Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Yeah, but happiness is a fuzzy concept, hard to measure and easy to discard (think of Bhutan's Gross National Happiness). GDP per capita is more tangible, and speaks more to people.

I can see this figure changing the dynamic of the relationship between Québec and ROC. It's a historical change really when you think about it. Now if the Québec authorities were clever, they would push Statcan to measure purchasing power across Canada, and publish provincial GDP per capita at PPP values (as Eurostat is doing for European countries). That would definitely change the image of Québec in Canada.

Out of curiosity, has the fact that countries like Lithuania, Poland, Czechia etc. have relatively high and rapidly rising GDP-PPP per capita changed some of the European discourse where those countries are usually dismissed as the "poor eastern backwater"?

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Of course they wouldn't, but it's hard to escape the fact that historical legacies linger. And I have no qualms admitting that for the French (and also the British), being economically superior to the Italians is part of our self-image, and we would be quite peeved if the Italians suddenly passed us in GDP per capita. In fact when Italy passed the UK briefly in the 1980s the British press was quite hysterical.

On top of this historical feeling of economic superiority, perhaps there's also the fact that Anglo-Canada perceives Québec as having a better lifestyle, the good life, etc., so the idea is: perhaps it's less fun in Anglo-Canada, but at least we're richer.

I don't think people perceive Quebec as being "more fun". The negative stereotype of Quebec in Toronto (which is >50% visible minority) is that Quebecers are more racist and not welcoming to people who don't speak French as a first language.

A lot of things that Quebecers find fun (and optimize their society for), aren't what Ontarians, or Torontonians, at least, find fun.

Torontonians are not outdoorsy. Quebecers are very outdoorsy. I, personally, am outdoorsy, and the thing I envy the most about Quebec is their excellent national parks system (SEPAQ), but few Torontonians I've talked to who have visited Quebec bring this up.

Torontonians are probably more materialistic than Montrealers, and I think it shows: the cars are nicer in Toronto and the shopping options are better, particularly in the luxury space. I'm not a person who cares to drop $500 on a designer T-shirt, but if you are, it's clear that Toronto has many more options in this regard. Montreal feels conspicuously provincial when it comes to luxury brand name stores.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Yeah, he is at least nominally francophone.

I think there is an impression that with the huge demographic changes in Canada, even Prime Ministers who are francophone to the degree that Justin Trudeau is, are going to become less and likely in the future.

Personally I am not 100% sure of that, as francophone Canadians are very embedded in Canadian affairs and quite savvy players of the game.

It could very well be that in a Canada where francophones are only 15% of the population that they will retain a highly disproportionate role in governing the country.

You see this in a number of other diverse countries where group X traditionally dominates the economy, group Y dominates the government, group Z dominates culture and education, etc.

A group doesn't necessarily have to be a majority (or even close to a majority) in order to exercise outsized influence in a sector. It just has to have competence, gravitas and (usually) history.

Of course, all of this is just a hypothesis. I am not sure if ROCers (especially in the West) would happily accept this situation in the future.

I dunno. The LPC is dominated by the Laurentian Elite who do see value in having francophone representation. At the provincial level Franco-Ontarians and Acadians are really prominent in the provincial Liberal parties of Ontario & New Brunswick (eastern Ottawa always has Franco-Ontarian OLP candidates despite being majority anglophone, for example).

But we are about to see a big first in Canada: a Conservative Party supermajority, with little representation from Quebec. This will be the third time the Conservatives win a giant majority (1958 and 1984 being the previous) but the previous two times, the CPC had a big breakthrough in Quebec and won a majority of the seats there. This will not happen this time. It's foreseeable the CPC could get as far as two-thirds of the seats in Parliament with less than a fifth of the seats in Quebec. Historically just a majority without also getting at least half of seats in Quebec is already a tall order (OTOH, 1993 and 2011 were the only times this has happened) but a supermajority is another thing altogether.

Quebec's relative weight in Parliament keeps declining. Over the last 25 years Parliament has gone from 301 to 343 seats but Quebec's representation has only gone from 75 to 78. And there are more and more seats within Quebec (in the Montreal area) that are winnable without the francophone vote. JT is not popular with francophones yet he still managed 32/78 by running up the numbers along non-francophones in the Montreal region. And fewer and fewer Ontarians are of the mindset that not being bilingual is disqualifying for a PM candidate.

Unless we re-open the constitution, I wouldn't blame Quebec for seeing the writing on the wall and planning their exit.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Francophone:

• Video Link

Anglophone:

• Video Link

It's like the difference between an elk and a moose really. Easy to tell (unless you're a Brit confused about what an elk is ).

From what I gather (Acajack and lio can correct me if I'm wrong), Quebecois actually were more upset at Justin Trudeau's French than Stephen Harper's French. Trudeau is supposed to have French as his mother tongue (raised by francophone parents, seen as being "from Quebec", etc.) so the expectation is that he should speak French perfectly and his hesitation in the language gets people mad. By contrast Harper, as an Anglo-Canadian politician with roots in Toronto & Calgary who first learned French as an adult when he pursued national leadership, there wasn't much expectation that he'd become fluent and so he gets more credit for "trying".

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

On the one hand, the Francophones have always had a disproportionate presence in the (Canadian) prime-ministership (or however you call it), because the Anglophones have tried to appease/include the Francophones to keep the country united (you see the same in Belgium where the Francophones have accepted a disproportionate share of Flemish primer ministers since the 1960s to appease the Flemings and keep the country united), but on the other hand, there doesn't seem to be anyone on the horizon in Francophone Canada who could possibly be prime minister in the foreseeable future... Or do you see anyone?

And if the PLQ collapses, this is basically the reservoir of Francophone Canadian prime ministers that is gone. (as I suppose no one seriously imagine a PQ, QS, CAQ prime minister of Canada, and the Conservatives are extremely marginal in Québec).

The leader of the closest thing we have to a "far-right" party is actually very francophone. (He has a very thick accent when speaking English, although he's fluent).

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I don't think people perceive Quebec as being "more fun". The negative stereotype of Quebec in Toronto (which is >50% visible minority) is that Quebecers are more racist and not welcoming to people who don't speak French as a first language.

A lot of things that Quebecers find fun (and optimize their society for), aren't what Ontarians, or Torontonians, at least, find fun.

Torontonians are not outdoorsy. Quebecers are very outdoorsy. I, personally, am outdoorsy, and the thing I envy the most about Quebec is their excellent national parks system (SEPAQ), but few Torontonians I've talked to who have visited Quebec bring this up.

Torontonians are probably more materialistic than Montrealers, and I think it shows: the cars are nicer in Toronto and the shopping options are better, particularly in the luxury space. I'm not a person who cares to drop $500 on a designer T-shirt, but if you are, it's clear that Toronto has many more options in this regard. Montreal feels conspicuously provincial when it comes to luxury brand name stores.

This is really more of a Toronto thing, not a ROC thing. Anglo-Canadians outside of the GTA are pretty outdoorsy if you look at places like Ottawa, Vancouver, Calgary, etc. (It's actually, IMO, one of the biggest cultural differences between GTA people versus other Anglo-Canadians).

It's really striking how if you're hanging out in the "cottage country" areas of Southern Ontario - places like Algonquin Park, Muskoka, Bon Echo, etc. - the folks you see on the trails and on the boats are very disproportionately white compared to Southern Ontario's overall population, which IMO is just a sign of how disengaged the GTA folks are from outdoorsy-ness.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The leader of the closest thing we have to a "far-right" party is actually very francophone. (He has a very thick accent when speaking English, although he's fluent).

Yeah, Maxime Bernier in English almost sounds like he's from France!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhsLYKGvQKY

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I dunno. The LPC is dominated by the Laurentian Elite who do see value in having francophone representation. At the provincial level Franco-Ontarians and Acadians are really prominent in the provincial Liberal parties of Ontario & New Brunswick (eastern Ottawa always has Franco-Ontarian OLP candidates despite being majority anglophone, for example).

But we are about to see a big first in Canada: a Conservative Party supermajority, with little representation from Quebec. This will be the third time the Conservatives win a giant majority (1958 and 1984 being the previous) but the previous two times, the CPC had a big breakthrough in Quebec and won a majority of the seats there. This will not happen this time. It's foreseeable the CPC could get as far as two-thirds of the seats in Parliament with less than a fifth of the seats in Quebec. Historically just a majority without also getting at least half of seats in Quebec is already a tall order (OTOH, 1993 and 2011 were the only times this has happened) but a supermajority is another thing altogether.

Quebec's relative weight in Parliament keeps declining. Over the last 25 years Parliament has gone from 301 to 343 seats but Quebec's representation has only gone from 75 to 78. And there are more and more seats within Quebec (in the Montreal area) that are winnable without the francophone vote. JT is not popular with francophones yet he still managed 32/78 by running up the numbers along non-francophones in the Montreal region. And fewer and fewer Ontarians are of the mindset that not being bilingual is disqualifying for a PM candidate.

Unless we re-open the constitution, I wouldn't blame Quebec for seeing the writing on the wall and planning their exit.

Cannot disagree with any of this.

[harls]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

From what I gather (Acajack and lio can correct me if I'm wrong), Quebecois actually were more upset at Justin Trudeau's French than Stephen Harper's French. Trudeau is supposed to have French as his mother tongue (raised by francophone parents, seen as being "from Quebec", etc.) so the expectation is that he should speak French perfectly and his hesitation in the language gets people mad. By contrast Harper, as an Anglo-Canadian politician with roots in Toronto & Calgary who first learned French as an adult when he pursued national leadership, there wasn't much expectation that he'd become fluent and so he gets more credit for "trying".

In defense of Harper (ugh), that lady's question was loaded with colloquialisms someone like Steve would probably have trouble grasping, especially during a live debate.

Ditto for the Dion interview, there were probably phrases he didn't pick up on.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Out of curiosity, has the fact that countries like Lithuania, Poland, Czechia etc. have relatively high and rapidly rising GDP-PPP per capita changed some of the European discourse where those countries are usually dismissed as the "poor eastern backwater"?

Not really because it hasn't registered in the mind of people yet. Besides, even Lithuania, Poland and Czechia still have a PPP GDP per capita lower than France and Britain. If they passed the UK and France (*IF*), then yeah, it might make a sensation.

But don't forget that their economies are boosted by financial transfers from Western Europe (via the EU) in ways that Québec could only dream of. It remains to be seen if their economies will keep growing after these financial transfers stop (as they will now that their GDP per capita is reaching the average of the EU).

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

From what I gather (Acajack and lio can correct me if I'm wrong), Quebecois actually were more upset at Justin Trudeau's French than Stephen Harper's French. Trudeau is supposed to have French as his mother tongue (raised by francophone parents, seen as being "from Quebec", etc.) so the expectation is that he should speak French perfectly and his hesitation in the language gets people mad. By contrast Harper, as an Anglo-Canadian politician with roots in Toronto & Calgary who first learned French as an adult when he pursued national leadership, there wasn't much expectation that he'd become fluent and so he gets more credit for "trying".

Most definitely.

As I mentioned in another post, the Liberals are the classic poster boy foils to the separatist argument that French is imperilled and that only independence will save it. So when you have a guy with a francophone name who is PM and telling you ad nauseam every day that that's not true and that status quo Canada is awesome for French and francophones, especially someone who has the name Trudeau had better have near-perfect French with the right accent.

Anglophones are not subjected to this scrutiny, and even Pierre Poilievre who has a French name but is clearly an anglophone from the West is not held up to the high standard either.

Now, Poilievre's wife, the daughter of Venezuelan refugees, if she didn't speak French properly, might raise questions since she is from Montreal.

But... she does.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNGZXlBFwHk

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by harls

In defense of Harper (ugh), that lady's question was loaded with colloquialisms someone like Steve would probably have trouble grasping, especially during a live debate.

Ditto for the Dion interview, there were probably phrases he didn't pick up on.

I always thought Harper's French was pretty good, though perhaps lacking in "street" nuances.

Poilievre's is better in that respect. (And I am sure his wife coaches him.)

He was on the year-end political satire show Infoman on New Year's Eve.

Trudeau cancelled his interview, which was scheduled to be recorded the day Chrystia Freeland resigned. He never rescheduled with the program.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I don't think people perceive Quebec as being "more fun". The negative stereotype of Quebec in Toronto (which is >50% visible minority) is that Quebecers are more racist and not welcoming to people who don't speak French as a first language.

A lot of things that Quebecers find fun (and optimize their society for), aren't what Ontarians, or Torontonians, at least, find fun.

And yet Montréal is much more popular as a destination than Toronto, so go figure.

But what you said about the negative stereotype (more racist and not welcoming) is what a French guy (lawyer) who worked in Toronto also told me he heard his (Anglophone) colleagues say about Québec. That being said, I don't think it's contradictory with the first paragraph. People could AT THE SAME TIME find Québec (Montréal in particular) more fun/chic/alluring/attractive AND also think that the Québecois are more racist and less welcoming. It's not antithetical. You know the famous British saying: France is the best country on Earth, but what a pity it is inhabited by the worst people on Earth.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Of course they wouldn't, but it's hard to escape the fact that historical legacies linger. And I have no qualms admitting that for the French (and also the British), being economically superior to the Italians is part of our self-image, and we would be quite peeved if the Italians suddenly passed us in GDP per capita. In fact when Italy passed the UK briefly in the 1980s the British press was quite hysterical.

On top of this historical feeling of economic superiority, perhaps there's also the fact that Anglo-Canada perceives Québec as having a better lifestyle, the good life, etc., so the idea is: perhaps it's less fun in Anglo-Canada, but at least we're richer. So now if Québec not only has the good lifestyle, but ALSO becomes richer than Anglo-Canada, what's left to us? I wouldn't be surprised if that plays a role too. In Europe if Spain and Italy suddenly had a higher GDP per capita than Northern Europe, on top of already being known for having a better lifestyle, sun and beaches, Northern Europe would be quite annoyed indeed.

As I am sure it was big deal when little old Ireland started outperforming the UK. (Yes I know the specific conditions that allowed that to happen.)

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

This is really more of a Toronto thing, not a ROC thing. Anglo-Canadians outside of the GTA are pretty outdoorsy if you look at places like Ottawa, Vancouver, Calgary, etc. (It's actually, IMO, one of the biggest cultural differences between GTA people versus other Anglo-Canadians).

Yeah, Vancouver looked like a very outdoorsy place when I visited. Much much more so than Seattle. If Toronto is as little outdoorsy as Seattle, then that sucks, as I'm a very outdoorsy person too (which kind of sucks in Paris too of course, but at least we have great ancient royal forests and woods all around the city if you care to go beyond the central areas, whereas Toronto doesn't seem to have much in terms of forests or nature areas in its metro area).

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I always thought Harper's French was pretty good, though perhaps lacking in "street" nuances.

Poilievre's is better in that respect. (And I am sure his wife coaches him.)

He was on the year-end political satire show Infoman on New Year's Eve.

Trudeau cancelled his interview, which was scheduled to be recorded the day Chrystia Freeland resigned. He never rescheduled with the program.

Isn't Polievre a native speaker if from Alberta? Harper worked very hard and was somewhat limited in actual speaking but could perform key PM tasks.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I don't think people perceive Quebec as being "more fun". The negative stereotype of Quebec in Toronto (which is >50% visible minority) is that Quebecers are more racist and not welcoming to people who don't speak French as a first language.

A lot of things that Quebecers find fun (and optimize their society for), aren't what Ontarians, or Torontonians, at least, find fun.

Torontonians are not outdoorsy. Quebecers are very outdoorsy. I, personally, am outdoorsy, and the thing I envy the most about Quebec is their excellent national parks system (SEPAQ), but few Torontonians I've talked to who have visited Quebec bring this up.

Torontonians are probably more materialistic than Montrealers, and I think it shows: the cars are nicer in Toronto and the shopping options are better, particularly in the luxury space. I'm not a person who cares to drop $500 on a designer T-shirt, but if you are, it's clear that Toronto has many more options in this regard. Montreal feels conspicuously provincial when it comes to luxury brand name stores.

I've got A LOT of family in Ontario, including quite a few in the GTA.

I think they way I'd describe it is as they do like quite a few things about Quebec (many of them being "fun"), but only in a place to visit. They wouldn't want to have that stuff all the time at home in Ontario, or at least they wouldn't want to make the trade-offs necessary for that to be the norm in Toronto, Kitchener, or wherever.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Yeah, Vancouver looked like a very outdoorsy place when I visited. Much much more so than Seattle. If Toronto is as little outdoorsy as Seattle, then that sucks, as I'm a very outdoorsy person too (which kind of sucks in Paris too of course, but at least we have great ancient royal forests and woods all around the city if you care to go beyond the central areas, whereas Toronto doesn't seem to have much in terms of forests or nature areas in its metro area).

Toronto has nothing in the metro area, but they're not that far away from the section of Ontario called "cottage country" - a band of forests & lakes that stretches from Parry Sound in the west all the way to the outskirts of Ottawa in the east which dips down almost to the US border near Kingston (you can see it very clearly in this Google satellite view as the green area north of the farmland area). This area is beautiful, very accessible for tourists (good road network throughout, lots of accommodations, etc.) and the more easterly part of it (which, granted, is a bit further from Toronto at about a 3-4 hour drive - still pretty close by Canadian standards!) contains some sections of genuine wilderness where you can hike for hours on a summer weekend without seeing a single other human. Last summer I hiked a hilltop around there (it's called "Evergreen Mountain" which is a somewhat dramatic name for a 420m peak - in fairness it is the tallest peak for about 20km in any surrounding direction and the north "slope" is a 100m cliff) which is 6km from the nearest all-weather road and probably 15km from the nearest house - despite being basically directly underneath the Toronto-Ottawa flight path. We were there all day and as far as we could tell, we had the entire hill to ourselves the whole time. We were probably at least 5km from the nearest other human.

Toronto folks are just not interested.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Yeah, Maxime Bernier in English almost sounds like he's from France!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhsLYKGvQKY

Lol, no! I've listened to the video, no, he definitely doesn't sound French. A French person would never sound so good in English (well except me, but I'm the one odd case).

The best a French speaker from France is gonna sound in English is this, which is... quite lacking.

• Video Link

The only public French figure who has a good English accent is Christine Lagarde.

• Video Link

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Isn't Polievre a native speaker if from Alberta? Harper worked very hard and was somewhat limited in actual speaking but could perform key PM tasks.

Poilievre may have learned some French as a child but he basically grew up in English and did all his schooling in English. Like Harper he worked hard on his French for his political career but perhaps had a bit of a better base to work with. Plus a wife who if not a native francophone (her first language is Spanish), speaks Quebec French like a native speaker.

To my knowledge Pierre Poilievre has never claimed to be a native francophone.

Contrast this with Justin Trudeau who regularly claims to be every bit as Québécois and francophone as a random lumberjack in the Saguenay. I don't blame Trudeau for doing that, and given his name, he almost had no choice to do it. But it does set certain expectations.