🚀 go-pugleaf

Luc Marcil wrote:
> 
> In message <517qsn$j8p@wpg-01.escape.ca> - jbuchy@escape.ca (Opus) writes:
> :>
> :>Elie Charest <turgon@mlink.net> wrote:
> :>
> :>
> :>>Well, all I can say is this. I lived for two years in Toronto, the
> :>>metropolis of this supposedly bilingual country. I never spoke french,

(snip)

All right I didn't get this first response, below, when it was
originally posted, so I'll respond back to it now.

> :>
> :>I shall pick up the gauntlet. You have done a fine job of comparing
> :>apples to oranges. The Anglophone/Allophone minority in Quebec is HUGE
> :>comepared to the Francophone minority here in Manitoba which has the
> :>largest Francophone population in NA outside of Quebec.

Larger than New Brunswick?

>I am sure you
> :>are aware that most of the non-Francophone population in Quebec lives
> :>in Montreal so it should be no surprise that English is such a common
> :>language in that area.

Let's not forget the Ottawa valley.

>I am of Ukranian descent. The Ukranian
> :>population in Manitoba is larger than the French population yet it is
> :>easier to get French services.

That's because French is one of the country's two official languages. Is
it easier to get French or English services? How about in Winnipeg
itself?

> :I guess my culture isn't as good as
> :>yours.

How do you come to that conclusion? Was Canada founded by colons from
Ukraine? Well, that explains why Ukrainian is not an official language.

>There are also several German communities near Winnipeg. It is
> :>difficult to do business in those towns without speaking German. I
> :>have yet to hear them lament the lack of Geman language services.

Sure. But the use of German is probably limited to those towns. German
is not an official language of Canada.

What you're saying, Opus, is that it would be normal for
franco-manitobans to assimilate to English - since that's what everybody
else does...

Now to the other one:
 
> Elie,
> 
> You could go live in Chicoutimi. There, all you'll ever hear is French. Even
> quite a colorful brand of French at that! You'll never have to bother with
> anything else ever again, be it English, German, Russian, Italian, Chinese,
> etc!!!

Why do you get the impression I'm bothered with English, German,
Russian, Italian, Chinese, Spanish (let's not forget our hispanic
friends!), and everyone else? Is it because you'd like to paint me as
intolerant and xenophobic already? Come, now, we've only started this
debate, and already you've got me all figured out! That's not a good
sign for a serious discussion. Keep on like that and you'll lose my
interest.
 
> As you start awakening to the rest of the world though, you'll realize that
> all around Chicoutimi, in North America, there are 300 Million people that
> speak mostly English. Nobody will force you against your will to speak
> anything but French, but if you want to get out of Chicoutimi one day, you'll
> have little choice!!! For as long as you're happy staying put in Chicoutimi,
> well, there you go: French all the way!!!

But, didn't you notice that I can speak, read and write English, and do
so quite often? There's a difference between learning and using English,
and being assimilated into English. Do you think they'll all start
speaking English in China tomorrow?
 
> Such is reality in North America and the world for that matter.

Ah! English, the master tongue. One day you'll have conquered the
world...
That is such an ethnocentric point of view!

> You can't
> expect, even in your wildest dreams, to get as many services in French in
> Toronto as you can get in Quebec. There are simply not enough French speaking
> people in Toronto to justify this. Although, there are smaller communities in
> the outlying areas of Toronto such as Oakville or Whitby for example, where
> you can get fairly decent services in French, including top notch French
> schools. Asking for French services in Toronto equivalent to those in Quebec
> would be quite preposterous indeed!

Yet, you can get a lot of service in English when you go to
Quebec...why, imagine that!

> As a result of these demographic realities, you cannot turn around and deny
> anglophones living in Quebec their right to English services because you can't
> get the level of French services that you'd wish to get elsewhere in Canada.

But we don't deny anglo-Quebeckers their right to English services!
That's the whole point! This entire discussion comes from the fact that
the most visible anglo-Quebecois activists say that they are actively
persecuted and stripped of their rights. My point was that, as a
minority, they are not in any particular bad shape, when you compare
their situation with other minorities in North America (or the world,
for that matter...)

> History, like it or not, has been such that there are a lot of English
> speaking people in Montreal and certain other areas of Quebec which amply
> justify maintaining services in English. There's no escaping reality!

Did I try to deny this? 
 
> You could harp for ever about developments throughout Canadian and Quebec
> history which have resulted in today's demographic and socio-economic reality

Typical. "Forget the excesses of the past, now we live in the present
bla bla bla"
Yet the past forges the present.

> and, like certain zealots here in Quebec, try to rewrite history and invent
> all kinds of "horror stories" about the so-called iniquities towards the
> French inhabitants of Canada and their exploitation by the bad descendants of
> General Wolf (the big bad wolf!!!).

Would you rather follow history as how it's being written by others:
i.e. Quebec has always profited from Canada more than it should have,
etc., etc. ?

You can't deny that, until the second part of this century, there was a
certain level of economic inequity between anglophones and francophones,
inside Canada and inside Quebec.

> But, the bottom line today is that French
> people thrive and succeed handily in Quebec, in Canada and elsewhere in the
> world.

Which is why we figure it's time to go on our collective way.

>The old cliches propagated by the secessionist religion whereby
> Quebecois carry water for their English bosses and occupy lesser positions in
> the corporate hierarchy have been nothing but anachronistic BS for quite many
> years by now.

But see, it's not the reason why I'm a sovereignist. Wether you like it
or not, Quebec is a distinct society: it's not just the language, it's a
different culture, with a certain outlook on politics, economics and
social issues. And Canada is paralyzed by its own nature to change so it
would meet Quebec's vision. The fact that the notion of two founding
nations is rejected by a majority outside of Quebec tells the truth
about how differently we imagine Canada. It would be better for both
nations if Quebec went its own way: it's better to be good neighbors
than feuding roommates.

One more thing. Using the fact that Quebecois have thrived (you should
add in the past 30 years...) to justify the argument that Canada works
is a bit disturbing. It implies that francophone Quebecois wouldn't have
succeeded as much without Canada. Are you suggesting that francophones
wouldn't have been able to prosper on their own? The fact that you
stress this fact, overshadowing the contributions Quebec has made to
Canada, shows how we are still perceived as descendants of those
"lumberjack and bringer of water", like my ancestors have been called a
couple of times on qc.politique.

>Forcefully instilling hatred in one people against another where
> no such hatred really existed in the first place in order to achieve the
> dreams of power of a certain few is nothing but total madness.

Hatred! My, how strong you go! Dreams of Power? No. Dreams of democracy
are what fuel me. But I'm not an idiot. I know that separation does not
mean an ideal society. But I know how to distinguish between different
political battles.

I'm not talking politics to tell other francophones to hate the english.
I know that's how people like you would like to portray me, because you
can't find the faults in my arguments. But I'm really not interesed in
that kind of discussion. My point is that Canada has outlived its
usefulness. It's time to redefine it from the bottom up or, since that
seems unlikely, go our way as a member of the world's sovereign nations.
 
> People in Bosnia and the old Yougoslavia keep dwelling on the past: look for
> yourself where this kind of hatred can lead... There is no such natural hatred
> here in Quebec. It is high time that we put an end to this dangerous rhetoric.

But there can be separation without hate! You're the one who keeps
bringing it up! You use it as some kind of scarecrow to support your
political view - though, when you look at it, it doesn't in support
anything in any way. Why don't you put an end to your own dangerous
rethoric? Isn't a velvet separation better than a bloody one, or won't
you have a peaceful divorce and shoot the first salvo?
 
> French immigrants came to North America 462 years ago. My grand-father spoke
> French, my father speaks French, I speak French and my daughter does and will
> speak French as well.

Good for you. Do you live in the province of Quebec?

> The bottom line today is that the French fact has gained
> tremendous strenght in Quebec in the last 30 years.

Yes, that's only natural: they're the majority.

> French people succeed in
> all facets of the North American and World economies. French people of Quebec
> are better educated, are better off financially, travel abroad more and more,
> participate at all levels of power in the Canadian Federation more than ever
> before. All the cliches peddled by the secessionists about the shabby
> treatment of French people throughout Canada are just plain BS.

The quality of life of all westerners has greatly improved in the second
part of the 20th century. This does not mean that a)there was no
exploitation before and b)that sovereignty is not a legitimate political
option.

Some sovereignists thrive on the notion that Quebec is constantly
shafted by Ottawa. Not me: I say it's occasionally shafted by Ottawa, as
are other provinces, and that it would better function as part of a true
Confederation or as an independent country.
 
> All this has happened in the Canadian Federation which, like any other
> political structures in the world, has evolved and adpated itself through
> time.

Yes, it's become more centralized.

> We can all see and appreciate the result of the participation of Quebec
> in the Canadian Federation. Quebec, like the rest of Canada, is the envy of
> most countries of the world and enjoys one of the best standard of living in
> the whole world.

It also has a national debt no one envies at all, believe me! It has
higher unemployment than a good deal of other industrialized countries,
and a widening income gap. Governments are cutting down those programs
that gave us those high standard of living. Constitutional talks lead to
deadlock, and regionalism is at an all-time high...

Anyway, a good standard of living has nothing to do with with
sovereingty.
 
> What does the secessionists have to offer to the people of Quebec which will
> top what we ALREADY HAVE??? Plenty of bitnersess, hatred, xenophobia and
> paranoia, that's for sure.

So far we've seen this mostly on the federalist side! Seriously, what do
we have to offer the people of Quebec? A smaller coutry you can actually
govern, with one common language: french - though I support services and
language protection rights for the anglophone minority. We offer them a
manageable society, who's not constantly locked in battle with a
centralist federal government, nor opposed to other provinces who feel
that demands for recognition are a threat to their own influence.

Will you argue that the Canadian Federation does not need to change (and
I mean CHANGE) so that it can function properly? And do you believe this
change can actually come about, seeing how all different regions of
Canada pull in different directions?

> But, nothing in terms of concrete benchmarks or
> goals to implement. No specific achievements to be pursued other than the
> destruction of Canada as it is today. Nothing but negativism!

That's your opinion. Of course, you're a little biaised...
 
> The real battle lead by the PQ is nothing but a dirty turf war with their
> federal counterparts which has reached the zenith of "nastiness". Nothing
> else. It's a battle as to whom will have jurisdiction over what. This has
> become such an intense battle that people are willing to risk their country,
> the well being of millions of citizens over its outcome.

> Quebecois people will not become and do not wish to become communists or
> radical socialists through sovereignty.

Socialism does not exist any more. But that's a different debate. The
left must identify what are the battles of tomorrow - for as long as
there is injustice, there will be people fighting for progress.
Sovereignty by itself will not bring us progress - as I said, that's a
different battle - but it seems a better avenue to change a society than
staying in Canada as it exists today.

> Quebecois people are amongst the
> biggest consumers in North America and they certainly are amongst those who
> live their lives and appreciate their standard of living the most fully! Do
> they wish to change this political orientation of theirs in any radical way?
> Not at all!

You make a big mistake here. Their high standard of living is not a
"political orientation". It is an economic reality found in North
America, and derives from the economic power of the British Empire and
then the United States. You're mixing up to concepts here which have
little to do with each other.

> What do the secessionists have to offer? A new type of society,
> some kind of a radical social-democracy?

A radical social-democracy is a contradiction of terms.

> No, the people of Quebec want none of
> that. They're already fed up with the increasing number of free loaders who
> exploit what they consider a system which is already too generous.

Of course you KNOW what Quebecois want. You've got a special antenna
that feeds you their thought.

In reality, what some Quebecois understand is that there are less and
less jobs because investors go and hire people abroad for wages that are
way under those that gave us such a "high standard of living". They
understand that "globalization" first enriches those who already have
money. They understand that democracy is not a corporate ideal, and that
the New Right wave (already turning back) offers little more than an
increase income gap, fewer jobs and lower standards of living.

But I digress.

> What is
> this all about? Why, all of a sudden, should the people of Quebec jeopardize
> all that they already have?

Yes, on day 1 of separation EVERYTHING will DISAPPEAR! Do you really
believe this? If so, why, if not, aren't ashamed of using PURE SCARE
TACTICS to support your argument?

>So that Bouchard and Landry finally succeed in
> obtaining control over the field of communications or manpower? Are we going
> to put everything on the line for this???

Well, if Canada had given those when the time was right, we wouldn't be
in the same mess, now, would we?
 
> As I said before, it's high time to put an end to this secessionist
> bullshit...

We'll do when you put an end to your own alarmist, narrow-minded and
one-sided ramblings...

 
__________________________________________

�lie Charest <turgon@mlink.net>

"Vive le Qu�bec Libre!"  Charles De Gaulle
"I don't need to elaborate on that ... Next question!"  Jean Chr�tien

----------BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----------
�
�d(efe0<�V��ɜ�S�N2252���*
���}Ό�KN<���J��k�z�xI�ԈoMK/�[�f�<�U2���Ln�[�f�4���g:v:��Z�^<WZ�|�q�^��p��Y}���t��5�:�lw��$����<
p�P�/��QHVO-.QHJ�QHR��y
)�
��
���9
���%V�\�9��
��E@�:
�E
e��
ũEe�E��\�\���
9�
�� C�3J��K�!�R��32��S�*

----------END PGP SIGNATURE----------