Bill 101 has successfully been sold to francophones as a necessary defensive mechanism needed to protect their language and culture from the onslaught of the English and remains massively popular.
Dr. Laurin shrewdly added clauses to the law that were overtly contrary to Canada's founding constitution, the BNA act. The inevitable challenges in the Supreme court and the subsequent defeats were anticipated and designed to bolster francophone resentment of Canada thus fostering a climate of confrontation that would serve separatists in their battle to convince Quebecers that Canada was an impediment to a flourishing Quebec society.
 |
| Evil father of Bill 101, hateful Anglophobe Camille Laurin |
The law was actually based and sold on two very wrong premises, the first that Quebec was becoming more and more English and secondly that it was the English and ethnic communities who were responsible for the perceived, yet false reality that English was on the upswing and threatening to steamroll the French nature of Quebec.
Let us consider that today's issue of massive immigration to Quebec by those speaking neither English or French wasn't an issue back when Bill 101 was conceived and where only about 20,000 immigrants per year were accepted compared to 50,000 today. Back then Quebec also produced more babies and was growing at a rate of 50,000 people (births minus deaths) locally compared to zero or negative growth today.
Bill 101 was a law conceived to battle a problem that didn't exist.
At any rate, restrictions were placed on the English language and the English community to the wild rejoicing of nationalists, while the general francophone population accepted the law as a necessary evil employed to forestall Quebec's demise as a French nation.
It wasn't actually that hard to convince the general francophone population that someone else's rights had to be trampled in order to protect theirs.
It's the same scenario employed around the world by ethnic-cleansing governments who first blame the ills of society on certain definable minorities and then place restrictions on those communities to placate and distract the masses.
While some of the tactics employed to rid nations of these pesky threats rise to genocide, other less obvious tactics are employed to disempower or drive out minorities deemed unwanted though restrictive laws that render these minorities, second-class citizens
Ethnic cleansing is the systematic forced removal of ethnic, racial and/or religious groups from a given territory by a more powerful ethnic group, often with the intent of making it ethnically homogeneous. WikipediaEvery single Quebec government since Bill 101 has enacted or enforced laws that promoted the destruction of the English minority, laws that renders the community so uncomfortable that an exodus to friendlier environs is preferable for many of the young and mobile.
What Anglo Quebec family doesn't count members who have emigrated to greener pastures in other parts of Canada or the USA?
How many times have you heard nationalist leaders tell us that if we don't like Bill 101, we should consider taking Highway 401, the road to Ontario.
Those my friends are the voices of ethnic cleansers who may blanch at being labelled as such, but who fit the bill.
Succeeding Quebec governments, whether separatists or federalists have always professed love for the anglo community but through their action or inaction in the face of Bill 101, have all worked to weaken, undermine, dislodge and ultimately render the Anglo community numerically impoverished and politically irrelevant.
`The premier (Legault) was asked to define just who is a "historical anglophone," after Immigration Minister Simon Jolin-Barrette, who is also responsible for the protection of the French language, said a new language policy will ensure all ministries and organizations offer public services almost exclusively in French.The policy should be ready in the coming weeks, Jolin-Barrette said, and will apply to communication with individuals as well as companies.Nothing will change for the "historic English minority," he explained — they "will always be able to receive all the services in their own language."
"Historic Anglo Minority."
Whenever you hear that phrase, understand that is code, and you are listening or reading an opinion provided by an ethnic cleanser.
Referring to the historic Anglo minority implies that it is a closed shop, amd nobody can join this community by choice and that immigrants who come to Quebec and their descendants will never be allowed to become Anglophones.
And therein lies the rub.
Consider that both native-born francophone and anglophone numbers are dwindling because of the falling birth rate which can no longer support a stable population.
For anglophones, this problem is infinitely more acute because of emigration by young Anglos fed-up with life in Quebec as well as inter-marriage between francophones and anglophones where two out of three blended families choose to educate their children in French.
While francophones can hope to bolster and restore their numbers through immigration and the forced adaptation of French as their language and culture, Anglophones are by law forbidden to assimilate new immigrants.
By refusing to allow a certain percentage of immigrants to enter the English primary school system, the law assures the gradual destruction of the English community in Quebec.
It is that plain and simple and we have already seen the results over the last thirty years, that is an Anglophone community reduced by half.
Beneath the surface of feigned respect and appreciation of the English in Quebec lies a starker and more sinister picture of francophone Quebec, a society obsessed with its purity, detesting the English and fearful of the necessary evil of impure immigrants who water down pur laine Quebec culture, even if they speak French.
Petty and vindictive, as highlighted by the Bonjour/Hi fiasco, 'pastagate' and more recently, the ruling by bureaucrats that a native French citizen of France did not possess the right stuff for immigration because a tiny portion of her dissertation was written in English (so that it could be published) highlights the underlying official enmity towards the English that is manifest and undeniable.
These are not isolated instances of pettiness but mark the underlying hateful attitude that Quebec governments and bureaucracy holds for the impure.
Such is the rhetoric of Francois Legault and his xenophobic minions, including the French media who heap scorn and disdain upon those not of the tribe.
Make no mistake, the organized assault on the English community is a plan launched by Dr. Laurin and followed and enforced up by every single subsequent Quebec government.
So don't single out Francois Legault and the CAQ for the hateful attitude towards Anglos and Ethnics, he and his party are just continuing the fine tradition of bashing minorities, the only difference being his unabashed zeal and shameful enjoyment of the endeavour.
Would Dr. Camille Laurin be alive today, he would be disappointed that Quebec has failed to gain independence but he'd be overjoyed at the humiliation his law has unleashed on the hated English and the decimation of the community his law has wrought.
Philip writes:
ReplyDelete"The inevitable challenges in the Supreme court and the subsequent defeats were anticipated and designed to bolster francophone resentment of Canada..."
Of course.
The most blatant examples of this were Blaikie I, Blaiki II, and the Canada Clause challenges to the Supreme Court. These were slam dunks for our side to win (which we did, unanimously, I believe) because those sections of Bill 101 directly and unambiguously contravened constitutional provisions. And, of course, the authors of those parts of Bill 101 that were ultimately found in contravention KNEW that they would be. Just as Philip commented, above.
Well, I think the same "strategy" is being played out with this week's announcement that a soon-to-be-announced slew of Quebec government services will be restricted to only those "historic anglos" and that the procedure to determine who qualifies as said historic anglo will be who qualifies for English language education as per the provisions of the Chapter on Language of Education in Bill 101.
As you all may know, the challenge to Bill 101's language of education provisions was struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2005's Gosselin (Tutor) decision in which Quebec francophone parents were denied the right to choose to attend English language schools in Quebec. One of the arguments made challenging the procedure of who is eligible to attend English schools was the invocation of the equality guarantees of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms found in section 15. But the Court said that one part of the constitution cannot be used to invalidate another part...so the restrictions stood. And we lost.
But the Court didn't say that discrimination wasn't happening; indeed, they actually, in a way, confirmed it...especially the example they used to illustrate why one part of the constitution couldn't be used to invalidate another: the Indian Act. The Court said (paraphrased) that if one could use the equality provisions of the constitution to invalidate other parts then any laws stemming from those sections of the Constitution involving Indians would be invalidated based on racial discrimination. And, of course, as everyone knows, the Indian Act is a race law. Funny that, because the procedure of discrimination in the Indian Act is based upon descent (parentage and whether a parent has a certificate), just like Bill 101.
But extending availability of government services in English to "NON-English language schools" services has nothing to do with Minority Language of Education provisions of the Charter, the part that section 15 was invoked to invalidate. As such, it is, again, a slam-dunk that they will be struck down as unconstitutional. Because it IS discrimination based on race and the constitution only makes provision for this racial discrimination for English schools and not other services. And, as Philip observed above regarding previous parts of Bill 101, Legault and company must know this. They are not dummies. It is the same strategy all over again.
I am a wee bit surprised that Legault is attempting to extend the body of government services that this "separate but equal" principle is to include. I say this because, in the past, the PQ only attempted this by motions in PQ conventions, not, if memory serves, by any project de loi or even any motions in the National Assembly. So this is a big leap for an actual government to make.
I am glad to see it, though. As complicated I think it was commented in a previous posting, this is a slippery slope. And I am glad in the sense that the additional services to be included in what is racial discrimination is actually happening. It is showing the Quebec Government's true colours.
As more than 60% of Quebec is cree and Inuit treaty land they should separate and have their own bill 101 stating only cree or Inuit can be spoken.
ReplyDeleteyou're right. every nation that has the means to be free should either be free or seek to be free. do you think the cree and innu have what's needed to sustain independance: number of people, democratic culture, house of representatives, constitutions, universities, trade deals, etc. ?
DeleteThe Francophone has the ability to sustain all student says, but what about the over $13 billion of equalization payments being forfeited, not to mention the Old Age Pension?
DeleteW-a-a-a-a-a-a-i-t a minute. Why worry? Let Quebec vote 52% for separation. Considering what that's doing in Britain and their Brexit, I can get a neurotic pleasure watching Quebec go through the same battle, and worse yet, the divide would be along ethnic lines as opposed to demographic lines, i.e., the youth vs the older Brits. GO LE-GO, GO!!! Most of the people I've left behind in Quebec are now dead, or they made their bed and will have to lie in it! This can be exciting!
@sauga
Delete"what about the over $13 billion of equalization payments being forfeited"
20% of equalization money comes from quebec, so your number ain't good to start with. then wha's the current surplus in quebec's budget this year? 6 billions? 7 billions? there you go, problem solved.
and even simpler for you: quebec's gdp over population puts it around 20th on the oecd's list of rich countries. that means it's in the top ten of non-petrol and non tax heaven countries. all this while not controlling half of its fiscal potential. so any intelligent reader will quickly figure out that this argument of yours is very weak indeed. you'll have to figure out another lie mate.
I have stumbled across the blog while researching the use of stop and/or arrêté on traffic signage. I am happy to have found it and this recent essay.
ReplyDeleteI am native to South Louisiana and have lived here all my life. My grandparents on my father's side were descended from the Acadians who were deported from present day Nova Scotia and my mother was native born French. My grandparents were fluent francophones as their maternal tongue as was my mother naturally.
I have seen how my father and those of his generation have for the most part lost the language their parents were fluent in. Much of this was a result of Louisiana forbidding the use of French in public schools, the courts, and any official transactions by the state constitution of 1921. The last Catholic Church parish in Louisiana ceased recording of sacramental baptisms, marriages and funerals in the early 1950's.
Finally realizing that French was being lost as a spoken language in Louisiana, the state established CODOFIL (Council for the Development of French in Louisiana) in 1968. Native French speakers primarily from Quebec and France were recruited and still are today to teach in Louisiana schools, primarily in south Louisiana. We have French immersion schools as well as schools where French is an elective for the students. It has been an uphill battle, especially in parishes that have not been historically francophone.
As an outsider I can understand the plight of the Quebecois francophones and their struggle to maintain their language and heritage in an increasingly anglophone society. They are but an island surrounded by an anglophone majority, who in many instances are in the seat of power, both politically and economically.
Bonne Chance!
As a Québécois francophone (who has nothing against current anglophone speakers in Québec and strongly disapproves of the recent Bill 21, but also of the attempted reforms of the Programme de l'expérience québécoise), it saddens me to read posts from blogs such as this one in which the historical struggle to keep our culture alive is demonized. Of course, I recognize that culture isn't fixed and that anglophones have always taken part in the shaping of francophone québécois culture, but there is an undoubtedly strong and affective link between peoples' language and identity that by itself warrants a careful use of measures (at some times better applied than others) to safeguard this identity. Arguments such as this blog's author's reflect bad faith and/or a profound lack of knowledge of the history of Québec on the one hand, and of the fate of the other Francophone minorities in North America on the other, as you have clearly shown.
DeleteIt turns out that such arguments also quite deliberately not mention that before the adoption of Bill 101, to speak English (or to "speak white," as was asked of Québécois in plain colonial English) was an absolute prerequisite to gain access to any position of power within business, aside from within a small commercial francophone bourgeoisie.
Merci !
Dear Unknown: Your curiosity is interesting insofar as you were researching ARRÊT signs. Quebec is the only jurisdiction in the entire world that uses this word on its STOP signs and it's wrong. ARRÊT is a noun meaning stop such as in bus stop, or rest stop, not the verb to stop (s'arrêter) or the imperative (arrêtez-vous). It was considerate of the State to implement the CODOFIL program. Sometimes language just dissipates due to lack of use.
DeleteSadly, and falsely, Quebec is using that false alibi to justify their language legislation even though the French language has existed in Quebec for about half a millennium and due to the pride of the population's majority, it will not disappear, and if so (unlikely), it won't happen in the lifetime of your grandchildren's great grandchildren.
The worry is now Quebec is not producing offspring the way they did for a 200-year period between about 1760 to 1960. It was the Roman Catholic that proclaimed for Quebec to become the majority, they would have to get into the bedroom and get busy. For 200 years, it worked and the white, Roman Catholic and French mother-tongued, reproduced and reproduced the way the Catholic religion says to do so.
The good: It worked. This self-proclaimed race multiplied and multiplied and became the majority to the tune, at one point, of 82% of the Quebec population.
The bad: Many of these families were stark poor, could barely afford to feed and properly educate themselves and many of them became an underclass no thanks to this false doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. "G-d will provide" was the prevailing sentiment of the community clergymen, and according to books I read by French speakers, the priests meddled in by knocking on the doors of their flocks to ensure they were not eating meat on Fridays and the women of the house were knocked up...constantly! Too, children were earnestly encouraged (read coerced) to join the clergy. It was "considered" a great honour to do so.
Finally, that 200 period ended when the majority realized they were being duped. They were still an underclass compared to the minority who had fewer children and working to better themselves through hard work and investing in education. Too, they had smaller families and so had greater resources to invest in better education. They didn't live through the credo "G-d will provide", and it took the majority 200 years to figure it out.
Two evil incarnates emerged at the same time circa the 1930s (a.k.a. the Great Depression), one a clergyman, namely an Abbé named Lionel Groulx and a politician, one named Maurice Duplessis. I can go on and on, but you can look up those two characters on Wikipedia to start, and in other sources once you have acquainted yourself with these. Also look up Revenge of the Cradles describing the 200 years of wild reproduction.
I have stated many times, and still do, that the birth of the separatist Parti Québécois and other more radical parties before it were the product of a society that was rendered insanely jealous underdogs, but had only themselves to blame. Even today, a full 45 years after the first anti-English legislation a.k.a. Bill 22, the minority makes up only about 20% of the population but makes up 40% of the tax base. Three years later, in 1977, a more stringent anti-English Charter of the French Language, a.k.a. Bill 101 was passed into law and that was after the French speaking business leaders six months earlier had a more mean-spirited Charter a.k.a. Bill 1, taken off the table.
It took racist laws to put French speakers in the driver's seat because they economically could not do it themselves. The French language was never in danger of being lost, their claim that it is is a blatant misnomer. Bonne chance to you, Unknown, in your pursuit of repatriating French in the Bayou.
Oh, good grief. Here we go again. Philip's reply was posted before I had a chance to complete my post thus I did not see it. To cut-and-paste your words, Philip, the ol' "the historical struggle to keep our culture alive is demonized" trick just doesn't fly, and that you choose to willingly believe what you learned from kindergarten through the end of high school was the conditioning of trashy drivel.
DeleteI will buy that there were some oppressive "speak Whiters" out there, inevitably there are oppressors and bigots out there, but that was not the majority of the minority. My mom's family was the first to arrive in 1914, in the Eastern Townships, namely Sherbrooke before moving two years later to a smaller town about 20 miles away.
My maternal grandfather came from oppression in Russia through the help of a brother, and then brought over my grandmother and three small children once he settled in Sherbrooke. They went on to have five more children in their small Quebec town. My grandfather started out as a rag picker, a most unrewarding and hard means to make a living, but he did, and managed to start a scrap yard and an animal fur storage business. 19 years after my grandfather died, my eldest uncle took over a business that had every last asset pledged to the hilt to the bank. That was in 1933, the height of the Great Depression. After a lot of crying and praying, he managed to keep his family provided for and employed French speaking people who otherwise likely would have starved, and their families. He turned around the businesses and also started a plumbing supply business to boot once things got better around war time (we'll forget about rationing and young men killed then).
It was hard work and determination that kept my ancestors going. My mother, after completing high school, left the protective bosom of her family to go to the big city, Montreal, then at least a two-hour drive or train ride away, to pursue studying nursing. Few women in the 1940s pursued a post-secondary profession, let alone complete high school, so that made for two generations of hard work and determination to better themselves. We were and are Jewish, so this poor excuse of speak White flies in the face of reality. My mother got no time off for Jewish holy days. Their cafeteria didn't accommodate her with kosher meals, so she sacrificed the comforts of home life with her family and many of her religious sensibilities to pursue her career. Think she didn't face endless anti-Semitism? Never mind your boo-hoo story. Pull yourselves up by your own goddamn bootstraps through pursuit of proper education and hard work. Language legislation will never be valid. It's strictly vindictive.
Spare me the conditioned drivel inflicted upon your brain by your schools. The longer you perpetuate it, the worse you'll end up. If you're from the Montreal area, you and those following you have hope. If you're from Bumpkinland, namely Lac-St-Jean, the Saguenay, the Magdalens and other rural outposts, you and future generation will be permanent angry ignoramuses, i.e., doomed.
Here's further proof the Revenge of the Cradles doctrine is the truth. This link to the internationally renowned magazine, The Economist is proof. https://www.economist.com/the-americas/2009/01/08/the-cradles-costly-revenge
ReplyDeleteP.S.: You will likely have to sign up for up to five article you can read per month for free. Totally worth it.