Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Nashe]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Admittedly the Quebec one predominates, but I do get where the ROC is coming from, more than the vast majority of Québécois who'd probably think all of this is completely insane.

Not insane... not at all. I just think you're a bit optimistic about it's extensibility. Nothing wrong with optimism, though.

Just your reaction to "fitting in" is quite telling. What's wrong with expecting people to move to a place to try and integrate and fit in?

Don't read TOO much into it, I wasn't trying to imply anything nefarious, in the general sense. I totally get it... I'm just wary of what "fit" CAN mean to different people (different things).

BTW I happen to think that the short-lived era where most western countries were almost all competing ferociously with each other for immigrants has reached its peak, and would expect a number of countries - especially in Europe - to curtail their intake considerably over the next decade or two.

Maybe, if we're just talking about the "volountary" immigrations. I see the number of refugee and asylum-seekers being pretty high for some time.

Originally Posted by Acajack

Finally, I don't see why Quebec wouldn't continue to grow under almost any immigration scenario. It's expected that births will be lower than deaths in Quebec by around 2040, and by 2060 the difference will be around 15,000 (more deaths than births). Does anyone seriously believe that we couldn't find 4 or 5 times that many good immigrants a year who'd want to move to Quebec?

I'm definitely not suggesting that it will shrink.

Circling back to my original point (as I think we're a bit off topic): I don't really see any reason why Quebec can't get what it wants as part of Canada, assuming the ROC doesn't panic about what that is... there SEEMS to be less of an aversion to that today compared to the knee-jerk reaction of '87, but I could be wrong. I'm not sure I really understand the aversion, as long as those needs are clearly articulated.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Nashe

Circling back to my original point (as I think we're a bit off topic): I don't really see any reason why Quebec can't get what it wants as part of Canada

You may not follow Quebec news, but it's one of the main news items these days that Ottawa is almost systematically saying "no" to what Quebec wants. (Healthcare transfers, single tax filing, decent Roxham Road management, separate immigration targets, Bill 21/NWC, etc.)

So, yeah, everyone who's paying attention is indeed seeing a reason why Quebec can't get what it wants as part of Canada: the current federal government is refusing to let it.

[Nashe]

Originally Posted by lio45

You may not follow Quebec news, but it's one of the main news items these days that Ottawa is almost systematically saying "no" to what Quebec wants. (Healthcare transfers, single tax filing, decent Roxham Road management, separate immigration targets, Bill 21/NWC, etc.)

Those are relatively "new" asks, though, no? Are they different than any other province gets (asking seriously)? Aside from a tenuous association between Roxham road and the previously discussed "immigration vetting", maybe...

I mean, if those two items (the ability to enforce borders and self-determination of taxation) are the REAL "current' issues... they are a request for sovereignty, essentially, as those things are a big part of what defines a "country". Again, no issue with that, other than the lack of honesty in calling it what it is...

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by lio45

You may not follow Quebec news, but it's one of the main news items these days that Ottawa is almost systematically saying "no" to what Quebec wants. (Healthcare transfers, single tax filing, decent Roxham Road management, separate immigration targets, Bill 21/NWC, etc.)

So, yeah, everyone who's paying attention is indeed seeing a reason why Quebec can't get what it wants as part of Canada: the current federal government is refusing to let it.

Single tax filing is not a “no” - the PM indicated that Ottawa could consider resuming tax collection on Quebec’s behalf.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Single tax filing is not a “no” - the PM indicated that Ottawa could consider resuming tax collection on Quebec’s behalf.

Which would end up costing more because federal employees are paid more than Québec employees.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Single tax filing is not a “no” - the PM indicated that Ottawa could consider resuming tax collection on Quebec’s behalf.

Though clearly you know that that is not acquiescing to the Quebec "ask", which is what we are discussing.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nashe

Not insane... not at all. I just think you're a bit optimistic about it's extensibility. Nothing wrong with optimism, though.

Don't read TOO much into it, I wasn't trying to imply anything nefarious, in the general sense. I totally get it... I'm just wary of what "fit" CAN mean to different people (different things).
Maybe, if we're just talking about the "volountary" immigrations. I see the number of refugee and asylum-seekers being pretty high for some time.
I'm definitely not suggesting that it will shrink.

Circling back to my original point (as I think we're a bit off topic): I don't really see any reason why Quebec can't get what it wants as part of Canada, assuming the ROC doesn't panic about what that is... there SEEMS to be less of an aversion to that today compared to the knee-jerk reaction of '87, but I could be wrong. I'm not sure I really understand the aversion, as long as those needs are clearly articulated.

One thing I have always found is that because progress has been so painstaking and stymied on the important stuff (like language and culture, on top of the list), Quebec tends to jealously guard any areas of responsibility that it has. And also focus on any new ones that could be up for grabs potentially.

Personally while it would be a convenience for taxpayers to simplify the tax filing process, there is no compelling reason (other than lower salaries to pay I guess) for Québec to do that and not Ottawa.

While I fully understand why, I still kinda deplore that Québec is caught in this piece-by-piece empire-building game when tweaks in key areas would be way more beneficial and logical. But it's tough or even impossible to make progress with Ottawa in those key areas, so here we are.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nashe

Not insane... not at all. I just think you're a bit optimistic about it's extensibility. Nothing wrong with optimism, though.

.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant that the Quebec view dominates in my mind (after living here for several decades). I don't think it dominates in Canada overall and I may not even see it taking root ever, or at least not for a very long time.

Though as has been said, I think the dominant view in Québec on such things is already shared in much of the western world, and is gaining steam. Even the UK is proposing a radically different approach to the asylum seeker issue that would make bien-pensant Canadians lose their minds if proposed here, or by the GOP in the US (which Canadians follow as Major League Politics).

[Acajack]

[QUOTE=Nashe;9886832]
Maybe, if we're just talking about the "volountary" immigrations. I see the number of refugee and asylum-seekers being pretty high for some time.
I'm definitely not suggesting that it will shrink.
/QUOTE]

This assumes that sovereign states are essentially powerless to control any such influx that attempts to cross their borders.

Admittedly it's harder for some (though Canada is in a decent spot) and 100% control is impossible.

But like raising teenagers, it's an illusion to think you can control everything, but a dangerous and tragic mistake to not use the control that you do have.

[Nashe]

Originally Posted by Acajack

One thing I have always found is that because progress has been so painstaking and stymied on the important stuff (like language and culture, on top of the list), Quebec tends to jealously guard any areas of responsibility that it has. And also focus on any new ones that could be up for grabs potentially.

I guess that sentiment is what crossed my mind as I wrote my last post.

While I fully understand why, I still kinda deplore that Québec is caught in this piece-by-piece empire-building game when tweaks in key areas would be way more beneficial and logical. But it's tough or even impossible to make progress with Ottawa in those key areas, so here we are.

At it's worst, I guess. My hope it's something more akin to a negotiating tactic: Aim high and "settle" for more linguistic and immigration control, which would land Quebec something they've been asking for for some time. The original focus of my queries were generally around those two core issues, which seemed to be original and persistent concerns, and are generally the ones I have the least issue with.

[Nashe]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant that the Quebec view dominates in my mind (after living here for several decades). I don't think it dominates in Canada overall and I may not even see it taking root ever, or at least not for a very long time.

Well, there are other things going on.
But I take your point, and I appreciate your explanations.

Though as has been said, I think the dominant view in Québec on such things is already shared in much of the western world, and is gaining steam. Even the UK is proposing a radically different approach to the asylum seeker issue that would make bien-pensant Canadians lose their minds if proposed here, or by the GOP in the US (which Canadians follow as Major League Politics).

It's a hot topic, for sure. I'm really hoping there is some reasonable zone to land on somewhere between JT's "open arms" and my fears over "fit" (sorry for using that again) being twisted into something a bit more nefarious, which people often do.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Geez, you don't look at this for a couple of days and already I'm 5 pages behind the times. Don't you people have lives outside of SSP?

Originally Posted by Acajack

At least you are getting the largely unfiltered view which IMO is fairly rarely heard in English in Canada.

That to me would be a valuable insight if the shoe were on the other foot.

Though I can understand if some people don't like what they hear.

I'm not sure what I'm getting, though, TBH. You say it's a largely unfiltered view, but of whom? To me it largely sounds like the views of activists, rather than the average person just struggling to deal with most challenges of life vs existential language issues.

So, I'm not convinced that it's "valuable insight" as a lot of what is posted here seems to be loaded opinions with a quiet goal of pissing off 'anglos' (not you, necessarily, but a healthy portion of what is posted on the topic, IMHO), rather than informing. Frankly, some of it sounds more like fantasy than reality (my perception).

As far as 'not liking what I'm hearing'... sure, every time I've been in Quebec, I've found the people to be friendly, interesting, and engaging. I notice a difference in culture and life view (very generally, and sometimes somewhat subtle, but there's no denying that it's there), that is very refreshing and different from what I'm used to, and I've embraced it. I'm glad that Quebec is different from where I live, just as Ontario, the prairies and the west coast are. Also, despite the ROC (which includes Quebec) view, there are noticeable difference between the Atlantic Provinces - especially NL, which is very different from NS, and I love it!

So, yeah, if the average Quebecois is nice to my face but secretly despises me because I'm just another 'dumb anglo', it will destroy my opinion of the people that I've met... but I feel that I know people well enough that I can read sincerity in face-to-face encounters, and therefore I think much of what you and Lio post here is meant to be provocative, not educational. Maybe I'm wrong, but damn it's a sad state if I am. It would mean that Quebec has simply become a province of grievances over a state of affairs that was set like, 300 years ago, and doesn't want to accept that the world has changed since then. I can only speak to my experience, but nobody I know ever sits around and complains about the French language or that we should somehow work against Quebeckers to eradicate their language and culture - that sounds more like something you would read on twitter or reddit, or some other toxic social media platform... the type of stuff that attracts the fringe element and people who want to anonymously air their grievances and enact some kind of twisted revenge on people that they've perceived to have slighted them in some way. Almost more like the 'truck convoy' crowd, vs the "average citizen".

Originally Posted by Acajack

Another thing is that the tone is a symptom of the times. A lot of people are getting a little bit panicky and edgy because they are sensing that the solutions they have long pegged their hopes on aren't necessarily panning out.

I can't speak to that, as I don't understand what "solutions they have long pegged their hopes on" actually are. In my 'outside-of-Quebec' mode of thinking (note: the ROC you refer to doesn't actually exist - other Canadian provinces are not a monolith), I have to wonder how much introspection occurs for these hopes - i.e. how realistic are the goals, given the entirety of the world in which we live. But that's just idle thought that means nothing, since I don't really have context.

Originally Posted by Acajack

Finally, note that while I do share a lot of these views, they don't all align with mine 100% perfectly.

But since there are so few contributors from my demographic on here, I try to provide what I sense is an accurate representation of the mood out there.

I mean, if I said that I think that Don Cherry is great and that tons of francophones think like me, that would not be giving you an accurate picture from francophone Canada.

For me, this kind of falls flat. I'd prefer to read what you actually think, rather than a perception of what others might be thinking. Of course there's value in your opinion of what others are thinking and saying, but you're not really a spokesperson for the 'average Quebecois', and I for one don't expect you to be. Just my opinion, though. It can be tricky to discuss these topics while trying to include the opinions of 'everybody' in your talking points.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

For me, this kind of falls flat. I'd prefer to read what you actually think, rather than a perception of what others might be thinking. Of course there's value in your opinion of what others are thinking and saying, but you're not really a spokesperson for the 'average Quebecois', and I for one don't expect you to be. Just my opinion, though. It can be tricky to discuss these topics while trying to include the opinions of 'everybody' in your talking points.

I tend to be of the opposite view, at least when I am dealing with someone I consider to be a respectable interlocutor. (Maybe I ain't one?)

For example, it's not very interesting to me to talk to an Albertan who is all concerned about climate change and wants the oil and gas industry reined in, because I can get that view from any Joe Schmo here where I live. And double that if that climate-concerned Albertan tries to pass himself off as typical of most Albertans.

I find I learn more from the different-minded as opposed to the like-minded. Or at least from the like-minded who have insights into the different-minded based on where they live and who they rub shoulders with.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I can't speak to that, as I don't understand what "solutions they have long pegged their hopes on" actually are. In my 'outside-of-Quebec' mode of thinking (note: the ROC you refer to doesn't actually exist - other Canadian provinces are not a monolith.

While there are certainly differences within the ROC in many respects, when it comes to opinions on Quebec (and a lot of these issues we are discussing which are Quebec-ROC discords), the ROC is virtually a monolith.

I recognize that opinions may vary regionally in the ROC when it comes to stuff like gun control or abortion or climate change for example, and that there certain areas of the ROC align with Quebec more, or it can even be said that certain

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nashe

Well, there are other things going on.
But I take your point, and I appreciate your explanations.
It's a hot topic, for sure. I'm really hoping there is some reasonable zone to land on somewhere between JT's "open arms" and my fears over "fit" (sorry for using that again) being twisted into something a bit more nefarious, which people often do.

You need not worry about using "fit" with me, as I consider it a perfectly logical and defendable position to have.

People in Tehran or Tomsk are free to decide amongst themselves how they want Tehran or Tomsk to be, and I certainly won't be telling them that their cities should be more like... Toronto.

But I've seen or heard few compelling reasons so far that convince me that Toronto (or even decent-sized sections of it) should be a lot more like Tehran or Tomsk.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nashe

I guess that sentiment is what crossed my mind as I wrote my last post.

At it's worst, I guess. My hope it's something more akin to a negotiating tactic: Aim high and "settle" for more linguistic and immigration control, which would land Quebec something they've been asking for for some time. The original focus of my queries were generally around those two core issues, which seemed to be original and persistent concerns, and are generally the ones I have the least issue with.

There may be opportunities for accommodation on more administrative or clerical matters (like the tax return question, justement) but I think that on matters of identity the trust level in the ROC vis-à-vis Quebec is the lowest it's been in a long time.

OldDartmouthMark is probably right in that no one at the corner tavern in Eastern Passage is discussing this, but scratch the surface and raise the topics and see what happens.

I think the average ROCer has always thought that Quebec probably couldn't be entrusted with too much power, and these feelings just ebb and flow over time.

The whole debate over Meech was mostly about that - I was there!

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

, I have to wonder how much introspection occurs for these hopes - i.e. how realistic are the goals, given the entirety of the world in which we live. But that's just idle thought that means nothing, since I don't really have context.

:

You need to consider what the Plan B that is on people's minds is: independence.

Independence won't resolve everything but it will take away the perceived as ever-growing Canadian Trojan Horse that anglicizes Quebec from the inside.

Lots of places balance a robust single national language domestically and seamless openness to the global language that is English in dealings with the outside world. Québécois are allowed to travel internationally too, so they can see this!

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

As far as 'not liking what I'm hearing'... sure, every time I've been in Quebec, I've found the people to be friendly, interesting, and engaging. I notice a difference in culture and life view (very generally, and sometimes somewhat subtle, but there's no denying that it's there), that is very refreshing and different from what I'm used to, and I've embraced it. I'm glad that Quebec is different from where I live, just as Ontario, the prairies and the west coast are. Also, despite the ROC (which includes Quebec) view, there are noticeable difference between the Atlantic Provinces - especially NL, which is very different from NS, and I love it!

So, yeah, if the average Quebecois is nice to my face but secretly despises me because I'm just another 'dumb anglo', it will destroy my opinion of the people that I've met... but I feel that I know people well enough that I can read sincerity in face-to-face encounters, and therefore I think much of what you and Lio post here is meant to be provocative, not educational. Maybe I'm wrong, but damn it's a sad state if I am. It would mean that Quebec has simply become a province of grievances over a state of affairs that was set like, 300 years ago, and doesn't want to accept that the world has changed since then. I can only speak to my experience, but nobody I know ever sits around and complains about the French language or that we should somehow work against Quebeckers to eradicate their language and culture - that sounds more like something you would read on twitter or reddit, or some other toxic social media platform... the type of stuff that attracts the fringe element and people who want to anonymously air their grievances and enact some kind of twisted revenge on people that they've perceived to have slighted them in some way. Almost more like the 'truck convoy' crowd, vs the "average citizen".

It's not at all that they secretly despise you.

Do you understand the difference between "liking you" and "wanting to be you"?

(I didn't invent that phrase. I stole it from a political scientist I once heard at a forum. I think it may have been Stéphane Dion's father. He did not have quite the same views as his son.)

[Nashe]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There may be opportunities for accommodation on more administrative or clerical matters (like the tax return question, justement) but I think that on matters of identity the trust level in the ROC vis-à-vis Quebec is the lowest it's been in a long time.

Which I admit I find strange, as it has the least impact on the other provinces, as far as I can tell. If Quebec could and did pass an edict tomorrow stating all "national" business was to be conducted in French only and *stuff about CEGEP which I only obliquely understand* was to their liking... sure... a bunch of Quebec anglophones would be upset, I don't deny that. But maybe everyone would be happier in the long run? (I know that sounds callous) It only makes sense (to me) that a province should be able to determine what language it uses officially, even just for administrative and cost reasons, taking the cultural ones out of the equation. In the end, if Quebec feels that is what it would take to ensure their cultural survival... I don't see any problem with allowing them to make that determination and deal with the good and bad that comes from it.

OldDartmouthMark is probably right in that no one at the corner tavern in Eastern Passage is discussing this, but scratch the surface and raise the topics and see what happens.

I think the tone is less anger and more fatigue now, truth-be-told. I think in '87 there were a lot of angry people willing to be contrary just for contrariness sake. Aside from those still-angry-boomers, the feeling I generally detect is a bit more "err, OK?" to the original asks.

I think the average ROCer has always thought that Quebec probably couldn't be entrusted with too much power, and these feelings just ebb and flow over time. The whole debate over Meech was mostly about that - I was there!

See above, though "the average ROCer" would be difficult to define, more than ever.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nashe

Which I admit I find strange, as it has the least impact on the other provinces, as far as I can tell. If Quebec could and did pass an edict tomorrow stating all "national" business was to be conducted in French only and *stuff about CEGEP which I only obliquely understand* was to their liking... sure... a bunch of Quebec anglophones would be upset, I don't deny that. But maybe everyone would be happier in the long run? (I know that sounds callous) It only makes sense (to me) that a province should be able to determine what language it uses officially, even just for administrative and cost reasons, taking the cultural ones out of the equation. In the end, if Quebec feels that is what it would take to ensure their cultural survival... I don't see any problem with allowing them to make that determination and deal with the good and bad that comes from it.

I think the tone is less anger and more fatigue now, truth-be-told. I think in '87 there were a lot of angry people willing to be contrary just for contrariness sake. Aside from those still-angry-boomers, the feeling I generally detect is a bit more "err, OK?" to the original asks.

See above, though "the average ROCer" would be difficult to define, more than ever.

I won't deny that your view exists out there. It always has. But it's a minority view in English-speaking Canada.

Also, these days woke-ish millennials and Gen Z people in the ROC also have it in for Quebec as they see it as a bastion of evil resistance to the Canadian diversity and multiculturalism dogmas.

It's not just old francophobic anglo boomers.