Monday, February 13, 2012

Civil Disobedience and Bill 101

"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." - Thomas Jefferson

A recent story about the the controversial mayor of Huntington, Stéphane Gendron, inspired me to delve into the question of civil disobedience in regards to a law that many Anglophones believe discriminatory, the infamous Bill 101.

The Huntington mayor is certainly unafraid of tilting at windmills, he was forced to come off his position that Israel didn't deserve to exist after the television station which airs his new magazine program where he made the remarks, was inundated with complaints.

But that's not what I wish to address here today, rather, it is his controversial stand against Bill 101 and his promise that he will ignore the law and continue to maintain bilingualism in his tiny town, which historically was English, but no longer qualifies for bilingual status under the law.
"I have no use for the insecure and culturally impoverished that are tightly-knit within the French language, who let their lives be governed by its potential disappearance from North America. By focusing on this linguistic insecurity, Quebec has been impoverished while Ontario, which said yes to immigration, ended up surpassing us."

("Je n'ai que faire des insécures et des pauvres culturels que sont les tricotés serrés de la langue française qui ne vivent qu'en fonction de l'heure de leur disparition en Amérique, a-t-il indiqué. À force de focuser sur l'insécurité linguistique, le Québec s'est appauvri et l'Ontario - qui a dit oui à l'immigration et à la diversité - a fini par nous doubler au passage.") LINK {Fr}
The OQLF has confirmed that a complaint has been laid, but went to lengths to say that they are looking to settle things without resorting to court.

I imagine they would, but that may not be possible, as Mayor Gendron has committed to defying any ruling or ordinance issued by the OQLF in regards to removing bilingualism from the town.

Mr. Gendron has promised that if need be, the town will create a line item in the budget entitled  "Human Rights and Dignity," to pay for any fines.

That doesn't augur well for the OQLF who are desperate to avoid publicity, especially internationally.

A plucky mayor of a little town, who fights the big bad language police, is a David and Goliath story that is sure to capture plenty of print space and air time.

That is something the OQLF is desperate to avoid.
As long as the debate rages in Quebec, everything is fine as far as they are concerned, but if this story leaks out of Quebec and is picked up by the American press, it will be a public relations nightmare for the province.
Let us just say Americans are not quite so nuanced and see language laws as discrimination, pure and simple.

I don't have to remind readers about the negative repercussions that still reverberate over Mordechai Richler's condemnation of Quebec in the New Yorker and on 60 minutes. Even though these interviews and stories appeared back in the nineties, they still haunt French language militants who reserve a special hate for the sardonic Richler, for humiliating them south of the border.


If the mayor of Huntington actually decides to fight, as he said he will, it will be the first time any city or town defies the OQLF and there is little doubt that the affair will be messy and embarrassing.
Over the course of any litigation, which of course will drag out for years, Mr Gendron will have plenty of opportunity and will be afforded plenty of face time on television to denounce the OQLF in the most colourful and unflattering of terms.

Now, over the life of this blog, a sentiment by French language militants has been oft repeated, that is the idea that even though we Anglos do not like Bill 101,  we must 'respect' it, because ours is a society of laws.

Here's typical opinion;

"Nous ne faisons que faire respecter la loi. Dans notre pays les lois sont importantes et tous, sans exception, doivent s'y conformer,"
(In our country, laws are important and we must obey them all without exception)  

Now before I continue, I AM NOT comparing Bill 101 to the Nurenberg laws, the various Apartheid laws of South Africa or race laws that discriminated against Blacks in the USA.
So please, no comments that I am making such a comparison.
Bill 101 is nothing like those laws and to intimate such, is to belittle the trials and struggles of those people subjected to their cruelty .

This post is merely a discussion over whether one should be obliged to obey an unjust law, and whether Bill 101 falls into this category.



That sounds like a good description of what the mayor of Huntington is suggesting he and his town are going to do..

Readers, if you aren't familiar with Martin Luther King's famous  "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" I would recommend reading it. It is a masterpiece.
It's a bit long, so you might want to save it for the weekend. Prepare to be humbled and inspired.
READ IT HERE    IN FRENCH

Would the shoe be on the other foot, I wonder if these French language militants would be so 'respectful' of a law that discriminated against their language.

What if Mr. Harper passed a federal law that forced every sign in Canada to be in English, with minority languages (including French) allowed, but on a diminished basis?

I don't even make the case that there is an equivalency to the above and Bill 101, the point is whether Francophones would feel justified in disobeying what they would clearly perceive as a discriminatory law?
How would it play out in Chicoutimi, Quebec City or Val D'Or?
Would these same militants who tell Anglos to respect Bill 101 because it is the law, advise Francophones to 'respect' this Harper law, or would they feel justified in disobeying.

It's easy to fall back on the old chestnut, that the law is the law, and that we all must obey it because it was passed by the majority.

But philosophers greater than I have built a consensus that such is not the case.

And so readers, the question as to whether Bill 101 is just or unjust, may be a matter of perspective.
And for those who believe it is unjust, the question remains as to whether it rises to the level of discrimination that morally justifies disobeying it. 


Henry David Thoreau framed the question quite succinctly;

"Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once?"

155 comments:

  1. Part 1

    Many jurisdictions on Earth have language policies that tend to favor a language at the expense of another, and Bill 101 is a fine example. These jurisdictions obviously feel that the language in question will be in jeopardy if left unchecked. Where most people have gears to grind with Bill 101 is the lack of protections for other linguistic minorities (read: English). This is where the anglophone community needs to stand up for itself and demand their rights be respected.

    The purpose of Bill 101 was to essentially reconquer Montreal by legislation and end the monopoly that English Montreal held over the city for over a century. Language laws, along with the creation of the civil service were means of helping francophones compete with the English and eventually take economic control of a city of which they were, and still are, the majority. During the Great Depression, many francophones moved to Montreal from the rural areas and eventually became the majority again so it's only normal that such conflict would arise.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Part 2

    The Quebec government wanted to completely reshape the power relationship between the two communities in such a way that anglophones would forced to live, as the government sees it, an actual minorities. Anglophones have traditionally never considered themselves as a linguistic minority, but rather, as part of the North American English speaking majority. They're now forced to fend for themselves in order to survive, like most minorities in the world.

    Bill 101 had some economic repercussions for sure. Although Quebec was initially angered at the departures of the big companies (Sun Life, Royal Bank etc.) as well as willing to negotiate flexibility, this seems to have created a francophone "Quebec Inc." sort to speak.

    Part 3 coming up later on (too tired now to continue :P)

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

      Delete
    2. This law broke up my family...I will never forgive this injustice

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

      Delete
    4. Yes, this has created a "francophone Quebec Inc." so to speak.

      But at what price?

      I contend it is NOT an economically working model. To wit:

      - $8 billion a year in equalization payments to Quebec;

      - net transfer payments to Quebec;

      - numerous sweetheart deals for Quebec - put in place by both government and the private sector (pushed by the government - to placate Quebec.

      Left on its own without these artificial financial "subsidies" the cost of francization would have brought Quebec into an even worse economic mess than it is.

      I advocate independence for Quebec because I truly believe that, once independent, Quebec will be forced to grant full minority rights and individual rights to its anglophone minority. Left on its own, Quebec will soon realize that in order to get its fair share of entrepreneurs, investors, and professionals, it will have to attract them from the pool of 350 million highly affluent, unilingual anglophones from that famous "Sea of English" that surrounds Quebec...and said unilingual anglos ain't gonna be attracted to come to Quebec because of our winters. They will only come if they can live in, work in, invest in, interact with the government in, educate their children in UNLINGUAL ENGLISH.

      The future of an independent Quebec will be an English one, one where not only anglos will have the freedom to live in their language but francophones as well. The best way to protect and preserve the French language is when that population learns English the way that the non-English peoples of the countries of Europe learn a second languages. Independence will provide Quebecers will the boundaries of a REAL nation that they can claim as their own, not a pretend one that Harper insultingly gave to Quebec via that silly resolution he passed a few years ago in Parliament.

      Delete
  3. Bill 101 and it's related laws are unjust.

    BTW, this week-ends news reports have the Charest government ready to table anti-bullying laws. Perhaps they should look at themselves first and the governments bullying of anglophones and allophones in this province. Not to mention franco radical groups, the media, and the PQ rhetoric.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are Quebecois that hide behind their language laws as justification to remain intolerant and obnoxious to everyone but the french community, When the unemployed french come to other provinces to find work because the Quebec economy doesn't have anything for them, the french are outraged that the Quebecois fascistic culture and code is not there to comfort them. This Fascist history with Quebec has wounded the entire country. This illegal action has lasted longer than the second world war. Aren't you hungry to share the the good times this country has been having for the past 40 years?? It's high time the entire province see they are crippled culturally and economically by this and that the rest of Canada is waiting for it to quit the tantrum and put on her big girl pants. Je me souviens Bill 101 the devil that stole my childhood and my family life.

      Delete
    2. I'm with you Anonymous!!!

      Delete
  4. Thank you for stating that you are not comparing Québec with apartheid and with the situation of blacks in USA before civil rights.

    "Would the shoe be on the other foot, I wonder if these French language militants would be so 'respectful' of a law that discriminated against their language."

    We would likely think about desobeying the law too, of course. More likely, we would support independence in greater number and if the federal "tyranny" would reach a given level, Québec would become independent. This is a difference between the two situations : we are the majority in a state of our own. (Please, I do not wish to argue about wether if we are still a part of Canada, if we are a nation, a state or whatever, bla bla bla. I simply mean that we are the majority in our parliament and that we can use democratic means to act according to our views.)

    I have argued before that franco-quebeckers and english-quebeckers are alike in many ways. And in this post, I see among english-quebeckers the same "mentalité d'assiégés". And I say this with no contempt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We should abolish all equalization payments to quebec. Let quebec beg their equalization funds from FRANCE! I don't capitalize quebec for the same reason I don't capitalize s**t.

      Delete
    2. I highly doubt France would provide equalization funds. They've already got problems of their own.

      Delete
    3. They've already got problems of their own.

      Un peu normal,la France Allonge les milliards depuis son entrée dans l'union Européenne afin de sauver la Grèce,le Portugal,l'Espagne et maintenant l'Italie.Je crois que le montant total que ce pays a injecté dans l'union tourne autour de 90 milliards d'Euros et ce n'est pas fini.Marine Le Pen a de plus en plus d'appuis des Français pour sortir de cette union.Les contribuables Allemands seraient aussi en faveur d'une telle sortie,selon les derniers sondages.

      Delete
    4. To those who state the Equalization programs for Quebec should be cut or eliminated: RIGHT YOU ARE! Considering Quebec has the resources in the ground to extract, their uncompetitive labour force, their overregulation of labour laws (read Bill 45, one of the PQ's first pieces of legislation passed after Bill 101) that forbids scab labour in case of strike. The law went further later when it became against the law for management to do the jobs of the striking workers.

      Editor recently wrote an article to remind us of how unions seem to run the businesses of the employers. Shell within the last couple of years pulled out of Montreal's East End, Electrolux pulled out of l'Assoption, and even Wal Mart closed its store in Jonquière when a union was being formed. Let's face it: Quebec's unionized labour force is underproductive, over regulated and over protected. Not that I'm against pro labour legislation, but with a global economy, workers are tending to go by the lowest common denominator. There is lots of manufacturing in China and other nations where workers have no rights, are exploited for all their worth and paid $1-a-day by the likes of Apple. Unfortunately, this is where labour is going, but if companies can close shops like Shell with endless grievances, poor productivity and uncompetetive wages, where are thes jobs going to go? Quebec just doesn't GET it!

      Delete
  5. @ Michel Patrice.
    2 things. First you didn't answer the question the post is really asking, which is essentially "Is bill 101 just?" You say you would disobey a Canadian law limiting French but my guess is you support the French Canadian law limiting English as just. Let me know if I misunderstood.
    2nd you say "I do not wish to argue about wether (sic) if we are still a part of Canada, if we are a nation, a state or whatever, bla bla bla" Is there an argument there? I mean there is fact, Quebec is a province in Canada, and then there is a dream (for some) that Quebec become it's own state. I'm not sure you can argue fact vs. fiction anyways?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I mean there is fact, Quebec is a province in Canada, and then there is a dream (for some) that Quebec become it's own state. I'm not sure you can argue fact vs. fiction anyways?"

      This is exactely the type of discussion I referred to. Being quite patient, I will take two minutes to explain what I mean. There is a parliament in Québec where we can vote laws. We were once unhappy with the situation of french in Québec, so we voted a law, bill 101. This is an instance of us using democratic means to act according to our will. You probably don't like the fact that I refer to Québec as "l'état québécois", nevertheless we have a government of our own that we control and that we use to act. This is not a dream, it is a reality. You are mistaking, the concept of a state and the concept of a recognized by the UN sovereign state.

      On the other side, there are the english-quebeckers who are a minority in the Québec government and who are also a minority in the federal government. The federal government has of course sympathy for their cause. But their cause is, for the federal government, one cause out of many, and what would be the very first issue to adress from english-quebeckers point of view is not necessarily the priority for the federal government.

      In this regard, our situation is not the same. Simple observation of mine that I wanted to share.

      And I did not answer the question "is bill 101 just", I did not know that I had to. About this, I have said in the past that this question is not really a question of individual vs collective rights, it is a more the issue of two peoples fighting for preponderance. It is a longer discussion.

      Delete
  6. Ah, but the separatists or French-language hard-liners still have one ammunition in their arsenal. That is, the vulnerability of the French language in the predominantly English North America*.

    I know that it is completely hogwash, but that argument is the working argument. That argument portrays that the condition between English and French is not symmetrical. Because of the asymmetrical condition, the laws are 'justified' to be unjust towards the English side but not towards the French side.

    *By North America I mean Canada and the United States, and not Mexico.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I disagree with at least one thing the author says. The anti-English laws (101, 86 etc.) are EXACTLY like those of apartheid South Africa. Indeed, this is linguistic apartheid in its simplest and "purest laine" form. It is legalizing racism, discrimination, and turning English Canadians (not only in Quebec---which in English DOES NOT have an accent, cher M. Patrice---but in New Brunswick and eastern Ontario) into second-class citizens. When the francophones (and I am not saying they are ALL racist anglophobes) build French-only or French-first institutions like schools, hospitals and community centres, with ENGLISH CANADIANS' TAX DOLLARS, we are fine with that because it "promotes bilingualism", but God help the anglophones of Kebec if they try to do the same with federal and provincial funding.

    The farce that we are a bilingual nation has to stop, and I have changed my tone since the 90s and have become a Kebec separatist (with, of course, the understanding that the new country will NOT be able to leave with the territory, people or resources it has now, since Canadians who wish to remain Canadian must be allowed to do so), since if politicians want to promote bilingualism, it should---indeed must---start in, and with, Quebec. Anything else is a joke and a sick one at that.
    Put another way: Canada (outside Quebec) should be ONLY as French as Quebec is English. Which would certainly include sign laws with French half the size of English and no more, reflecting EXACTLY how racist Quebec is. Quebec's portion of seats in the House of Commons should be reduced (or other provinces' increased) to reflect current reality. And there is no earthly reason why three (or possibly even two) Supreme Court justices must be from Quebec (and if it must be, at least one justice should be non-francophone).

    There are far too many horror stories of anglophones being turned away from French-only hospitals
    (in Ontario!!) and failing "French proficiency tests" that even some francophones would not be able to pass, in order to obtain government jobs. (The "tests" to pass English for those francophones, by comparison, is ridiculously easy. Fair? I don't think so.) Even the military is falling victim to Frenchification. And when language trumps excellence and competence, that language law demands it be overturned.
    Of course, no political party---not the Liberals of Trudeau/Chretien/Martin/Dion etc., not the NDPQ whose pro-separatist stand must have Jack Layton spinning in his grave, and it seems to me, not even the Conservatives under Harper, recognize that 85% of the population of a country will only stand so long for being discriminated against.

    I consider Mayor Gendron a hero and not only for English Quebecers but for all of Canada and will certainly give him as much press as I can.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said Lou!


      VIVE LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL!!

      Delete
    2. I completely agree with what Lou has said. These are not laws which simply present an inconvenience or slight annoyance as you seem to imply, these DAMN WELL ARE comparable to Nurenberg and Apartheid laws. What Quebec has been doing is not only racist and unjust, but it is *dangerous*. If we continue to walk down this path, the soft ethnic cleansing will eventually turn to violence and loss of life. History guarantees it.

      Looks like my comments in the previous entry inspired this topic. Here are my comments again, just so you can see where I stand:

      ===
      This may be out of context, but I'm sick of hearing buffoons justifying the existence of Bill 101 by boastfully proclaiming "It's the law". That so called law is as valid as the former laws in the southern states that mandated segregated "colored sections" for African Americans on buses, drinking fountains and schools. Or laws in Europe that stated Jewish persons could not own businesses or operate professional practices. Always the same bullshit about protecting what is a supposedly superior culture from the inferior, and Quebec is absolutely no different. Yes, Quebec will be remembered in history books right alongside other racist states and organizations.
      ===

      Delete
    3. Sorry, Lou, but this Gendron clown is no hero. Heros don't make statements like Israel has no right to exist. Israel exists BECAUSE of what Hitler did--try to kill world Jewry. Mackenzie-King, a former Canadian prime minister, didn't want more Jews. Several South American countries charged European Jews extortionate amounts for entry visas to their countries only to then not allow the Jewish refugees to dock at their ports. These cheated Jews ended up going right back where they came from and were gassed just like those who could not afford at all to flee.

      In the meantime, Israel started off as nothing but sand dunes for which top dollar was paid from the Jewish National Fund, an organization that started circa the turn of the 20th Century. Those sand dunes were turned into an infrastructure, a thriving civilization. If it wasn't for Israel, chances are the sand dunes of that era would be the sand dunes of today. Israel, on a per-capita basis, has more university graduates, more designated professionals and more scientists than ANY AND EVERY other country on Earth, including the U.S., Canada and Western Europe! Like it or not, that's how it stands.

      Anyone who can state that self-made country has no right to exist is NO hero! Sorry!

      Delete
    4. Israel didn't do it all on its own. It received billions of dollars of support over the years from the United States.

      Delete
  8. What ever the reasons for the existence of the Room 101 Law may appear to be, lets remember that those who enforce it, do not do it for love of language and culture. I suggest that evidence is plentiful to prove the contrary.

    This kind of overzealous extremism has not come about only because of the hate that resides in the heart of the separatist movement. It was aided and abetted by the now victims too. I remember as a boy how arrogant the English were in their belief that they would never need to learn to speak French. As time passed I notice that many English people decided to embrace the French language and even went so far as to call themselves the English Community. But English Canadians are not a community. They are among the three founding peoples of Canada. They fought in all the conflicts and wars, which threatened the sovereignty and freedom of Our Home And Native Land. It is for that reason that Section 133 of the BNA Act and the Federal Official Languages Act make English an official language of Canada. The self imposed term “English Community” only empowers the separatists to continue their thrashing of the rights of a founding people.

    French and English people of this province have learned to live together leaving the separatist extremist minority far behind. However, these extremists control many functions of government and sabotage the peace towns like Huntington and Montreal have achieved.

    In a healthy society, the pendulum needs to keep swinging, but disease has set in when that pendulum has been taken off its hinge and is being used by one side to beat the other side to a pulp!

    Since the eparatist extremist minority will not open its heart, perhaps the time has come to ask:

    "Do you agree that Montréal should become a Province of Canada after having made a formal offer to Quebec for an economic and political partnership within the scope of the will defending the future of Montréal and the agreement of July 1, 1996?"

    VIVE LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that the time to discuss the separation of Quebec into two distinct halves is upon us. We should have a primary referendum asking people to choose between two versions of Quebec: one French-only, and the other a bilingual province. Once we had a good idea of how many people wanted a fully French country, we could carve out a territory that would be in line with both the size of the population that wants a French-only country and their current geographical location.

      God, if only we could actually do this it would make me so happy. I cannot help but fantasize about how an unshackled Montreal could re-assert (or least try) itself within Canada, North America, and the world.

      Delete
    2. Si on se fie à la dernière manifestation contre La Loi 101,la quantité d'anglos que vous pouvez réunir autour d'une cause commune,tient largement dans une boîte de 12 Donuts.

      Delete
    3. you should just stop underestimating.

      Delete
    4. "you should just stop underestimating."

      Quelle est votre évaluation du "crowd" ? :D

      Delete
    5. I gather this "agreement of July 1, 1996" is a spoof on the Referendum of October 30, 1995? If not, and there is an actual "agreement", what is it? I'm sure it's in reference to the so-called "agreement" of June 12, 1995 that was agreed upon by the three Quebec party leaders of Quebec and NOBODY in Canada! What a sick farce THAT was?

      Delete
  9. So if I get Michel Patrice right, if Canada were to impose English-"promoting" laws in the RoC that are along the lines of the language laws of Quebec, francophones living the the Canadian province of Quebec would practice civil disobedience or seek ways to get the province out of the federation. So in a sense, that is an indirect indictment of 101 by M.Patrice. (i.e. if they did this to us, we wouldn't tolerate it, so it can't be that good, can it)

    And you're not a state of your own, M.Patrice. You're an autonomous province-state within a larger internationally recognized nation-state, in which you stay on your own volition. So the lines are not so clear-cut that you can demand from them, but they have no right to demand from you. The situation is blurred enough for Ottawa to be able to come here with demands once in a while. It's a price you pay for the 8 billion dollars a year. So there are benefits in this for you, but there are also costs. I just wish these costs were higher.

    Another question is why Canada tolerates the asymmetric relationship. The obvious answer is that Quebec uses blackmail skillfully. But maybe there is more to it. Maybe Reed Scowen was right. Maybe the values of the two peoples are not compatible. I read an article recently by a Frenchwoman who is a Paris-based correspondent for The Independent (a UK daily). She talked of the difference between the French and English in their attitudes to their languages and wrote that the French are so proud of their language that they wouldn't refrain from using state coercion to impose this langue fantastique on people (as in Toubon laws), whereas the English are proud in a much more distant way...so that they would find it insulting if the state had to be used to impose English on people. She wrote that if English were a dying language, the English would still be too proud to resort to laws to save it. So maybe the secret to the problem lies in this cultural nuance, and not so much in Canadians being scared of Quebec leaving. Many of them probably wouldn't mind seeing it go anyways.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I get your logic. What I say is that it is not really about if it is just or not. The question is more : is it in our interest or not? Bill 101 is in our interest. A hypothetical federal law that would forbbid french is against our interest. Period. It is the way people/nations think.

      About the state issue, my previous answer to comment 7:02 explains my view on this.

      (P.S. I have only a few minutes, I will be back later in the day/in the night.)

      Delete
    2. Wow Michel. You are so deep into your own Kool-Aid it is frightening! Your argument is basically that it's ok when you do it but not when others do the same.

      Honestly, separatists in Quebec are fucking retarded. Even if you had a path to independence you wouldn't be able to achieve it because you're so god-damned stupid.

      Delete
    3. If he is intellectually honest and able to apply "moral equivalence" (term coined by Prof.Chomsky), then he will have to admit that he is not only indicting bill 101 but also supporting civil disobedience against 101 and vindicating the partitionist sentiment of many Quebec residents.

      If he can apply moral equivalence, that is. I doubt that he can.

      Delete
    4. Adski,

      I said that nations (social groups, whatever) look after their own interest first, justice is a second thought. It is true for most (every) nations. I think it is intellectually honest to say so.

      You don't have to be contemptuous.

      Delete
    5. M. Patrice,

      Based on your comments, let me ask you a question. It is obvious that the anglophone / allophone-English communities feel that Bill 101 is an unjust law. Do you think that if those communities conduct civil disobedience in the model of King or Gandhi they are justified to do so?

      Delete
    6. Troy, they're just going to tell you that the english minority has no representation, while they do, which is correct. It's too bad they forgot that the Quebec government represents ALL the citizens of this province, not just the french separatists. In fact, the organizations which support their ideas are losing popularity at an astonishing rate. Nobody's forgotten what happened to the Bloc, and if Pauline keeps up her good work, the PQ is next.

      After that, opposition to changing our outdated / racist laws won't be so strong.

      Just like the Canadian law which says that "Businesses must provide rails for tying up horses", perhaps someday soon, nobody will care about Loi 101. In the meantime, I'm willing to bet the french language will still be going strong in this province.

      Delete
    7. Troy (and Adski),

      If they feel that this law is unfair and that they can't live with it, yes, they should go for civil disobedience. And I think that civil disobedience is a very effective mean of action. I too like Gandhi ; an independentist who wants his country to be independent from the british empire is something I can relate to. And I think that there are many separatists who pray at night that some anglo breaks the linguistic peace.

      May I add some nuances? You depict bill 101 as a tyranny. But a large part of the anglo community and a large part of allophones have come to live with it. A very large part of young anglos now speak french, more than we speak english. Many anglos left, but many more stayed (And Isn't Terri De Monti back from the west?). Some (many?) anglos send their kids to french school. Bill 101 has been examined more than once by the Supreme Court of Canada, examined, amended, modified. The Supreme Court of Canada which is not a nest of separatists, said that bill 101 is acceptable the way it is now. Reading the comment section of this blog, one forgets that our society, despite old tensions and grievances, is peaceful.

      This being said, I said that people (quebeckers in this case) judge something's rightfulness or wrongfulness according to their own interest first. And you are all on my back. (But if, let's say, the Editor said something like this, you would have said "it is so true, my brother, these self centered mother fuckers think only of themselves regardless of basic justice considerations!")

      But think about it for one minute. Nations think of their own interest first. When the americans invaded Iraq, were they thinking about their interests or about justice? Rich countries deal with poor countries the way they deal with them because it is fair or because it suits their interests? When there is a commercial dispute between USA and Canada, isn't each country thinking about its own interest? Would it be uselessly inflammatory if I asked if the federal government was looking for justice or looking after its own interest when ordering the massacre of the métis?

      Since many of you are fond of Apartheid history, let me take an example from South Africa. Whites in South Africa were outnumbered by blacks and they felt that if they let one inch to blacks, they would lose control and pay back for all they did to them in the past. Arguing with whites that apartheid was unfair would have been pointless because they felt that their survival was on the line, you would have been talking to a wall.

      So, if quebeckers think that bill 101 is essential to their survival, it is pointless to tell them that this law is unfair. What should you tell them instead? Honestely, I don't know. But this issue is not about fairness, it is not about individual rights and collective rights, it is about "two nations warring in the bosom of a single state."

      I also said that english quebeckers and french quebeckers are alike in many ways and that I see among english-quebeckers the same "mentalité d'assiégés". Any thoughts on this?

      Delete
    8. M. Patrice,

      You can sugar coat it all you want, but it will never make it right!! What you just stated is but a desperate attempt to rationalize the facts that you know you are not a Nation like Gandhi's India. That you have renounce being French and that all that is left of you is the Separatist Extremist MINORITY!! You do not represent French Canadians and there is no such thing as a Quebecois race. You’re grasping at straws just like you Nazi-like PQ that wants to lower the voting age to terrorize the kids into voting for separatists.

      You’ve not been able to instill a nation’s pride in “your” people because, as my teachers use to try to tell me, on est un Peuple Conquis! Not much to strive for! You dare compare your Separatist Extremist MINORITY to India? You’re delusional in thinking you’ll wipe out English Canadians!
      They are among the three founding peoples of Canada.

      Delete
    9. "But a large part of the anglo community and a large part of allophones have come to live with it."

      In his excellent essay The Banality of Evil Edward Herman borrows the term "normalization of unthinkable" to describe the acceptance of laws that are not only ridiculous, but also in many ways unethical and harmful.

      "Normalization of the unthinkable comes easily when money, status, power, and jobs are at stake. Companies and workers can always be found to manufacture poison gases, napalm, or instruments of torture, and intellectuals will be dredged up to justify their production and use. The rationalizations are hoary with age: government knows best, ours is a strictly defensive effort, or, if it wasn't me somebody else would do it. There is also the retreat to ignorance, real, cultivated, or feigned."

      Link to the essay:

      http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7278.htm

      ---


      "Nations think of their own interest first. "

      This is correct. And I was a vociferous opponent of the invasion of Iraq, as I am of the American Empire and its cynical foreign policy.
      Nation states, like corporations, are psychopathic entities devoid of empathy and working only in its own interest. But does this excuse Quebec? No. We live in Quebec so we should criticize Quebec, just like someone living in the US should criticize the US. The fact that states are self-serving entities is no excuse.

      ---


      "So, if quebeckers think that bill 101 is essential to their survival, it is pointless to tell them that this law is unfair."

      On the contrary. We must talk about it loudly and clearly. Maybe something will tick and they'll snap of of the doctrinal constraints imposed on them (Stephane Gendron is talking about it these days, and more people should). There are many other examples of such assumptions that we accept as "normal" because it was hammered into our heads. But if we think about them and put them to a test they don't stand, and we realize that what we are encouraged to think of as natural normality is simply an arbitrary convention that serves someone's interest.

      All these topics are touched upon in the essay I linked to above.

      ---


      "english quebeckers and french quebeckers are alike in many ways and that I see among english-quebeckers the same "mentalité d'assiégés""

      French Quebeckers have serious issues with being a continental minority. Anglo Quebeckers have issues with being a provincial minority. Quebec is a society composed of people with a chip on their shoulders. So is Canada in general, given the inferiority complex of Canadians towards the Americans.

      Canada is a funny country. But its province of Quebec is simply ridiculous.

      Delete
    10. I agree with you on the concept of normalization of the unthinkable. But I disagree on what is defined as unthinkable. Herman takes for examples manufacturing of poison gases, napalm, or instruments of torture. I wonder how he would rate bill 101 on the scale of unthinkableness. Even the Editor of No Dogs carefuly mentions that he is not comparing Bill 101 to the Nurenberg laws, the various Apartheid laws of South Africa or race laws that discriminated against Blacks in the USA.

      Of course, unthinkability is highly subjective and I am guessing that we will agree on this point, but comparing bill 101 with manufacturing instruments of torture is what? exaggerated perhaps? (Don't have a fit, I am just telling you my side of the story...)

      I think that you understand my point about nations thinking about their interests first.

      I think that french and english quebeckers have much in common, I think that the dynamics of our society is as fascinating as it is sometimes despairing and it is why I find forums such as this one interesting (as long as one gets over the mindless racist animosity).

      I am still curious : you quoted Chomsky and Herman, are you studying political sciences or something like that? And how old are you? I am not saying this to make of you or to put you in a box. I am just curious.

      Michel Patrice

      P.S. I read Chomsky's De la Guerre comme Politique Étrangère des États-Unis long ago. And quoting Chomsky you remind that I wanted to read Manufacturing of Conscent.

      P.S. I don't know what "people with a chip on their shoulders" means.

      Delete
    11. Manufacturing Consent was written by both Herman and Chomsky. It's a must read.

      I'm actually a comp sci graduate working in IT, but I read a lot about history, politics, media, world events. I tend to go for authors who criticize the established order in a total, and not partisan, manner (e.g. Zinn, Chris Hedges, Parenti, Pilger, Fisk, Seymore Hersh, Tariq Ali, Naomi Klein, John Gray, Alexander Cockburn, pre-9/11 C.Hitchens, Gore Vidal, etc...). The mainstream writers who are entangled with power centers (e.g. Ignatieff, Lisee, even Bob Woodward) are usually dull and dishonest, and not really worth reading.

      Delete
    12. I read Zinn's Une Histoire Populaire des États-Unis, interesting, and Klein's No Logo, fascinating.

      Nice talking with you. I guess that we will have the occasion to pursue this discussion in following posts.

      Delete
  10. Part 3 of my initial post...

    While I do believe that Bill 101 is unjust in some areas, I don't disagree with its objective. If you were an immigrant in Montreal in early 20th cent., you could never tell that francophones were the majority by just looking at the city. I have no problem with the concept of immigrants being legally obliged to attend French school since it's the language of the majority, however, an improvement would be to allow English mother tongue immigrants to attend English school. Currently over 90% of Quebec's anglophones are eligible for English instruction but many don't use it and send their children to private or French schools. It's up the English school boards to do what they can to attract these eligible students into their system. Keep in mind that control over these sort of things was one of the main reasons Quebec joined Confederation!

    In any case, I do believe that Bill 101 has some injustices and the anglophone community has to reach out to the francophone majority and make compromises so that it's a "win-win" scenario. A gain for either community doesn't have to mean a loss for the other.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Montreal has always been quite of a bilingual City rather than a predominant french city, which means that they were in close call in term of demography.

      Delete
    2. What ever the reasons for the existence of the Room 101 Law may appear to be, lets remember that those who enforce it, do not do it for love of language and culture. I suggest that evidence is plentiful to prove the contrary.

      This kind of overzealous extremism has not come about only because of the hate that resides in the heart of the separatist movement. It was aided and abetted by the now victims too. I remember as a boy how arrogant the English were in their belief that they would never need to learn to speak French. As time passed I notice that many English people decided to embrace the French language and even went so far as to call themselves the English Community. But English Canadians are not a community. They are among the three founding peoples of Canada. They fought in all the conflicts and wars, which threatened the sovereignty and freedom of Our Home And Native Land. It is for that reason that Section 133 of the BNA Act and the Federal Official Languages Act make English an official language of Canada. The self imposed term “English Community” only empowers the separatists to continue their thrashing of the rights of a founding people.

      French and English people of this province have learned to live together leaving the separatist extremist minority far behind. However, these extremists control many functions of government and sabotage the peace towns like Huntington and Montreal have achieved.

      In a healthy society, the pendulum needs to keep swinging, but disease has set in when that pendulum has been taken off its hinge and is being used by one side to beat the other side to a pulp!

      Since the separatist extremist minority will not open its heart, perhaps the time has come to ask:

      "Do you agree that Montréal should become a Province of Canada after having made a formal offer to Quebec for an economic and political partnership within the scope of the will defending the future of Montréal and the agreement of July 1, 1996?"

      VIVE LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL!!

      Delete
    3. VIVE LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL!

      OUI!...Maintenant que faisons nous?Avec William 'Pit' Bill Johnson qui supporte la CAQ,il nous reste pas beaucoup de convaincus pour former un parti.

      Delete
    4. "If you were an immigrant in Montreal in early 20th cent., you could never tell that francophones were the majority by just looking at the city."

      But why not let the immigrants see what they see? Why do you need laws and government to "help" them see what you think they should see? Why do you let your govt infantalize your immigrants, and then your own people too?

      If the immigrants failed to notice the franco "majority" after settling in Montreal, it'd be because a major part of that "majority" lives in the Regions which are as much of interest to an average immigrant as the region of Xinjiang in China. An average immigrant has as much to do with a farmer in Xinjiang as with a farmer in Abitibi (yes, some of our dairy products come from up north, so there is this connection with Montreal, but many of our clothes come from China, so here is that connection too). So what an immigrant sees in Montreal is that the English-French proportion is almost equal, with many other languages in the mix. So basically, you want to get the government "help" them see what they are not seeing. And you call this manipulation of reality an imposition of normality?

      You may say that as immigrants to a jurisdiction, they must be ready to face this jurisdiction in its entirety, not just their immediate surroundings. But Canada is also a jurisdiction. The entry visa has a maple leaf on it. The currency has a queen on it. The passports have Canada written on it. So why should that jurisdiction, which is 80% English be ignored, while the other jurisdiction (80% French) be forcefully imposed? Don't you think it's a little arbitrary?

      Delete
    5. Now, Don't fool yourself seppie into thinking the CAQ will exercise everything in their power to enforce bill 101...

      Besides, what makes you think the the "Pit" won't become the leader of this new party???
      It would be lethal and devastating for you seppies if ever it happened. You would probably shit in your pans if it did.

      Delete
    6. "But why not let the immigrants see what they see? Why do you need laws and government to "help" them see what you think they should see? Why do you let your govt infantalize your immigrants, and then your own people too?"

      When I go to Paris, I know it's a French city and I would be really surprised if most signs were in English only and people other than Frenchmen held top jobs. Wouldn't you? Now, I know that France is a country and Quebec isn't, but my point is that it's not normal that any areas should be economically controlled by a people that make up 10-13% and the remaining 83% or so get shitty jobs. This inequality came about when francophones immigrated to Montreal during the Great Depression and eventually became the majority. If the shoe were on the other foot, don't you think that the anglophones would have done the same thing and use their legislative clout to gain a better position in society?

      I'm not saying immigrants shouldn't see Montreal's English fact, only that when they come here they shouldn't mistake it for Toronto or Vancouver. Many jurisdictions in the world have governmental departments regarding tourism which technically "helps" them see things. Most immigrants come here for the French fact and know that they'll have to send their children to French school. So many jurisdictions have similar laws promoting the language of the majority at the expense of another, so why is the goal of protecting the French language in Canada any different?

      While immigrants that settle here are in Canada, they're settling in Quebec and there are certain rules that they must follow if they're to get full benefits of residing here. Other provinces would like to have the same about of powers over immigration. You need to become a Canadian citizen in order to get many of the benefits offered in Quebec. When you settle in any other province, they promote their respective province and give a bunch of reasons why they should settle there instead of another place. That doesn't necessarily mean they disregard the fact that they're part of Canada. Canada is a huge country with diverse peoples and societies living in it and I don't see why the Quebec government shouldn't promote its values, culture, beliefs etc... In other words, when immigrants come here, they come to Canada but (at least in theory) they should keep in mind that the particular society that surrounds them has certain interests and values.

      Delete
    7. Now, I know that France is a country and Quebec isn't, but my point is that it's not normal that any areas should be economically controlled by a people that make up 10-13% and the remaining 83% or so get shitty jobs. This inequality came about when francophones immigrated to Montreal during the Great Depression and eventually became the majority. If the shoe were on the other foot, don't you think that the anglophones would have done the same thing and use their legislative clout to gain a better position in society?

      Ok let me set the record straight here…First off, Prior to bill 101, Most of Montreal’s companies were owned and established by Anglos, so basically it was perfectly normal for them to have some sort of monopoly on the business level..Second off, that little 10-13 % to which you are referring, did most of the job in industrializing and building the city as we know today (and no, I am not boastfully claiming this with pride Btw, in fact, it is what it is or was), while Most Pure-Lainers’ on the other hand, were clung to the Clergy`s balls doing everything as they were told, such as reluctantly reproducing themselves and buying all sort of regressive craps on behalf the church so they could be held back into non-productivity and ignorance..Finally, true, I am with you on this, in the mid 70’s it became predominately French as the massive exodus of Anglos gradually reached its end. But ever since the time they became a majority, an agony of doom has settled in the city, reassuring that the city and the ROQ would pave its way down to hell with no hope of recovering from the permanent damages that have been inflicted upon it.

      ‘I'm not saying immigrants shouldn't see Montreal's English fact, only that when they come here they shouldn't mistake it for Toronto or Vancouver’
      Wow you fail to realize that Montreal isn’t as French as you’d like it to be. Welcome to the cold-harsh reality of the city.

      `While immigrants that settle here are in Canada, they're settling in Quebec and there are certain rules that they must follow if they're to get full benefits of residing here. Other provinces would like to have`

      You should perhaps let them know that there are other alternatives beside Montreal in Quebec so they can actually follow YOUR stupid rules in order to reap those full benefits.

      Hopefully, they’ll be lucky enough not to get the door slammed in their faces when it comes down to applying for jobs, because they won`t have access to those benefits for sure.

      ``That doesn't necessarily mean they disregard the fact that they're part of Canada. Canada is a huge country with diverse peoples and societies living in it and I don't see why the Quebec government shouldn't promote its values, culture, beliefs etc... In other words, when immigrants come here, they come to Canada but (at least in theory) they should keep in mind that the particular society that surrounds them has certain interests and values.``

      Aside from the Language, I don`tsee any trait that distinguishes you from Americans and Canadians. SO, PALLLEAAAAAAASE, Quit portraying yourself as `Apart and different. It`s getting very annoying to constantly hear this.

      Delete
    8. "I'm not saying immigrants shouldn't see Montreal's English fact, only that when they come here they shouldn't mistake it for Toronto or Vancouver."

      If an immigrant could potentially mistake Montreal for Toronto or Vancouver, what does it say about Montreal? Think about it.

      I don't think an immigrant to Paris would need the French government to remind him everyday that Paris is a French city. The fact the the Quebec government has to do it about Montreal is rather telling. Isn't it?

      The issue here is not the promotion of the province. It is the necessity to promote it. The repetition of certain mantras just makes them look suspect. As in when the SSJB repeats ad naseaum: Montreal is a French city. If it were, would you need to repeat it over and over? Especially if a minute later you contradict yourself and say that "Montreal s'anglicise".

      So the beef I have is not about the fact of promotion. It's more about the inaccuracies and the ideological bend in that promotion.

      Delete
  11. "The farce that we are a bilingual nation has to stop..."

    En passant,en français on ne dit pas du canada qu'il est bilingue mais plutôt que c'est un "pays" avec deux langues officielles.Je suis en accord avec l'abolition de l'"OLA" car ceci exercerait une pression supplémentaire sur notre Nation de la part de votre pays et convaincrait plus d'un Québécois de la nécessité urgente d'accéder à l'indépendance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A supplementary pressure onto your "nation" on behalf of ours to prompt its departure to take place??

      You, My friend, are more disconnected with reality than I thought you were... You need to snap out of the 70's, 80's and 90's and deal with the fact that people are no longer considering the independence as an option and as the sole solution to the provincial issues.. Probably the abolition of the OLA will be barely noticed and forgotten in a blink of an eye since people will be too much preoccupied with more important matters.

      Delete
    2. YellowSeppie, Your so-called "nation" has been repeatedly defeated by the Quebeckers who voted to remain part of Canada, and as such Quebec is the only Province that has implicitly ratified the Constitution (with its linguistic minorities rights provisions). So, your "nation" is a lot smaller than the province of Quebec. Time to take Levis, Saguenay and QC and the other inbreeding hotspots where your ilk hides and make your own, smaller, country.

      Delete
  12. Et pendant ce temps en ontario / Meanwhile in ontario

    http://fr.canoe.ca/infos/quebeccanada/archives/2012/02/20120209-162838.html

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Now, Don't fool yourself seppie into thinking the CAQ will exercise everything in their power to enforce bill 101..."

    Je crois que vous ne connaissez pas François Legault et son légendaire et inconditionnel amour pour les anglos.N'est-ce pas?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. then why did he recruit one?

      Delete
    2. then why did he recruit one?

      He speaks a really good french without any accent.Congrats Pit!

      Delete
    3. I say he will become the leader of the party...

      Delete
    4. You said...

      J'espère aussi,nous aurions enfin de l'action,un vrai débat dans la rue comme je les aimes.J'adore quand ça bouge.

      Delete
  14. "You need to snap out of the 70's, 80's and 90's and deal with the fact that people are no longer considering the independence as an option..."

    42% de la population Québécoise considère toujours l'option selon les derniers sondages et l'écart entre les Québécois et les canadiens s'intensifie à chaque fois que harper parle ou commet une action.Nul besoin d'énumérer ces dernières ici.Impossible de faire disparaître cette option.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you probably read an old article of the 90's to bring up this expired stat...and not to mention, those who still support it are too old, senile and powerless to raise an impact to get that crumbling moment going again. It's now worn-out and good for the shitter.

      Delete
    2. OQLF, it's written: les québécois et les Canadiens

      Delete
  15. "You would probably shit in your pans if it did."

    Non,je crois plutôt que l'on assisterait à l'arrivée d'une nouvelle race de cochons volants :)

    ReplyDelete
  16. "shit in your pans"?

    Désolé,je préfère la poutine aux spécialités anglaises :D

    ReplyDelete
  17. "...those who still support it are too old, senile and powerless..."

    Pourquoi croyez-vous que Parti Québécois est en faveur du droit de vote à partir de l'âge de 16 ans?Une petite idée?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. it's because they are desperately attempting to draw attention from a younger crowding by using any kind of tactic just to brainwash them.

      Delete
    2. it's crowd, not crowding btw

      Delete
    3. The funny thing is that more and more younger people are turning away from soverignty.

      It's a pretty dumb idea to allow a vote for those under 18 because most people under the age of 30 don't vote, as it is.

      PQ: FAIL

      Delete
  18. "http://fr.canoe.ca/infos/quebeccanada/archives/2012/02/20120209-162838.html"

    Appears people in Canada are beginning to wake up to the pharce of Bilingualism in Canada....About time.

    Down with the anti -anglo discrimination of this bad law.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I live in B.C. There is one of the largest Chinese populations in North America here. If you go into Chinatown, you will see signs only in Chinese....hardly any english. Do we care? No! Let them put their signs up in their own language - it's a free country - which means one can post whatever language they wish on their own personal property!

    Interestingly enough, there are no laws here in B.C. to legislate what language is posted, and no language police roaming about on a make work project ....and guess what?! The Chinese language is still as strong as ever in their community. There are actually persons whose first language is Chinese, despite being second, third, fourth generation Canadian.

    This is true also for the Indo-Canadian populated areas. Really, who needs a law to preserve their language? The ethnic communities are thriving and living in harmony with English.

    My question is....what's wrong with the french that they can't do the same? Are they that inferior to other cultures that they feel so threatened?

    I just have to shake my head at such nonsense. Perhaps I should have taken some other course other than the 5 years of French in school....if it is that "vulnerable" a language......and soon to be gone....Spanish would have been a better choice, I am thinking. They are showing to be a strong language in the south....and in no need of laws to proliferate.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The real truth is no Francophone actually believes the French language is threatened or needs protection. They won't admit it of course and hide behind this lie.

      In needs to be made loud and clear Bill 101 does NOT exist to protect French language and culture, it exists to enact revenge and hate. It is that simple.

      Claiming otherwise is as ridiculous as someone robbing a convince store at gun point and claiming they're doing it to protect customers and the cashier from germs the paper money may carry. They're protecting everyone's health by taking that dirty money out of circulation! So os this the truth, or is the real reason more obvious? Essentially Quebec politicians have been robbing our freedoms and rights at gun point for decades, claiming the same ridiculous protection excuse!

      Delete
  20. "what's wrong with the french that they can't do the same?"

    Parceque notre poids linguistique représente à peine 2% en amérique du Nord.Une autre question facile?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Parceque notre poids linguistique représente à peine 2% en amérique du Nord.Une autre question facile?"

      same old, same old excuse just to allow yourself to do whatever pleases you!!!

      Delete
    2. Ummm...and what about the Chinese? They are less than 2% of the population in North America and don't have the benefit of state apparatus behind them like the French do in Quebec.

      Face it, you will always make excuses for yourself because you are blind to the truth!

      Delete
    3. "same old, same old excuse"

      Same old,same old question...

      Delete
    4. "and don't have the benefit of state apparatus behind them like the French do in Quebec"

      Peut-être parce que nous sommes un des deux peuples fondateurs de ce pays et que nous avons certains droits historiques que les Chinois n'ont pas et n'auront probablement jamais.

      Delete
    5. So a group of people must meet 2 criteria in order to be justified in pursuing language legislation:
      1. be a sufficiently low minority
      2. be one of the founding nations

      When these 2 conditions are met, then we can go ahead with language laws. Otherwise, no.

      But what about a simpler explanation. The explanation where a kind of amorality has seeped into this culture, but not into other minority cultures. A kind of amorality which Quebec elites, political and cultural, have inculcated into the heads of people, the ideas which let them justify their anti-social and unethical behavior.

      How about dropping the search for sociopolitical and demographic excuses, and looking at the real cause - a complete absence of ethics and empathy, and an authoritarian adherence to laws that this society exhibits. How about snapping out of these cultural shackles? The rest will follow.

      Delete
    6. "The explanation where a kind of amorality has seeped into this culture, but not into other minority cultures"

      Vous me faite rire adski,j'ai l'impression d'entendre un chasseur de phoques vanter les bienfaits de la PETA.Vous qui êtes ouvertement en faveur de la disparition de notre langue si les forces opposés (l'ordre naturel des choses)(sic) le justifie.Je suis éblouie par votre morale.

      Delete
    7. "j'ai l'impression d'entendre un chasseur de phoques"

      I feel like I'm talking to someone from a different planet. You think the Quebecois are like the seals hunted down for their fur and killed under a cynical excuse of population control? If anything, you Quebecois are like the hunters, looking for the slightest sign of another language in the public space, and sending a denunciation to the OQLF.

      And if you're such a humanitarian, looking to preserve the "linguistic seals", why aren't you campaigning for other endangered languages? Do you speak Cree or Algonquin? Are you in favor of a law to promote these languages? Oh, I forgot, these languages are not from the "founding nations", so they don't qualify. They are not eligible for the language law exemption. Better luck next time, Indians. The sympathy doesn't extend to you.

      Delete
    8. La loi c'est la loi.Si j'apperçois mon voisin nettoyer son entrée de garage avec son arrosoir,j'appelle les services municipaux qui interdisent une telle pratique.J'agis de la même façon avec l'affichage publique.Je suis respectueux des lois...moi.

      Delete
    9. "You think the Quebecois are like the seals hunted down for their fur and killed under a cynical excuse of population control?"

      Je n'ai jamais dit cela.Je soulignais le fait que la morale a une drôle d'odeur sortant de la bouche d'un individu tel que vous.

      Delete
    10. ADSKI,

      this statement made by press9/seppie/oqlf et al, is very revealing and true to the core. In a nutshell he believes that since his long lost farmer ancestors arrived here first ( ohh wait, no they didn't, native indians were here for eons prior. By why argue with this fact...) that makes him/them surperior to any other peoples. The Quebecois are BETTER THAN any other immigrant because the came first!!!!! (errr 2nd). Now that says it all about their so called culture. Xenophobic small minded, arrogant seperatists. Please rid the ROC of this degrading presence.

      Delete
    11. "The Quebecois are BETTER THAN any other immigrant because the came first!!!!!"

      Est-ce que les amérindiens occupent une grande place aux É.U actuellement?Pourtant ils étaient là bien avant les Britanniques,c'est pareil au canada,aucune leçon à nous donner!
      Allez donc dire aux amerlocs qu'ils ne sont pas chez-eux et que leur lois sont racistes...Moron au carré.

      Delete
    12. Hey idiot! Your the one who said you deserve preferential treatment over other minorities because you were here first. That is the epitomy of narcisism and xenophobia. And yes you were here second, big deal, you also lost the war, be thankful your farmer ancestors werent destroyed or even better, sent to louisianna.. LOL How about some appreciation for a change. Your crap is getting long in the tooth.

      Delete
    13. "Your the one who said you deserve preferential treatment over other minorities because you were here first."

      Tout à fait normal.N'essayez pas d'avoir mon siège si j'arrive avant vous au cinéma,vous allez recevoir mon pop corn...Right in the face dude!

      Delete
    14. Well said!?

      Really is like talking with an imbicile. Why do I even bother arguing with someone who is obviously so disadvantaged. You have wasted enough of my time. Good night, and please try and do something constructive with your life. Start with getting off welfare please . It does the body good.

      Delete
    15. Voici deux phrases du même auteur:

      "Why do I even bother arguing with someone who is obviously so disadvantaged."

      "that makes him/them surperior to any other peoples."

      Hmmmmmm....

      Delete
  21. Excuse me, the FR majority in QC refuses to listen to us, has been treating us like a detriment to society ever since the 70s (Bill 22, 78, 101), and refuses to even listen to Francophones from other provinces who are disgusted at what they have found and studied -
    http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/403/offi/SubsiteMar11/Report_Home-e.htm
    For the past generation due to the threat of separation, appeasement politics has led us to where we are now: 'caught in a dynamic where it must constantly stand up for its rights, and yet is not necessarily able to promote them.' http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/canada/do-more-for-quebec-anglophones-rights-senators-tell-feds-53138.html

    As President for the Greater Montreal Associated Committees to Abolish Bill 101, we will be releasing a statement regarding the Top 20 reasons Bill 101 is against Quebec's interests - with many of the points made above by our Editor, tons of comments from contributors on the Rally Pages themselves and thanks Nancy Wood's story on the Arrest of the Quebec Militia leader. This will be in run up to our next protest in April (which will not be publicly announced, since we do not want to be attacked by a hoard of Anglophobic Septards, as we saw in the past three rallies).

    Thanks again Editor.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "...caught in a dynamic where it must constantly stand up for its rights"

      Nous vous comprenons car voyez-vous,nous avons aussi un peu le même problème.

      Delete
    2. "...caught in a dynamic where it must constantly stand up for its rights"

      C'est quand la dernière fois Hugo que vous avez été obligé d'allez en cours pour vous faire servir une boisson gazeuse dans votre langue sur un vol d'air canada?Pourtant le client a toujours raison,non?

      Delete
    3. when was the last time you applied for a job?

      Delete
    4. A job???You're kidding me,right?I am an OQLF agent and i have already too much work.

      Delete
    5. Wow, you have TOO much work on spending TOO much time on this blog.

      Delete
  22. For more comments from the Past Event Pages, see here, notice la brimade for yourselves :
    https://www.facebook.com/events/153948381321768/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hugo, I will be in Montreal within the month. Will there be another anti-Bill 101 protest coming up? I would attend if it's the first weekend in March.

      Delete
  23. "A job???You're kidding me,right?I am an OQLF agent and i have already too much work."

    En d'autres termes, vous n'avez pas de travail utile ... Pffft.... Il n'y a pas travaile a le OQLF. Un passione pour rien.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "C'est quand la dernière fois Hugo"

    Seule le "sprite" sur des vols de Air Canada, n'est pas. LOL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the worst thing in someone's life is getting the wrong soft drink on an Air Canada flight, there really is nothing to complain about.

      Delete
    2. Well, fairly profitable for the gentleman and his wife. 12,000 dollars for not getting the correct soft drink. Just shows how screwed up things have become with this language issue in Canada. This on a flight from and American City to Toronto (read flight between predominately english centers).

      Delete
    3. Air Canada ne sait pas encore que le client a toujours raison et que ce pays a deux langues officielles?Comme c'est étrange.

      Delete
    4. A person is travelling from an American city to Toronto and can't speak English? Strange.

      Just drink your Sprite and shut up already!

      Delete
    5. "A person is travelling from an American city to Toronto and can't speak English?"

      Air canada a une ligne Montréal-Paris.

      Delete
  25. After seeing the old CBS news piece on 60 minutes, I really think we should import English speaking parrots and sic them on the separatists. It would drive them even more batty than they already are! LOL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I looked like crazy for that 60 Minutes piece on YouTube, but I thought it was taken off the internet. I'm glad it has been found, but it's 14 years old, this past week in fact. It aired on Feb 6, 1998. It's only too bad a newer piece hasn't been aired since in the United States because the day after that piece aired, the callers on the French language radio talk shows went berzerk! Jean Cournoyer, a former Quebec government cabinet minister in the 1970s, had such a program. Before too long, he had to interrupt the program in an attempt to speak to his listeners and calm them down. The vitriolic, venomous anti-Sematism was spewing erratically and Cournoyer mentioned how he had good Jewish friends and it was unreasonable for callers to address the program this way. I imagine he was becoming offended as this was fast becoming a love-in for flouting and hatred towards the Jewish community. The late Mordechai Richler did a very good job of describing Quebec's anti-Sematism in his lifetime of literature.

      Delete
    2. Mr. Sauga, talk shows on french radio in Quebec have always been good to bigots and bigotted views. Dutrisac and all other radio hosts say all kinds of false and misleading anti-anglophone and anti-semetic trash and provide an outlet for rednecks.

      Even French TV is a bit off with Dr. Mailloux and all kind of weird psychologists spouting weird views.

      That's why I believe it is advantageous for francophones to learn English: to get a different perspective. French media promotes anglophobia. It's only when you see different media that you notice the difference. It's kind of like FOX news in the US or SUN news in Canada. They give you a prejudicial view of the world.

      Seeing this 60 Minutes segment, however, makes you see how ridiculous our laws have become! Imagine someone going door to door taking pictures of English signs as a job! Is this a make work project for imbeciles?

      Mordecai Richler did a good job exposing injustices in society.

      Thank you, Mordecai.

      And thank you, Editor, for posting the video.

      Delete
  26. Voici les faits :

    La plupart des sociétés de ce monde offrent l'école publique dans leur langue majoritaire.

    Par exemple, si vous déménagez en France, vous devrez envoyer vos enfants dans les écoles francophones.

    Ici au Québec on est très généreux et on traite très bien notre minorité anglophone car on vous donne accès à des écoles publiques anglophones, des hopitaux anglophones, vous pouvez communiquez avec le gouvernement en anglais, les commerces de Montréal engagent des gens qui parlent anglais, etc... Pour ce qui est de l'affichage commercial on vous donne le droit de le faire en anglais tant que le français y ais aussi.

    De façon général, la minorité anglophone du Québec est une des mieux traité au monde! Vous avez énormément de droits ici.

    La loi 101 a été créé pour protèger la culture Québécoise et notre langue française. Avant cette loi, 80% des immigrants envoyaient leurs enfants dans les écoles anglaises et la loi 101 est venu arrêter cela. Cette loi est la meilleur chose que nous avont accompli au Québec! C'est ce qui fait que, contrairement au reste de l'Amérique du Nord, notre société francophone a survécu.

    Vous les anglais n'allez pas disparaitre en Amérique du Nord, ni au Canada et ni à Montréal. Il y aura toujours des anglophones à Montréal. Donc vous n'avez rien à craindre. Mais pour nous les francophones, notre survivance est un combat perpétuel.

    Vous avez décidez de vivre dans une société francophone (le Québec), c'est votre choix mais vous devez respecter les règles de notre société. Si vous ne les aimez pas, vous avez toujours la liberté de déménager ailleur au Canada.

    Pour ce qui est du débat au sujet du status de la "nation" ou de la "société distincte" du Québec, et bien personnellement je me considère seulement Québécois et non Canadien. Vous penserez bien ce que vous voudrez ça ne me dérange pas, mais moi mon peuple, ma nation, ma culture, c'est le Québec! C'est ici que je me sens chez moi. Nous avons notre langue, notre propre accent (un accent unique au monde), nos penchants politique, nos coutumes, notre star system, notre cinéma, notre télévision, notre musique, etc...

    Ça peu être marqué "Canada" dans mon passport mais ça ne changera pas ce qui se passe dans la réalité, que nous sommes une société distincte. Dans mon coeur je serai toujours un Québécois et seulement un Québécois et ça c'est quelque chose que vous les anglophones ne pourrez probablement jamais comprendre...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you live in Quebec, you're Canadian. If you want to live in an independant French country, move to Haiti!

      Delete
    2. Mange ta merde lentement et avec soin! What you wrote is exactly what that is - merde - dreck - kaka! In any language, it's a parasitic stench of excrement! On top of that, it's 40 years old! The Editor did a very good job of recently showing how little Quebec spends on its minorities compared to other parts of Canada, so that one has been proven to be merde de la toreau.

      Votre "star system"? Don't you mean «système des étoiles». Star system is English, and you have to call tube steak a «chien chaud» or a ground beef patty a «hambourgois». What is that, food of the bourgoisie? Maybe it should be called a «jambon-de-la-prolétariat». After all, it's food for the proletariat. The bourgoisie wouldn't want to be seen eating the poor man's meat, would they? Well, maybe if it's on Wall St. where they sell them for upwards of $100 apiece and they're sprinkled with gold shavings. Oh, and let's not forget steak tartar!

      Your statement is old and boring! It's not as if it hasn't been heard before again, angain and again...like an old broken record. Think you can come up with, to put it in your "unique accent", kek-shows nouvelle|

      Delete
    3. Anonyme 9:04

      Bravo!Excellent commentaire,cependant,attendez-vous à une pluie d'attaques angryphonesque

      Delete
    4. Bill 101 is the best thing that's ever happened for seppies like you who wanted to aspire to the welfare level as HS dropouts... Congratulation, you're there!!!

      AnonymousFeb 13, 2012 09:04 PM the "best thing that's happened"??huh??? we certainly don't share the same concept of it!!!

      as for seppie....losership is what describes you the best!!!

      Delete
    5. Seppies are like the Quebec Nordiques: french losers gone bust and now extinct...

      Delete
  27. The Global Language Monitor announced that the English language had crossed the 1,000,000-word threshold on 10 June 2009.[80] The announcement was met with strong scepticism by linguists and lexicographers,[81] though a number of non-specialist reports[82][83] accepted the figure uncritically. However, in December 2010 a joint Harvard/Google study found the language to contain 1,022,000 words and to expand at the rate of 8,500 words per year.[84] The findings came from the computer analysis of 5,195,769 digitised books. The difference between the Google/Harvard estimate and that of the Global Language Monitor is about thirteen thousandth of one percent.

    ReplyDelete
  28. For the last time can someone tell what exactly is Quebecois culture??? These blowhards keep talking about protecting this culture???? What is it????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "can someone tell what exactly is Quebecois culture"

      Qué·bec·ois
         /ˌkeɪbɛˈkwɑ; Fr. keɪbɛˈkwa/ Show Spelled[key-be-kwah; Fr. key-be-kwa] Show IPA
      noun, plural -bec·ois  /-bɛˈkwɑ, -ˈkwɑz; Fr. -bɛˈkwa/ Show Spelled[-be-kwah, -kwahz; Fr. -be-kwa]
      A person who speaks a French variation of hillbilly dialect, enjoys cigarette chain smoking, acting loud, rude, obnoxious and arrogant towards others, consuming vast amounts of sugary junk and fatty foods, ungenerous and apathetic towards fellow man, closed minded, ignorant and hateful of all other cultures and people from outside native home of Quebec. Also known for having a lazy attitude, being unemployed, uneducated and expecting a free benefits, care and control from the government.

      Delete
    2. Keep Drummondville,

      Its in the Quebec dairy belt and if there was a quebec yes for sovereignty vote, all those dairy farms would go under.

      Delete
    3. Vous avez compris Mr.Marco?...Keep Drummondville

      MDR,je ne vois pas le rapport.Surement un "inside".

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

      Delete
    5. Mr. Marco,

      Part of Quebec culture is "The Price is Right" in French and Gray's Anatomy in French.

      Compris?

      LOL

      Delete
    6. La "culture"(sic) canadienne = TOUTES les productions américaines.

      Delete
    7. Here's a good example of the average Quebecois:

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

      Delete
    8. Anonymous 01:52 PM

      Not exactly.

      Part of Canadian culture are American programs on TV &
      a part of Quebec culture are American programs on TV translated in French and Canadian TV translated into French.

      See, we're all basically the same to a major degree in North America!

      Cheers to living together! =D

      Delete
  29. IF the Canadian government and/or Partitionists talked about dividing the Quebec territory after or even before Quebec independence, like harpers tough love approach, there would be a decline in support for Independence. For example as Quebec losing municipalities and regions that hold their own referendums to stay within Quebec and the loss of Quebec of Northern Territory awarded to Quebec after confederation.

    I know the seppies will just dismiss all this. On the other hand when its stated as a clear consequence, after all the screaming and yelling the Seppies and language chauvanists will be cornered into an unwinnable situation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Si vous le voulez,on vous donne Drummondville en échange du Mont-royal,marché conclue?

      Delete
    2. You don't get to choose, the good folk of Mont-Royal do.

      Delete
  30. For the last time can someone tell what exactly is Quebecois culture?

    Une invention pour faire chier les canadiens.MDR!

    ReplyDelete
  31. Mr. Sauga

    Lors de votre prochain passage chez-nous,n'oubliez pas de venir mettre quelques dollars dans le tiroir-caisse de chez Chouarte,la meilleure viande fumée de Montréal.:D

    ReplyDelete
  32. "If you want to live in an independant French country"

    Si vous adorez tant la reine,retournez en Angleterre!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mais pour vous, le Québec ne pas un pays indépendant parce que la majorité des gens ont voté de rester au Canada dans 2 referendums.

      Alors, c'est logique qu'il faut que tu vivras en Haiti ou peut-être France, si vous voudrez vivre dans un pays francophone.

      Mais, je vais vous avertir que peut-être il va falloir que vous parlez anglais, si vous travailler en France.

      Bonne chance! =D

      Delete
    2. On a déja la reine au Canada et mon Canada y compris le Quebec, donc je reste ici.

      Delete
  33. Pas surprenant que les anglos mettent du sel et/ou du sucre partout.Selon ce que je vois sur ce blogue leur jugement se limite à "Loser" ou "Winner","Success" ou "Fail".Aucune nuance entre les deux états,c'est "on" ou "off".Ce qu'ils mangent c'est pareil : Sucré ou salé.Faudrait leur apprendre à se servir des épices,aromates et fines herbes dont ce monde regorge.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Pas surprenant que les anglos..."

      Stereotype, much?

      Delete
  34. Actually Editor, there are several instances of the OQLF being defied, here in TMR they painted back bilingual signs in 2006: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Mount_Royal
    - and here's another part that is ridiculous (the name of the street is the same, but chemin is bigger than Road for example, which is really annoying when you are driving, since you want signs to be easier to read, no?)
    'The new English designations are now smaller than their official French equivalent, in compliance with the 1993 amendment to the Charter of the French Language. For unknown reasons, there are still street signs for several major boulevards for which the lettering has not been changed back to bilingual.'
    Ma langue doit etre plus grande la tienne, car nous ne sommes pas un petit peuple :) No inferiority complex there folks....moving onto Shawville:
    http://www.quebecoislibre.org/04/040320-3.htm (Inspector chased off, and Tyler tells the Govt to call off their Dogs :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hugo: "and here's another part that is ridiculous (the name of the street is the same, but chemin is bigger than Road for example"

      Speaking of ridiculous, on my neighborhood mailbox in Candiac, someone posted a note with a picture of a cat. The note reads: "Ce chat vous appartient-il? Is this cat yours?". The person wrote the English part in half size. Now, this is no governmental posting which has to follow the law, no matter how ridiculous. This is a private citizen. And it might not even have been be a francophone. Equally likely it could have been an anglophone or an allophone, wishing to "respect" the rules of his "hosts".

      This is an example of how state-sanctioned idiocy can become everyday normality and an automatic part of the natural cycle. At one point, the dogma becomes so pervasive that people stop realizing that they act in ridiculous ways. This is what Edward Herman, in his excellent essay The Banality of Evil called the "normalization of the unthinkable".

      In it, Herman writes:

      "The rationalizations are hoary with age: government knows best, ours is a strictly defensive effort, or, if it wasn't me somebody else would do it. There is also the retreat to ignorance, real, cultivated, or feigned. Consumer ignorance of process is important. Dr. Samuel Johnson avowed that we would kill a cow rather than forego eating meat, but visits to slaughterhouses have made quite a few people into vegetarians. A cover story of Newsweek some years ago, illustrating U.S. consumption of meat by showing livestock walking into a human mouth, elicited many protests-people don't like to be reminded that steaks are obtained from slaughtered animals; they like to imagine that they are manufactured in factories, possibly out of biomass."

      Link to the whole article:

      http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7278.htm

      Delete
    2. "The person wrote the English part in half size."

      Vous avez des voisins qui sont de bons citoyens exemplaires adski.Que faites vous donc dans ce quartier?Ils acceptent les petits rebels tel que vous?

      Delete
    3. Les gens dans ce quartier ont fait un accomodement raisonable :P

      (Just joking adski)

      Delete
    4. Good point Adski, when are you facebooking me finally god dammit :)

      Delete
  35. Neverendumb!!

    Racists with no race. Not French, France won't have them! Not Canadian, Canada's too small for so much hate!
    Wtf are they? Le Peuple Conquis!!

    Some pride that is!

    ReplyDelete
  36. "Racists with no race"

    Mieux que "Racists with all races" :)

    ReplyDelete
  37. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Justin Trudeau,un Seppie?Wow!

    http://tinyurl.com/7ndqadx

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't get too excited. He was just making a point about the Harper Conservatives and took it a little too far. He is a federalist.

      And just to let you know, most french speaking federalists started out as separatists but then they lived life a bit. They got out into the world and saw that it wasn't as it is presented in the francophone media and became federalist.

      Delete
  39. The entire french media ( le Devoir pour instance) and separatist movement are for the most part fraudulent in their presentations.

    Quebec is broke. JF Lisee trys to prove otherwise but his arguments are weak, at best.

    Quebec with Loi 101 is just trying to protect the language and culture of Quebec....of course.

    Quebec really receives no prequatione from the ROC as they pay taxes too. Just about 8-10 to billion less than the rest of us...Numbers don't lie.

    Hard to believe that the people of Quebec listen to the dribble from policitians and separatists..Of course they only hear what they want to hear. No one is a villian in their own movie..

    The issues will be solved when Quebec drags their sorry ass out of the confederation. Then, the realities will set in ....but by then it will be too late. For me, I hope Marois wins the next election and is forced by the idiots to call a referendum...

    Canada would be a much stronger country without the negative influence of Quebec.

    Just look at the record and see if you don't agree.

    What is the current debt now?

    Bonne chance avec votre nouvelle pay. LOL

    C'est incroyable. Trudeau is just another policitian in the vein of his father, who did more to set the stage for the downfall of the ROC. Still remember him giving the finger to Western Farmers. Still remember him and his franco ami Marc Lalonde and the NEP which nearly ruined Alberta for several years.

    Another in the ROC who is tired of paying taxes to be directed to "le natione etat".



    Take your precious Quebec and stick it up your ass. We are tired of Official Bilingulism, continued whining and pandering to the spoiled child, that you are.

    ReplyDelete
  40. AnonymousFeb 14, 2012 04:58 PM

    It is racists from the RoC and from QC that will break the country up!!

    I posted many times that the QC French media is almost all separatist and the Separatist school system is designed to certify children remain unilingual French all their lives. You are helping them win, perhaps because you are also a racist?

    VIVE LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If QC separates, I hope the Greater Montreal area will not go along with ROQ and also take the opposite direction

      Delete
  41. Justin et moi sommes depuis hier des amis Facebook :p

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I knew you would one day become a federalist =D

      Delete
  42. Makes me proud, proud, proud that every one of your quotes came from an American. I spend every day trying to figure out how you guys work. My friends think I'm rude for not speaking French to a waiter when ordering a meal that I'm paying for with my own money and my spouse thinks I'm borderline insane because I fully intend on moving to Alberta temporarily to import a car from the U.S. and not pay Quebec's truly ridiculous sales tax. My statement: "I am not about to hand over my money to a government that will either waste it or use it to oppress me. I don't care if it costs me more money to avoid the tax than to pay it."

    I spend every day here breaking all kinds of rules because they simply do not compute for me. I have tried to understand why I should do many of the things that good, rule-following Anglo-Quebecers do on a daily basis but every time I do, these funny old men with powdery white wigs pop up in my head and tell me to be bad. Nice to know someone gets it a little bit at least. :-)

    Here's one from my favorite founding "father":

    "[We] will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice, or representation."
    -- Abigail Adams.

    ReplyDelete
  43. The comparison between South African Apartheid laws and Bill 101's language of education laws can and must be made to the extent that the PROCEDURE of discrimination used is similar; that the DEGREE OF ABUSE is so widely different is so obvious that it shouldn't have to be mentioned. And besides, it is FRANCOPHONES AND ALLOPHONES who suffer mostly from the discrimination, not anglophones.

    But the mere fact that the procedure is the same should be an enormous source of shame to Quebec and most definitely should be discussed,replete with the South African comparison. To NOT do so is the insult to those who fought against it so valiently in ANY of its manifestations.

    ReplyDelete
  44. CIVIL WAR! CIVIL WAR! CIVIL WAR!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Only bombs, in fact, were the ideal communication process to convince the English that we were after something important.” PQ Minister Gerald Godin.

      http://dictionary.sensagent.com/g%C3%A9rald+godin/en-en/

      Delete
  45. Tony, was that your article in the Huffington Post? If so, bravo! Great piece.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Let us get one thing straight, that for all their false claims the Kebecois are still a Metis people, and that is why France left them behind in 1760. Of they keep pushing the false claim to being French, because they are very ashamed of being the result of miscegenation carried out on orders of the Sun King (Louis XIV) and Cardinal Richelieu, Prime Minister of France to quickly raise the population of New France an compete with Great Britain's New England colonies in the 18th century. the Kebecois are no different to the Cajuns of Louisiana and New Brunswick, they are whether they like it or not a people of Mixed Race. They had better learn to accept the reality of their background and live with it.

    ReplyDelete