Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Meuhud

The professor needs to get out from behind his desk and go into the Islamic World to understand the suppression of women via being forced to wear these coverings. It is the same for very orthodox Jewish women, maybe the Amish, etc. People being forced to conform as a way for the elites to keep their power by citing religion (dubious) versus common sense. It is not for nothing that the Islamic Republic of Iran forces women to submit to their "dress code"!

Yet the Iranian government appears to be failing at enforcing the dress code because so many people there are against it and willing to not abide by it. Watch some recent videos and especially ones on the streets of Tehran and you'll see what I mean.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

This was a joke online following Katzberg's victory; Australian and German fans were claiming him as their own and calling for DNA tests...

Australian I don't know, but he certainly struck me as looking very 1990 East German.

He seemed to LOVE the attention that day when I went to watch the athletes at the Trocadéro (I went for the French swimming team, who received a rapturous reception). He stayed waaaaaay longer than the other athletes on the stage, and didn't seem to want to leave. I found that funny!

Pictures my own.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Loco101

Yet the Iranian government appears to be failing at enforcing the dress code because so many people there are against it and willing to not abide by it. Watch some recent videos and especially ones on the streets of Tehran and you'll see what I mean.

I don't think this is evidence at all that the veils of various types are innocuous.

Au contraire.

[Acajack]

I also note that there are basically no women in Muslim countries themselves who laud the various coverings as empowering (or whatever). It's always those who are expatriated in the West who do so, when it isn't non-Muslim western women who are applauding from the safest positon possible.

Where are the feminists in Tehran or even Riyadh or Cairo who say the veil represents freedom and a choice?

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I also note that there are basically no women in Muslim countries themselves who laud the various coverings as empowering (or whatever). It's always those who are expatriated in the West who do so, when it isn't non-Muslim western women who are applauding from the safest positon possible.

Where are the feminists in Tehran or even Riyadh or Cairo who say the veil represents freedom and a choice?

Inconvenient truth.

[Acajack]

Franco-Ontarian TV network TFO tells employees they'll have to swear oath to King Charles III. Note that the network is the property of the province and the French-language outlet of TVOntario.

I am actually quite surprised that TFO employees didn't already have to make this oath.

https://www.ledroit.com/actualites/2024/...rment-au-roi-B2R63QYQSRBKRBWYYNCTTZQMOI/

Pretty sure all CBC-SRC (Radio-Canada) staff do have to take this oath as federal employees with the "Crown" being their official employer.

Quebec is probably the only province in Canada where public employees under the authority of of the provincial government don't have to take an oath to King Charles III.

[New Brisavoine]

Swearing an oath to an overseas king in the 21st century seems so retarded... I don't think even in the UK they have to swear any oath these days, let alone in Continental monarchies. It's as if the former dominions couldn't discard some old formalities that have lost any meaning nowadays. Utterly bizarre.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Swearing an oath to an overseas king in the 21st century seems so retarded... I don't think even in the UK they have to swear any oath these days, let alone in Continental monarchies. It's as if the former dominions couldn't discard some old formalities that have lost any meaning nowadays. Utterly bizarre.

It's not an overseas king. He is also the King of Canada. The oath is widespread in the UK as well. Constitutional Monarchies especially the British ones have been the most successful societes on earth. What do we replace the monarch with?

[mousquet]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Constitutional Monarchies especially the British ones have been the most successful societes on earth. What do we replace the monarch with?

Huh? Come again? Lol, what world do you live in?

Germany and Switzerland are federal republics and more successful than the UK. There's no question about that.
The Swiss standard of living downright humiliates that of most, if not all other developed nations.

It's not even proven that the British would really be better off than the French, despite the support they get from North America.
But they're good at overrating themselves in their widespread propaganda.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

It's not an overseas king. He is also the King of Canada.

He's the king of the United Kingdom. He has never lived in Canada and will never live there. It's just a foreign country to him. It's as if the civil servants in Québec had to swear an oath to the president of France. It's ridiculous.

Originally Posted by YOWetal

The oath is widespread in the UK as well.

It's not widespread. Only a very limited number of officials do the oath of allegiance in the UK, and I've never heard that BBC journalists have to do it (neither does a quick research online show that they have to). It would be very bizarre if they had too. The Test Acts and other antiquated stuff were dropped long ago in the UK.

Originally Posted by YOWetal

What do we replace the monarch with?

Republic. Australia will soon be one. Will Canada be the last holdout for fear of reawakening the linguistic/Québec issue with having to pick a president?

[New Brisavoine]

Anyway, just discovered this today. The prime minister of France in 1934. Doesn't he have an accent that could sound almost from Québec? It's the missing link between today's France's French and today's Québec's French I guess!

• Video Link

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

It's not an overseas king. He is also the King of Canada. The oath is widespread in the UK as well. Constitutional Monarchies especially the British ones have been the most successful societes on earth. What do we replace the monarch with?

If we can't replace the monarchy for legal or constitutional reasons, nothing stop us to make it less visible. Do we really need the image of a king or a queen on our money? The Governor General could just be like another higher up civil servant. An we definitely dont need to have elected politicians or public servants swearing an oath to a monarch, we dont have that in Québec and things dont go any worse that in the ROC because of that.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

He's the king of the United Kingdom....

I'm not debating whether we should or should not have a king, but for clarity the King of the United Kingdom is also the King of Canada. From Wikipedia:

Although the sovereign is shared with 14 other independent countries within the Commonwealth of Nations, each country's monarchy is separate and legally distinct. As a result, the current monarch is officially titled the King of Canada and, in this capacity, he and other members of the royal family undertake public and private functions domestically and abroad as representatives of Canada.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

I'm not debating whether we should or should not have a king, but for clarity the King of the United Kingdom is also the King of Canada. From Wikipedia:

I know, but that's just an artificial gimmick. He's as "Canadian" as I am. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if I knew Canada better than he does.

[Justanothermember]

I find it interesting that a bunch of random people from France in this thread are so concerned about Canada's Constitutional Monarchy, a country that they likely have no relevant ties to, simply because it involves a French-speaking population. Why does it have any relevance to them? Are they still upset about the loss of Nouveau France to the English and are wanting this out of spite?

FYI, Australia is nowhere near becoming a republic based on recent polling. And I will take a Constitutional Monarchy over a US-style republic any day.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

I know, but that's just an artificial gimmick. He's as "Canadian" as I am. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if I knew Canada better than he does.

From CBC:

'This great country': An inside look at Charles's 50-year romance with Canada
During some of his darkest days, Charles saw Canada as a refuge

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Justanothermember

I find it interesting that a bunch of random people from France in this thread are so concerned about Canada's Constitutional Monarchy, a country that they likely have no relevant ties to, simply because it involves a French-speaking population.

Oh, yeah. Just a mere detail that, a "French-speaking population". It's at the heart of why many of you don't understand your fellow "compatriotes" from Québec, from what I can see. The tendency to deny the uniqueness or elephant-in-the-room aspect of this 'otherness', as if it was only a detail.

If 20% of Canada was a German-speaking nation, you shouldn't be surprised if you had quite a few German and Austrian forumers coming and participating in a thread that discussed that German-speaking nation within Canada. It's no rocket science really, just cultural and language ties.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

From CBC:

'This great country': An inside look at Charles's 50-year romance with Canada
During some of his darkest days, Charles saw Canada as a refuge

This reads almost like these old 1950s BBC broadcasts about "our great imperial family". I suppose they serve the same sort of soppiness to the Australian public.

PS: To be clear, I think Charles is a great human being who was unfairly maligned for a long time by the British tabloid press, but he's first and foremost a Briton, and a European. He's neither Canadian nor Australian. He probably has closer ties with France than with any of the former colonies of England.

[Justanothermember]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Oh, yeah. Just a mere detail that, a "French-speaking population". It's at the heart of why many of you don't understand your fellow "compatriotes" from Québec, from what I can see. The tendency to deny the uniqueness or elephant-in-the-room aspect of this 'otherness', as if it was only a detail.

If 20% of Canada was a German-speaking nation, you shouldn't be surprised if you had quite a few German and Austrian forumers coming and participating in a thread that discussed that German-speaking nation within Canada. It's no rocket science really, just cultural and language ties.

I think I'm right, you still are bitter about losing Nouveau France to the English, and the Yanks for that matter, but that doesn't mean you have any ties to this country besides speaking a similar language, which is quite different from Francais in Quebec. Are you just as concerned about the rest of the French-speaking population in Canada, or do they not count simply because they live in English-dominant areas of the country?

There are other English-speaking countries around this world, yet does that mean I have any ties to them besides a similar language? No, that is a silly notion. You have no more ties to Canada than I do to Ireland.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

I'm not debating whether we should or should not have a king, but for clarity the King of the United Kingdom is also the King of Canada. From Wikipedia:

Yeah well we could pass a law saying that Canada is a tropical country and it would be legally accurate I suppose.