Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Some are basically non-existent except among recent immigrants from France. For example Faure which I know is common in France.

Faure is the southern French version of Lefèvre/Lefebvre, and the ancestors of the Québécois came from northern France, not southern France. That's why.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

A popular slag against French Canadians is that we're all inbred and the people who do this often point to our surnames.

That's true to some extent though. 12 to 15 million people descending from only 5,000 original settlers, that's unseen anywhere else in the world (even if you take into account the fact some indeed had children with native Indians or other communities). A French demographer had calculated that if the French had reproduced as much as the French Canadians since 1700, there would be... 1 billion French people today!

[MolsonExport]

Did they take into account the effects of the French Wars of Religion?

The French Wars of Religion were a series of civil wars between French Catholics and Protestants (called Huguenots) from 1562 to 1598. Between two and four million people died from violence, famine or disease directly caused by the conflict, and it severely damaged the power of the French monarchy.

Knecht, Robert J. (2002). The French Religious Wars 1562–1598. Osprey Publishing

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Did they take into account the effects of the French Wars of Religion?

What do you mean?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

That's true to some extent though. 12 to 15 million people descending from only 5,000 original settlers, that's unseen anywhere else in the world (even if you take into account the fact some indeed had children with native Indians or other communities). A French demographer had calculated that if the French had reproduced as much as the French Canadians since 1700, there would be... 1 billion French people today!

Obviously there is some degree of consanguinity in French Canada as in many other places, though not sure if the prodigious birth rate is necessarily proof of that.

Any original group of 100 or 5,000 or 10,000 or 50,000 people back in the day would have reproduced amongst themselves. Whether each couple had 5 kids or 15 kids. Any larger group started somewhere, ie with a much smaller group.

And of course as the group gets much larger the effects of consanguinity decrease as they get diluted. Obviously there can be exceptions to this and of course in French Canada as in other places certain diseases can be more common among groups of specific origins.

[New Brisavoine]

^^What's too bad is how your fertility rate dropped precipitously after the 1930s. If you had kept a high fertility rate, Canada today would have perhaps 25 million Francophones vs 33 million Anglophones. That would be more fun (although not the sort of fun MonctonRad would like).

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

^^What's too bad is how your fertility rate dropped precipitously after the 1930s. If you had kept a high fertility rate, Canada today would have perhaps 25 million Francophones vs 33 million Anglophones. That would be more fun (although not the sort of fun MonctonRad would like).

At one point in the 20th century there were a number of serious demographic projections that forecast that New Brunswick would eventually become Canada's second majority francophone province. Then as you note our fertility dropped off a cliff and that was the end of that.

Another thing is that is the ROC provinces had not had deliberately assimilationist policies the francophone population outside Quebec would probably be quite a bit larger. It's currently about 1 million but might be 2 or 2.5 million if the language and culture had not been actively suppressed. Obviously most of the ROC would have been an anglo-normative environment no matter what, and there would always have been some assimilation of francophones in these areas. But it would not have been as catastrophic.

[New Brisavoine]

I've just had a look... If Québec had kept the same growth rate as in the 1950s (we're not even talking of 19th century growth rates here, just 1950s), then the population of Québec today would be... 27 million people!! "Demography is destiny" as they say.

With 27 million people, Québec's share of Canada's population would be 45.5%, the same as in 1860. Canada would resemble Belgium a lot: 45% Francophones, 55% Anglophones (Dutch-speakers in Belgium).

PS: How big would Montréal be in a Québec of 27 million? 10 million people like Chicago?

[kool maudit]

It would have been big, because however many people the province accumulated, there's only one Saint-Lawrence and Montreal is the end of the line as far as that goes.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

I've just had a look... If Québec had kept the same growth rate as in the 1950s (we're not even talking of 19th century growth rates here, just 1950s), then the population of Québec today would be... 27 million people!! "Demography is destiny" as they say.

With 27 million people, Québec's share of Canada's population would be 45.5%, the same as in 1860. Canada would resemble Belgium a lot: 45% Francophones, 55% Anglophones (Dutch-speakers in Belgium).

PS: How big would Montréal be in a Québec of 27 million? 10 million people like Chicago?

Yes. Now a key difference between Belgium and Canada and another major factor in the constant minorization of francophones here is immigration.

Canada has almost always had appreciable immigration, and this immigration never contributed to the francophone population in any significant way until about 20-30 years ago. And even so the gains are reasonably modest. Whereas in Belgium they had less immigration but a lot of it still benefited the francophone share of the country. Thinking of people like Claude Barzotti or Salvatore Adamo, or even Lara Fabian who eventually ended up in Quebec.

Even in Quebec immigration (and even non-anglophone immigration) served to reduce the francophone share of the population historically, and has grown the anglophone population a lot well beyond the WASP and Irish origins of the group.

Immigration numbers for Canada as whole are quite striking in the 1910s especially, keeping in mind the total population of the country at the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_immigration_statistics#Annual_immigration_and_rate

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

It would have been big, because however many people the province accumulated, there's only one Saint-Lawrence and Montreal is the end of the line as far as that goes.

I think other cities in Québec would have grown too. Probably Québec City 3 or 4 million in its metro area, Sherbrooke 1 million, Saguenay 1 million.

I have a hard time seeing Montréal larger than 10 million, but who knows!

The question is what sort of economy they would have to support 27 million people. They would have had to develop some major world leaders in manufacturing, as you cannot support 27 million people with natural ressources, banking and tourism alone.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

I think other cities in Québec would have grown too. Probably Québec City 3 or 4 million in its metro area, Sherbrooke 1 million, Saguenay 1 million.

I have a hard time seeing Montréal larger than 10 million, but who knows!

The question is what sort of economy they would have to support 27 million people. They would have had to develop some major world leaders in manufacturing, as you cannot support 27 million people with natural ressources, banking and tourism alone.

Still with the Argentina example that I've used before, I see Montréal's (missed) destiny as a Buenos Aires of sorts. Either of an independent Quebec or as the capital and metropolis of all of Canada.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

^^What's too bad is how your fertility rate dropped precipitously after the 1930s. If you had kept a high fertility rate, Canada today would have perhaps 25 million Francophones vs 33 million Anglophones. That would be more fun (although not the sort of fun MonctonRad would like).

The revanche des berceaux was serious business for the French priests in the St. Lawrence River valley/

The solution to everything was to keep all those sturdy young habitant women pregnant, barefoot and in the kitchen.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Still with the Argentina example that I've used before, I see Montréal's (missed) destiny as a Buenos Aires of sorts. Either of an independent Quebec or as the capital and metropolis of all of Canada.

Montreal would not be the metropolis of all of Canada unless it was a legitimate bilingual city. At one time, this was it's destiny, but, the PQ, Bill 101 and a couple of referenda put an end to that.

Which is too bad, because I think Montreal is a more interesting city than Toronto. It would have done well as the NYC of Canada.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Yes. Now a key difference between Belgium and Canada and another major factor in the constant minorization of francophones here is immigration.

Canada has almost always had appreciable immigration, and this immigration never contributed to the francophone population in any significant way until about 20-30 years ago. And even so the gains are reasonably modest. Whereas in Belgium they had less immigration but a lot of it still benefited the francophone share of the country. Thinking of people like Claude Barzotti or Salvatore Adamo, or even Lara Fabian who eventually ended up in Quebec.

Even in Quebec immigration (and even non-anglophone immigration) served to reduce the francophone share of the population historically, and has grown the anglophone population a lot well beyond the WASP and Irish origins of the group.

Immigration numbers for Canada as whole are quite striking in the 1910s especially, keeping in mind the total population of the country at the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_immigration_statistics#Annual_immigration_and_rate

The tragedy of Québec is its climate (although I know the Québécois would vehemently deny it and eagerly embrace its "winters"). If Québec had the same climate as either California or Florida, you'd have up to 5 million French people eagerly moving there tomorrow. Problem solved. In fact the French population is so sick and tired with the state of the country now (major shootout involving 500 drug dealers in fucking Poitiers last night if you haven't read the news... I mean mid-sized, until recently super-quite POITIERS for Christ's sake!!), I can easily see 10 million French people happily moving to a Francophone version of California.

Québec's winters will always make most French people think twice before moving.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Québec's winters will always make most French people think twice before moving.

There's nothing wrong with a healthy invigorating climate. It puts hair on your chest.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Montreal would not be the metropolis of all of Canada unless it was a legitimate bilingual city. At one time, this was it's destiny, but, the PQ, Bill 101 and a couple of referenda put an end to that.

Which is too bad, because I think Montreal is a more interesting city than Toronto. It would have done well as the NYC of Canada.

The anglicization of Montreal is not that remote a possibility - past, present or future.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

The anglicization of Montreal is not that remote a possibility - past, present or future.

Depending on your choice of "past" it was pretty much a reality.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

The tragedy of Québec is its climate (although I know the Québécois would vehemently deny it and eagerly embrace its "winters"). If Québec had the same climate as either California or Florida, you'd have up to 5 million French people eagerly moving there tomorrow. Problem solved. In fact the French population is so sick and tired with the state of the country now (major shootout involving 500 drug dealers in fucking Poitiers last night if you haven't read the news... I mean mid-sized, until recently super-quite POITIERS for Christ's sake!!), I can easily see 10 million French people happily moving to a Francophone version of California.

Québec's winters will always make most French people think twice before moving.

Well Montreal should get Washington NYC climate by mid century. That is still cold but it hasn't stopped 15 million people from living there. I know French people are extra soft though so maybe the few weeks less winter on either end will help migration.

I wonder if Bill 101 and the exodus had never happened it would be much more attractive to migrants from France as a place you can work on International scale but with French at home. Totally understanding this would make Montreal less welcoming for the arriving retail worker hopeful from Chicoutimi. And of course would make independence impossible.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Still with the Argentina example that I've used before, I see Montréal's (missed) destiny as a Buenos Aires of sorts. Either of an independent Quebec or as the capital and metropolis of all of Canada.

Yeah but Argentina is vastly larger and full of natural ressources than Québec. Buenos Aires also doesn't have a Toronto to compete with. And as MonctonRad rightly says (for once), a Francophone Montréal cannot be the metropolis of the entire Canada, so it could be the metropolis of only Québec, which is why I have a hard time seeing it larger than 10 million. But then again who knows. Seoul has 20 million people, and South Korea is smaller geography-wise than Québec. Not the same culture though. The Québécois would never have been as "hard working" as the Koreans (in fact no Western people would ever be).