Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Hali87

That seems fair and a good solution in a lot of ways but I think due to the optics it wouldn't turn out well in practice.

What would make more sense to me is for the other provinces to offer incentives/assistance to people who would like to relocate from Quebec. For example Nova Scotia has a shortage of doctors and nurses - we could be recruiting from Quebec more actively with the promise that they can wear a hijab to work and speak as much English as they want. As far as I know we're not doing that.

I argued in the other thread that this is exactly what should happen. After all the law targets individuals in the public sector. They aren't likely to be unskilled. So there's value in courting them.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by theman23

Modern liberalism and wokeism has probably developed over the last twenty or thirty years, so I’m not sure it’s worth bringing up phenomenon from over a hundred years ago when discussing modern Anglo “Americans” (saffron’s words). In our lifetime are you denying that French Canadians have advantages and privileges that other minorities lack?

I actually wasn't being sarcastic.

As to your points, they're both connected and separate. Generally speaking though I don't think the present can be separated from the past.

The 1950s and 1960s are within living memory of millions of Canadians, and French Canadians were still by and large treated like crap back then.

Obviously outside of immigrant micro-groups where everyone is highly educated and affluent, sure French Canadians at the moment are the best-off "minority" in Canada.

(Unless one considers Anglo-Quebecers to be a true minority.)

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Hali87

That seems fair and a good solution in a lot of ways but I think due to the optics it wouldn't turn out well in practice.

What would make more sense to me is for the other provinces to offer incentives/assistance to people who would like to relocate from Quebec. For example Nova Scotia has a shortage of doctors and nurses - we could be recruiting from Quebec more actively with the promise that they can wear a hijab to work and speak as much English as they want. As far as I know we're not doing that.

Better make sure you can follow through on that commitment in Nova Scotia!

[theman23]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I actually wasn't being sarcastic.

As to your points, they're both connected and separate. Generally speaking though I don't think the present can be separated from the past.

The 1950s and 1960s are within living memory of millions of Canadians, and French Canadians were still by and large treated like crap back then.

Obviously outside of immigrant micro-groups where everyone is highly educated and affluent, sure French Canadians at the moment are the best-off "minority" in Canada.

(Unless one considers Anglo-Quebecers to be a true minority.)

The point I was refuting was the point saffron has made several times in this thread and the other, that modern day anglophones (“Anglo Americans” as he calls them) are concerned about minority rights so long as they don’t involve Québécois or French Canadians. This is obviously not true. Even by statute the French in this country have rights and privileges far beyond those of other minority groups, and no one has proposed limiting those despite his repeated drive by shit posts that insinuate otherwise.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by theman23

The point I was refuting was the point saffron has made several times in this thread and the other, that modern day anglophones (“Anglo Americans” as he calls them) are concerned about minority rights so long as they don’t involve Québécois or French Canadians. This is obviously not true. Even by statute the French in this country have rights and privileges far beyond those of other minority groups, and no one has proposed limiting those despite his repeated drive by shit posts that insinuate otherwise.

A lot of those privileges weren't given, they were either taken or self-made. Like it was said before, we were lucky in Québec to have a big enough population to make a difference and to be located in the same area. We used that power by voting in politicians that would fight for what we wanted, even if that annoyed people elsewhere.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

A lot of those privileges weren't given, they were either taken or self-made. Like it was said before, we were lucky in Québec to have a big enough population to make a difference and to be located in the same area. We used that power by voting in politicians that would fight for what we wanted, even if that annoyed people elsewhere.

Rights and privileges are given and taken. The distinction only depends on your perspective. The point still remains - a French speaker in Ontario can go to publicly funded French school and receive public services in French. If the poster I was quoting is correct - that "Anglo Americans" don't care for the rights of French speakers, then why can't we say the same for a Cantonese or Punjabi speaker in Ontario?

That's the only point in making here.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by theman23

If the poster I was quoting is correct - that "Anglo Americans" don't care for the rights of French speakers, then why can't we say the same for a Cantonese or Punjabi speaker in Ontario?

If you can't even recognize (not even quite the same word as "accept") that there is a significant historical and societal difference between French and Cantonese or Punjabi in Canada, then that's a big problem right there.

I mean, you've never noticed that there are large cities in Canada and thousands of smaller towns that function entirely in French?

Foreigners have no trouble understanding this.

Why is it so difficult for so many of our fellow Canadians?

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by theman23

All rights and privileges are given and taken. The distinction only depends on your perspective and is not worth making. The point still remains - a French speaker in Ontario can go to publicly funded French school, receive public services in French, and even the much ballyhooed catholic school system in the province exists as an accommodation for them. If the poster I was quoting is correct - that "Anglo Americans" don't care for the rights of French speakers, then why can't we say the same for a Cantonese or Punjabi speaker in Ontario?

That is because Canada is a bilingual country, it is not merely a favor done by Ontario.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by theman23

The point I was refuting was the point saffron has made several times in this thread and the other, that modern day anglophones (“Anglo Americans” as he calls them) are concerned about minority rights so long as they don’t involve Québécois or French Canadians. This is obviously not true. Even by statute the French in this country have rights and privileges far beyond those of other minority groups, and no one has proposed limiting those despite his repeated drive by shit posts that insinuate otherwise.

It's most definitely a prescient observation on Saffronleaf's part, and has been a steadily growing sentiment since the late 1980s when Anglo-Canadian progressives first started souring on Quebec, francophones and the French language because Quebec supported free trade with the US.

Bill 21 appears to be the last nail in the coffin of something that's been building towards a crescendo for about 30 years.

Yes, francophones have made gains in Canada over the years, decades and centuries.

But given the demographics, it's difficult for us to make gains without at least some acceptance on the part of the anglophone majority.

But strategy and calculation are not synonyms of magnanimity and generosity.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by Acajack

If you can't even recognize (not even quite the same word as "accept") that there is a significant historical and societal difference between French and Cantonese or Punjabi in Canada, then that's a big problem right there.

I mean, you've never noticed that there are large cities in Canada and thousands of smaller towns that function entirely in French?

Foreigners have no trouble understanding this.

Why is it so difficult for so many of our fellow Canadians?

I understand the reasoning behind the discrepancy and I'm not saying it should be otherwise. But there is a discrepancy.

Saffronleaf specifically said that Quebecois had less advantages and privileges than other minority groups. That is a factually incorrect statement.

Originally Posted by ToxiK

That is because Canada is a bilingual country, it is not merely a favor done by Ontario.

Never said it was a "favor", no different than allowing a muslim to go to mosque isn't something I would consider a "favor".

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by theman23

I understand the reasoning behind the discrepancy and I'm not saying it should be otherwise. But there is a discrepancy.

Saffronleaf specifically said that Quebecois had less advantages and privileges than other minority groups. That is a factually incorrect statement.

Two seemingly opposite things can still be true.

Québécois francophones clearly have more grandfathered rights and privileges than any other minority group in Canada.

But they are also arguably the minority which by far gets the least sympathy and understanding from the Canadian majority.

I am not that old but still old enough to remember when we were the "in" minority group.

I often tell my Indigenous friends and acquaintances to get as much as they can before the majority sours on them too.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Two seemingly opposite things can still be true.

Québécois francophones clearly have more grandfathered rights and privileges than any other minority group in Canada.

But they are also arguably the minority which by far gets the least sympathy and understanding from the Canadian majority.

I am not that old but still old enough to remember when we were the "in" minority group.

Only natural when a minority group develops some degree of success. No one cares much for the plight of the Chinese-Canadian either.

I often tell my Indigenous friends and acquaintances to get as much as they can before the majority sours on them too.

Yeah OK. This happens.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by theman23

Only natural when a minority group develops some degree of success. No one cares much for the plight of the Chinese-Canadian either.
.

I can see this as normal for sure, but I find that the cold assessment often flips over into resentment and bitterness.

While we can't say that "French Canada" (for lack of a better term) has passed Anglo-Canada, it's arguably caught up or is at least pretty close to having caught up.

I sometimes get the sense though that there is a feeling among ROCers that all of that is undeserved, and that it's a bit of sham or fake.

[TorontoDrew]

Bill 21 really has nothing to do with language as much as it has to do with old white biggoted attitudes about those who are different. It's much easier for a catholic person to remove a cross around their neck as opposed to let's use a hijab or turban. If the current and clearly introverted and racist party in power wants to get rid of all religious symbols from government run institutions, why not show some good faith and tear down that ridiculous cross off the the top of Mt Royal? Is it not run and paid for with public money? Get rid of that symbol if it's not about discrimination. But we all know what the bill really stands for, no more so then those who support it. That cross will stay lit, they should remove the lights at night and just light it up with natural gas as a symbol of what Bill 21 really stands for, racism.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

Bill 21 really has nothing to do with language as much as it has to do with old white biggoted attitudes about those who are different. It's much easier for a catholic person to remove a cross around their neck as opposed to let's use a hijab or turban. If the current and clearly introverted and racist party in power wants to get rid of all religious symbols from government run institutions, why not show some good faith and tear down that ridiculous cross off the the top of Mt Royal? Is it not run and paid for with public money? Get rid of that symbol if it's not about discrimination. But we all know what the bill really stands for, no more so then those who support it. That cross will stay lit, they should remove the lights at night and just light it up with natural gas as a symbol of what Bill 21 really stands for

Ridiculous cross? Do you even have any idea why it's there?

No cross, (arguably or at least mythologically) no city.

Some people have no concept of history.

The cross on Mount Royal is to Montreal what Romulus and Remus are to Rome.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Québécois francophones clearly have more grandfathered rights and privileges than any other minority group in Canada.

But they are also arguably the minority which by far gets the least sympathy and understanding from the Canadian majority.

In mathematical terms, yes, Quebecois francophones are a minority of the total Canadian population. Incidentally, the majority of Canadians still report English as their first language, but not by a wide margin (58%).

But since Quebec is one of the most autonomous sub-national entities in the world, and francophones are the overwhelming majority of Quebeckers and are proportionately represented in all positions of power within that province, no, Quebecois francophones are not a minority group in the practical sense of the word.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

In mathematical terms, yes, Quebecois francophones are a minority of the total Canadian population. Incidentally, the majority of Canadians still report English as their first language, but not by a wide margin (58%).

But since Quebec is one of the most autonomous sub-national entities in the world, and francophones are the overwhelming majority of Quebeckers and are proportionately represented in all positions of power within that province, no, Quebecois francophones are not a minority group in the practical sense of the word.

I think it's more accurate to say that:

- Anglo-Canadians consider Québécois to be a minority when it's advantageous for Anglo-Canadians to take this position.

- Anglo-Canadians consider Québécois to be a majority when it's advantageous for Anglo-Canadians to take this position.

- Québécois consider Québécois to be a minority when it's advantageous for Québécois to take this position.

- Québécois consider Québécois to be a majority when it's advantageous for Québécois to take this position.

[Hali87]

It depends on the frame of reference:

Québecois are a minority within Canada.
Francophones are a minority within Canada.
Anglophones are a minority within Quebec.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

Bill 21 really has nothing to do with language as much as it has to do with old white biggoted attitudes about those who are different. It's much easier for a catholic person to remove a cross around their neck as opposed to let's use a hijab or turban. If the current and clearly introverted and racist party in power wants to get rid of all religious symbols from government run institutions, why not show some good faith and tear down that ridiculous cross off the the top of Mt Royal? Is it not run and paid for with public money? Get rid of that symbol if it's not about discrimination. But we all know what the bill really stands for, no more so then those who support it. That cross will stay lit, they should remove the lights at night and just light it up with natural gas as a symbol of what Bill 21 really stands for, racism.

What you wrote reminds me of what Jagmeet Singh would say about people criticizing those who wear religious headgear and/or clothing. He has called it racism. But that's not the definition of racism and he knows it yet he knows that it will trigger many of his supporters. Some people don't agree with the religious views of others and it's not about ethnicity or race.

I actually support Law 21 in Québec. I'm betting that most people in my city would support it as well.



I'm impressed that Québec is imposing capacity restrictions for religious gatherings and making attendees show proof of vaccination. Unfortunately in Ontario, the Ford government is pandering to religious groups as there are no capacity restrictions and no proof of vax is needed.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

Bill 21 really has nothing to do with language as much as it has to do with old white biggoted attitudes about those who are different. It's much easier for a catholic person to remove a cross around their neck as opposed to let's use a hijab or turban. If the current and clearly introverted and racist party in power wants to get rid of all religious symbols from government run institutions, why not show some good faith and tear down that ridiculous cross off the the top of Mt Royal? Is it not run and paid for with public money? Get rid of that symbol if it's not about discrimination. But we all know what the bill really stands for, no more so then those who support it. That cross will stay lit, they should remove the lights at night and just light it up with natural gas as a symbol of what Bill 21 really stands for, racism.

No, it is not racism. I know it feels good to throw that insult but that doesn't make it true. You want to have a job where you represent the power of the State, a job where you usually have to wear a uniform, than you respect that uniform. If you are unable to represent something else than your god for the duration of your shift where you are in a position of authority, than you should not hold that position. It is not about the color of your skin, it is not about where you were born, it is about your choices. Religion is an opinion, nothing more. We wouldn't let a judge wear a MAGA hat or a prison guard wear a shirt of a political party, so why accept it for a religious reason (and yes, it is the same thing).

As for the Mont Royal Cross, it has no authority. It can't shoot anyone or put anyone in prison. It is there for historical reasons (like street names), to show how things were before. The crucifix in the Assemblée Nationale has been rightfully removed from the room where the laws are voted. Religion used to be too powerful in Québec and we don't want that anymore from any religion.