Thursday, June 21, 2012

OQLF Rolls the Dice

I have to apologize to readers for a serious error in analysis in not putting two and two together, when I failed to make the connection between several big retailers seeking legal opinions (which I told you about) in regard to French descriptors and the likely scenario whereby they received a demand letter from the OQLF.

Companies don't usually seek legal advice over hypothicals, especially in this case where the OQLF did nothing for thirty-five years.

At any rate the OQLF has ripped a page out of the Camille Laurin playbook, in pursuing a legal position that is not defensible in the belief that whether their legal position is right or wrong,  losing is as good as winning.

Either way they will be seen as the ultimate defender of the French language and if and when the agency suffers the inevitable court defeat, they will throw up their hands as a the ultimate victim and declare that it's not their fault.

The big retailers that received letters threatening that their Francisation certificate will be withdrawn if they don't knuckle over, ARE NOT rolling over, and intend on fighting for their good name in court, something the OQLF had hoped would not happen, but accepted that could. They are used to small merchants buckling over and have perhaps met their match with the big boys.

One of the companies involved leaked a story to Le Devoir indicating that the powerhouse law firm of Norton-Rose, has given a written opinion to its client that the OQLF is misinterpreting the law.
The Le Devoir story goes on to say that the OQLF can expect a powerful legal counter-attack by one of the most capable law firms in Canada.
This isn't going to be a David and Goliath fight, the OQLF will be facing millions of dollars in legal bills as the fight will be protracted.

Ultimately, whichever side loses, will appeal and it's likely the Supreme Court will be asked to rule on the matter in about five long years.

What's important is the interim, where if the OQLF strips the companies of their French certificate unilaterally, we can expect those companies affected to seek injunctive relief, that is to say,  a judicial stay until the case is ultimately resolved.

The companies will have ample grounds to win an injunction, since stripping a company of a French certificate based on the same law under which the 'OQLF issued it, is problematic, especially since the clauses referred to, haven't changed.
If the companies were 'non-compliant' years ago, why did the OQLF issue the certificate then?
A judge will have to consider the fact that even if the OQLF's position is somehow validated in law, its tolerance of the breach for so many years affords the companies an acquired right.

At any rate, there is ample grounds to allow an injunction barring any unilateral action by the OQLF.

If the court does grant such an injunction, it will be a devastating setback to the OQLF, a situation where they  lose the first critical round.

The Le Devoir article, based on deliberately leaked information spells out the companies' position rather succinctly, they'll go down fighting with the support of the Retail Council  of Canada, which is backing the companies to the hilt and devoting their considerable weight to the side opposing the OQLF initiative.

There are some interesting nuggets that I've mined in relation to the case.
It seems that the OQLF initiative may violate the North American Free Trade Agreement(NAFTA)
Article 1708: Trademarks Link
10. No Party may encumber the use of a trademark in commerce by special requirements, such as a use that reduces the trademark's function as an indication of source or a use with another trademark.
Martin Bergeron ,a spokesman for the OQLF sounded somewhat guarded in the defending the OQLF's legal position saying;
"We have our jurists, we have conducted our research, and we're very comfortable with our legal position.
("On a nos juristes, on a fait nos vérifications et on est très à l’aise avec notre position juridique », a assuré Martin Bergeron.")
Not exactly a statement ringing with confidence.
Remember what he said just two months ago.
"We verified our legal interpretation before proceeding. We understand others don't have the same interpretation as us.
("On a vérifié notre interprétation juridique avant d'aller de l'avant. On comprend qu'il y a des gens qui n'ont pas la même interprétation que nous», a-t-il lancé."
Readers should be reminded that a previous Quebec government was already advised that it was on shaky grounds if it tried to force modifiers on the public.

Two final thoughts.
Although, I believe the OQLF will lose this legal battle because of the flawed way they are directly imposing modifiers on trademarks, there is more than one way to skin a cat.
A slightly different approach would have yielded the same result but would have required an amendment to Bill 101.

What is that amendment?........Sorry, I not going to help make their case.

At any rate, I'm not sure if the OQLF will be happier if they win or happier if they lose. After all the image of the downtrodden and abused francophone nation at the hand of the evil overlords in the RoC, is a role they have relished ever since the birth of the quite revolution.

And now, just a clarification;
There seems to be a misunderstanding of the powers of the OQLF which is being circulated in the press.
The OQLF CANNOT fine anybody, the only action they can take  undertake unilaterally is to revoke a French language certificate from a company holding one.

When we are told in the  press that companies can be fined up to $25,000, it isn't the OQLF that can assess the fine, only the court.

The OQLF must refer offending cases for public prosecution and it is the court that will determine the penalty after a guilty verdict. The law provides for a maximum fine of $25,000 which a judge may or may not impose.

No OQLF inspector can walk into an establishment and issue a ticket like a police officer.


I've come out of my vacation to offer a reader platform for this very important issue.

310 comments:

  1. THE OFLQ ARE TRYING TO PUSH THE LITTLE GUY AROUND! DON'T LET IT HAPPEN! EVERYONE HAS TO FIGHT FOR THEIR RIGHTS! Here is my personal experience and how I feel about them:

    The Racist Office de la langue Francais has NO LEGAL AUTHORITY to require french modifiers!! There is NO requirement in the Trademarks Act or BILL 101 that a modifier be used if the tradename is a English! This is BULLSH*T!!! THEY ARE TRYING TO PULL A FAST ONE ON THE ENGLISH ONCE AGAIN. F*CK THEM!

    I tried to register a company in Quebec and to avoid the Language laws you can make up a word under the law (because then they can't come back at you and say you have an english name because it doesn't exist in any language) i.e. Evenco. Surpise Surpise, I get an automatic rejection from the Corporations Quebec saying my name in not in French. No shit! It's not even a word dumbasses! So I automatically lose my 300$ application fee. Good thing I'm a lawyer, so I call them up to complain and then they are like, well you have to get approval by the Racist Office de la langue Francais that it is acceptable. You idiots, pick up a dictionary and look it up! You will not find it in there!!

    SOOOO i have to call up the Racist Office de la langue Francais and they said I had to meet some "Compliance Officer". So I said listen, here is the law (i brought a copy) and this is my name Evenco. It is made up! I had to then justify to her how I made it up. Finally she says ok, I can give you approval BUT you have to use a French modifier like "les ordinateurs Evenco". I said what!! Where does the law says that I have to use a modifier??? She says, its a policy! POLICY DOES NOT EQUAL LAW. THE Racist Office de la langue Francais is gouverned by the LAW AND REGULATIONS AND NOT BY WHAT YOU DECIDE TO MAKE UP. They can make up all the policies they want but until it goes to court, they can basically do what they what. BULL POOO! I knew these arseholes would give me a hard time so I sais oh ya sure! Ill put a modifier. BUT I went back to Corporations Quebec and said it was approved but did not put a modifier! So had to reapply (another 300$) and wait for a refund, which by the way took 3 months to get back, and waste all this time and money to travel to the Racist Office de la langue Francais headquarters.

    Do you see how the Racist Office de la langue Francais is trying to slowly erode anglos rights? So eventually we lose our rights one step at a time. Next step they would do is say, oh look everyone is already using modifiers, lets legislate that. Then after that they say, NO ENGLISH WORDS AT ALL!!!

    They are another reason Quebec SUCKS economically!!! They stiffle ENGLISH ENTREPREUNEURS. If I did not know the law, I would have to spend probably 900 bucks for a lawyer to get my name I have a right to!! In addition to all the other application fees and the name research fees I did before hand.

    Go to h*ll Racist Office de la langue Francais. You are going to make my life and the anglos of montreal lives tough, I'm going to kindly reciprocate!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am with you all the way man. You hit it right on the nail and I'm pulling no punches with these douchebags anymore. The moment they say 'salut' to me we are done on all levels. Their double standard racist little game is over with me. They can say what they want....so can we. FUCK FRENCH PEOPLE.

      Delete
    2. You advocate the negative treatment of everyone who has the misfortune of greeting you in French, and you say "Fuck French People", but it is the French who are racist?

      Delete
    3. Mtl scotsman,

      There is a lawyer, not sure if its brett tyler. I read that he buys business signs and some how makes them immune to bill 101

      Delete
    4. @ MTL_Scotsman
      Thanks for sharing an interesting story.

      For all of those who believe that we should just bend over and take it, this story is an inspiration!.... Thanks

      Delete
    5. The next time those officers drops by to give their filthy ticket fines, we'll make sure they'll get it rammed deep down into their throats so they can pull a lesson! This is unacceptable and when I watched that on TVA, I was literally outraged and infuriated by those stupidities!It made me blow off the steam for a short while and couldn't believe my ears that it had gotten down to a point like this...This is very sad and they're definitely not asking to be liked whatsoever! In actual fact, they're going to draw a huge enemy-base down the line, who will eventually charge them in every way...this has gone way too far and I shake my head in disbelief.



      Vive et laisser vivre....MY ASS!

      Delete
    6. "In actual fact, they're going to draw a huge enemy-base down the line, who will eventually charge them in every way..."

      Enfin,un peu d'action...Réveillez-vous anglos!

      Delete
    7. Don't get me wrong, my beef is with the OLFQ, Bill 101, and the people that support these. I like the French Quebecois people I personally, they are good hearty bunch who are proud to be Canadian and like English, and they have told me themselves they wouldn't let their province get ruined by the separatist ideology. I am also born and raised in Quebec, as my family has been for 4 generations. My dad tells me stories when it used to be the English versus the french throwing stones at each other on Dorchester Street. Now the only difference is the French has started to throw shit at businesses (i.e. that convenience store) and the English have chosen not to rock the boat because of this new ideas of sensitivity. Man up and stand up for yourselfs.

      Delete
    8. To clear up any possible misunderstanding, I was replying to Keyser up there.I personally applaud your action.

      I can understand that a place like Quebec would want to ensure that immigrants learn their language, that ads have the courtesy of also being in the local language and that businesses offer service in French at least.

      When it goes further than that and starts getting into these petty name disputes or which language comes up first on a publication, or what language is spoken first to you, it becomes entirely indefensible. I wish you the best of luck against the OQLF.

      Delete
    9. A LESSON IN LAW AND HOW THE OFLQ IS DOING TO ATTACK ENGLISH NAMES

      Just to clarify what I did to conform with the law.

      First, I registered a FEDERAL COMPANY and not a QUEBEC company so I don't give money to Quebec to use to pay for the OLFQ.

      Second, I CREATED a name just to be absolutely safe as there is an exception to created names under s. 67 of the French Language Act:


      67. Family names, place names, expressions formed by the artificial combination of letters, syllables or figures, and expressions taken from other languages may appear in the names of enterprises to specify them, in accordance with the other Acts and with the regulations of the Government.


      I could have registered a trademark to fall under the exception of the Regulation respecting the language of commerce and business s. 7, 13 and 25 i.e. s. 25 states for signs:


      25. On public signs and posters and in commercial advertising, the following may appear exclusively in a language other than French:

      (1) the firm name of a firm established exclusively outside Québec;

      (2) a name of origin, the denomination of an exotic product or foreign specialty, a heraldic motto or any other non-commercial motto;

      (3) a place name designating a place situated outside Québec or a place name in such other language as officialized by the Commission de toponymie du Québec, a family name, a given name or the name of a personality or character or a distinctive name of a cultural nature; and

      (4) a recognized trade mark within the meaning of the Trade Marks Act (R.S.C. 1985, c. T-13), unless a French version has been registered.

      But I want to benefit from common law protection of a trademark for now. (which apparently the Quebec gouvernment doesn't accord any rights to, probably because of the name "Common Law" which is of British origin.

      So note subsections (1) and (4) of section 25 above.

      Subsection (1) grants and exception for business registered lets say in BC. Take for example STARBUCKS which is registered in BC
      (see the Federal Company registry: https://www.ic.gc.ca/app/scr/cc/CorporationsCanada/fdrlCrpDtls.html?corpId=3973824&V_TOKEN=1340331278380&crpNm=starbucks&crpNmbr=&bsNmbr= )

      Also 25 (4) grants an exception to a Trademark that is in English. i.e. "Starbucks". But note "Starbucks" is also a made up COMBINATION OF LETTERS!!! and would fall under s. 67 above.

      Delete
    10. A LESSON IN LAW AND HOW THE OFLQ IS DOING TO ATTACK ENGLISH NAMES Part 2

      What the OFLQ is trying to do I think is use s. 27 of the French Language Act to cite all these companies for non-compliance. S. 27 states:

      EXPRESSION THAT MAY SPECIFY FIRM NAME

      27. An expression taken from a language other than French may appear in a firm name to specify it provided that the expression is used with a generic term in the French language.

      as the sh*t disturbing Louise Marchand president of the OFLQ puts it: (http://www.respectdelaloi.gouv.qc.ca/citoyens/)

      "Une marque de commerce n’est-elle pas protégée?

      L'exception prévue dans la Charte n'oblige pas une entreprise à traduire une marque de commerce. Toutefois, même si elle est enregistrée, lorsque cette marque de commerce est utilisée comme nom d’entreprise, la Charte de la langue française exige qu’elle soit accompagnée d’un descriptif (générique) en français."

      Note the misinformation: she says when a registered trademark is used as the name of a firm it must have a generic term. BUT s. 27 READS DIFFERENTLY!!!!

      Now note the distinction between "expression" and "firm name". I read s. 27 as saying IF the firm name HAS an expression like "The coffee store STARBUCKS" where the expression is the "coffee store" is the expression and "Starbucks" is the Firm name, i.e. a registered trade mark, THEN you have to add a french expression like "The coffee store STARBUCKS magasin de cafes"

      I SEE NO PLACE IN THE LAWS THAT SAY IF YOU HAVE A REGISTERED TRADEMARK WITHOUT A DESCRIPTIVE EXPRESSION THAT YOU HAVE TO ADD A FRENCH DESCRIPTION. So when Starbucks Coffee (which is the firm name) wants to put Starbucks Coffee (its firm name) on a sign then under s. 27 it would have to include the generic term in french like Café Starbucks Coffee. BUT if you post a trademark i.e. "Starbucks" as registered here:

      http://www.ic.gc.ca/app/opic-cipo/trdmrks/srch/vwTrdmrk.do?lang=eng&status=OK&fileNumber=1181865&extension=0&startingDocumentIndexOnPage=11

      then s. 27 won't apply!!! Louise Marchand is a LIAR AND A FOOL!

      See how the OLFG works??? The government enacts LAWS. The regulations make the law more precise. A government body is appointed by the law/regulation to enforce the laws/regulations by enacting POLICIES. BUT the OFLQ is issuing policies saying it is the law, when in fact is their interpretation for THEIR OWN POLITICAL PURPOSES and is in fact not at all in compliance with the law. Unfortunately, you have to contest these policies in court. The court will tell the administrative body you are full of Sh*T and get it together. But until the courts rule, the administrative body can cause havoc.

      This is what CIPO did for business methods. CIPO grants or rejects patents. Because business methods are hard for them to understand, they made a "POLICY" stating that business methods are not patentable based on their "interpretation" of the laws and regulations when infact their interpretation was wrong. So for years they rejected valid patents based on this policy until it was contested in court. And their wrong interpretation was contested only by a major company, Amazon, which had tons of money and spent years fighting these incorrect Policies.

      The OFLQ are doing the same thing. SO we have to fight this. We should write some letter saying they are full of it and have as many people against their non-democratic ways sent them this letter to have our voices heard.

      I was pissed when I saw that starbucks in the west island comply with a this fake law assertation by the OFLQ by adding "Les cafés Starbucks". Stand up to these bullies Starbucks! There arguments won't last in court and frankly most people in Montreal are English and don't care about this translation garbage!

      Delete
    11. But I want to benefit from common law protection of a trademark for now. (which apparently the Quebec gouvernment doesn't accord any rights to, probably because of the name "Common Law" which is of British origin.

      You're a lawyer living in Montreal and you don't know that Quebec uses the Code Civil, not Common Law?

      Delete
    12. Yes, I do. But as with Law and the OFLQ there is always a fine line.

      This is what they teach at 1st year McGill Law: When the English first crushed the French rebels they imposed common law to rule them. Then the French complained and the English felt bad so they gave the french use of their civil code for some "civil" regular day to day questions like wills, contracts, patrimoine.

      But, not all the aspects of law were accorded under civil law, and some common laws where applied over Quebec jurisdiction. These laws are known as federal laws, which apply equally over all of Canada. In fact, the constitution enumerates the areas of jurisdiction divided between the provinces and the federal levels.

      Since Quebec is part of Canada and is subject to federal laws of federal jurisdiction, in our particular case, Trademarks and Commerce. In particular, the Trademarks Act is of Federal jurisdiction which is based largely on common law assimilated from Britain. This also include principles of common law, such as a common law trademark which refers to the use of a non-registered trademark.

      Another famous common law that is applied in Quebec is the Criminal Code which should be used against the OFLQ.

      Delete
    13. Editor....Norton has just advised me that phishing has contaminated this site...can you see if this is true...I returned here a half hour later and no warning this time

      Delete
  2. It's about friggin time companies (especially the big boys) stood up for their rights. Unlike the average small business owner who can't afford to defend their rights, big suppliers can. There should be some sort of Federal agency (available for minority rights) here in Quebec to defend and protect anglo rights. No one can afford to battle the gov't in court. Although it's nice to say that in a democratic society, we have laws in place and a judicial system available to protect, defend and ensure our rights. Problem is no one can afford it and therefore we end up losing anyway.
    There should be a sanction against the Quebec Gov't for any violation of rights and or a financial penalty for every time they attack minorities or companies and have the monetary compensation split between the plaintiff and the balance into a minority right's fund to be used to take the Quebec Gov't to court. It should be free to take the Quebec Gov't to court. They are using our money to pay for the lawyers they will use to fight us, why shouldn't we be allowed to use this same money to defend ourselves?

    It's about time the big guys stand up for their rights !!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Every four or five months xenophobia french people sit around and try to figure out publicity stunts to fan the flames of english hatred. And you know what? I AM FUCKIN DONE. It's so obvious and transparent and they go into full mode just before any election to make us the bad guys for some sort of counter attack. So here's what you want....

    IT IS OVER AND IT IS ON!! If they wanna be underhanded and sneaky and keep pulling little cheap stunts. I'm going to pull my punches too and go right around them. Us anglos have our wills and we have our ways as well. Buy American and sell American is all I'm saying in that category.

    As well, I will never hire another french person AGAIN in my company. The moment I see a french last name I'm throwing the resume straight into the trash. I'm going to live here cheaply and not spend a loonie on them. They are horrible employees anyways. They are passive agressive in every form and try to underhandedly threaten yo with Normes du Travail talk every chance they get.
    French companies suck in business anyway as well no french company lasts here because they only market towards 10% of the world and stomp around and bully each other till their companies implode on themselves. They are just dumb and the moral of the story with french and business is if you hang out with the trash your gonna get treated like it.

    The real sad truth is this has nothing to do with being french and being english. They are simply fuckin little assholes hiding behind the french who suffer from acute severe xenophobia. Its been perpetuated for years from asshole politicians acting like martyrs to keep their jobs. Its just a giant self made hate machine. Its a complete sickness and a perpetual rant of negativity. I'm simply here to build up my net and move on to where the money is.

    I'd be happy to seperate with these losers in life. I will work for free to line these douchebags up and rip up their passports. I really hope they keep up the hate and racism because they won't have to whine about seperating anymore. We'll be asking them to leave sooner or later.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Editor, is this racist, insulting diatribe really allowed here?

      Delete
    2. I decided to let it through.

      There is a rage building that needs a legitimate outlet.
      What I read above is frustration.
      I loosened the rules on both sides for this one post because it is such an emotional issue.

      Delete
    3. @ Anon. at 3:27 PM,

      You can't deal with the truth can you? Why don't you complain about the racist, intolerant diatribes that are constantly appearing all over the French media in Quebec?

      Delete
    4. Right on man.

      They dish it out every chance they get and once more they scream racism when someone does it back. Proves my first point all over again.

      If they had a logical arguement we would listen. But noooo they wanna seperate but piggyback off the federal nickel too. They can't see past their nose so I'm not even looking them in the eye anymore. Garbage.

      Then after they mock us they try to sit around and figure out every possible venue to shut us up. Remember the last stunt on magazines how we as anglos didn't appreicate their culture? They spit on us and then get mad that were supposed to like it too. Even now they wanna muzzle my post on what they started up AGAIN.

      When french people sit around and bitch about the anglos and why we don't respect their ways. Please try for once to get it in your narrow mind.

      YOU GUYS SET IT UP THIS WAY.

      Delete
    5. Racism as an answer to racism is a spectacularly unconvincing argument.

      Delete
    6. Maybe if those fucktards of seppies hadn't started perpetrating madness 40 years ago, this man above wouldn't be spewing hatred on francophone...

      Delete
    7. "As well, I will never hire another french person AGAIN in my company"

      I love you, AnonymousThursday, June 21, 2012 11:26:00 AM EDT. That's we all do in our office: it's a sort of silent policy, which applies to les québécois only. Thay do the same with us, anyway. So, quod dei deo, quod Caesaris Caesari.

      WA

      Delete
    8. I suppose it all boils down to whether you fight fire with fire or with water.

      Delete
    9. Someone willing to use fire to fight fire is in a very bad position to lecture about the evils of fire.

      Did Martin Luther King explain to his followers that the best way to achieve equity with White Americans was to refuse to employ them or give them service in one's store?

      Delete
    10. No, much simpler than that: you can choose to put up with crap from quebecois as much as you wish and as long as you wish. I have chosen NOT to put up with that.

      WA

      Delete
  4. "I'm simply here to build up my net and move on to where the money is."

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think the OQLF needs to step it up, I'm sure "real Québécois" will all agree that they've been way too soft in the past few years.

    First of all, let's get rid of ALL english media in the province. Why do we need english tv stations and radio stations? On est au Québéc icitte tabarnak, pi ça s'passe en français!
    And since a good percentage of french-only artists are funded by our tax dollars, we'd be getting more for our money. Loft Story, Star Académie and La Petite Poule aux Oeufs d'Or are thousands of times better than any english crap.
    Cinemas outside Montreal have started playing english movies one day per week, so that people can see the movies "as they were originally made". This is unacceptable, and will lead to definite assimilation (if it hasn't already started)! We shouldn't even allow movies from outside the province to be broadcast in theaters, we have so much fine talent here! (I hope one of you has filed an official complaint with the OQLF regarding this issue)

    Secondly, why are we allowed to access english content on the internet? Websites / services should be forced to have a "Français" section, and then they should apply for a "French Web service" certificate, given out by the OQLF. Everything else should be firewalled by the different ISPs. China already uses this kind of technology, why can't we?
    It would also show that we are a technologically advanced distinct society. It would also prevent les Québécois from being brainwashed by all the anglo propaganda, this site being a perfect example. We thought that laws dictating which languages you can or can't learn would be sufficient, but times have changed, we need to adapt!

    Come on OQLF, stop being lazy and weak!
    I'm sick of seeing the name "Canadian Tire", it should definitely be changed to "Canadienne Tailleur", which would be much more representative of our official language.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, build a huge wall to protect Quebec so that no one can come in or leave. Isolate Quebec from the entire world, have concentration camps for all of us who don't have French as our mother tongue so that we can be brain washed until we can only speak one language. Dude, are you for real???!!!

      Delete
    2. Quebecker of a Tree Stump is using Sarcasm/Satire, anon. He has made his real feelings known on the forum multiple times before, and they are the exact opposite.

      Delete
    3. Anon: I think your sarcasm detector is badly defective...

      Delete
  6. Au risque de me répéter : Moyen colon mon Quebecker

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Nouvelle offensive pour le français chez les détaillants"

    "...des amendes pouvant atteindre 20 000 $."

    Cashhliiiinnnnggg! Héhé!

    http://argent.canoe.ca/lca/affaires/quebec/archives/2012/06/nouvelle-offensive-pour-francais-chez-les-detaillants.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. Cheer up, everybody. Watch this vid to the end - guaranteed to put a smile on your face. Or a look of disgust. Either way, check in out and, no, I am not spamming:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HmlBLHfJrc&list=UUBU8aouKGKC7Wwj39U1rJow&index=1&feature=plcp

    ReplyDelete
  9. I hope the court rules against them and let the big boys to crush those savage worms like nothing... ENOUGH IS ENOUGH and down with the oqlf!!!This xenophobia has been rampant for years and it seriously needs to hit a wall so it can stop!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Replies
    1. if you haven't been able to do it in the past, then I don't see why you should be able in the near or far future...

      Delete
    2. À grands coups de 20 000$ on devrait y arriver.

      Delete
    3. not if it costs you a leg or an arm!

      Delete
    4. Luka Rocco Magnotta...Is it you????

      Delete
    5. Et avec la loi 78 nous allons VOUS anéantir ;-)

      Ah quel bel équilibre. Vous serez écrasés.

      Delete
  11. This whole new interpretation of bill 101 is fascinating. Below are few example of fictitious company names to show you the hypocrisy:

    MTL 514 inc No problem here
    MTL cinq-un-quatre inc. No problem here
    MTL Five-one-four inc. Non-compliant and subject to fine
    Les commerces MTL Five-one-four inc. No problem here
    Jean-Paul inc. Compliant
    John-Paul inc. Not sure if this is legal
    2012-2012 London inc. Not sure if this is legal
    1234-5478 Quebec inc. Totally legal numbered company

    The problem with interpreting this law in a whole new fashion is that it allows for the making up of rules as we play. I don't understand how a law that was put into effect in 1977 suddenly has new meaning. Canadian Tire has been here well before that and this is the first time this has really come up. What surprises me the most is that this new "attack" on companies is coming under the supervision of a Liberal government headed by, as far as I am concerned, an Anglophone leader. I am not sure our premier is totally on board and is probably sick of this himself but he has to tow the line and make it look like he is "deeply concerned" about the situation.

    I have always said to everyone that this whole ridiculous situation we live in Quebec is artificial because fundamentally, the vast majority of Francophones in Quebec are wonderful people and mean no harm. It is groups like MMF and SSJB that fan the flames and get the media involved to publicize "the inevitable decline of French in Montreal" and get everyone worked up. If the French language were in such danger, why is it still spoken over 250 years after the French left la Nouvelle France?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MMF *is* the SSJB. As is any "Mouvement Français".

      One xenophobic militant group granted undue importance by our francophone media (which is no more or less bought and paid for than the anglophone media its extremists often denounce) and working under cover of its venerable title as a "civic organization" doing the bidding of extreme right-wing French-Canadian political nationalism.

      Of course, additional fringe groups - some of them embracing violent means to achieve their ends - also exist.

      Delete
    2. So, basically, if a company has to change its original english commercial name to a french one, it means that London life, for instance, will be forced to calling itself "la vie Londre" if the OQLF wins its case...Boy, oh boy, it's awful to think that things can really escalate to such stupidities

      Delete
    3. La vie Londonienne...J'aime ça!

      Delete
  12. "why is it still spoken over 250 years after the French left la Nouvelle France?"

    Loi 101

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A language that is propped up by force is doomed.

      Delete
    2. S.R.,

      You fool, French language was well spoken and Montreal was the most important city in Canada before Bill 101.

      Delete
  13. "There arguments won't last in court and frankly most people in Montreal are English and don't care about this translation garbage!"

    I believe that is the whole reason behind Bill 101. Force people to care who might otherwise affect Rhodesian attitudes towards the locals.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And Yanni has summed up the entire crux of the reason Bill 101 is impotent.

      You can't "force" people to care. You can't reduce the rights of one group in favour of the rights of another because one group doesn't want to be bothered to preserve their own culture by themselves.

      Bill 101 represents another socialist policy of Quebec culture: let the government take care of us. Well, apparently socialism hasn't worked economically for Quebec, and neither to preserve any language.

      I truly believe it is up to the individual to protect their culture. And the individuals in Montreal don't want to have french forced down their throats.

      I would LOVE to have someone (Many Yannick) explain to me the logic behind how diminishing English preserves the French Culture?

      How about those businesses who want to preserve French can put up french signs and those people who want to send their kids to French schools send them to French schools and those people that want to speak french at home speak french at home. And those that don't, just don't.

      Why as an Allophone, do we have any obligation to preserve a culture that has as a raison d'etre to annihilate yours? hehe. It's this political correctness that has swept this question under the rug because oh "you don't want to offend anyone" or antagonize people to start planting bombs like the FLQ used to do.

      THE ULTIMATE HYPOCRISY! :)

      Delete
    2. "Force people to care who might otherwise affect Rhodesian attitudes towards the locals."

      Who are the Rhodesians in this case? Hard to say. Maybe the people with white pasty skin speaking a Latin-based European language called French?

      Those who pass laws just to have themselves noticed, ironically, have monopoly on state power. Are you suggesting that those locals with that state power are actually victims? And what are they the victims of? Victims of difference perpetrated against them?

      Is that a sufficient reason to rig up an apparatus, in many ways coercive and unethical, just to combat such relative triviality as indifference?

      Delete
    3. What francophones of Quebec fear is of becoming strangers in their own home. That demographic and globalization change Montreal enough that they will need to carry out their daily business in a second language rather than the one who has been spoken in their land for four hundred years.

      Who are the Rhodesians in this case? I would say it is those who want to move within a French province and carry on life as if the locals didn't exist. By so doing, English is imposed on the locals, since the onus is on them learning English rather than the newcommers learning French. The perception is that bill 101, petty names aside, is designed to turn this around.

      If you want to compromise, you have to understand how they think and not rely on easy outs like "they are racist". If you don't want to compromise, you will be unable to effect changes in the legislation, because non-francophones represent only 20% of the population of Quebec.

      Delete
    4. Fair enough Yannick, but a reality check is in order.

      The French language has been spoken here for 400 years not just because of the heartiness of yours and my French Canadian ancestors, but also because of the comparative indifference of the new Anglo/British administration which took a comparatively light-handed approach to their assimilation, leaving it up to time and influence to do the work that in other scenarios might have been achieved through genocide and White acculturation schools.

      The Rhodesians are equal and opposite forces here. I agree on the one hand it is those who come to Quebec and pretend French doesn't exist. But I can't subscribe to this view alone because it's only half the argument. The other half is the stubborn Quebec francophone who refuses to accept the reality that English is a necessary, important, valuable, and legitimate part of our reality. The Quiet Revolution erred royally when it sought to stroke our collective French Canadian-turned-"Québécois" manhood by eradicating as much "Englishness" as possible, and I believe we are doomed until we finally accept a bilingual nature which to me is so painfully obvious. I've said it once and I'll say it again; protectionist cultural legislation is useless and does the targeted "minority" a great disservice. Our strength comes from our institutions, not the way we "assert" ourselves by denying others' rights.

      What this province and country need are a huge and somewhat humbling wake up call; neither can continue to exist without acknowledging and encouraging the life-long work of bilingualism. Hiding behind one's relative majority/minority demographics to justify ignorance and anti-RoCism/anti-Quebecism is childish and gets us no further ahead.

      Delete
    5. Apparatchik, you've brought me out of my usual comment haunting for the first time ever to shout loudly (although without caps): "Right on!" Contrast the worthiness of the goals you're talking about here with the dispiriting current state of affairs, as incarnated in the ways we celebrate the upcoming national holidays. La Fête Nationale will (at least in Quebec, certainly not in francophone communities in ROC) boost "Québécois" manhood, which decidedly doesn't include "Englishness" amongst its virtues. Not even Leonard Cohen would be allowed to perform at the Fête Nationale concert in Montréal, even as the warm-up act. On the other hand, across the land, Canada Day consists mostly of new immigrants wondering where all the 'white people' are at the Canada Day parade/barbecue. In my experience, only the 11:00 fireworks bring out Canadians 'of longer standing' on Canada Day. (Not all of whom, I hasten to add, are white). As a celebration of the best of this country, neither holiday inspires me as much as 'the life-long work of bilingualism', as you so elegantly put it. To read Michel Tremblay with the same ease as Mordecai Richler, and everything that might stand for, is a goal worth working for.

      Delete
    6. Part of me thinks that time will be the best solution and its best not to fight these racist laws like bill 101 for the moment, but just stop any more advancement of these laws.

      The reality is the separatists are dying, Quebec economy is struggling, immigrants, other than those from the francopholy of course, are preferring English. This is pushing the language issue to the backburner. Then in 10 years when the next generation says, wait, all these oppressive french laws are hurting my future, they will legislate to abolish it.

      Remember, Bill 101 is only a law, and it can be abolished just as easy as it was enacted.

      Delete
    7. Apparatchik, I'm in 100% approval.

      I do not discount the, as you call it, other side of the equation. I just don't go out of my way to stress it out when confronted with "None of us care about French and that's ok, even if we live in Montreal." I then focus on my own side of the equation.

      I've argued your side as well, mostly to the OQLF-type extremists who post here.

      Delete
    8. MGuy is spot on in saying that you can't force people to care. As is Tony Kondacks who once wrote that you can't legislate respect.

      By choosing any kind of attention over indifference (anything but indifference), Quebeckers forget that indifference is still better that negative type of attention, and negative type of attention does not always lead to neutral or positive attention. And there is a big difference between an entrepreneur putting up French signage because he wants to, and because he doesn't want to get a ticket. Yes, the visible part is achieved as the signage goes up no matter what, but the invisible aspect - the motivation for putting it up - lingers heavy in the background.

      I disagree with Yannick when he says that this is all about combating the feeling of being a "stranger in your own home". It appears more to be the case of combating a feeling of no longer being a "maitre" in this so-called "home". And there is a big difference between these. Also, does everything that goes on in Quebec the "own home" of the Quebecois people? Should they own everything, and be entitled to everything, in the political jurisdiction called QC?

      I also disagree with the suggestion that if we were to "compromise" maybe there would be a chance at amending or loosening of 101. This is a ploy to get people into a constant state of concessions and compromise, all the while nothing changes at all, and if it does it changes in the direction of more repression. The truth is that even if we all started crawling on our knees in front of Quebeckers, they would still find a reason to uphold their laws. After all, the demography of North America is there to serve as an excuse, as well as host of other things.

      Delete
    9. Like Calgarian, I was really inspired by Apparatchik's post above.
      I'm nowhere nearly as bilingual as I wish; I improve monthly and yearly and it was really exciting and comforting to read of a life-long process to achieve.
      Communicating as well in French as I do in English is a worthy (if often frustrating) goal for me, and I share the sentiment of doom if people don't wake up to the joy and awesomeness of bilingualism. My life is much better and I am much happier since I became "fluent enough" to share a long weekend or an afternoon in (stumbling) French, or to read Dumas or LeDevoir.

      As well, I certainly know many, many, many anglophones (outside of QC) who very much wish they could speak French.

      Delete
    10. Adski you don't understand my position at all. The idea is not to grovel on your knees. The idea is to demand ammendments that francophones can live with. Anything else is doomed to failure unless you increase your demographic weight.

      I'd also add that the francophones at vigile.net would argue the same kind of slippery-slope as you except in the negative direction - start compromising with bill 101 (the staunchest of them arguing that a huge amount of compromises have already been made) and you will gradually erode bill 101 and by that leg the "French Fact" in Canada.

      Surely there's a third way between the two lunacies?

      Delete
    11. Frankly, it's heartwarming to read JBG and Calgarian's interest and openness regarding French, and I think it'd be great if millions more so-called English-Canadians followed suit. Keep pushing yourselves and never be satisfied with how far you've come. Like thousands of Montrealers, I had the luck of a bicultural/bilingual+immigrant upbringing and although I can read La Presse as effortlessly as the Globe and Mail (I consume Le Devoir and NatPo more out of habit than pleasure, kinda like my jujube fixation) and write to their columnists with similar ease, I don't encourage myself or anyone else to sit on their laurels because incremental improvement is possible in every context. Hopeless ideologues they both might have been, but I still think Trudeau's dream of spreading bilingualism beats out Laurin's dream of eradicating it.

      With regard to how wrong I think it is to legislatively stroke egos, I stand by my point. Yannick and adski, I think respect is earned, not demanded. And yes, I think there's a huge difference between putting a unilingual face on something because I'm told to versus because I want to. Bilingualism, even "forced", has the advantage of giving fair representation and accessibility to everyone. Over the course of a lifetime, it also has the effect of constantly and visually reinforcing vocabulary that helps both language groups attain bilingual fluency. For that reason alone, I believe everyone should advocate at least in terms of signage.

      I appreciate your intellectual wrestling with this both here and with the Vigile-type fundamentalists, but the third way between lunacies resides in a multi-generational project to attain genuine functional bilingualism.

      The French fact has arguably been a critical component in defining "Canada" from the time of the settlers to the present day. While I think language is an important part of who we are (as French-Canadians and now more broadly as French-speaking Canadians), I think it is French Canadian nationalism, with significant English Canadian support which is often begrudging and late in coming, that throughout history has contributed to making Canada a subtly distinct entity from our neighbor. From peacekeeping to official bilingualism to re-assessing our status and relationship vis-à-vis Britain, I don't think it's a stretch to say that the internal and often visceral quarrels that have pitted French and English Canadians against each other haven't forged Canada's national character in a significant way.

      At the risk of repeating myself Yannick, the "third way" you're looking for rests on the mutual acknowledgment of both groups' concerns by the opposite group and to stop looking for petty ways to stroke egos. The "Frenchies" need a good collective life-altering smack upside the head to wake them out of the collective delusion that excluding and vilifying English is the way to thrive, while the "têtes carrées" need to be knocked off their high horses of WASPy disinterest and accept that their sometimes hot-headed half-siblings across the Ottawa River, although numerically small, can provide a helpful and refreshing perspective on where this country is coming from and where it ought to go.

      That third way isn't going to happen if we don't genuinely take interest in and nurture each others' similarities and differences and allow for collaborative evolution on that basis. It has little to do with legitimating the notion that I should devoutly wish that my great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchildren will speak French. There is (and ought to be) scant little guaranteeing that my great-great-grandchildren will even speak English. For now, at least, I think cranking out bilingual children is the best start nationwide, not unilingual ones that can be easily brainwashed by haters and never know the "other".

      Delete
    12. Define these "ammendments that francophones can live with". Be specific (no ambiguity) and list all the conditions that would effectively close the case, i.e. after this this and that, francophones are happy, no more demands. Note that things like "respect for our language" is an ambiguous demand, and like every undefinable demand is open to wide interpretation. A concrete demand would be: increase transfer payments to this amount. Give us this many MPs in Ottawa. Ensure that in exactly 5 years everyone in the RoC speaks French at a conversational level and is subject to testing by Quebec FSL teachers parachuted onto the RoC. Make any criticism of bill 101 a misdemeanor, something like Holocaust Denial is some countries. Make bill 101 applicable throughout the RoC.
      Strip M.Richler of his Canadian citizenship posthumously. Open 70% of your dairy market to QC products.

      These are all examples of clear concrete demands.

      If you can't provide a list of demands, then your plea for meeting demands is absurd. It's like me asking you to give me something or else I'll be mad, and then refusing to tell you what that something is.

      Delete
    13. Adski wrote just what I was thinking. There ARE no amendments that francophones can live with (“ne touchez pas à une virgule”)… other than those that even more draconian and coercive, of course, and trample further on the freedom of expression of anyone else but them. Just look at all the separatist pot-bangers howling about freedom of expression with Bill 78. You know what? Freedom of expression includes the right not to express oneself in a particular language.

      PS: I think Apparatchik deserves some sort of award for providing the most lucid commentary on this blog (besides the Editor, of course).

      Delete
    14. Adski, I'm not going to speak for all Quebec francophones, nor even some of them. As always, there will always be some for which nothing will ever be enough, and everyone else will have opinions that fall all over a large spectrum. I've no doubt that some minority of Francophones are in complete agreement with you while others want nothing less than the last anglophone gone on the 401.

      But if you want an example of what I think would be achieveable, I believe that most francophones, just like most anglophones, are unaware of the finer points of subsection 23 of the bill of rights that governs education rights. All it would take to make education rights in Quebec the same as education rights in the rest of Canada would be to allow everyone with English as their mother toungue to attend the English school system.

      This is a simple change that would open Quebec up to immigration from America (not enough on its own, sadly), would perhaps bolster the falling enrolling rates in the English school system, and put Quebec at equality with all the other provinces in Canada.

      I think you could get enough francophones to see the fairness in this suggestion to accept it. What I don't think you'll do, is convince francophones to vote to scrap 101 entirely (though in effect for this one thing it would have the same result), and that is what you seem to be pushing for.

      If you think I'm wrong, what's your plan for making things better in Quebec? The francophones in Quebec have become as emotionally attached with 101 as canadians in the ROC with the healthcare system. Total repeal in either instance is an unatainable goal, in my opinion.

      @The Cat: I'm a bit saddened by your reaction. I had come to expect more of you than hasty generalizations.

      Delete
    15. It’s interesting that you’re not going to speak for all Quebec francophones if you never seemed to have any qualms about speaking for them before.

      You say that nothing will get settled until “amendments that francophones can live with” are put in place. You then admit you can’t articulate these demands because you can’t possibly know what all the francophones are thinking or expecting. In essence you claim the key to the problem is to alleviate some collective discomfort, and then admit that this discomfort is too diffuse to be pinned down precisely. This is utter absurdity. It’s like saying something has to be done about this, then failing to define what “this” is, because “this” is different for everyone. Really silly stuff.

      So forget other francophones for now. Speak for yourself. You cited one demand, concrete enough. Is it a clincher, or is it not? No more demands after that from you? Or is it just a prelude?

      As for my opinion about your idea – my opinion is predicated on whether it’s a clincher or not. If you (and your people) could articulate a demand that would be final, I’d agree to anything, even to renaming Yonge Street in Toronto to Jacques Parizeau Street. But since you’re choosing to dick around I must ask you to go back to the drawing board, consult with your people if you must, and come back with a list to which we can say, Yes, No, Yes, No, etc...and then you can decide if it’s worth staying in the RoC or not (whatever you decide is fine, as long as you decide).

      Delete
    16. @Yannick: It's that time of the year. The more I read about "la chasse aux anglos", the grouchier I become.

      Delete
    17. "If you can't provide a list of demands, then your plea for meeting demands is absurd."

      This I certainly agree with; it's too bad Quebec (esp separatist-minded) can't produce an accord on such a list to talk about. There is much splintering and disagreement among everyone in life, though the separatists seem to have (far) more than their fair share.


      "If you think I'm wrong, what's your plan for making things better in Quebec?"

      I know you're not addressing me; still, I'll chime in.

      Regardless of "Quebec", I think Canada overall would be much, much, much better off if more anglophones were supported federally to learn French. Canada should have more French (which is why I'd love to see Can Tire or whomever else go bilingual signage everywhere -- obviously that's jsut me, haha).

      And the thing is, while under 10% of anglos have French skills, a vast number of them VERY MUCH WISH THEY COULD SPEAK VERY GOOD OR EXCELLENT FRENCH, but lack the resources to do so. High schoolers can follow French avidly throughout and STILL graduate and find that, oops, they're totally not prepared for a real French environment.

      It's hard to learn French (or any language!). It would not be expensive to expand the already-existing French As A Second Language Program for Canadians you can find (if you search) in Montréal (and we have the freaking money, we're a wealthy country).

      Delete
    18. JBG, you`re a sharp guy, but you may be new to the QC issue.

      One word of advice - don`t get dragged into this whole `what would YOU do` thing. The `demands` for amendments they `could live with` are their demands for us. If they can`t even articulate them, it`s too bad. It`s not our job to think up their problems for them. It`s their job to tell us what they`re not happy about, so we can address it. Your getting sucked into guessing what the problem is is exactly want they want - the so called negotiations that never end and never settle anything.

      Reed Scowen raised this issue in his book. He wrote that ambiguity and uncertainty are in the political interest of Qc, whereas resolution and moving on aren`t. What we have here is an instance of this game. Follow the trail. The demands for changes are mentioned. The question to specify these demands is asked. An evasive answer is given (no way to know what ever Quebecker wants), one non-final suggestion is given, and the question is returned to you like a boomerang in the form of `what do you think it is that we want`. The object is for you to keep guessing for all eternity.

      Delete
    19. Actually, since that L’Actualité article appeared last spring, the editor of The Gazette has been discussing this very issue. He thinks Quebec could be doing more to promote anglo integration by having a Quebec version of the Katimavik program. The Quebec government is very happy to throw money hand over fist at immigrants from other countries for them to learn French, but not for migrants from the RoC. Nor is it interested in helping develop a summer program to match young Quebec anglos to volunteer for unskilled or semi-skilled jobs in other regions of Quebec to help them improve their French. (Actually, they do have such a program but only for anglos from the RoC.)

      The president of the QCGN says that “It saddens us greatly to learn that the integration of English-speaking Quebecers seems to be of minimal interest to the political leaders of Quebec.” And when Impératif Français got a surprising reaction from them about anglos speaking French, the article was never published. “It seems that many French-speaking Quebecers do not want to hear the message that English-speaking Quebecers are willing and increasingly able to integrate into Quebec society. They simply hear what they expect to hear.”

      David Johnston: The best French teacher for anglos is life experience

      David Johnston: How ‘immersed’ are anglos? The conversation continues

      David Johnston: Should Quebec do more to improve anglo integration?

      The government’s disinterest in anglos is hindering integration

      Delete
    20. @Adski : I think you're under the wrong impression. I'm not a Quebecker. I am a ROCer. The francophones from Quebec are not "my people". I, personally, don't have any demands. At all. I have an interest in better French-English relations and seeing the conflict get resolved, that's it.

      I'm perfectly happy living outside Quebec in an officially bilingual Canada where I have the right to public education for my future children anywhere in the Country. My only interest in the subject is that there are an increasing amount of anglophones in the ROC that resent official bilingualism, and some of their stated reasons is the economic drag of Quebec as well as the aggressive language laws in Quebec.

      This is the only vested interest I have into having a "resolution" in Quebec. Since I am a francophone, I believe I can empathize with their reasoning better than you can. Anglophones from the ROC as well as within Quebec (to a lesser degree) demonstrate on this blog on a daily basis that they have no understanding or empathy of how francophones feel about their language, be it in the context of a united Canada or an isolationist Quebec. How can anything get better if people keep inventing reasons for the behaviour of francophones instead of understanding them?

      As an francophone outsider, it is obvious to me that you will never ever convince francophone Quebecers to scrap 101. They are emotionally invested in it and they believe that it protects their language. You'd have better chances getting Canada as a whole to scrap national healthcare. It's just not going to happen in the foreseeable future.

      Francophone Quebecers as a whole seem happy with the Status Quo - it is people such as yourself and other commenters here that want changes. Therefore, it is you who has "demands". My "idea" is a suggestion of where you could start, since arguing against 101 as a whole will never take you anywhere. Since the whole situation has nothing to do with me and I could care less about the details, whether or not it is a "cincher" for me is completely irrelevant.

      I only want changes insomuch as I believe in an equal and open society. Since I care about the standing of the French language in Canada, I hope such changes will get you and others in the ROC to stop decrying Quebec as a facist state, and open up Quebec's economy to foreign investment in order to strengthen it. That way, instead of a Quebec that is a detriment to the standing of French in this country it will be a contributor.

      Does that clarify my position better?

      Delete
    21. I grew up surrounded by bilingualism, with basically everyone in my family and at school being bilingual so it probably wasn’t until I was a teenager that I realized there were people who weren’t bilingual.

      Therefore, I remember being taken aback while on a business trip to Calgary when someone asked me to say something in French because they had never heard it before! Despite their feeling of being very Canadian, I got the impression Calgary was very American. In fact, 10% of Calgarians actually WERE Americans then, mostly from Texas and working in the oil/gas industry.

      I also remember reading an article in L’Actualité in ’87 or ’88 asking whether French-Canadians felt more like Frenchmen who happened to live in America or more like Americans who happened to express themselves in French (the answer, obviously, was the latter).

      I blame Gérald Godin who upon coming back from a trip to Toronto in the ‘70s decided that “Montreal should be as French as Toronto is English”. This has always been a false comparison. The history of anglophones in Montreal is completely different from that of francophones in Toronto. Never mind that westward French-Canadian expansion beyond Manitoba basically ceased after the Riel Rebellion. The history of Calgary is only somewhat over a century old. There’s no reason that it should be as francophone as Ottawa, Montreal or Moncton.

      Delete
    22. I'm sorry Yannick, I guess somewhere between my late adolescence and early adulthood, I fell in love (for a second time) with Montreal's cosmopolitan vibe while increasingly losing sympathy for French-language militancy in the style of the SSJB and its upstart/copycats/one-uppers like the JPQ and RRQ. I'm not even sure the end justifies the means anymore.

      No major "spokesgroup" seems to embody my position at the provincial level, which is why I think Quebec politicians are a bunch of cowards and sellouts when it comes to this very important yet delicate issue. Which is too bad because it's hurt us and it's not getting any better.

      I'm perfectly happy living outside Quebec in an officially bilingual Canada where I have the right to public education for my future children anywhere in the Country

      Wouldn't it be better if we could have public education across the country which produces native (if not near-fluent) speakers of both languages? Entre le français de Lisa Raitt et l'anglais de Pauline Marois mon coeur vacille...

      My only interest in the subject is that there are an increasing amount of anglophones in the ROC that resent official bilingualism, and some of their stated reasons is the economic drag of Quebec as well as the aggressive language laws in Quebec.


      Frankly I'm disturbed by the number of RoC anglos resenting official bilingualism, but I don't think clamping down on anglos in Quebec is the answer. It's a chicken-and-egg argument to be sure, but when neither side wants to blink and compromise, all we get is escalation. Again, I don't personally need bilingualism, but it'd sure be nice if everyone in this country could row in the same direction.

      How can anything get better if people keep inventing reasons for the behaviour of francophones instead of understanding them?
      Because "assimilation" has been thrown around as the cataclysmic bogeyman ever since the monsignors ruled us. We've ditched Catholicism yet we still act as though our "louisianification" will cause our virginal francophone souls to burn in the hottest and deepest hell. Watch any of the interviews done on Radio-Can at the parade today and tell me that's not what's at work here. Faut quand même pas exagérer.

      And this is where it pays to carefully study your position before emotionally embracing the first one that comes to mind. An alternative to your question is: how will the Francophones, whose vested interest is not to piss off the anglos around them and within their territory, ever hope to establish any lasting peace with said anglos if knives are drawn indefinitely? I think the francophones need to re-evaluate how genuinely cataclysmic linguistic assimilation would be while at the same time scrapping 101 with their own two hands. If immigrant demographics don't cause it, francophones' own realization at their own lost opportunity under our current setup will. Mark my words.

      Besides, assimilation has occurred in both directions and continues to the present day. How many people weep for the assimilated anglophones in, say, Jeanne Reynolds', Daniel Johnson's, Claude Ryan's, and Gilles Duceppe's family trees; why's it such a big deal for Ruth Ellen Brosseau and hundreds of thousands in Acadia, Ontario, Vermont, Massachusetts and anywhere else?

      As an francophone outsider, it is obvious to me that you will never ever convince francophone Quebecers to scrap 101.
      Funny how New Brunswick applied to have its officially bilingual status codified in the 1982 Constitution Act whereas Quebec scrapped its de facto bilingualism barely a decade earlier. Francophone Quebecers who support sustained and continued anglophobia don't need convincing. They need to realize how truly harmful and toxic the current law (and surrounding misinformation) has been to them.

      Delete
    23. They are emotionally invested in it and they believe that it protects their language.
      There it is again: "emotion". Methinks we need to drop emotion, because it drives us to some rather insane behaviors. Emotionally, I'm sure many lily White Southerners in the early-mid 18th century didn't want them niggers to be emancipated. A century and a half later, few would hesitate to reprobate my use of a racial epithet -- even if used in jest. Yet somehow the Civil War remains the bloodiest conflict in U.S. history. All this to say that emotion shouldn't be the main vehicle through which we make our principal decisions as a society. Imagine what happens after a narrow YES vote if all the NO voters got emotional in Quebec.

      Francophone Quebecers as a whole seem happy with the Status Quo - it is people such as yourself and other commenters here that want changes.
      To use a Bushism, francophone Quebecers who are indifferent to (or approving of) the current side-effects of our language policy sorely misunderestimate the extent of the equally understandable adversaries they make while continuing to cover their ears and pretending to yodel. The much-needed dialog isn't coming and I fear that brute force won't provide a result either side will be satisfied with (let alone those like me who advocate and endorse collective and generational bilingualism).

      Delete
    24. Ok, that was a bit “train-of-thought”… but this blog is basically by and for anglophones living in Quebec, is it not? It appears that francophones are gaining a terrible reputation in the RoC pretty much thanks to francophone Quebecers only. Yes, there are awful reactions by extremists on both sides. Of course, a Quebec that is a contributor to the standing of French (as opposed to a detriment) sounds absolutely delightful! But you will also notice that the Louis Préfontaines of this world have absolutely no interest in “getting along” and are only interested in hostility.

      I don’t believe that anglo-Quebecers are generally looking to “scrap” Bill 101. They are legitimately concerned that rather than promoting the French culture, it is intended to slowly strangle Quebec’s English community into oblivion. S.R generously corroborates that opinion with his intention to “annihilate” Quebec’s anglo community. I would have imagined that your RoC minority franco sensibilities would correspond in lockstep with Quebec’s minority anglo sensibilities. Perhaps not.

      Also, as you’ve mentioned a couple times, are you implying that Quebec francophones are not as emotionally attached to the healthcare system as is everyone else in Canada? Or are you suggesting that it was necessary to invoke the Notwithstanding clause in order to bypass the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and trample on others’ rights in order to provide the healthcare system??

      Delete
    25. "I would have imagined that your RoC minority franco sensibilities would correspond in lockstep with Quebec’s minority anglo sensibilities. Perhaps not."

      RoC francophone minorities face challenges that are entirely different than those of anglophones in Quebec. I'm afraid that while I have a lot of sympathy for anglophones in Quebec, they are miles ahead of the rest of us in terms of availability of service.

      For instance, it's exceedingly hard to convince anglo-RoCanadians, even in places with a strong French community, that we want services in French. After all, we can speak English just fine, can't we?

      "Also, as you’ve mentioned a couple times, are you implying that Quebec francophones are not as emotionally attached to the healthcare system as is everyone else in Canada?"

      Fair enough, I suppose I should have wrote "Canadians in general". I was trying to find something that ROC Canadians, specifically, are emotionally attached to.

      "Or are you suggesting that it was necessary to invoke the Notwithstanding clause in order to bypass the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and trample on others’ rights in order to provide the healthcare system??"

      No, but now that you say it, sort of. Remember that the Charter of Rights and Freedom as well as the Notwithstanding clause only appeared when Trudeau repatriated the constitution in the 80's. National healthcare was instaured in the 60's well before the Notwithstanding Clause was ever a thing.

      The Federal government essentially strongarmed the provinces into instauring provincial equivalents based on the Healthcare system. Many libertarians out there would explain to you in length what an evil it is to be coerced into paying someone else's doctor bills. An evil only equalled with having to write French on one's signs, I'm sure.

      The decision was done against the wishes of the doctors, who went on strike in Saskatchewan and in Ontario. It is very much the decision of the majority, coercing the minority (healthcare providers).

      Now nowadays I would say most healthcare providers believe in the national healthcare. Whether that is reason or stockholm syndrome at work, you tell me. I'm sure there's anglophones in Montreal who are comfortable with 101 as well?

      Delete
    26. my bad. *based on Saskatchewan's healthcare system.

      Delete
    27. Entirely different how? Outside of Montreal, Quebec anglos have terrible access to healthcare in their own language. Elderly patients from the regions who seek healthcare in their own language often have to travel all the way to Montreal for service. The implication being, as you say, that they can speak French just fine, can’t they?

      As for the remainder of your diatribe, I don’t understand what you’re saying so I’m not sure how to respond.

      Delete
    28. "Entirely different how? Outside of Montreal, Quebec anglos have terrible access to healthcare in their own language. Elderly patients from the regions who seek healthcare in their own language often have to travel all the way to Montreal for service. The implication being, as you say, that they can speak French just fine, can’t they?"

      Anglophones in general benefit from a position of priviledge in that most of the world is actively trying to learn their language. Very rarely are they put in a position where the onus is on them to learn a different language. As such they can expect service/access to jobs almost everywhere on the globe.

      It is a powerful advantage. Even in heavily francophone areas in the ROC you'd be hard-pressed to find somewhere where they could not offer you service in English, or would be unwilling to. In fact in most cases ROC francophones bend over backward to avoid inconveniencing anglophones over language, thereby reinforcing the idea that "they don't need it - they speak english just fine." For this reason we often need our own instutions like hospitals, etc... just to insure that what is "bilingual" does not revert to "english-only" for the sake of convenience - we've seen it happen.

      The difficulties in francophone communities in the ROC are largely related to addressing their lack of confidence and demand for services in French, even of governmental institutions that are obligated to offer said services - forget about private services entirely. Simply put, the challenges facing the ROC francophones are a mixture of internal lack of self-assertion and general indifference of the majority population.

      In Quebec, on the other hand, the main challenges are policies put in place by the legal authorities in order to impede the availability of english services. For instance, Quebec is probably the only juridiction in the world where according to a government body (OQLF), a minority needs to be a local majority in order to receive services (municipal bilingual communications). This is of course, ridiculous.

      I'm trying to avoid commenting on who has it worse - but the nature of the challenge is obviously very different.

      "As for the remainder of your diatribe, I don’t understand what you’re saying so I’m not sure how to respond."

      I'm generally making a point that National Healthcare is a bit like 101 in that whether or not you think it is immoral and coercive depends on your values - that while it is difficult to imagine for us Canadians, there are many in America who would argue that it is a great, terrible evil akin to slavery. That, when you boil down to it, it is the majority (population of Canada) coercing the minority (Doctors, healthcare providers) to operate under a system that limits their personal freedom and ambition. That Canadians are emotionally attached to National Healthcare despite the fact that we would not crumble as a society were it to get scrapped. You'd be hardpressed to find another law/policy that united us together more than National Healthcare - a bit like 101 for the Franco-Quebecers.

      Personally I am pro-National Healthcare and I think 101 is excessive, but I find the comparison interesting.

      Delete
    29. Yannick 9:59 PM “Francophone Quebecers as a whole seem happy with the Status Quo - it is people such as yourself and other commenters here that want changes. Therefore, it is you who has "demands".”

      Yannick 4:42PM: “The idea is to demand ammendments that francophones can live with.”


      So they are happy with the status quo, but also they want amendments that could live with it.

      Happy with the status quo? Or the status quo needs to be amended?

      You really need to make up your mind.

      And it’s interesting that you say: “the idea is to demand amendments X and Y and Z can live with”, instead of “the idea is to listen to the demand of X and Y and Z to address it so their condition can be improved”. You are basically suggesting that others should figure out the problem X and Y and Z have, and propose some solution. Again, utter absurdity.



      Yannick 9:59PM: “How can anything get better if people keep inventing reasons for the behaviour of francophones instead of understanding them?”

      I though they were happy with the status quo…Never mind. There is a bigger issue. The issue is that you think that francophones are so special that their needs must be in the forefront. This is a general problem with the so-called identity politics. A group of people get together based on some arbitrary trait and demand special treatment.

      I have a more individualistic and classical conservative approach. Everybody is the master of his own fate. And everyone carries some baggage that he has to deal with. The government can help, but not at the expense of some else. That’s amoral yet that’s what identity politics is all about.

      Note that many people on the left are very critical of identity politics, and they view it as a distraction from the important issues, like the injustices produced by globalized capitalism. I personally think that identity politics has been thought up and put in place by the elites in order to divide the population which otherwise has common interests against those elites. So it’s divide and conquer basically.

      Delete
    30. You imply I want amendments. The amendments I want are much more global. I want, for example, for another super power to emerge to check the global power of the US. Some balance has to be restored. I want justice to the Palestinians. I want true democracy, one with real choice and not an illusion of choice. I want the end of global capitalism, though I am perfectly ok with small business capitalism.

      I don`t have any amendments for QC because I don`t really care. It`s a silly place and will probably remain silly for a long time. I`m here because I have a job here, but that job can relocate to some other place and I will with it. I am, like millions of people, an employee of a global organization.

      I have a general issue, and that`s when you can`t articulate your problem, then you must desist. What I find about Quebeckers is some deep seated issue that they either can`t or won`t articulate, yet they want everyone else to join in searching for the issue and propose solutions. But as I said, the issue is deep seated, and it`s probably a form of a colonized complex, something for which there is no quick fix, or maybe no fix at all.

      Delete
  14. C'est clair que John James "Goldilocks" veut donner l'impression que les libéraux ont à cœur de protéger le fait français au Québec. Ce sera bien pour sa prochaine réélection.

    ReplyDelete
  15. @anon 6:19 AM

    Your right, charest has to win the election before he quietly pulls the plug on the OQLF. As anglos and allos in Quebec have no political party to vote for, we need charest to win 2 more terms before demographic changes that were shown in the 2006 census start making a larger impact on Quebec politics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Even in the largely hypothetical fairy tale world in which Charest wins a fourth term and a majority, I think you'd be hard pressed to see him pull the plug on the OQLF.

      Also, I think some context is worthwhile here. The OQLF isn't just responsible for pesky language troopers which apply bill 101 to noncompliant signage (something that infuriates me both as a francophone and as an anglophone) but also does what I think is an excellent job in terms of terminology and coinages.

      Sure I'd dismantle the former division and triple the latter, but you and I both know that populism handily demolishes what genius can only painstakingly build, so the point is rather moot.

      Delete
    2. Apparatchik,

      ...but also does what I think is an excellent job in terms of terminology and coinages.

      This function can also be eliminated. To save resources, the province can refer to L'Academie francaise.

      Delete
    3. I agree it could, but under that logic, to save resources, we can have one world government too.

      I say keep the terminology going; it's one of the few things I think the OQLF does that is of use not just to Quebecers but to all Canadians (and others beyond).

      Delete
    4. Apparatchik,

      Well, there is much of oversimplification, is it not? Governments are different all the world over. Different forms, different politics, different laws... But a language is a language, is it not? Unless Quebec wants to admit that its language is not really French.

      Lemme ask you this. There are British and American English. While there are many others, those two are the most dominant. Why is there no regulation body for those? Those two "versions" of English have two main English-competency tests in the world. TOEFL in the USA and IELTS in the UK. In the French world, there is only DELF/DALF, administered by CIEP in France. Hence, is it not a duplication of effort for OQLF to assume the function you mentioned above?

      Delete
    5. a language is a language, is it not?
      A very good point, but languages can and do have varieties around the world...

      Unless Quebec wants to admit that its language is not really French.
      Was it Shaw who proposed English as a second language to Americans? I'm sure more than one person has tongue-in-cheekly suggested French as a second language to French Canadians... but I digress... and I'm not touching that one with a ten foot pole ;-)

      Why is there no regulation body for those?
      For one thing, English has the distinction of being an unregulated language. Spanish and Portuguese are at least two interesting examples.

      Delete
  16. "we need charest to win 2 more terms"

    o_Ô

    ReplyDelete
  17. We are all the same...This is nonsense.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pwe-pA6TaZk

    ReplyDelete
  18. Bien sûr avec un anglophone,probablement un américains qui impose sa musique,sa langue et son style de dance aux autres peuples du monde...Pathétique.Nous sommes tous pareil : Américanisés.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are so paranoid...if you get out of your bubble, you would discover that the guy does not impose anything.
      But you are too stupid to understand. Go back to your shack, stupid troll. I really hope that someday you'll become aware of your stupidity.

      Delete
    2. Je pense a ce point, la culture des quebecois est basé pas sur des actions de dévélopé une propre culture, mais de prendre des actions qui sont contraire des cultures de l'Amerique du nord.

      Delete
    3. Je crois que tu blagues, sûrement... ce mec (au moins, ce que j'ai vu de lui) adopte le style de danse des autres, les gens qu'il rencontre. J'ai pas vu le lien entierement (parce que j'ai regardé déja ses videos) mais je ne me souviens pas aucune imposition culturelle ou linguistique ou danse-ique.

      Delete
    4. Anon 7:07 am in the 70's it was Ontario's and Ottawa fault (remember go shit in Ontario or take the 401)...then it became ROC...ALL English and the french Canadians losing their culture..Now it's north America ...the super big threat..we are going to be destroyed ! to this day not one of you Quebecois has clearly defined besides speaking French what your culture is..you guys do EVERY thing the Anglo's do ...big box stores, american resto's ,films,copy cat late night shows,game shows,docu's,store products ,and on and on..it's never a defined answer,,it always changes like the world changes...

      Delete
    5. Anything to keep le mouvement alive.

      Delete
    6. pressnine401,

      Indeed. Aside of language, there is little cultural or lifestyle difference between Quebec and Roc or even between Quebec and (RoC + USA). Compare that with Quebec and (France + French Belgium + French Switzerland). The cultural difference is so big the only similarity is the language.

      I had this discussion with French European colleagues. They told me that for Europe Quebec was French-speaking North America. I had yet another discussion with French-Quebecers who had been roaming around and they told me that while living in Paris the only thing they felt at home is the language. One of them even went further. He worked in Paris and in Calgary. He told me that he felt more at home in Calgary despite the fact that he needed to speak English every time he was out of his home. Go figure...

      Of course these are just anecdotal examples without corroboration. Maybe Yannick can share his experience of a francophone working in Calgary.

      Delete
    7. Thanks Troy and well explained...but that's what I figured all along...maybe Yannick can give his view

      Delete
    8. Having lived in rural and urban areas, east and west, and having visited many parts of the USA, and some of Mexico, I personally feel the only "distinct" part of NA is Mexico. Everything in Quebec is exactly the same as in British Columbia or Illinois, and as Press 9 says, it's all the same Halo 3, Batman 8, Steig Larson, chinese take-out, struggle with new technology, impatience on the highway, frustration with the gov't, eagerness for long weekends and holidays, same clothing, U2, environmental apathy/environmental concern, questions about race and culture and religion and sex, Santa Claus, yarmulkes, knapsacks, marijuana, line-ups, facial hair styles and fretting over bra cup development, problems with aboriginal displacement and poverty as anywhere else in NA.
      Although I've never been, I'd to some extent lump Australia and NZ in as well.

      Delete
    9. A complicated question with a complicated answer.

      Let me give you my background. I come from Moncton, NB. I have lived in Halifax, Montreal, Hamilton, Calgary. I have visited Victoria, Vancouver, Regina, Ottawa, Toronto, Quebec City, Charlottetown, Sydney. I've only been to europe once as a child, and that was to Paris. I've visited NYC and Louisville KY in America.

      What I can tell you is that there are differences in Canada. Some places have a more distinct "American" feel and others have a more distinct "European" feel. Some feel newer, some feel older.

      I can tell you that Calgary has a distinct "American" feel. It prioritize car culture over pedestrian or transit culture, though this is changing under the current administration. It prioritizes suburban living, rather than living downtown. It prioritizes cookie-cutter big box stores over small, independant boutiques.


      Don't think, for instance, that you will be able to casually waltz in a downtown coffee shop like the Brulerie st-Denis in Calgary. People work downtown and go home to their suburbian paradises, so even Starbucks closes after 5 PM and on the weekend. Only the Tim Hortons stays open in downtown Calgary during the weekend. As for shopping you have the choice between a variety of identical shopping centres with identical food court all conveniently located on the central transit system, most stops of which are conveniently located near a major mall. The transit system could be worse, but for instance it once took us 15 minutes to drive to a movie theatre that a direct train line took an hour and a half to reach.

      The city is pedestrian-hostile, as half the crosswalks that used to exist have been fenced over, forcing you to a "pedestrian bridge" going over the streets so as not to inconvenience drivers. All in all, Calgary has a distinct american experience.

      Compare this to Montreal or Vancouver - which are the exact opposite with their pedestrian/metro friendly, cosmopolitan atmosphere. I would say that the cities that feel the most like Paris in Canada are Monteral and Vancouver, and the cities that feel the least like it are Edmonton and Calgary, with placed like Ottawa/Toronto halfway between the two extremes.

      But I'm sure that any town in Mexico blows them all out of the water in terms of distinctiveness.

      Delete
    10. You might have noticed that my answer has little to do with language. That's because "lifestyle" has little to do with language too. Language is it's own category, seperate from "lifestyle".

      But essentially, forget living in French anywhere outside Quebec, Ottawa and Moncton. Here in Alberta you have to be part of a hobby club to find French activities.

      Delete
    11. So does that not sort of suggest you agree the separatists are more than a little full of shit when they talk about things like our "culture" as being "distinct"?

      Deep down I find it difficult to think that human nature is anything other than universally and simultaneously good and slimy. The only differences (most of them superficial) can be accounted for by place and time.

      And since we live in North America in late June 2012 (most of us, at least), doesn't it seem a tad ludicrous that about two-fifths of us should be "struggling" to pretend to be a patch of Europe from early September 1759?

      Besides, with a little effort, we can find both "artisanal" and "cookie-cutter" everywhere. In Chicoutimi as in Calgary as in Guadalajara.

      It's ridiculous we should be making this about language when it so clearly has to do with an futile fear of being assimilated by a consumerist capitalist Western culture whose coattails we have ridden if not directly participated in since its founding. When you've already "assimilated" 99% of the way without so much as a fight, it seems rather hypocritical to cling to a minute difference (in this case refusing English-language fluency and deliberately putting up barriers and calling it "patriotic") as a battle horse.

      Delete
    12. "So does that not sort of suggest you agree the separatists are more than a little full of shit when they talk about things like our "culture" as being "distinct"?"

      Are we talking about culture or lifestyle? Because while language has little to do with lifestyle, it has a lot to do with culture. Quebec movies, music, musicals I believe are distinct from American/English counterparts, and distinctiveness is worth preserving.

      You might have noticed, there are many* French movies that get American remakes, and they typically all bomb at the box-office. Does this not tell you something? Either the medium or the consumer base has to be different to account for this.

      *By no means an exhaustive list, but Just Visiting, Starbuck, Three men and a baby, Ed TV, Dinner with the Schmucks come to mind.

      "Besides, with a little effort, we can find both "artisanal" and "cookie-cutter" everywhere. In Chicoutimi as in Calgary as in Guadalajara."

      We certainly can. Pockets of either exist literally everywhere. But to pretend that because of this there are no differences across the globe is ludicrous.

      I tell you that living in Calgary is very different than living in Ontario, or Vancouver, or Montreal - it's up to you to believe me or not.

      Delete
    13. Quebec movies, music, musicals I believe are distinct from American/English counterparts, and distinctiveness is worth preserving.
      While we're at it, we might even enumerate American/British distinctiveness, and distinctiveness between the various subcultures on each side of the Atlantic.

      You might have noticed, there are many* French movies that get American remakes, and they typically all bomb at the box-office
      I don't watch many movies, but when I do and I find out something is a remake, I usually try to get my hands on the original as a matter of principle.

      But to pretend that because of this there are no differences across the globe is ludicrous.
      I'm not saying that; what I'm saying is that you could justifiably see "local" distinctiveness irrespective of the scale you choose to use. And I believe there's a way to celebrate and blend distinctiveness in a manner that is harmonious rather than allow the various "distinctivenesses" be at odds with one another.

      Quebec anglophone culture, for example, both shares features with and is distinctive from anglophone culture elsewhere. Yet few flag-waving "Québécois" are even literate in anything English other than to know that it's a medium-term anathema to their existence. Imagine if Canada treated its French-Canadians that way in 2012 as a matter of official policy?

      Deux poids, deux mesures.

      Delete
  19. They impose in a way, by manipulating tastes with PR and advertising, which is a multi billion dollar business. You counter with state involvement and state sponsored coercive apparatus. Which one is better? Their side is trying to coopt our tastes by trickery, your side tries to get submission by beating us with a stick and manipulating our attitudes by guilt tripping ( the culture is dying, we must protect it)

    I'd say both sides are bastards in this, but especially yours.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Speaking of which, can some of you guys name some Montreal-BASED companies (aside from BMO,RBC and Sunlight)that fled to Toronto because of Bill 101?I'd like to know!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bell, Air Canada, CN are still based in Montreal but clearly their operations are more in Toronto/Ontario than in Montreal/Quebec. Make no mistake, BMO and RBC are still legally headquartered in Montreal. However, vast majority of their corporate activities happen in Toronto, along with the jobs and budgets associated with those activities.

      Delete
    2. @ Anonymous aka OQLF, etc. at 1:09 PM,

      "Sunlight?" Very funny...the company is called Sun Life. Your attempt at writing in English is pathetic, our resident seppie troll.

      I read a newspaper article some years ago that listed hundreds of companies that left Quebec because of the racist language laws and the threat of separation.

      Delete
    3. Oh gosh, I didn't realize it was "sunlight" when I wrote that! My mistake, I didn't mean to evoke bad reactions from any of you guys.

      Delete
    4. THE CAQ's Legault even admits it:

      The provision (BILL 101) also strikes at the heart of Legault’s claim that a CAQ government would reverse the outflow of Montreal’s head offices. In a speech to Montreal’s Chambre de Commerce two days before this meeting, Legault had deplored the flight of 16 of Montreal’s head offices between 2000 and 2008.

      http://www.vigile.net/Francois-Legault-finds-that-Bill

      Delete
    5. Air Canada is slowly eroding Headoffice head count in Montreal, the mayor has to plead for them to stay using the argument it would hurt montreal's already bad economy:


      http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/01/19/montreal-urges-air-canada_n_1217359.html

      Delete
    6. Totally out of context but itchingly curious...

      Mrs. Sauga, are you seriously Mr. Sauga's life companion... or has a gender change taken place for which I didn't get the memo?

      hello and congratulations either way
      ;-)

      Delete
    7. My bad.. I just read the "no relation to.." mention below.

      Sorry for not reading all the threads yet.

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

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ok, I'll make a deal with french terrorists

    For two years from now, you can move to france and have proper paperwork to work there for the rest of your life. You'll live in france and speak, read, hear frech for the rest of your life. You will lose your right to come back here. Forever.

    While you get drunk on ricard and drive your motorbike like crazy in Ringis we'll make Quebec a proud member of North America.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting you should mention that, since it's actually not a new idea. According to the 1763 Treaty of Paris, Canadiens had 18 months to emigrate to France if they wished.

      Those who didn't presumably didn't get the memo or were okay with the new administration. It's time we quit having this conversation whose time has long come and gone.

      Delete
    2. Not a very tempting deal, I should say.

      Delete
    3. Not like "101 ou 401" is any better, especially when "offered" by the descendents of those who failed to take the Treaty of Paris "deal".

      "Can't we all just get along?"

      Delete
    4. I believe we can "just get along" -- even if not today. Eventually. :-)

      Delete
    5. I seriously don't know why. Logistically, we've got everything we need.

      All that's lacking is the will and the management... which incidentally I believe are at the origin of the conflict.

      Delete
  23. Nous ne faisons pas de deal avec un boofon...Désolé.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. tu veux dire avec des gens comme toi

      Delete
  24. Protect the French language
    http://www.bloggingtories.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?p=100569

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

    ReplyDelete
  26. Je suis un membre de mouvement montreal français et je vis dans un shack a Montréal Est...moe,j'aime les jos louis et le pepsi, pi j'gagne ma vie sur vos taxe ma gang de bloke a marde et nous allons tous faire pour vous detruire......

    ReplyDelete
  27. Approximately 2 years ago the Northern Store in Kuujjuaq received a call from the Office... One person had filed a complaint. Long story short, it was a formality and was dropped. (Both grocery stores are run by anglo entities and that's just how it is). Nunavik, or at least Kuujjuaq is essentially run by the KRG (ARK for or Francophone friends) and it's kind of understood that due to the Anglican church doing all the leg work up there vs the RC, the Inuit have been speaking English as their second language for generations. Even the hospital is run under the English system. The precious laws aren't enforced there, they can't antagonize enough, but that leads me to question integrity... if you can't enforce the same law in all areas, you kind of lose credibility with that very law, don't you?

    Does anybody know how things work on the extreme east end of the North Shore (i.e. Saint-Augustin, across the water from the west coast of NFLD) where the old isolated (and frankly dying) fishing communities are still populated almost entirely by Anglophones? Does the Office bother with that? Kinda funny that some people like to continue complaining about Labrador when they have their own eastern arm they haven't colonized yet...

    ReplyDelete
  28. IF anglos and allos stopped obeying the law like they did in Shawville en mass there is nothing the OQLF or the QUebec government can do. The quebec government is use to compliance. Civil disobediance and mass protest cannot be stopped.

    If 100 000 anglos protested in the streets against bill 101 and the protest were covered by the world media and exposed Quebec would be humiliated in the world stage. Their hypocrisy wouldn't be tolerated by world opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Look at what the French students accomplished by protesting Bill 78!

    Not obeying Bill 101 will draw the attention of the UN and we can get a condemnation of Bill 101 from the UN!

    ReplyDelete
  30. Mr. Sauga (no relation to Mrs. Sauga)Saturday, June 23, 2012 at 10:19:00 AM EDT

    I was caught by surprise! I didn't figure Editor would make an appearance until next week.

    Be that as it may, I'll succinctly state just three things because it's coming to the point that it's not worth arguing anymore. I live in Ontario so anyone who chooses to open a small business in Quebec who is not francophone should seriously consider psychiatry, because the OFLQ feeds off the smaller fish anyway. Easy targets, right?

    The large corporations who have to retain expensive lawyers should pass the costs of this moronic way of having to do business in fascist French Quebec strictly to the Quebec consumer. They incur the costs in Quebec, they should pay for the costs. Leave the rest of the continent out of it.

    The RoC should look for every means possible to expel fascist French Quebec from confederation. Canada is a democracy, not a totalitarian state, and Quebec is practising politics that contravenes the NATURE of the constitution; besides, the RoC will save over $10 billion by extracting equalization and other payments to Quebec that exceed their contribution to the federal coffers. Who needs them? Quebec is a rudderless ship that is rocking the RoC's boat. I prefer smooth sailing, so who needs the man-made turbulence one fascist state is causing our democracy...that is, outside of Quebec.

    ReplyDelete
  31. On a different subject, notice how the new GM of the Habs, Québécois accent and all, first picked a Russian-American?

    Oh, the humanity! In fact, NO Quebec-born players went in the first round, and that includes Stephan Matteau Jr., born in the USA!

    If I'm correct, the only French speakers in the front office are the GM and the head coach, nobody else!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CORRECTION!

      There was a first-rounder from Quebec, more specifically from Pointe-Claire, a Montreal suburb.
      Michael Matheson, a Quebec born Anglo, was drafted 23rd by the Florida Panthers

      Delete
  32. @ Giuseppi MacGillivray,

    "The precious laws aren't enforced there, they can't antagonize enough, but that leads me to question integrity... if you can't enforce the same law in all areas, you kind of lose credibility with that very law, don't you?"

    It's my understanding that the language laws don't apply to Native reserves.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I looked at the Le Devoir article and couldn't resist taking a peek at the comments. I really shouldn't have. A lot of them are really misleading. For instance, many of them seem to be under the impression that other non English-speaking places also ban the use of English trademarks. Just to check this out, I took a brief virtual walk down part of the Champs-Elysees in Paris with Google street view and spotted United colors of Benetton, something called Megastore, Disney Store, Quality Burger Restaurant, Quick, Milady, Grand Optical, Orange, Money Exchange and Restauranti Vesuvio, all without any French descriptors or modifiers on their signs. Maybe someone whose written French is better than mine should put a comment in there on the Le Devoir article. You're welcome to cite my research.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "For instance, many of them seem to be under the impression that other non English-speaking places also ban the use of English trademarks"

      I wonder how much of it is actual ignorance of how business is done around the world, and how much of it is self-delusion i.e. believing what you want to believe.

      Also, those working in drivel factories called the mainstream press do not help by choosing to plant seeds of misinformation. Although that is their job and that's what they get paid for.

      Delete
  34. Oh yes, and some economic genius commenting on the Le Devoir article says that the 100 billion dollars it would cost to change the signs is a reasonable investment for the honour of (my little bit of sarcasm there) doing business in Quebec.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Actually, it says it would cost only $100 million to change the signs... what a bargoon! But you know, for such a tremendously wealthy society like Quebec, where people aren’t fussed at all about a measly $1625 tuition increase such that the cheapest tuition in the country rises to... still the cheapest tuition in the country, further harm to the economy in order to artificially create a false French "visage" is no big deal.

      After all, just have a peek at Quebec’s “debt clock”… only a quarter trillion dollars and rising! Money means nothing here as long as you can waste it in French.

      Delete
    3. The Cat,

      You get it wrong, man. With the 100M$ projects to change the signs, that means jobs for sign makers and installers. They will pay the taxes which mean additional income for the province. Also the materials removed can be recycled or sold as scraps, profits of which are taxable.

      It is a trickle down effect and with cross-subsidy the funds can be used to provide for free education for all. Can you not see how noble OQLF actions are?

      ;-)

      Delete
    4. When property is destroyed by hurricanes and earthquakes, we call it a disaster.
      When it is ordered destroyed by an ethnocentric make-work movement, it's righteously called patriotic, noble, pressing, and affirming.

      We seriously need another flood...

      Delete
  35. Vous ne semblez pas comprendre que nous ne sommes pas des Français.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. C'est vrai, nous sommes des canadiens

      Delete
    2. "...nous sommes des cana***** "

      Moi qui croyais que les insultes n'étaient plus tolérées sur ce blogue.

      Delete
    3. C'est dommage que ton imbécilité soit tolérée.

      Delete
    4. Soit content que ton imbécilité soit tolérée.

      Delete
    5. "Moi qui croyais que les insultes n'étaient plus tolérées sur ce blogue."

      Haha!

      Delete
  36. I often read and do not comment (like Calgarian in Montreal above).

    The language battle in Canada confuses me; it's great to have more than one language, and I wish I had 3 or 4 at my disposal rather than the 1.75 I currently possess.

    I agree one cannot legislate neither respect nor culture. Still, I would personally prefer Canadian Tire to have a bilingual name or to have 2 names - not in QC only but all across Canada. And I often wonder why they just don't go for that idea -- if I were CEO of Starbucks, I'd enthusiastically add "Café" to the name, with no need for 101 to ask me to.

    I'm totally taken aback by the anti-French/anti-English and anti-QC/anti-CA ideas and sentiments I see and hear (especially in the comments sections of various sites, including this one). Forget "why can't we just along"; I'm curious why we can't all embrace each other and fall in love? Bilingualism is better; Montréal is about the only place I feel there's such a thing as "Canada". I feel blessed to live in a bilingual country; I only wish it was much, much, much moreso.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I remember reading this article where it was shown that the more one talks about subjects like politics, the more extreme one becomes in their beliefs. Pretty much, people who comment tend to fall on either side of a great divide, that only becomes larger over time. Moderates tend not to post as much.

      Delete
    2. JBG, when you are cursed at on the streets for speaking english, denied jobs because you don't speak french, don't have English representatives in gouvernment, and have shit smeared on your store windows because you come from another country and can only speak some broken english, then you will not be confused.


      I blame the divide on the OLFQ, Bill 101, the government that enacted it, and the extremist separatists. Everything was fine until the FLQ started planting bombs.

      Delete
    3. JBG: "I agree one cannot legislate neither respect nor culture. Still, I would personally prefer Canadian Tire to have a bilingual name or to have 2 names - not in QC only but all across Canada. And I often wonder why they just don't go for that idea -- if I were CEO of Starbucks, I'd enthusiastically add "Café" to the name, with no need for 101 to ask me to. "

      How about because they don't feel like it as for why they don't go for that idea. Shouldn't not feeling like it be a good enough reason in your own business? How about the costs of renaming? How about loyalty and attachment to your original name? How about a history of concessions that only end in more demands, thus prompting one to finally put the foot down? Take New Look. They added a descriptive (Lunetterie New Look). Next thing you know, some people demand the store name be changed to Lunetterie Nouveaux Regard. And Cafés was actually added to Star Bucks, I believe.

      It's really irrelevant why they don't go for the idea, because in life not every idea had to be gone for. I can have an "idea" for you today, it doesn't mean that you have to do it if you don't feel like it. What's relevant is the insistence on regulating things that you admit cannot be regulated, like respect, culture, indifference, and how annoying and divisive that can be to the population that's been hammered in the head for 35 years with this nonsense and now maybe wants a little breather.

      Delete
    4. “Bilingualism is better; Montréal is about the only place I feel there's such a thing as "Canada". I feel blessed to live in a bilingual country; I only wish it was much, much, much moreso.”

      You’re bringing up a good point when addressing the fact that Mtl is the actual reflection of bilingualism in this country as opposed to the ROC and the ROQ. I am starting to have the same view on that matter!

      Delete
    5. Agreed.

      Montreal needs to be freed from extremism and let flourish into the naturally moderate, bilingual, open, and tolerant place that we all claim to be striving toward.

      Delete
    6. "when you are cursed at on the streets for speaking english, denied jobs because you don't speak french, don't have English representatives in gouvernment, and have shit smeared on your store windows because you come from another country and can only speak some broken english, then you will not be confused."

      Yet the French say the exact same about the English, and I've lived with separatist roommates, so I'm afraid I'm still not following your point here... Eventually someone has to be bigger and say no to continuing a toxic and pointless fight; clearly it's not Anonymous's day to do so. :-(

      Delete
    7. Hi Adski, thanks.

      "How about because they don't feel like it as for why they don't go for that idea. Shouldn't not feeling like it be a good enough reason in your own business?"

      I agree 100% (with everything you say above) however it doesn't answer my curiosity -- why don't they feel that way?

      I only ask because I'm enthusiastic about bilingualism, love it, and even when self-employed in Toronto, my business website was in French and English. Never had a French client; still loved to have it and always hoped I'd get one --- if for no other reason than the chance to talk in French ;-)

      Delete
    8. JBG once again I find your bilingualism efforts laudable, praiseworthy, and worth emulating from coast to coast. At the same time, I think adski is expressing his own frustration at the ugly underbelly of bigotry that I try hard to fight proactively.

      The ugly truth is that there is quite a bit of xenophobia -- both of the overt and subliminally telegraphed varieties. I won't dare speak for adski myself but from firsthand accounts I've frequently heard from many immigrants, I suspect having been a newcomer here makes you see quite a bit of it up close and some people feel more personally attacked and victimized by their "not belonging" to the correct side (or to the correct side fast enough).

      Not everybody will take the open-midedness and tolerance route that you show, and this is evidenced by the fact that many are willing to rewrite bill 101 so it's more restrictive rather than laxer on certain petty irritants like signage and education. How many separatists do you know are willing to do away with separate linguistic school boards and replace them with a schooling system that churns out people as fluently bilingual as Jean Charest (love him or hate him, he's an excellent poster-boy for Canadian bilingualism)? How many of those separatists do you think would be willing to replace the 2:1 French-predominant size ratio to a 1:1 bilingual or even French-first policy? Again, I argue, all the media, education, and legal institutions French Quebecers need to survive assimilation exist today and existed long before bill 101. Too bad on June 24th, we (in this province) conveniently forget that there's over a million francophones outside Quebec who also share in our frenchness but which we almost deliberately leave for dead because it then gives us a straw man example to point to.

      You might be surprised to learn that linguistic and ethnocultural pettiness is a sore point even for those like me who DO speak both languages natively and aren't functionally impaired (though deeply infuriated) by the forcible suppression of one of them.

      Delete
  37. Dear Editor, as a regular (silent) reader, I often find these conversations hard to follow due to the number of Anonymous comments. I wouldn't suggest forced real names, or even constant handles/nicknames, but I wish people had to enter some kind of handle or nick to make the discussion clearer.

    Just my two cents, rien de plus.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, the Editor has addressed this point before (most recently at the end of this posting a couple months ago). At the time, he said he would put up that announcement periodically; perhaps more frequent reminders would be in order. I think everyone agrees that Anonymous postings make it difficult to follow the blog or reply to the appropriate person. Unfortunately, I also think the majority of Anonymous postings are here simply to be snarky and contribute absolutely nothing. In fact, I think they are deliberately trying to sabotage the blog (unless they are indeed so feebleminded that they have nothing intelligent to contribute) therefore I doubt they would cooperate with the Editor’s requests in any event.

      Delete
    2. I agree in general, but as an aside, I kinda have to chuckle a little bit at how chaos can sometimes be entertaining.

      Not so hard to imagine:

      Anonymous replying to Anonymous disagreeing with Anonymous insulting Anonymous calling Anonymous to task on a detail that Anonymous is offended by while Anonymous goes off on a wild tangent.

      Apparatchik goes nihilistic or just plain batty?

      Delete
    3. "how chaos can sometimes be entertaining."

      Yes Apparatchik, that is very true!

      Delete
  38. So regarding that hate-filled half-wit, S.R (and his various sockpuppets) with his asinine one-liners… has he made anyone here feel tempted to participate in the completely inclusive and totally non-racist festivities this weekend before, as he says, he will “destroy” and “annihilate” us?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Cat,

      So tempting, eh? Let us see... To watch the St. John the Baptist low-cost parade at Parc Maisonneuve in the East End, or to watch Italy vs. England at home?

      Decision... decision...

      PS: Germany vs. Spain for Final.

      Delete
    2. I was under the impression that english music groups did play at last year's SJB.

      I've never attended myself, but are the festivities really racist?

      Delete
    3. I, for one, would certainly never think such a thing but perhaps you can inform me?

      RACE: 2. noun /rās/  (races, plural)
      A group of people sharing the same culture, history, language, etc.; an ethnic group.

      RACIST: 1. noun /ˈrāsist/ A person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
      2. (adjective) /ˈrāsist/ Having or showing the belief that a particular race is superior to another.

      Could it be true that:

      - St. Jean Baptiste (oops, Fête Nationale) festivities are 99.9% white, francophone and Catholic (just like at the St. Patrick’s Day or Canada Day festivities… oh wait, scratch that)?

      - As an integral part of the Quebecois nation, anglophones are traditionally warmly welcomed with open arms to celebrate being a vital part of the rainbow that is the Quebec family (that is, prior to their “annihilation”, of course).

      - There would be no problem waving a Canadian flag alongside a Quebec flag to celebrate the famous openness and tolerance of the Quebecois nation at Parc Maisonneuve (just like people commonly do on Canada Day)?

      We saw an example of this celebration of racial equality when Paul McCartney came to celebrate by playing a free concert on the Plains of Abraham in Quebec City, didn’t we? Or when people go around measuring the size of letters on commercial signs?

      Delete
    4. There is no need for the snarky tone. Like I said I've never attended. Why don't you tell me, without sarcasm?

      Delete
    5. Yannick,

      Some questions are better left unasked. Let me put it in another way. If the celebration is inclusive in nature, there should not be any problem in the first place for anyone to perform in whatever language one prefers, should it?

      Delete
    6. Well that all depends. Is the Saint-Jean Baptiste still a celebration of French Canadian culture, or has it become a civic holiday for the Province of Quebec?

      Delete
    7. Neither one, really. The government is trying to transmogrify it into a simple civic holiday like Canada Day but not many people are buying that.

      Its origins go back to Medieval European midsummer celebrations that were imported here. The festivities were originally organized by the SSJB, who commissioned the writing of “O Canada” on June 24, 1880 and which was first performed in Quebec City. In 1908, the Pope designated St. John the Baptist as the patron saint of French Canadians. Thus, the celebrations originally had a religious (Catholic) character celebrating francophone culture.

      With the Quiet Revolution, however, the celebrations became highly politicized and the religious symbolism replaced by separatist ideology. In 1968, rioters threw bottles at Pierre Trudeau during the ceremony. Trudeau refused to take cover or leave, saying he was a Quebecer and would not be intimidated (and he went on to win a large electoral majority partly on account of his courage and defiance in the face of separatist thugs).

      In 1977, René Lévesque had it declared Quebec’s National Holiday. It gradually became secularized and eventually it became officially a holiday for all Quebecers rather than only those of French-Canadian or Catholic origins. This is when the old question of civic vs. ethnic nationalism arises. Since 1984, the celebrations have been organized by the MNQ, who stated mission is to promote a sovereign Quebec. Thus, another element of Quebec culture has been taken away from those who disagree with sovereignty.

      In 2009, two Quebec bands with bilingual/English were barred from alternative celebrations (L’Autre St. Jean) when people complained after it became known they would perform their songs in English and this decision was defended by the SSJB. Only after public outrage was it clarified that songs in other languages were ever so graciously allowed and they were returned to the program.

      So now, the official line is that it’s simply a civic holiday for everybody who lives in Quebec but the government has a hard time convincing anyone of that. In fact, it’s widely regarded as a holiday for nationalists and thus largely ignored by everyone else.

      Delete
    8. Yannick,

      Once again, that falls into question that better left unasked. With simple search on Google and Wikipedia one knows that St. John the Baptist is the patron saint of Quebec. Thus, the feast of St. John the Baptist is NEVER about French Canadian. It is about Quebec as the place, which now is perverted by the separatist movements.

      Delete
    9. I disagree with the idea that this is a question better left unasked. It is an extremely pertinent one and I think The Cat provided a good summary about how a traditional religious holiday became a secular civic one.

      The question is all the more pertinent in Quebec where we no longer celebrate Saint John the Baptist but rather the National Holiday of all Quebecers. If June 24th is to be a French-Canadian folk holiday, then I can understand (though still disagree) with the idea that it should be about French-Canadian language/culture/whatever. And this is where the devil in the details comes in; is "nation(al)" a proxy for "people", "place", "majority", "select few", "assimilationism", "traditionalism", "triumphalism", "universality", or something else?

      A separatist love-fest, a French-Canadian traditional cultural festival, or a civic holiday that everybody should celebrate as they see fit without hindrance or chastisement? You won't be surprised to learn that while I personally view it as the second of these scenarios, I think "la paix sociale" merits we overwhelmingly and collectively endorse the third.

      The waters have been deliberately muddied and it is only once they are decontaminated or evaporated and replaced with new rain that we will achieve any true and lasting closure on the matter.

      Then again, the idea of making St Jean a federal holiday isn't completely as insane as it sounds on the face of it...

      Delete
    10. @ Yannick,

      "I was under the impression that english music groups did play at last year's SJB."

      The two English bands (Bloodshot Bill and Lake of Stew) that were eventually allowed to perform at the Johnny Baptist celebrations several years ago were harassed by members of the Jeunes Patriotes du Quebec (Quebec Hitler Youth).

      Delete
    11. @The Cat - Thanks for taking the time to put it all in context. Like Apparatchik said, it is an excellent summary of how it became what it is today.

      @Troy - But the Saint-Jean Baptiste is traditionally a French-Canadian holiday that used to be celebrated in all the provinces, not just Quebec. Well, in principle it still is, except you won't find much more than the occasional french association BBQ in a place like Alberta.

      It can totally be a civic holiday in Quebec and a cultural holiday in the ROC, hence why I asked the question.

      The equivalent to my people of the SJB is the Assumption Day on the 15th of August. We usually bring out 1755 and Zachary Richard out of the mothballs to perform, go see an Acadian play, see Acadian movies in general, or participate in the Tintamarre. I've seen in the past African artists perform what was decisevly non-Acadian but still French music for us, as well as folk dances from other parts of the world. It's not inclusive à outrance, but since the pretext is to celebrate Acadian culture I'm not sure it needs to be. I thought the SJB was perhaps much of the same.

      @Apparatchik - Again, a wonderful summary. Thank you.

      @Anonymous - That is really, truly terrible.

      Delete
    12. Agreed Cat, that was an informative rundown on SJBD and contained info I never have learned before... thanks for the brush up

      I don't view it as a Quebec day but a French Canada day and I like it... although the tone of much of the QC version sometimes leaves a bad taste of aggressive nationalism in my mouth, personally.

      Delete
    13. After still more riots in 1969, the St. Jean parade was suspended for two decades, until 1990. In the early 90s, I remember trusting Premier Lucien Bouchard’s declaration that the recently renewed St. Jean parade was “for all Quebecers”. Those were the days when William Johnson and Howard Galganov were in the news. As a Quebecer, Johnson wished to march along in the parade with everyone else since it was “for all Quebecers”. Naturally, the crowd of violent Quebec nationalists attacked him for daring to participate in “their” parade and the police had to protect him and whisk him away for his own safety. (It’s a shame that there is this violent streak in francophone Quebecers that we continue to see even today.) This was at the corner of Sherbrooke and Amherst and I remember saying « Mais Boubou dit que la parade est pour tous les Québécois! » and « NON, MONSIEUR!!! » was the reply I distinctly remember being bellowed at me.

      So much for an inclusive civic holiday “for all Quebecers”.

      Delete
    14. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    15. Correction: I meant in the late 90s. It was in fact in 1998 that bilingual William Johnson (formerly a student at Collège Jean-de-Brébeuf, with an M.A. in French Literature from the Université de Montréal, former journalist at the Montreal Gazette, Member of the Order of Canada, and then-president of the anglo-rights group, Alliance Quebec) received a pie in the face for having the audacity to participate in the St. Jean parade that’s supposedly “for all Quebecers”. (Howard Galganov was a whole other story.)

      Delete
    16. Cat, Troy, and Yannick; I think I share a blend of your sentiments about this holiday.

      Too bad our bought and paid for media won't allow us to have the dialog we need to have on this as a society. It seems we're condemned to a Martineau vs. Bourgeois showdown on everything in this province whenever things concerning language and constitution get discussed at official levels.

      Too bad, because most people I know are more of the live-and-let-live persuasion...

      Delete
    17. Ah, drat!

      The Italy - England game went all the way to penalty shoot-out this afternoon. That made me missed the parade of the Greats of this great nation. Otherwise, I would not miss it for the world.

      :-)

      In seriousness, happy Feast of St. John the Baptist.

      Delete
  39. Saint-Jean Baptiste, or Fete Nationale, is the day to burn Quebec flags.
    Having a BBQ of flags right now, how pretty it is to watch the blue and white Fleur de lis burn and disintegrate into ashes and nothingness, just like Quebec society, its economic and its international reputation.

    Join me, burn Quebec flags today!! It will make you feel a whole lot better. Or just spit on, step on and shovel manure on them---ahhh, bon fete St Jean! He he he.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, I agree in a certain principle -- only because ALL FLAGS SHOULD BE BURNED (imho).

      Delete
    2. In principle I agree with JBG in that nationalism is an expense the world can no longer afford.
      But to pick out just the fleurdelisé and roast it on June 24th I think is petty.

      Delete
    3. JBG, I like your thinking. You`re on the right track, as you probably figured what this this scam called `nation-state` is all about.

      Check this out, an interview of professor Chomsky with the drivel factory called CBC. At 6:12, he raises the issue of `state` and schools his interviewer on it.

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


      Overall, I don`t believe it`s realistic that nation-state will end any time soon, but I wish people at least stopped idolizing it with flags, anthems, holidays, fetishizing of silly things like elections and democracy. All these things ARE good only is a sense that they are slightly better from other alternatives, but maybe not all alternatives. Like the Native Indian anarcho-syndicalism that functioned well in North America before Europeans smashed it to pieces and replaced it with capitalism.

      Also, let`s not forget what Carl Jung had to say about nation state - that it`s simply a replacement of the gradually declining religion, with all the symbolism, worship of power, social engineering, and illegitimate control of people over other people.

      Delete
    4. JBG, I like your thinking. You probably figured out what this scam called nation-state is all about.

      Check out this interview of professor Chomsky with CBC. At 6:12 the issue of nation state comes up.

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

      I don`t think that it`s realistic to expect that nation state will end any time soon. But I wish that people at least stopped celebrating it, with flags, anthems, holidays, parades, excitement over silly things like elections. Nation state is ok only to the extent that its better than some alternatives, although it`s not better than all `the alternatives. Native Americans for example lived ok under anarcho-syndicalism before Europeans smashed it to pieces and replaced it with their inferior systems.

      Also let`s not forget what Carl Jung had to say about nation state. That it`s simply a replacement for the declining religion, with all its symbolism, power worship, social engineering, and excuses for arbitrary control of people over other people.

      Delete
    5. Adski, why are you according respectability to Chomsky, a notorious anti-Semite?

      Delete
    6. Anti-Semite or anti-Zionist? Contrary to what the Zionists tell you, there is a difference, you know. Look at the two and a half million Quebecers who tell the other two and a half million that the latter hate Quebec simply because they don't vote OUI.

      Alternatively, one can be pro-French-language protection while viscerally hating Quebec's existing language legislation (as I do) because in many cases it is petty, repressive, futile, or in certain cases even ineffective.

      Delete
    7. In the same way that I was called anti-Canadian for insisting that the Acadians were "my people", or that people are called Anti-American if they do not partake in that nation's odd worship of its founding fathers, christianity, or war personel.

      Personally I'm against Israel's actions, and it has nothing to do with jews or their religion/ethnicity.

      Delete
    8. Yannick, I'm concerned about you. I generally like the way you support your opinions but who called you "anti-Canadian" for being Acadian?? American friends and American government are rather different things. And being an anti-Semite or an anti-Zionist are also clearly two different things...

      Delete
    9. Some former friends in Ontario. They were generally intolerant people - often complained about muslims, believers in general (were very atheist), generally immigrants who "hung around their own kind", the natives, feminists... pretty much everyone different than them, extra-secular "cosmopolitan" ontario "Liberals".

      I remember the man once writing on my facebook wall after I made a passing comment about Acadia that "Such a place doesen't exist. You might as well invent a place called Lilliput for all the little people."

      We didn't stay friends very long.

      Delete
    10. I see. Well, I'm sorry to hear that. I thought perhaps you were referring to some people on this blog. Anyhow, regardless of any differences of opinion we may or may not have, I like you!

      Delete
    11. I was called anti-Canadian for insisting that the Acadians were "my people"
      Don't take it personally but DO take a second look at the source it's coming from.

      As an example, I myself have had Louis Préfontaine tell me on his very own blog that the "anglomaniacal" positions I hold are contributing to the death of French and the reduction of cultural and linguistic diversity to such an extent that I am ideologically an enemy of French in Quebec. In the same breath, he's claimed that he and his kind are working toward cultural and linguistic diversity.

      The whole thing is both surreal and pathetically amusing given his likely homogeneous linguistic and ethnic background, in addition to what I can only imagine is an equally homogeneous frequenting of French-only Quebec institutions throughout his formative years. I'm an ethnic and linguistic "mutt" and have attended both French and English institutions in Montreal since I was old enough to walk.

      Same goes for the very insular "progressive" "worldly" (pseudo-)"intellectual" trash you were formerly "friends" with in Ontario. Adjusting for language and federalist/separatist inclinations, we have the same obnoxiously righteous "intellectual" clique here in Montreal: largely white, ethnic French-Canadian, prone to cookie-cutter separatist ancestor worship (Groulx, Lévesque, Leclerc, Laurin, Chartrand) and scientifically incapable of any wrongdoing whatsoever -- so it's only natural they self-declare as the setters of social and cultural mores for the rest of us dweebles and hicksters who don't know any better.

      Delete
  40. I make it a point never to be in Quebec on Provincial Beer Drinking Day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kinda defeats the purpose, wouldn't you say?...

      Delete
    2. :-)

      Depends on how you feel about stupid drunk people wandering around your neighborhood I suppose.

      Delete
  41. Having read the posts here, I find that although many of the folks make good points in most of their rants and comments, we seam to have forgotten to further address the Backward FLQ Occupiers’ illegal attacks on our legitimate right to a Bilingual Montreal.

    MTL_Scotsman who is a lawyer explained how he circumvented the Room 101 Bill to get what he needed for his business and others talked about people like Brent Tyler having developed a defense that helps businesses temporally avoid FLQ O prosecution.

    I propose that personal legal action be taken against the individuals who work at the OQLF for knowingly harassing businesses to a criminal degree. This would cause those individuals to take notice that it is not only the government that is liable, but themselves as well. OQLF employees would see that they ere not as sheltered as they think they are.

    ReplyDelete
  42. ATTENTION READERS!"

    Please remember that once 200 comments is reached, you'll have to hit the "Load More" button on the bottom of the page to see the newest comments.

    ReplyDelete