Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[New Brisavoine]

^^You were more numerous than all of them, that's why. The French colonies in Brazil were barely colonies. Only a handful of people, surely less than 100. Not comparable to French Canada's 60,000 people at the time of conquest. And if only the governor of New France had sent people to till in the land in the Haut-Canada, probably Ontario would be a Francophone province today too.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

^^You were more numerous than all of them, that's why. The French colonies in Brazil were barely colonies. Only a handful of people, surely less than 100. Not comparable to French Canada's 60,000 people at the time of conquest. And if only the governor of New France had sent people to till in the land in the Haut-Canada, probably Ontario would be a Francophone province today too.

I know I know.

But there have been way bigger populations than us that got swallowed up.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Acajack

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).

I once saw a documentary where they categorized the world's cultures based on predominant family structure. IIRC they created something like 6-8 categories and concluded that around 95% of the world's population fits into one of these categories; and then theorized about how political structures in different countries are influenced by that country's family structure(s).

I forget most of the information in the documentary but there was one category of family structure (forget which one), which they concluded was found in Japan, Korea, Germany, Scandinavia, Ireland, northern Spain, and among French-Canadians (but not French in France!), Jews, and Roma. A very diverse mix of seemingly unrelated peoples.

One of the traits of this family structure is that cultures that have it tend to be extremely resilient to assimilation. He noted that whenever cultures with this structure face pressures that would normally result in the culture's gradual extinction, the culture manages to survive anyway. He gave French-Canadians, Jews, Roma, and Irish as examples of this phenomenon.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

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.

The Koran calls for modesty. The hijab is how some Muslim women interpret that instruction. Ergo, it is indeed a part of Islam, for some Muslims.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

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.

Correct, although one can never say "never".

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I forget most of the information in the documentary but there was one category of family structure (forget which one), which they concluded was found in Japan, Korea, Germany, Scandinavia, Ireland, northern Spain, and among French-Canadians (but not French in France!)

France has (or had, since all of this is mostly historical now) various different models of family anyway. France is a large country for Europe, that encompasses both Celtic Europe, Latin Europe, Germanic Europe, Alpine Europe, all with their respective histories and traditions. In North West France, there are no villages, people live in isolated farms, whereas in the south of France people live in dense villages with tall buildings along narrow streets to protect from the sun in summer. In Eastern France they have large openfields like in the Prairies, whereas in Western France they have millions of tiny little plots surrounded by hedgerows and separated by sunken paths, like in England.

It's all of Europe in one country really. Probably the model of family in Québec could be found in one part of France.

Here you can see the various traditional models of family in Europe. France has a lot of them on its territory, it's a mini-Europe.

[lio45]

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...

In the rankings of the deadliest mass shootings, Nova Scotia would be the sixth U.S. state, after Nevada, Florida, Virginia, Connecticut, and Texas, in that order. (The remaining 45 states never saw anything as deadly as Portapique.)

So, y'all would fit right in!

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

He gave French-Canadians, Jews, Roma, and Irish as examples of this phenomenon.

The Irish would be a bad example, since they were totally assimilated by the English. The Irish language has become almost entirely extinct. This is like French in Louisiana.

Interestingly the Welsh, who live much closer to England and London, have kept their language much better than the Irish. Of course Welsh today is a minority language in Wales, a bit like French in New Brunswick, but it's way more lively than Irish in Ireland. Even the prime minister of Wales can speak Welsh fluently, and does it on official videos.

• Video Link

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

The Koran calls for modesty. The hijab is how some Muslim women interpret that instruction. Ergo, it is indeed a part of Islam, for some Muslims.

The Koran doesn't call for modesty. There's only one ambiguous verse in it (which is not even considered one of the imported verses of the book) which has been interpreted by some as meaning women must display modesty, but other Islamic theologians do not think it means that.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by lio45

So, y'all would fit right in!

Would Justin Trudeau choose to settle in the independent Québec or in the US-annexed ROC though?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Would Justin Trudeau choose to settle in the independent Québec or in the US-annexed ROC though?

Good question. Without being sure, I'd bet he would settle in Quebec. His wife is Québécoise and more naturally francophone than he is. Plus most of his and her family ties are in Quebec.

Jean Chrétien who is one of the biggest pro-Canada Québécois and a major Non side figure, said that if Quebec became independent he'd think it was bad and sad but would still retire to his residence at Lac-des-Piles, in the Mauricie region.

Justin's father, Pierre Elliot Trudeau, said the same thing about his house on Avenue des Pins in Montreal.

[New Brisavoine]

^^In any case, if (big if) Québec became independent, there would surely remain open borders, like in the EU (it's not 1913 anymore!), so people would probably freely move across the border. I suppose that bigwigs like Trudeau & co. would have dual passports Canada/Québec, so could move across the border as they see fit.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

^^In any case, if (big if) Québec became independent, there would surely remain open borders, like in the EU (it's not 1913 anymore!), so people would probably freely move across the border. I suppose that bigwigs like Trudeau & co. would have dual passports Canada/Québec, so could move across the border as they see fit.

The issue of passports would have to be decided, as well as any "open borders." Don't forget that rump Canada would be more conservative (right wing) than current Canada, since the western provinces would make up well over 40% of the remaining population. This conservatism, as well as traditional western indifference to Quebec would mean that rump Canada would be disinclined to do Quebec any favours. The west would also be disinclined to do Ontario or the Maritimes any favours either, so they probably wouldn't be that interested in any accommodation to allow safe passage between Ontario and the eastern provinces.

Maritimers can already get to Ontario by driving through the US anyway (many already do).

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

The issue of passports would have to be decided, as well as any "open borders." Don't forget that rump Canada would be more conservative (right wing) than current Canada, since the western provinces would make up well over 40% of the remaining population. This conservatism, as well as traditional western indifference to Quebec would mean that rump Canada would be disinclined to do Quebec any favours. The west would also be disinclined to do Ontario or the Maritimes any favours either, so they probably wouldn't be that interested in any accommodation to allow safe passage between Ontario and the eastern provinces.

Maritimers can already get to Ontario by driving through the US anyway (many already do).

Though this points more to a disunion of the remaining Canada than it does to Canada-sans-Québec presenting a strong common front to take on Quebec and make it pay.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Though this points more to a disunion of the remaining Canada than it does to Canada-sans-Québec presenting a strong common front to take on Quebec and make it pay.

I think it means that rump Canada will be a much tougher negotiator than most pro independence Quebecois think.

Canada will not be a pushover after a "oui" vote.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Well, we had a part of our country separated from us by force, it's now called Belgium, and we're sort of ok with it.

When? In 1830? I'm talking today, in 2023, or even in the next 10 or 20 years... tell me that you wouldn't be angry at those who caused your country to fracture.

If you are talking history of 200 or 300 years ago... it's kind of easy to be sort of OK with it, as you don't have a direct connection. Am I pissed off because England and France were fighting, in the 1700s, over control of the territory that would later become Canada (that was in effect being taken from the indigenous peoples, FWIW)? Of course not, however I am angry that they are wanting to start it up all over again, rather than working together towards being a better country as a whole.

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

England is also separated from Northern Ireland by the independent Republic of Ireland, but they somehow manage.

In any case, if Quebec voted for independence, it's not something either you or I could change anything about. You have to make a positive case if you want to convince them to stay, not a "I would hate them if they leave".

Ha ha... nice try, but I can feel any way about it that I want... I don't need you or anybody to tell me how to feel about a sovereign country - that I happen to live in and care about - being broken up by the actions of one of its provinces.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Though this points more to a disunion of the remaining Canada than it does to Canada-sans-Québec presenting a strong common front to take on Quebec and make it pay.

Touché.

Anyway, people always exaggerate on this issue, as usual. In the real world, I'm ready to bet anything a divorce would be far less acrimonious than what some imagine. ROC would have too much to lose by not negotiating a free-border and perhaps also free-customs agreement with the République du Québec. They will remain each other's most important partner after independence, by far.

[Acajack]

So I guess if people can feel that strongly about lines on a map then they should be able to easily understand that people don't relish the idea of the actual people they are part of vanishing off the face of the earth.

[OldDartmouthMark]

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.

But you are the one who brought up the (cost) of the ferry connecting NL to the mainland. That's where the 'money discussion' originated.

Are you saying that you are an "ROCer"? (Though technically I suppose you are, but defintely not in spirit... )

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Touché.

Anyway, people always exaggerate on this issue, as usual. In the real world, I'm ready to bet anything a divorce would be far less acrimonious than what some imagine. ROC would have too much to lose by not negotiating a free-border and perhaps also free-customs agreement with the République du Québec. They will remain each other's most important partner after independence, by far.

I think it actually might be a relief for some ROCers, and not just the rabid anti-French ones.

https://www.gallimardmontreal.com/catalo...ebec-bercuson-d-j-cooper-b-9782890444393