🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <329E5EE2.7A32@interlog.com>, "Harry S. Margel Communications Inc." <hmargel@interlog.com> writes:
>John Connolly wrote:
>
>First of all, Beaudoin's policies only apply to services provided by the
>Quebec government. They have nothing to do with federal government
>services which you describe above. Secondly, english-speakers will
>continue to receive services in their language at a much higher level in
>Quebec than french-speakers receive from any other provincial government
>elsewhere in Canada. 
>
However this is irrevelant for so many reasons that I really don't care to 
go into all of them.  Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that Quebec 
does offer it's Anglophones more services than Ontario offers it's 
Francophones- so what?  The issue here is not Ontario, or not the other 
Canadian provinces, it's Quebec and the current movement in Quebec to 
restrict the use of English.  To justify Quebec's language policies by 
attacking the other provinces language policies, you not only miss the 
whole point....you also provide *no* justification.

I mean, using your logic, one could argue that a slaughter that took place 
in the mid-late 1970's in Cambodia was alright because it was not on the 
same magnitude as the holocaust during WWII....and Germany, as we all know, 
is a respected member of the international community.  

The same principle applies here- we are not talking about Ontario's 
language policies, we're talking about Quebec's.  Whether or not I like 
the way Ontario treats it's Francophone minority is irrevelant.
>
>What gives english canada the right to manipulate or keep quebec in a
>state of perpetual childhood? 

How does "English speaking" Canada keep Quebec in a state of perpetual 
childhood?  I think I'll need elaboration on this whopper!  Furthermore, 
let's remember that the strongest arguments the sovereignists both in the 
political life of the country, as well as on this group, have been able to 
provide do not produce discussion on why Quebec society would benefit from 
sovereignty....but rather promote the "bad side" of Canadian federalism.  
When you scrutinize the bad, and overlook the good, that too is a 
manipulation.
 
>Then you even have the gaul to complain about this state of "endless
>bickering". 
>No wonder they can't even talk to you.

If this last remark is intended for me, I have news for you buddy- they can 
and do talk to me.  I have a great many friends in Quebec who I talk with 
quite frequently....and I respect their opinions even if I don't always 
like what they have to say.  The great difference between them, and the 
likes of Paul Rodgers or Michel Catudal though is that they aren't setting 
out to tear Canada down at every turn- for the most part, they recognize 
that if Anglophone Canadians had been as nationalistic as the Romanians, 
Serbians, Croats, Russians, Hutus, etc...., then the situation could've 
been much worse.  Since you DO like to make the comparison between the way 
Quebec and other provinces treat their linguistic minorities, I suggest you 
compare the way Canada has treated Quebec, and contrast it with the way the 
Ukraine was treated by the Russian nationalists, the way Croatia was 
treated by Serbia, the way the Hungarians were treated in Romania, etc...  
After all, have a little consistency before you whine about another 
individual!!

******************************************************************************
Robert Kish			 	"The awful truth for the modern day
Trent University			capitalist is that their system of 
Peterborough, Ontario			economics is condusive not to 
Canadian Studies/Political Science	democracy, but rather, oligarchy!"
******************************************************************************