Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Hecate

lol. You guys gonna send them 14 billion a year to maintain their standard of living?

Québec has a GDP per capita that is roughly the same as France. So I don't know why we would have to send them money. Their contribution in the common pot would be roughly even.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by mousquet

No, they will never surrender again. WW2 is the vaccine against cowardice, if that's what you're thinking of.

Exactly. It's something North Americans cannot comprehend. I was reading American reactions on Twitter about France offering to send troops to Greenland, these guys forever seem to live in the past of 1940. The same old tired jokes (French riffle never used, how long it takes to surrender, etc), it's 2003 and 'Freedom fries' all over again. They simply do not realize what a cathartic moment in French history was the defeat of 1940. The entire French political life since 1940 has been built around "never again".

And the Americans, on the other hand, having not been defeated in a long time, have become as complacent as the French were in the 1930s. They may 'fall from high', as we say in French, when China really becomes serious.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

You don't understand the other EU countries. For them, the alliance with the US is the NUMBER ONE PRIORITY, above anything else. If they had to choose between the US and the EU, they might even choose the US and break the EU. They cannot imagine surviving without the US. The idea of gaining a few million Canadian customers weighs nothing compared to the protection afforded (so they imagine) by the US. It's also cultural at this point. They are so used to being a US ally, so dependent on the US culturally, that they simply cannot imagine severing ties with the US. The attitude of the Danish prime minister this past week has had people in France raising their eyes in disbelief.

She even went as far as saying that Denmark was "always a good ally of the US", so the US shouldn't mistreat Denmark. I mean even your prime minister would not fall to that level of abjection and servility.

The status quo ante is no more, Europe is going to realize that soon. Trump sees his allies as enemies to be destroyed or exploited. The realization was hard here that the United States aren't the same that they were, that realization will be hard in Europe too.

America has fallen.

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by mousquet

You mean the French military? No, they will never surrender again.

Both you and New Brisavoine said this, but really? Let's say French troops are stationed in Greenland and the US army decides to invade. Are they going to start repelling them and risk a domino effect that would drag half the world into a war just so that Denmark can keep their frozen piece of land? Personnally I doubt it. They could send troops to Greenland, but that would merely be a deterrent and just for show. Fighting islamists in Mali isn't exactly the same as this.

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

This is what I was alluding to. I cannot imagine Trudeau (or any other Canadian prime minister) falling to that level of abjection (but who knows?).

Justin Trudeau tried to appease the US just last week. When he realized retalitation wasn't going to cut it, he stated that Canada would help the US reach their "golden age".

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

America has fallen.

Not quite yet. I'll say that if they amend the constitution and allow a 3rd term.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by Hecate

lol. You guys gonna send them 14 billion a year to maintain their standard of living? Didn’t the money you guys were sending over to the Americans basically bankrupt the country and cause the French Revolution? lol. Round two?

14 billion, minus the 3 billion that Québec pays itself by contributing also to the program...

You can add to that the taxes Québec sends to Ottawa that is used redundantly to manage invasion into provincial matters. Oh, and pipelines being bought. In the end, it is much less than 14 billion. Still too much for my taste, but not as much as some ROCers like to pretend.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by le calmar

Let's say French troops are stationed in Greenland and the US army decides to invade. Are they going to start repelling them and risk a domino effect that would drag half the world into a war just so that Denmark can keep their frozen piece of land?

The idea is that the mere presence of EU troops would deter Trump. The guy doesn't like wars, and the American public (even his hardcore voters) DON'T want a war and foreign interventions.

Originally Posted by le calmar

Justin Trudeau tried to appease the US just last week. When he realized retalitation wasn't going to cut it, he stated that Canada would help the US reach their "golden age".

Yeah, but he didn't go as far as saying: "Please, please Donald, we've always been a good, nice ally to you, look what we've done for you, you cannot possibly do that to us. Say you can't. Please. Asking you."

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Not quite yet. I'll say that if they amend the constitution and allow a 3rd term.

Or that Trump and his minions just decide that the Constitution doesn't apply anymore, like a cyclist deciding that stop signs dont apply to him.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

Or that Trump and his minions just decide that the Constitution doesn't apply anymore, like a cyclist deciding that stop signs dont apply to him.

America is a legalistic society. Even THIS Supreme Court could not agree to a move in contravention of the Constitution.

So they'd have to amend the Constitution. We'll see if they achieve it.

For America to fall, they'd also have to end the free press. We're not there yet.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

America is a legalistic society. Even THIS Supreme Court could not agree to a move in contravention of the Constitution.

So they'd have to amend the Constitution. We'll see if they achieve it.

For America to fall, they'd also have to end the free press. We're not there yet.

I am not sure the Washington Post is really free anymore:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/25/media/washington-post-wont-endorse-presidential-candidate/index.html

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/cartoo...ashington-post-jeff-bezos-satire-2594952


ABC News paid million to Trump in a settlement:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/ab...ial-library-to-settle-defamation-lawsuit


Google (not technically a media, but still a distributor of information) caves to Trump:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/google-maps-rename-gulf-mexico-gulf-america-us-users-2025-01-27/


Well, Fox News is still fair and balanced, right?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by le calmar

PSPP is in a delicate position. Not so long ago he could say "anglophones bad" and get away with it.
.

I don't see PSPP as being in a delicate position at all right now. Instability and uncertainty about the Canadian stato quo and its future is a good thing for the PQ. It's even a potentially excellent thing for the PQ.

Any type of shift or disruption in how Canada is structured and governed or a radical change to its relationship with the US could very likely open up a potential window for Quebec independence.

The likes of which we have not seen in a long time. Maybe ever.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by le calmar

With Trump in the picture however, the picture isn't as well defined anymore. You have the aggressive anglophones south of the border who may attempt in a hypothetical scenario, that is still far-fetched but that can no longer be ruled out either, to swallow Québec whole and force it to surrender its language and culture and kill off the sovereigntist dream.

I don't think there would be much interest from the Americans to have Quebec as a full-blown US state. And if some other form of association were put in place, consider that they don't care if Puerto Rico uses Spanish. (Within the 50 states is another story of course.)

Americans see Quebec as a foreign place so they don't have any designs on making it run-of-the-mill Anglo-America as long as their business and other interests are served.

This is quite different from Anglo-Canadians who see Saint-Polycarpe as part and parcel of THEIR country and nation, and (often, anyway) as a result don't understand or accept why English isn't more welcome and embraced there, and a place where they don't feel fully at home.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

I am not sure the Washington Post is really free anymore:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/25/media/washington-post-wont-endorse-presidential-candidate/index.html

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/cartoo...ashington-post-jeff-bezos-satire-2594952


ABC News paid million to Trump in a settlement:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/ab...ial-library-to-settle-defamation-lawsuit


Google (not technically a media, but still a distributor of information) caves to Trump:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/google-maps-rename-gulf-mexico-gulf-america-us-users-2025-01-27/


Well, Fox News is still fair and balanced, right?

There are still an awful lot of US media who don't sing the praise of Trump...

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I don't see PSPP as being in a delicate position at all right now. Instability and uncertainty about the Canadian stato quo and its future is a good thing for the PQ. It's even a potentially excellent thing for the PQ.

Any type of shift or disruption in how Canada is structured and governed or a radical change to its relationship with the US could very likely open up a potential window for Quebec independence.

The likes of which we have not seen in a long time. Maybe ever.

Since 1867 at least, but Québec wasn't really free back then.

It was this sort of mariage back in 1867 (at 1:10):

• Video Link

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by le calmar

Then you have the anglo neighbours in the ROC who are willing to allow Quebec to function as a quasi-country within the confederation and let it do (almost) everything it wants it terms of language, culture, immigration, etc. In the current circumstances, some soft separatists may begin to think that associating with the not-so-bad anglos in the ROC could potentially save them from what is starting to look like an existential threat.
.

Others have explained quite well how Ottawa and the ROC don't really have a live-and-let-live attitude towards Quebec. It's more like a calculated tolerance of Quebec doing its own thing, but only to a certain degree.

One of the things to watch out for is how that calculation could change in the future as Canadian demographics are transformed and the Quebec and (especially) francophone share of the population continues to drop.

I sincerely wonder if there will still be as much hesitancy about pushing us around (for fear of political consequences) when we are only 15% of Canada's population?

It's an important question because by all estimates that day is coming sooner than we think.

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I don't see PSPP as being in a delicate position at all right now. Instability and uncertainty about the Canadian stato quo and its future is a good thing for the PQ. It's even a potentially excellent thing for the PQ.

Usually, I would agree. But with all the volatility that's happening right, many don't know what to think of all of this yet. They need time to assess the situation and see how things will evolve. I don't think soft separatists have decided that going the separation route is the only remedy yet. Probably the reason PSPP came out last week to tell his voter base that separation was "still" the right thing to do in spite of the context. Not saying it won't give an edge to the PQ though, it may just be too early to tell yet.

[mousquet]

Originally Posted by le calmar

Let's say French troops are stationed in Greenland and the US army decides to invade. Are they going to start repelling them and risk a domino effect that would drag half the world into a war just so that Denmark can keep their frozen piece of land?

The military only do what they're told. It's up to politicians in office.
If they were told to die, I guess a lot of them would for real. A lot of them are physically and mentally trained for that kind of things.

Originally Posted by le calmar

Fighting islamists in Mali isn't exactly the same as this.

Right. It might well be even worse in the African desert. Nothing like it, sand and heat to exhaust men and the equipment when you run after jihadists that know every corner and hole of their desert.
I mean, it is a most extreme environment, quite possibly harder than cold.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by le calmar

Usually, I would agree. But with all the volatility that's happening right, many don't know what to think of all of this yet. They need time to assess the situation and see how things will evolve. I don't think soft separatists have decided that going the separation route is the only remedy yet. Probably the reason PSPP came out last week to tell his voter base that separation was "still" the right thing to do in spite of the context. Not saying it won't give an edge to the PQ though, it may just be too early to tell yet.

Another thing that the federalist side may no longer have in its toolkit is the idea that Canada being a larger entity provides Quebec with safe shelter from various forms of aggression (diplomatic, trade, cultural, and maybe military).

I don't think that the "cultural" shelter was something people in Quebec believed in anymore, but they still had a point with the others.

Now those notions look like they are blowing up.

One could argue that Quebec on its own would be even worse off than it is as part of the larger Canada in terms of relations with the US.

That may be true but we can't know for sure, and it does look like no one in this part of the world is safe from Trump and the US, regardless of how big they are.

If that's the case, and we are going to get pushed around no matter what, why wouldn't we on the other hand not want to at least be able to make all of our own decisions on how we run things *internally* here?

[Acajack]

Now that I think of it, it's not Americans who are fighting Bill 21. It's people from Quebec (mostly non-francophones with a strong CanadiAn identity) and ROCers.

When Bill 101 is challenged it's typically not by American corporations but rather Canadian ones, either national or based in Quebec. Generally speaking in my observations US corporations are totally compliant with Bill 101.

Walmart, Best Buy, etc. operate all in French even in western Montreal. So much so that Anglo-Montrealers sometimes complain about the lack of English.

Yes Amazon just left Quebec but it's noteworthy that they simply pulled out instead of trying to circumvent or even change Quebec's labour laws and regulations with money and legal battles.

They are still a corporate predator in my book but even so they still respect Quebec's right to do things their own way. It's just not for them.

Perhaps all of this would change is Quebec were a US state. Though as I already said, Quebec is not going to become an American state. Probably not ever.

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by mousquet

The military only do what they're told. It's up to politicians in office.
If they were told to die, I guess a lot of them would for real. A lot of them are physically and mentally trained for that kind of things.

Well yes, the order would come from above. But I imagine the said order would stipulate that the French troops should abstain from retaliating since the stakes are too high, if it ever came to that. But okay, if your point is that the French troops would fight back if they were given the order in spite of all it implies, I suppose they would.