisie franco-suprémaciste et théâtralement maléfique quand il nuit à votre lubie. Un tantinet partisan?

      Intéressant de constater à quel point vous ressemblez aux "angryphones" les plus extrémistes dont vous semblez faire carrière à mépriser.

      Delete
    25. Avouez tout de même que les anglos sont franchement antipathiques.Ils agissent comme si la planète leur appartenait.

      Delete
    26. it's normal that a huge part of the world belongs to them, they worked hard and strove to obtain it. It's no different than any other empire, whether it's french or Chinese, whenever you claim acres of land that are vacant or seemingly vacant, it's then falls under your grasp and thus, you keep it.

      Delete
    27. Antipathiques pas nécessairement. On reproche souvent aux Allemands leur froideur, par exemple, mais à force de les fréquenter on finit par comprendre que ce sont de gens très accueillants. Du monde sympathique et antipathique on en rencontre partout.

      Pour ce qui est de l'arrogance nombriliste, je trouve ça intéressant, surtout du point de vue de civilisations (historiquement) dominantes. Je trouve à la fois loufoque et pathétique la conception d'un monde américano-, franco-, ou britanno-centrique, par exemple. Pourtant, il faut rendre à César ce qui lui appartient. Si une langue ou un pays domine à une époque particulière, inutile pour les autres de se créer des structures parallèles pour concurrencer. Il vaudrait alors mieux influencer que concurrencer, à mon avis.

      Delete
    28. "...I have the idea that the canadian identity (and/or canadian nationalism) is built, in part, on the negation of the identity of Québec and quebeckers. Your surprising instance of historic revisionnism is an interesting example of it."

      That statement can easily be turned on its head. The Quebecois identity is built, in part, upon the negation of the identity and culture of Anglophone Canadians.

      No one is as accomplished at historical revisionnism as Quebecois nationalists. They constantly deny the positive impact that Anglos have had on Quebec and try to render the history of Anglos in Quebec invisible (like the English language itself). They have even resorted to changing English place names to French ones.

      Delete
    29. Anonymous10:01,

      That statement can indeed easily be turned on its head. But I would say that we tend to ignore anglos in Québec much more than we deny the identity of english canadians. For instance, when candians say they are a nation, we don't scream that they are not.

      About the Quebecois identity is built, in part, upon the negation of the identity and culture of Anglophone Canadians, I would say that our identity began to be before the arrival of the british. Before 1759, then canadians (french born in Nouvelle-France) had already begun to call themselves canadians because felt they were no longer really french (from France). The canadian nationalism is something much younger in history.

      This being said, we of course overlook the positive impact of Anglos in Québec much like you downplay the negative impact of the Conquest. Each nation has its own subjective vision of itself and of its history, its own legends and its own myths. There is one exception : anyone who has seen Les Minutes du Patrimoine knows that the english canadian view of history is the objective truth.

      Michel Patrice

      Delete
    30. I mean : "About the Quebecois identity BEING built, in part,"...

      sorry

      Delete
    31. TO TROY;

      Thanks for the clarification. I get it now, good wordplay...

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSCe40HMv1c

      Delete
    32. @Michel

      If Quebec were to separate from Canada, would you be a proponent of the resulting country sharing sovereignty between, say a "federal" parliament in Quebec City and any number of "provincial" parliaments in the regions?

      Delete
    33. It is generally understood that there would a decentralization of powers, therefore more powers to regions.

      Some imagine some kind of "chambre des régions", some kind of regional governments. I personnaly think that cities should have more powers (since cities are the economics units that better fit economic reality) and that we should avoid making new structures.

      Your question probably leads to the idea that some regions (ie Montreal) gaining power would grow to become in their turn independentist entities within the newly independent Québec, or Montreal, differienciating from the rest of québec, wanting to get rid of bill 101. And, you would be right, that would be a possibility.

      Michel Patrice

      Delete
    34. Michel,

      Your argument may hold water if Canada and Quebec (and therefore nation Canadian and nation Quebecois) are two different countries with equal standing. Unfortunately, for you at least, it is not the case. Quebec is but a province, a sub-national entity of Canada. The equal standing is between each of Quebec and Ontario and Alberta and Nova Scotia and so on.

      Therefore, no matter how old it may be, Quebec nation is an integral part of the nation of Canada, while there are elements of Canadian nation that are not influenced by Quebec.

      Delete
    35. @Michel

      And do you believe that any of those various hypothetical provinces within Quebec ought to be allowed to separate from the hypothetical Republic of Quebec, if such were the will of their inhabitants?

      Delete
    36. Troy,

      "Your argument may hold water if..."

      What argument are you refering to? The historic continuity between Nouvelle-France and Québec? The negation of Québec identity as a part of canadian identity? The idea that our identity took shape before the arrival of the british? Or the idea that every nation has its own subjective vision?

      (Interestingly, you could seemingly not help stating that Québec is a province and not a nation. When I say that there is a negation of the Québéc identity in the canadian identity, I have this kind of pavlovian reflex in mind.)

      (Since I feel that we will argue on wether or not Québec is a nation and since I notice that french and english seem to have a different definition of nation, I will give my definition of a nation. Here are some definitions of nation that I find right : "a large human community, most often settled on one territory and who has a historic, cultural and economical unity" (my more or less adequate translation of the Larousse), "a community of people who share a common language, culture, ethnicity, descent, and/or history" (english Wikipedia), "une communauté humaine identifiée dans des limites géographiques parfois fluctuantes au cours de l'histoire, mais dont le trait commun supposé est la conscience d'une appartenance à un même groupe"(French wikipedia). This last one might be my favorite, I like the self-consciousness of belonging concept.

      Michel Patrice

      Delete
    37. It can be argued that the "Quebec nation" is really just part of a larger Francophone nation within Canada. There are many nations within the country, such as the Aboriginal nations, and these are far more ancient and much more distinct than the Francophone nation.

      Delete
    38. In reaction to Anonymous @ 2:25, it occurs to me to ask whether the Anglophone population within Quebec forms a "nation" and in what way a "nation" is different from a "community".

      Widening the question, do the descendants of German, Chinese, Irish, Italian, Muslim, or Jewish immigrants to Canada, for example, form a nation? Is "nationhood" in this context a tangible justification for demanding autonomy on the basis of language, religion, or culture? Whatever the answer, the sociological implications are deep.

      Further still, is granting/denying autonomy to some groups and not others really not a collective consolation prize awarding failure to integrate (and not necessarily assimilate) -- whether politically, linguistically, culturally, or otherwise?

      Delete
    39. Michel,

      Q: "What argument are you refering to?"

      A: "That statement can indeed easily be turned on its head. But I would say that we tend to ignore anglos in Québec much more than we deny the identity of english canadians. For instance, when candians say they are a nation, we don't scream that they are not."

      "(Interestingly, you could seemingly not help stating that Québec is a province and not a nation. When I say that there is a negation of the Québéc identity in the canadian identity, I have this kind of pavlovian reflex in mind.)"

      It is not my not helping doing something, it is something I do deliberately to make my point out. You see, you say "For instance, when candians say they are a nation, we don't scream that they are not." For me that statement is full of logical fallacy since Canada is a nation. United Nations say so, at least. Therefore there is such thing as Canadian nationality.

      Also, I am a bit disappointed in debating with you. You are a bit dishonest in presenting your argument. You see, the definition of nation in Wikipedia (the one you quoted) actually does not stop there. Your definition is followed by: "In this definition, a nation has no physical borders."

      What does it mean? It means that if nation Quebecois is to follow that definition, it can not be tied to the province of Quebec as it is now, since that should be no physical borders for that nation. Following your logic, nation Quebecois will include French Quebecers, Acadiens in New Brunswick, Franco-Ontarians, and French community in northern Maine. Conversely, it does not include the English community in the West side of Montreal and in Gatineau.

      However, the definition from Wikipedia does not stop there. It also says, "However, it can also refer to people who share a common territory and government (for example the inhabitants of a sovereign state) irrespective of their ethnic make-up." If this is the definition you want to take, then all residents of Quebec are Quebec nationals. As such, since the PROVINCE of Quebec is a sub-national entity of Canada, Quebec nation is very much a subset of Canadian nation.

      Delete
    40. @ ApparatchikJan01:10 PM

      "And do you believe that any of those various hypothetical provinces within Quebec ought to be allowed to separate from the hypothetical Republic of Quebec, if such were the will of their inhabitants?"

      Yes, they should be allowed to. But I would not tell them, they would have to figure it out by themselves, I would not help them and I would actively try to keep them in Québec. Paradoxal? Yes. And your question leads to : "if a part of the part that wants to leave Québec, should it be allowed?" and this will soon get absurd.

      Delete
    41. @ AnonymousJan 28, 2012 02:25 PM

      "It can be argued that the "Quebec nation" is really just part of a larger Francophone nation within Canada."

      Given my last comment three definitions of nation, it is hard to say that quebeckers are not a nation. So, since the very idea that Québec is nation hurts your mind, you belittle it by stating that Québec is not truely a nation but only a part of a larger french canadian nation.

      You bring this negation of our identity to enternaining heights.

      If you want to have a glimpse of the different paths that quebeckers and french canadians have taken, have a look at this discussion between a french canadian and I : http://michelpatrice.wordpress.com/2011/03/20/what-would-we-do-without-equalization-payment/#comment-120

      "There are many nations within the country, such as the Aboriginal nations, and these are far more ancient and much more distinct than the Francophone nation."

      Yes, there are many nations in this country and that doesn't change who I am. Your idea of many nations is quite similar to Trudeau's idea of multiculturalism. Since it could not be said that we were not a distinct community, they said that Canada was a community of communities, therefore french canadians (who later became quebeckers) would simply be a community among many others. I would say that this multiculturalism is now so built in the canadian that you don't see that it was made on purpose only a few decades ago.

      Delete
    42. To Anonymous 2:25

      Given my last comment three definitions of nation, it is hard to say that quebeckers are not a nation. So, since the very idea that Québec is nation hurts your mind, you belittle it by stating that Québec is not truely a nation but only a part of a larger french canadian nation.

      You bring this negation of our identity to enternaining heights.

      If you want to have a glimpse of the different paths that quebeckers and french canadians have taken, have a look at this discussion between a french canadian and I : http://michelpatrice.wordpress.com/2011/03/20/what-would-we-do-without-equalization-payment/#comment-120

      Yes "There are many nations within the country, such as the Aboriginal nations, and these are far more ancient and much more distinct than the Francophone nation."

      That there are many nations in this country does not change who I am. I find interesting to see how your idea of many nations is quite similar to Trudeau's idea of multiculturalism : it cannot be credibly said that french canadians (and later quebekers) are not a distinct community, therefore Canada will be a community of communities and they will be just a community among others. If find it hard not to see a negation of what we are into this.

      "Widening the question, do the descendants of German, Chinese, Irish, Italian, Muslim, or Jewish immigrants to Canada, for example, form a nation?"

      Let's take german for instance. There is obviously a german nation in germany. Do germans in Québec form a nation? (I never heard anyone say something like "we, german-quebeckers, think that so and so.") I would say that to be a nation you have to have a critical mass on your territory. German in Québec do not share, for instance, a common economy, they are integrated to the larger Québec economy, they don't have their own political institutions, and so on.

      "Further still, is granting/denying autonomy to some groups and not others really not a collective consolation prize awarding failure to integrate (and not necessarily assimilate) -- whether politically, linguistically, culturally, or otherwise?"

      Is denying the fact that quebeckers form a nation a consolation prize for having been uncapable of assimilating us?

      Delete
    43. Troy,

      "Also, I am a bit disappointed in debating with you. You are a bit dishonest in presenting your argument. You see, the definition of nation in Wikipedia (the one you quoted) actually does not stop there."

      The wikipedia articles on nations are of course much longer than the part I quoted. I quoted three definitions since the definitions are multiple and often a little different from each other. I did not mean to be dishonest.

      Your not helping stating that Québec is not a nation as an instance of negating Québec identity as a part of the canadian identity was maybe a bad choice. So, do you think that the canadian identity (and/or canadian nationalism) is built, in part, on the negation of the identity of Québec and quebeckers?

      About the territory, it is said "most often (but not necessarily) settled on one territory" and "identifiée dans des limites géographiques parfois fluctuantes". How French community in northern Maine and quebeckers form the same nation when they don't share common political institutions, a common economy, and so on?

      (I am leaving for the day, I will not be back before tonight.)

      Delete
    44. > [...] they should be allowed to. But I would not tell them, they would have to figure it out by themselves, I would not help them and I would actively try to keep them in Québec. Paradoxal? Yes. And your question leads to : "if a part of the part that wants to leave Québec, should it be allowed?" and this will soon get absurd.

      I suppose that this is just proof positive that most of us are partisan in nature. I want to see Canada's territorial integrity maintained while you would like keep Quebec undivided. Clearly, we will continue to persist in our respective dogmas until something stronger than either of us settles it for us, sooner or later.

      >If you want to have a glimpse of the different paths that quebeckers and french canadians have taken, have a look at this discussion between a french canadian and I

      I read the entire exchange and I must admit I am in near-unanimous agreement with the positions of your interlocutor "Canadien-Français" and reading your responses to his points felt like listening to a flippant know-it-all teenager telling his old and much wiser father how the world really is. I came away from it feeling like there might certainly be many ways to see the world, and there might not be a single "right" way to look at it, and this is a good thing for humanity. However, I continue to believe that you personify the very virulent strain of self-serving, trashy, and myopic political nationalism peddled by the the Laurins and Parizeaus and that if Quebec were to continue along the path charted by that gang that there will one day be a serious reckoning - politically, ethnically, linguistically, and socially.

      > Is denying the fact that quebeckers form a nation a consolation prize for having been uncapable of assimilating us?
      I think it cuts both ways, but the nationalists have more to gain, even from a moral victory, than federalists do.

      What we've been seeing from successive waves of political leaders from Quebec is most often a gradualist approach to achieving Quebec independence, whether de facto or de jure. Why demand to be recognized as a "nation" or as being a "distinct society" if (nationalist elements within) Quebec don't, in return, make a genuine attempt to integrate culturally and politically within Canada?

      Our media, provincial politicians, and separatist pundits serve up a daily brainwashing diet of expressions like "des pays comme le Québec", "Capitale-Nationale", and our own provincial government likes to pretend to be a grown-up, sending diplomats abroad. Viewing all these trends collectively, I can't help but spot many a nationalist gleefully appropriating the trappings of a yet-inexistent country without making the slightest effort to work to build and benefit the one he already has. The reason this infuriates me is that when I consider what the situation would be like if the shoe were on the other foot (e.g. Montrealers one day mobilizing for independence from a hypothetical independent Quebec). Tell me if you disagree that such action would be described with notions such as "sedition", "treason", "national emergency", "imperiling our territorial integrity", and "corrective therapy" would not only be thrown around, but acted on rather hastily by our "Police Nationale".

      But then again, I don't subscribe to the age-old notion of "la survivance" that has defined our experience as French-Canadians for centuries. There are plenty of worse things that could befall Quebecers than dropping French in one or two generations, and this is something no public figure in Quebec has the honesty to tell us.

      Delete
    45. Apparatchik,

      "I suppose that this is just proof positive that most of us are partisan in nature."

      I agree, absolutely.

      You read the exchange between Canadien Français and I. I might be a flippant know-it-all teenager, but I think that you have been also able to see some differing pont of view between a french canadian and a quebecker.

      "What we've been seeing from successive waves of political leaders from Quebec is most often a gradualist approach to achieving Quebec independence,..."

      We have a british side that some of us don't like to see. The french made a revolution and chopped the head of their king. The british limited the power of their king, little by little, over generations, turning, over centuries, a all mighty king into a decorative accessory. Quebecker have in some way this "prudence".

      "Why demand to be recognized as a "nation" or as being a "distinct society" if (nationalist elements within) Quebec don't, in return, make a genuine attempt to integrate culturally and politically within Canada?"

      Some of us want to reform federalism and would like something like a recognition of Québec as a distinct society, some other want independence. Our actions may sometimes look contradictory because they are the result of the actions of different groups. (Also, reforming federalism is a fall back position for independentist, if ideêndence fails, they would like at least a reform of federalism.)

      Also one could think that we don't genuinly attemp to integrate culturally and politically within Canada because we feel, right or wrongfuly, that integrating to Canada is integrating an indentity built in part on the negation of what we are.

      "Montrealers one day mobilizing for independence from a hypothetical independent Quebec). Tell me if you disagree that such action would be described with notions such as "sedition", "treason", "national emergency", "imperiling our territorial integrity", and "corrective therapy" would not only be thrown around, but acted on rather hastily by our "Police Nationale"."

      Yes, it would. Would it be delt hastily by our "police nationale"? No, I don't think so.

      You say OUR police nationale, OUR media and provincial politicians. Are you a french quebecker?

      Michel Patrice

      Delete
    46. REWRITE

      I forgot. "There are plenty of worse things that could befall Quebecers than dropping French in one or two generations,...". Yes, I agree with you.

      (The delete function doesn't seem to work...)

      Delete
    47. The attempts by French Quebeckers to differentiate themselves from other Francophones in Canada partially explains why there is a significant degree of hostility between them.

      Delete
    48. An Anglophone friend of mine lived in an Acadian village in New Brunswick for several years. He said that the Acadians were not at all fond of the Quebecois, because the latter looked down upon them. It is similar to the situation where the French in France thumb their noses at the Quebecois because they consider them to be a bunch of country bumpkins.

      Delete
    49. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    50. > I might be a flippant know-it-all teenager, but I think that you have been also able to see some differing pont of view between a french canadian and a quebecker.
      I suppose the part I find ridiculous is that "la francophonie canadienne" doesn't see the various French-speaking groups across the country as belonging to one whole, but almost encourages a division along provincial lines. In the context of an embattled minority, this has always disturbed me as it seems ridiculously counter-productive even when taking obvious regional/provincial realities into account.

      Quebecker have in some way this "prudence".
      Bullshit. Separatist and nationalist French-Canadians like it just the way it is because it allows them to have their cake and eat it too. Just enough so that we can exist in a parallel universe forged by the National Assembly, but just enough so that we keep getting the benefits of being more closely connected to English Canada than we realize we would have in any Goldilocks-type "sovereignty-association" scenario that only exists in the syphilitic minds of the remaining purs et durs. If they want to sell us a separate country, sell us a separate country. Call it separation or independence and not something deliberately misleading and euphemistic like sovereignty, which is a technical term which delineates what one level of government is responsible for versus another. This is a 40-year long charade and I'm fed up of it. It's not prudent to be self-obsessed over a "survivance" that was more about keeping the Church in business than it ever was about the true needs of the Canadiens (why else did the church not encourage us from learning English?). Shit or get off the pot.

      > Also one could think that we don't genuinly attemp to integrate culturally and politically within Canada because we feel, right or wrongfuly, that integrating to Canada is integrating an indentity built in part on the negation of what we are.
      More bullshit. Our nationalist political culture has no problem "affirming" this right, that notion, this recognition, or that principle. When something doesn't go our way, we've demanded it and gotten it. The very fact that Canada was redefined from a purely British Dominion into a post-colonialist state with "two founding nations" was a good start. I think Trudeau and company, whom many commenters here dislike for reasons that are their own, was right to bring "French power" to Ottawa and define it as the first step in allowing French-Canadians to appropriate the institutions of a country they were living in but were all but cut off from in practice. My only regret is that Quebec didn't continue in that direction and instead of encouraging multilateralism and genuine bilingualism, showing itself to be the example for all the other provinces, we fell back onto a cowardly, opportunistic, and wishy-washy Bourassa mentality of "let's fuck Ottawa for as much as we can". This has blown up in our face time and again as our provincial politicians keep deliberately misrepresenting the nature of a confederation and don't incite us to genuinely integrate with our co-nationals. Instead, the opinion leaders, media, many artists, and politicians continue with the self-serving narrative of an embattled people who needs to keep looking inward to "protect" itself.

      Sorry, but I don't need that kind of help.

      Delete
    51. > You say OUR police nationale, OUR media and provincial politicians. Are you a french quebecker?
      I realize you're comparatively new here, so I'll repeat. I'm a mutt. Literally. I'm part French-Canadian, of part British-Isles descent, and in the last century or so, the remainder of my ethnic heritage left Europe and set up shop here. I'm a francophone, anglophone, and allophone (in no particular order -- that part's important), and none of the "national myth" crap fazes me. You'll see me at Parc Lafontaine speaking French just as naturally as you'll spot me at Fairview speaking English. Yes, I credit my background and upbringing, but I've also had to work very hard on my own. And by most accounts, I'd say I've succeeded mightily. Am I living in a bubble just like you? Quite possibly, but here's the thing: I really like my bigger "mutt bubble" a hell of a lot better than either of the three homogeneous bubbles that alone make it up. The only difference is I don't seek to burst your comfort bubble -- or mine. I want them both to coexist with millions of others out there that are no more or less legitimate than either of ours.

      I think nationalism in any country is just the collective marketing hokum and propaganda cooked up and perpetuated to keep politicians employed. Humans have been reproducing and creating new ethnic, genetic, cultural, and linguistic mixes since the beginning of time, so this ridiculous obsession with allowing Quebec to evolve only along parameters deemed acceptable by péquistes and their nationalist acolytes is about as antithetic to me as having to obtain security clearance to use a bathroom.

      I am a Montrealer, a Quebecer, and a Canadian, again, in no particular order. If anything pisses me off, it's people who write or talk about how they "feel" more one of those identities than another without genuinely making it a lifetime's work of appropriating and integrating the overlapping meanings of each of those identities.

      > The attempts by French Quebeckers to differentiate themselves from other Francophones in Canada partially explains why there is a significant degree of hostility between them.
      This comes back to what I said above. If French Quebecers acted more like responsible stewards of Canadian Francophonie and seamlessly and unapologetically wove our French-language cultural institutions into the Canadian national tapestry into which they certainly belong, I believe this would both underscore the necessity of encouraging (without necessarily coercing) French-language rights and the continued growth of a shared continental culture that is our destiny, whatever side of the political divide one happens to be on.

      Delete
    52. "I'm a francophone, anglophone, and allophone"

      ? Hmmm... O_o

      Delete
    53. Apparatchik,

      I think that I have pissed you off. Sorry. I know that I can sound stubborned (which I am) and obnoxious (I don't mean to).

      Just two last quick comments :

      You say : "If anything pisses me off, it's people who write or talk about how they "feel" more one of those identities than another without genuinely making it a lifetime's work of appropriating and integrating the overlapping meanings of each of those identities."

      I would like to say that I don't feel more quebecker than canadian on purpose, I can't help feeling the way I feel. If I was born in Iran or in Japan, some my opinions could be different, the same if I was born two centuries ago ; same thing for you. We are in many ways products of our environment.

      I find interesting Anonymous 8:38 and 5:36 coments. If quebeckers feel different from other french canadians, it cannot be because of "neutral" factors, for instance, paticipating in two different local provicial political debates, or living in territories far apart, or participating in different cummunity activities. These neutral geopolitical factors cannot explain that different communities slowly evolve along diverging paths. No, it must be because of something bad that we are doing. (It reminds me of Sting's Russians Love Their Children Too. Old stuff, never mind.)

      Anyways, I see that I have offended you by sharing my point of view (which I did without insulting or attacking you personnaly). Thank you for explaining your point of view and your cultural background, which I find interesting.

      Delete
  8. Your effin francophone immigrants from Maghreb and Africa dumbass ( if we think about London and Paris ), because they are lazy, and they have guts to not work a day in their life and suck money from gov. Like in Quebec


    Cher Éditeur,vous laissez passer de tel propos racistes?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sorry, I was carried away. Yes, my comment was out of line.

      Delete
  9. @ Anonymous aka Press 9, Dartagnan, etc., etc.,

    "Cher Éditeur,vous laissez passer de tel propos racistes?"

    You have been posting bigotted, racist comments on this board for several years now, so why don't you shut the f*&k up?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Encore un agressif?Mais qu'est-ce qu'ils ont ces anglos?

      Qu'est-ce que Timmy met dans ses donuts?

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    4. @ Seppie,

      "Encore un agressif?Mais qu'est-ce qu'ils ont ces anglos?"

      We're not nearly as aggressive as you are, Mr. FLQ. In the past you have said that you wanted to "hunt" Anglos and that Anglos should wear helmets if they carry a Maple Leaf flag on Canada Day. Seriously, someone should report you to the authorities.

      "Qu'est-ce que Timmy met dans ses donuts?"

      Go stuff your face with some rancid poutine and guzzle down another jug of Pepsi.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    6. Aww come on Ed ... my French fry joke was hilarious :p

      Delete
  10. "Conservatives rise in Quebec poll"

    That's interesting, but not really surprising. Harper's Canada definitely isn't my idea of what this country should be, but I don't think Quebec is getting short changed. We're just not getting the special treatment we did in the past.

    Just two weeks ago, Harper was in Saguenay to announce a 15 million dollar investment to modernize maritime infrastructure:
    http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20120117/federal-government-investment-saguenay-120117/

    Of course this kind of news doesn't make headlines in Le Journal De Montréal, there are more important things for the front page, like how Kif-Kif Import is violating language laws...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Parce que c'est l'argent de Harper et des conservateurs maintenant?

    ReplyDelete
  12. The way the Habs' season is going, Patrick Roy may not be far off with what he has said. Consecutive GMs have been driving the team into the ground and while better players (free agents) may be wooed and say they're considering Montreal as a place to play, when push comes to shove, few end up coming. I don't even remember the last time the Habs signed a real impact player as a free agent. The closest one I can remember is Trevor Linden. In the end, he didn't fit in well and by the trade deadline within that first season, he was gone. The vicious media, the language malarky and high taxes are major, major deterrents.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haïti chérie dit: je vous ai dans l’œil…saviez-vous que je vous admire avec passion et ardeur, Monsieur Sauga. et que je me suis amouracher de vous en lisant vos petites commentaires dans les petites heures de la journée.
      moi, J’aimerai bien en savoir plus a votre sujet, si possible!

      Delete
  13. A lot of interesting points in this week's Friday mash up.

    1 - I think the NDP will not only loose support from within Quebec. I think the rest of the country will also give up on a party that is becoming more and more willing to adapt pro-Quebec policies. The Liberal Party of Canada will replace the NDP in popularity.

    2 - I think the Harper government is doing the right thing with Quebec. Quebec voters snubbed the Conservatives when they reached out to Quebec. Now it's Quebecs time to be snubbed. And besides, I do believe on a general level, I feel better with the Conservatives in charge of Ottawa that either the Liberals or NDP.

    3 - Really enjoyed your photo comic book page.

    4 - The comments from the ex-hab I think are good. It shows that the craziness that goes on in the Montreal media, and Quebec's political scene can have a negative effect on a already struggling team.

    5 - Why do we even care what Patrick Roy says?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Today's headline on TVA Nouvelles:

    Muguette Paillé candidate au PQ?
    http://tvanouvelles.ca/lcn/infos/national/archives/2012/01/20120128-073248.html

    You remember this lady, who went on french tv during the last federal election, to complain that she couldn't find a job, and pledged her support to Duceppe and the Bloc?
    This lady still hasn't been able to find herself a job, so why not join the PQ as an all-star candidate!?

    I think the PQ is heading in the right direction!
    :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I highly doubt that she has the capacity to sustain the task of your everyday MP. Besides, she kind of looked unsure about herself when she decided to step forward for a position as a potential candidate at the PQ rally today.

      hell, she even made a fool out of herself as far as I know and Pauline did not SEEM to CARE much about her present at all. So, basically, her attempt might be not as successful as she hopes so and also, let us no forget she doesn't have a "bachelor degree in Political Science", which leads me to believe that she will likely have her candidature request denied as a result of this.

      Delete
    2. Gee, a half-wit with no marketable skills unable to find employment for a year, sounds like perfect Parti Québécois ministerial material. I wonder how many jobs she'll be able to create or attract to Quebec?

      Delete
    3. She'll probably cause less harm then the others.
      I hope she runs a secure PQ riding, although I'm not sure they exist anymore.

      Delete
    4. Que pensez-vous de Réjean Hébert dans Sherbrooke?

      Delete
  15. Editor, you missed a big story this week:

    http://www.cyberpresse.ca/le-soleil/actualites/education/201201/16/01-4486497-lopposition-a-langlais-intensif-samplifie.php

    It has it all. Government doing something right for a change, the cynicism of the teachers, and how the parents haven't even been asked for an opinion (I suspect most of them would support the government in this case, since the proposal is in the interest of their kids). In fact, the only time the parents are mentioned is when the teachers say (guess) what the parents might think about it, without going to the source directly. I think it's very telling.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a proposition fraught with issues, actually.

      - Why should there be an intensive English-language curriculum only in sixth grade? Irrespective of whether we're talking about an English or French school, schools should be doing a decent job teaching both languages to all students, so that it doesn't sound like such a taxing or dramatic idea by the time they reach sixth grade.

      - Hitting the problem at the source and encouraging a genuine commitment to implement successful English immersion in virtually all French schools in Quebec is, for now at least, going to be seized upon and spun by French language supremacists as being toxic to our continuation as a species. You saw what they did over Cunneyworth, didn't you?

      - You'll need more qualified English teachers to teach more subjects to more students, which costs money. Spending tax dollars on English is sure to raise howls of protest from the usual suspects.

      The cocktail of bogeyman rhetoric over the Conquest, French-Canadian dispossession, humiliation at the hands of the evil English will only die once we as francophone Quebecers question the insanity of promoting collective insularity as a way of ensuring our continued existence.

      Delete
    2. Whether the 6th grade or a grade earlier, or later seems like a detail that can be worked out. That it will piss of the nationalists? The question is: what won't piss the off. It seems like everything pisses them off, so why even bother with they might think. The cocktail of bogeyman rhetoric is a constant, not a variable that depends on what we do. Money could be an issue, but the matter is important enough for Charest to divert funds to it. Finding ESL teachers could be an issue, not so much because of the lack of them but their potential unwillingness to venture into institutions where they would surely encounter resentment.

      The two things I mentioned still stand. What parents think hasn't been taken into account. And the teachers are so obviously acting in their self-interest, not in the interest of the children as they try very hard to claim.

      Delete
    3. L'anglais est une langue trop facile à apprendre.Pas besoin de cours,quelques heures d'internet et de télé américaine par semaine,suffisent amplement.

      Delete
    4. ...et pourtant le roi des one-liners est incapable d'exercer son talent dans la langue de Shakespeare, même après tout ce temps là...

      Delete
    5. Yeah right,nice try Apparatchik...

      Je continuerai d'écrire en français sur ce blogue par principe.

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    7. > Je continuerai d'écrire en français sur ce blogue par principe.
      Et moi je continuerai à vous caler dans les deux langues officielles sans faire passer mon incompétence en anglais pour un grand principe philosophique ou encore un type d'affirmation nationale qu'il faille perpétuer.

      J'aurais peut-être plus de respect envers vous si vous aviez l'honnêteté d'avouer la vérité et non pas de l'enrober dans un discours hypocrite qui ne sert qu'à vos fins partisanes.

      Delete
    8. "Et moi je continuerai à vous caler dans les deux langues officielles"

      Parlez-vous de la langue officielle des jeux olympiques?Celle qu'on a glissé délibérément sous le tapis de la honte aux derniers jeux au canaya?

      Delete
    9. Encore une fois les vrais événements réellement bilingues se dérouleront à Sherbrooke en 2013 lors des jeux du canada.

      http://www.cyberpresse.ca/la-tribune/sports/201201/18/01-4487077-jeux-du-canada-la-moitie-des-benevoles-devront-etre-bilingues.php

      Le Québec:Seul vraie province bilingue du canaya

      Delete
  16. Remember last week the Editor posted Fraser Institute's study about how Quebec actually spends the least per capita for services in minority language?

    http://nodogsoranglophones.blogspot.com/2012/01/french-versus-english-volume-44.html

    Jean-Paul Perreault of Imperatif francais denounces that study. In the best tradition of separatist movement, however, instead of arguing the contents of the study, he makes his straw man argument about English universities in Quebec and the super hospitals.

    http://www.imperatif-francais.org/bienvenu/articles/2012/manipulation-de-linstitut-fraser.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    2. Money spent on both universities and hospitals don't count, as the author of the study carefully explained, because these services don't cost the province extra, they just replace the alternate language service. Just as French schools and hospitals in other provinces weren't counted as well.
      The study deals only with with EXTRA language services provided to minorities.

      The study was undertaken by a Francophone professor from the Univ. Of Montreal.

      Delete
    3. Editor,

      You do not have to defend the study to me. It is Perreault and Imperatif francais who denounce Fraser Institute and its study.

      For me, I posted in this blog some time ago that looking at their financial reports, I found that McGill received noticeably less funding from the province than UdeM, be it in absolute or in per student terms. However, McGill received much more from research and from private donations than UdeM. That revenue made up the difference from provincial funding.

      The same situation happened also at the super hospitals. When the government did not have the money, it asked MUHC and CHUM to raise their own initial funds. MUHC ended up with 10 times privately-raised funds than CHUM.

      Delete
    4. Francophones donate to charities FAR LESS than other Canadians do, so it's no surprise that McGill and the MUHC receive more private donations than U de M or the CHUM. Selfish or just plain cheap, you decide.

      Delete