Tuesday, January 22, 2013

One Thousandth Post

It's hard to believe that we've gotten this far, but as I look down on the statistics page attached to this blog it tells me that this is the 1,000th post, which actually surprises me because I never thought I would stick with it this long.

In those 1,000 posts, I've written somewhere in the neighborhood of a million and a half words garnering some 35,000 comments!

Considering that in the first year I was basically writing to myself, excited to see a comment or two, we've come a long way.
This year we've approached, but not quite reached a million pageviews, something again I never believed could happen given the narrow scope of this blog.

It never was and remains today my intention to preach, I've realized that it is almost impossible to change somebody's mind when that person has firmly decided on a position.
My main goal is to call out separatist politicians and militants for misleading, lying and otherwise using dirty tricks to dishonestly advance their separatist agenda.

The militant separatists who come to our site do so to either troll or to recharge their separatist batteries by observing we, their 'enemies,' in our natural and unbridled element. To them I say, Welcome aboard, we aren't going anywhere.

I sum up their attitude with a paraphrased line that I repeated in a blog post a while back from the classic movie, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. When Humphrey Bogart asks an obviously phoney policeman for identification, the bandit answers;
"We don't need no stinkin' badges" (actually the line is a little different, but has become popular in this form)

Why this line?
Because it is the answer that separatists give every time they are reminded what their radicalism costs.

We don't need no stinkin' Walmart.
We don't need no stinkin' jobs. 
We don't need no stinkin' investment. 
We don't need no stinkin' head offices. 
We don't need no stinkin' skyscrapers.
We don't need no stinkin' Anglos.

This morning I read this story in Le Devoir
 "Air Canada hurts Montreal's growth"
(Air Canada nuit à la croissance de Montréal)
The story goes on to say that Air Canada is hurting Montreal by making Toronto its hub for international flights.
The truth is that Montreal will soon slip to fourth place in terms of air traffic behind Calgary, Vancouver and Toronto. Of course the writer of that article blames the sorry state of affairs on Air Canada, for being a bad corporate citizen.
In his opinion the airline shouldn't arrange its affairs to maximize profits, if it hurts Quebec!
The separatist response?;
"We don't need no stinkin' Air Canada"

Sadly, Air Canada's gradual shift away from Montreal is an allegorical description as to what has happened to our province. Link {fr} 

How many companies have said no to Montreal because of high taxes and prohibitive language laws?
What right-thinking international foreign company would choose Montreal as a location for their head-office when they conduct their business in North America in English and must afford employees the right to work in  French?
Waivers you say? That is what the separatists will answer, to which these companies reply;
We don't want no stinkin' waivers! We're going somewhere more hospitable"

When it comes to a list for possible location, be it a multimillion dollar corporation or an NHL free agent, Montreal and Quebec are generally struck from the list of possibilities, with good reason. Call it the "Lindros Effect."
Watch this old video from the CBC and tell me that Quebec's sour grapes attitude isn't exactly what I describe above.
Readers, I guarantee someone in the comments section will point out that Lindros was a bust, so no great loss. In other words;
"We don't want no stinkin' Lindros!

The dirty secret is that in order to attract any foreign investment that creates jobs, the Quebec government has to offer massive amounts of tax breaks, six times more than Ontario does per capita.
The hidden cost of these forgone taxes costs the Quebec treasury billions, but the figure never shows up because it is money never received.
But in Quebec, these facts aren't important.
When you are a separatist, you can explain anything away.

Remember the righteous outrage when Maclean's magazine called Quebec the most corrupt province? When it turned out to be true, the narrative changed.
Today the separatist line is that the corruption is due to federalists and at any rate, all the other provinces are just as corrupt, only Quebec has the courage to face it down. Hmmmmm.....

So that is why I don't bother arguing with separatists, they will never, ever believe that the sovereignty or language issue has been and remains detrimental to Quebec's growth and prosperity, this despite the clear evidence staring them in the face.

There are enough separatist charlatans on the airwaves telling us that an independent Quebec will be a paradise and that the repatriated taxes sent to Ottawa will be enough to make Quebec a gloriously successful and economically sound country. People believe what they want to believe, damn the evidence.
But the harm that these separatist con artists have brought down onto our economy is devastatingly real, sending Quebecers on an ever-downward spiral to economic disaster.
This week, my favourite Montreal city councillor Marvin Rotrand proposed hiking parking meter fees to match those in Toronto, Calgary or Vancouver, a reasonable argument until one takes into consideration that Montrealers are at least 25% poorer than citizens in those boom towns, when one considers income and personal and consumption taxes.
We have become little league, courtesy of language militants and separatists and that's the plain truth.

Sadly all this is done for no good reason, the French language in Quebec is in as much danger as Danish in Denmark or Hebrew in Israel.

The language issue is manufactured to boost support for sovereignty and nothing else.
Back in the days of the FLQ, Montreal was ten times as bilingual as it is now and yet language was never even brought up in the FLQ famous manifesto and nobody on the French side was 'anglicized' because of signs and store names.

Back then, the sovereignty issue was economic, the fact that francophones didn't control the economic levers of society.
We all know that the situation changed over the last forty years and now francophones are truly masters in their own domain.
But this left separatists without a burning issue to fire up the independence movement and so the phoney language issue was invented.

Every time you hear the language debate brought up, it is just a separatist wanting to drum up support for sovereignty. The unintended consequence of this underhanded, phoney separatist issue is that it hurts the economic well-being of our province, but to separatists it cannot be true, because they don't want it to be true.

The separatist/language flirtation has turned Quebec into a basket case, deep in debt and beholding to other Canadiens for its yearly allowance. We have gone from being a powerhouse to living in the poor house.

When Sun Life of Canada  told the PQ government that Bill 101 made Quebec an inhospitable home back in 1978 and moved to Toronto, it marked a watershed moment in Quebec economic history, the province set on a course of economic decline that still hasn't run it course.
Do Quebecers realize or care that the jobs provided by that one company, would support a town of 40,000-60,000 people?
Think of all the other head offices that left, perhaps less flamboyantly, but nonetheless taking tens of thousands of jobs with them.
But the separatist response now, is the same that we heard back then.

"We don't need no stinkin' Sun Life!
  
Today we are caught in an unenviable Catch-22 situation, ruled by separatists who don't and never will have enough support to separate.
Like a child playing house, it is all make believe, except that the damage caused by pretending that this province is on the march to sovereignty, is oh so real.

And so I shall continue to write about the lies, misinformation and cruel manipulation that is the separatist/language movement and hope that some of the facts that I point out will become part of the debate.
I'm not hopeful, but try I must.
Try we all must.

A note to readers.
I have heard the call about the comments section becoming unwieldy and promise to move to a new platform like Disqus or Facebook commenting as soon as I find someone able to help me with the migration.
It has become practically impossible to follow a discussion or train of thought when there are 300 comments.

I believe that BLOGGER isn't really designed for so many comments, as they don't seem to make updating the comment section a priority.

The new comment section will probably be a lot smaller, but more readable and interesting.
I promise to enact more control on trolls and eliminate one line comments that don't add anything to the conversation.

It is an evolution that is necessary, like a tree in need of pruning.
I know the regular contributors will come along, making the necessary effort to participate and that  is probably all that counts

As always, I want to thank you the readers without which I would have been long gone before this 1000th  post.
Best regards!

177 comments:

  1. Sour grapes attitude about Lindros? The guy was picked first overall and refused to play for the Nordiques. It's not like he picked another destination over Quebec. I don't see how the people from Quebec could have reacted another way.

    The Nordiques ended up trading him for several players, notably Peter Forsberg, and the franchise won two Stanley Cup in Denver while Lindros retired without lifting the prestigious trophy a single time.

    In this case, you have to blame Lindros for his poor attitude not the people from Quebec city.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is a catch-22, although Colorado won cups, the fact is that Lindros never won one, and Quebec never won one either...

      Lindros did have a bad attitude, but you never know what could have happened if he had played for Quebec.

      One thing is for sure. Commuting to TO the last few months for work, there is a huge unity difference between Ontario and Quebec. Our Montreal office may have ethnic representation here and there, an Italian/Greek/Portuguese flag hung in an office cubical, especially during events like world cups, but I hardly ever see a Canadian flag anywhere. In TO it is rare to see a cubical with out a flag somewhere.

      Born and raised in Montreal I would never realize it, but being here these months, I could see how a uniligual Non-Quebecer would be intimidated to work/play in Quebec.

      Delete
    2. Yo Legaré: Operative fact: COLORADO won the Cup, not Quebec, and did it the year they transplanted in Colorado. In that case, I think obtaining Patrick Roy that year was the final piece in that puzzle. Too bad Mario The Separatist Tremblay was such a jackass to publicly humiliate the team's star goalie the way he did, but another in the long line of Montreal's losses was Colorado's gain, and were well rewarded for their acquisition.

      I heard George Gillett, ex owner of the Habs, on a local Toronto radio show last week. When he was asked if Quebec could support a team again, he strongly felt not likely because of weak corporate sponsorship. Maybe different ministries of the Quebec government will buy those corporate boxes that are a vital income stream for the successful hockey teams! Tax dollars well spent!

      Willy, why don't you pick on players like Daniel Brière and Vincent Lecavalier? Brière was offered more money by the Habs than the Flyers when his Buffalo days ended and he became a free agent. For all the money, he chose the Flyers, probably because even if the offer was for less, there was probably more money left in his pocket after taxes; furthermore, who needs the scrutiny of the vicious media players in Montreal inevitably face?

      I'd call Lindros and aberration anyway. He was led around by the nose by none other than his meddlesome parents. They were overgrown animals with loose canons for mouths and genuine shit disturbers. I learnt this first hand.

      Delete
    3. I know that those Cups were won by the Avalanche. Seems like you skipped a line or two because it's clearly written in my other comment.

      Anyway, I wasn't "picking on" Lindros, I was just saying that he wasn't a good example to portrait "Quebec's sour grapes attitude". Actually, I believe that your Brière example is better.

      Delete
    4. Anybody been to Europe lately? Besides Arabic being on the rise.............English is spoken everywhere.........and KIDS main courses are multiple languages, as that of their neighbors.To Quebec I say one word.....DUH !

      Delete
  2. Congratulations on your 1000th post. You work very hard on this blog, and I hope you know the appreciation we all feel for you giving us all these great articles and dedicating so much time to help the English community. Thank you

    ReplyDelete
  3. Lord Dorchester

    Congratulations on your 1000th blog entry. I've been a long time reader. Here's to the next 1000 posts.
    Funny you brought up the Lindros effect. When Montreal was a Major League city a lot of free agents specificly had " no trade to Montreal" clauses in their contracts. It was fairly common and trust me, it wasn't because of our weather.
    As for that ridiculous Air Canada article in Le Devoir, the company routinely adds new flights originating from Montreal but because of poor sales, they invariably shut them down after a season or two and we get shunted through Toronto instead. Mexico City comes to mind as a recent example. Les Québécois aren't very interested in travelling it seems, unless its for a shitty all-inclusive vacation in the Caribbean. Quebec City, with a population the size of Edmonton's, doesn't even have any international flights. How pathetic is that?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you, thank you, thank you, Editor!

    Your posts have been providing a tremendous recognizance of the great number of people who have heretofore felt disenfranchised in mainstream media… OK,OK, I mean those of us whose opinion has largely been disregarded. ;-)

    You have also provided us with a terrific insight into the sadsack mentality of those among us who are bound by a colonialized mentality and wish to perpetuate their ancient grievances forever. I feel sorry for them, even while I recognize they are a minuscule segment of society.

    Good job and best wishes to you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Editor,
      Cat said it eloquently well. It is true that I have not been a participant of this blog for very long (just a few months), but I feel a little vindicated in knowing I am not alone, that my ideas and beliefs are shared and supported, and that gives me tremendous hope that something can be done, things can be improved. These ‘brainstorming’ sessions are invaluable. We’ll get there eventually.

      Thank you for all your incredible efforts and for providing the opportunity for the likeminded to congregate. Mainstream journalism can certainly borrow a page from your Blog posts. You bring the truth to the forefront and you take no prisoners! I would love to see this blog become so popular that your messages are posted both in English & French(for greater reach). I do realize, however, that this blog already takes up an enormous amount of your time and always to further enlighten us.

      So..Bravo!! Personally, I think you should be nominated for some kind of award...just sayin’

      Delete
  5. This is far and away one of my favorite posts.

    I love that fact that once again the seppies have been called out for their inexhaustible habit of explaining anything away.

    I would have to say that this trait of theirs, to defy all laws of economics and foreign investment and believe that an entire population can exist on fumes alone is more intriguing than it is frustrating.

    Congrats on 1000 posts, Editor.

    I'd love to see the trolls on this site accomplish even just five of their own.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @resident evil

      "I love that fact that once again the seppies have been called out for their inexhaustible habit of explaining anything away."

      do i understand correctly? you don't like people who tend to explain things?!?! what is you alternative to a good explanation resident evil?

      Delete
    2. "what is you alternative to a good explanation resident evil?"

      Reality. Talking reality...you can't beat it.

      Delete
    3. @ student

      There is a difference between explaining things (giving clarification) and explaining them away (waiving your hand and poo-pooing cold hard facts).

      Delete
    4. I thought "We don't need no stinkin'[enter item here]" was the term of the day, but I much prefer poo-pooing.

      Poo-pooing is the term of the day.

      Delete
    5. RE

      LOL, I can`t stop chuckling.

      Delete
  6. Oh, just read this:

    http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/quebec-canada/politique-quebecoise/201301/22/01-4613803-pauline-marois-ira-en-ecosse-apres-davos.php

    ...and loved the following line: "elle gagnera Édimbourg où elle rencontrera non seulement M. Salmond, mais aussi des responsables de l'opposition"

    What exactly is she going to talk to the federalist opposition about?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again as a taxpayer, I resent this witch going over to Scotland pretending to represent all quebecers to help them with their referendum on independence. I want my money to go to something useful and not more lies and deception about the state of affairs in this province.

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

      Delete
    3. According to the latest poll I am aware of, the madam goes to Scotland representing the will of only 28% of quebeckers. Not impressed!

      Delete
  7. "What exactly is she going to talk to the federalist opposition about?"

    i love easy questions.

    she's probably going to discuss with them about the coming referendum and scotland's hypothetical independance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Operative word: Hypothetical.

      Editor: My kudos as well. Rare is the time a day goes by I don't look for the lastest editorial and opportunity to comment. Personally, I hope you don't move to Facebook or others. I don't want to have to open a Facebook account or any others.

      Delete
    2. @"Student"

      Hey champion - we always have the always-pleasant task of hearing your self-righteous, chest-thumping bullshit, but for once, why not make an attempt at dissecting the Editor's points in his piece?

      I love easy questions too - because you're not here to contribute anything to the conversation.

      And another thing: don't even think about commenting about the Scotland situation. Some of us (present company included) have actually been there and seen what's going on first hand.

      That's what happens when you actually go out in the world and see things "Student" - you learn things, and your ignorance fades.

      Delete
    3. "I love easy questions too - because you're not here to contribute anything to the conversation."

      Au contraire,je crois qu'il est doué pour faire sortir le méchant des anglos.

      Delete
    4. @resident evil

      "why not make an attempt at dissecting the Editor's points in his piece?"

      what part of the editor's text do you think needs a revision resident evil?

      "don't even think about commenting about the Scotland situation. Some of us (present company included) have actually been there and seen what's going on first hand."

      why couldn't i comment on places you visited resident evil? anyways, please make a list of everywhere you went so i don't comment on one of them inadvertently.

      Delete
    5. Think he'll take the hint? Good response.

      Delete
    6. @resident evil

      what does vsisted mean?

      Delete
  8. On the topic of heavy corporate subsidies by the government to woo investors into Quebec, I remember Hyundai came to Bromont to produce automobiles. If I understand correctly, they left Bromont. What happened on that one?

    As for Montreal's slipping status as Canada's premier international hub, is that REALLY surprising anybody? For those who think so, you have serious mental problems!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thank you Editor for your hard work on this site and congratulations on your 1000th post. It does give we federalists hope and a place to vent our frustrations at the lack of honesty on the part of the separatists pertaining to their actual agenda. You're probably right and we may not change any minds but, as you noted, we must not stop trying our best to put a stop to their fanatical behaviour because if not, we're all going down on the ship, not just them. I have to pin hope on the new Equality Party and their platform to try to stop the massive mismanagement and complete disregard of investments and the misuse of our money by these people. Even now, after looking at the Charbonneau Commission yesterday, we have to wonder whether there is any truth left in this whole province by any public official. What an on-going mess we are in and things aren't looking any better soon.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Congrats on your 100th post. I rarely comment but I am a reader of this blog and find it very informative and at times entertaining.

    ReplyDelete
  11. A little Wednesday morning contrast:

    Quebec MDs third-lowest paid: report
    http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/montreal/Quebec+doctors+third+lowest+paid+Canada+report/7855702/story.html

    And yet... there's money to...

    Marois lance une offensive souveraineté:

    http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebec/369034/marois-lance-une-offensive-souverainete

    We don't need no stinkin' doctors...we're made of steel and electricity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When you read the above link concerning sovereignty from Marois and the comments by the readers, it is easy to see that they just don't get the turmoil involved in splitting up the country. Their utopia is a vote away and their pockets will all be lined with money if they can just get rid of the federal government. The new Equality Party has to make partitioning this place part of their platform so that these people understand that they can't just vote en masse to take all of us with them on their dream plans for a new country. The option for the areas of quebec that vote to remain part of Canada has to be there should another referendum be held. Areas that vote "NO" to separation have to be allowed to have that option or we are headed for big, big trouble in the future.

      Delete
    2. @resident evil

      "And yet... there's money to..."

      do you actually read articles that you propose to others? anyways, second paragraph starts with this: "Totalement à la charge du parti, cette campagne..."

      there's an expression for what you are doing here: populist propaganda.

      or maybe you're just a victim of it.

      Delete
    3. Moi a victim?

      I'm not the one whining like a little brat for "my own country" because I
      feel "oppressed" and "enslaved."

      I'm living my life, getting my shit done, getting paid and being happy...
      while you spend your time finding reasons to hate your unsatisfying life.

      Poo-poo to that!

      Delete
    4. @resident evil

      "Moi a victim?"

      well. it's either you are a demagogue or a victim of demagogy, a parrot if you prefer...

      you took a newsflash (marois lauches a promo campaign), distorted it so it fits your agenda (it's paid by our taxes), and compared it with something that you hope will hurt the feelings of your readers, in this case their health. this is pure demagogy.

      i think you are a victim. it's better for you, you know, cause it means you might not be corrupted inside. if you are the perpetrator there's less hope.

      Delete
    5. "i think you are a victim. it's better for you, you know, cause it means you might not be corrupted inside. if you are the perpetrator there's less hope."

      Am I the only one who is totally cracking up over this shit?

      http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/minister+Jean+Fran%C3%A7ois+Lis%C3%A9e+hints+party+sovereignty/7862591/story.html

      Delete
    6. Well I know I was lying in bed just this morning and thinking "that poor victim Resident Evil-how will he cope". I do hope things are going to improve your lot in life. lol. That idiot Lisee just won't quit with the idea that he is going to sell separatism to anglophones and allophones - can't wait to see the day he is confronted with the fact that we're NOT GOING WITH THEM - don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not a lemming and I can see the cliffs ahead of me. What a jerk.

      Delete
  12. In the spirit of educating our friend "student" on bill 101 :

    he writes :

    @yannick

    "If that's sending internal memos in English in their international industry, then they should be allowed to."

    ...and they are allowed.

    "Quebec shoots itself in the foot by forcing every internal documentation to be in French only."

    ...which it doesn't.

    mate, it would really be helpful if you quoted the law. i would quote it myself, but unfortunately i can't quote clauses that don't exist.


    Like I told you, go and read the actual law. Particularly chapter 6 - Labour relations. Specifically :

    41. Every employer shall draw up his written communications to his staff in the official language. He shall draw up and publish his offers of employment or promotion in French.

    43. Collective agreements and the schedules to them must be drafted in the official language, including those which must be filed pursuant to section 72 of the Labour Code (chapter C-27).

    49. Every association of employees shall use the official language in written communications with its members. It may use the language of an individual member in its correspondence with him.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So this is the letter of the law. How is it applied by the OQLF? Well, the OQLF contrives that the "communications" point (section 21) means that every single tool, communication, software, etc... must be in French only. Link

    If you go to the OQLF website and click on "travailleurs" it's plain as day. Unfortunately the site is not bilingual and I don't have the time to translate it, but I will copy the text here (because you can't be bothered to do your homework - you must be a rather poor student)

    Les travailleurs et travailleuses ont le droit d'exercer leurs activités en français (Charte, article 4). Tous les employeurs du Québec sont tenus de respecter ce droit fondamental. Ceux-ci doivent donc rédiger en français les communications qui s'adressent à leur personnel. La loi ne précise pas cependant que, dans les entreprises employant moins de cinquante personnes au Québec, les appareils, machines et équipements mis à la disposition du personnel doivent comporter des indications en français.

    Notons que, les entreprises qui emploient cinquante personnes ou plus au Québec sont assujetties à un processus de francisation (Charte, article 141). Celui-ci vise la généralisation de l'utilisation du français à tous les niveaux de l'entreprise et comporte, entre autres éléments, la responsabilité de mettre à la disposition du personnel des outils de travail en français, ainsi que celle d'utiliser le français dans les technologies de l'information.

    Ainsi, un ordinateur ou un logiciel est un outil de travail comme un autre, fourni aux membres du personnel à la discrétion de l'employeur, au même titre qu'un photocopieur, un appareil ou un équipement quelconque. Dans une entreprise qui a 50 employés ou plus, l'employeur est tenu de mettre à la disposition de son personnel la version française de tout logiciel d'utilisation courante, que ce logiciel soit acheté dans le commerce ou qu'il s'agisse d'une application maison.

    Certains employés peuvent exprimer une préférence pour la version anglaise, si l'employeur est d'accord pour la mettre à leur disposition, mais ces choix individuels ne doivent pas compromettre la généralisation de l'usage du français dans l'entreprise; en pratique, l'Office demande que la version française soit accessible sur tous les postes de travail en premier, ou par défaut (Foire aux questions, numéro 9).

    Ces entreprises doivent aussi utiliser le français dans leurs documents de travail, notamment dans leurs manuels et leurs catalogues.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Other gem :

      "La loi ne prévoit pas expressément que les réunions de travail se tiennent en français, ni que la formation offerte aux salariés doit être en français. Par contre, dans les entreprises plus importantes, qui ont à leur service 50 employés ou plus, le droit de travailler en français est mieux encadré, et se traduit par la mise en place d'un ensemble de mesures visant à généraliser l'usage du français dans le milieu de travail (Charte, article 141)."

      Translation : It's not in bill 101 expressively, but the OQLF will bully you about it if you have your internal meetings in English.

      Delete
    2. +1 for Yannick...just watch though, he'll tell you your claims are unsubstantiated and require further proof.

      Delete
    3. Note also that everywhere that stipulates that rules apply to businesses of more than 50 employees, the PQ ran on the platform to extend the same rules to businesses of more than 14 employees.

      Delete
    4. Yanninck - you have much more patience than the average bear with this troll but you will never have enough "proof" of anything just because he is not really after anything of substance - straight troll is all. But thank you for enlightening all of us with your knowledge.

      Delete
    5. I'm not sure if you meant that sarcastically Cutie - after all, there was nothing very enlightening about what I said. It's all stuff we already all knew through anecdotes shared on this site, some of them by yourself.

      I don't think that aggressiveness is the correct way to deal with people like student; I think he's just more likely to feel validated. He tends to aggressively ask questions and then shift tactics once he is answered; we can all see this, but I'm not sure he can. Hopefully he can then become a member who contributes more than noise.

      With information like this staring him in the face, he'll have to accept that he was wrong to a) just spout out statements and b) refuse to educate himself first like I asked him. I mean, practice what you preach man. Especially if you're going to be condescending about it ("i would quote it myself, but unfortunately i can't quote clauses that don't exist.")

      Delete
    6. No I wasn't being sarcastic Yannick - I always learn something everyday on this site - not ashamed to admit it. Was sincere in my compliment to you.

      Delete
    7. Alright, thanks for the compliment then. :)

      Delete
    8. @yannick

      "Well, the OQLF contrives that the "communications" point (section 21) means that every single tool, communication, software, etc... must be in French only."

      that's false. it needs to be available in french. not in french "only".

      i am planing a more detailed response, but generally speaking, if you want to avoid more questions, and if you have time, and for the benefit of everyone interested, try to associate every allegation you made about bill 101 and a specific clause or quote from it.

      Delete
    9. "if you want to avoid more questions, and if you have time, and for the benefit of everyone interested, try to associate every allegation you made about bill 101 and a specific clause or quote from it."

      Excuse me?

      And who do you think you are?

      You fail (which I think is something you know well) to understand no one on this blog owes you anything.

      If you want to learn more and have your questions answered, get off your ass and do some research mr. subsidized "student"

      Delete
    10. @resident evil

      "And who do you think you are?"

      a student.

      "You fail (which I think is something you know well) to understand no one on this blog owes you anything."

      fair enough. but when you write somthing that is false, for example that the coming pq's independance promo is paid by your taxes, you owe something to the truth, mate.

      "If you want to learn more and have your questions answered, get off your ass and do some research..."

      that's what i'm doing. i'm asking specialists on a specialized blog. isn't that a good way to learn resident evil?

      Delete
    11. Who exactly is paying for the "coming pq's independance promo"? Link please and proof - I won't accept a youtube video of her and her family talking about paying for this as proof.

      Delete
    12. @yannick

      ok i'll make it easier for you. here are your allegations:

      1. bill 101 forces a company of 10 anglos to talk to each other in French.
      2. bill 101 forces a company of 10 anglos to install Windows Vista in French.
      3. bill 101 forces "kids from anglophone families from placing their children in the francophone system" (sic).
      4. bill 101 pushes the service in English at the very back to "press 8".
      5. bill 101 is a basis to defend governmental workers when they act with hostility towards those who don't yet know French.
      6. bill 101 forces companies to send internal memos in English in their international industry. (what do you mean, emails sent abroad or what?)
      7. bill 101 forces every internal documentation to be in French only.

      and here are the law points that, according to you, should cover all that, (note that they only apply to companies of a hundred employees or more):

      41. Every employer shall draw up his written communications to his staff in the official language. He shall draw up and publish his offers of employment or promotion in French.

      43. Collective agreements and the schedules to them must be drafted in the official language, including those which must be filed pursuant to section 72 of the Labour Code (chapter C-27).

      49. Every association of employees shall use the official language in written communications with its members. It may use the language of an individual member in its correspondence with him.

      now which one goes with which?

      do you understand the nuance between "mettre à disposition", as stated in the law, and "forcing", the term you use instead?

      now about your analysis of my behavior, one thing bugs me:

      "He tends to aggressively ask questions and then shift tactics once he is answered..."

      don't you also change tactic yannick when your questions are answered? wouldn't it be wierd if i carried on asking questions even after they are answered?

      Delete
    13. @yannick

      "(because you can't be bothered to do your homework - you must be a rather poor student)"

      that's cheap, mate.

      Delete
    14. "but when you write somthing that is false, for example that the coming pq's independance promo is paid by your taxes, you owe something to the truth, mate."

      Today on Mario Dumont's television newsmagazine, this exact topic was discussed with Gerald Larose, ex-union leader, staunch separatist and confidant of Pauline.
      Larose argued with Dumont that the PQ is absolutely entitled to spend public money promoting sovereignty. Period.
      But from what I hear, the issue is being debated within the party itself. The PQ is rightly fearful of a vicious backlash and media attack if they do choose to spend public money.
      My hunch, Pauline will concentrate on getting re-elected, that is all she really cares about.
      This whole sovereignty push sounds like a smokescreen to me.

      Delete
    15. @editor

      i also think the pq is entitled to spend public money promoting sovereignty. after all, they were elected, and it's the number one article of their program. canada spends public money promoting federalism, right? what's the difference?

      here, i just underlined resident evil's error about the coming campaign. he wrongly implied the pq was going to spend public money on it instead of whatever else.

      Delete
    16. That's MY money you're spending on promoting something that only 28% of population are in agreement with so that makes it my business and I DAMN WELL RESENT MY MONEY BEING WASTED TO BUILD UP HER IMAGE AND THE SOVEREIGNTY OF QUEBEC. SO YES I'M DAMN MAD ABOUT IT.

      Delete
    17. The OQLF stikes again and now they hate cupcakes!

      http://westislandgazette.com/news/story/2013/01/23/cupcake-shop-owner-frustrated-by-language-watchdog/

      Delete
    18. Hi Student. I am going to take my time to give you a comprehensive answer. After this, if your attitude does not change, I will just ignore you as a waste of time like the others.

      The first thing is that I can't commend you for your reading comprehension. When I said many of these things, you were asking me if I supported the NB system over the Quebec system; not all my statements were directed at 101 directly but at the "Quebec System" in general. Let's start with the fundamentals.

      1. bill 101 forces a company of 10 anglos to talk to each other in French.
      2. bill 101 forces a company of 10 anglos to install Windows Vista in French.


      See above. The employer must provide software in French. Individuals can request software in other language, so long as it does not "compromise the usage of French as a whole in the enterprise". Read : so long as it's one or two individuals, and not the majority. We've had the testimony just the other day that someone was fined for this.

      The use of "10" is an embellishment. The real number, once bill 14 passes, will be 26.

      As for "talk", I meant "every written communication" and not the act of oral communication.

      3. bill 101 forces "kids from anglophone families from placing their children in the francophone system" (sic).

      Section 23.1 of the Chart of Rights and Freedoms grants education rights to linguistic minorities in Canada. These are as follow - you have the right to be educated in the minority language of your province if you have a) been educated in that language in Canada or b) have that language as a mother tongue. Bill 101 (see section 73) on the other hand, only provides for a) and then only because it was challenged in court. Originally people had to have been educated in English in Quebec only. This discourages immigration by anglophones from the UK or the US, cutting you from many highly skilled professionals. It also causes many anglophones who were enrolled in the French system voluntarily by their parents (such as Cutie's children) to lose their right to enroll their own children in the anglophone system.

      Delete
    19. 4. bill 101 pushes the service in English at the very back to "press 8".

      Bill 101 does not do this directly. Rather the government keeps cutting back on services or makes them harder to obtain.

      5. bill 101 is a basis to defend governmental workers when they act with hostility towards those who don't yet know French.

      Every time it happens, we hear "well the worker can't be blamed, after all it is not required that he knows English for his job, which is straight airlifted from section 46 of bill 101. See, for instance, that time a paramedic refused to speak English. The French media fell over each other to mention 101's provisions that he was under no obligation to speak English and therefore should not be blamed or disciplined.

      6. bill 101 forces companies to send internal memos in English in their international industry. (what do you mean, emails sent abroad or what?)

      I meant e-mails. See above. An international organization is simply one for which this requirement is the most ridiculous.

      7. bill 101 forces every internal documentation to be in French only.

      Section 41 and 43, and clarification of the OQLF.

      Delete
    20. More info for your #1, 2, 7 :


      141. The francization program is intended to generalize the use of French at all levels of the enterprise through

      (1) the knowledge of the official language on the part of management, the members of the professional orders and the other members of the personnel;

      (2) an increase, where necessary, at all levels of the enterprise, including the board of directors, in the number of persons having a good knowledge of the French language so as to generalize its use;

      (3) the use of French as the language of work and as the language of internal communication;

      (4) the use of French in the working documents of the enterprise, especially in manuals and catalogues;

      (5) the use of French in communications with the civil administration, clients, suppliers, the public and shareholders except, in the latter case, if the enterprise is a closed company within the meaning of the Securities Act (chapter V-1.1);

      (6) the use of French terminology;

      (7) the use of French in public signs and posters and commercial advertising;

      (8) appropriate policies for hiring, promotion and transfer;

      (9) the use of French in information technologies.

      1977, c. 5, s. 141; 1993, c. 40, s. 49; 1994, c. 40, s. 457; 1999, c. 40, s. 45.

      Delete
    21. @yannick

      "After this, if your attitude does not change, I will just ignore you as a waste of time like the others."

      oh la la. I’m scared. Come on mate. reply or don't, but don’t threaten, please.

      "When I said many of these things, you were asking me if I supported the NB system over the Quebec system…"

      not true, i asked you if quebec should carry on with bill 101 or without it. Here is my original question for reference: "should quebec stick with it (bill 101) or go the new brunswick way?".

      but it’s ok if you reply by including the oqlf policies, cause it's intimately related. what’s not ok is claiming I asked you to compare both "systems in general".

      point by point:

      1. Bill 101 forces a company of 10 anglos to talk to each other in French. -yannick

      and the truth is "associations of employees", in companies of 100 employees or more have to make their communications in french. and not in "french only". daily work and personal conversations between employees can obviously be conducted in whatever language they see fit. very far from your statement.

      2. Bill 101 forces a company of 10 anglos to install Windows Vista in French. - yannick


      the truth is a company of a 100 employees or more has to make french software the default version to be installed. And the company can install the English version if an employee requests it. Quite far from your statement.

      3. Bill 101 forces "kids from anglophone families from placing their children in the francophone system" (sic). -yannick

      thanks for acknowledging that you "have the right to be educated in the minority language of your province if you have been educated in that language in Canada or have that language as a mother tongue". doesn’t this contradict your original statement yannick?

      4. Bill 101 pushes the service in English at the very back to "press 8". -yannick

      thanks for acknowledging "Bill 101 does not do this".

      5. Bill 101 is a basis to defend governmental workers when they act with hostility towards those who don't yet know French. -yannick

      it’s true it’s illegal to blame someone because he doesn’t speak english. seems quite reasonable to me. but you can still blame someone that refuses to speak english even if he could. is this the case in the example you bring up? to me it looks like the victim understood french more than the paramedic spoke English, so in the heat of the fire the guy though french was the best language to use in order to be understood. that’s also quite reasonable.

      6. Bill 101 forces companies to send internal memos in English in their international industry. -yannick

      well the truth is it just doesn’t. bill 101 doesn’t force anybody to write emails in french to foreigners, abroad, that won’t understand it. come on, yannick.

      7. bill 101 forces every internal documentation to be in French only. -yannick

      after reading 41 and 43 and the clarification from oqlf, I still don’t see where it is written that everything needs to be in french "only" yannick.

      ---------------

      I think you now have what you need to rewrite what you don’t like about bill 101. it should now be a very very short list.

      nota bene. don't exaggerate when you discuss touchy topics yannick. and when asked about the state of affairs today, don't bring things from the past, like you did in detailing point 3, and things from the future, like you did in detailing point 2, as if they were actual.

      Delete
    22. Ok student, we're done. :) Good luck.

      Delete
    23. "The OQLF stikes again and now they hate cupcakes!"

      Le nom français est Gâtelet...Beaucoup plus appétissant.

      Delete
    24. Glad to say you're finished with the little troll Yannick - but again, thanks for the info. Hope he leaves soon; scrolling past his ramblings all the time is bothersome.

      Delete
    25. Merci Student d'éclairer nos amis anglophones qui semblemt très confus face à la charte de la langue officielle du Québec.

      Beau travail!

      Delete
    26. And Yannick was a francophone that was sympathetic to your cause - you people are unbelievable.

      Delete
    27. Good that you don't waste anymore time on him Yannick - he's not here to hear about flaws in Bill 101 - in fact HE ALREADY ADMITTED HE NEVER READ IT.

      This means everything the troll just wrote is pure hypothetical/apologist/fantastical bullshit.

      He's always accusing everyone on this blog of blowing smoke up his ass, but he just did exactly that in his sorry excuse for a rebuttal.

      But I do want to thank you for the way to laid things out.

      I think it'll make for a great format fof the Quebec Investment Facts site, where sepatrolls will not have a voice.

      I should also add that peut importe que Student is a separatist, he's also like so many other little 21-year-olds...

      ...arrogant and suffering from delusions of intellectual grandeur.

      I guess he has no idea that so many others his age also seem to think they know everything about everything.

      Oh well. :-)

      Delete
    28. I'm not sure how I feel about that - I'm very uncomfortable about a ressource whose' avowed purpose is to hurt economically the second largest economy of our country.

      Delete
    29. You're killing me, Yannick.

      I had this huge plan to put a picture of you in the header with the tag-line "Bill Bits 101" proudly brought to you by Yannick du Nouveau-Brunswick.

      Crap! Back to the drawing board.

      Delete
    30. Is it still the second largest economy in Canada? Not so sure about that but could be wrong. Anyway, I have to go along with Resident because we are limited in our ability to take down these separatists and we have to use any weapon we have at hand. They are going way too far now and they have to be stopped - unfortunately, it hurts the economy of everyone, not just them. Price we pay I guess.

      Delete
    31. Yannick, you're killing me. I was planning to use a picture of you for that part o the site along with the slogan "Bill Bits 101" proudly brought to you by Yannick du Nouveau-Brunswick.

      You're not gonna send me back to drawing board are you?

      Delete
    32. @Cutie : In terms of absolute GDP, it's still the second economy of the country (345 billions to Alberta's 295 billions). Of course, Quebec has more than twice the population of Alberta so these figures just show how decrepit its economy is, but Quebec is still a huge internal market and accounts for 20% of our total GDP.

      @RE : I dunno. Like I said I'm uncomfortable with the idea. If it's factual rather than emotional, and seeks to educate a potential investor "what to expect when investing in Quebec" rather than "don't invest in Quebec", I might be interested, but I surely wouldn't want my face plastered on it.

      Delete
    33. Oh no, don't get me wrong Yannick - the site will no be some digital version of the Idle No More movement. No way.

      Only cold hard facts and their factual consequences will be presented. There won't be anything like "don't open Walmart in this racist province."

      Another thing I want to do is present foreign investors with a comparison chart that lines Quebec up against the other provinces.

      Delete
    34. Yannick - It could have been so much better for all of us if they would just smarten up. They are hurting themselves, daily, with their policies and you know that much to be true I'm sure. Just think where we could have been had they been more reasonable - death by a thousand cuts.

      Delete
    35. @yannick

      so long, mate.

      @resident evil

      "he's not here to hear about flaws in Bill 101 - in fact HE ALREADY ADMITTED HE NEVER READ IT"

      false. i told yannick i was gonna read it. doesn't mean i had never read it before. only means i never memorized it.

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

      Delete
    37. Yesterday the temperature was -42C in Montreal (with wind chill). Apparently that cold temperature cracked the barrier to the underworld. And the bone-chilling cold seeped to the afterlife.

      Hell freezes over.

      I am completely in agreement with Yannick and would like to give him four thumbs up for all his patience in dealing with the so-called student and all the explanation he provided to such character. You sir, are a worthy opponent.

      Delete
    38. A state of affairs that I'm afraid will only last as long as you remember that there are 101 aspects which I support - namely, the requirement that non-anglophone immigrants enroll their children in the francophone system, and the requirement for service and signage in French.

      Delete
    39. @Student you got called out on your bullshit.

      And after all the effort Yannick put in to trying to debate with you (which was a total waste of time), you proved to us (once again) what separatists are really worth.

      Delete
    40. @Troy Personally, I don't consider Yannick to be an "opponent" at all. To me, he is someone with whom I may agree or disagree from time to time. His comments are always thoughtful, his intentions are always constructive and he is always respectful (and yes, even despite that “defending Nazis” comment… I think he got undeserved grief for that one). Unlike one or two others here, I regard him as a welcome commenter here.

      That said, I disagree that parents should be coerced into the education of their children. Most, if not virtually all, anglo and allo parents in Quebec want their children to master French. But depending on individual circumstance, if some parents have some reason to wish their children to be educated in English, I believe it should be their choice rather than the government’s, which is in accordance with Article 26 (3) of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (in French, it’s at this link). Of course, there are some people among us who would consider such a declaration to be applicable to everyone else but us because our “special” situation is not “universal”...

      Similarly, with regards to signage, you will never (or hardly ever) find English signs in places where there is no demand for such. Thus, attempting to create a phony French-only environment where it has never existed before is indeed akin to linguistic cleansing.

      Delete
    41. Merci, le Chat :)

      May we continue to respectfully agree to disagree.

      Delete
    42. Of course! Although I'm sure we agree more than disagree.

      Delete
    43. Both of you have valid points and I can see both sides but must side with Cat = Human Rights must take precedence over and above all else in a truly free society. We have seen what happens when we start down that "slippery slope" given the introduction of more Bills to remove more rights and freedoms so it proves that, once it starts, it continues, with no end in sight. We are not, and should not be "special", when it comes to rights and freedoms. Thank you both again for your always informative and insightful posts.

      Delete
  13. Great article editor, one of my favourite so far.

    "Every time you hear the language debate brought up, it is just a separatist wanting to drum up support for sovereignty."
    I don't think anyone could put it any better. Fear is an excellent motivator, as the americans have proved over and over again.

    The "We don't need no..." is quite accurate as well; it makes the whole thing similar to arguing with a stubborn child, no matter how many rational arguments you come up with, the reply is always "Nuh uh!"

    I think there's also some sort of fantasy by which getting rid of dirty "anglo" businesses/jobs will create more opportunities for the francophones. As if all these anglos are just going to leave and give their businesses up to the separatists.

    Or maybe they just think that a sovereign Quebec would be some sort of magical paradise, isolated from the rest of the world, where everything everyone needs is free (health care, education, day care, etc), and nobody has to work more than 35 hours per week (if they feel like working of course), and everyone would live happily ever after!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Congrats Mr. Editor good luck with the next 1000.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I also read with great interest the five Le Devoir papers about Air Canada and Montreal. I went as far as reading all the comments following the five papers and it seems that the sepratists's response is not "we don't need no stinkin' Air Canada". But I would not want to spoil the Editor's angle.

    I noted three or four interesting comments refering to american urbanist Jane Jacobs's views on cities's economic influence and the regionalisation of Montreal. If separatists do explain everything, they at least do it with arguments and ideas more elaborate than the usual and tiring "business left because of french".

    Reading the comments, I also learned that Québec government's firt choice would have been an international airport in Montérégie close to highway 20 (instead of Mirabel actual location) in order to be closer to Québec City. The airport would have then been more useful for both Montreal and Québec City (and Sherbrooke, Drummondville, etc) but Mirabel was the federal governement's call. I find this to be a good illustration of how decisions in transport shape the development of a nation and what are the consequences of not having the power to take those decisions by ourselves for ourselves.

    So what was separatists's response? Luc-Normand Tellier in his january 23th letter to Le Devoir concludes : "Il est parfois utile de se rappeler que le contraire de l’indépendance, c’est la dépendance."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Geez Michel: You guys want your cake and want to eat it too. You want the money from the Federal Government for all these projects but the Federal Government is not to have any say in such things as location of an airport. Are you people for real? What the hell would anyone in the business world in the rest of North America want with an airport in Quebec City, so far out of the way of Montreal, Toronto and Ottawa, the business hubs of the eastern part of Canada? Think man! The airport would have attracted no one and Toronto or Ottawa would have been the desired location rather than travelling all the way to Quebec City. That airport would never have attracted anyone but residents of quebec and even then, I'm much closer to Montreal or Ottawa than Quebec City. God man, use your head.

      Delete
    2. Michel:

      The Canadian Department of Transport studied five possible sites for Montreal's new airport: Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu (50 km/31 mi to the southwest), Vaudreuil-Dorion (40 km/25 mi to the west), Joliette (70 km/43 mi to the north), St-Amable (30 km/19 mi to the southeast), and Ste-Scholastique (60 km/37 mi to the northwest).
      Terminal view

      The federal government proposed that the airport should be located at Vaudreuil-Dorion. This location was well connected by existing road and rail routes, as well as being close enough to serve the population of the city; furthermore it could serve as the gateway to Ottawa as well as Montréal. Quebec Premier Robert Bourassa, who had a frosty relationship with Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, reportedly did not want such an important project to be placed so close to the Ontario border. The Bourassa government preferred that the new airport be situated in Drummondville (100 km/62 mi to the east).


      Source: Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montr%C3%A9al%E2%80%93Mirabel_International_Airport


      So clearly the federal government wasn't the only responsible for Mirabel's location.

      Delete
    3. LD

      I worked with some guys that helped pour the concrete for the runways at Mirabel and its well known that Vaudreuil was the first choice for the airport. Bourassa pushed the ill fated Mirabel option. While Montreal was dithering with two airports, Toronto was attracting all the European traffic and planning the behemoth of an airport they have now.

      Delete
    4. "The Bourassa government preferred that the new airport be situated in Drummondville (100 km/62 mi to the east)."

      I think the idea was that an airport in the Montreal-Sherbrooke-Trois-Rivières triangle would better serve Québec major cities and better help our development. The federal probably wanted to favor the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal triangle, a situation in which Montreal is increasingly regionalized.

      "So clearly the federal government wasn't the only responsible for Mirabel's location."

      Yes, the federal wasn't alone, there were two governments with each its vision, two sets of interests were involved and struggling over the decision.

      Could it be a possible cause (among other things) of the mess that Mirabel has become?

      Delete
    5. Could it also be that Montreal is no longer a "big business" destination in Canada? Michele - let's be honest - Montreal is no longer a power center in Canada and it's because of separatist policies - North Americans no longer feel welcome in quebec - simple. Even if you became a country, borders intact, your new country will suffer bitterness from the rest of the free world for a long, long time because no one, absolutely no one, understands what the big problem is that you have with people of other cultures and other languages. Face it - You will left totally on your own with no backers of any kind for many, many long years. People don't forget quickly - just like you guys are still bringing up the Plains of Abraham - the same scenario awaits you, your kids, your grand kids and great-great grand kids at least. "Lest We Forget" will become your theme.

      Delete
    6. As an example, I have an elderly aunt and her friend that live not 10km across from me in Ottawa and they refuse to come over for dinner anymore. They are terrified (she especially) that she will be stopped by the police and they will refuse to speak to her in english and she does not speak french. She also feels that, because she has Ontario licence plates, she will be targeted by them and stopped for nothing but the fact that her plates are not from quebec. This is how bad it is becoming over here. Don't you guys get it? You are scaring away everyone that does not speak your language. These are intelligent, nice people but they read incidents in the paper every day of Ms Pee telling people "to be proud of your language" and "report infringements" against their imagined slights to the french language. God - when are you people going to smarten up and realize the impact you are having on our daily lives?

      Delete
    7. @cutie003

      "I have an elderly aunt and her friend that live not 10km across from me in Ottawa and they refuse to come over for dinner anymore."

      what did you talk about with her when she came over?

      " You are scaring away everyone that does not speak your language."

      everyone? how do you know?!?

      "...Ms Pee telling people "to be proud of your language"..."

      what is wrong with that cutie003?

      Delete
    8. Cutie003,

      Stop and think for a minute.

      Now, honestly, are your aunt's fears rational?

      Delete
    9. Dammit student = you still don't get it = she's 86 years old and frightens very easily. Does this make you bigots feel good about yourselves; frightening elderly ladies with your BS. I hope you're proud of yourselves. You should all be in jail or put on Baffin Island to live with each other and leave the rest of us to hell alone.

      Delete
    10. Could it be a possible cause (among other things) of the mess that Mirabel has become?

      I find the story of Mirabel quite interesting actually, such a great project that was doomed from the start.

      I think many other factors led to what it is today:

      - Longer range jets meant that airliners crossing the atlantic no longer needed to stop at Mirabel to refuel.
      - The 13 was supposed to be extended all the way to the airport, providing a second route from Montreal. Of course, this was never done.
      - A high speed train link was planned between downtown montreal and mirabel airport. The built underground terminal at Mirabel served most of its time as an employee parking garage.
      - Highway 50 was supposed to extend all the way to the Ottawa region, I believe this was only completed last year.
      - Dorval (err sorry, P.E.T) should have been shut down, imagine all the prime real estate it would have left, right on the island of Montreal!

      It seems to me as if Mirabel airport was a great project and a great idea, and if the above had been completed, things might be quite different.

      I'd really love to know what the political motivations behind the decisions that were made. Was it just a "we don't have the money" thing, or was there more to it?

      Delete
    11. Plus the aunt mentioned, more than once and being ex military during WWII, that's exactly how fascists in Germany acted just before and during WWII.

      Delete
    12. Michel would probably also claim that the Olympic Stadium fiasco in Montreal is the fault of the Federal government.

      That reminds me of a very funny song by Bowser and Blue called "Faute du Federal."

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yFElFVVFpk

      ---------------------------------

      Many thanks to the Editor for this informative blog!

      Delete
    13. @durham

      "Michel would probably also claim that the Olympic Stadium fiasco in Montreal is the fault of the Federal government."

      that's umpugning motives. totally invalid argument. you should do like me and ask a question instead. for example, michel, who do you think is responsible for the olympic stadium fiasco? you should also include a few details about why you think it's a fiasco.

      then you might learn what michel really thinks. easy!

      hum...actually maybe you don't want to know what he thinks about it and are just interested in punching low... can you confirm this please?

      Delete
    14. "...are just interested in punching low..."

      À l'image du vrai durham,l'arrogant et le méprisable durham.

      "Il propose également de fusionner le Bas-Canada et le Haut-Canada dans le but d'assimiler les Canadiens français.."

      Delete
    15. @ student,

      Check out the following link on Wikipedia. You will quickly see why I - and many other people - think the Olympic Stadium is a total fiasco.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Stadium_%28Montreal%29

      Delete
    16. @durham

      i agree the olympic stadium is not a example of good project management.

      but i was more concerned about the way you brought this issue up, rather than the issue itself.

      Delete
  16. "they (separatists) will never, ever believe that the sovereignty or language issue has been and remains detrimental to Quebec's growth and prosperity, this despite the clear evidence staring them in the face."

    That our languages laws hurt our economy can be a rationnal argument yet it is unheard by francophones. Why?

    (http://michelpatrice.wordpress.com/2011/12/22/talking-to-a-wall/)

    It might be that francophones have seen their economic status getting much better since the Quiet Revolution. There used to be for francophone a glass ceiling that is no more.

    Let me use an outrageously inflammatory analogy with South Africa. Reading daily accusations of nazism, racism, fascism, apartheidism (if there is such a word) being thrown at each other's face, I guess that most of you will be ok with this kind of analogy.

    I guess that in South Africa, there were people arguing that the political instability resulting from the fight against Apartheid hurted South Africa's economy. And I guess that most blacks "never, ever believed it (or cared...), this despite the clear evidence staring them in the face."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Michel, you and I often disagree, but I take very stern offense to the fact that you compare the plight of the average Quebecois Francophone with a South African black.

      Very reprehensible comparison.

      Delete
    2. I can see that Michel, but unfortunately I don't see what enforcing that Windows Vista is installed in French has anything to do with removing the glass ceiling.

      In my opinion, francophones be they separatists and federalists should examine Bill 101 with great scrutiny, identify the parts which actually contribute to ensuring the continuation of services and usage of French and the parts which just antagonize businesses and contribute negatively to your economy.

      At its core, the "right to work in French" sounds very empowering to francophones. Unfortunately the law is a misnomer - much like the "right to work" in the USA is a right for employers to fire employees at-will and the illegality of mandatory membership in unions, the "right to work in French" would be better described as the "legal obligation to work in French" applied indiscriminately on Francophones, Allophones and Anglophones alike with total disregard to their own preferences.

      A law focused on empowering and increasing the freedom of francophones would, for instance, force the employer to make French software available at the request of the employee. A law that forces the employer and the employee to use French software unless the employee specifically requests a non-French version limits rather than increases personal freedom and empowerment.

      Delete
    3. I am not surprised, this guy has always been a sugar coated racist.

      Delete
    4. "It might be that francophones have seen their economic status getting much better since the Quiet Revolution. There used to be for francophone a glass ceiling that is no more."

      This is a good point. The economy as a whole might have gone down, but francophone access to the remainder of the economy has increased. And everyone would prefer more access to a smaller pie than little or no access to a bigger pie.

      So he's right to point out that wailing about an overall dip in the economy, no matter how impressive that dip is, will not affect those who don't really feel the effects of this dip.

      This also confirms Eric Hobsbawn's analysis in "Nations and Nationalism since 1780" which demystifies QC nationalism that has been skillfully wrapped in multiple layers of mystique.

      "I do not wish to reduce linguistic nationalism to a question of jobs, as vulgar materialist-liberals used to reduce the question of war to the profits of armaments firms. Nevertheless it cannot be fully understood unless we see the language as, among other things, a vested interest of the lesser examination-passing classes. Each step giving the language greater official standing, especially as a teaching language, multiplied the number of men and women who could have a share in this vested interest. Hence the crucial moment in the creation of language as a potential asset is not its admission as a medium of primary education but its admission as a medium of secondary education, such as was achieved in Flanders and Finland in the 1880s. For it is this which, as the Finnish nationalists were clearly aware, linked social mobility to the vernacular, and in turn to linguistic nationalism. It was in Antwerp and Ghent that a new secular minded generation, educated in Flemish in public secondary schools, produced many of the individuals and groups who formed and sustained the new Flamingant ideology. One might have expected the Flemings, like the Quebecois, with demography in their favor, to look to the future with confidence. In this respect they were more favored than the speakers of more rural idioms like Irish, Breton, Basque, Romansch, Frisian or Welsh which left to themselves, did not look like effective competitors in a purely Darwinian interlingual struggle for existence. But Flemish and Canadian French were in no sense threatened as languages. What was under threat was not their language but the status and social position of the Flamingant or Quebecois middle strata. Only political protection could raise these."

      Delete
    5. When languages lose their status and social position, they disappear thereafter. Look at the assimilation rates of immigrants for instance.

      It should be noted that political protection of the Welsh language has slowly been increasing proficiency of that language in Wales - mostly through support of the government in teaching it at school. The Trudeau rather than 101 approach.

      Delete
    6. "When languages lose their status and social position, they disappear thereafter."

      Not always. As Hobsbawn points out, Canadian French and Flemish were not in danger of disappearance, despite the fact that the Flemish and the Quebeocis occupied a lower rang in social hierarchy (we often hear of the self-deprecating "Negres Blancs" phrase used back in those days, which was true as far as social status goes, but not in terms of actual vitality of language, as the numbers of French speakers were increasing steadily since 1763). So languages can survive in lower social positions. French in QC survived thanks to reproduction rates encouraged by the Catholic Church. English in QC, pushed to a lower rang in a legal sense in the 1970s, survives based partly on its status outside of QC, partly on other reasons.

      Languages that lose their status and social position may disappear thereafter, they may not, but such thinking absolves those who make an upward jump of selfishness. So a Jean pushing a John off of his seat at CN in the 1970s was not acting in self interest, he was acting to preserve his culture. Because with the upward mobility of someone like Jean, his culture and his language would survive, otherwise the outlook was not so good. So Jean is absolved on any selfishness for his actions, on the contrary, he should be applauded for his altruism and dedication to his culture. In the meantime, John should not hold any grudges, because it was about a culture, not about a job. So John better bottle it, or else we'll label him angryphone, or something.

      So mystification continues even as new pieces are demystified, and the theory of cultural extermination is very good at obscuring any actions that might have been motivated by self-interest (I don't doubt that for many it was about culture, but for countless others it was a pure materialistic calculation...no document to prove it, Student, sorry).

      Delete
    7. Adski,

      "The economy as a whole might have gone down, but francophone access to the remainder of the economy has increased. And everyone would prefer more access to a smaller pie than little or no access to a bigger pie."

      My point exactly. I would like to have said it as clearly as you did.

      "(I don't doubt that for many it was about culture, but for countless others it was a pure materialistic calculation...no document to prove it (...)"

      It was a great deal about materialistic calculations, this has always been clear to me and I am always surprised to see talking about this as if it was some big secret.

      Yannick,

      I am not that interested in the details of Bill 101 (avalability of or mandotoy use of french software, whatever). (I would rather see independentists focus more on independence and less on language...)

      My point is that if someone blames every Québec problem on our language legislation and rejects our language legislation as a whole, one should not be surprised to find himself talking to a wall. Because francophones see greater benefits than inconvenience to our language legislation.

      Delete
    8. Resident Evil,

      "Reading daily accusations of nazism, racism, fascism, apartheidism (if there is such a word) being thrown at each other's face, I guess that most of you will be ok with this kind of analogy."

      Delete
    9. Adski,

      I might have found the evidence that you were looking for :

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mW5bN8Da5s4 (Starts at 3:05)

      "Quand nous parlons de langue, (...) ce n'est pas pour écrire un poème, une chanson ou une pièce de théâtre. (...) Pour nous, la langue, c'est une question de dollars et de cents."

      Delete
    10. Maybe this, the truth, is (was) communicated so directly to the francophones as an incentive to support nationalism, but when communicated to immigrants, it gets cloaked in layers of mystique. If you go up to an immigrant and say: it was about jobs for us, the immigrant will not see any incentive to accept the current arrangement, in fact he might oppose the arrangement because it does not work to his economic benefit. But if you deck it up with stories about cultural preservation, you might get his approval and his acquiescence. So in an FSL class, for example, you'd never hear the dollars and cents mentioned. Economy does not factor in at all, only cultural issues do.

      Also, maybe some francophones themselves do not want to accept such a vulgar materialist explanation, and prefer to think that it was all for a higher purpose.

      In any case, there must be a reason why the economic side of the transformation is often obscure from view or underplayed, while other, much less decisive factors get overplayed.

      Delete
    11. Adski,

      Do immigrants buy the cultural preservation thing? I don't really know. Will a recent immigrant learn french out of love of our culture? I am skeptical.

      "So in an FSL class, for example, you'd never hear the dollars and cents mentioned."

      If immigrants were told in FSL class about our socio-economic status being really bad in the sixties and how we turned things around etc, would we not be accused of separatist propaganda? History teaching is a very touchy matter in our society.

      Maybe immigrants should be told about the economic factor = if you don't speak french, your future is limited in Québec (unless you are highly skilled). And, yes, english is very useful, so you are basicaly condemned to learn both languages. And this about dollars and cents.

      "In any case, there must be a reason why the economic side of the transformation is often obscure from view or underplayed, while other, much less decisive factors get overplayed."

      Unlike what many think, conflicts are downplayed in our history classes. You know, we don't like la chicane. A discussion about culture will not rock the boat. A discussion about some kind of class struggle might become unconfortable.

      Did you attend FSL classes? If so, I am curious about your experience.

      Delete
    12. “Because francophones see greater benefits than inconvenience to our language legislation”

      You have no economy BECAUSE of your language legislation. And that is an indisputable FACT!

      Eventually you will run out of money and your “language legislation” will be a luxury you cannot afford. Recently, I spent time with people all across the country...THEY DON’T GIVE A F....ABOUT THIS PROVINCE. Some even told me that there are underground movements to get rid of us through a national referendum, (not that this is a new idea or surprises anyone), the question being “Keep Quebec or Flush Quebec? You don’t want to know the answer I kept hearing.

      How ironic though, for the seppies to achieve separation that way. Not through self determination, but rather, through being discarded & rejected and banished to the curb.

      Delete
    13. "If immigrants were told in FSL class about our socio-economic status being really bad in the sixties and how we turned things around etc, would we not be accused of separatist propaganda? "

      Interesting question. The answer is yes, because the explanation of "turned around" would be missing. What would be said is that an unjust system was overhauled. What would be left unsaid is that an unjust system was replaced with another unjust system. And propaganda is about what is left unsaid in relation to the stated fact.

      History is unfortunately littered with unjust systems overcome only to be replaced with another unjust system. Maybe a system is by definition unjust, and I might be giving away my anarchist side here.


      "Maybe immigrants should be told about the economic factor = if you don't speak french, your future is limited in Québec"

      Makes no sense. We are talking about immigrants already in the FSL class, so they do not need convincing to learn French. They already made that decision. The problem for many of them starts when they realize that knowledge of French may not be enough, and how subtle societal forces might be involved.


      "And, yes, english is very useful, so you are basicaly condemned to learn both languages."

      It is interesting that immigrants are condemned to learning English. Why is that? Partly because of the lingua franca pressure, but partly because they are condemned to the private sector which global and requires English. If they were given more opportunities in the public sector, maybe some of them would forgo learning a third language.

      "Unlike what many think, conflicts are downplayed in our history classes. You know, we don't like la chicane."

      They are, in every country, and at every school level where history is taught. Real history with all its nuance is subversive, one sided myth is convenient.


      "A discussion about culture will not rock the boat. A discussion about some kind of class struggle might become unconfortable."

      Uncomfortable, and dangerous. Because it's real. Class struggle is what most history is about and what most people in the past and present endure. Yet it is carefully excised from official history, and in the present people are encouraged not to think along these lines.


      Delete
    14. "That our languages laws hurt our economy can be a rationnal argument yet it is unheard by francophones. Why?"

      Denial, pure an simple, Denial.

      You choose not hear and see. In the end, it will bite you in the a&& as sure as the sun rises and sets every single day!

      Delete
    15. Michel, tu dis souvent que tu ne t'attardes pas aux détails. Pourtant, ce sont les détails de la loi 101 qui dérangent. Rien ne s'améliorera sans que les séparatistes comme les nationalistes y regardent de plus pres.

      Delete
    16. Adski,

      I am going to sleep. It was a nice discussion.

      I like (find funny) your vision of of brainless masses manipulated by obscure evil forces.

      I am still curious about your personnal experience in FSL.

      Delete
    17. Yannick,

      Peut-être que ce sont les détails de la loi qui dérangent et peut-être pourrait-il y avoir des changements. Mais les deux camps sont assez campés sur leur position et c'est difficile de discuter dans ce contexte.

      Quand on dit quelque chose comme "You have no economy BECAUSE of your language legislation. And that is an indisputable FACT! You choose not hear and see. In the end, it will bite you in the a&& as sure as the sun rises and sets every single day!", je ne sais pas ce que j'ai, mais j'ai tout d'un coup comme plus envie d'écouter. Ça fait que les détails qui dérangent...

      Bonne nuit.

      Delete
    18. Excellent arguments, adski and Yannick.
      Enjoy the slumber, Michel.

      Delete
    19. Sometimes I feel like Apparatchik only appreciates me when I side with Federalist arguments...

      Michel, je comprends entièrement. Surtout avec l'abus qui t'es réservé du a ton affilation politique. Mais je voudrais te faire voir que tes adversaires politiques s'attardent aux aspects les plus mesquins de la loi 101, et qu'ils en sont que plus convaincants. Refuser de réfuter ces aspects n'encourage en rien ton mouvement politique, surtout si tu n'es pas d'accord avec ces aspects mesquins.

      Delete
    20. That's exactly what I'm afraid of AnecTOTE = The ROC throwing out the baby (us) with the bathwater (seppies). That's why we must get a partition party or the Equality Party 2.0 must have an option to let those areas that vote to go - leave us and go it alone. This must be covered or we will definitely be thrown out as a whole if the ROC decides to get rid of quebec and, at this point, who can blame them? We're a huge money drain and we're rebels for no reason whatsoever. No cooperation, no working together, nothing in common with the separatists, socialist beyond reason and nothing to offer to the rest of the country. We're an embarrassment to North America and freedom in our society does not exist. We have about 2.5 million people destroying a country of 33 million. We have to try to find a peaceful way out of this and partition is the way to go.

      Delete
  17. FROM ED
    Michel,
    It was the harbour and the location of same that built Montreal. Being so far inland products were already on their way west. With the rail head offices here goods from Europe and elsewhere in the world were forwarded across North America. When countries around the globe were told they had to make shipping and lading bills in french they started
    sending ships up the new seaway to Toronto. They did not want to do this as it was not convenient. In Montreal they could unload, load and turn a ship around in 24 hours. 102 berths were full 24 hrs. day from April to November. I worked in ship repair. If a repair job was not completed the ship sailed anyway and we had to find our way back from Fathers point where the River Pilot's lived. It was that close. They still lose time having to go to Toronto but when the shippers moved the rail (CPRand CNR) moved their HQ's, repair shops/forwarding agencies to Toronto. Their piggyback, container transport etc. went as well. 100,000 well paying jobs.
    I remember when the Montreal star had one half page for Toronto stock exchange and Montreal S.E. took two pages. By 1980 it was the other way around. When the exodus was pointed out to rene Levesque he said, " if it seems to be a problem, we'll deal with it."
    100,000 jobs were lost on the waterfront alone, 98 % francphones. truck drivers fork lift, checkers and guards were all french.
    The reason things improved for francophones after 1960 was because a Liberal government under Jean Lesage took control from the Catholic Church so that Francophoners had only government taxes to pay instead fo both Church and government. Lesage has been labeled a separatist but he was merely trying to improve the life of French people and he did.
    The glass ceiling you mention was caused by the R.C. Church not educating boys past second high. They were stuck working by the hour on jobs that I have mentioned above. Bus and tram drivers were not highly paid. I remember a bus driver that mortgaged his house to buy a taxi so he could make money.
    I have been around a long time and never heard of accusations of Naziism until the party Quebecois started the hatred.
    The exodus of half a million anglos was probably not noticed by francophones because of the lies of party Quebecois. Friends I worked with on the waterfront have told me that back then they were told that the Canadian Government who controlled the Harbour was refusing to let ships unload there. The economical possibility of the harbour still is being wasted. Ed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FROM ED
      God Cutie, it's not meant to be a story. They're still arguing about whether language laws had any bearing on the economy of Montreal. I laid it all out. I was there reading the papers every day. Working and living in it. Watching the news every night, but they quote Hobspawn who never even visited North America. They'll find a million reasons why the glass ceiling ws raised for francophones. The answer I told them is history . Look it up! When Jean Lesage organized education for francophones he made everyone level. French kids could go to grade twelve like the english. The one french high school in Verdun had only grade eight and nine. Anyone wanting grade ten had to go downtown. The teachers were now paid a salary by the government instead of the Church having to use the left over brothers still hiding from WWII.
      By the way EDITOR Sun Life was not the first to go. It started with the rail ways and other national corporations. The stock market within a year. bank head offices, and manufacturing since the railways were gone found shipping a problem. '
      Sun Life was one of the last big insurance compnies but they were the only ones who had the guts to announce publicly
      that they were leaving because of the language laws. So many others sneaked away, in most cases without being noticed until some one went looking to do buiness with them. It's stillquestionable why Sun Life went. It could be thst they were doing much business in GROUP LIFE which meant dealing with head offices that were mostly in Toronto. Ed

      Delete
    2. Ed - would you have preferred it if I called it "nice history" rather than "nice story" Ed? There was nothing derogatory in my comment Ed nor in Yannick's. Don't know why you would be offended - sorry.

      Delete
    3. FROM ED
      Sorry Cutie, I didn't mean to take it out on you. It wasn't meant to be a story or history, It bugs me that you give some people facts
      that are staring them right in the face and people who were'nt there would rather give their own version of what they think happened. Instead of quoting some European philoseepher get some facts from the newspapers, then talk. Ed

      Delete
  18. FROM ED
    EDITOR
    Congratulations a 1000 times. I have learned a lot from your posts. Also with the information of peple like Mr.Sauga who is a fountain of facts,
    (His post about the hockey players today for example) I have learned from Cutie about the law. And from others about things I had never thought of. All thanks to you. Ed

    ReplyDelete
  19. @Editor. Congratulations, Enjoy this site immensely. Why did you have to mention Israel ?going to that place, will make Adski jump all over you.

    @Adski Way to go . Loved the piece .

    @Patrice one law from south Africa Apartheid
    Population Registration Act, Act No 30 of 1950
    Led to the creation of a national register in which every person's race was recorded. A Race Classification Board took the final decision on what a person's race was in disputed cases.
    When did the British do this to the Habitants, you can change race to hair color, straight hair, curly hair, which part of France original ancestors came from; you get the picture. If you go to http://africanhistory.about.com/library/bl/blsalaws.htm you will get a better picture of what was going on in South Africa.

    You will notice all the PQ hasbarat (fils à papa )write perfect English. Most probably money, private school, learning English in kinder garden, more than likely maternity. There saying “Hey vous autre! les moutons faite pas que je faite. faite que je te dites”and under there breath: No English for you, No GOOD job for you ;have to save that for my son or daughter, No going out west because there no work for you here ,go on welfare. ON&ON&ON. You also noticed Jack(once the lobster is in the pot etc.. guy) picked up his toys and went to a vineyard in France. Wonder where all those elite(White French Canadian Roman Catholics) invest there money. Then there is exPM(moved the federal dept onto the provinces, guy) and declared balance budget. Had his money off shore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Right on - they won't face the fact that their own fellow seppies look after themselves only and not the population as a whole. I keep saying = the minute outright trouble starts in this place because of their policies and the breakup of Canada, these A--h==== will be off to their private residences in wherever leaving the day to day battle to be fought by the same people they've hoodwinked for all these years. How to open the eyes of these francophones is our real challenge. We have to make them understand what major liars these people are.

      Delete
    2. "Why did you have to mention Israel ?"

      Because Israel and Denmark are both small nations, at seven and six and million inhabitants, both with a unique language, even more fragile than French. Yet they both encourage citizens to learn English to no detriment.
      You can walk up to just about any group of people, anywhere in Demark or Israel and converse in English.
      You can't say that in Quebec.

      Delete
    3. Good for Israel and Denmark. These are example nations Quebec politicians should be looking at when deciding how to run the province.

      Delete
    4. Wish we could count of that EDM - have no faith in these politicians. Just heard Couillard saying that he wants to re-open constitution talks to acknowledge Quebec as "different". Have to wait what he means by that before I can make a decision as to whether he should be leading our only (so far) supposedly federalist party.

      Delete
    5. To add to Editor's remarks above, is that Hebrew only existed in the scriptures for 2000 years without having been spoken. It was a governmental decision to bring back Hebrew as a national language when Israel became a state in 1948.

      When the Australian bigot came out with Passion of the Christ about ten years ago, a lot of the dialogue was in Aramaic. Who speaks Aramaic anymore? The scriptures preserved those languages for centuries, and any language today thanks to the information age can be properly catalogued for all time. That is certainly happening to Yiddish except for a few maturing people who have suddenly developed a connection to it because past generations spoke it (albeit for only a few centuries, mostly in Central and Eastern Europe) and now it's dying. My parents and grandparents spoke it, but I don't see my culture and me as an Ashkenazic Jew dying if I don't speak Yiddish. Sephardic Jews (of the Mediterranean) don't even speak it.

      This whole business about preserving French in Quebec is a total farce, just like the Afrikaaner nationalists of South Africa. Afrikaans is just poor Dutch spoken mostly by Boers (farmers), much like Quebec really speaks Joual.

      Delete
    6. Right you are EDM! All I know about Denmark is the average abode is very small and Denmark is a very expensive place to live. They are heavily socialized, so they better balance their books or like most socialist states, they'll be cutting provisions à la Grèce. The more socialized a state is, the harder the cutbacks because of reliance on the state for services, and in some cases, goods as well.

      Israel has the difficult job of a very large defense budget, I believe the largest per capita on the planet. After all, look at who and what surrounds them. Even Egypt is on the way to unravelling over 30 years of peace.

      Israel is fighting a very real, very dangerous enemy. Quebec separatists are trying to conjure up enemies (i.e., the rest of Canada that is only the hand that feeds them colossal equalization payments that I will make every effort from outside Quebec to lobby against.

      I assure our readers of three certainties in life: (1) The sun will rise tomorrow; (2) Every person breathing air today will die someday and (3) Quebec will find more ways to shoot itself in the foot and not cripple itself with any luck.

      Delete
    7. Denmark and Israel aren't exactly surrounded by the largest Anglophone population in the world, and sporting 10-20% of inhabitants who use English most often at home.

      Delete
    8. @Editor : Out of curiosity, how is Danish less threatened than French in North America?Whom/what threatnes it?

      @Mr Sauga : What a condescend attitude? How would you react if I tell that Canadian English is poor English?

      Delete
    9. Mr. Sauga "that Hebrew only existed in the scriptures for 2000 years without having been spoken. It was a governmental decision to bring back Hebrew as a national language when Israel became a state in 1948".It is modern Hebrew that is spoken in Israel , your statement gives the impression that it is scripture hebrew that is spoken today in Isreal.Mel Gibson born in Peekskill, New York, moved with his parents to Sydney, Australia, when he was 12 years old,Australian I am not sure,bigot yes.I agree with statements(1)&(2) but (3) change Quebec for Israeli ,same difference. Israel’s Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel (1948) declares that:
      "...THE STATE OF ISRAEL … will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations." (Laws of the State of Israel, 1948; State of Israel Official Website, 1998)WOW at the time I thought that this state was going to show the whole world how to live then it turned south(damn it).Mr Sauga Do you have an open mind,check the facts,no denial. Google "Discriminatory Laws in the State of Israel"and weep the way I did. I HAVE NO MORE TO SAY ABOUT THE STATE OF ISRAEL A WONDERFUL DREAM.

      Delete
    10. Isn't Israel surrounded by 200 million Arabic speaking people? Is Arabic banned in Israel? Are Arabic speaking Israeli citizens denied political rights? Isn't there an Arab party represented in the Israeli Parliament? Just asking.

      Delete
    11. Well it's important to distinguish between Arabic citizens of Israel and Palestinians. The latter are disenfranchised, having neither the rights of Israeli citizens nor the rights of citizens of a sovereign nation.

      Roughly 20% of Israel's citizens (again non-Palestinian) are Arab. They are underrepresented in the civil service (6%). There have been attempts to ban Arab parties in the past due to the claim that they seeked to deny the existance of Israel, but these attempts have been rejected by the Israeli supreme court.

      Arabic did not have equal rights in the past, but since the 90's Arabic has become an official language in Israel, with trilingual (including english) signage sometimes available. Israeli are taught a small amount of Arabic in school, but Arab communities sometimes have access to more substansive Arabic classes.

      Overall their approach seems to be more like Canada's than Quebec's.

      Delete
    12. @the quebec partition

      "Are Arabic speaking Israeli citizens denied political rights?"

      why do you ask this? what has it got to do with the situation in quebec?!?

      Delete
  20. Just received this in my e-mail - looks like another new group. Haven't read the website yet but thought I'd pass it on to all that are interested. The more the merrier!

    [Version française à suivre]

    Hello,

    We are pleased to introduce an important new voice called Canadian Rights in Quebec (CRITIQ), founded by a large group of experienced, knowledgeable and influential professionals and leaders from business, education, and media in Quebec. CRITIQ is dedicated to the protection in Quebec of those rights and freedoms invested in all Canadian citizens by our nation’s constitution, as well as by those international conventions by which Canada is bound.

    Visit the website www.critiq.ca or http://critiq.ca/m on a mobile device to see how you can add your voice and make a difference.

    Please forward this email to your contacts. Your support is needed, noted and appreciated.

    Best,

    CRITIQ Administration


    CANADIAN RIGHTS IN QUEBEC
    514.360.3236 | critiq.ca | info@critiq.ca

    Bonjour,

    Un nouveau mouvement voit le jour. Droits canadiens au Québec (CRITIQ) se consacre à la défense des droits et des libertés qui sont enchâssés dans la constitution du Canada pour tous les Canadiens, et dans des conventions internationales dont le Canada est signataire.

    Visitez notre site web www.critiq.ca ou www.critiq.ca/m sur un appareil mobile pour faire une différence.

    S'il vous plaît transmettre ce message à vos contacts. Votre soutien est nécessaire, noté et apprécié.

    Sincèrement,

    l'Administration de CRITIQ


    DROITS CANADIENS AU QUÉBEC
    514.360.3236 | critiq.ca | info@critiq.ca

    ReplyDelete
  21. Editor, thank you for this blog.

    A few years ago I was searching for some information and fell on this quirky little blog. The comments section was not what is today (the language has been cleaned up considerably), but I have to admit that those comments are what made me come back. I had found a place where people were not afraid to speak their minds.

    Congratulations on 1000 posts.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Because Israel and Denmark ...Ne sont pas entourés par 350 000 000 d'anglophones.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Israel is surrounded by Arabic speakers.

      Delete
    2. And independence will never alter that reality.

      Delete
    3. Are you really comparing the cultural influence of the United States with the one of the Arab World...

      Delete
    4. Denmark and Israel are also independent nations, so for the comparison to be fair Quebec would need to be independent also.

      Delete
  23. Mille fois chapeau. Merci.
    Bonne continuation!

    ReplyDelete
  24. The median annual receipted charitable contribution of a tax filer in QC that donated was only 44% of 9th place and poorer New Brunswick. This is only one of the ways in which Quebec is a sociological basket case.
    In Quebec a metro station, CEGEP, street and more are named in honour of a racist, BUT he was a nationalist! Highest high school drop out level in the industrialized world. We are #1 on pet abandonment. Only in QC are French hospitals turned into Frencher hospitals. The short video in this is hilarious! http://hopitallachine.wordpress.com/

    ReplyDelete
  25. I signed the petition even though I don't live near Lachine because the government has, again, been pushed into this decision by one of the most famous bigoted groups of all = the St. Jean Baptiste Society. These pressure groups are way, way out of control and seem to impact every decision made by the separatist government. We need stronger groups representing the moderates in this province. We are not doing enough to protect ourselves from these racists.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. earlier you wrote:

      "You should all be in jail or put on Baffin Island to live with each other and leave the rest of us to hell alone."

      and now:

      "We need stronger groups representing the moderates in this province."

      so you would be a moderate!?!

      Delete
    2. Don't bother answering him Cutie, after all, he already admitted in the last post that he never read Bill 101.

      As for Cutie's proposal, I once proposed it myself - not Baffin Island per se - but separatist island would be a fine idea. Give it a little time and I'm sure you champs would eventually find a reason to want to separate that island in two.

      Delete
    3. Caused by them wearing different coloured coats could be a reason to separate. You're right resident - they would find something to pick apart about each other. I wish these people would actually work for a living then perhaps they'd find less time to cause trouble for everyone else.

      Delete
  26. Quebec Investment Facts UPDATE:

    This has been a very busy week guys, but all this talk of Bill 101's details really inspired me to start working even sooner on the new site. What I intend to do is have a full site structure in place along with the pages.

    After watching Yannick go, I think we should have some sort of "10-Second Bill 101" page where we carefully dissect the bill in tiny, quickly-digestible bits and explain what these chunks mean to foreign investors.

    There was a book written by two authors, can't remember what it's called, but it was written in a Q & A format, and I found it very effective in systematically cutting down every sovereignist argument.

    Anyone know what boook I'm referring to?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. on your website, will you have yannick's first draft "bill 101 forces every internal documentation to be in French only", or the better version "bill 101 forces every internal documentation to be available in french"?

      Delete
    2. It's funny student, that when I write "101 forces anglophones to put their children in the francophone system" you read that as ALL anglophones exclusively, but when 101 writes "Internal documentation must be in French" you don't see it as exclusively French only. Why is that?

      For the record, I have been educating people on this blog the finer points of Canadian minority language education rights for a year now, and I have never pretended that EVERY anglophone had no minority language education rights. The fact that there are some at all who don't is violating section 23.1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and is unconstitutional, even if we in Canada have decided to look the other way for more than thirty years now.

      Delete
  27. Will keep looking Resident but thought this could help:
    http://www.sqlservercentral.com/blogs/hugo/2012/05/09/top-20-reasons-why-bill-101-is-a-nuisance-to-modern-quebec-society-greatest-hits-of-the-tyranny-of-bill-101/

    ReplyDelete
  28. Congratulation on your 1000th post, and thank you for all the hard work and intelligent thoughts that go into putting this blog together. I have been reading your blog from the very beginning when you would get just a few comments a day. I would read every comment posted and check back often to look for responses and updates. I have to admit I took a long break from the comments section, after finding it hard to follow and a bit too angry for my taste. The comments section made me realize two things, people from both side of the language divide are passionate about this topic and some people have way more free time than I have. Here is to many more posts, hopefully, some extolling the virtues and many great qualities this city and province has to offer. (maybe a future post…way way into the future).
    A Naughty Moose

    ReplyDelete
  29. Editor,

    Congratulations on the 1000th post. Keep up the good work. I am sorry that I can not contribute much lately.

    ReplyDelete
  30. M. Patrice,

    ...more elaborate than the usual and tiring "business left because of french".

    Can you then explain to me why is then Montreal business prominence in Canada is keep on declining? Montreal was the most populous, and economically the most important, city in Canada since the early 1700s until the beginning of the 1980s. How do you explain that? How do you explain the move of big businesses to Toronto?

    So say that it is because of the opening of St. Lawrence Seaway. I do not buy that. The fact remains that the Port of Montreal is the second busiest port in Canada (after Vancouver) and the world's busiest inland port. Port activities in Toronto is trivial compared to Montreal.

    Some say that because Toronto's proximity to the United States. I find it hard to believe either. While Toronto is close to Detroit - the center of automotive - Montreal is much closer to New York and Boston, the centers of finance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Troy,

      This is the argument that first brought me here in the first place (Thank you, Yannick). Since both of us are quite stubborn, we could argue forever if we take it back from the start. (And I am leaving on saturday for one week...)

      Here is what I think : http://michelpatrice.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/montreal-and-toronto/
      (Footnote #2 is interesting.)

      My opinion on this was influenced mainly by JRM Sauvé's Géopolitique du Québec and Janes Jacob's Cities and the Wealth of Nations. Two interesting reads.

      Delete
    2. If you haven`t seen this yet, you might like to read this opinion from Henri Aubin on Montreal`s declining prosperity and loss of head offices.

      http://www.montrealgazette.com/opinion/Aubin+avoid+losing+head+offices/7862525/story.html

      Delete
    3. M. Patrice,

      From your blog:

      In the beginning of North America’s colonisation, Montreal was at the gateway to the inner lands and Montreal became Canada’s economic center. With the developement of the inner lands, on both canadian and american side, the economical center of gravity moved west and Toronto benefited from it.

      If this premise was true, one would see that the economic center of the United States shifting towards the interior.

      The fact is, it is not the case. The Northeast Corridor (Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington) is still stronger than the Great Lakes Megalopolis (Chicago, Indianapolis, Detroit). Chicago, even, lost its status as the 2nd largest city in the USA (to Los Angeles). Detroit, that city has negative growth rate.

      Delete
    4. M. Patrice,

      Check the link that Laurie provided above. Note that there is no mention of language laws in the reasons given.

      Maybe the analogy for Quebec - to some extent - is California. I watched on Meet the Press on NBC and on Situation Room on CNN that Californians are leaving at significant rates to the states typically considered to be "worse". All because of high taxes of California. Remember than California has the highest GDP among all United States and more populous than Canada. Yet people are still leaving.

      Point is, if the population of a state as strong as California are leaving because of high taxes, imagine what high taxes will do for a not-so-strong province like Quebec.

      Delete
    5. Troy, you make us all think about the real core issues that make Canada tick with your great question about the difference between Toronto and Montreal circa 2013.

      And Dear Editor, questions like that are what bring me back to NO DOGS and explain why this blog is successful, beyond your expectations it seems. You write a provocative piece about "anglo rights" and then stand back. The comments pour in, overwhelming your antique host, but the cut and thrust finds a way. Congratulations on your 1000 th. Lang may your lum reek, as they say on the Isle of Rubbah (the ancestral home of the McTire clan). I cross swords with some of your regular commentators when I have the time to stick my nose in. There is a fair amount of angryphone babble and ranting but I fault myself when I over react to the rants. They are (still) free Quebecers so I must try to be a little less confrontational. You know, even Cutie and ED have their moments of lucidity. And I can't fault their passion for a better Quebec even if I may disagree with how they rationalize their opinions. Sharp cheddar is an acquired taste but its worth the effort. So I respectfully congratulate all the commentators who say what they think and take no prisoners in reply. They are partners in this blog's success. And yes, that includes you S.R., despite your tiresome reliance on sarcasm. All of you - angryphones, true believers, partitionists, souvrainistes, pedants and jokesters - please keep on blogging in the free world. There are some control freaks who would like to exclude "trolls" etc. but with time they will learn that the freedom of speech is the way forward.

      But back to Troy's question. Why is Toronto booming and Montreal seems to be in stasis? Troy is correct, it has nothing to do with the seaway. And it has been happenibg since the 1920's, not just since 1980. Check out the relative activity on the TSE vs. the MSE in the last 100 years and the irreversible trend is obvious. Forget why, I don't want to bore you further with a history lesson a la McTire. But the comparison between TO and MTL in 2013 is not pretty. Its not some anglo conspiracy like the dweebs on Vigile.net seem to think. The GTA attracts about 100,000 new consumers/taxpayers every year. There were over 50,000 new condo homes built in Toronto south of Bloor Street since 2003. TO is cooking with gas while MTL is rubbing sticks together and the tumbleweeds blow across the surface parking lots that dot centre ice Montreal. In fact, the old stereotype of staid WASP Toronto versus exciting wide open (i.e. creative) Montreal with its "joie de vivre" has effectively been reversed. Why? I happen to work in both Toronto and Montreal. I am back and forth all the time. Why has this happened ? Toronto is open to the world and open for business. MTL is not. There's far more to it than "openess" but I reget to say that MTL has lost its mojo and there is no sign that it will find it again any time soon. To paraphrase Peter, Paul and Mary - 'where have all the entrepreneurs and venture capitalists gone ? Gone to Toronto every one...' I think even Mr Sauga, who lives in the City that Rene Levesque built, as some cynics would say, will agree with me on this point. It bugs the heck out of me but there is no quick fix in sight. Enough. I'm depressing myself.

      Delete
    6. Troy and Laurie,

      Aubin's paper doesn't explain why Toronto was growing faster than Montreal in the 40s.

      Troy,

      "Note that there is no mention of language laws in the reasons given."

      He points out political uncertainty from sovereignty, I guess that languages legislation and sovereignism are seen as two aspects of a same broader picture.

      "Detroit, that city has negative growth rate."

      Yes, due to a deindusrialization phenomenon occuring in the last decades.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rust_Belt

      But Detroit and the surrounding areas developed in the last one or two centuries and it is this development that influenced our development. In the eight american states bordering the Great Lakes now live 87 millions inhabitants, so this area could have a negative growth rate for a very long time and still keep a huge economical size that will still influence us.

      "If this premise was true, one would see that the economic center of the United States shifting towards the interior."

      East american costal cities remain in a good position. There are large cities close to one another and cities need other cities to trade with (Janes Jacob again), and they are easily accessible by the open Atlantic ocean. To reach Montreal (and Toronto), one has to travel the Saint-Laurent river a long and difficult route.

      This being said, Boston was one of Jacobs's example of a stagnating city (in early XXth century, I believe) and an instance of a city that was rejuvinated (by different economic policies that have little to do with our discussion, in the last 50 years if my memory is right).

      (I am packing my luggage to be ready to leave for the week, so I will not be able to continue this much longer. Have a nice week.)

      Delete
  31. FROM ED
    Troy and Michel, For God's sake read the post I put up earlier. I explained in detail why thr decline statred. The seaway had nothing to do with it. It simply became a way out. Shipper's didn't want to lose a couple of days going to Toronto and back but the language laws gave them no choise. MONTREAL WAS THE INDUSTRIAL CAPITAL OF NORTH AMERICA. Rene Levesque destryed us personally. He was a lying little bastard that led the francophones down the garden path. He was warned that he was ruining Montreal's economy, but he cared only about his dream. Like Drapeau he had tunnel vision . Ed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr Brown,

      I read quickly read your post. What you explain is one factor among many others. And I am repeating myself, Toronto was growing faster than Montreal long before Lévesque came to power.

      Delete
    2. Something just crossed my mind.

      Lévesque, in the speech he gave when launching the PQ (available on YouTube), spoke, among other thing, of Canada losing economic ground in the world and of Québec losing economic ground in Canada.

      So, Montreal stagnation is one the causes that brought Lévesuqe and separatism. He argued that we should roll up our sleeves and take care of our own business. (It was a beautiful speech and, today, a tragicaly still relevant speech.)

      It can be argued that separatism increased the stagnation, but the relative stagnation of Montreal was nevertheless there long before (and it was there because of numerous geopolitical factors).

      Delete
    3. FROM ED
      MICHEL, You don't know what you are talking about. What you are saying is typical sepratist bullshit. Plerase don't quote Rene levesque to me. The man was a liar. He invented the lies that the PQ still uses. Montreal stagnation. What stagnation. Montrteal was the industrial capital of the world. There were jobs for everyone French and English. Get some old newspapers and look it up.
      EDITOR forgive my spelling. I find the letters so small on the post that I don't see the errors until it's posted. Ed

      Delete
    4. This thread of comments is dead. But ED, your suggestions that Montreal was the "industrial capital of North America" at 12:42 am and then "the industrial capital of the world" at 12:00 pm are totally false. Please, don't make up facts.

      Delete
    5. M. Patrice,

      I consider this sentence to be the cornerstone of your argument:

      With the developement of the inner lands, on both canadian and american side, the economical center of gravity moved west and Toronto benefited from it.

      I think I have to ask my question again. In the last 50 years at least, up to today, the Northeast Corridor of the United States is economically, politically and demographically stronger than the Great Lakes region. With this in mind, how do you explain that Toronto's growth is runaway compared to Montreal's?

      You mentioned a lot in your first respond, but you did not explain why if the Great Lakes region is in decline compared to Northeast region, that decline does not translate to Toronto and Montreal comparison. After all, the economic shift to the continental interior is your basic premise. After all, if Chicago and Detroit are in decline, should Toronto be too?

      As a side note, there are 455 direct flights weekly from Toronto to New York City (from Pearson or Bishop to JFK, La Guardia or Newark) and 159 flights to Chicago (O'Hare and Midway). As well, there are 102 flights to Boston compared to 71 to Detroit. This indicates, I think, that the relation between Toronto and East Coast is stronger than that between Toronto and Midwest. This contradicts your premise, I believe. FYI, there are 193 direct flights weekly from Montreal to New York and 39 to Boston. Quite sad numbers, IMHO.

      I am packing my luggage to be ready to leave for the week, so I will not be able to continue this much longer.

      Of course you are. You seem to do that quite often when a discussion is getting deeper and more intense.

      Delete