Wednesday, February 29, 2012

THE MYTH OF ANGLICIZATION- Part Two

Militants convince Quebecers that they are Dodos
On Monday I advanced the novel idea that the French language and Francophone culture in Quebec is actually thriving and those who propagate the myth that French is in danger do so for ulterior reasons, that is to frighten Quebecers in an attempt to make them more receptive of the sovereignty message.

It is a sad state of affairs that while the French language and francophone culture in Quebec is strong, vibrant and self-sustaining, Quebec militants are selling the fantasy that it is vulnerable and weak.
It is no different from an abusive husband berating his mate mercilessly, subjecting her to cruel psychological abuse, by telling her that she is stupid and worthless, just so he can control her.
Unfortunately this type of abuse, carried out on a long-term basis is usually successful and I am sad to see that Francophone Quebecers have been largely convinced that they are on the road of extinction, just like the Dodo bird.

 It's disgusting and shameful.

With this in mind, let us explore some of these myths and distortions that separatists bandy about to convince others (and themselves) that French is in mortal danger, a condition they maintain that can only be reversed through sovereignty.

Myth #1
Quebec is surrounded by a sea of English and with just 2% of the North American population, its francophone culture is in danger of assimilation.

We hear this argument over and over again, it is repeated nauseam and strangely nobody ever attacks the myth on the basis of its sheer stupidity.

There's no doubt that Quebec is physically surround by Anglophones, but what a school teacher in Anchorage, a car worker in Mexico, or an oil worker in Alberta has to do with anglicization is beyond me. None of these people are going to overrun the border to force the people of Quebec to become English.

English does bear down on Quebec, not because of any physical proximity, rather because the entire globe has adopted it as the lingua franca, a fact that not only affects Quebec, but the entire world.
Even as a metaphor the myth of the 2% is defective, because it purports that in facing the forces of anglicization, Quebec is somehow uniquely threatened, which is false.

Many successful countries, similarly sized to Quebec, face the same forces of anglicization.

Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Israel, Holland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary are just a few examples of small countries (population) with a unique culture and a thinly-spoken national language.
The forces of Anglicization are no stronger or weaker than in Quebec, yet strangly there is no great outcry in these countries over the danger of English and in fact most embrace English as liberating and empowering.

Tiny Denmark is perhaps the very best example of a country that has embraced English without adversely affecting its Danish language or culture.
Somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of all young Danes speak English, to the point that they are embarrassingly fluent, having had a significant portion of their education taught in English.
Despite the remarkably high rate of fluency in English, both the Danish language and culture flourish, the idea that Danish society is in imminent danger of collapse is laughable.

While countries similar in size and demographics to Quebec embrace English without negative consequences, the myth of the 2% is used to frighten Quebecers by propagating the lie that English barbarians and are set to overrun Quebec.
It is utter hogwash.

What language militants are doing is no different than my mother's warning to me as a lad, that there were wild dogs in the forest behind my house, a lie meant to keep me out of the woods.
Using fear-mongering as a weapon in the independence campaign is what the 2% myth is about, nothing else.

Myth #2
Both Louisana and Manitoba, once large French communities were completely assimilated and Quebec can suffer the same fate.

In French it's referred to as 'louisianisation', the myth that French communities in North America are all subject to assimilation.
Now I'm not going to debunk this myth with facts and figures showing why Quebec is not in the same boat, because readers, the myth is too stupid to debate. None of the elements that contributed to the Louisiana assimilation exists in modern Quebec

Suffice to say that if Quebec hasn't gone down the drain in two hundred years since the Louisiana assimilation, it isn't going to happen at all.

Pretending that Quebec society is fragile and vulnerable is beyond ludicrous considering that the population of Quebec is GREATER THAN HALF the countries in the world.

It's like being exposed to someone with the measles and putting oneself in quarantine for a year, just in case.......ain't gonna happen!!!

Myth #3
Immigration threatens the French language and Quebec culture.

There's no doubt that many Quebecers fear immigration, but sadly, most of this is racism, pure and simple.

To Quebecers who believe they can maintain their society as French, lily-white and Catholic, as it was in the 'good old days,' the sight of so many 'barbus' and 'voilées' is frustrating and unsettling and so it is to be expected that they are portrayed as a danger by those who fear them.

But an examination of the facts indicate that immigration isn't going to upset the language cart, even if we are told that it will, by the you-know-whos.

Each year Quebec nets about 40,000 new immigrants or about ½ of one percent of the population. Of these, half assimilate to the French community and half to the English. Over the last decade, the numbers have been moving upwards toward the French side of the language equation, but let us consider the situation as it is now.
In order to maintain today's  linguistic balance (87% French, 13% English) 35,000 out of the 40,000 immigrants need to assimilate to the French side of the language equation, but it doesn't happen.
As it is, a surplus of 14,000 'English' immigrants is created each year.
But this increased percentage of English speakers is almost completely cancelled out by the exodus of about 10,000 English speakers out of the province each year.

An increase of 4,000 English speakers a year isn't going to change the linguistic balance in a province of 8 million people. The only effect of this, is that the English community has finally stabilized, that's all.
Hmmm.....perhaps it is this fact that annoys militants.

Myth #4
Bill 104 and the right to 'bridging schools' is a danger to the French.

You'd think by the hysterical reaction by French language militants to the Supreme Courts decision to allow bridging schools as a path to an English education, the floodgates would open with Ethnics and Francophones exodusing the French educational system on a par with the Jewish slaves fleeing Egypt in the time of the Ten Commandments.
In fact only about 100-150 students a year 'sidestep' their way into English school through this apparent loophole.
Considering that 14,000 Anglo students eligible for English education under Bill 101, choose a French educational path, the loss of these 'cheaters'  isn't a big deal.
Again, much ado about nothing, another case of hysterical madness.

Myth #5
The 3 monkeys Syndrome-
Hear no English, See No English, Speak No English

In science, theories remain suppositions or educated guesses, unproven until they are validated or rejected through rigorous experimentation.

The theory proposed by French language militants today, is that any contact or public manifestation of English is dangerous and that English bosses, unilingual clerks, English music and English store names, etc. etc. are all dangerously dark forces of anglicization, even in the smallest of doses.
That's the theory.

Unfortunately for militants, the theory has already been disproved.
As I explained Monday, one only has to harken back to the sixties to see that small and large doses of English have proven ineffective tools of anglicization!

To argue that it is, despite the historical evidence to the contrary, is no different than defending the theory that the Earth is flat.

Myth #6
Francophone communities across Canada are disappearing, evidence that French in Quebec is also  under threat.
While it is true that French communities are dying a slow death across Canada, the same is true for English communities in rural Quebec.

The reasons for the demise of these communities is easily explained and that explanation and its logical corollary is the reason why French Quebec is in no imminent danger of collapse.
Surprisingly, it also explains why the Quebec English community will survive quite comfortably.

It's called 'Critical Mass' and it will be the subject of Friday's post...

I shall explain as best I can why French is set to expand, not contract.
I shall explain as best I can why the English in Quebec won't disappear.   

168 comments:

  1. Editor, to use your words near the top of the blog: "...those who propagate the myth that French is in danger do so for ulterior reasons, that is to frighten Quebecers in an attempt to make them more receptive of the sovereignty message."

    The word "frighten" in your sentance is the magic word. FEAR is the common weapon of ethnic cleansing, and what Quebec is doing is ethnic cleansing. The Late Mordechai Richler used those exact words in that 60 Minutes piece you posted about a week or so ago that was aired in February 1998. He referred to it as a GENTEEL form of ethnic cleansing, and [former MNA and leader of the now defunct Equality Party] Keith Henderson substantiated it stating "Okay, no guns, no bullets, but it's laws..."

    Richler and [60 Minutes reporter] Morley Safer chose to present the piece in a comical way, making OQLF spokesman Gerard what's-his-face and then Bill 101 minister Louise Beaudoin along with language cop Fernand Bernier look like the Three Stooges, because that's EXACTLY what they were. At least Gerard at the OQLF was able to keep a straight face telling Safer that bold-faced lie that a complaint about an English-speaking parrot in a pet store was a ruse. Ohhh, surrrrre it was...

    I was only sorry I couldn't tune in to [former Quebec cabinet minister and then radio host] Jean Cournoyer's radio phone-in show the next morning to hear all the anti-Semitic vitriol being spewed over the airwaves, so badly that Cournoyer had to interrupt the show to douse the racist fire of the callers explaining he had Jewish friends and this venom was unacceptable and inappropriate.

    Too bad too that I couldn't hear Howard Galganov's show on the same subject the next morning. I imagine it too was an eye opener!

    Finally, that manure, the Bouchard-Taylor Commission that ate up $5 million doing an excursion around all of Quebec to hear the chorus of the small minded tantamount to some neo-Nazi organization airing their dirty laundry about their dislike and disdain for those where aren't of their White Roman Catholic French speaking ilk.

    Yes, Editor, fear. lies and other distortions are what make Quebec's world go round. Why odn't they just go away, leave Canada, and see how far they'll go without the $10 billion + in equalization payments and other bribes given to them year after year after year after year.

    I still say Quebec should still separate if it will, and good riddance. Lest readers forget that I was born, raised and educated in Quebec.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Editor, since you think that "Quebec is strong, vibrant and self-sustaining", what's your opinion on your supporters who come here and comment that French is a dead language, bill 101 is it's life support, and Quebec should let it die and get over it?

      Delete
    2. Mr. Sauga - Quebec receives 7 billion in equalization payments according to the same formula used on everyone else. How is it a bribe just for Quebec and not for anyone else?

      Delete
    3. Mr. Sauga,

      Although your post is quite accurate on the hate the separatists employ to create fear, I strongly disagree with you on your let them go and see how far they get. This is what the racists wan and you're willing to give it to them with no regard for your fellow CANADIAN, French, English or Other Brothers. May I suggest that you may well be as separatist as the hate cult that has overwhelmed the "french", or more accurately, Quebecois School System?

      I find it offensive that you would call out "CHARGE" from behind and watch the front line fall! You’ve left this province where more than 75% of us have learned to live together and again, although you do describe the separatist extremist minority accurately enough, you have no right to help the commit this treasonous act!

      Delete
    4. I agree with Anonymous above and am also extremely offended by the notion (from an anglicized "ex-pat" descendent of immigrants now living elsewhere no less!) that Quebec ought to "hurry up and separate".

      It's easy to wish that this place turn into a modern-day Sodom and Gomorrah when you're living in an ivory tower 500 miles away.

      Much is often made of the "mercenary federalists" and other transient "softies" who would just as easily lean one way as another were a referendum held, as well as the "purs et durs" who continue to preach their increasingly dated version of a unilingual utopia to a hapless crowd.

      Yet so many, particularly in English Canada, fail to consider, recognize, and properly appreciate the effect that the staunch federalists in Quebec have had on keeping this country united. Just as everyone likes to say there wouldn't be a Canada as we know it without Quebec, the fact is, such a Canada could never exist - as you know it - without us.

      Delete
    5. To Anon 11:44,
      No other province has threatened to break up the Country as a negotiation tactic.

      Delete
    6. @ Apparatchik,

      "Just as everyone likes to say there wouldn't be a Canada as we know it without Quebec, the fact is, such a Canada could never exist - as you know it - without us."

      A Canada without Quebec would be stronger, freer, and more financially secure.

      Delete
    7. Well said, Mr. Sauga.

      But lest we forget: there is the fear on the side of anglo Canada as well, both inside and outside Quebec. And this is the fear of losing Canada should Quebec separate (a country divided down its middle cannot stand yadda yadda yadda). I contend it is this fear and the very successful blackmail formula that accompanies it that is responsible for the ROC putting up with and looking the other way when it comes to Quebec's human rights abuses (read: the hate law/race law Bill 101.

      Well, I say: enough is enough. It's time for Canada to be sacrificed for individual rights rather than the other way around. By appeasing Quebec, Canada has lost its soul and raison d'etre.

      Time for dissolution.

      In 1867, the existing constitutional framework known as The United Province of Upper and Lower Canada was dissolved to make way for The Dominion of Canada and now its time to dissolve the latter unworkable framework.

      Click on my name for the solution.

      Delete
    8. I find it insulting to imply that seperatists are using seperation as a negociation tactic.

      Separatists don't care, they want to be free. Separatists would like you to hate Quebec, stop giving them equalization, heck put up videos on youtube of rednecks burning Quebec flags - all those things would help Separatists convince others that Quebec is not at home within Canada, and that they have to go.

      Delete
    9. Your fave buddy, Mr. Sauga said...Wednesday, February 29, 2012 at 5:59:00 PM EST

      To the Anonymous contributors: 11:44PM: I didn't state the equalization payments are a bribe, but there are other programs (such as for every dollar of Quebec contributions to EI, $4.75 comes back in benefit programs where Ontario only gets such programs dollar-for-dollar with what Ontarians put in. Eq-payments, though work out to bribes because Quebec has social programs no other jurisdiction in Canada has, like $7-a-day daycare for the rich as well as the poor; Quebec has resources in the ground that can produce a lot of revenue, but why harvest them when Ontario and Alberta are supporting them with $8+ billion in Eq-payments.

      1:18am: Why should ON & AB support a spoiled brat who gets far more than it puts into the system yet does all it can to smite one of two of CANADA's official languages, berate Canada at every turn and call English an illegal language in certain circumstances. Beyond that, society curses a pro hockey coach and players for not being able to speak French and the media embellishes this to nauseating heights. $5 million in taxpayers' money (Eq-money too) was wasted on a commission that went around Quebec having to endure every vitriolic bigot who doesn't want to hear from English, burquas, and eveything that isn't «pur laine». Why is it that rabid impious and impudent racist rodent Gilles Proulx can go on a television network supported by the taxpayers in AND out of Quebec spewing vitriolic innuendoes («tête carré» this and «tête carré» that on Mario Dumont's political talk show) while Don Cherry practically gets fired for saying «Frenchmen» and European hockey players who wear eye visors are sissies during a hockey broadcast? Your rat bastard Premier, namely John James Charest asks Harper for $700 million for supposed help with social programs, takes the lot of it and takes credit for giving Quebec taxpayers a $700 million tax break, every dime of it courtesy of the CANADIAN taxpayer, mostly from outside Quebec. Fool Harper once, shame on Charest, fool him twice, shame on Harper!

      I won't specifically state all «pur laine» Quebeckers are anti-English racists, but the number who say the language laws are too severe and in many cases nonsensical is like finding mangos and coconuts growing in Canada. THERE JUST AIN'T ANY! Those Francophones who want more English in school for their children have their pleas fall on deaf ears, and letting ONE child slip through the private English school cracks is one too many. THAT is a consensus! Finally, if you're offended by my views on the subject, well, tough shitties for you! As for treason, then treaon I have these views is your beloved «pur laine» people VOTED for separation in 1995. Remember your leader of the day: It was the Jews, the Greeks and the Italians who thwarted Jacques Parasite of the throne and title as Le Roy Jacques I de Québec. He didn't single out WHICH ethnic groups were responsible at his speech, but he sure did about seven weeks later at some political junket in Calgary.

      Delete
  2. Editor, since you think that "Quebec is strong, vibrant and self-sustaining", what's your opinion on your supporters who come here and comment that French is a dead language, bill 101 is it's life support, and Quebec should let it die and get over it?

    *Accidently posted this in a threaded comment...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Spite by people frustrated at this institutionalised ethnic cleansing, I'd guess. I must say, though, that this situation is succeeding in putting me off learning French. I must also confess that when my cousin, born in St Leonard, raised in RDP and now living in Laval, tried to deter me from moving there, suggesting I'm better off moving West, I thought he was just being negative (he didn't go into too much detail). He'd like to move to Australia... I'm beginning to see his point: unfortunately, that ship has sailed for me... is there any place left in Canada where you don't have language wars or a socialist administration? If there is one, that's the place for me.

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

      Delete
    3. Anon 11:44pm, as someone who says both: that French is on life support, and that it needs no 101 to survive, let me explain what I mean.

      I mean that what's on life support is the illusion of status of French. 101 supports a life of an illusion of French being bigger than it really is. While at it, 101 keeps its own people in that false state, an almost infantile state, instead of helping them confront the reality in an adult way, which in this case would involve ensuring that Quebec functions sort of like Denmark. The people who march down St Catherine street demanding that Lunetterie New Look be renamed to Lunetterie Nouveau Regard are infants in adult bodies, and so are the scores of Quebeckers who support them tacitly. As this is happening, the ruling elites who don't believe on a word they themselves are saying, ensure that their offspring get the vest education possible in the language that matters.

      As for the survival of Quebec French, it will surely survive in the Regions, since there is absolutely no immigration there. Also, unlike in Louisiana or Manitoba, in Quebec Francophones wield political power, and the language of government is French. This wasn't the case anteaters else in North America after the French wee defeated in the colonial war.

      Delete
    4. ANYWHERE else in North America.

      WERE defeated.

      BEST education.

      etc...

      Delete
    5. If you think Quebec French will only survive in the regions, then you'll never convince the francophones to vote to repeal Bill 101. That is precisely the situation they aim to avoid.

      Provinces got to be like Louisiana and Manitoba when the institutional and city language was english, and only the heartland spoke french. From then it's a slow decline, especially now with the rural exodus Mk.2.

      Delete
    6. Well, they say it's about 'survival' and then they add new conditions: survival, but not in general, but specifically in urban areas in addition to rural areas.

      Or they'd say: survival is not all, French must also be 'respected'...

      Excuses change constantly.

      How about admitting that you don't really know what it's for. On one hand it limits your choices as a francophone, on the other hand they convinced you that thanks to that you're a maitre chez toi, so it has that good sound to it especially in a population that has a serious chip it's shoulder. But in the end who benefits from it? Not an Anglo, not an allo, but neither an average Franco.

      Delete
    7. Francophones, like any other group, aren't a homogeneous single-minded bloc. Sometimes when I'm arguing one thing, I get attributed opinions of others; perhaps in this case these are different francos, from different perspective, arguing different things.

      As to the "you're a maitre chez toi" - francos now can work in french, live in french, shop in french, things they had a hard time to do before Bill 101. Do you really think they did not benefit?

      The wage-gap between francos and anglos has also been closed, since all the managerial positions aren't going to unilingual anglos anymore.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous at 12:18,

      "The wage-gap between francos and anglos has also been closed, since all the managerial positions aren't going to unilingual anglos anymore."

      While that may be true, please also remember that the aggregate income of the province has been in constant decline, relative to other Canadian provinces, since the implementation of Bill 101.

      Delete
  3. Dear Editor,

    Your post is good and if I wasn't so tired, I'd add first hand information from my experiences that support most of what you've said. Please allow me to repost a previous post that unfortunately will continue to ring true for too long a time to come. Hopefully we can at least debunk the myth of The English Community..

    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!!

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

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

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

      What's wrong Seppie and backwardFLQOccupier?
      Nothing to say without insulting everyone?

      We'd all be so much better off without your HATE and treasonous assaults!!!

      Delete
  5. Quebec thrives on political conflict and bigotry no matter what or who it is. From the neighbours scrapping over who fucked who's boyfriend or husband, To how much english is enough to avoid french Quebecer's picking up those nasty " English habit's "The false pride in their hearts that Quebec is better than, every where and everyone. When I go to france they ask me to speak english, theEuro french don't want to hear the slang from Quebec, they think it's cute for about 1 minute. So what are Quebecer's protecting? A language that is slang? Cheese? Log cabins? Hockey? Fries? Spoons?? When you leave that province and live in another with a different process that encompasses ALL as the laws of our country state, you see that Quebec is effed up and the people are being ripped off Academically and Mentally by the trouble makers who encourage rigidity and ignorance. As a result the brave french who want a bigger scene make their way to other provinces. It's a struggle they have a time fitting in other places and they Talk about it and realize it's a sickness the way it is back home not know in the language of the rest of Canada.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "What are Quebecer's protecting?"

      Maybe just their identity? Insulting it won't matter to them : it's theirs, it's who they are.

      Delete
    2. It's a bit sad that every group that claims to have some specific "identity" does not tolerate dissent within the ranks. Maybe the identity isn't that strong after all, so the pretension must be kept at all costs?

      Delete
  6. "As a result the brave french who want a bigger scene make their way to other provinces..."

    ...et deviennent anglophones...Quelle bravoure effectivement.Ceux qui restent et luttent pour leur culture contre vents et marées sont les véritables braves.

    "So what are Quebecer's protecting? A language that is slang? Cheese? Log cabins? Hockey? Fries? Spoons??"

    Quelle ignorance et quel mépris.Vous êtes un pitoyable moron.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Quelle ignorance et quel mépris."

      Have to say, after looking at the comments on this blog, that I agree with anom @ 8:36.

      The question would be is there anything that needs protecting as the editor of this blog suggests. Could be just the inherent insecurity of the Quebecois instilled in them by the language zealots and people who breed contempt and fear amongst there own, to justify their own existence and raison d'etre.

      Quite f'kd up, really.

      Delete
    2. Seppie, what are you fighting and with whose money? I see you still have the habit of lobbing insults without ever articulating a counter-point. So, really, what is the point of you being here?

      Delete
    3. De quoi je me mêle TQP?Seriez-vous l'éditeur de ce blogue?Pas content de lire mes rebuffades?...Passez au suivant!

      Delete
    4. I'd be quite happy to have an intelligent conversation with you as I do with Michel Patrice, even if I probably disagree with him just as much as I do with you (well, I guess, because, unlike him, you never ever express a shred of an idea...). You got yourself moderated already: don't they teach you manners in Alabama? Last time I checked, you don't need to be the editor of the blog to question what your contribution to the discussion is. Apart from embarrassing yourselves, that is.

      Delete
  7. French colonization of the north American continent was a failed enterprise. It remains today as an aberration of the hopes of what it could've been. It's an artifact that has lost its original identity and has assumed that of the dominant society that has evolved on the continent. In fact, there is no Quebec culture that is distinguishable from the rest of north America. In all dominant areas of culture, from architecture to music and everything in between, Quebec only differs in the anachronisms that a poorly educated, rural based population has been indoctrinated with to maintain a social elite as an indispensable need for survival. Were it not for the many tubes of propaganda pumping impulse into the long decayed adventure of French empire , the brain dead patient of Quebec 'culture' would be the New Orleans of Canada.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Have you listened to Quebec Music/Movies, or are you just declaring that it's dead because that falls in line with your political objectives?

      Delete
    2. It's not a declaration of death, but of a still birth. I have no political objectives, just making the obvious observation that from Offenbach to the assinine game shows on French tv, the rural 'redneck' culture of jacked up up pick up trucks and 'love it or leave it' attitudes at bonfire parties of St Jean, I see no remarkable cultural difference between Quebec and the rest of North America. There are regional differences as can be witnessed from one territory to the next throughout the continent, but nothing that would indicate the presence of a different culture on the continent. Rock progressions to 'ayoie, tu fait mal a ma couer animal', fries with gravy and cheese, syrup soaked snow and a universally accepted moving day are not indicators of a unique culture but regional idiosyncracies that occur throughout the continent. The only distinct cultures that can be found in Quebec are those of the First Nations, at least in terms of what they've been able to retain from their cultures after the enforced assimilation they have been subjected to by the imperialist powers that disenfranchised them.

      Delete
    3. I'm having a hard time reconciling what you're saying with the fact that our French-Canadian cinema is watched internationally, and often gets nominated for oscars. The french-Canadian bands I listen to, I listen to because they are distinctively different from American bands.

      Are you sure you're not just looking at the very worst that Quebec has to offer? I would think the same as you if all I had to go off was Loft Story and Star Académie.

      Delete
    4. When you say American bands, are you suggesting a homogenous musical style? There are major differences between Southern Rock and the music of the David Matthews band and both differ remarkably from the hair metal scene that grew up in LA in the eighties. The same differences occur in American cinema from the films of the Cohen brothers to the mass consumption Twinky movies starring Jennifer Aniston. These differences do not indicate a different culture, only its different aspects. Quebec just represents a varied flavour of the same. It does not differ culturally from its continental neighbours the way Sweden differs from Greece, or Libya from Angola whose cultural differences are starkly visible even in todays globalized world.

      Delete
    5. Well, I guess I'll have to agree to disagree on that.

      Whether you want to call it a different flavour or an entirely different culture - if francos in Quebec want to preserve their 'distinct flavour', shoudn't they do it? If the rest of Canada's movie/music scene is any indication, without Quebec's 'distinct flavour', the only flavours available to us would be American.

      Delete
    6. They absolutely should. Preferably though, without the pretensions of nation and distinct society with which they justify the victimization and the scape goating of identifiable, distinct immigrant cultures within the province. A French Quebecois claim on territory as 'fatherland' to the distinct culture is not only false, it's a form of neo - colonialism and the old practices of enforced assimilation and cultural genocide. Ironically, it's these forces they popularly seek to combat but the claim is an advertisement as empty as the one popularized by the Zionist movement that hunts down Nazi war criminals while it funds Hellfire missiles and tanks to crush the Palestinian people. The dominant regional force will always usurp the role and identity of the victim to justify its ends.

      Delete
    7. I believe that the question of the Nation is a misunderstanding. People often understand "Nation" to mean the same as "(Sovereign) State". It's much more akin to "people".

      So it goes like this : to a franco, it's clearly obvious that they are a different people than the ROC, being of one language, one religion, and having a common history and (mostly) ethnic origin.

      There was a time (a century and a half ago, before the settling of the West) when the ROC was more or less one nation, when most had a british, protestant, anglophone ancestry. Nowadays, that is no longer the case - the ROC is a mosaic, and a highly succesful one at that.

      Not being part of a "people", to the anglo the claim of "Nationhood" by francos signifies that they want the extra powers and status of a sovereign state.

      So the franco doesen't understand why the anglo would deny what is painfully obvious, and concludes that the anglo is doing it out of spite.

      Or at least that is my conception of how it plays out. Am I wrong?

      I'm unsure what you say about French Quebecois claim on territory as fatherland being false and neo-colonialism. Would you clarify?

      Delete
    8. Quebec is also a mosaic, although not as successful as the ROC. Our ethnic minorities inhabit a verly localized area in and around Montreal. They lack political representation both provincially and on the federal level. When becoming Canadians and moving to Quebec, they did not anticipate the hypocrisy at the federal and local levels that denies them the rights guaranteed to every citizen under the charter of rights and freedoms. When going to the polls, their choice is limited to the liberal party, as corrupt as it is, because it at least promises them a hope of retaining the citizenship they covet. They and the historical anglophone minority are subjected to the humiliation of a tax funded organization that makes sure that all languages are subservient to French, even when it comes to signs that hang in front of their places of business. Streets bearing the names and history of Montreal are changed in the effort to erradicate the historical importance, if not the presence, of the different cultures that came together to make the province what it is. Their educational establishments are phased out and their children are forced into French schools, much like the ideas of Western education and religion where forced onto the First Nations.

      These are not the actions of a group seeking to preserve its identity within a multicultural whole. They are indicative of a group that seeks to enforce this identity even on the basis of falsified history and at the expense of its own minorities. It seeks to divide and has succeeded in creating a territory inhabited by the Francophone majority and the ghettoized 'autres'. When push comes to shove, they say 'well we want a place of our own' and to that end they recreate the actions of colonizing powers a hundred years ago who eradicated indigenous cultures in one way or another to make a place of their own as well.
      To the millions of Canadians who are neither of British or French descent , and are most likely here as a direct result of the actions taken by the French, British and their modern inheritors, the US, in turning the globe into their food and resource basket, Francophone claims in Quebec scarcely differ from French practices in Indochina or Africa. It's a case of the colonizers wanting to recolonize because their first attempt didn't go as planned.

      If someone speaks against these practices, they simply tell him to pack his bags and hit the 401. If he responds in like manner they look at him incredulously as if their right to stay here supercedes that of any other immigrant. They have adopted the stance of indigenous people, freedom seekers, while the true inheritors of this place languish on the same kind of reserves as they do in ROC.
      While the ROC is forced to concede that the country is a multinational tapestry and seeks to include the various cultures into the whole, Quebec militantly seeks to exclude them and seeks independence so that only the 'right kind' of immigrant is allowed into the province. In practice, these are the politics of race and white man's burden and the socialist aspect only exists if you are a Francophone Catholic.

      Delete
    9. Anon 10:36am, you're hitting close to home. I always said that Quebec is the US in French. Materialism, consumerism, nationalism, fast food, reality tv, rednecks, same cars, same architecture, same ignorance, entitlement, arrogance, and illusions of grandeur.

      Delete
    10. Anon 1:42 : Thanks for clarifying.

      I thought the idea behind having immigrants going to french schools (just like immigrants going to english schools in the ROC, unless they are francophones by birth) is to make sure that immigrants learn the language of the local majority, given that english public schools have had a historically poor track reccord at teaching french.

      Delete
    11. Anon 1:42pm, excellent post. Very well said.

      When you say that what's going on in Quebec is sort of a reprieve, or a second attempt by a colonizer to recolonize because the first attempt did not go as planned is both astute and very well articulated. It also shows that you see right through the thick wall of deception put out by the PR department of Quebec Inc.

      As I said before, Bill 101 to me is not something that could have been passed by people with a mindset of a victim. It could have only been passed by people with a 'my way or the highway' colonizer mindset. People who are uncompromising and unyielding. Essentially, colonizers.

      Delete
    12. So adski, what kind of law would be passed by people with a mindset of a victim? You speak of this with such conviction that I'm sure you'll have a very enlightning response.

      Delete
    13. Adski vit dans son ghetto anglos,isolé du reste du Québec francophone.Sa vision de la société Québécoise et canadienne provient à 90% d'auteurs anglophones qui n'ont jamais eu de contacts réels avec la société Québécoise,que des observateurs,des théoriciens.De là sa vision froide et détachée de la société qu'il "squat".Seul l'hémisphère gauche de son cerveau semble être actif.

      Delete
    14. I was under the impression that adski and apparatchik were bilingual Francophones... still, don't let the facts spoil a good rant in your pidgin French, eh Seppie?

      Delete
    15. Seppie, you're a liar. I live in Quebec, travel throughout the province on a regular basis. It's not the minorities that lack contact with Francophone Quebec, but the other way around. The largely unilingual Francophone community is disadvantaged not only by its language barrier, but by the indoctrination of suspicion and hate that is disseminated through the school system. I teach History at French and English schools in Quebec and the propaganda that passes as fact is surreal. Francophone Quebecers are not only incapable of communicating effectively with their minorities, but they're also incapable of relating or communicating with anyone else on this continent. This is, of course, by design. It guides the bewildered, ill equipped and educationally and socially disadvantaged Francophone Canadian to the right wing, racially dominated politics of nationalism in the guise of socialism. You can find similar examples of this type of strategy in 1920s and 1930s Austria and Germany when Hitler's 'socialist' party sought a new identity for the German speaking people through the imagined role of victims and by creating contrast between the pure race and their 'autres' who supposedly victimized them. As Parizeau said, the vote was lost to money and the ethnic vote, despite the fact that they only represented a minute fraction of the electorate.
      Quebec has been among the largest recipients of immigration in Canada's history. A quick tour of the province will show that outside Montreal and it's suburbs this immigrant population is non existent. Catholic spires and white Francophones dominate the landscape with their 'accomondation talks', their 'jeunes patririotes' parades, fashioned along old fascist principles, and a mythology of indigenous right and belonging partnered with a false patriotism whose only foundation and final expression is hate for those that are not the same.

      Delete
    16. > I was under the impression that adski and apparatchik were bilingual Francophones...

      Speaking for myself, I am a French- and English-speaker, yes.

      Delete
    17. "So adski, what kind of law would be passed by people with a mindset of a victim?"

      Once emancipated, they would have moved on without passing any laws. And there wouldn't have been any "massacres of apostrophes", perpetrated by a bunch of idiots, true, but with encouragement, tacit support, or AT BEST indifference of the majority of the population.

      For true victims, the collective perception would have shifted from "negres blancs" to equals. But it jumped a step further to the "maitres chez nous". That feeling of being the master laid dormant for a couple centuries, but it did resurface with ease when proper conditions arose.

      Francophones proved in the 1960's that they were never just the colonized, but the colonized (defeated) colonizers with white skin, the pomposity and grandiosity, and a European language of the second biggest colonialist in the history of the world.

      I guess a colonized colonizer is still a colonizer. He may lay low for while, but he doesn't really change inside.

      Delete
  8. Anom 10:36

    Makes a lot of sense really.

    Celine Dion didn't make it in French, she had to adopt the culture of the dominate society to make it and sing here most favorite songs in English. Had she stayed singing only in French in Quebec she would have not been the major "diva" success she currently enjoys.

    Yep, without the OLA, forced bilingualism in Canada, artifical means such as 101...you are probably right. The editor's piece tends to contradict your suggestions of "The New Orleans of Canada" He maintains that without 101 and other measures, the French fact will not atrophy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "OLA, forced bilingualism in Canada" - are you aware that the OLA provides federal bilingual services? Who's being forced to be bilingual? The more you know...

      Delete
    2. "are you aware that the OLA"

      Are you aware that the federal civil service have a 40% hiring quota for bilinguals. Nothing more than blatant discrimination against the anglo majority of Canada. For a better treatise on how this came to be....check out "Fearful Symmetry" by Brian Crowley. Are you also aware that all government documents and private sector packaging must be labelled in French which adds huges costs to both government and the private sector that is eventually underwritten by who "the anglo majority taxpayers of Canada"

      Give me a break.

      Delete
    3. "Are you aware that the federal civil service have a 40% hiring quota for bilinguals."

      Are you implying that, to provide bilingual services, the linguistic makeup for the service has to exactly match the linguistic makeup of the country? If so, we should have 13% of the service unilingual francophone, 18% be bilingual, 67% be unilingual anglophones, and for the sake of fairness, have the last 2% speak punjabi, mandarin or an aboriginal language but have no knowledge of either official languages? As seppie would say, MDR.

      Providing bilingual services requires a significant part of the service to be bilingual.

      "Nothing more than blatant discrimination against the anglo majority of Canada."

      Anglos often argue that efforts to provide services to francophones (services, might I add, that they pay taxes for and which anglos take for granted) are discrimination towards anglophones, because unilingual anglos are entitled to jobs. Laughable.

      "Are you also aware that all government documents and private sector packaging must be labelled in French which adds huges costs to both government and the private sector"

      Yes I am, it's only fair. You would rather that francos send their taxpayer money to Ottawa and get no services or documentation out of it? I agree, that is MUCH fairer. I will channel my inner Seppie : MDR.

      "that is eventually underwritten by who "the anglo majority taxpayers of Canada"

      Where is this exemption for paying taxes francophones have? I never heard of it, I want in.

      In the alternative, I'll do like you : take my (french) federal services for granted, and complain that my tax money goes to provide services in english.

      Delete
    4. 'Are you implying that'

      I am not familiar with MDR. Can you elaborate on the secret langue de les Quebecois??

      "Anglos often argue that efforts to provide services to francophones (services, might I add, that they pay taxes for and which anglos take for granted) are discrimination towards anglophones, because unilingual anglos are entitled to jobs."

      "Yes I am, it's only fair."

      By your standards. Who are the majority in the country that pay for all this...Certainly no the franco element in Quebec who do not pay but instead receive. "What is MDR"



      Desole mon ami or ma amis...Quebec receives all their money back plus an astounding 7 - 9 Billion on top. The might pay taxes but through unfair federal transfers they get it all back...plus equalization on top of it. "What is MDR" ??

      "Where is this exemption for paying taxes francophones have? I never heard of it, I want in."

      If you live in Quebec, your already inluded..not so much as a Franco in the ROC. "What is MDR?

      "in the alternative"

      What is the majority language of Canada? The majority of the revenue in Canada is generated by anglos, so, whether you like it or not, english is the common language. As many French Canadians or Quebecois (notice I make the distincion) have routinely found to be the case.

      Your tax money being spent on English services. Well, that would be the case with the majority of Canadians. Taxes spent on French...too much as it is essentially funded across the nation (2.4 billion per year for the OLA) sans Quebec as in reality they pay nothing to the operational budget of the country...After all, look at the Quebec provincial budget which is funded about 15% (maybe 13%) by equalization..

      "what is MDR".

      Obviously you live in Quebec and are one of the backsliders. If you live outside of Quebec you are naive and stupid like most Canadians who support the spoiled child of Canada.

      Delete
    5. 2.4 billions? You mean with 0.9% of the federal expenses of 270 billions, we get to provide equal services to both linguistic communities?

      I never knew it was this much of a bargain! Thanks for making my day, helpful Anonymous commenter.

      Delete
    6. "2.4 billions? You mean with 0.9% of the federal expenses of 270 billions, we get to provide equal services to both linguistic communities?"

      Only one problem with this!!1 They are not equal and most of the money goes toward supporting the french...Note that little money is spent in Quebec helping the alienated anglo minority....shshhhhh politically incorrect to do so...they might start making issues of separation again if they don't get to suck the wet tit of Ottawa.

      Delete
    7. You're right, the services are not equal. Whenever I have to call Ottawa, I have to spend half the time waiting for a rep if I'm calling in english than if I'm calling in french. I'd use english, but I'm worried that if we francophones all give in like this, they'll use it as an indication that we don't want our (lower quality) french services and put in even less efford in the services they do than they do now.

      Publications from the feds in areas where they think few francos will read them are full of engrishtastic errors: last summer I was at a shakespeare play that had been partly subsidised by the federal government. The english message from our very own Heritage & Official Languages minister, James Moore, was flawless in english but had no fewer than 5 gross mistakes in french over two paragraphs. They must have ran it through google translate, if there's 40% bilinguals in the federal service I'll eat my hat. Or maybe these are bilinguals on paper, who took their qualification exam 10 years ago and figured that being bilingual was a line in their CV?

      Completely unprofessional, imagine if Quebec's english publications were full of engrish? They'd be a laughing stock! But francophones don't matter to anglos, so frengrish is as good as we can expect. But of course, such is life. People as you indicate that we simply can't expect the feds to step up, even after 40 years of OLA, because shitty as the french services are they are already too much for the likes of you. We'll just have to be happy that our 2.4 billions buys us nominally equal services. And thankful we have to be, because the likes of you would use the fact that french services are shitty as evidence that we shoudn't have any at all.

      Delete
    8. Upon further reading of the Fraser Institute report from which the 2.4 billions figure is obtained, I have to say I'm not impressed. Most of this money is for education purposes, and represents the fact that french schools service people from a larger area and thus do not enjoy economies of scale to the same degree as anglophone schools.

      Federal monies that are reported as "being spent for OLA purposes" include grants to arts and culture not unlike the public funding of arts and culture in anglophone Canada; it's not clear to me why it's an extra cost when spent on francophones but not when spent on anglophones.

      The way you were talking about it, it was 2.4 billions spent to make federal services bilingual. Your Fraser Institute report can't be used to claim this. If anything, the figure it quotes as spent on translating/interpreting services was of 280 millions (a tenth of what you were pushing) and language training, bilingualism bonus, etc.. was of 100 milions. At about 12$ per Canadian per annum, this is a drop in the bucket.

      Delete
    9. "Or maybe these are bilinguals on paper, who took their qualification exam 10 years ago and figured that being bilingual was a line in their CV?"

      You are likely correct on this one,
      which again, shows what a waste of money the OLA has become. Federal worker gets to take time off and go to French language training (an vice versa I would suppose) at the expense of the taxpayer. Cost is high as replacement worker must be put in place. Anyways, doesnt matter, as after they qualify they proceed to go back to their job and never utilize French in many cases and consequently lose any bilingual skills they had acquired (use it or lose it analogy). The waste paper recycling bins in most government offices outside Quebec and NB are full of French versions of government policies and procedural guidlines.

      Look, I am not saying that bilingualism is not a good thing. I, however, do not agree with the level of stupidity and waste that accompanies the official language act. I have absolutely no issues of bilingual services where they are warranted by numbers. I do have a problem with bilingual services being provided in areas where there is no need.

      In reality, Canada is NOT a bilingual country when you look at the numbers. Time to end this expensive charade and misrepresentation to the world.

      Delete
    10. "In reality, Canada is NOT a bilingual country when you look at the numbers. Time to end this expensive charade and misrepresentation to the world."

      The statement "Canada is a bilingual country" does not mean "every citizen is personally bilingual", it means "there are large numbers of both anglophones and francophones, so we provide services to both".

      As to inefficiencies regarding training federal employees when they're old : that is recognised by everyone. This is what happens when our education system is designed to create bilingual skills peaking at the age of 16-18, then not value them at all.

      Delete
    11. "every citizen is personally bilingual",

      Canada is a country which has one official majority language and one official minority language...to be precise. It is not and likely never will be a bilingual country where a significant number of the population speaks both official languages. Jack Jedwad indicates a real figure of about 12% and Stats Canada indicates about 17% although that number is likely not valid as it is based upon self assessed bilingualism.

      "inefficiencies regarding training"

      Correct, the OLA is a wasteful program which has cost 100's of billions of dollars with no tangible effects. Canada is no more bilingual now that it was in 1969 when PET introduced the OLA. There needs to be a more practical approach to the issue.

      Many kids in the ROC are enrolled in French Immersion schools...( I happen to believe in some instances the parents are more concerned with free bussing and after school programs than they are with their children actually becoming bilingual). Intersting that the rate of bilingualism does peak about the end of secondary school and radically reduces quickly in the 19 - 24 age group, according to stats can figures. Why..very simple....in a predominately english country the people soon loose any skills they have acquired with regards to the French Language. In short, they have no reason to use it...You think anything is going to change...It hasn't, despite a huge pot of money being invested, since 1969.

      Delete
    12. That is correct - in the absense of the presence of french in anglophone universities (I can assure you that my francophone university demanded that I take english courses), and with anglos resisting bilingual jobs even where required, it creates an environment where the ability to speak/read french is not valued. As I mentionned elsewhere, french movies from Quebec make money worldwide, but aren't watched in the ROC. Incendies made more money in Australia than in the ROC, despite greater numbers in the ROC.

      Bilingualism, or multilingualism, just isn't valued in the ROC. Not many ways to change that. Getting people to see that bilingualism is a useful asset for some jobs, and that french services are important, is part of the solution.

      Delete
    13. "Bilingualism, or multilingualism, just isn't valued in the ROC. Not many ways to change that. Getting people to see that bilingualism is a useful asset for some jobs, and that french services are important, is part of the solution."

      That is correct as the people in the ROC, in their daily lives, have no benefit to be bilingual. Useful asset for some jobs...where there is predominately no french spoken in not an asset other than for personal purposes. French services important...only in areas where there is significatn need. Solution...I doubt there is one...As I said, nothing has changed in 40 years. Have all the immersion programs you want..at the end of the day there is really no need to speak french outside of Quebec where there is a subtantial number of uniligual french...Reality...

      Delete
    14. No other benefit than the personal fulfilment of knowing an extra language, of course. But I believe anglophones, who are priviledged in how the whole world accomodates their language, are much less likely to see the advantages of a second, third or fourth language than regular people. That's just an opinion, though.

      Delete
    15. Yikes! Anonymous in debate with Anonymous. Would the real Anonymous raise his / her hand?

      For you Anonymouses, kindly name your post so that we can track which one is Anonymous and which one is the other Anonymous.

      Delete
  9. Myth 1

    I agree that the vision of us being surrounded by 350 millions of english speakers is simplistic, I find it simplistic from both french and english side. And someone does attack this myth : J. René Marcel Sauvé attacks this myth in Géopolitique et Avenir du Québec. According to him, we are not surrounded, our territory is peripheral and it is one of the major factors of our survival and of our lasting existence as a people. If interested, his book has interesting chapters on Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Danemark, Israël and South Africa.

    But when comparing north american and european contexts, one has to remember that no european country or language outweights every other countries or languages together by 10 to 1 and that 23 languages (if my memory is right) co-exist in Europe.

    Also that french, in the Québec context, competes with a language that is both its local competitor and the new world lingua franca is an interesting factor that makes our situation somehow unique.

    Few languages once in real danger of disappearance (or assimilation, folklorisation, marginalisation, whatever) have succeeded in gaining ground ; catalan, hebrew and french in Québec could be the very few to have succeeded. And to my knowledge, Québec could be the only society in the world where french openly competed with english and gained ground. One commenter rightfully noted that it did not happen by magic.

    Despite english being the new world lingua franca, italians work in italian, frenchmen work in french, germans work in german and so on. In Québec, there was a time when you had to work in english and french speakers were second last in terms of earnings. Language laws adressed this issue and turned things around. Then again, it did not happen by magic.

    Again, it is not about the existence of french, it is about its status.

    Myth 2

    Again, the issue is not the hypothetical disappearance of french. What we mean by louisianisation is a process through which french speakers become citizens of second class, a process through which french becomes a folkloric language and a language of marginalization.

    As I said before it is not about the existence of french, it is about its status.

    Myth 3

    True, immigration will not cause the disappearance of french. But there is nevertheless a problem with immigration : immigrants tend to adopt (at least at first) the canadian vision of things. If immigrants would integrate our society and become, let’s say, 40% for independence and 60% against independence (should I say pro-dependence?), that would be much less of a problem.

    As immigrants become a larger part of our society, francos slowly lose the ability the choose for themselves. (Again, we cannot escape the issue of the definition of «themselves».) And independence is about the ability to decide for yourself. And the abilityb to decide for yourself is not only an issue for independentists, it is also an issue for federalist nationalists (who are federalists who see things from a Québec perspective).

    Integration of immigrants is a challenge not only for Québec but for also the whole western world. In Québec the problem might be more acute because, in Québec, two governments and two national visions compete on the same territory. The issue of immigration has also to be seen in the context of two nations struggling for preponderance.

    Would Québec be independent and would we have full ability to decide for ourselves, the integration of immigrants would be much less problematic because the struggle between two nations would no longer be.
    Integration would not automaticaly easy since it is a challenge everywhere in the western world, it would not be easy, but it would be easier.

    The challenge of immigration is not a threat to french, it is a threat to our ability to choose for ourselves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Merci Michel,toujours aussi pertinent que perspicace.Très intéressant à lire.

      Delete
    2. I quite enjoy reading your comments, Michel, because you put a lot of thought into explaining your viewpoint. Please don't give up even if some react negatively.

      Delete
    3. Michel, even if I rarely find myself in agreement with you, I always find your arguments an interesting read (Seppie, look and learn!). However, there is a rather large flaw in your argument: after two and a half centuries of co-existence between anglos and francos in Quebec and Montreal in particular, does it still make sense to talk about them as separate "nations"? Choosing for yourselves only has a sense if you have some sort of greater right over that piece of land than any other ethnic group, and you could argue that you do, at least over first generation immigrants. You do not, however, over all those anglos who've been there for two and a half centuries, sharing the same land. I can go as far as to say that they behaved like a***holes for a lot of that time, but that's no excuse to mirror that behaviour: "Parlez blanc" does not sound any better than "Speak white". And you haven't got any greater rights than the children of those allophone immigrants who were born in Quebec and haven't known any other Fatherland, so the ability to "choose for yourselves" must only come alongside the ability of all the other Peoples of Quebec to do the same thing: that is the essence of democracy. And compromises must be struck when there isn't a unique opinion.

      What is going on in Quebec right now is that a minority of the Francophone population is trying to eliminate a language and a culture (and a lot of people, by means of encouraging their migration) that has existed as long as the name Quebec has, just because they think they can. So, when you say that you don't want to end up like Louisiana, what it sounds like is that you wouldn't have had a problem with that provided the roles were reversed. I personally don't give a stuff about who did what to whom, I just take exception with what was done or, as Ghandi would have put it: An eye for en eye makes the world go blind. (And he knew a thing or two about getting the English out...)

      Delete
    4. M Patrice, your praises to the concept on independence bring a tear to my eye. Yet your own people have cheapened the very concept over the past decades. They have shown that independence can also be use as a tool of manipulation.

      Let's see. Quebeckers rejected it twice, even though the questions were framed to emphasize a connection with Cabada. They elect 'federalist' parties to power. They refuse to give pratique governments 'winning conditions'. They give it no more than 40 percent in polls, and if it goes over that, your press steps in to bring the number down (if it goes below 20 percent, the press steps in to bring it up).

      The point is to talk about it, isn't it? Talk to the Anglos, allos, people in the roc. Talk, talk, talk. Keep them on their toes. And while at it, cheapen and diminish the very notion of the concept, to the point where the phrase 'Quebec independence' now sounds like an oxymoron.

      So don't preach to us about the beauty of independence. Because in all likelihood, you don't even want it.

      Delete
    5. pequiste governments...not pratique governments

      Delete
    6. The Quebec Partition,

      "...after two and a half centuries of co-existence between anglos and francos in Quebec and Montreal in particular, does it still make sense to talk about them as separate "nations"?"

      As crazy as it may look from where you are (in England if my memory is right), it does. Of course, anglos and francos interact a lot, many anglos attend french school, etc. This is not Northen Irland. Nevertheless, regarding the "question nationale" both communities are two very distinct groups.

      Choosing for ourselves is about us and Canada.

      "Trying to eliminate a language and a culture (and a lot of people, by means of encouraging their migration) that has existed as long as the name Quebec has" is not a goal, it is a side effect. (And "eliminating" is a little strong...)

      Delete
    7. Adski,

      Québec society is not a homogeneous bloc. Two important factions are independentist nationalists (Parizeau for instance) and federalist nationalists (Bourassa for instance). The dynamic resulting of the actions of both groups sometimes (often) gives strange results like electing Lévesque in Québec and Trudeau in Ottawa.

      Both were elected by, let's say, 45% of voters, not necessarily by the same 45% of voters.

      I think that some (many) federalist nationalist used independence as a tool of manipulation, thinking otherwise would be naive. Bourassa used it as a tool of manipulation but thinking that Parizeau did not genuinly want independence is equally naive.

      Delete
    8. As crazy as it may look from where you are (in England if my memory is right), it does. Of course, anglos and francos interact a lot, many anglos attend french school, etc. This is not Northen Irland. Nevertheless, regarding the "question nationale" both communities are two very distinct groups

      Well, over here, the Scots hate the English, the Welsh hate the English, the Irish hate the English and the English hate everybody else, including most of the English: it must be the most tolerant Country in the world, given that we live side by side with millions of people we can't bloody stand (copyright Andy Parsons). But the Irish still speak English after becoming independent (as well as Irish, which has a surprisingly Greek sounding twang) and the Welsh still speak Welsh, at least when some Englishman is around... Then, again, there's no other place in the world (barring some village in Argentina) where Welsh is spoken outside of Wales...

      "Trying to eliminate a language and a culture (and a lot of people, by means of encouraging their migration) that has existed as long as the name Quebec has" is not a goal, it is a side effect. (And "eliminating" is a little strong...)

      I think "eliminating" is appropriate, given the asymmetrical treatment of Francophones in the RoC and Anglophones in Quebec. As for the "side effect" issue: excessive usage of Botox causes botulism, doesn't that make you want to go easy on the injections of cow's rear-end? As side effects go, it seems pretty dire...

      Delete
    9. Less than 25% of the Welsh still speak Welsh, though those numbers are increasing thanks to Welsh education and official language status in Wales.

      Delete
    10. A rather meaningless point: Welsh is not taught INSTEAD of English, but ALONGSIDE it. Except for a few old-timers, every Welsh-speaking person also speaks English.

      Delete
    11. English is taught in every single french school of this country. People comming out of francophone schools are expected to able to read and analyze novels. In comparison, people who have taken french in english schools are seldom able to do anything but count up to 10 in that language.

      I don't see how it's that different from welsh vs english schools. The welsh seem to have developped very effective schools that teach welsh very efficiently, even to people comming from english households. It's not impossible to devise an education system that teaches more than one language, it's a question of will.

      As they say, where there's a will, there's a way. In a significant part of english Canada, there is no will to learn french, so there is no way. But I can assure you that the converse is false for french schools.

      Delete
    12. It all sounds very nice, but then how do you explain the existence of unilingual Francophones? You've done a good job of explaining why the anglos in the RoC and, possibly, some parts of Quebec don't learn French, but if English is taught in French schools to such a good level, how come 40% of all Quebeckers can't speak English? And why is it the youngsters to a greater degree than the old-timers? This is not to absolve the anglos who do not learn French in Quebec (they really should), but to highlight the gap between formal policy objectives and the reality on the ground.

      Delete
    13. It's the youngsters who don't learn english in Quebec? I assumed that the statistics were skewered, as in the rest of Canada, by the elderly who tend to be more unilingual.

      I've got nothing. All the quebeckers I've met were able to speak/write well in english, but those would be the ones who felt comfortable living outside of Quebec, so of course woudn't include the worst unlinguals.

      EDIT : http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-004-x/2008004/article/10767-eng.htm#a

      It puts bilingualism amongst francophone youths of Quebec at 60%, and ROC francophone youths at 90%. I can't really tell why it's as low as 60% in Quebec other than the obvious. Clearly it's working for 60% of them, what about the other 40%? I suspect they are from the rural regions, but that is no excuse.

      Delete
    14. Statistics can be used to demonstrate anything. I'm not saying that the ones you refer to are wrong, but I'm dubious of statistics that take a minority of a subset of a sample and pretend to represent the whole picture. You refer to bilingualism among the youths of Quebec, but that data is skewed by the presence of the offsprings of bilingual immigrants, that represent a larger percentage of the population than their parents, due to the different natality rate between the native Francophone community and the immigrants. The son of an immigrant from Cameroon and, say, a pure-laine will most likely be a bilingual person as at least one of his parents is bilingual (both English and French are spoken in Cameroon), even if he doesn't receive bilingual education. The statistics as I've found them are that in 2006 there were 4 million speakers of French only, 3 million bilinguals and 336-thousand speakers of English only. Of the bilinguals, around 400-thousand spoke mainly English at home. It is one of the few things I don't actually disagree with the Seppies of the world on.

      Delete
    15. Question of the month by Quebec Partition in response to Anon 12:36PM:

      "It all sounds very nice, but then how do you explain the existence of unilingual Francophones? You've done a good job of explaining why the anglos in the RoC and, possibly, some parts of Quebec don't learn French, but if English is taught in French schools to such a good level, how come 40% of all Quebeckers can't speak English?"

      Anon 12:29PM response is a total crock of crap. Anon must have never been to the Regions, or Montreal Est for that matter:

      "All the quebeckers I've met were able to speak/write well in english, but those would be the ones who felt comfortable living outside of Quebec, so of course woudn't include the worst unlinguals. "

      Then he goes into what separatists (watch him say "I'm not a separatist" after this) like best: statistics. As if the real life experience can be overcome with some abstract numbers, many of which were pulled out of the a**.

      Delete
    16. Anon: "As they say, where there's a will, there's a way. "

      There is no will to learn French in the RoC, just like there is no will to learn Norwegian in Russia (with few exceptions of course). The real question is: why do you care? Honestly, who cares.

      Yes, people in the RoC have no interest in learning French, but that's because a. they don't need it for anything, b. Quebec has gotten under the RoC's skin to the point that many of these people would learn any other language before French.

      Yet the Quebeckers who learn English (and do it to personally benefit from the world language and not "out of openness" as they say) claim the right to demand reciprocity (we learned your language, so now learn ours or we will be angry) under the false pretense of "open mindedness". Except there can be no reciprocity in this case, because the importance of the languages is not symmetrical. It's as simple as that.

      Delete
    17. adski : It's nothing to me, but then all the bilingual jobs will be going exclusively to anglophones, and anglos will cry even harder at having some jobs they don't have the skills for. It's in my interest that lots of anglos become bilingual, so that they can get bilingual jobs as well.

      And no, the solution is not "have no bilingual jobs", that would remove federal services for 23% of Canadians, and provincial services for a significant amount as well.

      You're entirely correct, I've never been to the Régions or to Montréal Est. I've visited Montreal downtown, and the city of Quebec. I have an uncle who lives in Laval, though he's not native from Quebec. Stats all I have to go on.

      I would add, however, that personal experiences can give one a skewed version of reality, and that stats allows you to double check that version of reality by comparing with the big picture. Take what I said that you have so much issue with : that I haven't met unilingual francophone Quebeckers. If I were like you, I would use my annecdotes to draw a big picture conclusion (there are no francophone unilinguals) when that is patently false (less than half of Quebec francophones are bilingual).

      Furthermore, my stats were from the Statistics Canada website, to which I provided a link, and certainly not "pulled out of the ass".

      Your conclusion that I must be a seperatist because I use statistics is puzzling. Lots of people use statistics.

      Delete
    18. Edit : "all the bilingual jobs will be goign exclusively to anglophones" should read francophones, obviously.

      Quebec Partition : You were the one talking about unilingualism amongst Quebec "youngsters to a greater degree". Not being intimately acquainted with the situation, I decided to look into the numbers of "youngsters". You are correct to doubt all statistics - but I think that statistics, especially from an official source such as Stat Can, are better than claiming annecdotal evidence is the end-all of fact-finding.

      For instance, one issue you could raise with the stats provided is that it's self-reported answer to the question "Do you feel like you can sustain a conversation in both languages". That's usually the question asked to measure bilingualism in anglos in the ROC. People may exagerate their ability, and different people with similar skills will answer differently.
      And you're probably right, the "francophone" population may very well include offsprings of 'mixed' unions, so to speak.

      It's still info, though, and the only official kind I was able to find.

      Delete
    19. Anon: “It's in my interest that lots of anglos become bilingual, so that they can get bilingual jobs as well.”

      You see the world differently than me. Maybe it’s you being a Francophile or a Francophone, and me being neither of the two. Your solution to the problem is for the Anglos who don’t need French in their everyday lives to learn French in order to justify arbitrary conditions imposed by the government on employment eligibility (i.e. citizen has to adapt to the govt). I’m proposing something opposite: for the government to stop imposing the bilingualism requirement on its employees outside Quebec and NB, i.e. for the govt to adapt to the people.

      We have a situation:
      1. federal govt requires French for its potential employees
      2. potential employees do not need French in their lives, though they are asked to know it for the job

      Your solution: have the potential employees adapt to the requirement
      My solution: scrap the idiotic requirement, even if Quebec makes threats.

      Delete
  10. Yes Michel,

    Though these Laws were imposed on an English Speaking population that were a majority and still are a majority in their own areas of Quebec and are a majority in their country of Canada. Therefore theoretically Anglos in Montreal can say they are threatened by a sea of Francophones and laws that their state uses to suppress an official language minority for their betterment, at the Anglos expense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And therein lies the fundamental problem. Canada (ROC) is supposed to embrace the french culture, language etc etc while at the same time anglos in Quebec are subjugated by the French majority in Quebec to second class status with actual laws which overide fundamental rights. Cleary a double standard between Quebec and the ROC.

      Delete
    2. I don't think I've seen any province (other than New-Brunswick, but they are a special case) "embracing" french culture. The feds are supposed to provide bilingual services to reflect the fact that we have two large linguistic populations in Canada, and immersion education provides a leg up to anglos who want to access the tiny fraction of all jobs that require bilingualism.

      But embracing french culture? Quebec movies make more money in Australia than in Canada, I don't see the embracement.

      Delete
    3. "Quebec movies make more money in Australia than in Canada, I don't see the embracement." I should say, they make more money in Australia than in the ROC. They of course make most of their money in Quebec and in France.

      Delete
    4. And I understand your point of view.

      We have a lot in common, both of us being both a majority and a minority.

      Your comment also illustrates, as if we needed yet another illustration, that we are "two nations warring at the bosom of a single state" (Durham), "two scorpios in the same bottle" (Lévesque), two nations struggling for preponderance (Séguin).

      We both have strong identities, and I believe and have argued before, that there is (but not only), built in the canadian identity, a negation of the Québec identity, and that both identities are not "dissolvable" one into the other.

      You will note that I have never blamed anglos for not assimilating to us nor have I ever told them that they should. I know it is as pointless as telling us to assimilate to the canadian majority. And I have never blamed them for not learning french (in fact, they speak more french than we speak english).

      This being said, there is in our society a on-going tension between two groups. It is sad. It would be better if it was not. It is a problem. But honestly, I don't know what do about it. Things would be simplier if we did not exist, yet this solution sounds unappealing to me.

      Delete
  11. I like how the editor uses the fact that immigrants assimilate to the francos (a direct result of their being forced into french schools by bill 101) as being indicative of fear of immigrants assimilating in english being unfounded (and therefore bill 101 being unnecessary).

    "It works, so we don't need it!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It may well be that the immigrants would rather learn both languages and do business with all of Canada (and North America in general) rather than having to choose. You'd think it would make sense given the largest concentration of bilingual people in Canada being in Quebec. It is such a stupid thing to have unilingual laws, schools and businesses in the most bilingual part of the Country that you'd have to wonder what all the acrimony against the Yanks is about...

      Delete
    2. Don't Quebec french schools also teach english?

      In my home province of New-Brunswick, the reality is that french schools form almost perfectly bilingual students (we read as many novels as anglophones in english schools do, such as 1984, lord of the flies or To Kill a Mockingbird), but students of english schools would have trouble reading a preschooler book written in french.

      I understand that while that was also the case a long time ago in anglophone public schools in Quebec, they now are pretty good at teaching both languages. How is the english teaching at french public schools?

      Delete
  12. I live in British Columbia and took 5 years of French in school. My teachers were either British, Dutch or French from France origin throughout those years. Not one Quebecois French teacher. When I tried to speak French, I doubt any person from Quebec could understand me. There was nowhere or no one to practice the language. When I travelled in Europe, I could understand the French spoken but still couldn't speak it....and was too shy to try.

    If you go learn English in Quebec, you at least have the opportunity to practice your English on 13% of those that live in a fairly close proximity. In B.C.....I don't know any French Canadians. I don't know where I would even go to find any. There are french immersion schools in every community but where all those people who learn the language go outside the classroom - I haven't a clue.

    Personally, if I lived in Quebec, I would have loved to have learned French by immersion. But I still think it would have been important enough to have English classes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's funny you say that - One of the older gentlemen I work with has had the opposite problem. He was taught by a Quebecois teacher, and when he tried to take french in university he was told he coudn't speak it by a professor from France, to his utter confusion.

      Delete
  13. Since we are on the myth theme, let me explain one crucial reason the French Quebecois School System prohibits the introduction of other languages before the age of 10 or so. I posted this a while ago. Seems to me from the unsuspecting comments I've read here that few have read it, so here goes some of it:

    It has been studied an discovered worldwide that, prior to the age of about ten, children can learn as many as seven languages without being mixed up. The world has adopted measures to afford children the right of multilingual learning. Even the worst tyrannical regimes have allowed this, yet the only place that has banned its people to officially learn two or more languages, especially before the age of 10, is the Canadian PROVINCE of Quebec!!!

    This disgusting practice is part of the game plan to stop opposing views of a population because the separatists know that the French Media in this province is almost all separatist or separatist leaning. How else can we explain that more than 98% of those who voted yes to separation were unilingual French and those who voted no spoke more than one language? In this province, if you speak French and want to verify the news, you need a second language. Any second language!

    In Quebec, if you were born French, you have no right of a multilingual education. Only those of other nationalities that had prior English education have the right to English bilingual schooling and they must proof such right with a document provided to them by the provincial government! Can you recall another society that tattooed its undesirable citizens?

    Note that the children of the separatist leaders are multilingual yet those same leaders prevent the rest of Quebecers access to other languages! Instead they force us to send our children to not French school, but Quebecois Separatist School!

    Can you recall another society that forced its citizens to send children in the social engineering breeding ground? They said; “We don’t need you. We have your children!”

    When you pass by a school and notice that only the Quebecois flag flies because the Canadian Flag is missing, ask yourself; is this a French school or a Separatist Factory?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In New-Brunswick, we only start english classes in grade 4 (age 10 or thereabouts), and we have no problems learning english... Jeez, paranoid much?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous wrote:

      “Only those of other nationalities that had prior English education have the right to English bilingual schooling and they must proof such right with a document provided to them by the provincial government!”

      This is incorrect。

      You can be educated in English in the United States,for
      example, come to Quebec,become a Canadian citizen and you STILL will not have the constitutional right to education in English。This is because Jean Charest -- that wonderful Liberal who all the anglos vote for -- has not seen fit to bring
      into force in Quebec s。23.1.a of the Canadian Charter of Rights。。。whereas this right exists for francophone immigrants so they can attend French schools in all other nine Canadian provinces。

      See chapter 5 of my book which explains all this by clicking on my name。

      Delete
    3. Tony,

      That still doesn't change the fact that the French Quebecois School System is a Separatist Factory! If you doubt what I'm saying and what I've lived, I invite you to enter any French Quebecois School (you can tell what that is because of the deliberate absence of the Canadian Flag) and wave a small Canadian Flag around. If you come out of there with the feeling that you did a good and appreciated deed, I'll eat my Maurice Richard hattrick tuque!!
      The document that I speak of which is provided by the provincial government allowing entry to English or bilingual school, is given to those who went to English school in the PROVINCE of Quebec and wish to afford their children the same right.

      Delete
    4. "...the only place that has banned its people to officially learn two or more languages, especially before the age of 10, is the Canadian PROVINCE of Quebec!!!"

      I don't want to bother you or anything, but english classes now start in grade 1.

      After you waved your canadian in one of our schools, I suggest that you get a olympic swimmer to wave a (tiny) Québec flag at the medal ceremony.

      Delete
    5. I'm sure he'll find a way to be paranoid about Quebec and the teaching of english in some other way.

      Even if it started in grade 4, why would that be the end of the world? I started learning english in grade 4 (and I mean *started*, before that I watched TV in english but I'll be damned if I understood more than a word out of 10) and my english is so good nowadays that people can no longer tell that I'm not a native speaker. It's not only about when you start teaching language, it's about how much effort you're going to be putting into it.

      Delete
    6. M. Patrice,

      "After you waved your canadian in one of our schools, I suggest that you get a olympic swimmer to wave a (tiny) Québec flag at the medal ceremony."

      What you are asking is illegal. IOC rules prohibit the display of sub-national symbols by athletes. While it is true that athletes did that and probably will do that again, but that does not make it legal.

      Delete
    7. Troy,

      I was refering to the story of Jennifer Caroll.

      For more information : http://www.ledevoir.com/non-classe/16400/un-geste-politique and http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Carroll

      Regardless of commonwealth games rules, her "crime" was political.

      Interestingly, Caroll is anglophone.

      (My mistake, it wasn't the olympics but the commonwealth games...)

      Delete
    8. Michel

      You can mention exceptions all you want in order to justify the sinister underhanded plan to control a society. But the critical majority of children in Quebec are denied the right to learn a second language because the separatists know, as the world knows, that at an early age the human brain develops differently when a second language is introduce. The plan is to deny French Quebec kids that right so they never become comfortable enough with other languages to inform themselves via any other media than the 90+% separatist controlled French Language media of QC.

      As for the fact that you don’t find fault in school officials ousting you if you sport a Canadian Flag, what can anyone say other than it’s institutionalized treason!

      You dare compare an unsuspecting athlete taking orders from a separatist coach to wave the banner of the pre-revolutionary cross-dressing monarch Louis 14 at the commonwealth games versus Canadians showing their colors in their country?
      Talk about a diseased Kool-Aid point of view!

      As smart and as kind as you may think you are, you will turn on your separatist masters when you too, will discover how they’ve tricked you, to make of you a treasonous janissary.

      Remember, they don’t need us, if they have our children!

      Le Peuple Conquis!

      Some pride they instilled in us eh?

      Delete
    9. M. Patrice,

      I am aware of Jennifer Carroll. What she did was not unprecedented. On a bigger stage, Catriona Lemay Doan waved the Saskatchewan flag at the Olympics. I do not know whether it was legal then, but in Vancouver it definitely was not.

      Regardless, what is your point? Schools should carry the Canadian flag, as long as they are on Canadian soil. Schools should be a neutral ground, not be politicized.

      Delete
    10. Yep, still paranoid. Better get yourself a tinfoil hat, I hear the separatists are looking into brainwashing the recalcitrants with poutine-charged mindwaves.

      Delete
    11. Mr. Anonymous Mar 1, 2012 08:04 AM

      It’s not paranoia my racist sympathizer. It you have the balls of a True French Canadian, try sporting our Blood-Soaked Flag in any of your Separatist Factories you call école. You will soon find yourself suckling your thumb and hiding behind the grade school teacher’s skirt.

      The Flag of a Proud Quebec becomes the banner of the pre-revolutionary cross-dressing monarch, Louis XIV when The Blood-Soaked Maple Leaf is absent!!

      For all the shame you've instilled in French Canadians, we say:

      VIVE LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL!!

      Delete
    12. The Canadian flag flew at my school, as well as the flag of New-Brunswick and the Acadian flag.

      By the way, this is the only flag I found that was "the banner of Louis XIV"
      http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Royal_Standard_of_the_Kingdom_of_France.svg

      It does not look like the flag of Quebec.

      Delete
    13. Troy,

      Someone said that a canadian flag would not be welcomed in our schools. My point was that displaying Québec flag was offensive to many ; for instance, Caroll's Québec flag made a scandal (and nobody cared for Lemay Doan's Saskatchewan flag).

      Anonynous7:43's comment illustrates my point in a very entertaining way.

      "Schools should carry the Canadian flag, as long as they are on Canadian soil. Schools should be a neutral ground, not be politicized."

      Your suggestion is perfectly rational and understandable, but it shows a misunderstanding of our society. Displaying the canadian flag in Québec is political. You can't escape it. (And saying it is not political is also political... :) )

      Delete
    14. M. Patrice,

      "(and nobody cared for Lemay Doan's Saskatchewan flag)."

      Wrong. IOC did and does. That is why the rules were issued, to exactly prevent such incident from happening.

      "...but it shows a misunderstanding of our society. Displaying the canadian flag in Québec is political."

      You highlighted my sentiments exactly. What kind of society do we have here in Quebec that children in their early age are denied symbols of the country where they live and breathe? Is this society really that perverted?

      Speaking of flag, as an immigrant I want to take pride of the Quebec flag. I really do, but I can not. You see, Quebec flag is the 3rd best sub-national flag in Canada + USA, after New Mexico and Texas. Yet this beautiful flag has been perverted by fractions of the society that the flag does not represent EVERYONE in its jurisdiction.

      I lived in California and in Texas for a while. In those states, their flag is a symbol that is accepted by - and a source of pride for - all stripes and layers of the society. Even those on the opposing political view are proud of their Bear and Lone Star flags, respectively. Sadly, that is not the case with the fleurdelise.

      Delete
    15. Troy,

      Do you see a difference between reactions regarding Caroll and Lemay Loan? Could we settle for "cared much less"?

      "...children in their early age are denied symbols of the country where they live and breathe? Is this society really that perverted?"

      If you accept (without having to agree, just accepting the fact for one minute) that Québec is the country that we are emotionnaly attached to, does it not suddenly make more sense?

      Delete
    16. Anonymous responds to me with:

      "That still doesn't change the fact that the French Quebecois School System is a Separatist Factory! If you doubt what I'm saying..."

      No, Anonymous, I certainly do NOT doubt at all what you are saying and concur completely.

      Delete
    17. @ Troy

      "Schools should carry the Canadian flag"

      Vous ne trouvez qu'il y a assez de violence dans nos écoles.Pas besoin de provocations supplémentaires.

      Delete
    18. Mr. Patrice,

      In you response to Troy you say:
      “If you accept (without having to agree, just accepting the fact for one minute) that Québec is the country that we are emotionally attached to, does it not suddenly make more sense?”
      NO! It dose not make sense at all! It just proves to us that you are so beyond racism that you renounce being French and are trying to create a new race! This will not stand! Quebec is NOT a country and no matter how much you play with words, we see you as committing treason!
      Canada has participated in this charade wrongly. Should have heeded the call that if the country is divisible so is the most racist jurisdiction on the continent!
      True French Canadians know how great this Country is and call for preemptive measures. What’s good for the CanadianGoose shall also be good for the NeoQuebecoisRacists!!

      For all the shame you've instilled in French Canadians, we say:



      VIVE LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL!!

      Delete
    19. Seppie,

      Why would there be a provocation for flying a national flag on its own soil?

      Delete
    20. M. Patrice,

      "If you accept (without having to agree, just accepting the fact for one minute) that Québec is the country that we are emotionnaly attached to, does it not suddenly make more sense?"

      Your premise can not make sense as it is based on false logic.

      But it just confirms that you and those like you want to force your illusion* to other members of the community and you want to start forcing on the children. That despite the fact that the majority of the society does not hold on the same illusion you have.


      *I say that it is an illusion since Quebec has never been, is not, and I think will not be a country - at least not in my lifetime.

      Delete
  14. Many of the comments lead me to believe there's quite a bit of hypocracy going on in Quebec. It seems that the francophones who move to other provinces expect to keep their language and culture alive and are strongly encouraged to avoid assimilation. In Quebec, immigrants and anglophones are expected and encouraged to assimilate with the francophones. I believe this is what you call a double standard.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Immigrants are expected and encouraged to assimilate with the anglophones in the ROC. Consider that they don't have access to french schools, unless they are francophone by birth.

      Francophones have access to schools (like anglophones of Quebec) but no other provincial services in most of the provinces. In New Brunswick both languages are equal, and in Ontario there are some services (like health care) offered to francophones in some designated areas of the province. Even then, just 2 posts ago showed that a 24% francophone area had it's hospital defunded because it had the gall to try (and fail) to hire bilingual nurses to offer said services.

      In comparison, Montrealers have access to bilingual hospitals, more than one english university as well as public schools. That's more than all francophones outside of Moncton N-B and perhaps Ottawa have.

      Delete
    2. To 5:46pm
      I think you misunderstand my point. I was not talking about having access school or healthcare or services offered in whatever language.

      I believe there is a huge difference between learning a language to communicate with your new host and assimilating with your new host.

      I was not judging one way or the other. I just wanted to point out a double standard.

      What I meant to convey was that the EXPECTATION of assimilation for the francophone is different when they look inward and when they look outward (of the Province). It looks like the newcomer to Quebec is expected to "assimilate" and the francophone leaving Quebec is encouraged to keep their culture and language alive, not to "assimilate" (which I completely agree with by the way). So why should a newcomer, be it an immigrant or anglo from another province, be expected to assimilate into Quebec society and not keep THEIR language and culture alive? Double standard?

      Delete
    3. Whereas I'm talking about the ability (not expectation) to keep your culture. That ability is way higher in Montreal for anglophones than for immigrants all accross the country, or francophones anywhere but Moncton N-B.

      For immigrants, in the absence of education or any real ability to live in their language, it's hard to see how they are expected to not assimilate.

      But then : full disclosure, I don't live in Montreal. Do you think that immigrants have a higher expectation to stop "being immigrants" there than in Vancouver or Toronto? I can assure you that I've seen red-blooded Ontarians angry when they heard people speak a non-english language. It's hard to get an overall picture from personal experiences.

      Delete
    4. I do believe immigrants are under more pressure to assimilate in Quebec. I agree with what you say, ability vs. expectation is very different, my original post was about expectation and how francos are under pressure NOT to assimilate while they put pressure on others to do the opposite.

      There are radicals everywhere I suppose.

      It reminds me of a story. A while ago I was out with my family and some friends in Repentigny (predominantly French area). We went to an ethnic fast food restaurant and our friends ordered their food in English and the middle-eastern server replied in English (OMG!), he probably speaks 3 or 4 languages. Anyway, my teenage daughter tapped me on my shoulder and asked "Mommy, why is everyone staring at us?", I said "Why do you think?", "Because we're speaking English?" Yes, that was exactly why everyone was staring at us! I just smiled at them and they looked away embarrassed. Such is life in Quebec.

      Delete
    5. Anon 8:23am is right. There is a double standard. Francophones in non-francophone jurisdictions must keep their culture because diversity is good, while non-francophones in the francophone jurisdiction of QC should do all they can to "francise" themselves and their families for a host of reasons: minority "always" adapts to the majority, out of "respect" for the majority, because they signed a "contact", because of "bon foi"...etc...

      I don't know where this hypocrisy comes from but my guess is this: they think that their culture is worth preserving and cultivating, while other cultures are not. This is a remnant of the French cultural arrogance Quebeckers retained from their French forebearers, in my opinion, a powerful cultural trait propagated by Quebec artists, writers, politicians, and so on...

      Delete
    6. I just don't buy into the argument of arrogance.

      Could it be because francophones and immigrants outside of Quebec are forced by circumstances to learn & work in english, while immigrants in Quebec don't necessarily need to learn & work in french due to circumstances alone? The fear is then that, given enough immigrants that choose english over french, Quebec Montrealers become a small minority on their home territory. The argument then goes that it's respectful for the local majority to learn french vs only learn english.

      I've always heard the integration argument as a french vs english one, not as a "you must stop being an immigrant ASAP". I think some of you are mixing both arguments.

      As a francophone who's lived in the ROC all of my life, and who has spent significant time in all provinces but Manitoba and Newfoundland, I've never seen provincial governments put in much pressure to "preserve my culture" outside of New-Brunswick. Nor have I seen any efforts to help "preserve our diversity". Mostly the local francophones are just completely irrelevant, and the only lip service given to francophones is a quick "Hello bonjoor" at the airport.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous writes:

      ".etc... I don't know where this hypocrisy comes from but my guess is this: they think that their culture is worth preserving and cultivating, while other cultures are not."

      It's also illegal...and unconstitutional because "language" is a prohibited base of discrimination.

      But we have not and will not get relief from the courts which have, with minor exceptions, ignored the rule of law in this regard and totally abandoned Quebec anglos FOR POLITICAL EXPEDIENCY.

      And not just Quebec courts but Canada's Supreme Court as well.

      Canada has lost its soul. And I believe the country's continued existence should be called into question as a result.

      Delete
    8. Hello bonjour Anonymous Mar 1, 2012 12:30 PM,

      in the event of Quebec separation, should you still be greeted in Canada with "Hello Bonjour", or a "Hello" would suffice?

      Delete
    9. In the event of a Quebec Separation, you would still have half a million of francophones in Ontario, and a third of New Brunswick.

      That would place our federal politicians in a bind. Would they repeal the OLA immediately? I think not, that would be bad for optics. Rather, they would systematically defund it and not staff bilingual positions, until the situation had perdured long enough that the OLA could be safely struck down, making provisions for local services of course.

      So the airport "Hello bonjoor"s would continue for a little time, I think.

      Delete
    10. I asked "should", not "would"

      Delete
    11. Then probably not, there would be a better argument for "Hello/Ni Hao", outside the airport of Moncton N-B.

      Delete
    12. In the event of a Quebec Separation?

      There will not be a Quebec Separation! What part of VIVE LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL do you not understand? Continue your divisive racist ways and watch Quebec go to pieces!

      Montreal and surrounding regions want out of your hateful minority!!

      VIVE LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL!!!

      Delete
    13. Hello Anonymous @ Mar 1, 2012 04:11 PM,

      I'm with you here - rooting for the same team. Just wanted to see how a francophone from ROC sees the situation after an eventual (possible but not probable) separation.

      Hello Anonymous @ Mar 1, 2012 03:02 PM

      why should there not be a Bonjour as well? Aren't there plenty of Francophones in NB?

      Delete
    14. I meant "except Moncton N-B, everywhere else would be wiser to say Hello/Ni Hao".

      New Brunswick would probably remain officially bilingual due to its one third of francophones, but I expect french services everywhere else to shrivel up. Not only because of the much lesser demand on the federal level, but also because of the much lesser supply of francophones. That's not even counting the angry ROC backlash that would probably follow a separation.

      People like me grew up in a Canada they understood to be bilingual and proud of their two linguistic communities; I expect many of us francophones would no longer recognise a Canada bereft of the OLA. Whether they live with it, assimilate, or emigrate to Quebec would be a choice they would have to make. My significant other being an anglo-Canadian, I doubt she'd be willing to leave her country to live in a non-english one. Others must be in similar situations. I'm sure most would end up staying in Canada, but some woudn't.

      Delete
    15. Again you sound like there will be a clean break. Boy, are you ever wrong!!

      Canada played Russian roulette enough times already. There’s no way this will happen again, especially with the separatists loading the gun. The Clarity Act is law. Just as you separatist tell us that your unconstitutional Room 101 segregation law can create hatred but must be obeyed, so will the Clarity Act be obeyed. If you don't like it, leave. One thing is certain; you'll never get all the territory. Already there are several regions with movements preparing to officially request becoming integral parts a The New Canadian Province...

      By the way, you are not dealing with landed immigrants here. You are trying to wipe out one of the founding nations. They may have marginalised themselve in the past by unsuspectingly accepting the nomenclature of “English Community", but that's over too! A Victorious Founding Nation will only be pushed so far!!

      Mon Ami, the time for honoring yourself will soon be at an end!

      Delete
    16. What kind of crazy person are you? I'm not even a Quebecker, let alone a separatist. I was just answering that dude's question.

      Delete
    17. @Anon 8:22pm

      You make me laugh. Are you suggesting that if Quebec and Canada were to split up, leaving the feancophone population at a negligible fraction of the total ROC population, Canada would still maintain the costly and ineffective OLA, because scrapping it would be 'bad for the optics'? Especially with the big pro Franco bullying voice of QC out of the picture? With the anti Franco sentiment that is bound to follow? With all this, the ROC would still channel funds into the OLA? What about Punjabi and Mandarin that would outnumber French in the ROC? Would they get their 'office' as well?
      The Anon who spoke of cultural arrogance was
      right btw. Implying that the OLA should be kept is an example of it.

      Delete
    18. Sorry, that was for the 2:22pm anon.

      Delete
  15. Francophones outside of Ottawa and Moncton simply don't make up a critical mass in many locations to take advantage of economies of scale。 For example,the anglos of Blanc Sablon,Quebec -- a geographically isolated fishing village on the North Shore of Quebec with about 1,500 people -- has no where near the same services in English as do the francophones of Moncton,New Brunswick in French。

    Anglo Montrealers have access to hospitals, social services etc because 75% of all Quebec anglos (hundreds of thousands) live within a 25% mile radius of downtown Montreal。。。PLUS THEY BLOODY WELL BUILT THEIR OWN INSTITUTIONS, NOT THE GOVERNMENT OF QUEBEC。

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Total agreement that the francophones in most parts of Canada don't make up a critical mass to warrant their own institutions. Yet,

      "PLUS THEY BLOODY WELL BUILT THEIR OWN INSTITUTIONS, NOT THE GOVERNMENT OF QUEBEC"

      The government of Quebec sure is funding them with taxpayer money, though, up and above the numbers required based on anglo population alone.

      There were francophone hospitals, colleges all over Canada, but in the same situation anglos prefered to stop financing them, and fuse them with anglo institutions to operate "bilingually" (read : in english).

      Yet it's in Montreal that immigrants and anglos are "expected to assimilate" while in the RoC "francophones expect to keep their language and culture alive." How they expect to keep their language alive in the near-total absense of jobs, higher education, culture, services in french is beyond me.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous writes:

      "Yet it's in Montreal that immigrants and anglos are "expected to assimilate" while in the RoC "francophones expect to keep their language and culture alive." How they expect to keep their language alive in the near-total absense of jobs, higher education, culture, services in french is beyond me."

      And yet that recent Fraser Institute studt suggests that Quebec anglos, per capita, get only a fraction of public funding than do their francophone counterparts in the ROC.

      Look. There comes a point at which soneone has to recognize and acknowledge that government can only go so far in artificially propping up the institutions of a language group in which fewer and fewer people are freely choosing to speak that language.

      This is NOT the fault of those in Quebec who freely choose to exercise the frredom of speech and freedom ossociation to speak English.

      Delete
    3. Tony : absolute numbers of francophones in the ROC have actually increased, it's relative demographic weight that has decreased. For instance, in Ontario the number of francophones has increased from 341 000 in 1951 to 510 000 in 2011 - almost a doubling. But within that time period, their weight has diminished from 7.4% to 4.2%.

      The only province where the number of francophones has decreased dramatically is Saskatchewan, where it is now half of it's 1951 number (16 to 36 thousands)

      So when you say "fewer and fewer people are freely coosing to choose that language", be sure you are using the correct words. The word "fewer" implies that there are less francophones in the ROC than before, and that simply isn't true. There are more francophones than there ever were in Canada, there is just that many more anglophones, and it is just that much easier to erase the presence of Canadian francophones than ever before.

      Even so, I believe you are changing the subject rather than address the point I am making. The OP said that francophones are expected to keep their culture in the ROC while anglophones were expected to assimilated with Montreal. Given the unequality of ressources, services, and language visibility available to both communities, I simply don't agree.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous writes:

      "So when you say 'fewer and fewer people are freely coosing to choose that language', be sure you are using the correct words."

      I am more than willing to be corrected on this point.

      As I said in a previous post in Part I of this excellent debate, we fall into a trap when we play what I call "the francophone numbers game" because it is beside the point.

      As I wrote in Part I on Feb. 27th, "The question that should be asked is how and why we've gotten to the point in Canada that it is the responsibility of GOVERNMENT to protect and preserve a language of a particular identifiable group."

      Delete
    5. Is it really the responsability of government to protect and preserve a language of a particular identifiable group?

      All I ask is what we already have - nominally equal bilingual federal services, and access to education in the minority language. I believe this is the job of the government, because in the absence of a private market for government services it's not as if we can vote with our wallets, so we have to fall back on voting with our votes and appealing to the good nature of the anglophones.

      I would also support the continued funding of Radio-Canada, though that is not entirely for linguistic reasons since I am also in favour of funding english CBC. Some grants to arts & heritage, then again not entirely for linguistic reasons. I'm as interested in keeping the Ukrainian heritage village out of Calgary as I am in maintaining the citadel of Halifax or the forteress of Louisbourg, and of funding original english shows/movies as I am of funding french equivalents.

      When you really think about it, the various levels of governments do very little beyond providing (some) bilingual services; I'm unsure how much is being done to protect and preserve a language as you say.

      When I was pointing out that little was done in this regard for francophones in the ROC, I was not implying that they deserve it. I was trying to explain that English Montrealers are in a better position than their ROC francophone counterparts, and that the assumptions that out-of-Quebec francophones are priviledged may not be founded.

      Delete
  16. Several anonymous posters have taken Mr. Sauga to task for taking the "Let Quebec go!" stance, obsrrving that they, unlike Mr. Sauga, still live in Quebec while he has left the province.

    I would be curious to know whether Anonymi vote, as do 90% of their fellow Quebec anglos, for the Liberal Party of Quebec, who are, as far as I'm concerned, just as separatist and as anti Canada as the PQ (and, indeed, on occasion, have proven to be MORE separatist, as evidenced by 1992's Bill 150). And we haven't even mentioned the Liberals' FULL and CONTINUED support of the race law/hate Bill 101.

    Anonymi's outrage and energies would be better placed if they diverted it from Mr. Sauga to their fellow anglos and neighbours...and the ballot box.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tony,

      Is there an alternative in many of the Montreal seats to the Liberals? I've read editorials that if Anglos didn't vote for union nationale and stayed with the PLQ that the PQ may have not gotten elected. At the moment in Many ridings especially the Allo dominated areas of Montreal, voting anything but QUebec libs is not an option.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous asks:

      "Is there an alternative in many of the Montreal seats to the Liberals? I've read editorials that if Anglos didn't vote for union nationale and stayed with the PLQ that the PQ may have not gotten elected. At the moment in Many ridings especially the Allo dominated areas of Montreal, voting anything but QUebec libs is not an option."

      The question regarding vote splitting amongst federalists in the 1976 election and whether votes cast for the Union Nationale split the federalist vote and enabled the PQ (with a minority of the overall popular vote) to win the '76 general election is one which was, immediately following that election, debated ad infinitum. I am not that familiar with the debate too much; however, I believe the consensus was that it didn't contribute to it.

      When the Equality Party fielded candidates in something like 19 out of a total of 125 ridings in 1989, the strategy was specifically tailored to avoid vote splitting. See:

      https://docs.google.com/View?docid=dg6n6657_183hrd9wncd

      Well, it worked THAT time because we got four candidates elected, as I'm sure you know. And, quite impressively, the Equality Party got between 60-70% of ALL anglophone votes cast in those ridings in which they fielded candidates (this is not MY claim but that of demographic expert Pierre Drouilly of UQAM who analyzes these kinds of things and wrote about it at the time).

      But the vote-splitting bugaboo was nevertheless a concern then and despite planning for it, I am convinced that those 30-40% of anglos in those ridings that did NOT vote Equality and instead voted for the Liberals (the U.N. was no longer a party by then) did so specifically out of fear of vote-splitting. Indeed, those that DID vote Equality did so because they were SO enraged by Bill 178 that they let that emotion (as they SHOULD have!) dictate their choice IN SPITE OF vote-splitting concerns.

      Believe it or not, a good chunk of the electorate simply don't understand how the voting process works. You can tell them -- and even show them the statistics on paper! -- that in a riding such as D'Arcy McGee you can split the historical vote that the PQ gets in that riding, literally, 19 times and STILL not elect the PQ and they still won't "get it". So many people think an election is like a referendum where there is a tally of ALL votes which decides who forms the government. Ignorance of the voting process is the problem here.

      Throw in the fact that all the Liberals have to do is whisper -- just once! -- in the ears of a 70 year old grandmother in Cote St. Luc that a vote for an anglo rights party will take votes away from the Liberals and elect the PQ and that is precisely what that grandmother will believe no matter how many times we tell and show her that this isn't the case.

      So, yes, vote-splitting is and always WILL be a concern...but it can be planned for strategically by NOT fielding candidates in a anglo rights/Liberal alternative provincial party. Nevertheless, it will always be an uphill battle.

      Delete
    3. Sorry, typo; that last sentence should read:

      "So, yes, vote-splitting is and always WILL be a concern...but it can be planned for strategically by NOT fielding candidates in ridings in which vote-splitting is a possibility."

      Delete
  17. Encore une ombre au tableau pour les "liberals".Ça n'arrêtera donc jamais...

    http://tinyurl.com/6qnsldd

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course, and your amis péquistes are pure like a shy virgin dressed in white.

      Delete
  18. "Of course, and your amis péquistes are pure like a shy virgin dressed in white."

    Peut-être mais plus intelligents car ils ne se sont jamais fait prendre...Eux ;-D

    ReplyDelete
  19. For more on "critical mass" and the question of who is the best treated minority, I suggest you refer to chapter 14 of my book (click on my name) or read the following:

    https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1EcEfj5RzB-8Yp9q0IerRjvk5ZXkb2XjtQsZsvsbXca0&pli=1

    ReplyDelete
  20. Again you Sepeis make it sound like there will be a clean break. Boy, are you ever wrong!!

    Canada played Russian roulette enough times already. There’s no way this will happen again, especially with you separatists loading the gun. The Clarity Act is law. Just as you separatist tell us that your unconstitutional Room 101 segregation law can create hatred but must be obeyed, so will the Clarity Act be obeyed. If you don't like it, leave. One thing is certain; you'll never get all the territory. Already there are several regions with movements preparing to officially request becoming integral parts a The New Canadian Province...

    By the way, you are not dealing only with landed immigrants here. You are trying to wipe out one of the founding nations. They may have marginalised themselves in the past by unsuspectingly accepting the nomenclature of “English Community", but that's over too! A Victorious Founding Nation will only be pushed so far!!

    Mon Ami, the time for honoring yourself will soon be at an end!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous: you better hope that the NDP is not the government of the day when Quebec leaves because if they are, Quebec WILL leave with all its territory intact.

      That, my friend, is the irrefutable implictions of the Sherbrooke Accord.

      Delete
  21. Tony, my friend,

    The Sherbrooke Accord is the agreement signed on June 12, 1995. It was signed by three separatists and is unconstitutional!!
    They dared include it in the divisive referendum as though it was an agreement between Ottawa and Quebec City. Disgusting to think there would not have been a civil war over such deception had they stole just a few more votes.

    Remember?
    Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995?

    Well we have a question of our own;

    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?

    And btw, with that opportunistic turncoat Thomas Mulcair at the helm, you can be sure the NDP will b the NDPQ and lose its national status. Even if there are flakes in that party, there are enough people who would see through UncleTom’s trickery and would stop him.

    You may think that your book has convinced us to give up, but you miscalculate what Country means!! What makes you think that will not have already created LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What makes you think that we will not have already created LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL?

      Delete
    2. Anion 10:02PM: "The Sherbrooke Accord is the agreement signed on June 12, 1995. It was signed by three separatists and is unconstitutional!! "

      Signed by three separatists. Interesting to know. I think I still remember the scene. Bouchard, Parizeau, Dumont all sitting down, with the ass-kissing brownnoser JF Lisee passing the document around for each one of them to sign.

      I always wondered what this "agreement signed on June 12, 1995" was. Now knowing this, I can't believe that these dweebs put it in the referendum question and phrased it so as to imply that this June 12 "agreement" was within a scope of "a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership". Talk about a blatant attempt to confuse people into thinking that this "agreement" was somehow struck with Canada. Of course the apologists for the question will say that all the details were in the "booklet" sent to everyone residing in Quebec, but why couldn't there have been a clear question plus the booklet? Why a convoluted question plus the booklet? The booklet, may I add, that the govt correctly gambled that the ignorant population, which doesn't read anything, wouldn't read.

      I can't believe the feds didn't get involved to dispel this manipulation. But maybe they couldn't. If my memory serves me right, the govt of Quebec framed the referendum law so as to prevent the feds from getting involved in any way.

      Well, as I said before, I'm not so much opposed to Quebec "leaving" the rest of the country (leaving it alone that is, and ideally leaving in a cut up condition), but thank god for the Clarity Act anyways. Last thing I'd want is for these manipulative schmucks to get away with proverbial murder, like they could have back in 1995.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous writes:

      "The Sherbrooke Accord is the agreement signed on June 12, 1995. It was signed by three separatists and is unconstitutional!!"

      Just for clarity's sake, I don't think Anonymous is claiming that the actual Sherbrooke Accord was created in 1995 but that a Quebec bill was passed on that date that the Sherbrooke Accord drew its inspiration from. I say that because the Sherbrooke Accord -- an NDP official policy paper -- was officially created on May 7, 2005. See:

      http://www.pierreducasse.ca/IMG/pdf/Declaration_Sherbrooke_ENG_V2.pdf

      In another post when I brought up the Sherbrooke Accord and wrote that we better hope the NDP will not be the government of the day when Quebec attempts to separate because, I said, yes, Quebec WILL separate intact, a poster replied that, no, that won't be the case because Canada has the Clarity Act which will make that impossible.

      I disagree...and the reason I wrote what I wrote is that unless one actually READS the Sherbrooke Declaration, you won't get to see the one paragraph that the media seems to always conveniently leave out when the Accord is discussed. It is the following paragraph from page 8:

      "According to its values, the NDP rejects also any use of -- or threat of -- force against Quebec at any stage. Our vision is one of trust toward democracy, good faith and values of peace."

      Without any challenging authority (ie, the military) to back up the rule of law, Quebec gets to do what it wants vis a vis territory and there won't be anything you or I can do about it.

      So for those of you that voted for Tommie (Mulcair, not Douglas) and his gang back in April, go look in the mirror on the day Quebec becomes independent if you're looking for who to blame for the fiasco you find yourselves in.

      Delete
    4. What you fail to mention is that the turncoat NDP was not the government of canada and that canada did NOT signe or agree to the Sherbrooke Accord..

      Delete
    5. Adski,

      A few weeks ago, I believe you asked what was the agreement signed on June 12, 1995 and I meant to answer you. Sorry that I didn't, but your asking again, does demonstrate how our politicians played Russian roulette with our lives. When I say that it’s disgusting to think there would not have been a civil war over such deception had they stole just a few more votes, I think you can see how that could have happened. After the vote, the separatist leaning Marketing company Leger and Leger carefully framed a survey question to yes voters and still discovered that of those who voted yes, 32+% of them believed that there would not have been a separation if the yes won.

      Can you imagine what French Canadians would have done if they found out how we were wronged? It’s no wonder the office of Lucien Bouchard sent personalized letters to soldiers of French descent to defect from Canada and join the new Quebec “army”.

      Despite the many terrible insults shared by all of us on this site, I believe few of us on either side could accept, “winning” in such a deceptive way.

      You may wonder why some people on this site seam more wooded by the separatist’s racism than others. Well it is because we understand the damage of that racism more. We are not bothered by the competition of two languages in a bilingual country or by immigrants coming here to find a better life and to help make our lives better. BUT, to be trumped by our leaders who played a game where a peaceful society would end up in such a disgusting way? And to add to it that it was the ethnic vote and even repeat it by singling out The Greeks The Italians and The Jews?
      What kind of violence inciting leaders are these?

      Quebec separation must never happen because the basis for the movement still remains jealousy, racism and revenge! It is for this reason that our group, and other fast growing groups are poised to ask for the affimation of the new PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL. We shall demonstrate how arguments used by the separatist AGAINST Canada, can also be used by us FOR Canada. The difference is that we wouldn’t need trickery for it. We’ll get a CLEAR Majority asking a simple question.

      The beauty of LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL Movement is that it is not and act of treason to ask for an affirmation of jurisdictional citizenship from The Governor General and from our country Canada. This is why its doable and why even if it never happens, the separatists, at the least, may feel some empathy.
      We hope we’ll never need to do it, but in order to resist that hateful cult that has crippled our country and shamed French Canadians for much too long, we will!

      You asked if the agreement of July 1, 1996 was a document that you could inspect which was more than the unsuspecting French Canadians who were almost ripped from their country did. Well I can tell you that the two questions below are a demonstration of how people can be fooled.

      I think you can see by my zeal, that I have never been more disgusted, offended. Or disheartened over anything as I have been over this crime. The rest of this part of the story, I’ll be glad to tell you in further posts.

      Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995?




      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?




      PS Tony thx for clearing that Sherbrooke Accord thing, but the truth is that there never was an Ottawa/Quebec City agreement.

      VIVE LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL!!

      Delete
    6. Anonymous writes:

      The beauty of LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL Movement is that it is not and act of treason to ask for an affirmation of jurisdictional citizenship from The Governor General and from our country Canada. This is why its doable and why even if it never happens, the separatists, at the least, may feel some empathy.

      It is not doable if you are counting on the alleged goodwill of Canada to do it for you.

      They won't.

      The only thing the non-francophones of Quebec have to negotiate with is their 20% "no" block vote in separation referendums. This is your bargaining chip and it is the only thing that will get you your rights back.

      The courts haven't worked for you and won't get your rights and freedoms back for you.

      The so-called Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms doesn't work and won't get your rights and freedoms back for you.

      The Government of Canada won't either.

      But you can use the 20% "no" block vote to tell Canada that you will trade it in exchange for your own province in an independent Quebec in which you will have all your rights.

      Do you all know that in both the 1980 and 1995 referendums that the 20% "no" vote by non-francophones decided the "no" victory? Quebec's anglos and allos on both occasions saved Canada.

      And what did you get for your loyalty?

      Successive Canadian governments have continued to shit upon you...and take you for the patsies that you are.

      Wake up and smell the coffee; you are expendable. You have been and always will be...and the only way you can get the 11th province you want is to tell Canada that enough is enough and that you hold the key to break up the country...and if they won't give you what you want, you'll sell your vote to the highest bidder.

      The 20% "no" block vote is a valuable commodity; don't give it away so easily as you did in 1980 and 1995. We must seriously consider approaching the PQ and demonstrating to them that it is in their interest to neutralize this 20% if they want to have any chance of getting 50% plus one and getting their dream of an independent Quebec.

      Let's exchange the 20% for our own province. It will only be once this becomes a possibility that Canada will, hat in hand, come calling to the Quebec anglos with some real proposals a la "la province canadienne de Montreal". Until then, you are simply a bunch of silly non-entities that will be taken advantage of because it will be determined -- correctly -- that you have no other option but to vote "no".

      The only way to save Canada is to be ready to sacrifice Canada.

      Delete
    7. Tony,

      You are not the only one who has strategies. LA PROVINCE CANADIENNE DE MONTREAL Movement is not about only English people. We are about Canada and Canada means Welcome! You seam to be basking in the cold info that you wrote in your destroy Canada book.

      The when and how we’ll have The 11th Province is our concern because it is base on Love Of Country, not what can I get for free out of this place.

      The time will come and it will from places you’ve not considered because in your mind CanadaMustEnd.
      Are there separatists on all sides?

      Delete
  22. Tony..

    While you bask in the sun in Arizona, the NDP are in self destruct mode as a national party.

    The recent reward in Quebec is in fact their undoing. Where was the NDP born? You really think the founders are particularily enthralled with the interim lead at this time or the thought of good old Tommy Mc.. Give your head a shake.

    They are done like dirt.

    ABP

    ReplyDelete
  23. "I believe anglophones, who are priviledged in how the whole world accomodates their language, are much less likely to see the advantages of a second, third or fourth language than regular people."

    Well, as you stated, there really is no advantage for the people in the ROC to learn French. As a matter of fact, most are irritated by the French language recordings on commercial airlines which they view as a waste of time and/or effort. They would happily forgoe the announcements for a 1% decrease in airfare. Reality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would it kill you to reply in the threaded comment so that I don't have to hunt these all over the page?

      Delete
    2. Sorry, my mistake which I noticed after it was posted.

      Delete
    3. @ Anon. at 12:22 AM,

      It would be easier to follow your debate with the other "Anonymous" if you started posting as "Calgary Anonymous" again.

      Delete
    4. Yes, I'd love to see ALL anonymi choose an adjective that can preceed "Anonymous" in their monikers. That way it will be easier for all of us to keep track of which one we are responding to.

      Even better, consider using your real name. Not that I am condemning you for NOT using your real name; if you feel more comfortable using an alias to post here, by all means go ahead and do it.

      But "Calgary Anonymous" or "Scooby-Do Anonymous" or "Geshtalt Anonymous" or whatever is much preferred to so many using the same "Anonymous".

      Delete
  24. Nice post. I learn something totally new and challenging on sites I stumbleupon everyday.

    It's always helpful to read through articles from other authors and
    use a little something from their web sites.

    my blogthere yahoo hack download

    ReplyDelete