Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Still not visible today?

I've been able to view them. More comments later.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

And this is what Élisée Reclus wrote about Ottawa, which Acajack will particularly like.

This is all very fascinating. I lived in Ottawa for a time when I was younger and there actually still clearly were some old remnants of the type of city (demographically and culturally) that Reclus described almost a century before.

It's mostly gone today however.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

And this is what Élisée Reclus wrote about the relationship between the Acadians and the Québécois back in 1890. Note that he refers to the Québécois as "Canadiens". He uses the term "Canadiens" to refer solely to the French Canadians of Québec. The Anglophone Canadians he called "Anglais" and "Américains". If he uses these terms that's because local people used them. Élisée Reclus was usually very well informed, and very faithful in his descriptions of countries.



And Moncton, since we have several Moncton residents here.

This Reclus was a very perceptive guy.

One of my parents (born in the 1940s) used these kinds of terms to describe people while growing up.

They were the "Acadiens".

French Canadians from Quebec (like Wilfrid Laurier or Louis St-Laurent) were "Canadiens".

Sir John A Macdonald would have been an "Anglais", or maybe an "Écossais". Though most anglophones would have been "Anglais" and definitely not "Canadien".

Americans were "Américains" or even "Bostonnais" believe it or not.

They also had names for Indigenous people and African-Americans* which you can imagine what they were, but I won't write them down here because some people will get really excited!

*At least for one of my parents there were quite a few black people in the vicinity, who were descended from freed American slaves who lived in their own towns inland away from the coast. As recently as 50-60 years ago they still had churches with gospel singing on Sundays like you'd see in the movie Sister Act. Most of these towns have disappeared at this point. So one of my parents in spite of growing in a small entirely Acadien town of 150 people, had lots of black people around them in their youth. My other parent grew up in another part of Acadie and probably never saw a black person (other than on TV or in the movies) until they were about 25.

[lio45]

Some of the stuff presented to me by the fb algorithm that seemed worth sharing (language-related in both cases) :

IMG_1968


IMG_1969

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Zeej

It's fact that at least two other provinces explored their own secession from Canada in the event of a OUI result in 1995, so I doubt very much that the rest of the country would continue on pretending as though nothing had happened. Your assertion is not based in fact. In the lead up to the 1980 referendum, Canada made a decision to allow Quebec to consult its population. I don't see why there would be a double standard towards other provinces, particularly in the event that one manages to secede.

In Saskatchewan's case:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatche...separation-roy-romanow-reveals-1.2744298

It's one thing to "explore" some possibilities, it's quite another to act on them. I'm ready to bet a big sum of money no province would move after Québec's secession.

[Acajack]

In spite of what I say about most of the ROC being extremely similar to the US, I also have my doubts that there would be a rattachiste (annexationist) move towards the US from any of the ROC provinces if Quebec became independent.

I mean, people here and elsewhere always say very insistently that it isn't just Quebec that makes Canada different from the US.

Wouldn't Canada-sans-Québec joining the US only prove that that's true, and that Canada has no identity without Quebec?

[kwoldtimer]

Surprises me that it never seems to occur to people that the USA might not be interested in absorbing Canada. They have trouble dealing with Puerto Rico and D.C. Canada would probably be far more than they could digest.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Surprises me that it never seems to occur to people that the USA might not be interested in absorbing Canada. They have trouble dealing with Puerto Rico and D.C. Canada would probably be far more than they could digest.

Definitely agree. There is often this assumption when the issue is discussed that the decision about whether Canada becomes part of the US is ours to make and only ours. That's very misguided.

[Acajack]

Though there is probably a psychological cope involved in the widespread assumption among Canadians that if we wanted to join the US, that they'd immediately say yes.

If ever we got to discussing it seriously and the Americans actually said "no thanks", it would be interesting to see what effect that would have on the Canadian psyche.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Acajack

In spite of what I say about most of the ROC being extremely similar to the US, I also have my doubts that there would be a rattachiste (annexationist) move towards the US from any of the ROC provinces if Quebec became independent.

I mean, people here and elsewhere always say very insistently that it isn't just Quebec that makes Canada different from the US.

Wouldn't Canada-sans-Québec joining the US only prove that that's true, and that Canada has no identity without Quebec?

I don’t think that Ontario-west would join the US (although… Alberta? ). I think it would be a new version of Canada.

Currently, though, the Atlantic Provinces are mostly considered a financial drain by the ROC (which includes Quebec, BTW), and I could see a struggling ‘New Canada’ cutting ties in order to survive (or thrive) financially. Quebec going rogue would physically isolate us from the other ROC, so why not?

Mind you, they would lose a strategic east coast port, but perhaps it wouldn’t be considered necessary anymore. Quebec might attempt to annex the Acadien parts of NB, though, but I suspect they would do everything possible to eliminate Halifax’s competitiveness as an eastern port in order to protect Montreal’s hold on it.

To your point, if the Maritimes or NL were ever to become a US territory, it wouldn’t be from some desire of the citizens to become American, or some sudden realization that we are just the same as them so we may as well be part of them. It would be financially necessary, or it could happen forcefully if the US perceived a broken Canada and separated Quebec as being a threat.

I would suggest that we shouldn’t worry about it too much as it is highly unlikely that it will ever happen. Good topic for discussion, though.

FWIW, aside from the language differences, is Quebec really all that different from America? I’d argue that your politics are a little further to the right than your ROC, and the isolationist ideals are a different flavour, but more in line with the US than Canada. Food for thought.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Surprises me that it never seems to occur to people that the USA might not be interested in absorbing Canada. They have trouble dealing with Puerto Rico and D.C. Canada would probably be far more than they could digest.

I’m not sure that Puerto Rico is a good comp for Canada, though.

Firstly, there is that long border that we share. Trump rhetoric aside, they can’t handle their border with Mexico, and there might be some perceived value in avoiding a “Mexico North”. A lesser concern might be further isolation of Alaska.

The real prize, IMHO, would be the vast land full of untapped natural resources that could be invaluable to them in a future world where theirs are virtually tapped out.

That said, it is only speculation, and I am not knowledgeable enough to decisively say whether Canada would be an asset or a liability to them, but I’m leaning towards asset.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I would suggest that we shouldn’t worry about it too much as it is highly unlikely that it will ever happen. Good topic for discussion, though.

The "Maritimes joining the USA" part, or the Quebec sovereignty part?

New Leger poll out today, PQ at ~45% among francophone Quebecois, while the CAQ is at ~20% province-wide, worst result since back when it was a third party in its early days.

I'd say the odds of a third referendum are higher than the other way around (i.e. >50%). All the main CAQ ministers are damaged goods and tainted now -- think JT's Libs, but provincially. In other words even if Legault decides to retire there's no fresh blood available. No way that party doesn't get voted out in 2026. And we'll need something to replace it.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Though there is probably a psychological cope involved in the widespread assumption among Canadians that if we wanted to join the US, that they'd immediately say yes.

If ever we got to discussing it seriously and the Americans actually said "no thanks", it would be interesting to see what effect that would have on the Canadian psyche.

The U.S. has always been expansionist and the politics of the new territories has never stopped them from expanding whenever given the chance, especially in the contiguous mainland USA -- I am pretty sure it's just never happened.

The combined country would be the biggest and greatest in the world...

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Surprises me that it never seems to occur to people that the USA might not be interested in absorbing Canada. They have trouble dealing with Puerto Rico and D.C. Canada would probably be far more than they could digest.

Exactly. I said that a few months ago, but then I was told that supposedly the US would never refuse some enlargement. I have my doubts... Ideology trumps everything these days, and the Republicans wouldn't like to have some woke, godless, super-liberal new states in the US which would alter US presidential elections. Not to mention the 50 stars on the US flag, the familiar shape of the US on geographic maps, and all other sorts of sentimental reasons.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Though there is probably a psychological cope involved in the widespread assumption among Canadians that if we wanted to join the US, that they'd immediately say yes.

There'd actually be a higher likelihood of France accepting Québec to join the French Republic. The French are a very sentimental, Latin people, and I'm sure they would in their majority agree to it, without even thinking of all the complicated consequences...

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by lio45

The "Maritimes joining the USA" part, or the Quebec sovereignty part?

I was having the exact same question.

Originally Posted by lio45

I'd say the odds of a third referendum are higher than the other way around (i.e. >50%).

Yeah, if things continue that way, a 3rd referendum is extremely likely (unless the Canadian government does like the Spanish and British governments and refuses it... I know people say they couldn't, but I think they could if they are too afraid of the possible result). A OUI win, on the other hand, is still as ever very uncertain, although by no means impossible.

If I had to make a forecast, I'd say there'll be a 3rd referendum before 2030 (possibly in 2027?), but the PQ will lose it once again.

[mousquet]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

There'd actually be a higher likelihood of France accepting Québec to join the French Republic. The French are a very sentimental, Latin people, and I'm sure they would in their majority agree to it, without even thinking of all the complicated consequences...

Heck, the French would even take Wallonia, Belgium in in a heartbeat, in a crushing majority (including myself ) just because speaking French is enough, while Wallonia's current economy would worsen the government budget.

We are too sentimental indeed. Like prez Macron says, we are herbivores in a world of predators.
A people of gentle preys in the middle of bloody barbarians.

At least, Québec would mean some additional revenues... It's not the Paris region, but it would help somehow.

[OldDartmouthMark]

.

[OldDartmouthMark]

.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by lio45

The "Maritimes joining the USA" part, or the Quebec sovereignty part?

New Leger poll out today, PQ at ~45% among francophone Quebecois, while the CAQ is at ~20% province-wide, worst result since back when it was a third party in its early days.

I'd say the odds of a third referendum are higher than the other way around (i.e. >50%). All the main CAQ ministers are damaged goods and tainted now -- think JT's Libs, but provincially. In other words even if Legault decides to retire there's no fresh blood available. No way that party doesn't get voted out in 2026. And we'll need something to replace it.

Both.

For the Maritimes part... nah. If Quebec were to separate, "Canada" would probably work out some deal for a customs-protected transportation route either through Quebec or the US (probably the US, as it would be a more efficient route), and continue to use the easternmost provinces for shipping, Navy, fishing, etc. etc. etc.. Halifax would actually gain importance as a shipping port, given that Montreal would no longer be part of Canada.

For the Quebec sovereignty part, it would be an extremely bold and risky move, IMHO. People will respond emotionally in the polls all day long, because there are no consequences to saying that you want sovereignty!! Vive Quebec!!! and all that. But when it comes to paying the bills, there will be a lot to lose, and level heads would likely prevail.

IMHO... but it doesn't matter what I think, really. I didn't think the US should vote in Trump, but they just signed up for another 4(+) years of crazy, so...