Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Truenorth00]

Immigrants are going to vote for a party that thinks they are a threat and problem? Comment est-ce que tu pense cela fonctionnera?

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Immigrants are going to vote for a party that thinks they are a threat and problem?

Your bias.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Your bias.

A personal judgement or attack is not a substitute for an explanation.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

A personal judgement or attack is not a substitute for an explanation.

Apply it to yourself then. Portraying the PQ has some sort of xenophobic far-right party is ridiculous. As seen from Europe, the conservatives of Western Canada and other 'drill baby drill' types out there are much more far-right.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Apply it to yourself then. Portraying the PQ has some sort of xenophobic far-right party is ridiculous. As seen from Europe, the conservatives of Western Canada and other 'drill baby drill' types out there are much more far-right.

You're projecting your continental nonsense as usual. Nowhere did I suggest they were a far right party.

[Acajack]

The Parti Québécois has made significant efforts over decades to try and attract people of immigrant origin to the cause. Starting with Gérald Godin in the 1970s, and followed by many others since then.

I wouldn't say it's been a total failure but the results have still been minimal and only minority fractions of immigrant origin communities have come on board.

The PQ (and the Bloc) have nonetheless had notable minority figures in their parties over the years, with several notable PQ Ministers when they have formed the government.

It's not even close to where they'd like it to be, but it's false to say that the PQ is a party with no minority presence. They've even had some anglo presence over the years, but that's even more minimal.

I've noticed that Scotland's separatist movement seems to have been better at attracting immigrants. Not sure what's going on there. Maybe it's because there is less of a language and cultural barrier? (All immigrants in Scotland integrate in the same culture, whereas in Quebec there is a considerable percentage of immigrants who integrate into Anglo-American culture, even if they do learn some French to varying degrees.)

Another thing working against the PQ of course is that Canada is still, by all accounts, a very good country. The UK isn't really that bad either but Canada is still doing better than them.

I'd say the current PQ approach is that they're very open to anyone of any origin who wants to embrace the cause, but they're not going to do anything special to say "your culture's traditional dancing will be taught to everyone in an independent Québec - are you on board now?"

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

You're projecting your continental nonsense as usual.

Last time I checked, Toronto was also located on a continent.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Nowhere did I suggest they were a far right party.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Some more rebalancing of the eternal bad guys vs good guys debate:

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle...vices-francais

First I've ever heard of a problem at Civic - certainly the front line is fully bilingual. I guess I'm not surprised.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Last time I checked, Toronto was also located on a continent.

You should stick to French. You clearly don't understand English euphemisms.

[Acajack]

I am having fun today.

https://twitter.com/L0cutux/status/1...465176/photo/1

[Acajack]

https://twitter.com/TheLuckyJames/st...700603/photo/1

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

PQ governments of another era considered reciprocity agreements with the ROC provinces in terms of services and institutions for anglophones (Quebec) and francophones (ROC).

I believe the first evocation of it was rejected by the ROC provinces who didn't want to do more for French. This would have been under Lévesque.

Then some years later a less nice proposal came out of the PQ, to reduce English accommodation in Quebec to the levels of French in the ROC. This would have been under Parizeau I think.

But it was ruled out and I think Parizeau might have said: "Come on now, we can do that to our anglos. That would be way too mean."

It always seems to me that things like that start out with the erroneous assumption that there's some kind of social or cultural parity among minority language communities in different parts of Canada. There are legal provisions, especially at the federal level, that apply to/protect such communities equally, and the provinces have their various rules, but the day-to-day reality is different depending on language and location.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

The Parti Québécois has made significant efforts over decades to try and attract people of immigrant origin to the cause. Starting with Gérald Godin in the 1970s, and followed by many others since then.

I wouldn't say it's been a total failure but the results have still been minimal and only minority fractions of immigrant origin communities have come on board.

[...]

I've noticed that Scotland's separatist movement seems to have been better at attracting immigrants. Not sure what's going on there. Maybe it's because there is less of a language and cultural barrier? (All immigrants in Scotland integrate in the same culture, whereas in Quebec there is a considerable percentage of immigrants who integrate into Anglo-American culture, even if they do learn some French to varying degrees.)

Then the PQ and other separatists must be doing something wrong.

It's not just the Scottish National Party. Even Marine Le Pen manages to attract quite a few immigrants, and have people from immigrant background in top positions in her party (for example Malika Sorel, daughter of Algerian immigrants, has just joined Marine Le Pen's party and been catapulted #2 on their party list for the European election next June).



Perhaps what sets Scotland and France appart from Québec is we have a strong sense of nationhood (with symbols, heroes, past achievements, glories, etc), and that may be attractive to some immigrants. Québec, in comparison, seems always to be unsure about who they are, whether they are a nation at all, whether they should be independent or remain a Canadian province forever, whether it isn't in fact racist and reactionary to promote an identity separate from Anglo-Canada. When the Francophone 'pure laine' Québécois are themselves divided about what Québec should be, perhaps it's no wonder the concept of a Québécois nation and Québec independence is not something that will "galvaniser" the immigrants and their children, the way "la Fraaaaaance", or "our braaaave Scotland" can arouse children of immigrants.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Apply it to yourself then. Portraying the PQ has some sort of xenophobic far-right party is ridiculous. As seen from Europe, the conservatives of Western Canada and other 'drill baby drill' types out there are much more far-right.

You can call it whatever you want but there is open hostility to immigration. A lot of us Anglophones used to calling them xenophones are starting to see their point as rents soar and we see open chants for genocide on our streets (Like we are in Marseille or Brussels)

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

You should stick to French. You clearly don't understand English euphemisms.

And you irony.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

You can call it whatever you want but there is open hostility to immigration. A lot of us Anglophones used to calling them xenophones are starting to see their point as rents soar and we see open chants for genocide on our streets (Like we are in Marseille or Brussels)

Marseille has very few Islamists or pro-Hamas demonstrations. It's completely different from Brussels, where there is a real issue with Islamism and terrorism.

In Marseille the problem is drug, due to France's stupid prohibition of cannabis. Religion plays little role there.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Acajack

The Parti Québécois has made significant efforts over decades to try and attract people of immigrant origin to the cause. Starting with Gérald Godin in the 1970s, and followed by many others since then.

I wouldn't say it's been a total failure but the results have still been minimal and only minority fractions of immigrant origin communities have come on board.

The PQ (and the Bloc) have nonetheless had notable minority figures in their parties over the years, with several notable PQ Ministers when they have formed the government.

It's not even close to where they'd like it to be, but it's false to say that the PQ is a party with no minority presence. They've even had some anglo presence over the years, but that's even more minimal.

I've noticed that Scotland's separatist movement seems to have been better at attracting immigrants. Not sure what's going on there. Maybe it's because there is less of a language and cultural barrier? (All immigrants in Scotland integrate in the same culture, whereas in Quebec there is a considerable percentage of immigrants who integrate into Anglo-American culture, even if they do learn some French to varying degrees.)

Another thing working against the PQ of course is that Canada is still, by all accounts, a very good country. The UK isn't really that bad either but Canada is still doing better than them.

I'd say the current PQ approach is that they're very open to anyone of any origin who wants to embrace the cause, but they're not going to do anything special to say "your culture's traditional dancing will be taught to everyone in an independent Québec - are you on board now?"

There's big differences between the Scottish and Quebec independence pushes. On the economic side, Scotland will likely have some accomodation and eventually gain EU membership and probably adopt the Euro. That is an economic future Quebec's sovereignists can't offer.

Then there's the language and culture issue. How can a campaign that is fundamentally based on protecting the language AND culture be inclusive? If it was just about language, I'd argue that it would be much better received. But it's never just about language. Scotland doesn't have this problem. Their campaign is one largely based around economic and governance grievances which is a message that can resonate with immigrants. Especially in a non-federated and non-constitutional country like the UK where a lot more is governed from the centre. The Scottish argument is not fundamentally very different from that made by American revolutionaries. The Quebecois pitch is very different though.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Then the PQ and other separatists must be doing something wrong.

It's not just the Scottish National Party. Even Marine Le Pen manages to attract quite a few immigrants, and have people from immigrant background in top positions in her party (for example Malika Sorel, daughter of Algerian immigrants, has just joined Marine Le Pen's party and been catapulted #2 on their party list for the European election next June).



Perhaps what sets Scotland and France appart from Québec is we have a strong sense of nationhood (with symbols, heroes, past achievements, glories, etc), and that may be attractive to some immigrants. Québec, in comparison, seems always to be unsure about who they are, whether they are a nation at all, whether they should be independent or remain a Canadian province forever, whether it isn't in fact racist and reactionary to promote an identity separate from Anglo-Canada. When the Francophone 'pure laine' Québécois are themselves divided about what Québec should be, perhaps it's no wonder the concept of a Québécois nation and Québec independence is not something that will "galvaniser" the immigrants and their children, the way "la Fraaaaaance", or "our braaaave Scotland" can arouse children of immigrants.

I don't know about that. Scottish independence hasn't really been any more of a consensus than Quebec independence, and the Rassemblement National isn't really about independence anyway. Their support goes up and down just like any other party's. They haven't necessarily had highs that the PQ hasn't attained at various points in their history.

And I was just looking at the current cabinet of Scotland, which is dominated by their equivalent to the PQ, the Scottish National Party. OK so the top guy (equivalent to a Premier here) is a minority fellow, but all of the rest are white Scots and seemingly of some form of British origin.

The last PQ government ministers were generally dominated by French Canadians as you'd imagine, but also had people like Zakaïb (Syrian), Facal (Uruguay), Curzi (Italy*), Kotto (Cameroon), and Malavoy (born in Germany but actually French).

*I know that in France and the US, Italians are considered super-French and super-American and indistinguishable and assimilatable, but in Quebec it's not really a given that a long-established person of Italian origin is going to be a fully integrated Québécois. Pierre Curzi was born in Montreal to Italian parents.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

https://twitter.com/TheLuckyJames/st...700603/photo/1

Reminds me, I've been wanting to ask:

In Montreal, when I get "Bonjour/Hi", I always respond "Hello/Bonjour". Is that considered appropriate or passive/aggressive?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

There's big differences between the Scottish and Quebec independence pushes. On the economic side, Scotland will likely have some accomodation and eventually gain EU membership and probably adopt the Euro. That is an economic future Quebec's sovereignists can't offer.

Then there's the language and culture issue. How can a campaign that is fundamentally based on protecting the language AND culture be inclusive? If it was just about language, I'd argue that it would be much better received. But it's never just about language. Scotland doesn't have this problem. Their campaign is one largely based around economic and governance grievances which is a message that can resonate with immigrants. Especially in a non-federated and non-constitutional country like the UK where a lot more is governed from the centre. The Scottish argument is not fundamentally very different from that made by American revolutionaries. The Quebecois pitch is very different though.

As I alluded to, there is no "alternative path" to integration for a newcomer to Scotland unlike in Quebec, with all of the cultural and political baggage and socialization that goes along with that alternative choice.

If you move to Montreal, go to McGill, hang out with anglos, read the Gazette and listen to CJAD, are you really going to get an objective view of things that maybe Quebec sovereignists could possibly have a point?

In Scotland everyone by virtue of linguistic homogeneity is exposed to a much more diverse range of views on the topic.