Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[dleung]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Every time this issue comes up (just once in a blue moon of course!), ROCers always focus the discussion on money, but the truth is that if you look at global history, the question of independence - yay or nay - is never primarily about money.
I am not saying this to deny or deflect. I've actually studied this a lot and it's almost always true.

If it wasn't about money, Oui would have won by now. Money is what is keeping the confederation together lol

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by dleung

If it wasn't about money, Oui would have won by now. Money is what is keeping the confederation together lol

Confirming this theory of mine:

Canada is an assembly of shareholders that likes to pretend it is a close-knit family.

We claim that we are similar in collective sentiment to the many other, often less fortunate, families out there but deep down it is really maintaining access to grandpa's inheritance that keeps us together.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Every time this issue comes up (just once in a blue moon of course!), ROCers always focus the discussion on money, but the truth is that if you look at global history, the question of independence - yay or nay - is never primarily about money.
I am not saying this to deny or deflect. I've actually studied this a lot and it's almost always true.

Oh, the debate is primarily a passionate one regarding how one sees oneself in the fabric of Canada, North America and the world. It is at it's core a matter of how one self identifies. Are you solely a Quebecois, a Canadian, or a combination of both?

As a general rule most ROCers prefer to have, and are passionate about having a unified Canada from coast to coast, including a Quebec that is a proud homeland for the French fact in North America. It is at the margins of this debate where there is controversy (ie - how the rump anglophone population is treated in Quebec, and whether or not an anglo-Canadian can migrate to Quebec and feel welcomed and comfortable).

I acknowledge that the debate in Quebec itself is somewhat more existential, and that the Quebecois feel differently about their status in Canada, and how minority populations should be treated. This is the dangerous terrain which could lead to the nation fracturing (especially if the Canadian PM and the Quebec Premier of the day are hostile and belligerent).

So, the debate is about perception and passion. At the end of the day however, if the decision is made to separate, then the debate will shift to a purely economic one - ie who gets what and who pays for what (just like in any divorce). And, just like in any divorce, there will be hurt feelings, anger and likely some bitter recriminations. Not many divorces are velvet ones. There will be hard feelings for decades. Don't expect otherwise.........

[dleung]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Confirming this theory of mine:

Canada is an assembly of shareholders that likes to pretend it is a close-knit family.

We claim that we are similar in collective sentiment to the many other, often less fortunate, families out there but deep down it is really maintaining access to grandpa's inheritance that keeps us together.

More like mom needs daddy's credit card

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by dleung

If it wasn't about money, Oui would have won by now. Money is what is keeping the confederation together lol

I think it's more than just money. The biggest brake on the independence push has always been the fear of the unknown. People, in Canada as everywhere, don't really like change, especially such a big change as seceding and forming another country. Voters always tend to prefer the status quo.

You can tell it's not really the money, because in a hypothetical world were Québec and Canada would be two separate countries, it's very unlikely that a majority of Québec voters would vote to join Canada even if it the financial benefits were demonstrated to be 100% certain. Heck, even the Moldovans, who speak the same language as Romania, are in their majority not in favor of reuniting with Romania, even though that would be like winning the lottery for them (automatic entry in the EU, large Romanian and EU funds raising standards of living tremendously, freedom of living and working in any part of the EU).

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Not many divorces are velvet ones. There will be hard feelings for decades. Don't expect otherwise.........

Judging from the Irish example, I wouldn't think so. Ireland's secession from the UK was infinitely more violent and full of anger than what a Québec secession would be, and yet by the 1930s, i.e. a mere 10 years after that secession, both countries and both peoples were essentially on very good terms with each other. The Irish government refused any entreaty from the Nazis in WW2 to side with Germany against the UK. The British government was also rather relaxed when the Irish in 1937 unilaterally decided to stop being a dominion, drop George VI as their head of state, and become a republic. Something the Brits would never have accepted in 1922, well 15 years later it generated no retaliation or recrimination.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

My SO's also going through the same evolution. Was vehemently federalist while living in Asia and Europe.

Ironically, living in Toronto has pushed my SO the other way, and now softly in the Oui camp. Shocked and angry at how marginalized French is in Toronto, especially in regards to government services (I guess it's not surprising given how toothless the FLSA is). With the OPS alone, SO's had to file multiple ombudsman complaints.

The City also classified my SO as "Anglophone" by default, and refused to offer services in French. It took so many bureaucratic hurdles to prove Francophone status, and frankly at this point it's just getting ridiculous.

This is an interesting position to take: French in Toronto and Ontario as a hill to die on and something to push one over the edge regarding Quebec's place in Canada.

I am originally a minority francophone from outside Quebec and lived in Ontario for quite some time.

I pretty much see French services in the ROC as a lost cause with the possible exceptions of certain parts of New Brunswick and maybe Eastern Ontario. I've even mostly given up on Ottawa as a city when it comes to this, so you can imagine what I think about Toronto.

So the way your SO feels is actually a bit alien to me. That would never be the "kicker" as my expectations are already rock-bottom.

Though I suppose that what might move the needle for some people is the contrast between French services in the ROC - where even the only bilingual province New Brunswick is taking about scaling things back - with reactions from anglos to measures from the Quebec government which are really about trying to prevent English from taking over. (I know this analysis is not shared by many on SSP but it is mine.)

Basically, it's fine (I suppose) that the ROC doesn't walk the walk on bilingualism, but if you're gonna also try to actively prevent the only francophone province from taking the steps it thinks it needs to remain francophone, then...

[New Brisavoine]

Interesting article in the Le Devoir today.

PSPP, "pro-independence diplomat" on a mission

Le Devoir
March 3, 2023

On a European tour, the PQ leader wishes to renew ties and give France “the desire to exert worldwide influence” again.

https://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebe...spp-diplomate-independantiste-en-mission

I think PSPP, as you guys call him, is going to be disappointed. Emmanuel Macron is probably the French president least likely to ever support the independence of Québec.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Interesting article in the Le Devoir today.

I think PSPP, as you guys call him, is going to be disappointed. Emmanuel Macron is probably the French president least likely to ever support the independence of Québec.

I think you're right but I also don't think that PSPP has any illusions.

He's just doing what he needs to do as the leader of the PQ.

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by Acajack

This is an interesting position to take: French in Toronto and Ontario as a hill to die on and something to push one over the edge regarding Quebec's place in Canada.

I am originally a minority francophone from outside Quebec and lived in Ontario for quite some time.

I pretty much see French services in the ROC as a lost cause with the possible exceptions of certain parts of New Brunswick and maybe Eastern Ontario. I've even mostly given up on Ottawa as a city when it comes to this, so you can imagine what I think about Toronto.

So the way your SO feels is actually a bit alien to me. That would never be the "kicker" as my expectations are already rock-bottom.

Though I suppose that what might move the needle for some people is the contrast between French services in the ROC - where even the only bilingual province New Brunswick is taking about scaling things back - with reactions from anglos to measures from the Quebec government which are really about trying to prevent English from taking over. (I know this analysis is not shared by many on SSP but it is mine.)

Basically, it's fine (I suppose) that the ROC doesn't walk the walk on bilingualism, but if you're gonna also try to actively prevent the only francophone province from taking the steps it thinks it needs to remain francophone, then...

Totally get what you mean. SO's constantly saying, how the hell do the Franco-Ontarians keep tolerating these daily injustices. It's the difference in expectations that's so jarring to SO. Especially since SO's point of comparison is the current situation of Montreal Anglos and how much better they have it.

SO's from Gaspesie (ironically near the hometown of René Lévesque), where the view towards the ROC is very benign and they grew up with the view that Anglos would treat francophones as equal partners and would slowly fulfill their end of their bargain and start embracing bilingualism (maybe a bit naive). SO's a mutt with partial Anglo lineage, like most people in that region. People in the ROC keep saying that more exposure to Anglo Canada would bond them more closely with ROC. Which is true in a way, as SO's dating an Anglo. But at the same time SO's lost all trust or hope in the Canadian project, and if asymmetrical federalism doesn't kick in eventually, SO will go back to Quebec to vote Oui.

Speaking of which, recently at a party there were a few who were openly hostile to Quebec and francophones, and had an American step in to call them out for it. Super awkward situation for my SO to be in. It's literally racism, even if we don't call it that in "woke Canada".

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think you're right but I also don't think that PSPP has any illusions.

That being said, after having read the article, I must say he's received a more encouraging welcome in Paris than I would have imagined. One minister in Macron's government even told him that they wished to strengthen ties between France and Québec.

I think the mistake he's made is not to meet Marine Le Pen (according to the article). PSPP says Québec is more centrist, and he doesn't wish to meet people from extremist parties, but Marine Le Pen may very well succeed Macron in 2027, and she would certainly be much more favorable to the independence of Québec. And she's adopted a more centrist discourse in recent years, trying to make her party look more serious and a credible alternative. Basically she'd like to be the French Meloni (the new prime minister of Italy). It's a mistake not to meet a politician of that caliber in my opinion, whatever one thinks of her.

Here are some interesting bits from the article translated in Englyshe.

[After Oxford, Scotland, and Brussels, arriving in France and speaking a few days later to journalists from his hotel in Paris] The PQ leader is surprised by the in-depth knowledge of Quebec politics shown by the people he met during this first mission abroad. "They know that the PQ is not dead and that we had a good campaign. I tell them that the decline of French and of our culture makes independence a necessity to ensure the sustainability of our linguistic and cultural model."

Each time [I meet politicians in Paris during this trip], he says, the linguistic situation of Quebec and the future of its culture comes back in the conversation. "I get asked a lot of questions and people talk to me all the time about the opposition between Quebec's universalism and Canadian communitarianism. Not only have we probably inherited the French mentality on these issues, but, in the case of Quebec, it is a condition for the survival of French. Without a universal approach, if each community competes with the others, French will become the language of just one community among others.

The meeting with François Hollande [Macron's predecessor] was particularly warm, he says. "It reminds us there is a friendship between Quebec and France that is very strong. Many in France think that Quebec has a destiny that is not yet fulfilled."

For Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, the Quebec and French nations are destined to get closer together. He even believes that Quebec could help France better defend its language and culture. "We have a role to play in encouraging France to assume its difference and its greatness by not contenting itself with participating in the Anglo-American universe. We want a France that rediscovers the desire to exert a worldwide [cultural] influence."

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

That being said, after having read the article, I must say he's received a more encouraging welcome in Paris than I would have imagined. One minister in Macron's government even told him that they wished to strengthen ties between France and Québec.

I think the mistake he's made is not to meet Marine Le Pen (according to the article). PSPP says Québec is more centrist, and he doesn't wish to meet people from extremist parties, but Marine Le Pen may very well succeed Macron in 2027, and she would certainly be much more favorable to the independence of Québec. And she's adopted a more centrist discourse in recent years, trying to make her party look more serious and a credible alternative. Basically she'd like to be the French Meloni (the new prime minister of Italy). It's a mistake not to meet a politician of that caliber in my opinion, whatever one thinks of her.

Here are some interesting bits from the article translated in Englyshe.

I don't think it's that much of a big deal for a French Minister to say they want to strengthen ties with Quebec. They always say that and Ottawa doesn't freak out about that stuff.

As for Le Pen I think you are probably right but in terms of our politics it's too early for him to meet with her. He wouldn't gain much right now and she and the RN (FN) are still too widely seen as politically radioactive here.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by dleung

^^I thought it was about secularism, not snuffing out Islam! Get your story straight lol

The hijab is NOT Islam, just as the Inquisition is not Catholicism. There's nowhere in the Koran that says women should wear a hijab. You can be a perfectly good Muslim without wearing a hijab.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

But it doesn't matter what I want, so maybe I will someday be living in the 51st state of Atlantica. Guess I better brush up on my firearm skills...

Actually, wouldn't the entry of ROC in the US tilt the US in the liberal camp? For that very reason, the Republicans will never agree to the entry of ROC in the US.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I don't think it's that much of a big deal for a French Minister to say they want to strengthen ties with Quebec. They always say that and Ottawa doesn't freak out about that stuff.

It's a change of tone compared to the Sarkozy years when the French government was not interested in strengthening ties with Québec (Sarkozy basically thought that ROC was were things were happening, and that France should get closer to ROC and ditch the very provincial Québécois, whom he didn't really like). As for Hollande, I don't remember he ever showed any interest towards Québec. Under Sarkozy it was pointed out by journalists that he never visited Québec (I think he may have briefly gone to Québec City during the 200th anniversary, and then even that I'm not entirely sure). I don't recall that Hollande visited Québec either. The last time those presidential visits took place and all the France-Québec diplomacy took place was under Chirac.

And no, I think you're a bit wrong about Ottawa here. In France it's always been known that the Canadian federal authorities don't really like the importance given to the unofficial Québec embassy in Paris. It's something that always irked them before Sarkozy. Since Sarkozy, it's been mostly dormant.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

It's a change of tone compared to the Sarkozy years when the French government was not interested in strengthening ties with Québec (Sarkozy basically thought that ROC was were things were happening, and that France should get closer to ROC and ditch the very provincial Québécois, whom he didn't really like). As for Hollande, I don't remember he ever showed any interest towards Québec. Under Sarkozy it was pointed out by journalists that he never visited Québec (I think he may have briefly gone to Québec City during the 200th anniversary, and then even that I'm not entirely sure). I don't recall that Hollande visited Québec either. The last time those presidential visits took place and all the France-Québec diplomacy took place was under Chirac.

And no, I think you're a bit wrong about Ottawa here. In France it's always been known that the Canadian federal authorities don't really like the importance given to the unofficial Québec embassy in Paris. It's something that always irked them before Sarkozy. Since Sarkozy, it's been mostly dormant.

OK maybe you're right. Sarkozy was the coldest, and Chirac was the coziest. Socialists are always a bit "cool".

BTW it was the 400th anniversary. We've been here a long time, even if apparently we're still "immigrants".

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

BTW it was the 400th anniversary. We've been here a long time, even if apparently we're still "immigrants".

You're right. I had my mind thinking of something else.

It's crazy, when you think about it. You were the 1st European settlement in North America, and yet didn't manage to control the entire continent. We wouldn't have that conversation otherwise. I wonder how "defensive" would be the few Anglophone provinces in a largely Francophone North America...

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

Totally get what you mean. SO's constantly saying, how the hell do the Franco-Ontarians keep tolerating these daily injustices. It's the difference in expectations that's so jarring to SO. Especially since SO's point of comparison is the current situation of Montreal Anglos and how much better they have it.

SO's from Gaspesie (ironically near the hometown of René Lévesque), where the view towards the ROC is very benign and they grew up with the view that Anglos would treat francophones as equal partners and would slowly fulfill their end of their bargain and start embracing bilingualism (maybe a bit naive). SO's a mutt with partial Anglo lineage, like most people in that region. People in the ROC keep saying that more exposure to Anglo Canada would bond them more closely with ROC. Which is true in a way, as SO's dating an Anglo. But at the same time SO's lost all trust or hope in the Canadian project, and if asymmetrical federalism doesn't kick in eventually, SO will go back to Quebec to vote Oui.

Speaking of which, recently at a party there were a few who were openly hostile to Quebec and francophones, and had an American step in to call them out for it. Super awkward situation for my SO to be in. It's literally racism, even if we don't call it that in "woke Canada".

I sense a growing perception in Quebec (and surprisingly among some francophones outside Quebec) that a kind of "covenant" has been broken.

Though I think it's too early to tell where this will lead to people landing on the various existential questions. At least some it seems are going to react with resignation. Some with anger but for others it's disillusionment.

And of course the reaction of many many ROCers is quite predictably: "covenant? what covenant? there was never any covenant of any sort!"

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

You're right. I had my mind thinking of something else.

It's crazy, when you think about it. You were the 1st European settlement in North America,

The others (British, Spanish) were all around the same time, though in different parts of the continent.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

You're right. I had my mind thinking of something else.

It's crazy, when you think about it. You were the 1st European settlement in North America, and yet didn't manage to control the entire continent. We wouldn't have that conversation otherwise. I wonder how "defensive" would be the few Anglophone provinces in a largely Francophone North America...

What is the true "accident of history" in our case, isn't that we didn't end up controlling the entire continent, but rather that when the mother country lost this part of the empire, we didn't as distinct people fade away into oblivion like Niew Nederland or the short-lived French colony in Brazil (subject of the great book Rouge Brésil by Jean-Christophe Rufin).