Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by someone123

It's not really just up to how people in Markham or Brampton or Surrey feel. There are structural political factors in Canada like the Charter and the existence of Quebec.

I understand what you are saying and some aspects of this debate do feel antique. Most Canadians will not have visceral feelings about the referendum era for example. But I think if anything people overrate how much we're headed into a brave new world and the old stuff will cease to matter.

Sure. I'm not saying Joe's going to disappear and those old feelings are going to remain for a good long time. In low-turnover regions of the country, they may remain for generations. However, I don't foresee the old animosities rising to a fervour pitch.

I guess the closest analogy that I can make might be the view held on homosexuality. At one point, there was a very strong anti-homosexual viewpoint held by the majority of the population. Today - while still somewhat there admittedly - it's hardly what it used to be. Someone yelling a slur today is far more likely to be ostracized and condemned.

To the younger crowd I chit-chat to, it just is a thing as natural as the sun rising in the east. In fact, being opposed is actually the more unnatural viewpoint. In a country that is increasingly dominated by multiple langauge speakers, being unilingual is the exception, not the norm.

Admittedly, I'm just gazing into my discount crystal ball. It's often wrong.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by thewave46

To the younger crowd I chit-chat to, it just is a thing as natural as the sun rising in the east. In fact, being opposed is actually the more unnatural viewpoint. In a country that is increasingly dominated by multiple langauge speakers, being unilingual is the exception, not the norm.
.

Is it really? That's not the impression I get. At least not in a functional, tangible, everyday way.

In a country with a high degree of immigration, you will always have quite a few people who can speak more than one language, but in a majority of cases they are more temporary accoutrements than something with staying power.

It's very hit and miss whether the second generation will speak the heritage language. Much less the third or fourth.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by thewave46

Sure.

My larger point being: Will a newer Canadian really feel that particular conflict in their bones like old-stock Canadians? Sure, Joe from Brockville might be the same old-school Canadian and harbour the same opinion, but is Joe the face of future Canada? Demographics say no. Future Canada lies in the suburbs of Markham, Brampton and Surrey. Their experience will be different than Joe's.

In a certain sense I think that's a good thing. I'd say that this is an era where Canada actually becomes more multicultural and it helps mitigate the old animosities that majority-single minority counties have. Francophones will simply become a facet of life in this country, not considered a noisy minority demanding "special treatment" (i.e. the same treatment as Anglophones).

Which is why The Social is about as key to the national pulse and future as grandma is.
One: they might not even have a pulse at all
Two: they're reflective of the past - CTV is old media and The Social doubly so - the bobbleheads on a national TV network morning show. Could one think of a more irrelevant genre?

Like the Rolling Stones who stopped putting out relevant music somewhere about 1980, they still exist and tour. However, they're as relevant to 20-somethings as The Social is. Ol' Joe likes his classic rock in Brockville though.

As a francophone I can tell you that New Canadians of the Markham or Brampton variety aren't necessarily more benign or open-minded towards us than the Brockville Joes of the world.

I mean right on here on SSP we have dleung types (self-outed ethnically BTW) who say totally prejudiced things about francophones without any restraint or shame.

A lot of people take on the lay of the land by osmosis when they move to a new place, and in more than a few circles in Canada that includes various degrees of irritation with Quebec, French, etc. It's almost a rite of passage on the road to becoming Canadian in some cases.

In fairness it's not uncommon to meet immigrants to Quebec who've become Canadian citizens (especially if they are seamlessly integrated with the francophone community and have little to do with anglophones) that have dismissive or harsher views about the ROC or Anglo-Canadians.

The overall result of demographic change might still be a slightly dulled edge to our historic tiff, but I'd caution against thinking that it will actually make it a feature of the past.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Acajack

As a francophone I can tell you that New Canadians of the Markham or Brampton variety aren't necessarily more benign or open-minded towards us than the Brockville Joes of the world.

I mean right on here on SSP we have dleung types (self-outed ethnically BTW) who say totally prejudiced things about francophones without any restraint or shame.

A lot of people take on the lay of the land by osmosis when they move to a new place, and in more than a few circles in Canada that includes various degrees of irritation with Quebec, French, etc. It's almost a rite of passage on the road to becoming Canadian in some cases.

In fairness it's not uncommon to meet immigrants to Quebec who've become Canadian citizens (especially if they are seamlessly integrated with the francophone community and have little to do with anglophones) that have dismissive or harsher views about the ROC or Anglo-Canadians.

The overall result of demographic change might still be a slightly dulled edge to our historic tiff, but I'd caution against thinking that it will actually make it a feature of the past.

I remain optimistic, but I suppose we could argue until the end of time about the future. I'm just one guy in one place, so I'm hardly an oracle.

The dulling of the animosity has been pleasant over the past 25 years. I'm hoping it continues.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by thewave46

I remain optimistic, but I suppose we could argue until the end of time about the future. I'm just one guy in one place, so I'm hardly an oracle.

The dulling of the animosity has been pleasant over the past 25 years. I'm hoping it continues.

We're not "arguing" BTW. I'm enjoying the discussion. You have lots of interesting things to say.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

A lot of people take on the lay of the land by osmosis when they move to a new place, and in more than a few circles in Canada that includes various degrees of irritation with Quebec, French, etc. It's almost a rite of passage on the road to becoming Canadian in some cases.

They will participate in Canadian politics and in Canadian politics for the foreseeable future there will be the same irritants around Quebec politicians making what are seen as ostentatious demands or Charter rights that are clearly spelled out not matching what people feel should be provided on the ground in various places.

If anything it might get nastier if people feel there are a bunch of constitutional carve-outs for people they have no historical knowledge of or connection to. One challenge that Canada has is the relative weakness of ties between regions and provinces, since so much growth came from immigration instead of internal migration and births. Although it does seem lately like people move around more.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Acajack

We're not "arguing" BTW. I'm enjoying the discussion. You have lots of interesting things to say.

I suppose I don't really have much more to add. I admit I live in an area of the country that very much is more 'old Canada' than 'new Canada'. I'd like to think that as I sit in the cafe and hear mostly English, some French and occasionally another language (usually someone on a phone call) in the background that making it work is actually possible.

Imperfect, sure. But possible. Without the deep-seated nastiness that used to permeate.

I hope that a bit of that spirit is also picked up too by newcomers.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

They will participate in Canadian politics and in Canadian politics for the foreseeable future there will be the same irritants around Quebec politicians making what are seen as ostentatious demands or Charter rights that are clearly spelled out not matching what people feel should be provided on the ground in various places.

If anything it might get nastier if people feel there are a bunch of constitutional carve-outs for people they have no historical knowledge of or connection to. One challenge that Canada has is the relative weakness of ties between regions and provinces, since so much growth came from immigration instead of internal migration and births. Although it does seem lately like people move around more.

In a country where civic education and ambient reinforcement of civic knowledge are rather weak and low-profile, high percentages of people not knowing why things are the way they are (e.g. bilingualism) often leads to a lot of misunderstandings, frustration and hostility.

In discussions both in person and online, it's quite apparent to me that a pretty significant share of the population only has fairly vague notions of the country's history and origins.

In that context it's not difficult to imagine a lot of hardline attitudes that stem from a perception that francophones may have arrived in Canada at some point in the 20th century à la Ellis Island, to an already wholly anglophone country, promptly took over one corner of it, and for some reason refused to do what all of the other good newcomers did (i.e. integrate/assimilate).

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

In that context it's not difficult to imagine a lot of hardline attitudes that stem from a perception that francophones may have arrived in Canada at some point in the 20th century à la Ellis Island, to an already wholly anglophone country, promptly took over one corner of it, and for some reason refused to do what all of the other good newcomers did (i.e. integrate/assimilate).

A lot of North Americans have an inflated sense of how legible Quebec culture and history are to them.

We can look to Afghanistan as an example of a country with a culture that is illegible to modern North Americans. To the median British Columbian given their understanding of their own culture rated at 10, maybe Alberta is 9.5, Quebec is 7, and Afghanistan is 0.5.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

A lot of North Americans have an inflated sense of how legible Quebec culture and history are to them.

We can look to Afghanistan as an example of a country with a culture that is illegible to modern North Americans. To the median British Columbian given their understanding of their own culture rated at 10, maybe Alberta is 9.5, Quebec is 7, and Afghanistan is 0.5.

This is an interesting concept. How would you rate the average Canadian's understanding of, say, US culture?

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

This is an interesting concept. How would you rate the average Canadian's understanding of, say, US culture?

I will add the caveat that my numbers are guesses and just meant for illustrative purposes.

I think the average Canadian understanding of the US is bad and much lower than Canadians think, because it is basically dictated by coastal American media outlets that do not fully represent the country, and places like Georgia and Texas are significantly different from Canada (not just due to old US Southern culture but Latin American too). The understanding of the US border states is much better but probably still overrated.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Acajack

This is an interesting concept. How would rate the average Canadian's understanding of, say, US culture?

As in a "I get the deep reasoning why things are the way they are in all facets of this huge and diverse country" versus the superfluous "I consume your culture and get only the picture via the media's reporting"?

I'd give it an 8. Maybe 8.5.

There's a lot of ignorance on this side of the border with regards to that side of the border, more than most would care to admit with respect to American culture.

We like to think we're more knowledgeable than we are.

[Acajack]

I tend to agree with you guys.

Canadians tend to greatly overestimate how much they understand and know US culture and society, but the level is still decently high.

Clearly the best in the world for that outside of the borders of the US itself, obviously.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

A lot of North Americans have an inflated sense of how legible Quebec culture and history are to them.

We can look to Afghanistan as an example of a country with a culture that is illegible to modern North Americans. To the median British Columbian given their understanding of their own culture rated at 10, maybe Alberta is 9.5, Quebec is 7, and Afghanistan is 0.5.

I think language plays a pretty big role in this.

I'd only give the median Ontarian slightly higher than BCers in undertstanding Quebec. Maybe 7.5, in spite of them being right next door. Ontarians who have francophone family members they are in contact with, or who are Franco-Ontarians themselves, would score a bit higher. But that's only a small minority of Ontarians.

Even so, the Canadians outside Quebec who "get" Quebec the most are probably northern NB Acadians. I'd give them a 9.5 on that.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think language plays a pretty big role in this.

I'd only give the median Ontarian slightly higher than BCers in undertstanding Quebec. Maybe 7.5, in spite of them being right next door. Ontarians who have francophone family members they are in contact with, or who are Franco-Ontarians themselves, would score a bit higher. But that's only a small minority of Ontarians.

Even so, the Canadians outside Quebec who "get" Quebec the most are probably northern NB Acadians. I'd give them a 9.5 on that.

It is interesting to note that - despite the large difference in understanding culture - the median Anglo-Canadian and Quebecois have very similar ideas about the role of government in society. Sure, there's some differences, but the political extremes of other countries aren't really replicated here.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by thewave46

It is interesting to note that - despite the large difference in understanding culture - the median Anglo-Canadian and Quebecois have very similar ideas about the role of government in society. Sure, there's some differences, but the political extremes of other countries aren't really replicated here.

One point of tension is that there are some strong progressive elements in American culture that have shifted very quickly. Obama appealed "don't ask, don't tell" in 2010 and announced that he supported same-sex marriage in 2012. Many issues are now moving significantly faster than circa 2010 gay rights. You can be 5 years out of step with these progressive politics today and have significant differences in opinion that may generate a strong reaction. I think eventually this will be too unstable and collapse (everybody committing hate crimes or whatever for reasons nobody understands) but it is where it is right now. Quebec is not really on board with this and moving at the same pace.

Anyone remember early 2000's atheism and the term "New Atheism"? We do not have to go back to the French Revolution.

It also seems like American politics are getting more and more strident. New Yorkers and Californians have opinions about South Carolina. Why shouldn't Ontarians and British Columbians have opinions about Quebec?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by thewave46

It is interesting to note that - despite the large difference in understanding culture - the median Anglo-Canadian and Quebecois have very similar ideas about the role of government in society. Sure, there's some differences, but the political extremes of other countries aren't really replicated here.

Yes, I'd agree with that.

Historically few areas of Canada have been nearly unanimous on one side of an issue whereas other parts of the country are massively of the other view. And this generally has included the Quebec-ROC rapport. Often certain areas lean more way than others, but there is always a fairly sizeable chunk of the population in each region that shares the other parts of the country's views.

Though someone123 is correct that there is a pretty big Quebec-ROC divide at the moment on everything related to wokism and values, and I'd add secularism, religion and even diversity to the mix.

In the ROC all of the respectable classes pretty much adhere to the US blue state views on such matters (ie either full wokism or wokism-lite at the very least), whereas in Quebec it's perfectly acceptable to reject or question this stuff and many of the respectable people (a majority of them, perhaps) actually do so here, and are even quite puzzled that they get hated on by ROCers for that.

(It's quite telling that I am unable to find a single instance of a ROC politician at any level who supports Bill 21.)

Quebecers' political reactions and thinking have of course always been greatly influenced by the US, but there seems to be a growing Euro-French strain in Quebec. Quebec nationalist sociologist and commentator Mathieu Bock-Côté was just announced as the host of a new show on France's top-rated news channel. He already has regular columns in newspapers and magazines there, and is a frequent talking head in their media. Stuff like strong-armed securalism and a critical view of anglosphere-style diversity (perhaps as close as there is to an actual dogma in the ROC) doesn't come to Quebec from anywhere but France.

Whereas the ROC for its part has basically adopted most of the US' parameters and mapped them onto Canadian debates, lock stock and barrel with little room for other sources of inspiration.

[goldeneyed]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Swiss German cantons, which make up about 65% of the population, don't get to throw their demographic weight around in referendums to tell the French or Italian cantons what to do on their own turf.

That's kinda the point of a true confederation like Switzerland.

Would this true confederation work the same way if one of the three turfs were English speaking as opposed to what they do now, and whether they represented 35% or 65% of the population?

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Acajack

WTAF?

https://www.ctv.ca/shows/the-social/does-the-french-language-need-to-be-protected-in-canada-s8e209

OMFG that was terrible!

All they could talk about was Quebec. They forgot about francophones in other provinces including where I live who certainly need language protection. They also don't realize how the corporate world will not respect French in Quebec without language laws.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think language plays a pretty big role in this.

I'd only give the median Ontarian slightly higher than BCers in undertstanding Quebec. Maybe 7.5, in spite of them being right next door. Ontarians who have francophone family members they are in contact with, or who are Franco-Ontarians themselves, would score a bit higher. But that's only a small minority of Ontarians.

Even so, the Canadians outside Quebec who "get" Quebec the most are probably northern NB Acadians. I'd give them a 9.5 on that.

I would say that you are pretty accurate. There are some here who are almost entirely Franco-Ontarians who work and spend a lot of time just across the border who understand Quebec well. Just like northern NB, my region borders smaller almost 100% francophone places that will elect separatist candidates.