Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

What about Québec?

Never heard of "bouiner". I do know "glander" but it's rarely used here.

Our terms:

flâner
niaiser
slaquer (la pédale)
se pogner le beigne
se pogner le bacon
zigonner
tataouiner

[begratto]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

I bet your media didn't even talk about it.

Of course they did. Flights to India from Montreal and Toronto have been impacted.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Canada has a lot of weird rules about cultured (ie. live/microbial) products that make things like raw milk cheeses, cultured butters, and proper crème fraîche difficult to buy here. In fairness, the Americans do as well although not as badly.

I always feel like a lot of these rules come because of American trade and influence. I suspect we'd be more Euro aligned on food standards if we could do it without real economic/trade impacts.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Never heard of "bouiner". I do know "glander" but it's rarely used here.

Our terms:

flâner
niaiser
slaquer (la pédale)
se pogner le beigne
se pogner le bacon
zigonner
tataouiner

To pleasure oneself with a doughnut?

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

To pleasure oneself with a doughnut?

More like to grab one's doughnut.

[Acajack]

The Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to hear the Bill 21 challenge.

[Zeej]

Originally Posted by Acajack

The Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to hear the Bill 21 challenge.

Popcorn time.

[le calmar]

It feels like all the ingredients for the perfect storm are slowly starting to fall into place.

A new federal government Québécois don’t relate to is about to take power, the PQ on track to win the next election which will in turn proceed with a referendum. Bill 21 and the whole concept of non withstanding clause being challenged by the Supreme Court will no doubt impact the results of the latter.

And then you have the orange guy next door who will no doubt try to take advantage of the chaos to achieve whatever he is trying to do. Interesting times.

[Acajack]

Anyone have an idea of how long the Supreme Court will take to hear this case and rule on it? I am thinking a year to 18 months? Am I about right?

If so that could be just in time for the next Quebec election in 2026.

Note that I am not one of those that believes the Supreme Court of Canada is completely blind to the political impacts of its decisions. Especially not as they concern Quebec.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by le calmar

It feels like all the ingredients for the perfect storm are slowly starting to fall into place.

A new federal government Québécois don’t relate to is about to take power, the PQ on track to win the next election which will in turn proceed with a referendum. Bill 21 and the whole concept of non withstanding clause being challenged by the Supreme Court will no doubt impact the results of the latter.

And then you have the orange guy next door who will no doubt try to take advantage of the chaos to achieve whatever he is trying to do. Interesting times.

For sure. Didn't think about Trump interference but imagine Trump says a week before a referendum that Quebec is a fair place so he'd admit them to NAFTA no problem. Or in fact they should even be exempt from the tariffs that might be in place at the time. Could be a game changer.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

The current Premier (Susan Holt), while anglophone, is bilingual, and I have heard no complaints about the quality of her French. We now have a new Lieutenant Governor too, and she is a bilingual Acadian. The worm has turned.

The worm has just turned but the worm has turned before, starting even in 1960 when Ti-Louis Robichaud was elected Premier.

We still got Blaine Higgs as Premier and a unilingual Lieutenant Governor (named by Ottawa no less) in the 2020s, after all that.

So the moral of the story is that steps back are always possible.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

The Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to hear the Bill 21 challenge.

So it's the end of Canada?

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Anyone have an idea of how long the Supreme Court will take to hear this case and rule on it? I am thinking a year to 18 months? Am I about right?

If so that could be just in time for the next Quebec election in 2026.

Note that I am not one of those that believes the Supreme Court of Canada is completely blind to the political impacts of its decisions. Especially not as they concern Quebec.

If the SCC waters down the NWC through judicial activism a lot of Anglo Conservatives especially in the West are going to be extremely upset as well, even if they're generally anti-Bill 21. It could force a reopening of the constitution.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

If the SCC waters down the NWC through judicial activism a lot of Anglo Conservatives especially in the West are going to be extremely upset as well, even if they're generally anti-Bill 21. It could force a reopening of the constitution.

'Boite de Pandore' is your new item of French vocabulary for tonight.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

For sure. Didn't think about Trump interference but imagine Trump says a week before a referendum that Quebec is a fair place so he'd admit them to NAFTA no problem. Or in fact they should even be exempt from the tariffs that might be in place at the time. Could be a game changer.

Interesting.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

If the SCC waters down the NWC through judicial activism a lot of Anglo Conservatives especially in the West are going to be extremely upset as well, even if they're generally anti-Bill 21. It could force a reopening of the constitution.

I think you're right about some Conservatives in the West but not sure how mature or galvanizing the pro-NWC cause is outside Quebec at this point.

I think the anti-NWC crowd is much larger overall, and would be much easier to mobilize.

Of course that could change.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

So it's the end of Canada?

Not really, but it could cause a pretty big crisis and be another nail in the coffin. (Not that the coffin is fully nailed at this point, but it does have a few.)

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

For sure. Didn't think about Trump interference but imagine Trump says a week before a referendum that Quebec is a fair place so he'd admit them to NAFTA no problem. Or in fact they should even be exempt from the tariffs that might be in place at the time. Could be a game changer.

I see him more egging Alberta to separate and join the U.S. (I wouldn't even be surprised if Trump already made a clear offer to Danielle Smith). Trump wants to be on Mount Rushmore, and good way for him to achieve that (at least, in his mind) would be to increase the size of the USA. Adding Alberta, the territories and maybe Saskatchewan could be enough to do that. It would add lots of resources, reduce the commercial deficit with Canada and wouldn't tip the balance politically in favor of the Democrats. Also, it would weakens Canada, and in Trump's twisted mind if an "enemy" gets hurt, it is a win for him.

[New Brisavoine]

Time to watch this movie again:

• Video Link

[New Brisavoine]

"If you're a state, we won't have a deficit, we won't have to tariff you." Ca paraît frappé au coin du bon sens.

https://x.com/atrupar/status/1882470582333153287