Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[harls]

Originally Posted by Acajack

..as it's a popular "meme" in Canada to say that Scotland is more distinct from Britain (England, really) than Quebec is from the ROC.

Never heard of that 'meme'.

Originally Posted by Acajack

An Englishman moving to Scotland will be relatively plug-and-play in a way that a ROC could never dream of fitting in in Quebec. (Assuming that that many ROCers would even consider moving to Quebec.) Even Montreal with the large institutional network of the anglo community there is way more of a fish-out-water experience than moving from England to any city in Scotland.

Dunno. It was pretty easy for me. I was the only anglophone in my office of 20 employees in Montreal. Guess I am the exception rather than the example, of course..

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by thewave46

John Lennon was the glue of the Beatles.

Quebec occupies a similar role in Canada.

And Paul, George, and to a lesser extent, Ringo, still had successful solo careers post Beatles.

John had a great post Beatles career, but sadly it didn't last all that long...

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Acajack

All of which proves how dubious GDP per capita can be when it comes to the typical standard of living in a place.

What looks like it's in better shape on the ground: Quebec or Mississippi?

Would you rather be an average Mississippian or an average Quebecer?

Je suis d'accord que les gens de Québec ont le plus meilleurs vies que les gens de Mississippi.

But again, how much of that is because of an economy and national system that supports Quebec? Also, keep in mind this is the starting point. It only goes down from here as independence shrinks the economy while increasing burdens.

If separatism was so economically great, why did all the big corporate HQs and banks flee Montreal? And why would actual separation not bring more of this? For example, I look at companies like BBD and CAE and MDA in Montreal, and I cannot imagine a world where they aren't in play, if Quebec declares independence. It's hard enough to keep them in Canada with preferential military contracts, generous R&D subsidies and substantial export development loans. A smaller country would have far less leverage. Those companies would finally pull the trigger and move to the US entirely.

I agree that the economy is less relevant to the overall discussion of separatism. But I do think it's very deceptive to downplay and minimize the impact as much as many separatists do.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Sure. But this is where I think separatists should actually be honest about what the economic consequences of separation might be. You may be okay with being as poor as Portugal. What about everybody else?

Let's not forget that the last time around, they insinuated that an independent Quebec could keep the Canadian dollar and maybe even the Canadian passport. Would the result have been the same if the offer was basically, "You won't be as poor as Portugal."

The Federal Ponzi Scheme is on track to taking Canada to Portugal’s level anyway (this is where casper chimes in to say doing as well as Portugal is a Great JT Achievement ) so this particular scarecrow isn’t what you think it is

(In all seriousness, it’s a decent argument for sovereignty (the argument “the current LPC/CPC are going to turn Canada into shit”)

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

PS: Of note, many of the 18-24 electorate were English natives, studying in Scottish universities which are cheaper than English universities, and who were eligible to vote. Anyone residing in Scotland was eligible to vote. Native Scots residing in England were not eligible to vote.

Unless you're seriously trying to argue that 15% of all Scottish residents aged 18-24 are English undergraduates, this doesn't track.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I was really surprised when I first learned how little power even the devolved Scottish Parliament has. Regions in France or Italy have even less. So I can absolutely understand the frustration in those places where their provinces really are reduce to compromise economic colonies of the central government. We don't have anything close to this in. Canada.

Whatever "nationalism" really exists in places like Scotland or Wales is really just regional irritation over the extreme centralization of the UK's political & economic power in London. You'll find the same phenomenon at play in Northern or Western England.

If the UK reformed itself into a Canada-style federation (say with the 9 English regions as provinces along with Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland for a federation of 12 provinces) then the Scottish independence movement would basically disappear. Or at least it would become quite fringe (like, say, the Newfoundland independence movement is in Canada).

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

enough market on everything from consumer goods to jobs, that efforts are made at bilingualism. It's why you can buy a MacBook with a French Canadian keyboard. I suspect, Quebec would get reduced to just a French outport and English Canada to an American outport, for goods and services post breakup.

This is a good point. Right now, for American companies translate things into French so they can sell their products in Canada, a market of 40 million people. Quebec with its 8 million people don't have as much of a pull. A lot of American retailers may simply stop selling their products in Quebec so they don't have to provide things like French-language manuals and customer support lines.

You actually see this at play in the EU. A lot of the smaller countries in the EU with their own language, like Czechia, Hungary, Greece, etc. simply don't get products available in their own language. Go to a typical discounter supermarket in Prague, and at least half the stuff on the shelf will have product labels in German only, maybe with a sticker on the front translating some key details like safety info into Czech.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by thewave46

Canada and Quebec are married. An arranged marriage, but married.

Walk away from your roommate and you're done.

Walk away from your spouse, kids, shared debts, assets, and you'll find the ghosts of your past and paperwork intruding rather frequently on your life in the future. Doubly so if you're stuck in the same location because that's where your job is.

This will prove much more problematic and require much more legal interaction. As in, nearly continually until the kids are grown.

Don't get me wrong, sometimes divorce is a good thing. However, it is rarely the clean break some fantasize.

No, we are roommates, we just live in the same house/country. The analogy ends at the fact that even separated, we would still be in the same room in the same building (which would also be the case in a divorce, an equally flawed analogy but less accurate than the roommate one).

Actually, a marriage wouldn't work because the ROC is to infatuated with the downstairs neighbour and tries to get her attention. However the neighbour (or rather neighbor in that case) is too self absorb to notice.

[harls]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

No, we are roommates, we just live in the same house/country. The analogy ends at the fact that even separated, we would still be in the same room in the same building (which would also be the case in a divorce, an equally flawed analogy but less accurate than the roommate one).

Actually, a marriage wouldn't work because the ROC is to infatuated with the downstairs neighbour and tries to get her attention. However the neighbour (or rather neighbor in that case) is too self absorb to notice.

My old room mate from university at Carleton drove to Montreal in October of 1995 with all his Canadian flags and crap in tow. The year prior that I lived with him, he never once mentioned Quebec and I don't think he had ever came with the the rest of us to Hull on beer odysseys the year prior. He was an Albertan.

I found that pretty distasteful and pithy.

[harls]

You can be separated and still get along - it's true. Usually the first couple of years after the separation you still have the same friends, might go out together and do stuff.. but then you're going to realize, 'what am I doing?' I could be much happier alone without worrying about what the other is up to when I am not around.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Unless you're seriously trying to argue that 15% of all Scottish residents aged 18-24 are English undergraduates, this doesn't track.

At the 2011 Scottish census, among the population of residents of Scotland born in the UK and whose age was 18-24, 11.6% were born in the UK outside of Scotland. For those age 16-17 it was only 6.6%.

Other questions?

[Acajack]

I'd been finding Justin Trudeau's French when unscripted was getting worse and worse in recent months, and it turns out it wasn't just me as some media are starting to talk about it.

It seems to coincide with his separation from his wife and the lead-up to it. My sense is that they spoke French at home all the time but that aside from that he speaks pretty much English only with people in his PM entourage.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by harls

Never heard of that 'meme'.

..

OK, "counter-argument" then.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by thewave46

John Lennon was the glue of the Beatles.

Quebec occupies a similar role in Canada.

correct on both counts.

John kept the Beatles from being completely dominated by Paul and from becoming overwhelmed by Paul's "granny music" (see: Obladi-Oblada). I love Paul McCartney's contributions, but his work was much better when the cloyingly sweet quality was tempered by a dose of sour/bitter from John. At the end of the day, I would say that John was the most "essential" Beatle, without taking anything away from the amazing contributions of Paul and George (and even Ringo...despite that made-up joke about him being "not even the best drummer in the Beatles" [that sounds like a John witticism if I ever heard one], his contributions to the Beatles's sound are indispensable).

One thing that nobody could ever dispute: In terms of the Beatles, the whole was much (much, much...) greater than the sum of its parts.

A united Canada is like that too, despite how quarrelsome it can be.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

This is a good point. Right now, for American companies translate things into French so they can sell their products in Canada, a market of 40 million people. Quebec with its 8 million people don't have as much of a pull. A lot of American retailers may simply stop selling their products in Quebec so they don't have to provide things like French-language manuals and customer support lines.

You actually see this at play in the EU. A lot of the smaller countries in the EU with their own language, like Czechia, Hungary, Greece, etc. simply don't get products available in their own language. Go to a typical discounter supermarket in Prague, and at least half the stuff on the shelf will have product labels in German only, maybe with a sticker on the front translating some key details like safety info into Czech.

These trivialities aside, I haven't heard much about these countries having linguistic insecurities on their own territories. There are already lots of stores in Canada that have products with no French labelling on them - you even find this stuff in Quebec as well.

Canada has laws in place for labelling but enforcement is pretty lax, and as with most such cases the "biggies" and "majors" will comply whereas things are more elusive with the smaller mom and pops and imported stuff.

Speaking more generally, Canada as a "buffer" from anglicization coming from the US isn't much of a selling point in Quebec because most of the anglicization in Quebec comes not from the US but from the ROC or even from the English-speaking community of Quebec itself which is of course an extension of Anglo-Canada on Quebec territory.

If you look at Americans' dealings with other countries they don't give a damn what language you operate in on your own territory, or even how your local laws are set up and you may even get a pass for pretty bad human rights abuses. So if an independent Quebec wants to do something as innocuous (to Americans, anyway) as operating all in French on an internal level across their northern border, they won't care one whit as long as the trade numbers and conditions are good for them and their national security isn't threatened.

Anglo-Canada is different because as is normal it sees the entirety of Quebec as part of itself (this is primarily a geographic sentiment though) and also views Anglo-Quebecers as their brethren and even in many cases as soldiers fighting the good fight for Canada in Quebec. (There is a delicious irony in this that I'll perhaps save for another post.)

[Zeej]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Speaking more generally, Canada as a "buffer" from anglicization coming from the US isn't much of a selling point in Quebec because most of the anglicization in Quebec comes not from the US but from the ROC or even from the English-speaking community of Quebec itself which is of course an extension of Anglo-Canada on Quebec territory.

No, Anglo Quebec is a hybrid, not an extension of the ROC. According to Jean-Marc Leger in his book Cracking the Quebec Code, Anglo-Quebec leans 60% ROC, 40% ROQ. Far from being an extension of either, it's a highly nuanced group that neither Quebec nor Canada particularily bothers to understand. While Leger's publication is still obviously somewhat general, it was one of the first to try to scratch the surface.

It is unfortunate that at times, its loudest voices (Gazette, people who have time to call into CJAD to rant etc.,) are the most out-dated (there is of course, a reason for this and that reason is largely its Postmedia overlords). However, the silent majority of anglo-Quebecers are keenly aware of what's at play in Quebec and are allied with efforts to promote and grow the French language.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Zeej

No, Anglo Quebec is a hybrid, not an extension of the ROC. According to Jean-Marc Leger in his book Cracking the Quebec Code, Anglo-Quebec leans 60% ROC, 40% ROQ. Far from being an extension of either, it's a highly nuanced group that neither Quebec nor Canada particularily bothers to understand. While Leger's publication is still obviously somewhat general, it was one of the first to try to scratch the surface.

It is unfortunate that at times, its loudest voices (Gazette, people who have time to call into CJAD to rant etc.,) are the most out-dated (there is of course, a reason for this and that reason is largely its Postmedia overlords). However, the silent majority of anglo-Quebecers are keenly aware of what's at play in Quebec and are allied with efforts to promote and grow the French language.

This.

One cannot generalize from the angry rants of elderly, Galganovian CJAD callers, any more than one could draw generalizations about Quebecois culture from "Allo Police"

[harls]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There are already lots of stores in Canada that have products with no French labelling on them - you even find this stuff in Quebec as well.

Really? Any grocery store you go to in Gatineau all products are bilingual. I think that is the law. Same as in Vancouver or Edmonton or Halifax.

The only thing here is that if French is on one side, they turn the label to face you.

Originally Posted by Acajack

Canada has laws in place for labelling but enforcement is pretty lax, and as with most such cases the "biggies" and "majors" will comply whereas things are more elusive with the smaller mom and pops and imported stuff.

The only places I see English only signs are dépanneurs run by Chinese owners... and not just in my apparent anglo bastion of Aylmer, in the old city of Gatineau where you live.

All it would take is one call from a busy body to the OQLF to get them to comply.

My kid made a couple of signs on my door for Halloween - Knock if you dare / Cogne si tu oses. My older kid joked that the French one should have been bigger and above the English one.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

John kept the Beatles from being completely dominated by Paul and from becoming overwhelmed by Paul's "granny music" (see: Obladi-Oblada).

So, continuing with the Beatles analogy, I would assume that "John" is Quebec, and "Paul" is Ontario. Quebec keeps Ontario from completely dominating the entire federation (The Beatles).

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

I love Paul McCartney's contributions, but his work was much better when the cloyingly sweet quality was tempered by a dose of sour/bitter from John.

I'm not so sure Ontario (Paul) is cloyingly sweet, but the province does tend to be a little Boy Scout like in character. I really like the analogy that Quebec is sour and bitter like John.

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

At the end of the day, I would say that John was the most "essential" Beatle, without taking anything away from the amazing contributions of Paul and George (and even Ringo...despite that made-up joke about him being "not even the best drummer in the Beatles" [that sounds like a John witticism if I ever heard one], his contributions to the Beatles's sound are indispensable).

Is John (Quebec) the most essential Beatle (province). That's hard to say, but, Quebec is certainly a defining characteristic of the country in general. Canada without Quebec is unthinkable.

So, if John is Quebec and Paul is Ontario, then who is Ringo and George?

Obviously Ringo is Atlantic Canada. We just get no respect down here (but eveyone likes us).

I guess this makes George the West.

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

One thing that nobody could ever dispute: In terms of the Beatles, the whole was much (much, much...) greater than the sum of its parts.

A united Canada is like that too, despite how quarrelsome it can be.

Agreed wholeheartedly. The Beatles broke up primality because of John (and Yoko). The world of music was never the same. We may complain on here about the lack of influence on the world stage of our country, but, if Canada were ever to dismember itself, I'm sure the rest of the world would notice, and something important would have been lost. If the Beatles were Canada, then the US is the Rolling Stones. The Stones are hugely influential, but, I always liked the Beatles better.

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

If the Beatles were Canada, then the US is the Rolling Stones.

If the US is the Rolling Stones, Canada is Herman's Hermits.