|
Hello TLers,
Due to possible confusion, the topic is "The Parti Quebecois" with the subtext of "Are they an appropriate party to represent all of Quebec, and are they making responsible choices?"
Disclaimer: This OP is biased toward a bilingual, ex-west-islander 4th year engineering student at concordia perspective. I am far from being removed enough to be unbiased. This is my understanding and my view. Hopefully we can discuss this.
Some notable responses:
On December 14 2012 04:37 bonifaceviii wrote:
Montreal resident dismayed at Parti Quebecois' irrational hostility toward bilingualism; film at 11!
But seriously, if you're from Montreal the PQ isn't for you.
On December 14 2012 05:30 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 05:24 Abraxas514 wrote:On December 14 2012 05:19 bonifaceviii wrote:On December 14 2012 05:13 Abraxas514 wrote:
The minor squabbles between europeans that ended with the british rule of Canada are largely unimportant if you want to start being specific about history. But isn't your whole OP about the minor squabbles between ex-European colonizers? I know it sucks that the PQ won, dude, but what did you expect? Every post you've made so far is an attempt to misdirect the conversation. If you would like to argue why the PQ is good for quebec, please provide statistics, articles from respected news outlets, or specific talking points like your peer did before you. I'm from Toronto and don't give a shit, if you didn't notice. I don't think that the PQ is good for Quebec. I also don't think a Montreal college kid making a dumb OP whining that his party lost is a particularly good "conversation".
On December 14 2012 04:52 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 04:50 Abraxas514 wrote:On December 14 2012 04:37 bonifaceviii wrote:
Montreal resident dismayed at Parti Quebecois' irrational hostility toward bilingualism; film at 11!
But seriously, if you're from Montreal the PQ isn't for you. Interesting because about half the population of Quebec lives in the metropolitan region of Montreal. It's okay dude, Ontario would gladly take you guys if you were to secede from Quebec. The whole "Toronto hates Montreal" thing can be set aside for the greater good.
On December 14 2012 05:03 Kurr wrote:
I am french, lived in Quebec for 4 years, and couldn't be happier to be out of that place. These borderline psychotic cases are one of the primary reasons why.. it's shameful and I couldn't bear to be associated with that.
On December 14 2012 05:22 DreamTheaterFan wrote:
To everybody here in TL reading this and are unaware of Quebec's situation, I urge you to disregard OP's ridiculous stand on the matter, it is one of the most misleading, misinformed and filled with hatred post I've ever read.
No wonder people are so confused about the middle east or any other political crisis for that matter... how can you form an objective opinion on a far-away country when within your own country media and opposition fill your head with crap and you can't see the bigger picture?
History:
Some of you may be familiar with my province of Quebec. It's a place where francophones historically were oppressed by the british, whether by language or just systemic discrimination.
Since the 1970s Quebec has been a very different place since "bill 101". You can't make a sign in English any more, be it the name of your store, your menu, or an advertisement. Forty years later, 90% of Montreal speaks French natively.
Fast forward to the spring of 2012... or the "Quebec spring" where dirt-poor third-street students marched against the Liberal party of quebec's plan to increase university tuition to comparable levels in Canada, with some accompanied increase in service.
Pauline Marois, and the PQ in general, used this as a strong pivot to differentiate themselves from the Liberals. They promised to reverse the tuition hike, and keep the increase in loans and bursaries the Liberals instated to compensate for the tuition hike.
Present:
Now, Quebec suffers the consequence of electing a french "fundamentalist" party.
I say "fundamentalist" because they refuse to acknowledge their being part of canada:
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/09/17/canadian-flag-taken-down-replaced-with-fleur-de-lis-at-quebec-legislature-as-pq-takes-oath-of-office/
(In my opinion, this constitutes treason to the Crown)
Quebec universities LOSE funding:
ctvnews: pq-tells-universities-to-cut-140-million-in-costs-for-current-school-year
So Marois basically duped the province about their budget plans.
Then she buffs up the OQLF, the "french language gestapo" despite a failing budget and a hiring freeze:
Budget cuts to many services, buff to OQLF
This is an organization that wants to shut down an ice cream store for having flavor names in english, and using a horrible word like "sprinkles" instead of it's french counterpart:
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/quebec-s-language-laws-leave-ben-jerry-s-shop-with-ice-cream-headache-1.1077743
They also prevent big retailers like "wallmart" from having english-suggestive names.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/10/13/french-language-english-companies.html
Entire cities are dropping their "bilingualism". Saint-Lazare is a city that always had a large english-speaking population, who now cannot even be served in court in english.
http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/facing-complaints-from-language-office-st-lazare-drops-bilingualism-1.1067977
Edit: This next part was actually a satire.
+ Show Spoiler +
Conclusion:
My prediction is that this minority government won't last long. There is serious distrust, especially in montreal, of government officials, culminating in the resignation of Montreal's and Laval's mayors, within a week of each other:
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/montreal-mayor-resigns-denies-corruption-allegations-1.1025935
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/11/09/quebec-laval-mayor-gilles-vaillancourt-announces-political-future.html
We SERIOUSLY distrust our leaders.
If Pauline Marois' amendments to bill 101
(http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/12/05/montreal-pq-language-bill.html)
gets down voted in parliament, then the party looses power, and a new government must be elected.
In all honesty, look at the electorial maps:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/quebecvotes2012/
It looks like the united states. The south, or the "places where there are anglophones, immigrants, jobs, and universities" voted almost completely for the Liberal party (who earned 50 seats, compared to the PQs 54 seats) or the CAQ. The entire north "almost-absolutely french" areas voted unanimously for the PQ.
TL;DR
This makes me think that Quebec might be better served by a two party system. Let the south half be all bilingual and practice all kinds of progressive nonsense, and let the PQ take the north and secede. Everyone's happy.
EDIT:
I don't hate the French. My whole mother's side lives in Paris. I want to avoid incidents such as these, which are founded on French people not wanting Anglophones in "their" province:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/a9tro worker face assault charge language incident/7470155/story.html
|
you do know that the reason Montreal's and Laval's mayors quit is because they were being unofficially accused of being part of a huge collusion/corruption scheme right? doesn't have much to do with the PQ, it's been going on for years (accusations have been coming up since the Charboneau Commission)
Libs won't vote against the amendments to bill 101 because they don't even have a leader since Jean Charest quit. It's very much so not in their interest to start a new election campaign.
also, not that it seems to matter to you but there's plenty of universities in regions that haven't voted for the Liberal party
cool generalizations
|
On December 14 2012 04:10 SwEEt[TearS] wrote:
you do know that the reason Montreal's and Laval's mayors quit is because they were being unofficially accused of being part of a huge collusion/corruption scheme right? doesn't have much to do with the PQ, it's been going on for years (accusations have been coming up since the Charboneau Commission)
Libs won't vote against the amendments to bill 101 because they don't even have a leader since Jean Charest quit. It's very much so not in their interest to start a new election campaign.
also, not that it seems to matter to you but there's plenty of universities in regions that haven't voted for the Liberal party
cool generalizations
My only point about the mayors was that us city-people really distrust our leaders at this moment in time.
Here is the map from wikipedia of the universities in Quebec. Compare that to the electoral map if you wish.
As you can see, no universities in the north.
Here is a quick photoshop I made of universities/cities of quebec, versus electorial map:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/107275289/Quebec.jpg
|
We distrust our leaders cause they are corrupted. Until they prove otherwise, why should we trust them? The cuts needed to be done since the previous government didn't govern properly and we were constantly under a deficit year after year. You can't blame the PQ for the 9 years of the PLQ. It's like when Obama took the United States in 2008...there was a lot of shit because of Republicans and shit.
TLDR : yeah your arguments are bad.
|
Montreal resident dismayed at Parti Quebecois' irrational hostility toward bilingualism; film at 11!
But seriously, if you're from Montreal the PQ isn't for you.
|
im french-quebecois from montreal... and sorry but you know nothing about our history.... we are a whole different nation. thousands of people died to protect our nation, you can go live in ontario if you dont like the current government...
Some of you may be familiar with my province of Quebec. It's a place where francophones historically were oppressed by the british, whether by language or just systemic discrimination.
lol is that really what they learned you at school?
|
On December 14 2012 04:37 bonifaceviii wrote:
Montreal resident dismayed at Parti Quebecois' irrational hostility toward bilingualism; film at 11!
But seriously, if you're from Montreal the PQ isn't for you.
Interesting because about half the population of Quebec lives in the metropolitan region of Montreal.
From wikipedia:
QUEBEC
Population Ranked 2nd
Total (2012) 8,080,550 [3]
MONTREAL
Population (2011)[3]
• City 1,649,519
• Density 4,517.6/km2 (11,701/sq mi)
• Urban[4] 3,407,963
• Urban density 2,205.4/km2 (5,712/sq mi)
• Metro[5] 3,824,221 (2nd)
|
On December 14 2012 04:50 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 04:37 bonifaceviii wrote:
Montreal resident dismayed at Parti Quebecois' irrational hostility toward bilingualism; film at 11!
But seriously, if you're from Montreal the PQ isn't for you. Interesting because about half the population of Quebec lives in the metropolitan region of Montreal.
It's okay dude, Ontario would gladly take you guys if you were to secede from Quebec. The whole "Toronto hates Montreal" thing can be set aside for the greater good.
|
Are you Serious?
I will try to clarify the Bill101
disclaimer : I am myself Québécois.
As quebecois, we stand as a minority of 4% of french speaker within the whole north america. this means that by our simple presence withing an english world that is america, we receive tremendous cultural influence from english culture. Anyone who's been to Quebec will concede it. we all learn english as 2nd language at school, we all use franglish slangs.
Studies (look out for yourself) have proven that before bill 101 french as a language of use was regresing. After 101 it stabilized. WHY? because Bill101 was made to protect our culture from that strong influence. Bill 101 is basically institutionalizing our culture withing the laws of our province.
what it does: Forces every one who's parent didn't go to an english school to get educated in French until college (ig french quebecois and immigrants). Forces every company to advertise in French since the language of use in Quebec in French. Forces every enterprise to function in French, meaning that everyone should work in french within Quebec(most do not respect it).
Outside Law 101, we as Quebecois MUST be able to speak english in order to find a job. because nowadays we live in an english world. WE learn it, why wouldnt you. Do you ever go to france and ask to be served in english, or ask to study in english? no because they speak french. why is it different with us.
this sir OP here, comes from west-island where some people can´t speak a word of french, people who've been living in Quebec for years 10 20 30 40 years and still do not speak french. the english minorty of quebec, complains that we as a people do not respect their individual rights of english speakers. although, there are 3 major english hospitals and 2 major english university ranked in the best school of the world (eg Mcgill which is 8th worldwide I think). Also the Government AKA the people's Money and taxes FUNDS THESE ENGLISH ONLY SERVICES. The english minority of quebec is one of the most pleased minority of the world. Do you see latinos ask for spanish schools in LA? no they go to english school like everyone else.
why is it so important to us? first of all, because language is a mental and conceptual structure. it orders thoughts and concepts of communication. this mean with every language comes a different structure of THINKING. As an example, Inuits (northern indigenous people of quebec) have over a hundred different term for the word SNOW. before colonisation, they had no concept of money and business. what does it mean? Culture is a way of thinking, and to preserve it as a minorty you have to defend it. english is nowhere near to disappear as a culture my friend. french, without bill101 in quebec is.
That said, it is understandable that Quebec as a distinct people, culture and Nation wants to part ways with canada. the main reason? we do not think the same. Every nation according to the UN bill of rights has its right of autodetermination. and we simply do not recognize ourself like canadians. Look at our present government of canada. conservative, rightwing, who not so long ago thought global warming was a scam, who's membership is opus dei related, who wants to go back on gay marriage and abortion, who erased the gun registry, who buys for billions and billions of warplanes instead of investing in education and culture. that is just not how we are.
right now quebec does not suffer from the elected party. if you'd watched the political scene in quebec you should know that we have this cycle in which a party is first elected minoritary, then re elected majoritary. the governement will last because the other parties aren't ready for an other election too soon and Bill101 is untouchable in Quebec.
we don't want to shut down english stores, we want them to change their names. Couchetard, a french entreprise renamed Circle K for its stores in the US, that's logical no?
|
I am french, lived in Quebec for 4 years, and couldn't be happier to be out of that place. These borderline psychotic cases are one of the primary reasons why.. it's shameful and I couldn't bear to be associated with that.
|
Do you ever go to france and ask to be served in english, or ask to study in english? no because they speak french. why is it different with us.
I don't think you've ever been to France, or any European country for that matter.
|
On December 14 2012 03:34 Abraxas514 wrote:
Hello TLers,
Present:
Now, Quebec suffers the consequence of electing a french "fundamentalist" party.
this op is terrible. its so biased/based on wrong assumptions I dont get how we can discuss it without shitting all over what you say...
lol a fundamentalist party... yeah muslim broterhood ftw man. everyone knows Lisee has ties with the Hamas as well.
btw they will be defeated at the Assemblee nationale sometime this spring.
|
On December 14 2012 04:56 crazyweasel wrote:
Are you Serious?
I will try to clarify the Bill101
disclaimer : I am myself Québécois.
As quebecois, we stand as a minority of 4% of french speaker within the whole north america. this means that by our simple presence withing an english world that is america, we receive tremendous cultural influence from english culture. Anyone who's been to Quebec will concede it. we all learn english as 2nd language at school, we all use franglish slangs.
Studies (look out for yourself) have proven that before bill 101 french as a language of use was regresing. After 101 it stabilized. WHY? because Bill101 was made to protect our culture from that strong influence. Bill 101 is basically institutionalizing our culture withing the laws of our province.
what it does: Forces every one who's parent didn't go to an english school to get educated in French until college (ig french quebecois and immigrants). Forces every company to advertise in French since the language of use in Quebec in French. Forces every enterprise to function in French, meaning that everyone should work in french within Quebec(most do not respect it).
Outside Law 101, we as Quebecois MUST be able to speak english in order to find a job. because nowadays we live in an english world. WE learn it, why wouldnt you. Do you ever go to france and ask to be served in english, or ask to study in english? no because they speak french. why is it different with us.
this sir OP here, comes from west-island where some people can´t speak a word of french, people who've been living in Quebec for years 10 20 30 40 years and still do not speak french. the english minorty of quebec, complains that we as a people do not respect their individual rights of english speakers. although, there are 3 major english hospitals and 2 major english university ranked in the best school of the world (eg Mcgill which is 8th worldwide I think). Also the Government AKA the people's Money and taxes FUNDS THESE ENGLISH ONLY SERVICES. The english minority of quebec is one of the most pleased minority of the world. Do you see latinos ask for spanish schools in LA? no they go to english school like everyone else.
why is it so important to us? first of all, because language is a mental and conceptual structure. it orders thoughts and concepts of communication. this mean with every language comes a different structure of THINKING. As an example, Inuits (northern indigenous people of quebec) have over a hundred different term for the word SNOW. before colonisation, they had no concept of money and business. what does it mean? Culture is a way of thinking, and to preserve it as a minorty you have to defend it. english is nowhere near to disappear as a culture my friend. french, without bill101 in quebec is.
That said, it is understandable that Quebec as a distinct people, culture and Nation wants to part ways with canada. the main reason? we do not think the same. Every nation according to the UN bill of rights has its right of autodetermination. and we simply do not recognize ourself like canadians. Look at our present government of canada. conservative, rightwing, who not so long ago thought global warming was a scam, who's membership is opus dei related, who wants to go back on gay marriage and abortion, who erased the gun registry, who buys for billions and billions of warplanes instead of investing in education and culture. that is just not how we are.
right now quebec does not suffer from the elected party. if you'd watched the political scene in quebec you should know that we have this cycle in which a party is first elected minoritary, then re elected majoritary. the governement will last because the other parties aren't ready for an other election too soon and Bill101 is untouchable in Quebec.
we don't want to shut down english stores, we want them to change their names. Couchetard, a french entreprise renamed Circle K for its stores in the US, that's logical no?
May I remind you families in the West Island have been living in Canada for well over a hundred years.
I agree about Harper's government, but that has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.
Hundreds of years of second-class status during the colonial age doesn't justify doing the same to anglophones in the information age. Bill 101 guarantees French is the ruling language of Quebec. We don't need bilingual dogs and French translations of words like "brownies" and "sprinkles".
|
^^ Canada was founded over 400 years ago by french colonists.
we can get into flawed arguments all day long if you want.
|
On December 14 2012 05:08 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
^^ Canada was founded over 400 years ago by french colonists.
we can get into flawed arguments all day long if you want.
Archaeological studies and genetic analyses have indicated a human presence in the northern Yukon region from 24,500 BC, and in southern Ontario from 7500 BC.[15][16][17]
The minor squabbles between europeans that ended with the british rule of Canada are largely unimportant if you want to start being specific about history.
Whoever "planted their flag first" is completely irrelevant.
|
On December 14 2012 05:13 Abraxas514 wrote:
The minor squabbles between europeans that ended with the british rule of Canada are largely unimportant if you want to start being specific about history.
But isn't your whole OP about the minor squabbles between ex-European colonizers?
I know it sucks that the PQ won, dude, but what did you expect?
|
To everybody here in TL reading this and are unaware of Quebec's situation, I urge you to disregard OP's ridiculous stand on the matter, it is one of the most misleading, misinformed and filled with hatred post I've ever read.
No wonder people are so confused about the middle east or any other political crisis for that matter... how can you form an objective opinion on a far-away country when within your own country media and opposition fill your head with crap and you can't see the bigger picture?
|
You haven't actually suggested a topic for discussion. This all just reads like a rant which ends with a radical and unrealistic conclusion.
|
On December 14 2012 05:19 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 05:13 Abraxas514 wrote:
The minor squabbles between europeans that ended with the british rule of Canada are largely unimportant if you want to start being specific about history. But isn't your whole OP about the minor squabbles between ex-European colonizers? I know it sucks that the PQ won, dude, but what did you expect?
Every post you've made so far is an attempt to misdirect the conversation. If you would like to argue why the PQ is good for quebec, please provide statistics, articles from respected news outlets, or specific talking points like your peer did before you.
|
On December 14 2012 05:22 Rezudox wrote:
You haven't actually suggested a topic for discussion. This all just reads like a rant which ends with a radical and unrealistic conclusion.
The topic is "The Parti Quebecois" with the subtext of "Are they an appropriate party to represent all of Quebec, and are they making responsible choices?"
I will edit the OP.
|
On December 14 2012 05:05 Abraxas514 wrote:
May I remind you families in the West Island have been living in Canada for well over a hundred years.
I agree about Harper's government, but that has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.
Hundreds of years of second-class status during the colonial age doesn't justify doing the same to anglophones in the information age. Bill 101 guarantees French is the ruling language of Quebec. We don't need bilingual dogs and French translations of words like "brownies" and "sprinkles".
Families in the west island have been living in someone else's home for hundread years. now its their homes as well but they have to respect the nation in which they live. starting by speaking the language of use. I dont give a shit if you speak english to your mom dad or friend at home or a your teaclub. i want you to speak french at school and at work in order to maintain my culture from dying.
its not justifying years of second class status or anything. we have a culture to protect, it is in the collective interest to protect it. what are you complaining about? you think we shouldnt protect our culture is it what you are saying?
harper as alot to do in this discussion. as quebecois we are the anti thesis of what politicaly canada is.
On December 14 2012 05:03 Kurr wrote:
I am french, lived in Quebec for 4 years, and couldn't be happier to be out of that place. These borderline psychotic cases are one of the primary reasons why.. it's shameful and I couldn't bear to be associated with that.
then im glad you left.
|
On December 14 2012 05:24 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 05:19 bonifaceviii wrote:On December 14 2012 05:13 Abraxas514 wrote:
The minor squabbles between europeans that ended with the british rule of Canada are largely unimportant if you want to start being specific about history. But isn't your whole OP about the minor squabbles between ex-European colonizers? I know it sucks that the PQ won, dude, but what did you expect? Every post you've made so far is an attempt to misdirect the conversation. If you would like to argue why the PQ is good for quebec, please provide statistics, articles from respected news outlets, or specific talking points like your peer did before you.
I'm from Toronto and don't give a shit, if you didn't notice. I don't think that the PQ is good for Quebec.
I also don't think a Montreal college kid making a dumb OP whining that his party lost is a particularly good "conversation".
|
edit - refer to later post
|
On December 14 2012 05:13 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 05:08 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
^^ Canada was founded over 400 years ago by french colonists.
we can get into flawed arguments all day long if you want. Show nested quote +Archaeological studies and genetic analyses have indicated a human presence in the northern Yukon region from 24,500 BC, and in southern Ontario from 7500 BC.[15][16][17] The minor squabbles between europeans that ended with the british rule of Canada are largely unimportant if you want to start being specific about history. Whoever "planted their flag first" is completely irrelevant.
Canada as a nation champ. If he wanted to say the French were the first on the continent, he would. Instead, he said that Canada was founded 400 years ago. Previous societies were primarily irrelevant by the time Europeans came and took over, so the human presence youre talking about has no impact or reason to be in this argument. Your nitpicking is what's irrelevant.
|
"the OQLF, the "french language gestapo""
Godwin's Law usually takes longer but this time it's right in the OP.
|
Peaceful secession movement =/= treason. Especially since the supreme court has more or less said that provinces have the right to separate from Canada after a referendum (with some caveats). As for what I think of the PQ? At the moment, they are probably less bad than the PLQ or the CAQ (or QS :/ ), and I say this as a staunch federalist. There just wasn't much option at the last provincial election.
As far as separatist movements go, though, Option National is definitively the less anti-Anglophone one.
On December 14 2012 05:39 PizzaParty wrote:
"the OQLF, the "french language gestapo""
Godwin's Law usually takes longer but this time it's right in the OP.
Impressive indeed.
|
On December 14 2012 05:37 crbox wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 05:03 Mikau wrote:
Do you ever go to france and ask to be served in english, or ask to study in english? no because they speak french. why is it different with us.
I don't think you've ever been to France, or any European country for that matter. Why would you say that? I only been to France (no other parts of Europe sadly  ) But he made a point, you don't go to France and be asked to be served in english. I don't agree with Mikau though, because the population of Montreal is a little over 50% english speaking, so in some neighborhood, it's quite standard to be served in english. If you only speak French in Montreal you have to be a little retarded (I learned French before English btw, my family speak French, etc.) EDIT : Btw this : Show nested quote +"i want you to speak french at school and at work in order to maintain my culture from dying." is probably top3 most retarded quote I've seen in a while. I'm not trying to diss you or anything, just made me laugh a little that's all ^^ You don't have control over what people do, you can either live with it or make whiny posts on TL as long as you want XD
The point I made was that in France (and nearly everywhere else in Europe) it is quite normal to be served in English. Yes people prefer it if you make an effort of speaking French (or whatever the native tongue is where you are) but most of the time they will make an effort to speak English to you. The same goes for studying in English. Most (if not all) universities have their major programs in English. Most of the classmates I have (in Belgium) are from all over the world and we speak English all the time.
So what you were saying is not only a pretty bad argument in it's own right, it's also blatantly false.
I'll just say that I know nothing about Canada and wasn't trying to get involved in this discussion, I was merely trying to call someone on their nonsense.
|
On December 14 2012 05:37 LiamTheZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 05:13 Abraxas514 wrote:On December 14 2012 05:08 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
^^ Canada was founded over 400 years ago by french colonists.
we can get into flawed arguments all day long if you want. Archaeological studies and genetic analyses have indicated a human presence in the northern Yukon region from 24,500 BC, and in southern Ontario from 7500 BC.[15][16][17] The minor squabbles between europeans that ended with the british rule of Canada are largely unimportant if you want to start being specific about history. Whoever "planted their flag first" is completely irrelevant. Canada as a nation champ. If he wanted to say the French were the first on the continent, he would. Instead, he said that Canada was founded 400 years ago. Previous societies were primarily irrelevant by the time Europeans came and took over, so the human presence youre talking about has no impact or reason to be in this argument. Your nitpicking is what's irrelevant.
Who "founded" Canada is the irrelevant point here. I mean, look at this map:
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/NorthAmerica1762-83.png)
So 400 years ago "we" were French, then 250 years ago "we" were English. Then 30 years ago the French people took the power back. The French are a distinct nation, yes obviously, but they are also within Canada, a country which is supposedly built on tolerance, a mosaic as opposed to a melting pot.
But this discussion is NOT about whether Quebec should be English or French. It is about whether the PQ is doing a good job or not.
|
On December 14 2012 03:34 Abraxas514 wrote:Then she buffs up the OQLF, the "french language gestapo" despite a failing budget and a hiring freeze: Expanding the OQLF
Nice of you to link an article from 9 months ago about Christine St-Pierre, the ex-Minister of Culture under the PLQ government and blame the PQ for it when they have only been in power for 3 months.
|
On December 14 2012 05:43 Fischbacher wrote:Peaceful secession movement =/= treason. Especially since the supreme court has more or less said that provinces have the right to separate from Canada after a referendum (with some caveats). As for what I think of the PQ? At the moment, they are probably less bad than the PLQ or the CAQ (or QS :/ ), and I say this as a staunch federalist. There just wasn't much option at the last provincial election. As far as separatist movements go, though, Option National is definitively the less anti-Anglophone one. Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 05:39 PizzaParty wrote:
"the OQLF, the "french language gestapo""
Godwin's Law usually takes longer but this time it's right in the OP. Impressive indeed.
A squad of unwatched fervent government-mandated French-pushers who literally come to your store, tell you your menu isn't French enough, kick out paying customers, fine you, insult you, and have absolutely no accountability.
At least to someone who isn't purelaine, I guess.
Also, their study shows the measures aren't needed:
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/life/Editorial OQLF study shows English restrictions needed/7622675/story.html
EDIT:
Thanks for keeping me on my toes, here is a summary of next year's budget changes:
But, in an unusual move, the expenditure budget also announced a series of cuts that some programs will have to make in the next four months.
A few highlights:
- $4.1 million cut in managing the environment in 2013-2014
- $120 million cut in housing for 2013-2014
- $373, 000$ to be cut in primary and secondary school budgets in the next 4 months
- $61 million cut in employment programs 2013-2014
- $17 million cut to assistance measures for families, to be made within the next 4 months
- $1.3 million cut to economic development fund
- $78 million less for management of Natural Resources
- $138 million cut in health care system budget, to be made in the next 4 months (budget will increase in 2013-2014)
- $140 million cut to university budgets (This was announced later)
- $1.1 million spending increase in the Office de la Langue Française for 2013-2014
Posted the wrong article, fixed now!!
|
Do you ever go to france and ask to be served in english, or ask to study in english? no because they speak french. why is it different with us.
Yes. I would say it is considered polite to at least attempt to get by in the national language, but lets be honest asking someone if they speak English or to conduct a transaction in English is not a slight or transgression.
The english minority of quebec is one of the most pleased minority of the world. Do you see latinos ask for spanish schools in LA?
The exception is that extensive accommodations have been made to facilitate transition into English learning, there are environments in schools across the US that blur the line until sufficient comprehension is established to have Latino students learn with the general student population. I assume these exist in the French speaking public facilities of Quebec as well.
|
On December 14 2012 06:00 Abraxas514 wrote:
A squad of unwatched fervent government-mandated French-pushers who literally come to your store, tell you your menu isn't French enough, kick out paying customers, fine you, insult you, and have absolutely no accountability.
So why are they pursuing it anyway?
Really ? Where ? Seriously you are going to show some evidence for claims like this.
Fines are like a speeding ticket, if you don't do anything wrong you won't get any. Store owners know they have to have signs in French. They don't and get a fine. It's their fault really.
I'm not sure it's been said so far in the thread but remember that Quebec has one and only one official language : French. New-Brunswick has French and English. All the other have English only. "But Canada is bilingual !" I hear you type. Federal institutions are bilingual, not the country. If it was I could speak French everywhere in Canada, which is not the case.
|
On December 14 2012 06:18 PizzaParty wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 06:00 Abraxas514 wrote:
A squad of unwatched fervent government-mandated French-pushers who literally come to your store, tell you your menu isn't French enough, kick out paying customers, fine you, insult you, and have absolutely no accountability.
So why are they pursuing it anyway? Really ? Where ? Seriously you are going to show some evidence for claims like this.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/quebec-s-language-laws-leave-ben-jerry-s-shop-with-ice-cream-headache-1.1077743
The point of the argument is "The PQ is mismanaging our province by increasing funding to an organization that does not warrant the increase, and cutting important services like university and healthcare funding."
Can the pro-PQ posters, and the anti-everything posters, please stay on topic. I'm saying the PQ is bad for Quebec. This was never an english versus french debate.
|
you made a shitty op that turned into a shitty thread.
thats what happened.
User was warned for this post
|
On December 14 2012 08:56 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
you made a shitty op that turned into a shitty thread.
thats what happened.
Cant say Im surprised, people are way too passionate about this stuff to have a discussion about it with people they know in real life, let alone strangers on the internet. Its a case of you're never gonna convince them - they're never gonna convinve you so you just kind of shout at each other until everything goes to shit.
Honestly this is kinda like if someone made a huge topic about how shitty the Democratic party is and how bad it is that they've been elected again. GL having an intelligent, rational discussion after that
|
On December 14 2012 06:00 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 05:43 Fischbacher wrote:Peaceful secession movement =/= treason. Especially since the supreme court has more or less said that provinces have the right to separate from Canada after a referendum (with some caveats). As for what I think of the PQ? At the moment, they are probably less bad than the PLQ or the CAQ (or QS :/ ), and I say this as a staunch federalist. There just wasn't much option at the last provincial election. As far as separatist movements go, though, Option National is definitively the less anti-Anglophone one. On December 14 2012 05:39 PizzaParty wrote:
"the OQLF, the "french language gestapo""
Godwin's Law usually takes longer but this time it's right in the OP. Impressive indeed. A squad of unwatched fervent government-mandated French-pushers who literally come to your store, tell you your menu isn't French enough, kick out paying customers, fine you, insult you, and have absolutely no accountability. At least to someone who isn't purelaine, I guess. Also, their study shows the measures aren't needed: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/life/Editorial OQLF study shows English restrictions needed/7622675/story.htmlEDIT: Thanks for keeping me on my toes, here is a summary of next year's budget changes: Show nested quote +But, in an unusual move, the expenditure budget also announced a series of cuts that some programs will have to make in the next four months.
A few highlights:
- $4.1 million cut in managing the environment in 2013-2014
- $120 million cut in housing for 2013-2014
- $373, 000$ to be cut in primary and secondary school budgets in the next 4 months
- $61 million cut in employment programs 2013-2014
- $17 million cut to assistance measures for families, to be made within the next 4 months
- $1.3 million cut to economic development fund
- $78 million less for management of Natural Resources
- $138 million cut in health care system budget, to be made in the next 4 months (budget will increase in 2013-2014)
- $140 million cut to university budgets (This was announced later)
- $1.1 million spending increase in the Office de la Langue Française for 2013-2014 Posted the wrong article, fixed now!!
Hey mate, I'm not even a Quebecer. Just pointing out that the reason the PQ won last election was because their opposition was shit and more shit. And the Nazi comparison is fucking ridiculous.
|
I'm an Anglo-Montrealer, born and raised in the West Island, and while I'll never in my life vote for the PQ the way other Anglos talk about them you'd think we were living under some kind of fascist regime. In reality we're among the best treated linguistic minorities in the world. We've got to deal with a faction of the French who are a bit extreme, but they're definitely a minority and generally are harmless. I'd feel far more uncomfortable living in certain parts of the American south.
Separatism and language issues in general are such emotional issues, that it's understandable why rhetoric sometimes gets a bit nuts. But I think Quebec's actual policies are currently very fair to both the minority Anglophones and Allophones and the French majority. That being said, it bothers me that the PQ's campaign is still so language-centric, even when myself and lots of other Quebeckers are so tired of them. We've got serious issues in this province and, while it might shock some people, language has very little to do with them! When separatism is your raison-d'etre it's almost impossible to look for common ground because emphasizing difference is how they've been electorally successful.
|
On December 14 2012 06:18 PizzaParty wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 06:00 Abraxas514 wrote:
A squad of unwatched fervent government-mandated French-pushers who literally come to your store, tell you your menu isn't French enough, kick out paying customers, fine you, insult you, and have absolutely no accountability.
So why are they pursuing it anyway? Really ? Where ? Seriously you are going to show some evidence for claims like this. Fines are like a speeding ticket, if you don't do anything wrong you won't get any. Store owners know they have to have signs in French. They don't and get a fine. It's their fault really. I'm not sure it's been said so far in the thread but remember that Quebec has one and only one official language : French. New-Brunswick has French and English. All the other have English only. "But Canada is bilingual !" I hear you type. Federal institutions are bilingual, not the country. If it was I could speak French everywhere in Canada, which is not the case.
Cool bullshit, bro. Ontario has no official language. Furthermore, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_language_in_Canada#Ontario
The whole concept of an official language at the provinicial level is distasteful, regardless.
|
As an immigrant, I'm not too afraid of the PQ. The Quebecois has sensibilities that people who are not part of a minority do not understand very well. It doesn't justify all the negative aspects of their attitude, but it's not really a huge problem either. There is absolutely 0% chance for Quebec to become independent at this point.
Anyway, PQ will probably won't govern worse than Liberals, I think the main problem is the fact that most anglos/immigrants feel like they have to vote liberal even though they don't want to just because they would never vote for a separatist party...then the CAQ came to split the vote further.
I'm not very content with the cutting of funding to education at all. The dean at McGill send us a email denouncing the fact that they are being forced to manage the decline of the system with no prior warning.
One thing I'm sure of, however, is that the PQ will manage the debt better than the libs can.
|
On December 14 2012 09:40 MajorityofOne wrote:
When separatism is your raison-d'etre it's almost impossible to look for common ground because emphasizing difference is how they've been electorally successful.
ok so iv been reading a little bit about how quebec wants to seperate from canada and become their own country , but i dont really understand because hasent canada build infrastructure and goverment buildings there ? like if they were to become their own country out side of canada what would they do to pay for all that ... would they tax the fuck out of the francophone s that voted for this ?
this bill 101 i dont really understand either , isnt it the shops owners right to have whatever kind of sign they want ? like if your in an english part of canada and you have a french sign thats allowed but if that bill passes thats not aloud ? i thought we were a forgiving country and that you can be from any culture and not get hated on because of that ..
i live up in whitehorse and there are alot of francophones up here and if they speak in french to me ill speak in as much french as i know to them without disrespect but it kinda seems like the people that are VERY strongly into the PQ party just want to kick english people out of quebec ( or at least thats what it seems like reading a few things )
iv been wondering this for quite a while , ( if this comes off a little ignorant im sorry about talking about this subject )
|
Quebec would turn into a third world country if it separated
all the people with brains would leave the French there
User was warned for this post
|
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/01/17/montreal-lisee-oqlf-bill-14-housefather-bilingual-status.html
a $20,000 grant to finance production costs and a provincial "awareness" tour of a musical project aimed at strengthening ties between Montreal's French and English-speaking communities.
a bill to amend the French Language Charter, which could strip communities of their bilingual status when their population of native English-language speakers drops below 50 per cent.
the Laurentians town of Sainte-Agathe, where less than 10 per cent of the population of 10,000 is English-speaking, the municipality was forced this month to stop publishing its quarterly newsletter in both French and English.
Quebec's language watchdog agency, l'Office Québécois de la Langue Française, issued that order after an OQLF inspector made a surprise visit to Sainte-Agathe early last autumn.
Sainte-Agathe's Deputy Mayor Jean-Léo Legault said the town was also told to replace several English computer keyboards found in its offices and take down a few public signs that were in English.
And of course, this:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/01/17/montreal-muhc-lachine-staff-transfer-exodus.html
Close to 50 staff members at the Lachine Hospital have requested transfers, in response to plans that would remove the hospital from the McGill University Health Centre network.
In December, health minister Réjean Hébert said he was considering transferring the hospital's control from the McGill University Health Centre to the local health and social services network in Lachine.
When the MUHC first took over the Lachine Hospital in 2008, the hospital was in a "deplorable situation," according to Rinfret.
After investing significant time and energy into improving the hospital, Rinfret said he would prefer to keep Lachine the way it is.
These are just two of the many headlines I've been seeing over the past couple months.
I feel like the PQ and our ministers are slowly trying to erase any english presence from it's province, while attempting to produce francophone propaganda to try to convince us "square-heads" that we are quebecers just like you.
First of all, real "purelaines" consider themselves a seperate nation and even if I wanted to think of myself as quebecer they would never accept it, and second of all, I'm insulted at the attempt. I consider myself primarily Canadian and secondly Montrealer. I'm an anglophone living in a community of people who get along just fine.
Quebec, this is why you are loosing doctors, engineers, professors and lawyers, not to mention businesses and other practices. You are systematically pushing us away instead of trying to give us a place.
|
On December 14 2012 12:27 Rebornlife wrote:
Quebec would turn into a third world country if it separated
all the people with brains would leave the French there
I love the subtext. There's a dichotomy between "The French" and "people with brains".
How sweet.
On January 18 2013 23:15 Abraxas514 wrote:
Quebec, this is why you are loosing doctors, engineers, professors and lawyers, not to mention businesses and other practices. You are systematically pushing us away instead of trying to give us a place.
Alternatively education is cheap + people can get paid better elsewhere. Notably in the US. For a couple G's I can get bachelor in engineering which is ludicrously easy to do, and then I can go make a lot more money if I'll just drive south for a couple of hours.
|
On December 14 2012 09:40 MajorityofOne wrote:
I'm an Anglo-Montrealer, born and raised in the West Island, and while I'll never in my life vote for the PQ the way other Anglos talk about them you'd think we were living under some kind of fascist regime. In reality we're among the best treated linguistic minorities in the world.
Having lived in Quebec for a number of years (I wasn't born in Quebec, and moved outside of Quebec within the last year), I really can't agree that Anglophones are "among the best treated linguistic minorities in the world". I experienced nothing but hostility, even when trying to make an effort to speak French. The PQ is horrible, in both senses of the acronym.
|
We are divided enough as it is. It is sad when people divide further over something as trivial as language.
|
I can't imagine this thread turning into anything decent because what you have is Canadians who have some good reasons to be angry with (some characteristics of) Quebec, and QC francophones who read threads like this and are completely disgusted by all the generalizations against them and their people. So many folks here write like all QC francophones are trash or whatever. And then we're told "oh no us Canadians are always perfectly fine, you're the bad ones". People like myself have now completely lost any drive, any hopes that we could fix the situation. How could we? There are people in this thread pretending to be righteous when in reality they're just bitching and have no actual good intentions. And this is true for both sides. You barge in here with so called hopes of a better tomorrow and you feed the fire with insults and gross generalizations or anecdotes. Hypocrites.
Some 'out of Quebec Canadians' look from a distance and see this cesspool of fucking hostility and are bitter toward Quebec and think lowly, oftentimes of the entire population of Quebec (or so it seems)
Some montrealers who speak English have to deal with the (hopefully occasional) racist francophone dick and grow bitter
Some francophones from QC are faced with negative comments about the province from anglophones and it's just disheartening to be thought of so lowly.
All that creates tensions. Do you really think we'll grow to be great buddies if you keep up your shit? Start thinking logically and think about where the problems come from rather than what they are. You can't honestly hope to fix the unfortunate behavior of some Quebecers just by talking about how terrible a province you think QC is. Do you really need a fucking panel of discussion where you'll talk us down? This thread doesn't even try to bring up actual solutions. And the solutions that are brought up are clearly just the ramblings of pissed off men.
One of the arguments for the idea that Quebec is a bunch of bad people apparently is that we elected the PQ. Let's not forget (or ignore) that the PQ got elected through what mostly is a strategic vote against the PLQ which had been in power for too long and had loosened up the checks in our public finances. It was less about people voting for their ideals than people voting against what they hate. Also the PQ is farther on the left for social policies - some people just look at the left/right debate and ignore the language thing which they view as inconsequential (mostly because "I'm a francophone and I don't give a fuck"). Then of course, there are the people who voted for the PQ because they're angry and tired of being looked down upon by so many (and let's not even talk about whether or not it's justified for anglophones to think of us so lowly).
And *LOL* at "treason to the crown". The crown... rofl.
|
I live in Montreal, and originally am from out east.
I've only had one hostile language encounter in the year and a half I've been here, so that's not too bad. Honestly, I've been pretty okay in this city as far as language stuff goes.
That being said, in Montreal there's a general rudeness to everyone, not just francophones. Montreal is a rude city. Drivers, pedestrians, everyone's just....not friendly.
I will be leaving as soon as school is done, but not because of language issues. Well, okay, I won't actually be able to work here, so that is another issue, but I can't expect to get a job since I don't speak much french at all and it is a french society, after all.
The Parti Quebecois are pretty out-there when it comes to some language stuff, but I think most Quebecors (and city-folk, in particular) really don't give much of a shit when it comes down to it. People are pretty much only concerned with their own day-to-day lives (hence the rudeness).
I don't know what other parts of Quebec are like, though. This is only an anglophone's experience in Montreal.
|
I had to clear some of this out:
Since the 1970s Quebec has been a very different place since "bill 101". You can't make a sign in English any more, be it the name of your store, your menu, or an advertisement. Forty years later, 90% of Montreal speaks French natively.
This is most obviously not true. In 2006, only 13.2% of Montreal are anglohpones and 66.5% are francphones. My guess is that you forgot to account in the allophones and only bothered to look up the anglophone '%'. That leaves us with with 20.3% for allophones, which makes a huge difference, because most of them (or at least a good number of them) learn english as their second language.
Here's a map of Montreal showing the demographic by area :
+ Show Spoiler +
edit:
Once again, I thought you wrote something odd.
(In my opinion, this constitutes treason to the Crown)
When you wrote that, what crown did you have in mind exactly? Let me remind you that following the Canada Act 1982 (1982 c. 11) passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom, Canada's constitution was patriated and no further require us asking anything to the U.K. You can be a loyalist and really appreciate the values of the crown, it's history, it's prestige, but Quebec not acknowledging their part in Canada has nothing to do with treason to the Crown. Perhaps you could say treason to Canada but my next argument covers that as well.
If you recall correctly, Quebec never signed the constitution. Yes Ms. Marois' Party refusing to acknowledge Quebec being part of Canada can come across as shocking to some people, but in theory, Quebec truly isn't "part" of Canada.
After doing a bit of research I also found out that one year before the the signing of the Canada Act 1982, the Government of Quebec has tried and failed to pass the Quebec Veto Reference, which would allow the province of Quebec a veto over Amendments to the Constitution of Canada. One year later the U.K. passed the Canada Act 1982 and therefore, Canada's constitution was created. It doesn't justify anything, but this clearly shows why Quebec didn't sign it in the first place and following current politics, won't sign it anytime soon.
Now I am no separatist but a man of numbers and facts, so I just wanted to get this straight
|
To anyone wanting a good, well written view of the Quebec issue over separatism, please read this: http://www.amazon.ca/Question-Separatism-The-Struggle-Sovereignty/dp/1926824067/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1358526649&sr=8-1
"Question of Separatism, The: Quebec and the Struggle over Sovereignty"
"The incomparable Jane Jacobs passed away on April 25, 2006. Undeniably a genius on urban issues, Jane Jacobs also grappled with the question of nations and political sovereignty. Out of print since the mid 80s, The Question of Separatism, Quebec and the Struggle Over Sovereignty now includes a new preface and an exclusive and previously unpublished 2005 interview conducted in Jane Jacobs’ Toronto home just a year before she died. Using her renowned ability to observe the real world, Jane Jacobs discusses the timeless issues that affect—or afflict—debate on separatism in the world. These include emotion, national size and the paradoxes of size, duality and federation. She also delves into the specifics of Quebec-Canada relations and casts her experienced and penetrating gaze on two great cities, Montreal and Toronto."
Jane Jacobs is american and argue that the separation of Quebec would be good for both Canada and Quebec. Of course, she's not the word of God or anything, but I definitely urge people to take a look at what she has to say.
|
I can't imagine this thread turning into anything decent because what you have is Canadians who have some good reasons to be angry with (some characteristics of) Quebec, and QC francophones who read threads like this and are completely disgusted by all the generalizations against them and their people. So many folks here write like all QC francophones are trash or whatever. And then we're told "oh no us Canadians are always perfectly fine, you're the bad ones". People like myself have now completely lost any drive, any hopes that we could fix the situation. How could we? There are people in this thread pretending to be righteous when in reality they're just bitching and have no actual good intentions. And this is true for both sides. You barge in here with so called hopes of a better tomorrow and you feed the fire with insults and gross generalizations or anecdotes. Hypocrites.
This sadly resumes 75% of this thread, and I must say some of the posts were borderline xenophobic.
As for the OP, I don't have much to contribute as I don't really follow politics. As a french immigrant in Montreal, I'm so far not a fan of the PQ but that's mainly due to the cut done to universities (I'm still a student) which for me makes no sense considering what will happen is cuts in the quality of teaching and/or the number of students universities can accept. This looks like a short-term fix that will have consequences later.
Anyway, wouldn't be too worried if you're against the PQ, it's still a minority government which many Quebecois don't agree with anyway.
|
On January 19 2013 01:24 crbox wrote:I had to clear some of this out: Show nested quote +Since the 1970s Quebec has been a very different place since "bill 101". You can't make a sign in English any more, be it the name of your store, your menu, or an advertisement. Forty years later, 90% of Montreal speaks French natively. This is most obviously not true. In 2006, only 13.2% of Montreal are anglohpones and 66.5% are francphones. My guess is that you forgot to account in the allophones and only bothered to look up the anglophone '%'. That leaves us with with 20.3% for allophones, which makes a huge difference, because most of them (or at least a good number of them) learn english as their second language. Here's a map of Montreal showing the demographic by area : + Show Spoiler +edit: Once again, I thought you wrote something odd. When you wrote that, what crown did you have in mind exactly? Let me remind you that following the Canada Act 1982 (1982 c. 11) passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom, Canada's constitution was patriated and no further require us asking anything to the U.K. You can be a loyalist and really appreciate the values of the crown, it's history, it's prestige, but Quebec not acknowledging their part in Canada has nothing to do with treason to the Crown. Perhaps you could say treason to Canada but my next argument covers that as well. If you recall correctly, Quebec never signed the constitution. Yes Ms. Marois' Party refusing to acknowledge Quebec being part of Canada can come across as shocking to some people, but in theory, Quebec truly isn't "part" of Canada. After doing a bit of research I also found out that one year before the the signing of the Canada Act 1982, the Government of Quebec has tried and failed to pass the Quebec Veto Reference, which would allow the province of Quebec a veto over Amendments to the Constitution of Canada. One year later the U.K. passed the Canada Act 1982 and therefore, Canada's constitution was created. It doesn't justify anything, but this clearly shows why Quebec didn't sign it in the first place and following current politics, won't sign it anytime soon. Now I am no separatist but a man of numbers and facts, so I just wanted to get this straight
If you say "speaks this language natively" it can mean that for example an anglophone learnt french by going to a french daycare when he was 3-4 years old. This means every "montreal bilingual" speaks french natively.
What I have a really hard time with is the OQLF. We are a first world country with Language Police. It's illegal for me to put up a sign IN my restaurant that is only in english such as "bathrooms->" even if it is the SAME size as an identical french sign.
And while cutting funding to universities, hospitals and critical services, the PQ EXPANDS funding to their language police.
It's so disgusting.
|
|
|
I can't believe there is a thread on this on TL I am so happy.
Before I say my piece I'll give you my background. I am English. I was born in Edmonton, Alberta. When I was six I moved to Montreal, and I lived there until I was 32. I moved to Toronto last summer, summer of 2012. It was a choice and a move that took me three years to do since first thinking about it. Here are the reasons why I left Montreal.
1) I will get this out of the way, since it is no one's fault. The weather in Montreal. In winter it can be -30 Celsius with the wind, regularly. The winters of 2009 and 2010 were particularly brutal. 2011 was a "mild" winter, but that only meant a hotter summer. Summer in montreal is not dry. It is virtually always near 100% humidity due to Montreal's proximity to a shit ton of water. There are about 6 weeks of nice weather per year, unless you have a colder summer, so spring seems to last longer. So yeah, in Toronto winter is much much better, and the summer is about the same, so overall win. Vancouver is also nice, but it's a different winter, much more grey sky and rain. But their summers are even nicer.
2) The economy. When I moved to Montreal in 1986 it was in the twilight of its glory, but it still had some glory. It was still an economic powerhouse. It had cheap universities, good healthcare and social insurance. Business was attracted to Quebec. But it had stopped investing in its future by 1986. Nothing was being built for the future and everything was more and more on loan from the past. From 1986 to 2012, when I lived in Montreal, there is virtually no new infrastructure that has been built. Every bit of infrastructure in Montreal was the same one in 2012 that I first encountered in 1986, only in 2012 it was even more decrepit and worn down. Twice I opened the paper to read about a piece of a bridge or tunnel that collapsed on someone's head, once with fatalities, and once miraculously not (it was at like 5 am on a Sunday and it so happened that there were no cars right underneath when it collapsed but it is the Ville Marie tunnel it is a very busy tunnel normally.) Quebec is a fiscal basketcase. It is increasingly in debt with a population that is increasingly Green/Left/Environmentalist that wants less growth, less development, to not "harm the Earth" so to speak. So I have witnessed in my short life Montreal willing destroying everything that once made it the great powerhouse of Canada. No new hydro dams can be built, except for what are called micro-dams, which are meant for powering small local areas and cannot sustain economic and industrial growth. I am not for new hydro dams, I am for advanced nuclear, but Quebec is vehemently anti nuclear. That is a big reason I came to Ontario which is the nuclear capital of Canada. Quebec is certainly anti-coal and oil power as well. That leaves natural gas, which Quebec has and has been using for a long time, and can maintain for awhile as current costs stay low with increased fracking. Quebec is also vehemently anti fracking, which I am as well, being for nuclear as a much saner and safer option. Also solar and wind, which Quebec is overwhelmingly for. What this means is that Quebec's energy costs will soar as the move from cheap and reliable hydro to expensive and unreliable solar and wind. Solar is particularly funny to hear support for from a population that has a winter that lasts 7 months. Also a cultural shift away from wanting to be a technologically advanced society on par with America, to rejecting entirely competition with America and wanting an economy based on restaurants, bars and nightclubs, art galleries, tourist stuff, and other elements of a service economy. This is solely my opinion, and I would love to be proven wrong, but I do not believe this current economic model for Quebec is sustainable, and that is why they are increasingly in debt and overtaxed, and growth has ceased, except for growth in service industries. Ontario on the other hand has the right model I believe. They have much more industry and manufacturing. Alot of it is businesses that moved from Quebec after the 1995 referendum. And that leads me into...
3) The bullshit language politics bullshit. Yeah estie de crisse it's fucking annoying. There is increasing tensions between anglos and francophones especially since 2008 since the economy started doing worse and worse. Separatism is again on the rise. My mother is a teacher in a french elementary school and she is the english teacher. She has seen over the years time and time again an effort to minimize the amount of English that their kids learn, even though it is the world's so-called 2nd language and almost every country wants their kids to learn it (see South Korea for instance.) I speak French fluently, I have had many French gfs over my life, and lots of French friends. It has never been an issue to me, but I have witnessed it's resurgence over the past 5 years and fuck that man. I got the fuck out of Montreal, for a compounding of everything I have said here. Quebec in general I find is more and more a closed insular society, and that is very scary. I used to say I would never move to Ontario, but I could not be happier right now with my decision. It took awhile to make new friends but it was worth it.
TLDR: From Montreal. Never thought I would leave. Moved to Toronto because of weather, economic decline and language politics. Couldn't be happier. Fuck the Parti Quebecois they ruined Quebec.
|
My university (mcgill) is getting 100s of courses eliminated because of these cuts. I am just a Toronto born student currently residing in montreal for my studies so I don't really feel like I have too much of a right to judge Quebec's internal politics, and I definitely detect a large amount of sensationalism in the OP. However, the politics of pointless nationalism (or provincalism I guess in this case), divisive politics and scapegoats which steal focus from REAL issues and direct them towards senseless chest thumping and manufactured attacks to collective "pride" are present in every government on earth and are equally distasteful in all circumstances. Governments should focus on governing, not furthering ideological agendas that have little to no impact on the welfare of their citizens, and when the former impedes their ability to perform the latter... I guess I find it very sad, even more so of course when it impedes my ability to get a quality education.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 19 2013 04:43 Perdac Curall wrote:
I can't believe there is a thread on this on TL I am so happy.
Before I say my piece I'll give you my background. I am English. I was born in Edmonton, Alberta. When I was six I moved to Montreal, and I lived there until I was 32. I moved to Toronto last summer, summer of 2012. It was a choice and a move that took me three years to do since first thinking about it. Here are the reasons why I left Montreal.
1) I will get this out of the way, since it is no one's fault. The weather in Montreal. In winter it can be -30 Celsius with the wind, regularly. The winters of 2009 and 2010 were particularly brutal. 2011 was a "mild" winter, but that only meant a hotter summer. Summer in montreal is not dry. It is virtually always near 100% humidity due to Montreal's proximity to a shit ton of water. There are about 6 weeks of nice weather per year, unless you have a colder summer, so spring seems to last longer. So yeah, in Toronto winter is much much better, and the summer is about the same, so overall win. Vancouver is also nice, but it's a different winter, much more grey sky and rain. But their summers are even nicer.
2) The economy. When I moved to Montreal in 1986 it was in the twilight of its glory, but it still had some glory. It was still an economic powerhouse. It had cheap universities, good healthcare and social insurance. Business was attracted to Quebec. But it had stopped investing in its future by 1986. Nothing was being built for the future and everything was more and more on loan from the past. From 1986 to 2012, when I lived in Montreal, there is virtually no new infrastructure that has been built. Every bit of infrastructure in Montreal was the same one in 2012 that I first encountered in 1986, only in 2012 it was even more decrepit and worn down. Twice I opened the paper to read about a piece of a bridge or tunnel that collapsed on someone's head, once with fatalities, and once miraculously not (it was at like 5 am on a Sunday and it so happened that there were no cars right underneath when it collapsed but it is the Ville Marie tunnel it is a very busy tunnel normally.) Quebec is a fiscal basketcase. It is increasingly in debt with a population that is increasingly Green/Left/Environmentalist that wants less growth, less development, to not "harm the Earth" so to speak. So I have witnessed in my short life Montreal willing destroying everything that once made it the great powerhouse of Canada. No new hydro dams can be built, except for what are called micro-dams, which are meant for powering small local areas and cannot sustain economic and industrial growth. I am not for new hydro dams, I am for advanced nuclear, but Quebec is vehemently anti nuclear. That is a big reason I came to Ontario which is the nuclear capital of Canada. Quebec is certainly anti-coal and oil power as well. That leaves natural gas, which Quebec has and has been using for a long time, and can maintain for awhile as current costs stay low with increased fracking. Quebec is also vehemently anti fracking, which I am as well, being for nuclear as a much saner and safer option. Also solar and wind, which Quebec is overwhelmingly for. What this means is that Quebec's energy costs will soar as the move from cheap and reliable hydro to expensive and unreliable solar and wind. Solar is particularly funny to hear support for from a population that has a winter that lasts 7 months. Also a cultural shift away from wanting to be a technologically advanced society on par with America, to rejecting entirely competition with America and wanting an economy based on restaurants, bars and nightclubs, art galleries, tourist stuff, and other elements of a service economy. This is solely my opinion, and I would love to be proven wrong, but I do not believe this current economic model for Quebec is sustainable, and that is why they are increasingly in debt and overtaxed, and growth has ceased, except for growth in service industries. Ontario on the other hand has the right model I believe. They have much more industry and manufacturing. Alot of it is businesses that moved from Quebec after the 1995 referendum. And that leads me into...
3) The bullshit language politics bullshit. Yeah estie de crisse it's fucking annoying. There is increasing tensions between anglos and francophones especially since 2008 since the economy started doing worse and worse. Separatism is again on the rise. My mother is a teacher in a french elementary school and she is the english teacher. She has seen over the years time and time again an effort to minimize the amount of English that their kids learn, even though it is the world's so-called 2nd language and almost every country wants their kids to learn it (see South Korea for instance.) I speak French fluently, I have had many French gfs over my life, and lots of French friends. It has never been an issue to me, but I have witnessed it's resurgence over the past 5 years and fuck that man. I got the fuck out of Montreal, for a compounding of everything I have said here. Quebec in general I find is more and more a closed insular society, and that is very scary. I used to say I would never move to Ontario, but I could not be happier right now with my decision. It took awhile to make new friends but it was worth it.
TLDR: From Montreal. Never thought I would leave. Moved to Toronto because of weather, economic decline and language politics. Couldn't be happier. Fuck the Parti Quebecois they ruined Quebec.
"Also a cultural shift away from wanting to be a technologically advanced society on par with America, to rejecting entirely competition with America and wanting an economy based on restaurants, bars and nightclubs, art galleries, tourist stuff, and other elements of a service economy. "
WTF are you talking about? You're not making any sense.
People, go read and educate yourselves before posting on this issue. You're only promoting hate and distrust by giving out small anecdotal evidence like this one.
Of course the PQ is far from perfect. I personally didn't vote for them last election. But to say that they are all racists and close-minded is very ignorant. You obviously don't follow closely Quebec's politics, or don't know about its history, or only read biased sources (*cough* Globe and Mail *cough*).
|
On January 19 2013 05:14 Xain wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 19 2013 04:43 Perdac Curall wrote:
I can't believe there is a thread on this on TL I am so happy.
Before I say my piece I'll give you my background. I am English. I was born in Edmonton, Alberta. When I was six I moved to Montreal, and I lived there until I was 32. I moved to Toronto last summer, summer of 2012. It was a choice and a move that took me three years to do since first thinking about it. Here are the reasons why I left Montreal.
1) I will get this out of the way, since it is no one's fault. The weather in Montreal. In winter it can be -30 Celsius with the wind, regularly. The winters of 2009 and 2010 were particularly brutal. 2011 was a "mild" winter, but that only meant a hotter summer. Summer in montreal is not dry. It is virtually always near 100% humidity due to Montreal's proximity to a shit ton of water. There are about 6 weeks of nice weather per year, unless you have a colder summer, so spring seems to last longer. So yeah, in Toronto winter is much much better, and the summer is about the same, so overall win. Vancouver is also nice, but it's a different winter, much more grey sky and rain. But their summers are even nicer.
2) The economy. When I moved to Montreal in 1986 it was in the twilight of its glory, but it still had some glory. It was still an economic powerhouse. It had cheap universities, good healthcare and social insurance. Business was attracted to Quebec. But it had stopped investing in its future by 1986. Nothing was being built for the future and everything was more and more on loan from the past. From 1986 to 2012, when I lived in Montreal, there is virtually no new infrastructure that has been built. Every bit of infrastructure in Montreal was the same one in 2012 that I first encountered in 1986, only in 2012 it was even more decrepit and worn down. Twice I opened the paper to read about a piece of a bridge or tunnel that collapsed on someone's head, once with fatalities, and once miraculously not (it was at like 5 am on a Sunday and it so happened that there were no cars right underneath when it collapsed but it is the Ville Marie tunnel it is a very busy tunnel normally.) Quebec is a fiscal basketcase. It is increasingly in debt with a population that is increasingly Green/Left/Environmentalist that wants less growth, less development, to not "harm the Earth" so to speak. So I have witnessed in my short life Montreal willing destroying everything that once made it the great powerhouse of Canada. No new hydro dams can be built, except for what are called micro-dams, which are meant for powering small local areas and cannot sustain economic and industrial growth. I am not for new hydro dams, I am for advanced nuclear, but Quebec is vehemently anti nuclear. That is a big reason I came to Ontario which is the nuclear capital of Canada. Quebec is certainly anti-coal and oil power as well. That leaves natural gas, which Quebec has and has been using for a long time, and can maintain for awhile as current costs stay low with increased fracking. Quebec is also vehemently anti fracking, which I am as well, being for nuclear as a much saner and safer option. Also solar and wind, which Quebec is overwhelmingly for. What this means is that Quebec's energy costs will soar as the move from cheap and reliable hydro to expensive and unreliable solar and wind. Solar is particularly funny to hear support for from a population that has a winter that lasts 7 months. Also a cultural shift away from wanting to be a technologically advanced society on par with America, to rejecting entirely competition with America and wanting an economy based on restaurants, bars and nightclubs, art galleries, tourist stuff, and other elements of a service economy. This is solely my opinion, and I would love to be proven wrong, but I do not believe this current economic model for Quebec is sustainable, and that is why they are increasingly in debt and overtaxed, and growth has ceased, except for growth in service industries. Ontario on the other hand has the right model I believe. They have much more industry and manufacturing. Alot of it is businesses that moved from Quebec after the 1995 referendum. And that leads me into...
3) The bullshit language politics bullshit. Yeah estie de crisse it's fucking annoying. There is increasing tensions between anglos and francophones especially since 2008 since the economy started doing worse and worse. Separatism is again on the rise. My mother is a teacher in a french elementary school and she is the english teacher. She has seen over the years time and time again an effort to minimize the amount of English that their kids learn, even though it is the world's so-called 2nd language and almost every country wants their kids to learn it (see South Korea for instance.) I speak French fluently, I have had many French gfs over my life, and lots of French friends. It has never been an issue to me, but I have witnessed it's resurgence over the past 5 years and fuck that man. I got the fuck out of Montreal, for a compounding of everything I have said here. Quebec in general I find is more and more a closed insular society, and that is very scary. I used to say I would never move to Ontario, but I could not be happier right now with my decision. It took awhile to make new friends but it was worth it.
TLDR: From Montreal. Never thought I would leave. Moved to Toronto because of weather, economic decline and language politics. Couldn't be happier. Fuck the Parti Quebecois they ruined Quebec. "Also a cultural shift away from wanting to be a technologically advanced society on par with America, to rejecting entirely competition with America and wanting an economy based on restaurants, bars and nightclubs, art galleries, tourist stuff, and other elements of a service economy. " WTF are you talking about? You're not making any sense. People, go read and educate yourselves before posting on this issue. You're only promoting hate and distrust by giving out small anecdotal evidence like this one. Of course the PQ is far from perfect. I personally didn't vote for them last election. But to say that they are all racists, close-minded, and hurt Quebec financially is very ignorant. You obviously don't follow closely Quebec's politics, or don't know about its history, or only read biased sources (*cough* Globe and Mail *cough*).
The economic decline of Quebec has been ongoing since the 1980s and is very reliably sourced, and not from the G&M, from actual economic statistics. The Quebec government is now subsidizing video games. Now I know we all love video games here, but you can't base an economy on useless fluff like this. This is what I meant by cultural shift in Montreal. Montreal used to be the industrial powerhouse of Canada. Productive enterprises, productive labor. Many of them left down the 401 after 1995. That is a well established fact.
|
On January 19 2013 05:07 sickoota wrote:
My university (mcgill) is getting 100s of courses eliminated because of these cuts. I am just a Toronto born student currently residing in montreal for my studies so I don't really feel like I have too much of a right to judge Quebec's internal politics, and I definitely detect a large amount of sensationalism in the OP. However, the politics of pointless nationalism (or provincalism I guess in this case), divisive politics and scapegoats which steal focus from REAL issues and direct them towards senseless chest thumping and manufactured attacks to collective "pride" are present in every government on earth and are equally distasteful in all circumstances. Governments should focus on governing, not furthering ideological agendas that have little to no impact on the welfare of their citizens, and when the former impedes their ability to perform the latter... I guess I find it very sad, even more so of course when it impedes my ability to get a quality education.
You do completely have a right to judge Quebec's internal politics, and I think you do make a point. However you have to understand that there is a belief that this ideological agenda, even though it's not directly related to the welfare of the citizen, is viewed as a step toward better conditions, albeit indirectly. Seceding has a bunch of incidences, economic ones for sure, but also social ones. Whether they're right or wrong is obviously an entire debate.
|
On January 19 2013 05:20 Perdac Curall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 05:14 Xain wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 19 2013 04:43 Perdac Curall wrote:
I can't believe there is a thread on this on TL I am so happy.
Before I say my piece I'll give you my background. I am English. I was born in Edmonton, Alberta. When I was six I moved to Montreal, and I lived there until I was 32. I moved to Toronto last summer, summer of 2012. It was a choice and a move that took me three years to do since first thinking about it. Here are the reasons why I left Montreal.
1) I will get this out of the way, since it is no one's fault. The weather in Montreal. In winter it can be -30 Celsius with the wind, regularly. The winters of 2009 and 2010 were particularly brutal. 2011 was a "mild" winter, but that only meant a hotter summer. Summer in montreal is not dry. It is virtually always near 100% humidity due to Montreal's proximity to a shit ton of water. There are about 6 weeks of nice weather per year, unless you have a colder summer, so spring seems to last longer. So yeah, in Toronto winter is much much better, and the summer is about the same, so overall win. Vancouver is also nice, but it's a different winter, much more grey sky and rain. But their summers are even nicer.
2) The economy. When I moved to Montreal in 1986 it was in the twilight of its glory, but it still had some glory. It was still an economic powerhouse. It had cheap universities, good healthcare and social insurance. Business was attracted to Quebec. But it had stopped investing in its future by 1986. Nothing was being built for the future and everything was more and more on loan from the past. From 1986 to 2012, when I lived in Montreal, there is virtually no new infrastructure that has been built. Every bit of infrastructure in Montreal was the same one in 2012 that I first encountered in 1986, only in 2012 it was even more decrepit and worn down. Twice I opened the paper to read about a piece of a bridge or tunnel that collapsed on someone's head, once with fatalities, and once miraculously not (it was at like 5 am on a Sunday and it so happened that there were no cars right underneath when it collapsed but it is the Ville Marie tunnel it is a very busy tunnel normally.) Quebec is a fiscal basketcase. It is increasingly in debt with a population that is increasingly Green/Left/Environmentalist that wants less growth, less development, to not "harm the Earth" so to speak. So I have witnessed in my short life Montreal willing destroying everything that once made it the great powerhouse of Canada. No new hydro dams can be built, except for what are called micro-dams, which are meant for powering small local areas and cannot sustain economic and industrial growth. I am not for new hydro dams, I am for advanced nuclear, but Quebec is vehemently anti nuclear. That is a big reason I came to Ontario which is the nuclear capital of Canada. Quebec is certainly anti-coal and oil power as well. That leaves natural gas, which Quebec has and has been using for a long time, and can maintain for awhile as current costs stay low with increased fracking. Quebec is also vehemently anti fracking, which I am as well, being for nuclear as a much saner and safer option. Also solar and wind, which Quebec is overwhelmingly for. What this means is that Quebec's energy costs will soar as the move from cheap and reliable hydro to expensive and unreliable solar and wind. Solar is particularly funny to hear support for from a population that has a winter that lasts 7 months. Also a cultural shift away from wanting to be a technologically advanced society on par with America, to rejecting entirely competition with America and wanting an economy based on restaurants, bars and nightclubs, art galleries, tourist stuff, and other elements of a service economy. This is solely my opinion, and I would love to be proven wrong, but I do not believe this current economic model for Quebec is sustainable, and that is why they are increasingly in debt and overtaxed, and growth has ceased, except for growth in service industries. Ontario on the other hand has the right model I believe. They have much more industry and manufacturing. Alot of it is businesses that moved from Quebec after the 1995 referendum. And that leads me into...
3) The bullshit language politics bullshit. Yeah estie de crisse it's fucking annoying. There is increasing tensions between anglos and francophones especially since 2008 since the economy started doing worse and worse. Separatism is again on the rise. My mother is a teacher in a french elementary school and she is the english teacher. She has seen over the years time and time again an effort to minimize the amount of English that their kids learn, even though it is the world's so-called 2nd language and almost every country wants their kids to learn it (see South Korea for instance.) I speak French fluently, I have had many French gfs over my life, and lots of French friends. It has never been an issue to me, but I have witnessed it's resurgence over the past 5 years and fuck that man. I got the fuck out of Montreal, for a compounding of everything I have said here. Quebec in general I find is more and more a closed insular society, and that is very scary. I used to say I would never move to Ontario, but I could not be happier right now with my decision. It took awhile to make new friends but it was worth it.
TLDR: From Montreal. Never thought I would leave. Moved to Toronto because of weather, economic decline and language politics. Couldn't be happier. Fuck the Parti Quebecois they ruined Quebec. "Also a cultural shift away from wanting to be a technologically advanced society on par with America, to rejecting entirely competition with America and wanting an economy based on restaurants, bars and nightclubs, art galleries, tourist stuff, and other elements of a service economy. " WTF are you talking about? You're not making any sense. People, go read and educate yourselves before posting on this issue. You're only promoting hate and distrust by giving out small anecdotal evidence like this one. Of course the PQ is far from perfect. I personally didn't vote for them last election. But to say that they are all racists, close-minded, and hurt Quebec financially is very ignorant. You obviously don't follow closely Quebec's politics, or don't know about its history, or only read biased sources (*cough* Globe and Mail *cough*). The economic decline of Quebec has been ongoing since the 1980s and is very reliably sourced, and not from the G&M, from actual economic statistics. The Quebec government is now subsidizing video games. Now I know we all love video games here, but you can't base an economy on useless fluff like this. This is what I meant by cultural shift in Montreal. Montreal used to be the industrial powerhouse of Canada. Productive enterprises, productive labor. Many of them left down the 401 after 1995. That is a well established fact.
But what you don't understand is that the decline of Montreal versus Toronto can be traced back to the war economy of the second world war, well before the PQ existed.
|
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
+ Show Spoiler +
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA
|
On January 19 2013 05:14 Xain wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 19 2013 04:43 Perdac Curall wrote:
I can't believe there is a thread on this on TL I am so happy.
Before I say my piece I'll give you my background. I am English. I was born in Edmonton, Alberta. When I was six I moved to Montreal, and I lived there until I was 32. I moved to Toronto last summer, summer of 2012. It was a choice and a move that took me three years to do since first thinking about it. Here are the reasons why I left Montreal.
1) I will get this out of the way, since it is no one's fault. The weather in Montreal. In winter it can be -30 Celsius with the wind, regularly. The winters of 2009 and 2010 were particularly brutal. 2011 was a "mild" winter, but that only meant a hotter summer. Summer in montreal is not dry. It is virtually always near 100% humidity due to Montreal's proximity to a shit ton of water. There are about 6 weeks of nice weather per year, unless you have a colder summer, so spring seems to last longer. So yeah, in Toronto winter is much much better, and the summer is about the same, so overall win. Vancouver is also nice, but it's a different winter, much more grey sky and rain. But their summers are even nicer.
2) The economy. When I moved to Montreal in 1986 it was in the twilight of its glory, but it still had some glory. It was still an economic powerhouse. It had cheap universities, good healthcare and social insurance. Business was attracted to Quebec. But it had stopped investing in its future by 1986. Nothing was being built for the future and everything was more and more on loan from the past. From 1986 to 2012, when I lived in Montreal, there is virtually no new infrastructure that has been built. Every bit of infrastructure in Montreal was the same one in 2012 that I first encountered in 1986, only in 2012 it was even more decrepit and worn down. Twice I opened the paper to read about a piece of a bridge or tunnel that collapsed on someone's head, once with fatalities, and once miraculously not (it was at like 5 am on a Sunday and it so happened that there were no cars right underneath when it collapsed but it is the Ville Marie tunnel it is a very busy tunnel normally.) Quebec is a fiscal basketcase. It is increasingly in debt with a population that is increasingly Green/Left/Environmentalist that wants less growth, less development, to not "harm the Earth" so to speak. So I have witnessed in my short life Montreal willing destroying everything that once made it the great powerhouse of Canada. No new hydro dams can be built, except for what are called micro-dams, which are meant for powering small local areas and cannot sustain economic and industrial growth. I am not for new hydro dams, I am for advanced nuclear, but Quebec is vehemently anti nuclear. That is a big reason I came to Ontario which is the nuclear capital of Canada. Quebec is certainly anti-coal and oil power as well. That leaves natural gas, which Quebec has and has been using for a long time, and can maintain for awhile as current costs stay low with increased fracking. Quebec is also vehemently anti fracking, which I am as well, being for nuclear as a much saner and safer option. Also solar and wind, which Quebec is overwhelmingly for. What this means is that Quebec's energy costs will soar as the move from cheap and reliable hydro to expensive and unreliable solar and wind. Solar is particularly funny to hear support for from a population that has a winter that lasts 7 months. Also a cultural shift away from wanting to be a technologically advanced society on par with America, to rejecting entirely competition with America and wanting an economy based on restaurants, bars and nightclubs, art galleries, tourist stuff, and other elements of a service economy. This is solely my opinion, and I would love to be proven wrong, but I do not believe this current economic model for Quebec is sustainable, and that is why they are increasingly in debt and overtaxed, and growth has ceased, except for growth in service industries. Ontario on the other hand has the right model I believe. They have much more industry and manufacturing. Alot of it is businesses that moved from Quebec after the 1995 referendum. And that leads me into...
3) The bullshit language politics bullshit. Yeah estie de crisse it's fucking annoying. There is increasing tensions between anglos and francophones especially since 2008 since the economy started doing worse and worse. Separatism is again on the rise. My mother is a teacher in a french elementary school and she is the english teacher. She has seen over the years time and time again an effort to minimize the amount of English that their kids learn, even though it is the world's so-called 2nd language and almost every country wants their kids to learn it (see South Korea for instance.) I speak French fluently, I have had many French gfs over my life, and lots of French friends. It has never been an issue to me, but I have witnessed it's resurgence over the past 5 years and fuck that man. I got the fuck out of Montreal, for a compounding of everything I have said here. Quebec in general I find is more and more a closed insular society, and that is very scary. I used to say I would never move to Ontario, but I could not be happier right now with my decision. It took awhile to make new friends but it was worth it.
TLDR: From Montreal. Never thought I would leave. Moved to Toronto because of weather, economic decline and language politics. Couldn't be happier. Fuck the Parti Quebecois they ruined Quebec. "Also a cultural shift away from wanting to be a technologically advanced society on par with America, to rejecting entirely competition with America and wanting an economy based on restaurants, bars and nightclubs, art galleries, tourist stuff, and other elements of a service economy. " WTF are you talking about? You're not making any sense. People, go read and educate yourselves before posting on this issue. You're only promoting hate and distrust by giving out small anecdotal evidence like this one. Of course the PQ is far from perfect. I personally didn't vote for them last election. But to say that they are all racists and close-minded is very ignorant. You obviously don't follow closely Quebec's politics, or don't know about its history, or only read biased sources (*cough* Globe and Mail *cough*).
He was making a comparison to Montreal's past. Between the 60s and 70s it was a place as forward thinking as New York City. The Expo (1967). The Olympics (1976). Ville Marie Tunnel (1972). Champlain Bridge (1962). Mercier Bridge (1963). Pont de la Concorde and Pont des Îles (bridges) (1965). Lafontaine Tunnel (1967). Charles de Gaulle Bridge (1965). Pie IX Bridge (1967). Papineau-Leblanc Bridge (1969). Jacques Bizard Bridge (1966).
Our on-island airport:
In November 1960, the airport was renamed Montreal–Dorval International Airport/Aéroport international Dorval de Montréal. On December 15 of that year, the Minister of Transport inaugurated a new $30 million terminal.
I can go on and on about how great a city Montreal was before I was born (in 1987) but every time I hear about how amazing a place it was to live in I feel like that was somewhere else, a place lost in time. It's only a matter of time before a particularily strong resurgence of nationalism pops up and ALL the anglos just pack up and leave.
|
On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA
What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that.
|
Unfortunately, the problem is that the PQ doesn't care what the rest of Canada thinks, nor do the PQ's supporters. They think that Quebec can continue on its own without any help or support by Canada and the federal government.
Then, they pull things like policing languages... Which just alienates themselves commercially from the rest of the global economy, which just hurts themselves and their own populous.
I won't get into the bastardized slang english riddled version of french that is being spoken....
|
On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA
Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes?
As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times.
Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done.
|
On January 19 2013 07:57 Abraxas514 wrote:What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that.
There are so many things that are wrong with that, I don't know why you people insist on defending your ridiculous BS.
In Canada we don't refer to our federal government as "the crown" Abraxas514, nobody ever does that. We refer to the Monarchy of Canada as "the crown", not the entire government. As I'm sure you know, the Queen of Canada (more commonly known as the Queen of the UK) is the head of State of our country, but that's only by law.
To use that particular terminology "Treason to the Crown" is ridiculous for two reasons
First: To betray the monarchy of Canada is a ridiculous concept. Fuck the Queen and everything she represents in our country. An outdated monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Canada needs to get rid of that fluff. Legal reforms are required. Technical but impractical laws don't apply in real life and should therefore be purged from common language. Progress, please. Let's not sit back on our rotting constitution.
Second: The definition of the word "treason". Maybe you're using a convenient one, that is poorly worded. Being technically unpatriotic is not treason though, and any honest person knows that. You may not be honest.
You think being ridiculed is bad, but you deserved it. Some "arguments" are so bad that they deserve nothing more than to be laughed at. I was nice enough to give you a little rundown but don't butcher the English language by using the word treason like that again. People do the same thing with the word terrorist so much that it loses its value.
On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done.
No not treason to the crown  . Not signing a constitution but adhering to it is not treason. I gave a quick crash course above. This is a province which democratically agreed to live under a constitution in which it did not agree in the name of democracy. It's in opposition to it, but agrees with it regardless. If you ask me, it takes a fair amount of patriotism in a nation to accept this, even if you might say a true patriot would bend over and take it in the ass for your majesty Elizabeth. We've still got our minds and that's okay.
I'm sorry you had bad experiences in QC, we have our fair share of bad apples, but most of us are fine folks who look down on the behavior of the trash that roams some of our streets. I want to say that when I was in Banff for less than I week, I had bad experiences with anglophones twice. They didn't like me speaking French with my friends, they didn't like my accent... Yet most of the people I encountered were great, and it's a shame that I came across bad people. I'm sorry that you did as well.
|
On January 19 2013 08:50 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 07:57 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that. There are so many things that are wrong with that, I don't know why you people insist on defending your ridiculous BS. In Canada we don't refer to our federal government as "the crown" Abraxas514, nobody ever does that. We refer to the Monarchy of Canada as "the crown", not the entire government. As I'm sure you know, the Queen of Canada (more commonly known as the Queen of the UK) is the head of State of our country, but that's only by law. To use that particular terminology "Treason to thr Crown" is ridiculous for two reasons First: To betray the monarchy of Canada is a ridiculous concept. Fuck the Queen and everything she represents in our country. An outdated monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Canada needs to get rid of that fluff. Legal reforms are required. Technical but impractical laws don't apply in real life and should therefore be purged from common language. Progress, please. Let's not sit back on our rotting constitution. Second: The definition of the word "treason". Maybe you're using a convenient one, that is poorly worded. Being technically unpatriotic is not treason though, and any honest person knows that. You may not be honest. You think being ridiculed is bad, but you deserved it. Some "arguments" are so bad that they deserve nothing more than to be laughed at. I was nice enough to give you a little rundown but don't butcher the English language by using the word treason like that again. People do the same thing with the word terrorist so much that it loses its value. Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. No not treason to the crown . Not signing a constitution but adhering to it is not treason. I gave a quick crash course above. This is a province which democratically agreed to live under a constitution in which it did not agree in the name of democracy. It's in opposition to it, but agrees with it regardless. If you ask me, it takes a fair amount of patriotism in a nation to accept this, even if you might say a true patriot would bend over and take it in the ass for your majesty Elizabeth. We've still got our minds and that's okay. I'm sorry you had bad experiences in QC, we have our fair share of bad apples, but most of us are fine folks who look down on the behavior of the trash that roams some of our streets. I want to say that when I was in Banff for less than I week, I had bad experiences with anglophones twice. They didn't like me speaking French with my friends, they didn't like my accent... Yet most of the people I encountered were great, and it's a shame that I came across bad people. I'm sorry that you did as well.
Unfortunately for you, "fuck the queen" isnt a valid argument. The crown is just another word for federal things in canada, look up crown corporation for example.
Just because quebec didnt sign the canada charter doesnt mean they arent bound by it. Canada always let quebec do what it wanted because montreal was the capital and powerhouse for so long. Today the province is a shadow of its former self.
|
On January 19 2013 09:26 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 08:50 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 07:57 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that. There are so many things that are wrong with that, I don't know why you people insist on defending your ridiculous BS. In Canada we don't refer to our federal government as "the crown" Abraxas514, nobody ever does that. We refer to the Monarchy of Canada as "the crown", not the entire government. As I'm sure you know, the Queen of Canada (more commonly known as the Queen of the UK) is the head of State of our country, but that's only by law. To use that particular terminology "Treason to thr Crown" is ridiculous for two reasons First: To betray the monarchy of Canada is a ridiculous concept. Fuck the Queen and everything she represents in our country. An outdated monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Canada needs to get rid of that fluff. Legal reforms are required. Technical but impractical laws don't apply in real life and should therefore be purged from common language. Progress, please. Let's not sit back on our rotting constitution. Second: The definition of the word "treason". Maybe you're using a convenient one, that is poorly worded. Being technically unpatriotic is not treason though, and any honest person knows that. You may not be honest. You think being ridiculed is bad, but you deserved it. Some "arguments" are so bad that they deserve nothing more than to be laughed at. I was nice enough to give you a little rundown but don't butcher the English language by using the word treason like that again. People do the same thing with the word terrorist so much that it loses its value. On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. No not treason to the crown . Not signing a constitution but adhering to it is not treason. I gave a quick crash course above. This is a province which democratically agreed to live under a constitution in which it did not agree in the name of democracy. It's in opposition to it, but agrees with it regardless. If you ask me, it takes a fair amount of patriotism in a nation to accept this, even if you might say a true patriot would bend over and take it in the ass for your majesty Elizabeth. We've still got our minds and that's okay. I'm sorry you had bad experiences in QC, we have our fair share of bad apples, but most of us are fine folks who look down on the behavior of the trash that roams some of our streets. I want to say that when I was in Banff for less than I week, I had bad experiences with anglophones twice. They didn't like me speaking French with my friends, they didn't like my accent... Yet most of the people I encountered were great, and it's a shame that I came across bad people. I'm sorry that you did as well. Unfortunately for you, "fuck the queen" isnt a valid argument. The crown is just another word for federal things in canada, look up crown corporation for example. Just because quebec didnt sign the canada charter doesnt mean they arent bound by it. Canada always let quebec do what it wanted because montreal was the capital and powerhouse for so long. Today the province is a shadow of its former self.
The "fuck the queen" part was not the argument, I guess that's why you chose not to address the substance of my post.
And then you go on to insult Quebec and fine if that's what you're into. Good constructive work on your part.
Edit: but "fuck the queen" makes an interesting point in that merely saying it does not make a traitor out of me. Disagreeing with "her" constitutionally, even less so.
|
On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done.
The Crown is not the way we refer to the government, I've never heard anyone do it anyway. This is not 1904 anymore, Canada's a big boy now and the UK no longer have any real authority on us.
Seriously, I work at a post office, and people would often specifically ask me to not give those stamps with the Queen's picture. (Although Kate & William ones are embraced with glee for some reason.)
I'm sorry about your bad experiences, but I'm afraid I've never had these even when I was learning french. It's not really an excuse to get angry yourself and start insulting Quebecers. Fighting discrimination with more discrimination isn't how it's done. You're becoming what you hate while contributing to the problem.
On a side note, do you think a guy who only speaks french would run into some discrimination in, say, Alberta?
EDIT: I think anti-Quebec arguments are done pretty poorly in this thread overall. I'm far from a separatist but I find myself being forced to defend Quebec rofl.
|
A sad thing that a fine peaceful nation like Canada lets such things stand in the way of their legendary kindness and politeness.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
Parti Quebecois won't last long.
They're the "rebound". Liberal party was so corrupt they had to be ousted. Parti Quebecois was the next best looking piece of puke available.
Once quebec gets over the hangover that is the Parti Quebecois, they'll be thrown out too. Nobody cares about this language law crap anymore.
|
On January 19 2013 10:01 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. The Crown is not the way we refer to the government, I've never heard anyone do it anyway. This is not 1904 anymore, Canada's a big boy now and the UK no longer have any real authority on us. Seriously, I work at a post office, and people would often specifically ask me to not give those stamps with the Queen's picture. (Although Kate & William ones are embraced with glee for some reason.) I'm sorry about your bad experiences, but I'm afraid I've never had these even when I was learning french. It's not really an excuse to get angry yourself and start insulting Quebecers. Fighting discrimination with more discrimination isn't how it's done. You're becoming what you hate while contributing to the problem. On a side note, do you think a guy who only speaks french would run into some discrimination in, say, Alberta? EDIT: I think anti-Quebec arguments are done pretty poorly in this thread overall. I'm far from a separatist but I find myself being forced to defend Quebec rofl.
Depends. Nobody talks about "the crown" in common conversation, but it is obliquely referenced in terms like "crown prosecutor" or "crown corporation."
|
On January 19 2013 09:31 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 09:26 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 08:50 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 07:57 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that. There are so many things that are wrong with that, I don't know why you people insist on defending your ridiculous BS. In Canada we don't refer to our federal government as "the crown" Abraxas514, nobody ever does that. We refer to the Monarchy of Canada as "the crown", not the entire government. As I'm sure you know, the Queen of Canada (more commonly known as the Queen of the UK) is the head of State of our country, but that's only by law. To use that particular terminology "Treason to thr Crown" is ridiculous for two reasons First: To betray the monarchy of Canada is a ridiculous concept. Fuck the Queen and everything she represents in our country. An outdated monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Canada needs to get rid of that fluff. Legal reforms are required. Technical but impractical laws don't apply in real life and should therefore be purged from common language. Progress, please. Let's not sit back on our rotting constitution. Second: The definition of the word "treason". Maybe you're using a convenient one, that is poorly worded. Being technically unpatriotic is not treason though, and any honest person knows that. You may not be honest. You think being ridiculed is bad, but you deserved it. Some "arguments" are so bad that they deserve nothing more than to be laughed at. I was nice enough to give you a little rundown but don't butcher the English language by using the word treason like that again. People do the same thing with the word terrorist so much that it loses its value. On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. No not treason to the crown . Not signing a constitution but adhering to it is not treason. I gave a quick crash course above. This is a province which democratically agreed to live under a constitution in which it did not agree in the name of democracy. It's in opposition to it, but agrees with it regardless. If you ask me, it takes a fair amount of patriotism in a nation to accept this, even if you might say a true patriot would bend over and take it in the ass for your majesty Elizabeth. We've still got our minds and that's okay. I'm sorry you had bad experiences in QC, we have our fair share of bad apples, but most of us are fine folks who look down on the behavior of the trash that roams some of our streets. I want to say that when I was in Banff for less than I week, I had bad experiences with anglophones twice. They didn't like me speaking French with my friends, they didn't like my accent... Yet most of the people I encountered were great, and it's a shame that I came across bad people. I'm sorry that you did as well. Unfortunately for you, "fuck the queen" isnt a valid argument. The crown is just another word for federal things in canada, look up crown corporation for example. Just because quebec didnt sign the canada charter doesnt mean they arent bound by it. Canada always let quebec do what it wanted because montreal was the capital and powerhouse for so long. Today the province is a shadow of its former self. The "fuck the queen" part was not the argument, I guess that's why you chose not to address the substance of my post. And then you go on to insult Quebec and fine if that's what you're into. Good constructive work on your part. Edit: but "fuck the queen" makes an interesting point in that merely saying it does not make a traitor out of me. Disagreeing with "her" constitutionally, even less so.
Actually i answered in short because i was on a friends ipad (in french lol). I agree the queen is vestigial but she does still represent us, and therefore the word i used.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Canada
I am not insulting french canadians. I am upset with the PQ and anti-anglo sentiment. With people who get upset if you say bonjour/hi. Who really believe english is still a threat. I dated a girl who honestly believed that (from st-jean) and have dealt with many clients who got upset when i said "hi" (i worked as a host for Kelsey's).
So far i havent seen one post addressing the topic: why is the PQ actually good for this province?
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
Abraxas514
PQ isn't. Nobody is defending PQ.
Don't worry about it. They will pass and life will move on.
|
On December 14 2012 04:31 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 04:10 SwEEt[TearS] wrote:
you do know that the reason Montreal's and Laval's mayors quit is because they were being unofficially accused of being part of a huge collusion/corruption scheme right? doesn't have much to do with the PQ, it's been going on for years (accusations have been coming up since the Charboneau Commission)
Libs won't vote against the amendments to bill 101 because they don't even have a leader since Jean Charest quit. It's very much so not in their interest to start a new election campaign.
also, not that it seems to matter to you but there's plenty of universities in regions that haven't voted for the Liberal party
cool generalizations My only point about the mayors was that us city-people really distrust our leaders at this moment in time. Here is the map from wikipedia of the universities in Quebec. Compare that to the electoral map if you wish. As you can see, no universities in the north. Here is a quick photoshop I made of universities/cities of quebec, versus electorial map: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/107275289/Quebec.jpg
Some thing like 90% of the population of Canada is within 100km of the Border with the US. Most of the people in the north of Quebec are native too. Not exactly a thriving market for a large school like that up there.
|
On January 19 2013 11:07 cz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 10:01 RavenLoud wrote:On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. The Crown is not the way we refer to the government, I've never heard anyone do it anyway. This is not 1904 anymore, Canada's a big boy now and the UK no longer have any real authority on us. Seriously, I work at a post office, and people would often specifically ask me to not give those stamps with the Queen's picture. (Although Kate & William ones are embraced with glee for some reason.) I'm sorry about your bad experiences, but I'm afraid I've never had these even when I was learning french. It's not really an excuse to get angry yourself and start insulting Quebecers. Fighting discrimination with more discrimination isn't how it's done. You're becoming what you hate while contributing to the problem. On a side note, do you think a guy who only speaks french would run into some discrimination in, say, Alberta? EDIT: I think anti-Quebec arguments are done pretty poorly in this thread overall. I'm far from a separatist but I find myself being forced to defend Quebec rofl. Depends. Nobody talks about "the crown" in common conversation, but it is obliquely referenced in terms like "crown prosecutor" or "crown corporation."
In the constitution the Prime Minister is only acting by the allowance of the Queen. The Governer General is the Queens Representative in Canadian politics. The position is pretty much 100% powerless and just goes with the flow in practice but in theory they could refuse to call elections and not sign bills into law.
|
On January 19 2013 11:08 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 09:31 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 09:26 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 08:50 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 07:57 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that. There are so many things that are wrong with that, I don't know why you people insist on defending your ridiculous BS. In Canada we don't refer to our federal government as "the crown" Abraxas514, nobody ever does that. We refer to the Monarchy of Canada as "the crown", not the entire government. As I'm sure you know, the Queen of Canada (more commonly known as the Queen of the UK) is the head of State of our country, but that's only by law. To use that particular terminology "Treason to thr Crown" is ridiculous for two reasons First: To betray the monarchy of Canada is a ridiculous concept. Fuck the Queen and everything she represents in our country. An outdated monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Canada needs to get rid of that fluff. Legal reforms are required. Technical but impractical laws don't apply in real life and should therefore be purged from common language. Progress, please. Let's not sit back on our rotting constitution. Second: The definition of the word "treason". Maybe you're using a convenient one, that is poorly worded. Being technically unpatriotic is not treason though, and any honest person knows that. You may not be honest. You think being ridiculed is bad, but you deserved it. Some "arguments" are so bad that they deserve nothing more than to be laughed at. I was nice enough to give you a little rundown but don't butcher the English language by using the word treason like that again. People do the same thing with the word terrorist so much that it loses its value. On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. No not treason to the crown . Not signing a constitution but adhering to it is not treason. I gave a quick crash course above. This is a province which democratically agreed to live under a constitution in which it did not agree in the name of democracy. It's in opposition to it, but agrees with it regardless. If you ask me, it takes a fair amount of patriotism in a nation to accept this, even if you might say a true patriot would bend over and take it in the ass for your majesty Elizabeth. We've still got our minds and that's okay. I'm sorry you had bad experiences in QC, we have our fair share of bad apples, but most of us are fine folks who look down on the behavior of the trash that roams some of our streets. I want to say that when I was in Banff for less than I week, I had bad experiences with anglophones twice. They didn't like me speaking French with my friends, they didn't like my accent... Yet most of the people I encountered were great, and it's a shame that I came across bad people. I'm sorry that you did as well. Unfortunately for you, "fuck the queen" isnt a valid argument. The crown is just another word for federal things in canada, look up crown corporation for example. Just because quebec didnt sign the canada charter doesnt mean they arent bound by it. Canada always let quebec do what it wanted because montreal was the capital and powerhouse for so long. Today the province is a shadow of its former self. The "fuck the queen" part was not the argument, I guess that's why you chose not to address the substance of my post. And then you go on to insult Quebec and fine if that's what you're into. Good constructive work on your part. Edit: but "fuck the queen" makes an interesting point in that merely saying it does not make a traitor out of me. Disagreeing with "her" constitutionally, even less so. Actually i answered in short because i was on a friends ipad (in french lol). I agree the queen is vestigial but she does still represent us, and therefore the word i used. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_CanadaI am not insulting french canadians. I am upset with the PQ and anti-anglo sentiment. With people who get upset if you say bonjour/hi. Who really believe english is still a threat. I dated a girl who honestly believed that (from st-jean) and have dealt with many clients who got upset when i said "hi" (i worked as a host for Kelsey's). So far i havent seen one post addressing the topic: why is the PQ actually good for this province?
Being that I'm a masters student of political science, I know the place of the Queen, and vestigial is the right word. In French we say "caduc". Legally she "represents us" but in real life she doesn't. From a legal perspective, we can say the powers are "derived" from the Queen but really it's just a technicality. Any treason is committed against the true sovereign and in this case I would argue that it's the population, or the State which represents the population. Not the Queen, who's an expensive mascot.
Now we can talk about the PQ all day and undoubtedly we'll disagree, but let me make my case very quickly. Like I said before, QC elected the PQ as a minority government during the brutal and fast decline of the PLQ's popularity. This decline was brought forward by the discovery that the provincial government (and many of its municipalities, for which it is responsible) were heavily corrupt. This led many voters, many of which aren't separatists, to vote for what was perceived as a "lesser evil", that is the PQ. Additionally, Quebecers are generally farther on the left than the rest of Canada, which like I said before, makes them a good vote as far as the left/right debate goes. There are also a bunch of separatists who aren't extremists at all, but view the entire situation as desperate. I have absolutely no hate for anglophones, but I don't think we'll ever get along - and this thread reinforces that belief of mine.
But let's talk about the language thing. Yes, obviously the PQ pushes legislation which aims to promote the French language, and it's unfortunately done at the detriment of anglophones who would like to live here. This kind of legislation doesn't seem to make sense anymore but please understand that a while ago, it did. I won't bother with the history lesson but it was only a few decades ago that my grandparents were essentially inferior to anglophones even in Montreal. When the equality movements started kicking in, there was a counterbalance effect that led Quebec legislators to turn Montreal into a French city, as previously, business conducted in Montreal was in English despite the overwhelming francophone majority.
This "shift", was kind of abrupt because francophones were getting out of many generations of folks who were a sort of subspecies, downside of being a conquered people. This also kind of explains why our French is butchered so badly.
Now things have been good for decades, but bad blood between the nations doesn't go away so easily, especially not when Quebec gets heavily criticized for a bunch of reasons - some legitimate, others not so much. And I'm not blaming the rest of Canada here - francophones have not been exceedingly cooperative either. That said, we have differences which border on irreconcilable. Our left-leaning politics tick off the rest of Canada, and the less-left-leaning politics of Canada look bad to us for instance. I could go for hours on how our differences, cultural and otherwise, make our compatibility as people very limited.
All this to say, the outdated BS from the PQ has its roots somewhere, and we can't just ignore that and attack its pool of voters, those people have had a broad array of reasons to vote for the PQ, and they're not necessarily hateful hicks.
As for seeing English as a "threat"' well that's a bit more complicated. I guess to put it simply, some people think that our cultural baggage is to be preserved, and that we should fight to prevent it from being "diluted". There's something sad about the idea that in 3-4 generations, maybe 10, maybe more, our specific "type" French may cease to exist. The fact is the language has no actual utility in North America. The thing about a language is you can't shove it in a museum really. When it dies it's gone. My contention is that NA French will inevitably die off, as will every language we know in their actual form. In 1000+ years, if there still is such a thing as English, it won't be anything like what we have today. So why even bother trying to preserve it? On the other hand, there's something downright insulting and patronizing in the idea that we should just let it go. I'm sure that in many cases there's no malice behind it, but the fact of the matter is, QC French is slowly, naturally, losing ground. And if you view this as unimportant, then that's your opinion - but we don't all feel that way. Some people feel very strongly about it, regardless of the fact that it's perhaps irrational.
Edit: The point I try to make in the last paragraph is essentially that if left to the economic concept of supply and demand, French would die off in North America because it's uneconomical already and it's getting worse. That's why Quebec, in some ways, tries to put itself in a vacuum, because without it, French will disappear quicker. It comes with many many downsides, and maybe it's dumb, but people view the preservation of the culture as highly important. And also, we have the douchebags - and I want to say, I'm sorry you've had some poor experiences here.
|
On January 19 2013 11:08 Abraxas514 wrote:
Who really believe english is still a threat. I dated a girl who honestly believed that (from st-jean) and have dealt with many clients who got upset when i said "hi" (i worked as a host for Kelsey's).
Well it is a threat honestly, but the consequences of a separation would be more practical and far worse I believe.
It's a hard thing to understand, really, unless you're concerned. I never understood this sentiment myself until I went to Quebec, as a frenchman.
For example, there are many regions in France which used to have their own language (Britain for example), which is barely spoken nowadays. It is pretty much a symptom of their culture's death and their assimilation. Although Britain remains a special place in many ways, it is now pretty much just "France", and you can't really understand the problem unless you think about those who witnessed the last moments of their culture in person.
So, I used to look at Britain, and think that there was no problem at all, that people just needed to "move on" and that it was progress anyway... because I simply value my own language and culture more. But then I went to Quebec and saw how young people spoke a mix of half-french and half-english with a small pain in my heart. You can't feel it, because your language is dominant internationally (although your academicians are probably feeling pretty bad as the globalization of english has pretty much transformed it into a 'business language" and dimissed the most refined parts), but for those who foresee the disappearance of their heritage in a couple of years, it's not a pleasant sight.
|
On January 19 2013 11:44 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 11:08 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 09:31 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 09:26 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 08:50 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 07:57 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that. There are so many things that are wrong with that, I don't know why you people insist on defending your ridiculous BS. In Canada we don't refer to our federal government as "the crown" Abraxas514, nobody ever does that. We refer to the Monarchy of Canada as "the crown", not the entire government. As I'm sure you know, the Queen of Canada (more commonly known as the Queen of the UK) is the head of State of our country, but that's only by law. To use that particular terminology "Treason to thr Crown" is ridiculous for two reasons First: To betray the monarchy of Canada is a ridiculous concept. Fuck the Queen and everything she represents in our country. An outdated monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Canada needs to get rid of that fluff. Legal reforms are required. Technical but impractical laws don't apply in real life and should therefore be purged from common language. Progress, please. Let's not sit back on our rotting constitution. Second: The definition of the word "treason". Maybe you're using a convenient one, that is poorly worded. Being technically unpatriotic is not treason though, and any honest person knows that. You may not be honest. You think being ridiculed is bad, but you deserved it. Some "arguments" are so bad that they deserve nothing more than to be laughed at. I was nice enough to give you a little rundown but don't butcher the English language by using the word treason like that again. People do the same thing with the word terrorist so much that it loses its value. On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. No not treason to the crown . Not signing a constitution but adhering to it is not treason. I gave a quick crash course above. This is a province which democratically agreed to live under a constitution in which it did not agree in the name of democracy. It's in opposition to it, but agrees with it regardless. If you ask me, it takes a fair amount of patriotism in a nation to accept this, even if you might say a true patriot would bend over and take it in the ass for your majesty Elizabeth. We've still got our minds and that's okay. I'm sorry you had bad experiences in QC, we have our fair share of bad apples, but most of us are fine folks who look down on the behavior of the trash that roams some of our streets. I want to say that when I was in Banff for less than I week, I had bad experiences with anglophones twice. They didn't like me speaking French with my friends, they didn't like my accent... Yet most of the people I encountered were great, and it's a shame that I came across bad people. I'm sorry that you did as well. Unfortunately for you, "fuck the queen" isnt a valid argument. The crown is just another word for federal things in canada, look up crown corporation for example. Just because quebec didnt sign the canada charter doesnt mean they arent bound by it. Canada always let quebec do what it wanted because montreal was the capital and powerhouse for so long. Today the province is a shadow of its former self. The "fuck the queen" part was not the argument, I guess that's why you chose not to address the substance of my post. And then you go on to insult Quebec and fine if that's what you're into. Good constructive work on your part. Edit: but "fuck the queen" makes an interesting point in that merely saying it does not make a traitor out of me. Disagreeing with "her" constitutionally, even less so. Actually i answered in short because i was on a friends ipad (in french lol). I agree the queen is vestigial but she does still represent us, and therefore the word i used. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_CanadaI am not insulting french canadians. I am upset with the PQ and anti-anglo sentiment. With people who get upset if you say bonjour/hi. Who really believe english is still a threat. I dated a girl who honestly believed that (from st-jean) and have dealt with many clients who got upset when i said "hi" (i worked as a host for Kelsey's). So far i havent seen one post addressing the topic: why is the PQ actually good for this province? Being that I'm a masters student of political science, I know the place of the Queen, and vestigial is the right word. In French we say "caduc". Legally she "represents us" but in real life she doesn't. From a legal perspective, we can say the powers are "derived" from the Queen but really it's just a technicality. Any treason is committed against the true sovereign and in this case I would argue that it's the population, or the State which represents the population. Not the Queen, who's an expensive mascot. Now we can talk about the PQ all day and undoubtedly we'll disagree, but let me make my case very quickly. Like I said before, QC elected the PQ as a minority government during the brutal and fast decline of the PLQ's popularity. This decline was brought forward by the discovery that the provincial government (and many of its municipalities, for which it is responsible) were heavily corrupt. This led many voters, many of which aren't separatists, to vote for what was perceived as a "lesser evil", that is the PQ. Additionally, Quebecers are generally farther on the left than the rest of Canada, which like I said before, makes them a good vote as far as the left/right debate goes. There are also a bunch of separatists who aren't extremists at all, but view the entire situation as desperate. I have absolutely no hate for anglophones, but I don't think we'll ever get along - and this thread reinforces that belief of mine. But let's talk about the language thing. Yes, obviously the PQ pushes legislation which aims to promote the French language, and it's unfortunately done at the detriment of anglophones who would like to live here. This kind of legislation doesn't seem to make sense anymore but please understand that a while ago, it did. I won't bother with the history lesson but it was only a few decades ago that my grandparents were essentially inferior to anglophones even in Montreal. When the equality movements started kicking in, there was a counterbalance effect that led Quebec legislators to turn Montreal into a French city, as previously, business conducted in Montreal was in English despite the overwhelming francophone majority. This "shift", was kind of abrupt because francophones were getting out of many generations of folks who were a sort of subspecies, downside of being a conquered people. This also kind of explains why our French is butchered so badly. Now things have been good for decades, but bad blood between the nations doesn't go away so easily, especially not when Quebec gets heavily criticized for a bunch of reasons - some legitimate, others not so much. And I'm not blaming the rest of Canada here - francophones have not been exceedingly cooperative either. That said, we have differences which border on irreconcilable. Our left-leaning politics tick off the rest of Canada, and the less-left-leaning politics of Canada look bad to us for instance. I could go for hours on how our differences, cultural and otherwise, make our compatibility as people very limited. All this to say, the outdated BS from the PQ has its roots somewhere, and we can't just ignore that and attack its pool of voters, those people have had a broad array of reasons to vote for the PQ, and they're not necessarily hateful hicks. As for seeing English as a "threat"' well that's a bit more complicated. I guess to put it simply, some people think that our cultural baggage is to be preserved, and that we should fight to prevent it from being "diluted". There's something sad about the idea that in 3-4 generations, maybe 10, maybe more, our specific "type" French may cease to exist. The fact is the language has no actual utility in North America. The thing about a language is you can't shove it in a museum really. When it dies it's gone. My contention is that NA French will inevitably die off, as will every language we know in their actual form. In 1000+ years, if there still is such a thing as English, it won't be anything like what we have today. So why even bother trying to preserve it? On the other hand, there's something downright insulting and patronizing in the idea that we should just let it go. I'm sure that in many cases there's no malice behind it, but the fact of the matter is, QC French is slowly, naturally, losing ground. And if you view this as unimportant, then that's your opinion - but we don't all feel that way. Some people feel very strongly about it, regardless of the fact that it's perhaps irrational. Edit: The point I try to make in the last paragraph is essentially that if left to the economic concept of supply and demand, French would die off in North America because it's uneconomical already and it's getting worse. That's why Quebec, in some ways, tries to put itself in a vacuum, because without it, French will disappear quicker. It comes with many many downsides, and maybe it's dumb, but people view the preservation of the culture as highly important. And also, we have the douchebags - and I want to say, I'm sorry you've had some poor experiences here.
Well put. I agree with your deconstruction of the political situation. Preservation of society is important but the method of "disconnection from your country" is as poorly thought out as a kid running away from home to preserve his independance. Quebec needs the transfer payments. They need non francophone business. The romans believed all countries should adopt their culture, but in this case the opposite is mostly true. Canada as a whole should take a lesson on our views on drugs, education and liberalism in general, and quebec should embrace the multicultural apporach canada takes and promote real bilingualism instead of squeezing english away.
|
On January 19 2013 12:14 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 11:44 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 11:08 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 09:31 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 09:26 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 08:50 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 07:57 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that. There are so many things that are wrong with that, I don't know why you people insist on defending your ridiculous BS. In Canada we don't refer to our federal government as "the crown" Abraxas514, nobody ever does that. We refer to the Monarchy of Canada as "the crown", not the entire government. As I'm sure you know, the Queen of Canada (more commonly known as the Queen of the UK) is the head of State of our country, but that's only by law. To use that particular terminology "Treason to thr Crown" is ridiculous for two reasons First: To betray the monarchy of Canada is a ridiculous concept. Fuck the Queen and everything she represents in our country. An outdated monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Canada needs to get rid of that fluff. Legal reforms are required. Technical but impractical laws don't apply in real life and should therefore be purged from common language. Progress, please. Let's not sit back on our rotting constitution. Second: The definition of the word "treason". Maybe you're using a convenient one, that is poorly worded. Being technically unpatriotic is not treason though, and any honest person knows that. You may not be honest. You think being ridiculed is bad, but you deserved it. Some "arguments" are so bad that they deserve nothing more than to be laughed at. I was nice enough to give you a little rundown but don't butcher the English language by using the word treason like that again. People do the same thing with the word terrorist so much that it loses its value. On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. No not treason to the crown . Not signing a constitution but adhering to it is not treason. I gave a quick crash course above. This is a province which democratically agreed to live under a constitution in which it did not agree in the name of democracy. It's in opposition to it, but agrees with it regardless. If you ask me, it takes a fair amount of patriotism in a nation to accept this, even if you might say a true patriot would bend over and take it in the ass for your majesty Elizabeth. We've still got our minds and that's okay. I'm sorry you had bad experiences in QC, we have our fair share of bad apples, but most of us are fine folks who look down on the behavior of the trash that roams some of our streets. I want to say that when I was in Banff for less than I week, I had bad experiences with anglophones twice. They didn't like me speaking French with my friends, they didn't like my accent... Yet most of the people I encountered were great, and it's a shame that I came across bad people. I'm sorry that you did as well. Unfortunately for you, "fuck the queen" isnt a valid argument. The crown is just another word for federal things in canada, look up crown corporation for example. Just because quebec didnt sign the canada charter doesnt mean they arent bound by it. Canada always let quebec do what it wanted because montreal was the capital and powerhouse for so long. Today the province is a shadow of its former self. The "fuck the queen" part was not the argument, I guess that's why you chose not to address the substance of my post. And then you go on to insult Quebec and fine if that's what you're into. Good constructive work on your part. Edit: but "fuck the queen" makes an interesting point in that merely saying it does not make a traitor out of me. Disagreeing with "her" constitutionally, even less so. Actually i answered in short because i was on a friends ipad (in french lol). I agree the queen is vestigial but she does still represent us, and therefore the word i used. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_CanadaI am not insulting french canadians. I am upset with the PQ and anti-anglo sentiment. With people who get upset if you say bonjour/hi. Who really believe english is still a threat. I dated a girl who honestly believed that (from st-jean) and have dealt with many clients who got upset when i said "hi" (i worked as a host for Kelsey's). So far i havent seen one post addressing the topic: why is the PQ actually good for this province? Being that I'm a masters student of political science, I know the place of the Queen, and vestigial is the right word. In French we say "caduc". Legally she "represents us" but in real life she doesn't. From a legal perspective, we can say the powers are "derived" from the Queen but really it's just a technicality. Any treason is committed against the true sovereign and in this case I would argue that it's the population, or the State which represents the population. Not the Queen, who's an expensive mascot. Now we can talk about the PQ all day and undoubtedly we'll disagree, but let me make my case very quickly. Like I said before, QC elected the PQ as a minority government during the brutal and fast decline of the PLQ's popularity. This decline was brought forward by the discovery that the provincial government (and many of its municipalities, for which it is responsible) were heavily corrupt. This led many voters, many of which aren't separatists, to vote for what was perceived as a "lesser evil", that is the PQ. Additionally, Quebecers are generally farther on the left than the rest of Canada, which like I said before, makes them a good vote as far as the left/right debate goes. There are also a bunch of separatists who aren't extremists at all, but view the entire situation as desperate. I have absolutely no hate for anglophones, but I don't think we'll ever get along - and this thread reinforces that belief of mine. But let's talk about the language thing. Yes, obviously the PQ pushes legislation which aims to promote the French language, and it's unfortunately done at the detriment of anglophones who would like to live here. This kind of legislation doesn't seem to make sense anymore but please understand that a while ago, it did. I won't bother with the history lesson but it was only a few decades ago that my grandparents were essentially inferior to anglophones even in Montreal. When the equality movements started kicking in, there was a counterbalance effect that led Quebec legislators to turn Montreal into a French city, as previously, business conducted in Montreal was in English despite the overwhelming francophone majority. This "shift", was kind of abrupt because francophones were getting out of many generations of folks who were a sort of subspecies, downside of being a conquered people. This also kind of explains why our French is butchered so badly. Now things have been good for decades, but bad blood between the nations doesn't go away so easily, especially not when Quebec gets heavily criticized for a bunch of reasons - some legitimate, others not so much. And I'm not blaming the rest of Canada here - francophones have not been exceedingly cooperative either. That said, we have differences which border on irreconcilable. Our left-leaning politics tick off the rest of Canada, and the less-left-leaning politics of Canada look bad to us for instance. I could go for hours on how our differences, cultural and otherwise, make our compatibility as people very limited. All this to say, the outdated BS from the PQ has its roots somewhere, and we can't just ignore that and attack its pool of voters, those people have had a broad array of reasons to vote for the PQ, and they're not necessarily hateful hicks. As for seeing English as a "threat"' well that's a bit more complicated. I guess to put it simply, some people think that our cultural baggage is to be preserved, and that we should fight to prevent it from being "diluted". There's something sad about the idea that in 3-4 generations, maybe 10, maybe more, our specific "type" French may cease to exist. The fact is the language has no actual utility in North America. The thing about a language is you can't shove it in a museum really. When it dies it's gone. My contention is that NA French will inevitably die off, as will every language we know in their actual form. In 1000+ years, if there still is such a thing as English, it won't be anything like what we have today. So why even bother trying to preserve it? On the other hand, there's something downright insulting and patronizing in the idea that we should just let it go. I'm sure that in many cases there's no malice behind it, but the fact of the matter is, QC French is slowly, naturally, losing ground. And if you view this as unimportant, then that's your opinion - but we don't all feel that way. Some people feel very strongly about it, regardless of the fact that it's perhaps irrational. Edit: The point I try to make in the last paragraph is essentially that if left to the economic concept of supply and demand, French would die off in North America because it's uneconomical already and it's getting worse. That's why Quebec, in some ways, tries to put itself in a vacuum, because without it, French will disappear quicker. It comes with many many downsides, and maybe it's dumb, but people view the preservation of the culture as highly important. And also, we have the douchebags - and I want to say, I'm sorry you've had some poor experiences here. Well put. I agree with your deconstruction of the political situation. Preservation of society is important but the method of "disconnection from your country" is as poorly thought out as a kid running away from home to preserve his independance. Quebec needs the transfer payments. They need non francophone business. The romans believed all countries should adopt their culture, but in this case the opposite is mostly true. Canada as a whole should take a lesson on our views on drugs, education and liberalism in general, and quebec should embrace the multicultural apporach canada takes and promote real bilingualism instead of squeezing english away.
I agree in principle but practically there's no easy way. Multiculturalism is an ideal which is hard to attain but it's a beautiful one. It has been more or less achieved in other societies so I would never say it's impossible, but in our specific case, well let's just say we have ways to go. Like I expressed earlier, I've essentially given up on the idea that Quebec and Canada can get along. I'd be more than willing to change that opinion if I were shown the faintest suggestion that we can manage our differences like mature folks and become bros, but frankly I'm not optimistic right now. We can be miserable together.
|
|
|
On January 19 2013 08:50 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 07:57 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that. There are so many things that are wrong with that, I don't know why you people insist on defending your ridiculous BS. In Canada we don't refer to our federal government as "the crown" Abraxas514, nobody ever does that. We refer to the Monarchy of Canada as "the crown", not the entire government. As I'm sure you know, the Queen of Canada (more commonly known as the Queen of the UK) is the head of State of our country, but that's only by law. To use that particular terminology "Treason to the Crown" is ridiculous for two reasons First: To betray the monarchy of Canada is a ridiculous concept. Fuck the Queen and everything she represents in our country. An outdated monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Canada needs to get rid of that fluff. Legal reforms are required. Technical but impractical laws don't apply in real life and should therefore be purged from common language. Progress, please. Let's not sit back on our rotting constitution. Second: The definition of the word "treason". Maybe you're using a convenient one, that is poorly worded. Being technically unpatriotic is not treason though, and any honest person knows that. You may not be honest. You think being ridiculed is bad, but you deserved it. Some "arguments" are so bad that they deserve nothing more than to be laughed at. I was nice enough to give you a little rundown but don't butcher the English language by using the word treason like that again. People do the same thing with the word terrorist so much that it loses its value. Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. No not treason to the crown . Not signing a constitution but adhering to it is not treason. I gave a quick crash course above. This is a province which democratically agreed to live under a constitution in which it did not agree in the name of democracy. It's in opposition to it, but agrees with it regardless. If you ask me, it takes a fair amount of patriotism in a nation to accept this, even if you might say a true patriot would bend over and take it in the ass for your majesty Elizabeth. We've still got our minds and that's okay. I'm sorry you had bad experiences in QC, we have our fair share of bad apples, but most of us are fine folks who look down on the behavior of the trash that roams some of our streets. I want to say that when I was in Banff for less than I week, I had bad experiences with anglophones twice. They didn't like me speaking French with my friends, they didn't like my accent... Yet most of the people I encountered were great, and it's a shame that I came across bad people. I'm sorry that you did as well.
Sweet. I'll try that argument next time I get a speeding ticket in Quebec - since quebecers aren't "really" a part of Canada (by your argument) so laws don't apply to people outside of Quebec and Canadian laws inside Quebec. Sweet! I never thought beating the police would be so easy!
|
On January 19 2013 13:33 Grimmyman123 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 08:50 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 07:57 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that. There are so many things that are wrong with that, I don't know why you people insist on defending your ridiculous BS. In Canada we don't refer to our federal government as "the crown" Abraxas514, nobody ever does that. We refer to the Monarchy of Canada as "the crown", not the entire government. As I'm sure you know, the Queen of Canada (more commonly known as the Queen of the UK) is the head of State of our country, but that's only by law. To use that particular terminology "Treason to the Crown" is ridiculous for two reasons First: To betray the monarchy of Canada is a ridiculous concept. Fuck the Queen and everything she represents in our country. An outdated monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Canada needs to get rid of that fluff. Legal reforms are required. Technical but impractical laws don't apply in real life and should therefore be purged from common language. Progress, please. Let's not sit back on our rotting constitution. Second: The definition of the word "treason". Maybe you're using a convenient one, that is poorly worded. Being technically unpatriotic is not treason though, and any honest person knows that. You may not be honest. You think being ridiculed is bad, but you deserved it. Some "arguments" are so bad that they deserve nothing more than to be laughed at. I was nice enough to give you a little rundown but don't butcher the English language by using the word treason like that again. People do the same thing with the word terrorist so much that it loses its value. On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. No not treason to the crown . Not signing a constitution but adhering to it is not treason. I gave a quick crash course above. This is a province which democratically agreed to live under a constitution in which it did not agree in the name of democracy. It's in opposition to it, but agrees with it regardless. If you ask me, it takes a fair amount of patriotism in a nation to accept this, even if you might say a true patriot would bend over and take it in the ass for your majesty Elizabeth. We've still got our minds and that's okay. I'm sorry you had bad experiences in QC, we have our fair share of bad apples, but most of us are fine folks who look down on the behavior of the trash that roams some of our streets. I want to say that when I was in Banff for less than I week, I had bad experiences with anglophones twice. They didn't like me speaking French with my friends, they didn't like my accent... Yet most of the people I encountered were great, and it's a shame that I came across bad people. I'm sorry that you did as well. Sweet. I'll try that argument next time I get a speeding ticket in Quebec - since they aren't "really" a part of Canada (by your argument) so their laws don't apply to people outside of Quebec. Sweet! I never thought beating the police would be so easy!
What is this I don't even
You don't understand at all . Also don't get speeding tickets come on.
If you need me to spell it out: Quebec is a part of Canada. I never said otherwise, and I never said that the laws don't apply.
|
Some people seem to make it like all Quebec are assholes. Well, that is plain wrong.
They have a bunch of lunatics ; so do every provinces and countries and it is absurd that they get so much attention. Most Québécois will treat you well, from my experience. And if you stick to big cities (AKA Montreal), you won't have any trouble. Racism is not generalized and I won't let some idiots ruin my perception of Quebec.
|
Djzapz: You do not think you will ever get along with anglophones even though you have no hate for them? Here's an idea, stop thinking on terms of anglo or franco. If people stopped using those stupid labels then there would not even be a debate. Even if two people are not fluent in eachother's language, basic communication is still very easy.
Also, as a law student you should try not to let your beliefs cloud your reasoning. The queen is the sovereign, not the people. It's fine to have the opinion that this should not be the case, but you cannot pretend that something is not real just because you do not like it.
|
On January 19 2013 14:09 XenOmega wrote:
Some people seem to make it like all Quebec are assholes. Well, that is plain wrong.
They have a bunch of lunatics ; so do every provinces and countries and it is absurd that they get so much attention. Most Québécois will treat you well, from my experience. And if you stick to big cities (AKA Montreal), you won't have any trouble. Racism is not generalized and I won't let some idiots ruin my perception of Quebec.
Xen if you read my OP you would see all the problems are in montreal because thats where most of the anglophones live.
I hope people talking about the pq being temporary are right, or else a see hundreds of engineers and many medical doctors moving 2 hours away for higher wages and less corruption, not to mention no language police.
|
On January 19 2013 13:33 Grimmyman123 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 08:50 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 07:57 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that. There are so many things that are wrong with that, I don't know why you people insist on defending your ridiculous BS. In Canada we don't refer to our federal government as "the crown" Abraxas514, nobody ever does that. We refer to the Monarchy of Canada as "the crown", not the entire government. As I'm sure you know, the Queen of Canada (more commonly known as the Queen of the UK) is the head of State of our country, but that's only by law. To use that particular terminology "Treason to the Crown" is ridiculous for two reasons First: To betray the monarchy of Canada is a ridiculous concept. Fuck the Queen and everything she represents in our country. An outdated monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Canada needs to get rid of that fluff. Legal reforms are required. Technical but impractical laws don't apply in real life and should therefore be purged from common language. Progress, please. Let's not sit back on our rotting constitution. Second: The definition of the word "treason". Maybe you're using a convenient one, that is poorly worded. Being technically unpatriotic is not treason though, and any honest person knows that. You may not be honest. You think being ridiculed is bad, but you deserved it. Some "arguments" are so bad that they deserve nothing more than to be laughed at. I was nice enough to give you a little rundown but don't butcher the English language by using the word treason like that again. People do the same thing with the word terrorist so much that it loses its value. On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. No not treason to the crown . Not signing a constitution but adhering to it is not treason. I gave a quick crash course above. This is a province which democratically agreed to live under a constitution in which it did not agree in the name of democracy. It's in opposition to it, but agrees with it regardless. If you ask me, it takes a fair amount of patriotism in a nation to accept this, even if you might say a true patriot would bend over and take it in the ass for your majesty Elizabeth. We've still got our minds and that's okay. I'm sorry you had bad experiences in QC, we have our fair share of bad apples, but most of us are fine folks who look down on the behavior of the trash that roams some of our streets. I want to say that when I was in Banff for less than I week, I had bad experiences with anglophones twice. They didn't like me speaking French with my friends, they didn't like my accent... Yet most of the people I encountered were great, and it's a shame that I came across bad people. I'm sorry that you did as well. Sweet. I'll try that argument next time I get a speeding ticket in Quebec - since quebecers aren't "really" a part of Canada (by your argument) so laws don't apply to people outside of Quebec and Canadian laws inside Quebec. Sweet! I never thought beating the police would be so easy!
Are you 12? Only the sq gives tickets on highways and municipals on roads. The mounties only deal with federal crimes in quebec
|
On January 20 2013 01:00 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 14:09 XenOmega wrote:
Some people seem to make it like all Quebec are assholes. Well, that is plain wrong.
They have a bunch of lunatics ; so do every provinces and countries and it is absurd that they get so much attention. Most Québécois will treat you well, from my experience. And if you stick to big cities (AKA Montreal), you won't have any trouble. Racism is not generalized and I won't let some idiots ruin my perception of Quebec.
Xen if you read my OP you would see all the problems are in montreal because thats where most of the anglophones live. I hope people talking about the pq being temporary are right, or else a see hundreds of engineers and many medical doctors moving 2 hours away for higher wages and less corruption, not to mention no language police.
Stop calling it a language police and stop suggesting that all anglophones are educated while francophones are not.
|
On January 19 2013 11:07 cz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 10:01 RavenLoud wrote:On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. The Crown is not the way we refer to the government, I've never heard anyone do it anyway. This is not 1904 anymore, Canada's a big boy now and the UK no longer have any real authority on us. Seriously, I work at a post office, and people would often specifically ask me to not give those stamps with the Queen's picture. (Although Kate & William ones are embraced with glee for some reason.) I'm sorry about your bad experiences, but I'm afraid I've never had these even when I was learning french. It's not really an excuse to get angry yourself and start insulting Quebecers. Fighting discrimination with more discrimination isn't how it's done. You're becoming what you hate while contributing to the problem. On a side note, do you think a guy who only speaks french would run into some discrimination in, say, Alberta? EDIT: I think anti-Quebec arguments are done pretty poorly in this thread overall. I'm far from a separatist but I find myself being forced to defend Quebec rofl. Depends. Nobody talks about "the crown" in common conversation, but it is obliquely referenced in terms like "crown prosecutor" or "crown corporation."
"The Crown" of 1867 and "The Crown" of today are two different things. Canada now has a fully patriated constitution, the institutions of the monarchy are merely hold-overs designed to keep government functioning in a manner consistent with our past.
Institutions like the Governor General have absolutely no authourity over Canada, but are necessary implements in order to keep our country running. As a drastic change like an elected head of state would alter Canada in fundamental ways (with no certainty that it would even benefit Canadians).
Removing the remnants of the monarchy is just more trouble than it's worth.
|
On January 20 2013 04:34 PizzaParty wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2013 01:00 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 14:09 XenOmega wrote:
Some people seem to make it like all Quebec are assholes. Well, that is plain wrong.
They have a bunch of lunatics ; so do every provinces and countries and it is absurd that they get so much attention. Most Québécois will treat you well, from my experience. And if you stick to big cities (AKA Montreal), you won't have any trouble. Racism is not generalized and I won't let some idiots ruin my perception of Quebec.
Xen if you read my OP you would see all the problems are in montreal because thats where most of the anglophones live. I hope people talking about the pq being temporary are right, or else a see hundreds of engineers and many medical doctors moving 2 hours away for higher wages and less corruption, not to mention no language police. Stop calling it a language police and stop suggesting that all anglophones are educated while francophones are not.
April 1, 1964 was "to align on international French, promote good Canadianisms and fight Anglicisms, [...] work on the normalization of the language in Québec and support State intervention to carry out a global language policy that would consider notably the importance of socio-economic motivations in making French the priority language in Québec."
You can call it "normalization" or "state intervention" but the office de la langue francaise IS a state ran organization that actively pursues any english/allophone signage, messages, postings, names etc. They are literally the police of language in quebec .
"The police are a constituted body of persons empowered by the state to enforce the law, protect property, and limit civil disorder."
Instead of enforcing law against people they enforce law against language. They are quite literally language police.
Also, instead of misinterpreting my expression against the PQ as expression against french people, try to reason here. MOST OF THE FRENCH POPULATION LIVES IN THE SOUTH OF QUEBEC. And I suggested these people are more liberal, forward thinking and more democratic. So take all your innate hatred of everything english somewhere else, because all you're doing is derailing this thread.
|
I'm an anglophone from BC and I understand what DJzapz means when he says that anglos and francos will never truly live in harmony.
I myself have a french fiancee who was born in BC and I've seen the situation from both sides. Her mother can't stand it in BC. She's lived here for upwards of 20 years and still hasn't wanted to work in the area and learn the language. Which ofc would make my parents angry that someone could be so against our culture and language that they wouldn't even try. I'm not saying all francophones are like that at all but when there are cases like that and then quebec votes in a party like the PQ you can't exactly blame some anglos for feeling that way. In fact her father loves it here in BC and wouldn't move back if he didn't have to and then they get thrown together with the extremists.
To the subject at hand from the outside looking in I don't see how the PQ are helping this situation one bit. Nothing creates separation between people like openly stating that "were different and we want to keep it that way!"
edit: (warning this section is biased ^^) just going to add in that a lot of anglos (at least in the west) don't dislike the francos as much as they dislike the government. People here are sour that the political leaders from Quebec will talk down about oil and other natural resource industries that we survive off just to take (huge) equalization payments from us and put it towards having better social services than us and bragging about it back to us.
|
On January 20 2013 00:15 hzflank wrote:
Also, as a law student you should try not to let your beliefs cloud your reasoning. The queen is the sovereign, not the people. It's fine to have the opinion that this should not be the case, but you cannot pretend that something is not real just because you do not like it.
Well, I don't think the law is very close to "reality'. Do you think that the Queen controls Canada more than the Canadian people?
|
On January 20 2013 05:23 Dawski wrote:
To the subject at hand from the outside looking in I don't see how the PQ are helping this situation one bit. Nothing creates separation between people like openly stating that "were different and we want to keep it that way!"
edit: (warning this section is biased ^^) just going to add in that a lot of anglos (at least in the west) don't dislike the francos as much as they dislike the government. People here are sour that the political leaders from Quebec will talk down about oil and other natural resource industries that we survive off just to take (huge) equalization payments from us and put it towards having better social services than us and bragging about it back to us.
Precisely. I'll never understand how french canadians could see my extreme dislike of the PQ as racism toward their culture. I am personally somewhere in the middle of the PLQ and CAQ camps, with strong support for CAQ liberalism and strongly against seperatism. Those are two political parties ran (I think, exclusively) by french canadians. And I support them.
So how exactly do I hate you?
The "purelaine" (purelaine) french have this idea that keeping their culture intact means refusing to assimilate into the rest of canada. But this is completely backwards. Canada doesn't try to assimilate anyone, instead they should follow canada's "mosaic" viewpoint into multiculturalism instead of the "melting pot" they are trying to create.
On January 20 2013 06:11 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2013 00:15 hzflank wrote:
Also, as a law student you should try not to let your beliefs cloud your reasoning. The queen is the sovereign, not the people. It's fine to have the opinion that this should not be the case, but you cannot pretend that something is not real just because you do not like it. Well, I don't think the law is very close to "reality'. Do you think that the Queen controls Canada more than the Canadian people?
All points of this conversation are moot. The word "crown" is an old synonym for our government, and has almost nothing to do with the queen, besides the fact that we "act with her permission" which means absolutely nothing.
The queen doesnt control shit here. When I said treason to the crown, well, imagine if Texas decided to succeed from the US because their population won't accept some gun law that is passed. They eliminated any trace of the US from their state courts and proposed a bunch of new laws that could prevent someone born in Texas to exercise all of their rights as an American.
Treason:
Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]."
aaaaaand seperatism could loosely be seen as an effort to overthrow canadian control over quebec. Thats it, really.
|
On January 20 2013 05:23 Dawski wrote:
I'm an anglophone from BC and I understand what DJzapz means when he says that anglos and francos will never truly live in harmony.
I myself have a french fiancee who was born in BC and I've seen the situation from both sides. Her mother can't stand it in BC. She's lived here for upwards of 20 years and still hasn't wanted to work in the area and learn the language. Which ofc would make my parents angry that someone could be so against our culture and language that they wouldn't even try. I'm not saying all francophones are like that at all but when there are cases like that and then quebec votes in a party like the PQ you can't exactly blame some anglos for feeling that way. In fact her father loves it here in BC and wouldn't move back if he didn't have to and then they get thrown together with the extremists.
To the subject at hand from the outside looking in I don't see how the PQ are helping this situation one bit. Nothing creates separation between people like openly stating that "were different and we want to keep it that way!"
edit: (warning this section is biased ^^) just going to add in that a lot of anglos (at least in the west) don't dislike the francos as much as they dislike the government. People here are sour that the political leaders from Quebec will talk down about oil and other natural resource industries that we survive off just to take (huge) equalization payments from us and put it towards having better social services than us and bragging about it back to us.
I think some people have a really low understanding of Quebec's politics in this thread. This isn't necessarely directed at you but I just wanted to use your post as a exemple.
You said that the PQ isn't helping the situation, well if the PQ was not elected the student crisis would be even worse. Also, the elections were a 3-way battle between, the most corrupted governement we had since a very long time, a new formed right party and the PQ which was the only left alternative(even if since they've been elected they are more center-right). The separation of Quebec wasn't an issue in the last election.
Another thing that I don't get is: why do you blame the PQ for rudeness agaisnt anglophones. A bill that protect french doesn't affect how you get treated by other people.
|
On January 20 2013 06:35 Abraxas514 wrote:The "purelaine" (purelaine) french have this idea that keeping their culture intact means refusing to assimilate into the rest of canada. But this is completely backwards. Canada doesn't try to assimilate anyone, instead they should follow canada's "mosaic" viewpoint into multiculturalism instead of the "melting pot" they are trying to create.
To be honest I haven't witnessed any long-lasting multicultural societies... success always ends up in positive assimilation.
Multiculturalism is a vague state where different cultures live together, but it doesn't last long when seen from an historical point of view.
|
On January 20 2013 06:35 Abraxas514 wrote:
Treason:
Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]."
aaaaaand seperatism could loosely be seen as an effort to overthrow canadian control over quebec. Thats it, really.
Since we live in a confederation, Canada doesn't control the province of Quebec, if the separation is voted in a referendum I don't see how it could be perceived as a treason.
|
On January 20 2013 06:45 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2013 06:35 Abraxas514 wrote:The "purelaine" (purelaine) french have this idea that keeping their culture intact means refusing to assimilate into the rest of canada. But this is completely backwards. Canada doesn't try to assimilate anyone, instead they should follow canada's "mosaic" viewpoint into multiculturalism instead of the "melting pot" they are trying to create. To be honest I haven't witnessed any long-lasting multicultural societies... success always ends up in positive assimilation. Multiculturalism is a vague state where different cultures live together, but it doesn't last long when seen from an historical point of view.
I know very little about the specifics of the Canadian situation, but this is how I feel about it as well.
If the two sides are truly that antagonistic, they can't co-exist successfully forever. Multicultural societies have a way of falling apart.
|
On January 20 2013 04:58 Abraxas514 wrote:
So take all your innate hatred of everything english somewhere else, because all you're doing is derailing this thread.
You need to calm down and take a break from this thread.
|
On January 20 2013 07:06 PizzaParty wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2013 04:58 Abraxas514 wrote:
So take all your innate hatred of everything english somewhere else, because all you're doing is derailing this thread. You need to calm down and take a break from this thread.
Actually PizzaParty all your replies have been either attempts to discredit my OP, or misdirections from the original conversation.
You have provided absolutely no information that would help your cause.
If you want to tell me why the OLF is a good thing, seperation is a good idea, and the evils of assimilation, go ahead.
|
On January 20 2013 01:02 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 13:33 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 08:50 Djzapz wrote:On January 19 2013 07:57 Abraxas514 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA What with all the moronic laughing? In Canada we refer to our federal government as "the crown". We have a picture of the queen on our money (monstly coins). You make yourself look really dumb by laughing at that. There are so many things that are wrong with that, I don't know why you people insist on defending your ridiculous BS. In Canada we don't refer to our federal government as "the crown" Abraxas514, nobody ever does that. We refer to the Monarchy of Canada as "the crown", not the entire government. As I'm sure you know, the Queen of Canada (more commonly known as the Queen of the UK) is the head of State of our country, but that's only by law. To use that particular terminology "Treason to the Crown" is ridiculous for two reasons First: To betray the monarchy of Canada is a ridiculous concept. Fuck the Queen and everything she represents in our country. An outdated monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Canada needs to get rid of that fluff. Legal reforms are required. Technical but impractical laws don't apply in real life and should therefore be purged from common language. Progress, please. Let's not sit back on our rotting constitution. Second: The definition of the word "treason". Maybe you're using a convenient one, that is poorly worded. Being technically unpatriotic is not treason though, and any honest person knows that. You may not be honest. You think being ridiculed is bad, but you deserved it. Some "arguments" are so bad that they deserve nothing more than to be laughed at. I was nice enough to give you a little rundown but don't butcher the English language by using the word treason like that again. People do the same thing with the word terrorist so much that it loses its value. On January 19 2013 08:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 19 2013 06:44 RavenLoud wrote:
Being a first year student at McGill, the cuts to the university fundings makes me absolutely furious. There also has been price increase for tabacco products but that doesn't bother me that much since I don't smoke. I'm still more confident about PQ's ability to get the debt under control compared to the PLQ but removing funding to universities is simply stupid.
I have to say that this attitude of "PQ being environmentalist leftist isolationalist" isn't really that accurate. In fact, Marois has indicated that she is open to talk about the construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Quebec despite the local unpopularity of such act. (Meanwhile, BC and Alberta continue to wrestle on similar issues..)
EDIT: As immigrants, I have absolute confidence in saying that I'd get less discrimination in Quebec than most of the rest of the world, even in developed countries. In fact, my grandma who came to visit us from Asia without speaking a single word of French once said that Quebecers/Canadians are probably the nicest people on Earth. (Don't know about that, but compared to mainland China where she lives, I think that's understandable lol). She was amazed by the fact that random people would open doors for her, help her with bags and even give change to her when she shops because she didn't understand the money that well at first.
"Treason to the crown" HAHAHAHA Yes, treason to the crown. You are a university student, yes? As for Quebecers being polite - I contest that, I've been treated horribly in quebec simply because my french was not satisfactory, many times. Sorry, this topic infuriates me so. I'm done. No not treason to the crown . Not signing a constitution but adhering to it is not treason. I gave a quick crash course above. This is a province which democratically agreed to live under a constitution in which it did not agree in the name of democracy. It's in opposition to it, but agrees with it regardless. If you ask me, it takes a fair amount of patriotism in a nation to accept this, even if you might say a true patriot would bend over and take it in the ass for your majesty Elizabeth. We've still got our minds and that's okay. I'm sorry you had bad experiences in QC, we have our fair share of bad apples, but most of us are fine folks who look down on the behavior of the trash that roams some of our streets. I want to say that when I was in Banff for less than I week, I had bad experiences with anglophones twice. They didn't like me speaking French with my friends, they didn't like my accent... Yet most of the people I encountered were great, and it's a shame that I came across bad people. I'm sorry that you did as well. Sweet. I'll try that argument next time I get a speeding ticket in Quebec - since quebecers aren't "really" a part of Canada (by your argument) so laws don't apply to people outside of Quebec and Canadian laws inside Quebec. Sweet! I never thought beating the police would be so easy! Are you 12? Only the sq gives tickets on highways and municipals on roads. The mounties only deal with federal crimes in quebec
I am not serious, its called sarcasm, something you might be new to. It was in referense to the previous post, as quoted.
|
On January 20 2013 12:07 Grimmyman123 wrote:
I am not serious, its called sarcasm, something you might be new to. It was in referense to the previous post, as quoted.
I said 12 because that is too young to drive, and when you drive, you know that the person giving you the ticket is either a SQ or a city cop. So "canadian rules" have nothing to do with speeding fines. Completely irrelevant point but anyway..
|
On January 20 2013 00:15 hzflank wrote:
Djzapz: You do not think you will ever get along with anglophones even though you have no hate for them? Here's an idea, stop thinking on terms of anglo or franco. If people stopped using those stupid labels then there would not even be a debate. Even if two people are not fluent in eachother's language, basic communication is still very easy.
Also, as a law student you should try not to let your beliefs cloud your reasoning. The queen is the sovereign, not the people. It's fine to have the opinion that this should not be the case, but you cannot pretend that something is not real just because you do not like it.
This thread has been quiet but I hadn't noticed that so I'll address it.
I believe that the problem is external to me. I am fully able to stop thinking in terms of anglophones/francophones given a setting wherein that is possible. Unfortunately, the debate is around me all the time. I think "we" can't get along because there's an overwhelming amount of issues, some real and some manufactured by one side or the other to cause clashes. On the other hand I am perfectly bilingual and I'm nice to anyone who politely talks to me in English in Montreal.
As for the second part of your post, I'm not a law student, I'm a political science student*. The advantages of that is I'm able to examine the real world rather than the world as described by obsolete law texts which while they're technically law, don't actually hold any water whatsoever. To say that the queen is sovereign because it says so in the constitution is not only gullible but also dishonest since the queen, in the real world, has none of the actual powers that should come with being sovereign.
I've had this very same debate before with a lawyer I believe, (on TL even) and we won't come to an agreement. I understand your stance, but I think it's short-sighted.
*: After my masters I'm thinking about getting a second one in law. I'm able to question things but I'm also able to know when not to. Cheers.
|
On January 20 2013 06:52 Kimaker wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2013 06:45 Kukaracha wrote:On January 20 2013 06:35 Abraxas514 wrote:The "purelaine" (purelaine) french have this idea that keeping their culture intact means refusing to assimilate into the rest of canada. But this is completely backwards. Canada doesn't try to assimilate anyone, instead they should follow canada's "mosaic" viewpoint into multiculturalism instead of the "melting pot" they are trying to create. To be honest I haven't witnessed any long-lasting multicultural societies... success always ends up in positive assimilation. Multiculturalism is a vague state where different cultures live together, but it doesn't last long when seen from an historical point of view. I know very little about the specifics of the Canadian situation, but this is how I feel about it as well. If the two sides are truly that antagonistic, they can't co-exist successfully forever. Multicultural societies have a way of falling apart.
I don't think that they have "a way of falling apart", in fact I'd argue the contrary, since most nations in today's world are the direct results of centuries of assimilation. The odd new factor here is the rarification of force usage, as cultural conflicts used to end violently one way or the other.
The real question would be : do francophones and anglophones durably dislike each other ? I don't think it's that easy to answer, because from my experience the new generation is very positive towards the english culture and heritage (damn traitors).
|
On January 21 2013 00:50 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2013 06:52 Kimaker wrote:On January 20 2013 06:45 Kukaracha wrote:On January 20 2013 06:35 Abraxas514 wrote:The "purelaine" (purelaine) french have this idea that keeping their culture intact means refusing to assimilate into the rest of canada. But this is completely backwards. Canada doesn't try to assimilate anyone, instead they should follow canada's "mosaic" viewpoint into multiculturalism instead of the "melting pot" they are trying to create. To be honest I haven't witnessed any long-lasting multicultural societies... success always ends up in positive assimilation. Multiculturalism is a vague state where different cultures live together, but it doesn't last long when seen from an historical point of view. I know very little about the specifics of the Canadian situation, but this is how I feel about it as well. If the two sides are truly that antagonistic, they can't co-exist successfully forever. Multicultural societies have a way of falling apart. I don't think that they have "a way of falling apart", in fact I'd argue the contrary, since most nations in today's world are the direct results of centuries of assimilation. The odd new factor here is the rarification of force usage, as cultural conflicts used to end violently one way or the other. The real question would be : do francophones and anglophones durably dislike each other ? I don't think it's that easy to answer, because from my experience the new generation is very positive towards the english culture and heritage (damn traitors).
It's not anglophones and francophones, it's specifically those two specific subsets of anglophones and francophones which have a way of nearly systematically perpetuating the negative feelings toward each other.
|
this thread is terrible and is so full of inaccuracies like the guy saying "all the universities are in the south" or the other dude who says "LOL the CROWN hahaha its not 1904 anymore" or some other asshole that is ripping french spoken in Quebec as a "bastardized english version of french"
this is basically endless bs on a forum that is supposed to have a higher standard on the way people should expose facts and opinions lol.
seriously Canada is awesome cause for basically 250 years two different nations ( english ppl and french ones - dont bash me for leaving out the natives ) have founded/built/thrived in a fine country without killing each other.
Meanwhile you had plenty of shitstorms when 2 nations in the same country didnt get along ( just to name a few of the recent ones ; Bosnia, Rwanda, etc. ) So stop breaking my fucking ballz about how you think Alberta is way moar awesome than some vague idea you have about a party that wont be in power until the end of the winter but has been a part of the political scene since 1968. Stop posting shit like they were the muslim broterhood of french separatism. They are not.
Havent voted for them, probably never will btw.
this thread is a great example of why french ppl and english ppl dislike each other; making statements about stuff you dont know/dont understand tends to be frustrating for the one who is being judged/misunderstood. ( thats basically how I feel atm lol)
|
On January 21 2013 11:11 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
this thread is terrible and is so full of inaccuracies like the guy saying "all the universities are in the south"
I made a map layover of universities versus geography and cities.
EDIT: Also comparing voter areas. I wanted to show that there is a clear trend of location versus political viewpoint.
|
On January 21 2013 11:32 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 11:11 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
this thread is terrible and is so full of inaccuracies like the guy saying "all the universities are in the south" I made a map layover of universities versus geography and cities. EDIT: Also comparing voter areas. I wanted to show that there is a clear trend of location versus political viewpoint.
I don't quite understand what you were trying to say though. The universities tend to be located in urban areas basically. So the trend you've determined is clearly a fallacy about cause and effect.
|
I'm a french Canadian, from Montreal west island and I can't wait to get out of here. Most of the time I speak English with friends, but when I leave Montreal, sometimes I slip up and greet people in English instead of French and when they realize I speak fluent French, I always get ranted on about how I'm a disgrace and all that kind of stuff. It's quite frustrating, IMO.
As for politics, my biggest issue with the PQ is that they want(ed?) to remove access to English CEGEPs unless you went to English school prior to that? I'm a comp sci student and I personally prefer talking about computer stuff in English, it's just how I've always done it. My reading comprehension in French is complete garbage, so it's another reason I went in English. However, like most French people who go to English CEGEPs, my family speaks French, so I will keep speaking French at home, which means I'm not likely to lose it. I think CEGEP is a point where you should be able to choose which language you want to study in, especially since you can get a career from it, it's better to give you a chance to go into whichever language you're most comfortable in to succeed in life later.
/rant off
I do get a big laugh when I work with an English customer, then greet a new customer in French and they just run off in anger because I said "hi, bonjour" instead of "bonjour, hi". It always makes me giggle that people are that angry about such a little thing. (I still think "hi, bonjour" leads into a french conversation a lot easier than the other way around, but that's just me I guess)
|
This is a long-standing tradition as the article state, not meant as an offense.
Now as a french canadian who has been going to english schools most of his life, I like to think I have a good perspective of both sides.
Preface: When you look at the federal electoral map it is very obvious that Quebec as a whole has very different values as the rest of Canada. To put in bluntly, in political terms, Quebec is more socialist, which in itself is not a bad thing, it just has a different set of values. This results in left-wing parties like the liberal party of canada to be considered middle or even right-wing parties. It's then no surprise that the most left-wing party is always elected in Quebec at the federal level. For a long time this was the Bloc Quebecois but has changed recently. Nevertheless, the point remains that Quebec, fundamentally, is very different from Canada.
On a provincial level then, there is a clash of values in the community. It's clear at this point that Quebec will never be separated from Canada regardless if socially this makes sense. Economically it doesn't and it would be a bureaucratic mess. So you have a lot of immigrants from Canada and US mostly but also every part of the world, who have more have a different culture than the rest of Quebec, and you have the rest of Canada who has very different values as Quebec. Can you really fail to see that the Quebec Culture will die very rapidly if nothing is done? I'm the perfect example: I went to english school because it will give me better opportunities in life, and I know little to nothing about my province's culture nor do I care. Of course you can't let them oppress you, but can you really blame them for trying to protect an obviously dying culture?
The PQ is in office today because of the number of corruption scandals within the PLQ, which you seem to favor over the PQ without knowing even knowing their intentions. 'Anything but the PQ' they say. At least they have clear motives. Besides, there is a large percentage of population that always votes for the 'left' and one that always vote for the 'right' because they agree with the fundamental values of that party. Those people don't tip the balance in elections. However, it makes sure that the PQ does keep pushing laws to help retain Quebec culture. It's fine, english people won't be oppressed. It's reasonable to force people to write signs in french as well as english, it's a french province. None of the laws against the english are really a big deal, they're just a whiny bunch for the most part.
TL;DR: You cannot argue that Quebec Culture is dying and whether you care or not is not the rest of the provinces problem. If the PQ is in office today its for two reasons: 1. People care about Quebec Culture, 2. People don't trust other parties as much as they trust the PQ to do a good job. You aren't oppressed so stop complaining, if the majority of people care about Quebec culture and want to protect it, you have to respect that because you are a citizen.
A whole thread because democracy is at work and you're not pleased with the result.
|
On January 21 2013 12:25 Steel wrote:
but can you really blame them for trying to protect an obviously dying culture?
can you explain that statement with a series of facts please. yeah you know, since its so obvious.
A whole thread because democracy is at work and you're not pleased with the result.
I agree with that part though. Stop seing the PQ as a big bad wolf. Its just another left-centrist party. No biggie. srsly. Canadians in general should stop worrying about Quebecs independance. If people voted no back when there was no Internet, no immigrants and had Rene Levesque, I doubt it could happen today.
|
On January 19 2013 01:20 BallinWitStalin wrote:
That being said, in Montreal there's a general rudeness to everyone, not just francophones. Montreal is a rude city. Drivers, pedestrians, everyone's just....not friendly.
From Alberta, and I have to concur with the statement that I had less pleasant experience when living in Montreal than before. Maybe it's because I am foreigner, don't speak french, simply unlucky or what.
|
On January 21 2013 11:11 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
this thread is terrible and is so full of inaccuracies like the guy saying "all the universities are in the south" or the other dude who says "LOL the CROWN hahaha its not 1904 anymore" or some other asshole that is ripping french spoken in Quebec as a "bastardized english version of french"
this is basically endless bs on a forum that is supposed to have a higher standard on the way people should expose facts and opinions lol.
seriously Canada is awesome cause for basically 250 years two different nations ( english ppl and french ones - dont bash me for leaving out the natives ) have founded/built/thrived in a fine country without killing each other.
Meanwhile you had plenty of shitstorms when 2 nations in the same country didnt get along ( just to name a few of the recent ones ; Bosnia, Rwanda, etc. ) So stop breaking my fucking ballz about how you think Alberta is way moar awesome than some vague idea you have about a party that wont be in power until the end of the winter but has been a part of the political scene since 1968. Stop posting shit like they were the muslim broterhood of french separatism. They are not.
Havent voted for them, probably never will btw.
this thread is a great example of why french ppl and english ppl dislike each other; making statements about stuff you dont know/dont understand tends to be frustrating for the one who is being judged/misunderstood. ( thats basically how I feel atm lol)
The "crown" shit may not be that relevant (just a technicality anyway) but it's true.
Also, the Francophones and the Anglophones did "try to kill each other" at one point. It wasn't that big, and things worked out later on, but I'm just saying.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 21 2013 12:39 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 11:11 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
this thread is terrible and is so full of inaccuracies like the guy saying "all the universities are in the south" or the other dude who says "LOL the CROWN hahaha its not 1904 anymore" or some other asshole that is ripping french spoken in Quebec as a "bastardized english version of french"
this is basically endless bs on a forum that is supposed to have a higher standard on the way people should expose facts and opinions lol.
seriously Canada is awesome cause for basically 250 years two different nations ( english ppl and french ones - dont bash me for leaving out the natives ) have founded/built/thrived in a fine country without killing each other.
Meanwhile you had plenty of shitstorms when 2 nations in the same country didnt get along ( just to name a few of the recent ones ; Bosnia, Rwanda, etc. ) So stop breaking my fucking ballz about how you think Alberta is way moar awesome than some vague idea you have about a party that wont be in power until the end of the winter but has been a part of the political scene since 1968. Stop posting shit like they were the muslim broterhood of french separatism. They are not.
Havent voted for them, probably never will btw.
this thread is a great example of why french ppl and english ppl dislike each other; making statements about stuff you dont know/dont understand tends to be frustrating for the one who is being judged/misunderstood. ( thats basically how I feel atm lol)
The "crown" shit may not be that relevant (just a technicality anyway) but it's true.
Also, the Francophones and the Anglophones did "try to kill each other" at one point. It wasn't that big, and things worked out later on, but I'm just saying.
1. The crown shit is still relevant since the fucking queen is on every coin/bill and that technically, the general governor is Harpers boss. You have never seen a criminal trial where the crown requests a 25 years sentence or something to that effect...
2. the 1838 revolts were no more then skirmishes where angry french canadians were fighting red coats =/= other canadians because Durham had published a study that said : '' fuck those frenchies, we should assimilate them, should be done within 20 years, ezpz." Srsly not much in there, its only been used to glorify the separatist movement and show its members their struggle "had roots"
|
On January 21 2013 12:49 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
1. The crown shit is still relevant since the fucking queen is on every coin/bill and that technically, the general governor is Harpers boss. You have never seen a criminal trial where the crown requests a 25 years sentence or something to that effect...
2. the 1838 revolts were no more then skirmishes where angry french canadians were fighting red coats =/= other canadians because Durham had published a study that said : '' fuck those frenchies, we should assimilate them, should be done within 20 years, ezpz." Srsly not much in there, its only been used to glorify the separatist movement and show its members their struggle "had roots"
Technically the Queen is Harper's boss and the governor general represents the queen. The GG is NOT Harper's boss, not even technically. But if "the crown" crossed our democratically elected nutter, we'd have a political crisis on our hands that would probably be resolved through amendments to the constitution. The GG would be dismissed and we'd push our royalty mascot further down. As it is, the Governor general says "yes" to everything Harper says. There are also a few other functions which are more useful than just her agreeing to everything, but there really isn't all that much to that job.
And yes we have Elizabeth on some of our money (not all!). We also have beavers on dimes but I'm not the subject of beavers am I. I mean seriously am I a citizen of Canada or a subject of the Queen? Let's be realistic here.
|
I'm too am a ex-west-islander, and this OP is offensive, arrogant and screams ignorance. Change it so quebecers actually want to read the thread  .
|
On January 21 2013 12:34 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 12:25 Steel wrote:
but can you really blame them for trying to protect an obviously dying culture?
can you explain that statement with a series of facts please. yeah you know, since its so obvious. Show nested quote +A whole thread because democracy is at work and you're not pleased with the result. I agree with that part though. Stop seing the PQ as a big bad wolf. Its just another left-centrist party. No biggie. srsly. Canadians in general should stop worrying about Quebecs independance. If people voted no back when there was no Internet, no immigrants and had Rene Levesque, I doubt it could happen today.
Isn't he an example that explains his statement?
To be honest, I am a French Canadian, grew up in the West Island, some of my friends speak better English than French. I also wanted to go to an English school when I was younger, but I couldn't, since neither of my parents went to one. While I do disagree that some laws are harsh, it is to preserve our culture. It is not because our history didn't start before Jesus Christ that it should not matter less or more than any other culture. Our culture defined us as we are, what we stand for and what we aim to achieve. Our political views, in Canada, are seen as socialist, but is that a bad sign? Is it so wrong that we fight for different causes? No, and we should always remember that. We have much to learn from all the cultures around the world, ours is no different.
Quebec is a mix of people and we should keep homage to what has defined us through the years or risk forgetting it all. "Je me souviens".
Edit: Why was Kurr a notable response to the OT? If anything, it was a personal response...
|
On January 21 2013 12:49 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 21 2013 12:39 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 11:11 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
this thread is terrible and is so full of inaccuracies like the guy saying "all the universities are in the south" or the other dude who says "LOL the CROWN hahaha its not 1904 anymore" or some other asshole that is ripping french spoken in Quebec as a "bastardized english version of french"
this is basically endless bs on a forum that is supposed to have a higher standard on the way people should expose facts and opinions lol.
seriously Canada is awesome cause for basically 250 years two different nations ( english ppl and french ones - dont bash me for leaving out the natives ) have founded/built/thrived in a fine country without killing each other.
Meanwhile you had plenty of shitstorms when 2 nations in the same country didnt get along ( just to name a few of the recent ones ; Bosnia, Rwanda, etc. ) So stop breaking my fucking ballz about how you think Alberta is way moar awesome than some vague idea you have about a party that wont be in power until the end of the winter but has been a part of the political scene since 1968. Stop posting shit like they were the muslim broterhood of french separatism. They are not.
Havent voted for them, probably never will btw.
this thread is a great example of why french ppl and english ppl dislike each other; making statements about stuff you dont know/dont understand tends to be frustrating for the one who is being judged/misunderstood. ( thats basically how I feel atm lol) The "crown" shit may not be that relevant (just a technicality anyway) but it's true. Also, the Francophones and the Anglophones did "try to kill each other" at one point. It wasn't that big, and things worked out later on, but I'm just saying. 1. The crown shit is still relevant since the fucking queen is on every coin/bill and that technically, the general governor is Harpers boss. You have never seen a criminal trial where the crown requests a 25 years sentence or something to that effect... 2. the 1838 revolts were no more then skirmishes where angry french canadians were fighting red coats =/= other canadians because Durham had published a study that said : '' fuck those frenchies, we should assimilate them, should be done within 20 years, ezpz." Srsly not much in there, its only been used to glorify the separatist movement and show its members their struggle "had roots"
I think you've got the cause-effect thing wrong here. Durham's report is only after the end of the Rebellions, it did not cause it. The report basically concluded that there was no need to freak out over what happened and the French Canadians are a people without culture that will be eventually assimilated.
The causes of the Rebellions are more about the suppression of French Canadians in the political and economical process.
Plus, though it was not a wide spread war, the Rebellions were serious and there were members who fled to the US and tried to achieve independence from colonial rule.
EDIT: For someone who comes in a thread to shit on everyone for being ignorant and inaccurate, perhaps you should think about leading by example.
|
On January 21 2013 12:59 MstrSplntr wrote:I'm too am a ex-west-islander, and this OP is offensive, arrogant and screams ignorance. Change it so quebecers actually want to read the thread .
I'm open to real advice in unbiasing my views, but I honestly think the "preserve our culture" bit is complete bullshit, akin to americans who are completely against any type of gun control because it's "their culture". The way I see it, quebec culture isn't "dying", it's evolving. To stop that evolution is a backwards way of thought.
|
On January 21 2013 13:42 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 12:59 MstrSplntr wrote:I'm too am a ex-west-islander, and this OP is offensive, arrogant and screams ignorance. Change it so quebecers actually want to read the thread . I'm open to real advice in unbiasing my views, but I honestly think the "preserve our culture" bit is complete bullshit, akin to americans who are completely against any type of gun control because it's "their culture". The way I see it, quebec culture isn't "dying", it's evolving. To stop that evolution is a backwards way of thought.
Maybe it's backwards. But to say it's bullshit is a bit ridiculous. People really do feel that way. What you view as the natural evolution of the culture in Quebec is, at the same time, the dissolution of our initial culture into the general North American culture and its anglosaxon roots. To say that the good ole' melding pot is the only way forward IMO is to neglect some alternatives which may be viable and more plausible in practice if our goal is for people to be happy.
|
On January 21 2013 13:42 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 12:59 MstrSplntr wrote:I'm too am a ex-west-islander, and this OP is offensive, arrogant and screams ignorance. Change it so quebecers actually want to read the thread . I'm open to real advice in unbiasing my views, but I honestly think the "preserve our culture" bit is complete bullshit, akin to americans who are completely against any type of gun control because it's "their culture". The way I see it, quebec culture isn't "dying", it's evolving. To stop that evolution is a backwards way of thought.
But what is preventing it from evolving?
A language is part of one's history. You know, you can still grow up in Quebec and not learn a single French word. The bill 101 doesn't stop you from this.
|
[/QUOTE]
Our political views, in Canada, are seen as socialist, but is that a bad sign? Is it so wrong that we fight for different causes?
[/QUOTE]
This is a trend I am noticing in some posts. It seems people are making the assumption that the rest of canada, while being a little farther on the right, dislikes the fact that Quebec is more Socialist.
I never once heard someone complain about Quebecs political stance other than how it effects their own province.
edit: I suppose I should go farther on this topic to get my opinion across on parties like PQ and the separatist mentality.
A democratic country thrives in an environment of having mutliple different political stances. That's how true government and a good oposition are created. I never understood how Quebec having a different political stance than the rest of canada is a good argument for separation
|
On January 21 2013 14:03 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +
Our political views, in Canada, are seen as socialist, but is that a bad sign? Is it so wrong that we fight for different causes?
This is a trend I am noticing in some posts. It seems people are making the assumption that the rest of canada, while being a little farther on the right, dislikes the fact that Quebec is more Socialist. I never once heard someone complain about Quebecs political stance other than how it effects their own province. edit: I suppose I should go farther on this topic to get my opinion across on parties like PQ and the separatist mentality. A democratic country thrives in an environment of having mutliple different political stances. That's how true government and a good oposition are created. I never understood how Quebec having a different political stance than the rest of canada is a good argument for separation
Don't misquote me though. The fact that I am saying that we are seen as socialist does not mean that I think the rest of the Canada complain about people from Quebec.
What I'm implying is that people from Quebec generally have different ideas and I'm asking if it's wrong that we have different ideas.
Also, the separation never been about a different political stance, it has always been about a different cultural stance.
|
On January 21 2013 14:19 warshop wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 14:03 Dawski wrote:
Our political views, in Canada, are seen as socialist, but is that a bad sign? Is it so wrong that we fight for different causes?
This is a trend I am noticing in some posts. It seems people are making the assumption that the rest of canada, while being a little farther on the right, dislikes the fact that Quebec is more Socialist. I never once heard someone complain about Quebecs political stance other than how it effects their own province. edit: I suppose I should go farther on this topic to get my opinion across on parties like PQ and the separatist mentality. A democratic country thrives in an environment of having mutliple different political stances. That's how true government and a good oposition are created. I never understood how Quebec having a different political stance than the rest of canada is a good argument for separation Don't misquote me though. The fact that I am saying that we are seen as socialist does not mean that I think the rest of the Canada complain about people from Quebec. What I'm implying is that people from Quebec generally have different ideas and I'm asking if it's wrong that we have different ideas. Also, the separation never been about a different political stance, it has always been about a different cultural stance.
Ok sry didn't mean to misquote it's just the sentiment I got from both yours and anothers post, but then to answer your question. No, It's obviously not wrong to have different ideas from the rest as long as they actually make sense for you and aren't there just because culturally you have to be.
For example: From my post on page 5 I believe I explain how I'm pretty connected to the Quebec situation all the way here in BC through my french fiancee. One thing I hear from her about her relatives is that a lot of them identify as catholic but don't actually practice it. It's more of a cultural preservation thing which me being an anglophone from BC, who doesn't want to sound like an ignorant prick, can't help but say that is a bit odd.
Edit: Okay maybe odd isn't the best word to use but what I mean by that is -
I don't understand how the idea of preserving a culture that the majority of the population doesn't necessarily agree with just for the sole reason of preserving it makes sense.
|
On January 21 2013 14:31 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 14:19 warshop wrote:On January 21 2013 14:03 Dawski wrote:
Our political views, in Canada, are seen as socialist, but is that a bad sign? Is it so wrong that we fight for different causes?
This is a trend I am noticing in some posts. It seems people are making the assumption that the rest of canada, while being a little farther on the right, dislikes the fact that Quebec is more Socialist. I never once heard someone complain about Quebecs political stance other than how it effects their own province. edit: I suppose I should go farther on this topic to get my opinion across on parties like PQ and the separatist mentality. A democratic country thrives in an environment of having mutliple different political stances. That's how true government and a good oposition are created. I never understood how Quebec having a different political stance than the rest of canada is a good argument for separation Don't misquote me though. The fact that I am saying that we are seen as socialist does not mean that I think the rest of the Canada complain about people from Quebec. What I'm implying is that people from Quebec generally have different ideas and I'm asking if it's wrong that we have different ideas. Also, the separation never been about a different political stance, it has always been about a different cultural stance. Ok sry didn't mean to misquote it's just the sentiment I got from both yours and anothers post, but then to answer your question. No, It's obviously not wrong to have different ideas from the rest as long as they actually make sense for you and aren't there just because culturally you have to be. For example: From my post on page 5 I believe I explain how I'm pretty connected to the Quebec situation all the way here in BC through my french fiancee. One thing I hear from her about her relatives is that a lot of them identify as catholic but don't actually practice it. It's more of a cultural preservation thing which me being an anglophone from BC, who doesn't want to sound like an ignorant prick, can't help but say that is a bit odd.
Haha, not to worry, I just wanted to explain what I truly meant to say. God we're such Canadians, we're excusing ourselves, hahaha <3
To reply to your original post on the 5th page, I believe that's just people in general. I see Canadians (everyone, French or English) as an open-minded culture in general (see the ones that do travel), yet there are still those that have a difficulty in change. They may speak French or they may speak English, but I doubt that has to do with anything.
Some people aren't comfortable leaving their zone of comfort (like learning a new language). Personally, as I mentioned previously, I'm a French Canadian, but I love to learn new languages, visit new cultures. If I have to see a foreign movie, I will watch that movie in its language. I believe it brings forth much more than dubbed movies.
So in retrospective, I don't think it's because she's French that she doesn't want to learn a new language. My Grandmother is a French Canadian and loves to tell me stories about her different trips. When I was younger, she kept telling about words in different languages and what they meant and how to pronounce them. She's 76.
|
On January 21 2013 14:41 warshop wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 14:31 Dawski wrote:On January 21 2013 14:19 warshop wrote:On January 21 2013 14:03 Dawski wrote:
Our political views, in Canada, are seen as socialist, but is that a bad sign? Is it so wrong that we fight for different causes?
This is a trend I am noticing in some posts. It seems people are making the assumption that the rest of canada, while being a little farther on the right, dislikes the fact that Quebec is more Socialist. I never once heard someone complain about Quebecs political stance other than how it effects their own province. edit: I suppose I should go farther on this topic to get my opinion across on parties like PQ and the separatist mentality. A democratic country thrives in an environment of having mutliple different political stances. That's how true government and a good oposition are created. I never understood how Quebec having a different political stance than the rest of canada is a good argument for separation Don't misquote me though. The fact that I am saying that we are seen as socialist does not mean that I think the rest of the Canada complain about people from Quebec. What I'm implying is that people from Quebec generally have different ideas and I'm asking if it's wrong that we have different ideas. Also, the separation never been about a different political stance, it has always been about a different cultural stance. Ok sry didn't mean to misquote it's just the sentiment I got from both yours and anothers post, but then to answer your question. No, It's obviously not wrong to have different ideas from the rest as long as they actually make sense for you and aren't there just because culturally you have to be. For example: From my post on page 5 I believe I explain how I'm pretty connected to the Quebec situation all the way here in BC through my french fiancee. One thing I hear from her about her relatives is that a lot of them identify as catholic but don't actually practice it. It's more of a cultural preservation thing which me being an anglophone from BC, who doesn't want to sound like an ignorant prick, can't help but say that is a bit odd. Haha, not to worry, I just wanted to explain what I truly meant to say. God we're such Canadians, we're excusing ourselves, hahaha <3 To reply to your original post on the 5th page, I believe that's just people in general. I see Canadians (everyone, French or English) as an open-minded culture in general (see the ones that do travel), yet there are still those that have a difficulty in change. They may speak French or they may speak English, but I doubt that has to do with anything. Some people aren't comfortable leaving their zone of comfort (like learning a new language). Personally, as I mentioned previously, I'm a French Canadian, but I love to learn new languages, visit new cultures. If I have to see a foreign movie, I will watch that movie in its language. I believe it brings forth much more than dubbed movies. So in retrospective, I don't think it's because she's French that she doesn't want to learn a new language. My Grandmother is a French Canadian and loves to tell me stories about her different trips. When I was younger, she kept telling about words in different languages and what they meant and how to pronounce them. She's 76.
Hahaha <3
Yeah, I've come to same conclusion myself seeing as how I know her well and she's a very nice lady just like anyone else out there. With that post I was just trying to delve into the many different conflicts that cause a disunity between people.
Man when I talk to people on here I really don't understand how this is a problem at all ^^
|
On January 21 2013 14:48 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 14:41 warshop wrote:On January 21 2013 14:31 Dawski wrote:On January 21 2013 14:19 warshop wrote:On January 21 2013 14:03 Dawski wrote:
Our political views, in Canada, are seen as socialist, but is that a bad sign? Is it so wrong that we fight for different causes?
This is a trend I am noticing in some posts. It seems people are making the assumption that the rest of canada, while being a little farther on the right, dislikes the fact that Quebec is more Socialist. I never once heard someone complain about Quebecs political stance other than how it effects their own province. edit: I suppose I should go farther on this topic to get my opinion across on parties like PQ and the separatist mentality. A democratic country thrives in an environment of having mutliple different political stances. That's how true government and a good oposition are created. I never understood how Quebec having a different political stance than the rest of canada is a good argument for separation Don't misquote me though. The fact that I am saying that we are seen as socialist does not mean that I think the rest of the Canada complain about people from Quebec. What I'm implying is that people from Quebec generally have different ideas and I'm asking if it's wrong that we have different ideas. Also, the separation never been about a different political stance, it has always been about a different cultural stance. Ok sry didn't mean to misquote it's just the sentiment I got from both yours and anothers post, but then to answer your question. No, It's obviously not wrong to have different ideas from the rest as long as they actually make sense for you and aren't there just because culturally you have to be. For example: From my post on page 5 I believe I explain how I'm pretty connected to the Quebec situation all the way here in BC through my french fiancee. One thing I hear from her about her relatives is that a lot of them identify as catholic but don't actually practice it. It's more of a cultural preservation thing which me being an anglophone from BC, who doesn't want to sound like an ignorant prick, can't help but say that is a bit odd. Haha, not to worry, I just wanted to explain what I truly meant to say. God we're such Canadians, we're excusing ourselves, hahaha <3 To reply to your original post on the 5th page, I believe that's just people in general. I see Canadians (everyone, French or English) as an open-minded culture in general (see the ones that do travel), yet there are still those that have a difficulty in change. They may speak French or they may speak English, but I doubt that has to do with anything. Some people aren't comfortable leaving their zone of comfort (like learning a new language). Personally, as I mentioned previously, I'm a French Canadian, but I love to learn new languages, visit new cultures. If I have to see a foreign movie, I will watch that movie in its language. I believe it brings forth much more than dubbed movies. So in retrospective, I don't think it's because she's French that she doesn't want to learn a new language. My Grandmother is a French Canadian and loves to tell me stories about her different trips. When I was younger, she kept telling about words in different languages and what they meant and how to pronounce them. She's 76. Hahaha <3 Yeah, I've come to same conclusion myself seeing as how I know her well and she's a very nice lady just like anyone else out there. With that post I was just trying to delve into the many different conflicts that cause a disunity between people. Man when I talk to people on here I really don't understand how this is a problem at all ^^
What I learned in life, is that it's most of the times the unhappy people that scream the loudest (it is completely normal). To be honest, we have many problems as a society, but identifying them and trying to fix them is what makes us a better and greater nation. I love the quote "imperfection makes perfection."
P.S.: I agree with you. I am proud to say, when I'm on vacation, that I'm a Canadian. And a French Canadian too! I love Quebec though, don't get me wrong
|
For anglophones that feel Quebec is rude or how they are sometimes discriminated against. I'm curious, because have you ever been an immigrant to another part of the world ? Where you don't speak the language ? Not talking about a 1week vacation, but like 1 year living elsewhere.
I mean... I'm french (from France), and I live in Montreal. And I still get discriminated against or get rude comments from time to time. Not because of my language. Just because of bullshit. I got rude comments while I was travelling in the US and in Italy too.
To me what you're experiencing is just... normal. Sad but normal, that's just how some people react to "the stranger".
While you're not technically an immigrant though, you're still almost like one when you're in Quebec and don't speak French. And I guess your "difference" is just something that is more apparent when it comes to not being able to speak the main language and therefore will attract all the morons to be rude to you.
So really... I wouldn't worry too much about it.
|
On January 21 2013 13:42 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 12:59 MstrSplntr wrote:I'm too am a ex-west-islander, and this OP is offensive, arrogant and screams ignorance. Change it so quebecers actually want to read the thread . I'm open to real advice in unbiasing my views, but I honestly think the "preserve our culture" bit is complete bullshit, akin to americans who are completely against any type of gun control because it's "their culture". The way I see it, quebec culture isn't "dying", it's evolving. To stop that evolution is a backwards way of thought.
I already spoke of that feeling, but you seem to be hermetic to it.
I guess that Palestine, Ireland, native America, Copts, South Korea, and Tibet are just "bullshit".
Let me put it this way : "to be honest, I believe my culture is superior to the redneck-born alcohol-driven junk culture of english Canada. I'd take Voltaire and Rousseau over McDonalds and Hummers any day."
Wouldn't you be mad ? You consider that it's simple "evolution" just because you think it's progress, or because you don't care because it's not detrimental to your own identity.
|
On December 14 2012 03:34 Abraxas514 wrote:
Since the 1970s Quebec has been a very different place since "bill 101". You can't make a sign in English any more, be it the name of your store, your menu, or an advertisement. Forty years later, 90% of Montreal speaks French natively.
Actually, isn't this misleading? I believe the truth is that you can't make an English only sign OR a sign where English is the same size or larger than the French lettering. Something like that, right?
|
On January 21 2013 17:44 Jacmert wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 03:34 Abraxas514 wrote:
Since the 1970s Quebec has been a very different place since "bill 101". You can't make a sign in English any more, be it the name of your store, your menu, or an advertisement. Forty years later, 90% of Montreal speaks French natively.
Actually, isn't this misleading? I believe the truth is that you can't make an English only sign OR a sign where English is the same size or larger than the French lettering. Something like that, right?
Yes, you can have both. That, or people don't respect the law.
|
Anyways, my two cents on this are that I believe the OP is a bit too-biased and misrepresents things a little bit, but overall I do share his concerns (from an outsider's viewpoint, anyways - I live in BC).
One of the people who posted in this thread made a comment about how the official language laws in Quebec are necessary to help preserve their (French language) culture in the face of overwhelming anglophone cultural/media influences (from the USA and the rest of Canada). While that concern is a legitimate one, it made me realize that part of the whole "problem" is that the majority in Quebec (Francophones) have LEGISLATED measures to enforce and shape their culture in a directly intrusive/suppressive way on the minority (Anglophones). Now, even if what I said is true, I don't know if it's a black & white thing where it's definitely wrong, but it does seem like [the government] has overstepped their bounds/mandate a bit.
It's not like the Quebec government is funding Francophone culture and not funding Anglophone culture (I think that would be fine). And it's not like the Quebec government is requiring all essential services to always be offered in French (this is probably in effect, and I'd support it, too). But it's quite another thing to ban other people's cultures from being expressed. For example, if I went to a French restaurant, and everything on the menu was forced to be in English (or English with smaller French lettering), I would be like, "this sucks. I wanted a French restaurant experience, not this white-washed English treatment). Or if I went to a Chinese restaurant, and they were forced to have their main menu text as English and Chinese lettering had to be secondary, I would be like... "Ok, this isn't very Chinese" (I'm Chinese-Canadian, btw). So this is one of the reasons I feel the French language laws, or the way they are enforced, feel like they are overstepping - in my opinion.
|
On January 21 2013 18:12 Jacmert wrote:
Anyways, my two cents on this are that I believe the OP is a bit too-biased and misrepresents things a little bit, but overall I do share his concerns (from an outsider's viewpoint, anyways - I live in BC).
One of the people who posted in this thread made a comment about how the official language laws in Quebec are necessary to help preserve their (French language) culture in the face of overwhelming anglophone cultural/media influences (from the USA and the rest of Canada). While that concern is a legitimate one, it made me realize that part of the whole "problem" is that the majority in Quebec (Francophones) have LEGISLATED measures to enforce and shape their culture in a directly intrusive/suppressive way on the minority (Anglophones). Now, even if what I said is true, I don't know if it's a black & white thing where it's definitely wrong, but it does seem like [the government] has overstepped their bounds/mandate a bit.
It's not like the Quebec government is funding Francophone culture and not funding Anglophone culture (I think that would be fine). And it's not like the Quebec government is requiring all essential services to always be offered in French (this is probably in effect, and I'd support it, too). But it's quite another thing to ban other people's cultures from being expressed. For example, if I went to a French restaurant, and everything on the menu was forced to be in English (or English with smaller French lettering), I would be like, "this sucks. I wanted a French restaurant experience, not this white-washed English treatment). Or if I went to a Chinese restaurant, and they were forced to have their main menu text as English and Chinese lettering had to be secondary, I would be like... "Ok, this isn't very Chinese" (I'm Chinese-Canadian, btw). So this is one of the reasons I feel the French language laws, or the way they are enforced, feel like they are overstepping - in my opinion.
Until the 70's, before bill 101 was passed, things were different in Quebec, especially in Montreal. You would go to a Sears, Eaton, many big stores downtown and you would have a hard time getting served in french. Also, the majority of business managers and executives didn't speak a single word of french, although the vast majority of their staff was francophone. The OP dared mentionning anglophones being treated as second-class citizen now, which is hilarious, because francophones WERE second-class citizen in Montreal back then, although they represented the vast majority of the population.
Many people, especially young anglophones don't have this kind of historical perspective today and they think they're being mistreated. They don't understand that francophones represent less than 2% of the total population of North America, without laws to enforce some basic things, in long term, it's over.
If you give someone the choice between english and french, whether it's for publicity or for their children's education, that person will always choose english first, it's the logical choice. Without laws, the french language is fighting an uphill battle in North America that is virtually impossible to win.
|
On January 21 2013 21:45 lepape wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 18:12 Jacmert wrote:
Anyways, my two cents on this are that I believe the OP is a bit too-biased and misrepresents things a little bit, but overall I do share his concerns (from an outsider's viewpoint, anyways - I live in BC).
One of the people who posted in this thread made a comment about how the official language laws in Quebec are necessary to help preserve their (French language) culture in the face of overwhelming anglophone cultural/media influences (from the USA and the rest of Canada). While that concern is a legitimate one, it made me realize that part of the whole "problem" is that the majority in Quebec (Francophones) have LEGISLATED measures to enforce and shape their culture in a directly intrusive/suppressive way on the minority (Anglophones). Now, even if what I said is true, I don't know if it's a black & white thing where it's definitely wrong, but it does seem like [the government] has overstepped their bounds/mandate a bit.
It's not like the Quebec government is funding Francophone culture and not funding Anglophone culture (I think that would be fine). And it's not like the Quebec government is requiring all essential services to always be offered in French (this is probably in effect, and I'd support it, too). But it's quite another thing to ban other people's cultures from being expressed. For example, if I went to a French restaurant, and everything on the menu was forced to be in English (or English with smaller French lettering), I would be like, "this sucks. I wanted a French restaurant experience, not this white-washed English treatment). Or if I went to a Chinese restaurant, and they were forced to have their main menu text as English and Chinese lettering had to be secondary, I would be like... "Ok, this isn't very Chinese" (I'm Chinese-Canadian, btw). So this is one of the reasons I feel the French language laws, or the way they are enforced, feel like they are overstepping - in my opinion. Until the 70's, before bill 101 was passed, things were different in Quebec, especially in Montreal. You would go to a Sears, Eaton, many big stores downtown and you would have a hard time getting served in french. Also, the majority of business managers and executives didn't speak a single word of french, although the vast majority of their staff was francophone. The OP dared mentionning anglophones being treated as second-class citizen now, which is hilarious, because francophones WERE second-class citizen in Montreal back then, although they represented the vast majority of the population. Many people, especially young anglophones don't have this kind of historical perspective today and they think they're being mistreated. They don't understand that francophones represent less than 2% of the total population of North America, without laws to enforce some basic things, in long term, it's over. If you give someone the choice between english and french, whether it's for publicity or for their children's education, that person will always choose english first, it's the logical choice. Without laws, the french language is fighting an uphill battle in North America that is virtually impossible to win.
And many french canadians don't understand the fundamental argument from our side. We think it's fine you guys push french everywhere, we just think it's NOT fine to eliminate english. Quebec should have been, and should be, a bilingual province. You wouldn't have lost all those company headquarters, tax dollars, doctors, engineers, lawyers, professors, and people who didn't want to risk the referendum going 1% the wrong way.
The truth is Anglophones are a minority that are prevented from using their language without a french watchdog. Not all quebec services are offered in english by the way, many times I've gotten letters from the quebec city court and I needed to ask for a translation at city hall.
Remember, you may be 2% of north america's population, but you are 78.1% of Quebec's population while anglophones are just 7.7%.
|
On January 21 2013 21:45 lepape wrote:
If you give someone the choice between english and french, whether it's for publicity or for their children's education, that person will always choose english first, it's the logical choice. Without laws, the french language is fighting an uphill battle in North America that is virtually impossible to win.
Is that such a bad thing then? It seems like natural development, it's a tiny speck of french culture in a sea of english culture, obviously the influence is 100% one-directional. Seems weird to make discriminating laws etc to try to battle this force, which probably won't be stopped anyway. Though maybe this is just my views because it's such a weird situation for a person like me from a country which isn't bilingual in the slightest, but it sounds weird to me that quebecians feel their culture will be destroyed unless they force everyone to speak french, while american natives etc still have their culture and language even though they really have no laws at all protecting them, it just means they are perfectly fluent in English as well.
|
On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
And many french canadians don't understand the fundamental argument from our side. We think it's fine you guys push french everywhere, we just think it's NOT fine to eliminate english. Quebec should have been, and should be, a bilingual province.
Please tell me, where are you not allowed to write in english, or to speak english? Where has english been eliminated exactly? Btw I'm from the West Island too and let me tell you, if you really think english has been eliminated anywhere, I don't think we even live on the same planet.
On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
You wouldn't have lost all those company headquarters, tax dollars, doctors, engineers, lawyers, professors, and people who didn't want to risk the referendum going 1% the wrong way.
After receiving some low-cost education, these professions are being offered much better wages in the US and in other provinces, don't give me the whole ''secession is making them scared'' BS. Just like in most aspects of our lives, money is the deciding factor here.
On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
''Not all quebec services are offered in english by the way, many times I've gotten letters from the quebec city court and I needed to ask for a translation at city hall.
If you received a translation, why are you saying not all services are offered in english?
On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
Remember, you may be 2% of north america's population, but you are 78.1% of Quebec's population while anglophones are just 7.7%.
And this number slowly but surely keeps getting lower, in favor to the english side.
Are you concerned that your great-great-grandchildren might not share your cultural identity or your langage, because you are a minority here? Look, this is a difficult concept to comprehend, because most nations take their cultural identity for granted. But for francophones in Quebec, losing our cultural heritage is a legitimate long-term concern. Now you might say this is unrealistic or unimportant, but until you even try to care about this aspect, I don't think you'll ever understand anything about this whole debate.
|
On January 21 2013 23:36 Tobberoth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 21:45 lepape wrote:
If you give someone the choice between english and french, whether it's for publicity or for their children's education, that person will always choose english first, it's the logical choice. Without laws, the french language is fighting an uphill battle in North America that is virtually impossible to win. Is that such a bad thing then? It seems like natural development, it's a tiny speck of french culture in a sea of english culture, obviously the influence is 100% one-directional. Seems weird to make discriminating laws etc to try to battle this force, which probably won't be stopped anyway. Though maybe this is just my views because it's such a weird situation for a person like me from a country which isn't bilingual in the slightest, but it sounds weird to me that quebecians feel their culture will be destroyed unless they force everyone to speak french, while american natives etc still have their culture and language even though they really have no laws at all protecting them, it just means they are perfectly fluent in English as well.
Natives in many cases live in 'reserves' which are separated from society for the most part. And to say that they preserve their culture is a bit misleading considering that we've been shitting all over it and they're nothing like their former selves.
You ask if it's a bad thing that people would choose English over French - well that's purely subjective. Like I said before, some people want to preserve the culture, others are more interested in efficiency and such. If you're on one side, naturally you'll think the other is silly - but that's the nature of the human heart is it not? We value some things over others.
|
On January 21 2013 23:49 lepape wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
And many french canadians don't understand the fundamental argument from our side. We think it's fine you guys push french everywhere, we just think it's NOT fine to eliminate english. Quebec should have been, and should be, a bilingual province. Please tell me, where are you not allowed to write in english, or to speak english? Where has english been eliminated exactly? Btw I'm from the West Island too and let me tell you, if you really think english has been eliminated anywhere, I don't think we even live on the same planet. Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
You wouldn't have lost all those company headquarters, tax dollars, doctors, engineers, lawyers, professors, and people who didn't want to risk the referendum going 1% the wrong way. After receiving some low-cost education, these professions are being offered much better wages in the US and in other provinces, don't give me the whole ''secession is making them scared'' BS. Just like in most aspects of our lives, money is the deciding factor here. Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
''Not all quebec services are offered in english by the way, many times I've gotten letters from the quebec city court and I needed to ask for a translation at city hall. If you received a translation, why are you saying not all services are offered in english? Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
Remember, you may be 2% of north america's population, but you are 78.1% of Quebec's population while anglophones are just 7.7%. And this number slowly but surely keeps getting lower, in favor to the english side. Are you concerned that your great-great-grandchildren might not share your cultural identity or your langage, because you are a minority here? Look, this is a difficult concept to comprehend, because most nations take their cultural identity for granted. But for francophones in Quebec, losing our cultural heritage is a legitimate long-term concern. Now you might say this is unimportant, but until you even try to care about this aspect, I don't think you'll ever understand anything about this whole debate.
Your great great grandchildren might very well not share your cultural identity or language regardless. Maybe your grandchild decides he doesn't want to live where you do and moves to the US, or Spain, or China. Boom, now your great great grandchildren speak Chinese, and nothing your politicians did now meant anything. Just like you might not share too much with your ancestors from France, if you go back far enough.
The important factor here, is that your great great grandchildren won't give a crap. It's not like they will wake up one day and think "Damn, I wish my great great grandfather voted for party X so that I would be speaking french instead of english" because that's not how it works, just like I'm not pissed that I speak swedish instead of danish (I live in southern sweden, which historically belonged to denmark). It doesn't matter to me, since this is how I grew up.
|
On January 21 2013 23:49 lepape wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
And many french canadians don't understand the fundamental argument from our side. We think it's fine you guys push french everywhere, we just think it's NOT fine to eliminate english. Quebec should have been, and should be, a bilingual province. Please tell me, where are you not allowed to write in english, or to speak english? Where has english been eliminated exactly? Btw I'm from the West Island too and let me tell you, if you really think english has been eliminated anywhere, I don't think we even live on the same planet. Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
You wouldn't have lost all those company headquarters, tax dollars, doctors, engineers, lawyers, professors, and people who didn't want to risk the referendum going 1% the wrong way. After receiving some low-cost education, these professions are being offered much better wages in the US and in other provinces, don't give me the whole ''secession is making them scared'' BS. Just like in most aspects of our lives, money is the deciding factor here. Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
''Not all quebec services are offered in english by the way, many times I've gotten letters from the quebec city court and I needed to ask for a translation at city hall. If you received a translation, why are you saying not all services are offered in english? Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
Remember, you may be 2% of north america's population, but you are 78.1% of Quebec's population while anglophones are just 7.7%. And this number slowly but surely keeps getting lower, in favor to the english side. Are you concerned that your great-great-grandchildren might not share your cultural identity or your langage, because you are a minority here? Look, this is a difficult concept to comprehend, because most nations take their cultural identity for granted. But for francophones in Quebec, losing our cultural heritage is a legitimate long-term concern. Now you might say this is unrealistic or unimportant, but until you even try to care about this aspect, I don't think you'll ever understand anything about this whole debate.
The 'translation' is me asking the person at the guichet what it means, not QC sending me a paper in english. Also, certain income tax forms are no longer available in english (I think this is mainly corporate forms).
Instead of worrying about loosing your culture, and imposing legislation that is completely against liberal socierty trends, you should work hard at adding the best elements of your culture to canadian culture in general. Be part of the system, not a vacuum sealed section that is only technically considered part of the greater machine.
|
On January 22 2013 00:06 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 23:49 lepape wrote:On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
And many french canadians don't understand the fundamental argument from our side. We think it's fine you guys push french everywhere, we just think it's NOT fine to eliminate english. Quebec should have been, and should be, a bilingual province. Please tell me, where are you not allowed to write in english, or to speak english? Where has english been eliminated exactly? Btw I'm from the West Island too and let me tell you, if you really think english has been eliminated anywhere, I don't think we even live on the same planet. On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
You wouldn't have lost all those company headquarters, tax dollars, doctors, engineers, lawyers, professors, and people who didn't want to risk the referendum going 1% the wrong way. After receiving some low-cost education, these professions are being offered much better wages in the US and in other provinces, don't give me the whole ''secession is making them scared'' BS. Just like in most aspects of our lives, money is the deciding factor here. On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
''Not all quebec services are offered in english by the way, many times I've gotten letters from the quebec city court and I needed to ask for a translation at city hall. If you received a translation, why are you saying not all services are offered in english? On January 21 2013 23:25 Abraxas514 wrote:
Remember, you may be 2% of north america's population, but you are 78.1% of Quebec's population while anglophones are just 7.7%. And this number slowly but surely keeps getting lower, in favor to the english side. Are you concerned that your great-great-grandchildren might not share your cultural identity or your langage, because you are a minority here? Look, this is a difficult concept to comprehend, because most nations take their cultural identity for granted. But for francophones in Quebec, losing our cultural heritage is a legitimate long-term concern. Now you might say this is unrealistic or unimportant, but until you even try to care about this aspect, I don't think you'll ever understand anything about this whole debate. The 'translation' is me asking the person at the guichet what it means, not QC sending me a paper in english. Also, certain income tax forms are no longer available in english (I think this is mainly corporate forms). Instead of worrying about loosing your culture, and imposing legislation that is completely against liberal socierty trends, you should work hard at adding the best elements of your culture to canadian culture in general. Be part of the system, not a vacuum sealed section that is only technically considered part of the greater machine.
Canada is a bilingual country
Quebec is a bilingual province
You expect services in English -everywhere-. Watch me try to get services in French when I go to BC. No. I speak English there. I know you can pull the numbers here but what percentage of Francophones do we need to have parked over there for BC to start spending money on bilingual provincial services?
|
On January 21 2013 23:36 Tobberoth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 21:45 lepape wrote:
If you give someone the choice between english and french, whether it's for publicity or for their children's education, that person will always choose english first, it's the logical choice. Without laws, the french language is fighting an uphill battle in North America that is virtually impossible to win. Is that such a bad thing then? It seems like natural development, it's a tiny speck of french culture in a sea of english culture, obviously the influence is 100% one-directional. Seems weird to make discriminating laws etc to try to battle this force, which probably won't be stopped anyway. Though maybe this is just my views because it's such a weird situation for a person like me from a country which isn't bilingual in the slightest, but it sounds weird to me that quebecians feel their culture will be destroyed unless they force everyone to speak french, while american natives etc still have their culture and language even though they really have no laws at all protecting them, it just means they are perfectly fluent in English as well.
You're right, we're pretty dumb to even try to protect what we are, let's just all assimilate and get done with this useless language already.
And the natives is a whole other topic, let's just say that they're just not a good exemple of a culture being well-preserved at all, they're actually pretty much the worst example to bring up. They have many laws helping them, at least in Quebec most of them don't even know their native language, or poorly (part of the problem is due to the fact those languages have no written tradition).
|
On January 22 2013 00:11 lepape wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2013 23:36 Tobberoth wrote:On January 21 2013 21:45 lepape wrote:
If you give someone the choice between english and french, whether it's for publicity or for their children's education, that person will always choose english first, it's the logical choice. Without laws, the french language is fighting an uphill battle in North America that is virtually impossible to win. Is that such a bad thing then? It seems like natural development, it's a tiny speck of french culture in a sea of english culture, obviously the influence is 100% one-directional. Seems weird to make discriminating laws etc to try to battle this force, which probably won't be stopped anyway. Though maybe this is just my views because it's such a weird situation for a person like me from a country which isn't bilingual in the slightest, but it sounds weird to me that quebecians feel their culture will be destroyed unless they force everyone to speak french, while american natives etc still have their culture and language even though they really have no laws at all protecting them, it just means they are perfectly fluent in English as well. You're right, we're pretty dumb to even try to protect what we are, let's just all assimilate and get done with this useless language already. And the natives is a whole other topic, let's just say that they're just not a good exemple of a culture being well-preserved at all, they're actually pretty much the worst example to bring up. They have many laws helping them, at least in Quebec most of them don't even know their native language, our poorly (part of the problem is due to the fact those languages have no written tradition).
It's funny when a dude from Sweden says 'oh yeah post-genocide natives are just dandy'.
|
On January 22 2013 00:14 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 00:11 lepape wrote:On January 21 2013 23:36 Tobberoth wrote:On January 21 2013 21:45 lepape wrote:
If you give someone the choice between english and french, whether it's for publicity or for their children's education, that person will always choose english first, it's the logical choice. Without laws, the french language is fighting an uphill battle in North America that is virtually impossible to win. Is that such a bad thing then? It seems like natural development, it's a tiny speck of french culture in a sea of english culture, obviously the influence is 100% one-directional. Seems weird to make discriminating laws etc to try to battle this force, which probably won't be stopped anyway. Though maybe this is just my views because it's such a weird situation for a person like me from a country which isn't bilingual in the slightest, but it sounds weird to me that quebecians feel their culture will be destroyed unless they force everyone to speak french, while american natives etc still have their culture and language even though they really have no laws at all protecting them, it just means they are perfectly fluent in English as well. You're right, we're pretty dumb to even try to protect what we are, let's just all assimilate and get done with this useless language already. And the natives is a whole other topic, let's just say that they're just not a good exemple of a culture being well-preserved at all, they're actually pretty much the worst example to bring up. They have many laws helping them, at least in Quebec most of them don't even know their native language, our poorly (part of the problem is due to the fact those languages have no written tradition). It's funny when a dude from Sweden says 'oh yeah post-genocide natives are just dandy'.
How is that funny, and how is that what I said?
My point was that just because your culture isn't protected by laws doesn't mean it disappears. Say french and english are given 100% equal "rights" in Quebec, will everyone speak English there 200 years from now? Probably, though that would happen eventually anyway if that was the case. But it also wouldn't mean that 20 years from now, only 5% of the population there speaks French.
It's such a weird situation especially because it's allowed by modern times. If something like this happened 400 years ago and a very small minority in a small part of a country tried to protect their culture by laws, they would have been kicked out. Nowadays, instead, there has to be protective barriers put up, which really only delay the innevitable. If you give equal space to both, the part which people prefer will succeed.
|
Are you not allowed to place text in a language of your choosing on a sign? The greek restaurant needs to have its shit in French as well, I guess? Language police just sounds extremely silly.
|
On January 22 2013 00:51 Thorakh wrote:
Are you not allowed to place text in a language of your choosing on a sign? The greek restaurant needs to have its shit in French as well, I guess? Language police just sounds extremely silly.
You are, go to Chinatown and there will be signs in purely Chinese even. In little Italy you can find signs in Italian/French/English I believe.
The OP is just so ....biased that he came up with the idea that you are not allowed to put signs in anything other than French for some reason.
|
On January 22 2013 00:26 Tobberoth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 00:14 Djzapz wrote:On January 22 2013 00:11 lepape wrote:On January 21 2013 23:36 Tobberoth wrote:On January 21 2013 21:45 lepape wrote:
If you give someone the choice between english and french, whether it's for publicity or for their children's education, that person will always choose english first, it's the logical choice. Without laws, the french language is fighting an uphill battle in North America that is virtually impossible to win. Is that such a bad thing then? It seems like natural development, it's a tiny speck of french culture in a sea of english culture, obviously the influence is 100% one-directional. Seems weird to make discriminating laws etc to try to battle this force, which probably won't be stopped anyway. Though maybe this is just my views because it's such a weird situation for a person like me from a country which isn't bilingual in the slightest, but it sounds weird to me that quebecians feel their culture will be destroyed unless they force everyone to speak french, while american natives etc still have their culture and language even though they really have no laws at all protecting them, it just means they are perfectly fluent in English as well. You're right, we're pretty dumb to even try to protect what we are, let's just all assimilate and get done with this useless language already. And the natives is a whole other topic, let's just say that they're just not a good exemple of a culture being well-preserved at all, they're actually pretty much the worst example to bring up. They have many laws helping them, at least in Quebec most of them don't even know their native language, our poorly (part of the problem is due to the fact those languages have no written tradition). It's funny when a dude from Sweden says 'oh yeah post-genocide natives are just dandy'. How is that funny, and how is that what I said? My point was that just because your culture isn't protected by laws doesn't mean it disappears. Say french and english are given 100% equal "rights" in Quebec, will everyone speak English there 200 years from now? Probably, though that would happen eventually anyway if that was the case. But it also wouldn't mean that 20 years from now, only 5% of the population there speaks French. It's such a weird situation especially because it's allowed by modern times. If something like this happened 400 years ago and a very small minority in a small part of a country tried to protect their culture by laws, they would have been kicked out. Nowadays, instead, there has to be protective barriers put up, which really only delay the innevitable. If you give equal space to both, the part which people prefer will succeed.
What you said ignores the whole thing where people value certain cultural elements. The fact that you don't personally give it any value doesn't change anything. Come on dude. Your apathy DOES NOT change the fact that many people don't want our culture to die off or to be diluted.
I look at what happened to the natives and I think it's incredibly sad and a huge loss. You seemed to think that they were doing great.
|
On January 22 2013 01:06 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 00:26 Tobberoth wrote:On January 22 2013 00:14 Djzapz wrote:On January 22 2013 00:11 lepape wrote:On January 21 2013 23:36 Tobberoth wrote:On January 21 2013 21:45 lepape wrote:
If you give someone the choice between english and french, whether it's for publicity or for their children's education, that person will always choose english first, it's the logical choice. Without laws, the french language is fighting an uphill battle in North America that is virtually impossible to win. Is that such a bad thing then? It seems like natural development, it's a tiny speck of french culture in a sea of english culture, obviously the influence is 100% one-directional. Seems weird to make discriminating laws etc to try to battle this force, which probably won't be stopped anyway. Though maybe this is just my views because it's such a weird situation for a person like me from a country which isn't bilingual in the slightest, but it sounds weird to me that quebecians feel their culture will be destroyed unless they force everyone to speak french, while american natives etc still have their culture and language even though they really have no laws at all protecting them, it just means they are perfectly fluent in English as well. You're right, we're pretty dumb to even try to protect what we are, let's just all assimilate and get done with this useless language already. And the natives is a whole other topic, let's just say that they're just not a good exemple of a culture being well-preserved at all, they're actually pretty much the worst example to bring up. They have many laws helping them, at least in Quebec most of them don't even know their native language, our poorly (part of the problem is due to the fact those languages have no written tradition). It's funny when a dude from Sweden says 'oh yeah post-genocide natives are just dandy'. How is that funny, and how is that what I said? My point was that just because your culture isn't protected by laws doesn't mean it disappears. Say french and english are given 100% equal "rights" in Quebec, will everyone speak English there 200 years from now? Probably, though that would happen eventually anyway if that was the case. But it also wouldn't mean that 20 years from now, only 5% of the population there speaks French. It's such a weird situation especially because it's allowed by modern times. If something like this happened 400 years ago and a very small minority in a small part of a country tried to protect their culture by laws, they would have been kicked out. Nowadays, instead, there has to be protective barriers put up, which really only delay the innevitable. If you give equal space to both, the part which people prefer will succeed. What you said ignores the whole thing where people value certain cultural elements. The fact that you don't personally give it any value doesn't change anything. Come on dude. Your apathy DOES NOT change the fact that many people don't want our culture to die off or to be diluted. I look at what happened to the natives and I think it's incredibly sad and a huge loss. You seemed to think that they were doing great.
It's not about apathy. Sure, I don't care about whether or not people speak french in Canada, but I'm not saying it's bad that they do and I'm not saying people have no right to care. All I'm saying is that experience shows us that fighting this kind of invisible threat to your culture is futile. It's one thing if the rest of Canada tried to forcefully get rid of french, such as changing laws to specifically destroy the culture... for example a law disallowing kids to speak french in school. However, I also find it weird to try to do the opposite.
Is it a huge loss if no one speaks French natively in Canada in 300-400 years? That's up to opinion I guess, but my reasoning in this case is that if you give French and English equal space (point being to not discriminate against either) and people over time choose to go with English, then it can't really be a huge loss since it was voluntary. What would be even cooler would be if there was a merger over time and the Canadian language became more of a mix of French and English.
|
On January 22 2013 01:15 Tobberoth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 01:06 Djzapz wrote:On January 22 2013 00:26 Tobberoth wrote:On January 22 2013 00:14 Djzapz wrote:On January 22 2013 00:11 lepape wrote:On January 21 2013 23:36 Tobberoth wrote:On January 21 2013 21:45 lepape wrote:
If you give someone the choice between english and french, whether it's for publicity or for their children's education, that person will always choose english first, it's the logical choice. Without laws, the french language is fighting an uphill battle in North America that is virtually impossible to win. Is that such a bad thing then? It seems like natural development, it's a tiny speck of french culture in a sea of english culture, obviously the influence is 100% one-directional. Seems weird to make discriminating laws etc to try to battle this force, which probably won't be stopped anyway. Though maybe this is just my views because it's such a weird situation for a person like me from a country which isn't bilingual in the slightest, but it sounds weird to me that quebecians feel their culture will be destroyed unless they force everyone to speak french, while american natives etc still have their culture and language even though they really have no laws at all protecting them, it just means they are perfectly fluent in English as well. You're right, we're pretty dumb to even try to protect what we are, let's just all assimilate and get done with this useless language already. And the natives is a whole other topic, let's just say that they're just not a good exemple of a culture being well-preserved at all, they're actually pretty much the worst example to bring up. They have many laws helping them, at least in Quebec most of them don't even know their native language, our poorly (part of the problem is due to the fact those languages have no written tradition). It's funny when a dude from Sweden says 'oh yeah post-genocide natives are just dandy'. How is that funny, and how is that what I said? My point was that just because your culture isn't protected by laws doesn't mean it disappears. Say french and english are given 100% equal "rights" in Quebec, will everyone speak English there 200 years from now? Probably, though that would happen eventually anyway if that was the case. But it also wouldn't mean that 20 years from now, only 5% of the population there speaks French. It's such a weird situation especially because it's allowed by modern times. If something like this happened 400 years ago and a very small minority in a small part of a country tried to protect their culture by laws, they would have been kicked out. Nowadays, instead, there has to be protective barriers put up, which really only delay the innevitable. If you give equal space to both, the part which people prefer will succeed. What you said ignores the whole thing where people value certain cultural elements. The fact that you don't personally give it any value doesn't change anything. Come on dude. Your apathy DOES NOT change the fact that many people don't want our culture to die off or to be diluted. I look at what happened to the natives and I think it's incredibly sad and a huge loss. You seemed to think that they were doing great. It's not about apathy. Sure, I don't care about whether or not people speak french in Canada, but I'm not saying it's bad that they do and I'm not saying people have no right to care. All I'm saying is that experience shows us that fighting this kind of invisible threat to your culture is futile. It's one thing if the rest of Canada tried to forcefully get rid of french, such as changing laws to specifically destroy the culture... for example a law disallowing kids to speak french in school. However, I also find it weird to try to do the opposite. Is it a huge loss if no one speaks French natively in Canada in 300-400 years? That's up to opinion I guess, but my reasoning in this case is that if you give French and English equal space (point being to not discriminate against either) and people over time choose to go with English, then it can't really be a huge loss since it was voluntary. What would be even cooler would be if there was a merger over time and the Canadian language became more of a mix of French and English.
Well we have determined that you think it's weird now.
|
On January 22 2013 00:26 Tobberoth wrote:
If something like this happened 400 years ago and a very small minority in a small part of a country tried to protect their culture by laws, they would have been kicked out.
If we still functioned like 400 hundred years ago, France and the UK would have wiped Canada off the map. Hopefully (or oddly, as you seem to think), we have learned to respect each other's lives a little more.
On January 22 2013 01:15 Tobberoth wrote:
Is it a huge loss if no one speaks French natively in Canada in 300-400 years? That's up to opinion I guess, but my reasoning in this case is that if you give French and English equal space (point being to not discriminate against either) and people over time choose to go with English, then it can't really be a huge loss since it was voluntary. What would be even cooler would be if there was a merger over time and the Canadian language became more of a mix of French and English.
I don't know if you're being hypocrite or not, because I'm pretty sure that you do hold values and that you do feel nostalgia when those values that you dearly held on slowly vanish.
Now, if you say that it's just that you personally don't care about our culture, well, I mean, ok? Every man for himself I guess. Poor Injuns.
|
OK guys, let's settle the french sign debate with some facts.
Commerce and business
Product labels, their instructions, manuals, warranty certificates as well as restaurant menus and wine lists must be in the official language. Other languages may be used, provided the official language's prominence is at least equivalent.[16][17][18]
Catalogues, brochures, folders, commercial directories and other such publications, must be in the official language. All software (for example, video games and operating systems) must be available in French unless no French version exists.[19]
Signs and posters must be in the official language and they may also be in another language provided the official language be markedly predominant.
A number of exceptions to the general rules for commercial products, signs, and advertising:
Products destined exclusively for export;
Educational products for the teaching of a language other than French;
Cultural and ideological companies, groups, signs, and literature (including non-French broadcasters, newspapers, etc.);
Companies (usually multinational corporations) that sign an agreement with the OQLF permitting an exemption from the francization requirement. (However, the rules regarding the right of a worker to work in French still apply.)[20]
In many parts of Quebec, various signs with bilingual French and English text of equal sizes can be seen, although French is usually slightly predominant on these signs; for example, it is located to the left of other languages so that it is read "before" the non-French text when reading left-to right. Formerly, the size and colour of text in other languages were tightly regulated as well.
Signs and posters must be in the official language and they may also be in another language provided the official language be markedly predominant.
So what this means is that if I have a sign for a car wash, for example, it must look like this:
L A V E-----A U T O
-----------carwash----------
The signs that you see that aren't in french we're given the grandfather clause because they are a core part of montreal culture BUT don't think that means they are legal, they are just 'tolerated'.
But the fact of the matter is, I can't have a sign outside my mexican restaurant that says "Fiesta!!" or call my restaurant "Joe's Burgers". French must be predominant, which means in larger font, and on top.
Now, if you go to my OP you will see a link to a Ben and Jerry's where the language officer did not like some of the in-store signage.
The fact that there is a law restricting me to put up a sign on my private property describing my private business is incredible. It's no wonder so many people just up and left over the past few decades, nobody wants to play by these rules.
|
On January 22 2013 01:48 Abraxas514 wrote:OK guys, let's settle the french sign debate with some facts. Show nested quote +Commerce and business
Product labels, their instructions, manuals, warranty certificates as well as restaurant menus and wine lists must be in the official language. Other languages may be used, provided the official language's prominence is at least equivalent.[16][17][18]
Catalogues, brochures, folders, commercial directories and other such publications, must be in the official language. All software (for example, video games and operating systems) must be available in French unless no French version exists.[19]
Signs and posters must be in the official language and they may also be in another language provided the official language be markedly predominant.
A number of exceptions to the general rules for commercial products, signs, and advertising:
Products destined exclusively for export;
Educational products for the teaching of a language other than French;
Cultural and ideological companies, groups, signs, and literature (including non-French broadcasters, newspapers, etc.);
Companies (usually multinational corporations) that sign an agreement with the OQLF permitting an exemption from the francization requirement. (However, the rules regarding the right of a worker to work in French still apply.)[20]
In many parts of Quebec, various signs with bilingual French and English text of equal sizes can be seen, although French is usually slightly predominant on these signs; for example, it is located to the left of other languages so that it is read "before" the non-French text when reading left-to right. Formerly, the size and colour of text in other languages were tightly regulated as well. Signs and posters must be in the official language and they may also be in another language provided the official language be markedly predominant. So what this means is that if I have a sign for a car wash, for example, it must look like this: L A V E-----A U T O-----------carwash---------- The signs that you see that aren't in french we're given the grandfather clause because they are a core part of montreal culture BUT don't think that means they are legal, they are just 'tolerated'. But the fact of the matter is, I can't have a sign outside my mexican restaurant that says "Fiesta!!" or call my restaurant "Joe's Burgers". French must be predominant, which means in larger font, and on top. Now, if you go to my OP you will see a link to a Ben and Jerry's where the language officer did not like some of the in-store signage. The fact that there is a law restricting me to put up a sign on my private property describing my private business is incredible. It's no wonder so many people just up and left over the past few decades, nobody wants to play by these rules.
I explained the reason for that law which is admittedly getting dated.... You're making a big deal out of this. I won't see French signs in BC but I guess I can't reasonably expect that and you can.
Freaking signs dude :/ come on. If you intend to live in Montreal long enough that you need to be able to read the signs of private businesses, make an effort and learn rudimentary French...
|
On January 22 2013 01:48 Abraxas514 wrote:
The fact that there is a law restricting me to put up a sign on my private property describing my private business is incredible.
In every civilized country, there are laws restricting the population about how they can describe their private business on their private property.
The most obvious example being curse words and explicit sexual language. I don't find this too incredible.
|
Personally I don't feel like a people identifying themselves by their culture instead of by their own person and merit makes sense.
I'm a 3rd generation dutch immigrant myself. My family assimilated into the western BC culture but at the same time that's not losing our culture, that's adding onto it. Sure my grandparents born in the netherlands would have liked to see us carry traditions but we decided not to. In my opinionated mind If it makes more sense to your grand-kids in 50 years to speak english and they voluntarily do it there shouldn't be anything holding that back. I understand it's different that we moved to an english speaking place but the general premise that we were a small minority (Quebec to North America) still stands I guess.
Also people keep saying that you can't be expected to get french service or see french signs in BC. You actually do see them all over the place. In fact you can see signs in pretty much every language. If you go to richmond you'll see a Scotiabank with everything inside and out in mandarin. It has no english or french on the bank whatsoever. I'm not making an argument here to say that Quebec should be this way though, I'm only stating facts
This debate has reached the point it always does where we have two different sets of people that will never understand eachother. Both sides, in their own mind, have legitimate reasons for feeling the way that they do. We can never expect to change the others minds in these kind of debates because our minds just work differently.
|
On January 22 2013 02:18 Dawski wrote:
Personally I don't feel like a people identifying themselves by their culture instead of by their own person and merit makes sense.
Where does your personal merit start and your education end?
And are you saying that you're basically... cultureless? Come on.
You're an anglophone canadian. You're not dutch. You have only small traces of your dutch heritage. You were born in the Canadian culture - and if you believe that it doesn't change a thing, then I invite you to travel around the world because there are differences between the Na tribe in China and the working class of Louisiana.
I'm an immigrant myself, first generation. And even I don't call myself "chilean", most of what was chilean in my has been lost long ago. Why would I perpetrate the Chilean tradition in France anyway? I'm emigrating, this isn't a damned invasion. There is no comparison with people who lose their traditions in their own homes.
On January 22 2013 01:48 Abraxas514 wrote:
Now, if you go to my OP you will see a link to a Ben and Jerry's where the language officer did not like some of the in-store signage.
Oh my, how scandalous. Meanwhile, every succesful European film is remade in english before its release in North America because fuck french/finnish/german/spanish/portuguese.
|
On January 22 2013 02:18 Dawski wrote:
Personally I don't feel like a people identifying themselves by their culture instead of by their own person and merit makes sense.
I'm a 3rd generation dutch immigrant myself. My family assimilated into the western BC culture but at the same time that's not losing our culture, that's adding onto it.
That was exactly my argument for bilingualism in Quebec. But I don't think that's going to happen unless a new generation of people in this province speak both languages and finally decide embracing the canadian culture of a "mosaic" is worth a shot.
|
On January 22 2013 01:41 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 00:26 Tobberoth wrote:
If something like this happened 400 years ago and a very small minority in a small part of a country tried to protect their culture by laws, they would have been kicked out. If we still functioned like 400 hundred years ago, France and the UK would have wiped Canada off the map. Hopefully (or oddly, as you seem to think), we have learned to respect each other's lives a little more. Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 01:15 Tobberoth wrote:
Is it a huge loss if no one speaks French natively in Canada in 300-400 years? That's up to opinion I guess, but my reasoning in this case is that if you give French and English equal space (point being to not discriminate against either) and people over time choose to go with English, then it can't really be a huge loss since it was voluntary. What would be even cooler would be if there was a merger over time and the Canadian language became more of a mix of French and English. I don't know if you're being hypocrite or not, because I'm pretty sure that you do hold values and that you do feel nostalgia when those values that you dearly held on slowly vanish. Now, if you say that it's just that you personally don't care about our culture, well, I mean, ok? Every man for himself I guess. Poor Injuns.
I'm not being a hypocrite at all, because I'm not saying people who like their culture should disregard it or get rid of it. I'm saying it's a natural process and that fighting said process might be futile and costly (costly in the sense that you might alienate a lot of people and create a lot of trouble, just to prolong something a few decades which might or might not be worth it). There's a clear difference between saying "everyone living here should be forced to use only language X because we are afraid of language Y becoming more prominent" and saying "everyone living here should be allowed to use only language X because it's their culture". I think it's cool that people cling to their culture and there's nothing wrong with that, I love traditional Swedish food and I think it's sad that it's becoming less common for Swedish families to eat it, but I don't think it would make sense to have laws in place to try to make swedes eat more traditional food to keep the tradition alive. People choose by themselves what they want to eat and if this means that in the long run people won't eat traditional Swedish food anymore, so be it.
Me saying I don't care about your culture was just to make the point clear that Canadians don't need to get defensive because I'm not saying anyone is wrong and I'm not trying to judge anyone, I'm just discussing a viewpoint because I think the whole situation is very interesting (Canada being bilingual but it's very localized and there's some controversy etc). I didn't mean it in the sense "who gives a shit about french culture in canada, just let english take over wtf", I acknowledge that french Canadians don't like English influence.
|
On January 22 2013 02:35 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 02:18 Dawski wrote:
Personally I don't feel like a people identifying themselves by their culture instead of by their own person and merit makes sense. Where does your personal merit start and your education end? And are you saying that you're basically... cultureless? Come on. You're an anglophone canadian. You're not dutch. You have only small traces of your dutch heritage. You were born in the Canadian culture - and if you believe that it doesn't change a thing, then I invite you to travel around the world because there are differences between the Na tribe in China and the working class of Louisiana. I'm an immigrant myself, first generation. And even I don't call myself "chilean", most of what was chilean in my has been lost long ago. Why would I perpetrate the Chilean tradition in France anyway? I'm emigrating, this isn't a damned invasion. There is no comparison with people who lose their traditions in their own homes. Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 01:48 Abraxas514 wrote:
Now, if you go to my OP you will see a link to a Ben and Jerry's where the language officer did not like some of the in-store signage. Oh my, how scandalous. Meanwhile, every succesful European film is remade in english before its release in North America because fuck french/finnish/german/spanish/portuguese.
What I'm saying is I do in fact have a culture. I just feel that some people put way too high of a value in cultural identity. I am an anglophonic BC canadian you're correct and that's what I was stating. And the point was my grandparents who also put high value in cultural identity had to let our family assimilate to the anglophonic culture for the sole reason that it just made sense.
People in this thread said themselves that if their children eventually had the option of speaking french or english that they would choose english. Why hold that back for the sake of (to some people) such a small part of what makes you who you are?
And this is why I said that this will always be a debate. I understand I'm opinionated to think that cultural background doesn't hold much value. Which is why I'm not saying that my way of thinking is superior but I don't think it's possible for the one side to understand the other. Personally I feel like a lot of this is the media at work. If you live your whole life in western canada with the media constantly hyping how mosiac we are in culture you will get offended when Quebec challenges that. On the flip side if you live your whole life in Quebec where the media constantly hypes the importance of the culture you will get offended when we challenge that as well.
After reading the man's post above me I forgot that I left out one detail. This post is in response to the PQ making language laws to preserve a culture. I have no problem with people having a culture in general.
|
@Tobberoth no, I meant that it was hypocritical of you to say such things when you would probably react in a similar fashion if your own culture was concerned.
It's not different than saying that money doesn't matter when you have everything you need. Sure, a very small number of people will genuinely not care, but most simply don't realize what it is like to be broke.
@Dawski what other things that aren't culture seperate us from mokeys, aside from physiological details?
And your grandparents did the right thing, as I said it does make sense to adopt the culture of a country you emigrate to, but to adopt the culture of those who come into your home... dunno, sounds different, don't you think?
|
@Dawski your parents decided to assimalate because they immigrated in a new country, why would they immigrate if they are not going to assimalate with the local culture? The difference between your family situation and the Quebec is that the majority of the Quebec's population have French ancestors who colonized the continent and we did not immigrate to Canada we are just born here with a different culture. Why would we assimilate ourselves with a culture that is in minority in our province? That doesn't make sense it's like if mexicans would assimilate themselves to the american culture while living in Mexico.
|
On January 22 2013 03:03 Kukaracha wrote:
@Tobberoth no, I meant that it was hypocritical of you to say such things when you would probably react in a similar fashion if your own culture was concerned.
It's not different than saying that money doesn't matter when you have everything you need. Sure, a very small number of people will genuinely not care, but most simply don't realize what it is like to be broke.
It's a good point to make, but I still don't consider it hypocrisy since I'm not telling anyone to do anything I wouldn't do in a similar situation. If I said "Quebec should obviously do this, it will fix the whole problem in the long term", sure. While a very different situation, slightly similar sentiments are brewing in Europe. Extreme right wing parties are claiming that islam is "invading" Europe and diluting our culture and we need to try to prevent this by law, a person I know actually told me she got mad when she saw an article in arabic in a Swedish newspaper. I personally found that quite disgusting and I think the whole movement is stupid, because they are making something which might be plausible on a very long term scale seem immediate, and it easily takes racist tones such as saying "If we keep allowing muslims into our country, Swedes won't be blonde and blue eyed anymore, our culture will be destroyed". And I would go with a similar perspective there (though, again, the situation is not exactly comparable to french canada), we are allowed to like our culture, but if we have to pay with racism to prolong "blond hair and blue eyes in sweden" for a few decades, I say it's not worth it. If I'm allowed to stay swedish, I honestly don't care if Swedes all have brown hair and don't speak swedish in a few hundred years. As long as it's voluntary and happens naturally.
On January 22 2013 03:03 Kukaracha wrote:
@Dawski what other things that aren't culture seperate us from mokeys, aside from physiological details?
And your grandparents did the right thing, as I said it does make sense to adopt the culture of a country you emigrate to, but to adopt the culture of those who come into your home... dunno, sounds different, don't you think?
Well, has anyone said anyone has to adopt any culture? From what I understood, the discussion is whether or not laws should be used to try to curb english influence, so that in the long term, the culture can be maintained through the generations by force, while your discussion is rather about english canadians coming to your part of canada and telling you to stop being french canadian.
|
On January 22 2013 03:27 Tobberoth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 03:03 Kukaracha wrote:
@Tobberoth no, I meant that it was hypocritical of you to say such things when you would probably react in a similar fashion if your own culture was concerned.
It's not different than saying that money doesn't matter when you have everything you need. Sure, a very small number of people will genuinely not care, but most simply don't realize what it is like to be broke.
It's a good point to make, but I still don't consider it hypocrisy since I'm not telling anyone to do anything I wouldn't do in a similar situation. If I said "Quebec should obviously do this, it will fix the whole problem in the long term", sure. While a very different situation, slightly similar sentiments are brewing in Europe. Extreme right wing parties are claiming that islam is "invading" Europe and diluting our culture and we need to try to prevent this by law, a person I know actually told me she got mad when she saw an article in arabic in a Swedish newspaper. I personally found that quite disgusting and I think the whole movement is stupid, because they are making something which might be plausible on a very long term scale seem immediate, and it easily takes racist tones such as saying "If we keep allowing muslims into our country, Swedes won't be blonde and blue eyed anymore, our culture will be destroyed". And I would go with a similar perspective there (though, again, the situation is not exactly comparable to french canada), we are allowed to like our culture, but if we have to pay with racism to prolong "blond hair and blue eyes in sweden" for a few decades, I say it's not worth it. If I'm allowed to stay swedish, I honestly don't care if Swedes all have brown hair and don't speak swedish in a few hundred years. As long as it's voluntary and happens naturally. Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 03:03 Kukaracha wrote:
@Dawski what other things that aren't culture seperate us from mokeys, aside from physiological details?
And your grandparents did the right thing, as I said it does make sense to adopt the culture of a country you emigrate to, but to adopt the culture of those who come into your home... dunno, sounds different, don't you think? Well, has anyone said anyone has to adopt any culture? From what I understood, the discussion is whether or not laws should be used to try to curb english influence, so that in the long term, the culture can be maintained through the generations by force, while your discussion is rather about english canadians coming to your part of canada and telling you to stop being french canadian.
This is precisely what I meant by my last post and why I had to quickly edit in that last paragraph because I realized it sounded like I was saying I wanted to take French culture away.
I love the french culture. This past Christmas I had dinner at my fiancee's families place and they are as french as you can get. Their big home-made tourtierre and all. I understand how important it is to them. The question is whether it is worth all these xenophobic laws to stop something that will eventually happen naturally.
|
Speaking to the whole rudeness vs anglos perception questioned earlier, I've heard people mention or complain about it to me before but every time I've been to montreal or QC the experience has been at the very worst comparable to NY/Chi and usually quite congenial so long as I do my best with french. My experience might be a little different since I'm speaking as a vermonter from near the border, so I'd met some quebecois and picked up local broadcast french over tv/radio as a child before ever going to canada. The only thing that bugs me is when the wealthier set comes down from montreal or QC to vermont on vacation to throw some (admittedly needed) tourist money around and end up bossing staff around, expecting people to speak french in our state or disregard tipping norms.
More to the topic, the question I have here is probably most relevant to montreal posters- how do you guys feel the language policies have been working out in regard to immigration? I ask because the last time I was in the city, it seemed to me that at least some of the population speaks neither french nor english as their first language. Some of it'll come down to demography, but is there any concern that the hot ticket immigrants and investors will just go west and save themselves some of the added adjustment/costs? I really respect the drive to preserve the culture but I'm curious where the discourse is right now as to how you balance that with the need to keep the local economy dynamic, and what lengths people are willing to go to in favor of one at the expense of the other.
|
On January 22 2013 03:41 waltermatthau wrote:
Speaking to the whole rudeness vs anglos perception questioned earlier, I've heard people mention or complain about it to me before but every time I've been to montreal or QC the experience has been at the very worst comparable to NY/Chi and usually quite congenial so long as I do my best with french. My experience might be a little different since I'm speaking as a vermonter from near the border, so I'd met some quebecois and picked up local broadcast french over tv/radio as a child before ever going to canada. The only thing that bugs me is when the wealthier set comes down from montreal or QC to vermont on vacation to throw some (admittedly needed) tourist money around and end up bossing staff around, expecting people to speak french in our state or disregard tipping norms.
More to the topic, the question I have here is probably most relevant to montreal posters- how do you guys feel the language policies have been working out in regard to immigration? I ask because the last time I was in the city, it seemed to me that at least some of the population speaks neither french nor english as their first language. Some of it'll come down to demography, but is there any concern that the hot ticket immigrants and investors will just go west and save themselves some of the added adjustment/costs? I really respect the drive to preserve the culture but I'm curious where the discourse is right now as to how you balance that with the need to keep the local economy dynamic, and what lengths people are willing to go to in favor of one at the expense of the other.
About the tipping, that's not representative of Montreal at all. Mostly just represents dicks.
Around here (MTL) we have quite a high rate of immigracy because the french reproduction rate is really low.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/famil50f-eng.htm
I mean REALLY low, to the point where the "Average number of children at home per family" for "couple families" is 0.9.
This means if we didn't have immigrants, Quebec's population might decrease. If you know a bit about economics you know a declining population in a first world country is a horrible problem. Already my generation's (Y) payments for baby-boomer retirees will be astonishingly high, if there are fewer people contributing to their pensions, were fucked.
So Montreal accepts MANY immigrants per year. http://www.micc.gouv.qc.ca/publications/fr/recherches-statistiques/FICHE_syn_an2011.pdf is your source (sorry I didn't find the english version, it may or may not exist). Many of these immigrants move to toronto, ottowa or vancouver, for many different reasons besides language. In my opinion it's for the following reasons: TO because of job opportunities, ottowa for higher level jobs/research/get away from french laws without going too far from montreal, and vancouver for it's easy winters/good job market and hockey team?
Now, there are a number of people here who don't speak either english or french. They are typically either elderly immigrants who came with their families (the majority would be chinese) or people here on business. This is a pretty big problem because two years ago I was in the south shore Kim Phat and I couldn't get ANY help... everything was written in chinese. I finally found some teenage chinese kids and they explained to me what the signs said. I'm not sure why the OLF doesn't have a problem with this, but it may be because it isn't english.
|
On January 22 2013 05:19 Abraxas514 wrote:So Montreal accepts MANY immigrants per year. http://www.micc.gouv.qc.ca/publications/fr/recherches-statistiques/FICHE_syn_an2011.pdf is your source (sorry I didn't find the english version, it may or may not exist). Many of these immigrants move to toronto, ottowa or vancouver, for many different reasons besides language. In my opinion it's for the following reasons: TO because of job opportunities, ottowa for higher level jobs/research/get away from french laws without going too far from montreal, and vancouver for it's easy winters/good job market and hockey team?
According to the source you provided, "Many of these immigrants move to ...." is 15% (85% have stayed in Quebec). Is it as abnormal as your trying to make it seems when you consider only 63% say they speak French ? (If I weren't speaking the local language I would be more inclined to migrate elsewhere... laws or not. Also there are many reason to migrate anyway).
|
It's already been pointed out, but I just want to emphasize that the PQ got elected mostly as a strategic vote to get the piece of shit that was the PLQ out of there. Many people (including myself) don't really support their separatist/language agenda even though we voted for them.
|
Quebec not joining generic drug deal
Last month, Wall announced the provinces would bulk buy six widely used generic drugs. He suggested the initiative could save provincial and territorial drug plans up to $100 million once it is fully implemented. Quebec was the only province to say it would not take part.
Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall says it's not surprising that Quebec has pulled out of a national health-care committee set up by the provinces.
Nor will it hinder further progress, said Wall, who chairs the group with Prince Edward Island Premier Robert Ghiz.
"As of late, Quebec has been more of a distraction at this table than a constructive partner," Wall said Tuesday in an email released to The Canadian Press by his office.
"We have been making significant progress in areas like joint purchase of generic drugs, sharing best practices, bending health-care cost curves and improving patient care without a lot of input from Quebec."
The premier was not available for further comment.
Quebec left to 'concentrate on own priorities'
Quebec's decision to pull out of the group was made public Monday. It had been quietly announced in a letter dated Jan. 11 and signed by Health Minister Rejean Hebert and Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Alexandre Cloutier. Quebec said it intended to concentrate on its own priorities.
I'm not 100% sure if this is solely PQ related or some kind of long standing issue between quebec's leadership and canadian boards. But seeing how our healthcare budget got nerfed, Quebec would be apt to find as many cost-saving measures as possible, and buying drugs on a larger scale seems to be a sensible way to save a few million.
When I see articles like this I think "what ARE these people doing?"
|
http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Marois make sovereignty push despite falling poll/7945508/story.html
“We have been on the defensive since the ’95 referendum,” Marois said at the close of a weekend PQ meeting, where an action plan was hatched to revive the independence debate.
“From now on we are on the offensive,” she said.
A Léger Marketing poll, for the Gazette and Le Devoir, conducted Feb. 5, 6, found support for sovereignty has dropped to 37 per cent from 43 per cent a year earlier.
Marois said with 90,000 members and its secret weapon — “militancy,”
With a minority government, she repeated, she cannot call a referendum now, so her government intends to pursue an approach called “sovereignist governance.”
That means seeking all powers granted Quebec under the existing Canadian constitution.
No no no no no. Anti-Federalism is on the drop in Quebec. The majority of french canadians don't want this. Why the hell is Marois continuing with this unpopular bullshit? The bottom line here is the pequists are burning more and more money that was cut from hospitals and universities in order to fund this whole project. She hopes to win a majority next election, ya right.
In other news, about tuition:
In a tweet, ASSÉ, the Association pour la solidarité syndicale étudiante, which has called for free tuition, replied to the premier.
“The freeze on tuition fees its not indexing. Pauline Marois should open a dictionary!”
Morons. Fucking moron liberal art undergraduate losers who don't understand the first thing about exonomics, job markets, taxes etc. Anyone who doesn't know that money value is relative to the current year doesn't know the first thing about economics and should go shoot themselves in the foot every time they decide to attend education summits and write letters.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
So the habs are #1 on the ladder, city hall is shut down while provincial cops raid every single office, but do you know what makes news in montreal?
http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2013/02/19/pastas-interdites-dans-un-resto-italien
For those that don't read french:
A very popular upscale Italian restaurant/club-lounge is getting harassed by the OLF. Know why? The word "Pasta" on the menu.
Quelle est la prochaine étape pour Massimo Lecas? «C’est entre les mains de mes avocats, m’a-t-il répondu. Jusqu’ici, ça m’a déjà coûté 4500 $ de frais. Le Buona Notte existe depuis 22 ans et c’est la première fois qu’on se fait dire que notre menu est trop «italien».
Basic translation: What's the next step for (the owner)? "It's in the hands of my lawyers, but up until now it's costed me 4500$ of lawyer fees. We've existed for 22 years, and this is the first time our menu was deemed too "Italian".
... Gotta applaud the PQ for giving these guys a nice fat budget instead of my engineering school.
|
On February 21 2013 01:16 Abraxas514 wrote:So the habs are #1 on the ladder, city hall is shut down while provincial cops raid every single office, but do you know what makes news in montreal? http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2013/02/19/pastas-interdites-dans-un-resto-italienFor those that don't read french: A very popular upscale Italian restaurant/club-lounge is getting harassed by the OLF. Know why? The word "Pasta" on the menu. Show nested quote +Quelle est la prochaine étape pour Massimo Lecas? «C’est entre les mains de mes avocats, m’a-t-il répondu. Jusqu’ici, ça m’a déjà coûté 4500 $ de frais. Le Buona Notte existe depuis 22 ans et c’est la première fois qu’on se fait dire que notre menu est trop «italien». Basic translation: What's the next step for (the owner)? "It's in the hands of my lawyers, but up until now it's costed me 4500$ of lawyer fees. We've existed for 22 years, and this is the first time our menu was deemed too "Italian". ... Gotta applaud the PQ for giving these guys a nice fat budget instead of my engineering school.
i cant believe this thread hasnt been closed, its full of prejudice, misunderstanding of the quebec situant and full of obnoxious insults towards québécois. journaldemontreal is the least recognized journalistic source, known for its lack of fact accuracy and strong rightwing ideology bias.
according to UN charts of rights Bill101 is totaly legit and in no possible case can be opressive towards the english pop of quebec. I can give y'all hundreds of scientifically recognized articles of linguists, socio-linguists ethnolinguistics that cleary demonstrate the necessity of institutionalizing and politizing the language in order to maintain culture and linguistical variety. bill101 is the perect example of saving french in northamerica. mods pease close this thread
|
+ Show Spoiler +On February 21 2013 01:27 crazyweasel wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 01:16 Abraxas514 wrote:So the habs are #1 on the ladder, city hall is shut down while provincial cops raid every single office, but do you know what makes news in montreal? http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2013/02/19/pastas-interdites-dans-un-resto-italienFor those that don't read french: A very popular upscale Italian restaurant/club-lounge is getting harassed by the OLF. Know why? The word "Pasta" on the menu. Quelle est la prochaine étape pour Massimo Lecas? «C’est entre les mains de mes avocats, m’a-t-il répondu. Jusqu’ici, ça m’a déjà coûté 4500 $ de frais. Le Buona Notte existe depuis 22 ans et c’est la première fois qu’on se fait dire que notre menu est trop «italien». Basic translation: What's the next step for (the owner)? "It's in the hands of my lawyers, but up until now it's costed me 4500$ of lawyer fees. We've existed for 22 years, and this is the first time our menu was deemed too "Italian". ... Gotta applaud the PQ for giving these guys a nice fat budget instead of my engineering school.
i cant believe this thread hasnt been closed, its full of prejudice, misunderstanding of the quebec situant and full of obnoxious insults towards québécois. journaldemontreal is the least recognized journalistic source, known for its lack of fact accuracy and strong rightwing ideology bias.
according to UN charts of rights Bill101 is totaly legit and in no possible case can be opressive towards the english pop of quebec. I can give y'all hundreds of scientifically recognized articles of linguists, socio-linguists ethnolinguistics that cleary demonstrate the necessity of institutionalizing and politizing the language in order to maintain culture and linguistical variety. bill101 is the perect example of saving french in northamerica. mods pease close this thread
pretty much what I think everytime this fucking thread pops up again and again. Everyone knows that Journal de Montreal is pure b.s. btw.
I agree with the fact that this thread is shit and should be closed because of all the prejudice and inaccuracies that it carries.
I dont want to get into a backseat modding attitude but damnit, most of the things in that thread are false/biased or the result of misunderstanding of the context...
|
If you must use legislation to keep your heritage alive, you've already failed. That's my opinion on the subject.
It doesn't matter how much BS the journal is FFS. The point is the OQLF targeted a private business for not being french enough. That is the fact and I think the people in this thread are allowed to have the opinion that it is bullshit in a modern day society
|
On February 21 2013 07:24 Dawski wrote:
If you must use legislation to keep your heritage alive, you've already failed. That's my opinion on the subject.
It doesn't matter how much BS the journal is FFS. The point is the OQLF targeted a private business for not being french enough. That is the fact and I think the people in this thread are allowed to have the opinion that it is bullshit in a modern day society
you don't seem to understand ethnlingusitic nor sociolingusitics. the need of using legislation is because there is something called culutral/linguistical hegemony but you probably don,t have the intelect to even know this word.
User was warned for this post
|
On February 21 2013 07:30 crazyweasel wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 07:24 Dawski wrote:
If you must use legislation to keep your heritage alive, you've already failed. That's my opinion on the subject.
It doesn't matter how much BS the journal is FFS. The point is the OQLF targeted a private business for not being french enough. That is the fact and I think the people in this thread are allowed to have the opinion that it is bullshit in a modern day society you don't seem to understand ethnlingusitic nor sociolingusitics. the need of using legislation is because there is something called culutral/linguistical hegemony but you probably don,t have the intelect to even know this word.
Nice, attacking me already that was fast.
I understand what all that stuff is, unfortunately I disagree with cultural importance being held so high by people to describe themselves. Who gives a fuck what your background is? If that is your reason for doing things then you need to take a step back on life.
I, like many others, believe in a free-market system. Private property rights, freedom to language, etc. What you're saying is that our opinion isn't worth a damn and that a thread discussing a topic from this point of view should be closed?
It actually makes me sick to my stomach
edit: if I say that I feel the amount of money Quebec recieves in transfer payments to support their higher value social services is bullshit, are you honestly going to tell me that "I just don't understand Quebecs problems?"
|
Wow let's not go all Youtube on this !
On February 21 2013 07:24 Dawski wrote:
If you must use legislation to keep your heritage alive, you've already failed. That's my opinion on the subject.
Well it's very nice to have opinion on things, but protectionism is as old as economy itself.
The world is changing continously, even a third of the english language comes directly from french (as the english court was norman and spoke french for quite some time). Just like the eternal struggle between progressists and traditionalists, it's not about reaching any sort of goal but about defending your own worldview.
But it is weird to ask an italian restaurant to change the name of their food.
On February 21 2013 07:37 Dawski wrote:
I understand what all that stuff is, unfortunately I disagree with cultural importance being held so high by people to describe themselves. Who gives a fuck what your background is? If that is your reason for doing things then you need to take a step back on life.
Huh? Culture is everything. As in everything that makes us human beings, in opposition to animals. How can you say that culture is bullshit and then give a political opinion? :p
On February 21 2013 07:37 Dawski wrote:
edit: if I say that I feel the amount of money Quebec recieves in transfer payments to support their higher value social services is bullshit, are you honestly going to tell me that "I just don't understand Quebecs problems?"
The situation used to be the other way around, is this your way to say "thank you"? The same is happening in Belgium right now, Flanders used to feed of Wallonia's coal-based industry, but now that it's dead they want to split from those who once built their roads...
Alas, short memories.
|
On February 21 2013 07:48 Kukaracha wrote:Wow let's not go all Youtube on this ! Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 07:24 Dawski wrote:
If you must use legislation to keep your heritage alive, you've already failed. That's my opinion on the subject. Well it's very nice to have opinion on things, but protectionism is as old as economy itself. The world is changing continously, even a third of the english language comes directly from french (as the english court was norman and spoke french for quite some time). Just like the eternal struggle between progressists and traditionalists, it's not about reaching any sort of goal but about defending your own worldview. But it is weird to ask an italian restaurant to change the name of their food.
I was just getting angry at the fact that the 2 posters before me actually said that an opinion like mine should be a reason to close a thread.
I understand that they are two different world-views. I want them to understand I have just as much a right to express mine as they do theirs.
I'm allowed to put a video like this up.
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/search/all/source/charles-adler/what-is-ldquoethnociderdquo/2147304187001
whether that comes from a right-wing bias or not because although it may be different from what your worldview is, it is still a valid opinion.
|
On February 21 2013 07:53 Dawski wrote:
I was just getting angry at the fact that the 2 posters before me actually said that an opinion like mine should be a reason to close a thread.
Oh I was reacting at the mix of insults and clumsy disdain that usually characterizes Youtube comments ("bro you don't know socioeconomics, you are ignorant, kill yourself").
Well, my problem would be that the OP isn't really discussing or debating about anything, he's mostly ranting (even getting banned just two weeks ago on this page), and nobody answers except when they simply feel offended.
It simply does not respect TL's quality standards. I have no idea why it's still up, or hasn't been moved to blogs.
|
On February 21 2013 07:48 Kukaracha wrote:Wow let's not go all Youtube on this ! Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 07:24 Dawski wrote:
If you must use legislation to keep your heritage alive, you've already failed. That's my opinion on the subject. Well it's very nice to have opinion on things, but protectionism is as old as economy itself. The world is changing continously, even a third of the english language comes directly from french (as the english court was norman and spoke french for quite some time). Just like the eternal struggle between progressists and traditionalists, it's not about reaching any sort of goal but about defending your own worldview. But it is weird to ask an italian restaurant to change the name of their food. Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 07:37 Dawski wrote:
I understand what all that stuff is, unfortunately I disagree with cultural importance being held so high by people to describe themselves. Who gives a fuck what your background is? If that is your reason for doing things then you need to take a step back on life. Huh? Culture is everything. As in everything that makes us human beings, in opposition to animals. How can you say that culture is bullshit and then give a political opinion? :p Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 07:37 Dawski wrote:
edit: if I say that I feel the amount of money Quebec recieves in transfer payments to support their higher value social services is bullshit, are you honestly going to tell me that "I just don't understand Quebecs problems?" The situation used to be the other way around, is this your way to say "thank you"? The same is happening in Belgium right now, Flanders used to feed of Wallonia's coal-based industry, but now that it's dead they want to split from those who once built their roads... Alas, short memories.
Culture is everything? so I can't be upset at the Chinese culture of shark fin soup even though it slaughters hundreds of endangered animals? Culture is important to know how you got to where you are, but other than setting up a world-view it is next to meaningless in making decisions which could change things for the better or worse.
I don't agree with ANY situation where equalization payments (supposed to be used to make sure social standards are up to par) are being manipulated to ensure higher social standards than the rest. Just because that's how it used to be doesn't mean that now we get to turn around and do the same to the other side. It's a stupid system, scrap it
|
On February 21 2013 08:00 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 07:53 Dawski wrote:
I was just getting angry at the fact that the 2 posters before me actually said that an opinion like mine should be a reason to close a thread. Oh I was reacting at the mix of insults and clumsy disdain that usually characterizes Youtube comments ("bro you don't know socioeconomics, you are ignorant, kill yourself"). Well, my problem would be that the OP isn't really discussing or debating about anything, he's mostly ranting (even getting banned just two weeks ago on this page), and nobody answers except when they simply feel offended. It simply does not respect TL's quality standards. I have no idea why it's still up, or hasn't been moved to blogs.
You're correct that the OP's content wasn't up to quality standards, but this IS a valid topic. If you want I'll create a new thread, one which isn't full of insults to try get my point across and then we can close this one
|
On February 21 2013 08:03 Dawski wrote:
Culture is everything? so I can't be upset at the Chinese culture of shark fin soup even though it slaughters hundreds of endangered animals? Culture is important to know how you got to where you are, but other than setting up a world-view it is next to meaningless in making decisions which could change things for the better or worse.
Of course you can, but then it's just your culture against yours. And it does set-up a world view, which is a critical... well, almost the only factor involved in abstract decision-making. There is no absolute better nor an absolute worse! It's up to us to defend our own opinions.
Take right/left differences. Even though you see things from one perspective, you probably understand that the key points of disagreement are structural, they lie in a way to see the world : the value of a nation over the value of a people, value of personal freedom over the value of equality, value of independence over the value of solidarity, etc... and these are, well, cultural.
I'm sure you would be upset if tomorrow your neighbourhood turns into a communist think tank.
On February 21 2013 08:03 Dawski wrote:
I don't agree with ANY situation where equalization payments (supposed to be used to make sure social standards are up to par) are being manipulated to ensure higher social standards than the rest. Just because that's how it used to be doesn't mean that now we get to turn around and do the same to the other side. It's a stupid system, scrap it
Well, then take it as a refund, and then everyone can part ways and share only an open market and a flag.
But then the problem is : who payed more in the end ? I guess people would care about that.
|
One of the reason why we should separate, is that Abraxis will have to put Quebec as his country in his TL profile. That alone should convince so many people to vote for the independance, because personally I don't see what his fuss with Quebec is.
The English media keeps saying the independance is coming and the French part is getting radical, while what WE hear is that independance is a dead idea that should be abandoned. There's really a big agenda here to keep Canada united, and it's just a sad thing that most Quebecers, French or English, don't understand it.
I personally see why an English Quebecer would never hope for independance, but I qualify as ignorant anyone who doesn't think Quebec is a nation inside Canada. Well, it's been considered that way up until the 70s, so it's kind of normal that the French Quebecers fight AT LEAST for their recognition inside Canada, although a flat-out independance would probably be better in the long run.
As for the PQ, well it was the best realist choice possible. Now of course ,by voting for them as Separatists (although I can see reasons to NOT separate, so I'm kind of a mild separatist, if you want), it is to vote for a party that will never separate.. not with this generation of politicians at least.
|
On February 21 2013 08:11 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 08:03 Dawski wrote:
Culture is everything? so I can't be upset at the Chinese culture of shark fin soup even though it slaughters hundreds of endangered animals? Culture is important to know how you got to where you are, but other than setting up a world-view it is next to meaningless in making decisions which could change things for the better or worse. Of course you can, but then it's just your culture against yours. And it does set-up a world view, which is a critical... well, almost the only factor involved in abstract decision-making. There is no absolute better nor an absolute worse! It's up to us to defend our own opinions. Take right/left differences. Even though you see things from one perspective, you probably understand that the key points of disagreement are structural, they lie in a way to see the world : the value of a nation over the value of a people, value of personal freedom over the value of equality, value of independence over the value of solidarity, etc... and these are, well, cultural. I'm sure you would be upset if tomorrow your neighbourhood turns into a communist think tank. Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 08:03 Dawski wrote:
I don't agree with ANY situation where equalization payments (supposed to be used to make sure social standards are up to par) are being manipulated to ensure higher social standards than the rest. Just because that's how it used to be doesn't mean that now we get to turn around and do the same to the other side. It's a stupid system, scrap it Well, then take it as a refund, and then everyone can part ways and share only an open market and a flag. But then the problem is : who payed more in the end ? I guess people would care about that.
I suppose your correct. Me saying that culture is useless was foolish, in the way that it creates a worldview. I do still believe however that there is a more advantageous way of seeing the world. That is how biases are created, when someone like me believes their way of thinking is superior. I personally don't see anything wrong with a bias provided you can back it up.
Take for example the league of students in Quebec that are rallying (from what i hear more like rioting but i'll be fair) against paying tuition for post-secondary education. My bias tells me that these entitled kids should realize that TROC has been, in a large part, the one funding their tuitions that are already less than half of ours. Is that not superior than promoting something that isn't needed and that they cannot as a province afford themselves? Even the PQ leader doesn't know what to say to this group of students and she was the one who was apart of the rallies herself!
|
I didn't know they were pushing for free education. I'm quite surprised, as I just came back from a semester in Saguenay (north of Quebec), and while there was a strong movement against the rise of tuition fees, only a few spoke of more drastic measures. It does seem a bit idealistic - but hey, that what the far-right and the far-left do : ask for more, always more.
I do, however, agree with the opposition to the previously planned rise of costs, not in the sense that Quebec should be treated better but in the sense that Canada as a whole should adopt a cost-control policy regarding post-secondary education. It's too late in the US, but I believe that Canada can avoid the storm.
"The storm being student debt, the possible future generator of the next global economical crisis!"
The situation becomes that much more ridiculous when you see that american universities are investing less and less on education, and more and more on comfort and infrastructures.
|
On February 21 2013 08:39 Kukaracha wrote:
I didn't know they were pushing for free education. I'm quite surprised, as I just came back from a semester in Saguenay (north of Quebec), and while there was a strong movement against the rise of tuition fees, only a few spoke of more drastic measures. It does seem a bit idealistic - but hey, that what the far-right and the far-left do : ask for more, always more.
I do, however, agree with the opposition to the previously planned rise of costs, not in the sense that Quebec should be treated better but in the sense that Canada as a whole should adopt a cost-control policy regarding post-secondary education. It's too late in the US, but I believe that Canada can avoid the storm.
"The storm being student debt, the possible future generator of the next global economical crisis!"
The situation becomes that much more ridiculous when you see that american universities are investing less and less on education, and more and more on comfort and infrastructures.
The student debt crisis is extremely real and i'm not doubting that fact, it's just always confused the hell out of me. Wtf are these universities thinking? It's the most basic economics that if you post too high a price you are cutting off customers. Like i've said before I am one who believes in a free market. People are still willing to go into debt to get your product sure, but you've gotta know you are shooting yourself in the foot in the long run and once the bubble bursts you WILL go bankrupt.
That's why I don't believe we should impose legislation on tuition costs because the costs of getting the degree are outweighing the productivity gain of having one and it will come crashing down. The system will then be reset and new universities will spring up who understand this. That may do a lot of damage to those students currently in the system but It's similar to the bail-out situations in the US with GM. While many people will lose their jobs if the company goes under, economically it simply makes sense in the long term.
edit: Also forgot to go a little further into detail: The reason why I'm against legislation forcefully imposing lower tuition is because in the future it is extremely possible that post-secondary institutions could be hindered by the legislation reducing growth. In the future with good handling the economy may just even itself out and may even be headed towards growth. You don't want a situation where the value of a degree is far more than the university is allowed to sell it for.
|
On February 21 2013 08:39 Kukaracha wrote:
I didn't know they were pushing for free education. I'm quite surprised, as I just came back from a semester in Saguenay (north of Quebec), and while there was a strong movement against the rise of tuition fees, only a few spoke of more drastic measures. It does seem a bit idealistic - but hey, that what the far-right and the far-left do : ask for more, always more.
I do, however, agree with the opposition to the previously planned rise of costs, not in the sense that Quebec should be treated better but in the sense that Canada as a whole should adopt a cost-control policy regarding post-secondary education. It's too late in the US, but I believe that Canada can avoid the storm.
"The storm being student debt, the possible future generator of the next global economical crisis!"
The situation becomes that much more ridiculous when you see that american universities are investing less and less on education, and more and more on comfort and infrastructures.
Do you live in Canada or France? Just curious.
The PQ is toxic for Quebec and for Canada as a whole imo. If you really need to stoop to legislating what people can put on a menu in their restaurant your culture is already long gone and your just creating animosity with blatantly discriminatory laws.
If BC tried to pull that with English forcing Asian's to change their signs/menus people would shit themselves.
|
dear dawski.
the fact that you and me disagree is most likely due to to culture itself. as a matter of fact, there is no social relation that isn't culturally determined (this is proven by science). the main reason you have an opinion is because of your culture. now tell me culture isn't important. culture influences every actions/decision you make. there is a sociolingusitical notion named linguistical market that basically comes down to dominant language vs alternatives ones. the dominant one right now is english (due to european historical emperialism and present status of english as THE market language). knowing this you should then agree that in an mostly english northamerica you guys have alot of DIRECT influence on our french but also on "native" languages. Every existing research on the subject leads to a regression of the alternatives markets such a french or inuktituk for example. meaning these language are more and more english and less and less authentical (we can debate on language revitalisation later). we can argue on the good it makes but if we look at the "indians" life conditions that are directly correlated to acculturation we find -> highest non-employment, suicide, alchoolism, game dependance in the whole canada. now it is a natural process that happens with the constant dominant market vs alternative. as a matter of fact since bill101 passed, regression of french slowly went down to a point where right now it is constant. still regressing but at a slow rate. now, what if YOUR culture was the one slowly getting sucked in the wheel? the thing is not that i am anglophobe not at all i just want to keep my french identity like alot of quebecois. now the best way to do it is to go with legislation that way we ensure the persistance our cultural differences. And you can't deny we have differences of thinking which i consider the first good reason to get the fuck out of that canada we don't fit in (in term of ideology).
PQ's creation was to give quebec its independance, now its purpose is debatable (although independance will ALWAYS have its pertinence) . the feasability of independance is also debatable although it is a complete legitimate choice of ours not yours.
now the reason i want this thread Locked is because not only it is not decently presented (mostly ranting against french canadians) also because alot of people like you who don't have the whole information on the matter are only creating frustration in people like me who are directly conserned. while you can have an opinion, all opinions are not valid. yours is definately not valid. your last post jsut made it clear on how much you do not understand politics in quebec (on the student strike).
free quebec, free scotlant, free catalogne!
|
On February 21 2013 08:59 tokicheese wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 08:39 Kukaracha wrote:
I didn't know they were pushing for free education. I'm quite surprised, as I just came back from a semester in Saguenay (north of Quebec), and while there was a strong movement against the rise of tuition fees, only a few spoke of more drastic measures. It does seem a bit idealistic - but hey, that what the far-right and the far-left do : ask for more, always more.
I do, however, agree with the opposition to the previously planned rise of costs, not in the sense that Quebec should be treated better but in the sense that Canada as a whole should adopt a cost-control policy regarding post-secondary education. It's too late in the US, but I believe that Canada can avoid the storm.
"The storm being student debt, the possible future generator of the next global economical crisis!"
The situation becomes that much more ridiculous when you see that american universities are investing less and less on education, and more and more on comfort and infrastructures. Do you live in Canada or France? Just curious. The PQ is toxic for Quebec and for Canada as a whole imo. If you really need to stoop to legislating what people can put on a menu in their restaurant your culture is already long gone and your just creating animosity with blatantly discriminatory laws. If BC tried to pull that with English forcing Asian's to change their signs/menus people would shit themselves.
lol have you ever been to quebec? in our chinatown, menus are bilingual sometime trilinguals. they have their chinese description with french traduction below (aint that normal ? i mean we need to knwo what we buy?)
PQ isnt toxic for quebec (debatable but on a left/right thing but not in terms of nationalism or separatism). seems like every canadian has an inherent hate toward the idea that a distinct nation should have their own country, goals, orientations? why do you care so much?
|
On February 21 2013 09:07 crazyweasel wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 08:59 tokicheese wrote:On February 21 2013 08:39 Kukaracha wrote:
I didn't know they were pushing for free education. I'm quite surprised, as I just came back from a semester in Saguenay (north of Quebec), and while there was a strong movement against the rise of tuition fees, only a few spoke of more drastic measures. It does seem a bit idealistic - but hey, that what the far-right and the far-left do : ask for more, always more.
I do, however, agree with the opposition to the previously planned rise of costs, not in the sense that Quebec should be treated better but in the sense that Canada as a whole should adopt a cost-control policy regarding post-secondary education. It's too late in the US, but I believe that Canada can avoid the storm.
"The storm being student debt, the possible future generator of the next global economical crisis!"
The situation becomes that much more ridiculous when you see that american universities are investing less and less on education, and more and more on comfort and infrastructures. Do you live in Canada or France? Just curious. The PQ is toxic for Quebec and for Canada as a whole imo. If you really need to stoop to legislating what people can put on a menu in their restaurant your culture is already long gone and your just creating animosity with blatantly discriminatory laws. If BC tried to pull that with English forcing Asian's to change their signs/menus people would shit themselves. lol have you ever been to quebec? in our chinatown, menus are bilingual sometime trilinguals. they have their chinese description with french traduction below (aint that normal ? i mean we need to knwo what we buy?) PQ isnt toxic for quebec (debatable but on a left/right thing but not in terms of nationalism or separatism). seems like every canadian has an inherent hate toward the idea that a distinct nation should have their own country, goals, orientations? why do you care so much?
Regardless of how many languages are on a menu your still forcing people to put French on there. To me that's a pretty clear sign that a significant part of the population doesn't want French on signs or else it wouldn't need to be legislated. In the "French cultural stronghold" of Canada you need to make it law to have French on signs that's not a healthy sign for a culture.
A restaurant got fined $4500 for having pasta on a menu lol. You don't see why that is bad for business? Or why that would piss off English speaking business owners in Quebec? Correct me if I'm wrong but Quebec's economy has gone down since the glory days when it was the Banking/Manufacturing centre of Canada which was owned by Anglophones left.
I care because the Natives in Northern Quebec who have stated over and over and over again over the years they want to stay in Canada might get fucked over. Same with the English speaking Canadians who live in Quebec. I personally think that the whole animosity between English speaking Canada and Quebec is retarded. We have been entwined for over a century. I can't see things really being that bad being a part of Canada. It's not like we force children to not speak French or ban French Signs. We still have French on every label across Canada. We still give you $8 Billion a year in Equalization payments even if it is not the highest per capita it is still a shit load of money.
Separating won't help keep your language. You still have two massive English speaking countries on both of your borders any ways.
|
On February 21 2013 09:01 crazyweasel wrote:
dear dawski.
the fact that you and me disagree is most likely due to to culture itself. as a matter of fact, there is no social relation that isn't culturally determined (this is proven by science). the main reason you have an opinion is because of your culture. now tell me culture isn't important. culture influences every actions/decision you make. there is a sociolingusitical notion named linguistical market that basically comes down to dominant language vs alternatives ones. the dominant one right now is english (due to european historical emperialism and present status of english as THE market language). knowing this you should then agree that in an mostly english northamerica you guys have alot of DIRECT influence on our french but also on "native" languages. Every existing research on the subject leads to a regression of the alternatives markets such a french or inuktituk for example. meaning these language are more and more english and less and less authentical (we can debate on language revitalisation later). we can argue on the good it makes but if we look at the "indians" life conditions that are directly correlated to acculturation we find -> highest non-employment, suicide, alchoolism, game dependance in the whole canada. now it is a natural process that happens with the constant dominant market vs alternative. as a matter of fact since bill101 passed, regression of french slowly went down to a point where right now it is constant. still regressing but at a slow rate. now, what if YOUR culture was the one slowly getting sucked in the wheel? the thing is not that i am anglophobe not at all i just want to keep my french identity like alot of quebecois. now the best way to do it is to go with legislation that way we ensure the persistance our cultural differences. And you can't deny we have differences of thinking which i consider the first good reason to get the fuck out of that canada we don't fit in (in term of ideology).
PQ's creation was to give quebec its independance, now its purpose is debatable (although independance will ALWAYS have its pertinence) . the feasability of independance is also debatable although it is a complete legitimate choice of ours not yours.
now the reason i want this thread Locked is because not only it is not decently presented (mostly ranting against french canadians) also because alot of people like you who don't have the whole information on the matter are only creating frustration in people like me who are directly conserned. while you can have an opinion, all opinions are not valid. yours is definately not valid. your last post jsut made it clear on how much you do not understand politics in quebec (on the student strike).
free quebec, free scotlant, free catalogne!
I've already addressed the points about culture in one of my last posts (the same student strike post).
I straight up disagree that the acculturation of the natives are what led to the factors of unemployment, suicide, alcoholism, and game dependence. Native reserves are not forced upon the people. The natives that live that are allowed to leave and join the rest of Canada with all the positives and negativities it has.
But there in lies what your problem with the situation is. You feel that the natives shouldn't have to join the rest of canada and should be able to continue in their preserving of their culture even though it is unsustainable.
My opinion is the fact that the idea of trying to preserve a cultural identity through legislation has no value in a modern multicultural society. I understand that I may feel a little upset if my culture was the one being taken away. But if it makes sense you do what you have to do.
You're correct is saying that if you want to separate then when the 51% vote comes in you are allowed to do so and i'm not saying you shouldn't be. I'm actually surprisingly not anti separatist BUT while the separatists are apart of canada they will respect the country they live in and be thankful for all we have given you trying to promote the french language around the whole country.
My opinion IS valid and is shared by many people in this country of Canada. Like you have said your worldview is also based on your culture so your opinion is no more valid than mine is. Even hinting at the fact that it is, is what disgusts me yet again. I am directly involved with the politics in Quebec because my tax money goes there, that is the truth.
I want you to explain to me right now how my stance on the student strike in Quebec equates to me "not understanding Quebecs problems"
It seems I was mistaken unless someone else could find it for me. I said there was a native band that was doing well in the economy in the energy sector and spoke up against theresa spence but can't seem to find it. I removed it from my post
|
@Dawski
I don't believe that the economy regulates itself, at least not on a human level, because there's no "regulated place" to reach. Wealth distribution has changed greatly through history, and it will continue to change regardless of regulations because human will is always determinant!
I see two problem with the idea of an absolutely free market : 1) it's an ideal unsupported by any sort of previous evidence (unless you look at devastated African countries, but I think they're bad examples), 2) it does not take in account the current situation (if we let the dogs loose right now, the biggest players will simply remain the biggest players... in a free market, Microsoft would've achieved its monopoly, since nothing would've forced them to save Apple!). There are other indirect problems : if the state loses so much power, how can it fight companies whose income surpasses the GDP of a number of third-world countries? How do we deal with mercenary companies like Blackwater? I think that legislation is important to mantain a balance that is essentially unnatural, since in a natural context the weak simply vanish and luck plays the largest role.
@tokicheese
I'll let you guess : I come from one of the most pessimistic countries in the world, and everyone thinks we're lazy cowards although we're one of the most productive nations on earth and have the best military record of the western sphere. :p
|
On February 21 2013 09:33 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 09:01 crazyweasel wrote:
dear dawski.
the fact that you and me disagree is most likely due to to culture itself. as a matter of fact, there is no social relation that isn't culturally determined (this is proven by science). the main reason you have an opinion is because of your culture. now tell me culture isn't important. culture influences every actions/decision you make. there is a sociolingusitical notion named linguistical market that basically comes down to dominant language vs alternatives ones. the dominant one right now is english (due to european historical emperialism and present status of english as THE market language). knowing this you should then agree that in an mostly english northamerica you guys have alot of DIRECT influence on our french but also on "native" languages. Every existing research on the subject leads to a regression of the alternatives markets such a french or inuktituk for example. meaning these language are more and more english and less and less authentical (we can debate on language revitalisation later). we can argue on the good it makes but if we look at the "indians" life conditions that are directly correlated to acculturation we find -> highest non-employment, suicide, alchoolism, game dependance in the whole canada. now it is a natural process that happens with the constant dominant market vs alternative. as a matter of fact since bill101 passed, regression of french slowly went down to a point where right now it is constant. still regressing but at a slow rate. now, what if YOUR culture was the one slowly getting sucked in the wheel? the thing is not that i am anglophobe not at all i just want to keep my french identity like alot of quebecois. now the best way to do it is to go with legislation that way we ensure the persistance our cultural differences. And you can't deny we have differences of thinking which i consider the first good reason to get the fuck out of that canada we don't fit in (in term of ideology).
PQ's creation was to give quebec its independance, now its purpose is debatable (although independance will ALWAYS have its pertinence) . the feasability of independance is also debatable although it is a complete legitimate choice of ours not yours.
now the reason i want this thread Locked is because not only it is not decently presented (mostly ranting against french canadians) also because alot of people like you who don't have the whole information on the matter are only creating frustration in people like me who are directly conserned. while you can have an opinion, all opinions are not valid. yours is definately not valid. your last post jsut made it clear on how much you do not understand politics in quebec (on the student strike).
free quebec, free scotlant, free catalogne! I've already addressed the points about culture in one of my last posts (the same student strike post). I straight up disagree that the acculturation of the natives are what led to the factors of unemployment, suicide, alcoholism, and game dependence. Native reserves are not forced upon the people. The natives that live that are allowed to leave and join the rest of Canada with all the positives and negativities it has. But there in lies what your problem with the situation is. You feel that the natives shouldn't have to join the rest of canada and should be able to continue in their preserving of their culture even though it is unsustainable. My opinion is the fact that the idea of trying to preserve a cultural identity through legislation has no value in a modern multicultural society. I understand that I may feel a little upset if my culture was the one being taken away. But if it makes sense you do what you have to do. Just like the native band in the Okanagan, BC who have embraced the culture around them and started a private business in the energy sector and arn't dealing with any of those problems you discussed. http://www.straight.com/news/okanagan-nation-alliance-open-letter-stephen-harper-regarding-idle-no-more-movementYou're correct is saying that if you want to separate then when the 51% vote comes in you are allowed to do so and i'm not saying you shouldn't be. I'm actually surprisingly not anti separatist BUT while the separatists are apart of canada they will respect the country they live in and be thankful for all we have given you trying to promote the french language around the whole country. My opinion IS valid and is shared by many people in this country of Canada. Like you have said your worldview is also based on your culture so your opinion is no more valid than mine is. Even hinting at the fact that it is, is what disgusts me yet again. I am directly involved with the politics in Quebec because my tax money goes there, that is the truth. I want you to explain to me right now how my stance on the student strike in Quebec equates to me "not understanding Quebecs problems"
Regarding the reserves you really don't understand the problem. It's not about culture it's about keeping them out of places like Hasting Street in Vancouver. + Show Spoiler +There is no parental structure after the Residential schools/borderline genocide before that. People who left the residential schools were often abused sexually and physically and had no real education and were banned from speaking their original language. When people would return home after the residential school they wouldn't be able to speak to their parents because they were forced forget the language. It's understandable when you can't find decent work and can't relate to your family you might turn to alcoholism which was already wide spread since the firewater days. Kids with alcoholic parents who don't know how to be parents causes a lot of kids to not give a fuck at school and drop out. I have a native friend who had an alcoholic uncle living on a reserve who killed himself while his kids were still in elementary school. He called the oldest home to clean up a mess and when the oldest walked in the door he found his dad in the living room with a gun still in his mouth. That guys kids eventually dropped out of high school and now they are all alcoholics. How can kids who don't even graduate highschool and barely got out of elementary school compete with the average Canadian when looking for a job? There are some serious problems in Native Society and I personally don't have a clue how to fix it.
Sorta off topic but saying they can just leave the reserve isn't true.
|
On February 21 2013 09:38 Kukaracha wrote:
@Dawski
I don't believe that the economy regulates itself, at least not on a human level, because there's no "regulated place" to reach. Wealth distribution has changed greatly through history, and it will continue to change regardless of regulations because human will is always determinant!
I see two problem with the idea of an absolutely free market : 1) it's an ideal unsupported by any sort of previous evidence (unless you look at devastated African countries, but I think they're bad examples), 2) it does not take in account the current situation (if we let the dogs loose right now, the biggest players will simply remain the biggest players... in a free market, Microsoft would've achieved its monopoly, since nothing would've forced them to save Apple!). There are other indirect problems : if the state loses so much power, how can it fight companies whose income surpasses the GDP of a number of third-world countries? How do we deal with mercenary companies like Blackwater? I think that legislation is important to mantain a balance that is essentially unnatural, since in a natural context the weak simply vanish and luck plays the largest role.
@tokicheese
I'll let you guess : I come from one of the most pessimistic countries in the world, and everyone thinks we're lazy cowards although we're one of the most productive nations on earth and have the best military record of the western sphere. :p
Haha fair enough. I find it strange people know about Napoleon but still rag on France. Atleast you don't live in igloos .
|
On February 21 2013 09:44 tokicheese wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 09:33 Dawski wrote:On February 21 2013 09:01 crazyweasel wrote:
dear dawski.
the fact that you and me disagree is most likely due to to culture itself. as a matter of fact, there is no social relation that isn't culturally determined (this is proven by science). the main reason you have an opinion is because of your culture. now tell me culture isn't important. culture influences every actions/decision you make. there is a sociolingusitical notion named linguistical market that basically comes down to dominant language vs alternatives ones. the dominant one right now is english (due to european historical emperialism and present status of english as THE market language). knowing this you should then agree that in an mostly english northamerica you guys have alot of DIRECT influence on our french but also on "native" languages. Every existing research on the subject leads to a regression of the alternatives markets such a french or inuktituk for example. meaning these language are more and more english and less and less authentical (we can debate on language revitalisation later). we can argue on the good it makes but if we look at the "indians" life conditions that are directly correlated to acculturation we find -> highest non-employment, suicide, alchoolism, game dependance in the whole canada. now it is a natural process that happens with the constant dominant market vs alternative. as a matter of fact since bill101 passed, regression of french slowly went down to a point where right now it is constant. still regressing but at a slow rate. now, what if YOUR culture was the one slowly getting sucked in the wheel? the thing is not that i am anglophobe not at all i just want to keep my french identity like alot of quebecois. now the best way to do it is to go with legislation that way we ensure the persistance our cultural differences. And you can't deny we have differences of thinking which i consider the first good reason to get the fuck out of that canada we don't fit in (in term of ideology).
PQ's creation was to give quebec its independance, now its purpose is debatable (although independance will ALWAYS have its pertinence) . the feasability of independance is also debatable although it is a complete legitimate choice of ours not yours.
now the reason i want this thread Locked is because not only it is not decently presented (mostly ranting against french canadians) also because alot of people like you who don't have the whole information on the matter are only creating frustration in people like me who are directly conserned. while you can have an opinion, all opinions are not valid. yours is definately not valid. your last post jsut made it clear on how much you do not understand politics in quebec (on the student strike).
free quebec, free scotlant, free catalogne! I've already addressed the points about culture in one of my last posts (the same student strike post). I straight up disagree that the acculturation of the natives are what led to the factors of unemployment, suicide, alcoholism, and game dependence. Native reserves are not forced upon the people. The natives that live that are allowed to leave and join the rest of Canada with all the positives and negativities it has. But there in lies what your problem with the situation is. You feel that the natives shouldn't have to join the rest of canada and should be able to continue in their preserving of their culture even though it is unsustainable. My opinion is the fact that the idea of trying to preserve a cultural identity through legislation has no value in a modern multicultural society. I understand that I may feel a little upset if my culture was the one being taken away. But if it makes sense you do what you have to do. Just like the native band in the Okanagan, BC who have embraced the culture around them and started a private business in the energy sector and arn't dealing with any of those problems you discussed. http://www.straight.com/news/okanagan-nation-alliance-open-letter-stephen-harper-regarding-idle-no-more-movementYou're correct is saying that if you want to separate then when the 51% vote comes in you are allowed to do so and i'm not saying you shouldn't be. I'm actually surprisingly not anti separatist BUT while the separatists are apart of canada they will respect the country they live in and be thankful for all we have given you trying to promote the french language around the whole country. My opinion IS valid and is shared by many people in this country of Canada. Like you have said your worldview is also based on your culture so your opinion is no more valid than mine is. Even hinting at the fact that it is, is what disgusts me yet again. I am directly involved with the politics in Quebec because my tax money goes there, that is the truth. I want you to explain to me right now how my stance on the student strike in Quebec equates to me "not understanding Quebecs problems" Regarding the reserves you really don't understand the problem. + Show Spoiler +There is no parental structure after the Residential schools/borderline genocide before that. People who left the residential schools were often abused sexually and physically and had no real education and were banned from speaking their original language. When people would return home after the residential school they wouldn't be able to speak to their parents because they were forced forget the language. It's understandable when you can't find decent work and can't relate to your family you might turn to alcoholism which was already wide spread since the firewater days. Kids with alcoholic parents who don't know how to be parents causes a lot of kids to not give a fuck at school and drop out. I have a native friend who had an alcoholic uncle living on a reserve who killed himself while his kids were still in elementary school. He called the oldest home to clean up a mess and when the oldest walked in the door he found his dad in the living room with a gun still in his mouth. That guys kids eventually dropped out of high school and now they are all alcoholics. There are some serious problems in Native Society and I personally don't have a clue how to fix it. Sorta off topic but saying they can just leave the reserve isn't true.
I don't believe I was saying what the cause of the natives problems are. The self-preserving of their culture is what led them to pass down a language to their children that wasn't used outside of the reserves and further disconnected them from the outside world. If the self-preserving of your culture is what is your downfall, no matter how much it sucks and I do know that it would suck, change it to better your life. When my dutch grandparents were dirt poor in the netherlands they got all the money they could and got on the first boat to canada and assimilated into a new culture because that's what was necessary
|
On February 21 2013 09:07 crazyweasel wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 08:59 tokicheese wrote:On February 21 2013 08:39 Kukaracha wrote:
I didn't know they were pushing for free education. I'm quite surprised, as I just came back from a semester in Saguenay (north of Quebec), and while there was a strong movement against the rise of tuition fees, only a few spoke of more drastic measures. It does seem a bit idealistic - but hey, that what the far-right and the far-left do : ask for more, always more.
I do, however, agree with the opposition to the previously planned rise of costs, not in the sense that Quebec should be treated better but in the sense that Canada as a whole should adopt a cost-control policy regarding post-secondary education. It's too late in the US, but I believe that Canada can avoid the storm.
"The storm being student debt, the possible future generator of the next global economical crisis!"
The situation becomes that much more ridiculous when you see that american universities are investing less and less on education, and more and more on comfort and infrastructures. Do you live in Canada or France? Just curious. The PQ is toxic for Quebec and for Canada as a whole imo. If you really need to stoop to legislating what people can put on a menu in their restaurant your culture is already long gone and your just creating animosity with blatantly discriminatory laws. If BC tried to pull that with English forcing Asian's to change their signs/menus people would shit themselves. lol have you ever been to quebec? in our chinatown, menus are bilingual sometime trilinguals. they have their chinese description with french traduction below (aint that normal ? i mean we need to knwo what we buy?) PQ isnt toxic for quebec (debatable but on a left/right thing but not in terms of nationalism or separatism). seems like every canadian has an inherent hate toward the idea that a distinct nation should have their own country, goals, orientations? why do you care so much?
The language you use in this post shows that you clearly already agree with PQ ideals, so you obviously won't see any reason to consider them toxic. But we are only having this discussion in the first place because of their toxic behaviour.
|
This anglo-franco problem is really annoying though, because aside from that Canadian people are pretty much the coolest and kindest people I've met so far.
It's like meeting carebears who play badass sports (hockey is amazing), only to find that they profoundly dislike each other. It's heartbreaking!
|
On February 21 2013 09:52 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 09:44 tokicheese wrote:On February 21 2013 09:33 Dawski wrote:On February 21 2013 09:01 crazyweasel wrote:
dear dawski.
the fact that you and me disagree is most likely due to to culture itself. as a matter of fact, there is no social relation that isn't culturally determined (this is proven by science). the main reason you have an opinion is because of your culture. now tell me culture isn't important. culture influences every actions/decision you make. there is a sociolingusitical notion named linguistical market that basically comes down to dominant language vs alternatives ones. the dominant one right now is english (due to european historical emperialism and present status of english as THE market language). knowing this you should then agree that in an mostly english northamerica you guys have alot of DIRECT influence on our french but also on "native" languages. Every existing research on the subject leads to a regression of the alternatives markets such a french or inuktituk for example. meaning these language are more and more english and less and less authentical (we can debate on language revitalisation later). we can argue on the good it makes but if we look at the "indians" life conditions that are directly correlated to acculturation we find -> highest non-employment, suicide, alchoolism, game dependance in the whole canada. now it is a natural process that happens with the constant dominant market vs alternative. as a matter of fact since bill101 passed, regression of french slowly went down to a point where right now it is constant. still regressing but at a slow rate. now, what if YOUR culture was the one slowly getting sucked in the wheel? the thing is not that i am anglophobe not at all i just want to keep my french identity like alot of quebecois. now the best way to do it is to go with legislation that way we ensure the persistance our cultural differences. And you can't deny we have differences of thinking which i consider the first good reason to get the fuck out of that canada we don't fit in (in term of ideology).
PQ's creation was to give quebec its independance, now its purpose is debatable (although independance will ALWAYS have its pertinence) . the feasability of independance is also debatable although it is a complete legitimate choice of ours not yours.
now the reason i want this thread Locked is because not only it is not decently presented (mostly ranting against french canadians) also because alot of people like you who don't have the whole information on the matter are only creating frustration in people like me who are directly conserned. while you can have an opinion, all opinions are not valid. yours is definately not valid. your last post jsut made it clear on how much you do not understand politics in quebec (on the student strike).
free quebec, free scotlant, free catalogne! I've already addressed the points about culture in one of my last posts (the same student strike post). I straight up disagree that the acculturation of the natives are what led to the factors of unemployment, suicide, alcoholism, and game dependence. Native reserves are not forced upon the people. The natives that live that are allowed to leave and join the rest of Canada with all the positives and negativities it has. But there in lies what your problem with the situation is. You feel that the natives shouldn't have to join the rest of canada and should be able to continue in their preserving of their culture even though it is unsustainable. My opinion is the fact that the idea of trying to preserve a cultural identity through legislation has no value in a modern multicultural society. I understand that I may feel a little upset if my culture was the one being taken away. But if it makes sense you do what you have to do. Just like the native band in the Okanagan, BC who have embraced the culture around them and started a private business in the energy sector and arn't dealing with any of those problems you discussed. http://www.straight.com/news/okanagan-nation-alliance-open-letter-stephen-harper-regarding-idle-no-more-movementYou're correct is saying that if you want to separate then when the 51% vote comes in you are allowed to do so and i'm not saying you shouldn't be. I'm actually surprisingly not anti separatist BUT while the separatists are apart of canada they will respect the country they live in and be thankful for all we have given you trying to promote the french language around the whole country. My opinion IS valid and is shared by many people in this country of Canada. Like you have said your worldview is also based on your culture so your opinion is no more valid than mine is. Even hinting at the fact that it is, is what disgusts me yet again. I am directly involved with the politics in Quebec because my tax money goes there, that is the truth. I want you to explain to me right now how my stance on the student strike in Quebec equates to me "not understanding Quebecs problems" Regarding the reserves you really don't understand the problem. + Show Spoiler +There is no parental structure after the Residential schools/borderline genocide before that. People who left the residential schools were often abused sexually and physically and had no real education and were banned from speaking their original language. When people would return home after the residential school they wouldn't be able to speak to their parents because they were forced forget the language. It's understandable when you can't find decent work and can't relate to your family you might turn to alcoholism which was already wide spread since the firewater days. Kids with alcoholic parents who don't know how to be parents causes a lot of kids to not give a fuck at school and drop out. I have a native friend who had an alcoholic uncle living on a reserve who killed himself while his kids were still in elementary school. He called the oldest home to clean up a mess and when the oldest walked in the door he found his dad in the living room with a gun still in his mouth. That guys kids eventually dropped out of high school and now they are all alcoholics. There are some serious problems in Native Society and I personally don't have a clue how to fix it. Sorta off topic but saying they can just leave the reserve isn't true. I don't believe I was saying what the cause of the natives problems are. The self-preserving of their culture is what led them to pass down a language to their children that wasn't used outside of the reserves and further disconnected them from the outside world. If the self-preserving of your culture is what is your downfall, no matter how much it sucks and I do know that it would suck, change it to better your life. When my dutch grandparents were dirt poor in the netherlands they got all the money they could and got on the first boat to canada and assimilated into a new culture because that's what was necessary
Most do speak English now because of the Residential schools. The Residential schools should have made them better because they followed your logic. Instead most of the problems that Native's face is from that.
They spoke their language because the Natives were isolated in the middle of nowhere in the early 20th century. They forcefully took the kids out of their reserves and then forced them to conform to white society. The stated goal of the residential school was to kill the Indian in the child.
The reserves are not about keeping culture now. They are about keeping them in one place so they don't end up in poverty somewhere else.
|
On February 21 2013 09:52 Dawski wrote:
When my dutch grandparents were dirt poor in the netherlands they got all the money they could and got on the first boat to canada and assimilated into a new culture because that's what was necessary
Yeah, but, they weren't invaded... they immigrated! It's a little harsh to blame native americans for not adapting, it's like stealing someone's house, planting them a tent outside, and telling them to deal with it!
There's a dude who did that in France though, he murdered a family and basically took their home. He would chill outside and tell people that the owners gave him the house.
|
On February 21 2013 09:54 Kukaracha wrote:
This anglo-franco problem is really annoying though, because aside from that Canadian people are pretty much the coolest and kindest people I've met so far.
It's like meeting carebears who play badass sports (hockey is amazing), only to find that they profoundly dislike each other. It's heartbreaking!
The thing is I don't dislike the francos...do I dislike an idiology which the majority don't actually share? sure I do but the francos are just as much a respectable people as anyone else. The reason why I'm invested in this is because my fiancee is a french-canadian living in BC. While she likes to hold onto her culture she doesn't support the legislation to do it. I've talked on this subject many times before as you can tell haha. So that's also why i get upset when people accuse someone like me of hating francophone culture and people when it's the furthest from the truth. I'm marrying into one ;P
|
On February 21 2013 09:54 Kukaracha wrote:
This anglo-franco problem is really annoying though, because aside from that Canadian people are pretty much the coolest and kindest people I've met so far.
It's like meeting carebears who play badass sports (hockey is amazing), only to find that they profoundly dislike each other. It's heartbreaking!
We don't though. It's a select few expressing their opinions.
Thanks for the compliment though. It would be hard if Canadians disliked other people, as we're a society made out of people from all over the world (mostly true in the urban cities though).
|
On February 21 2013 09:58 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 09:52 Dawski wrote:
When my dutch grandparents were dirt poor in the netherlands they got all the money they could and got on the first boat to canada and assimilated into a new culture because that's what was necessary Yeah, but, they weren't invaded... they immigrated! It's a little harsh to blame native americans for not adapting, it's like stealing someone's house, planting them a tent outside, and telling them to deal with it! There's a dude who did that in France though, he murdered a family and basically took their home. He would chill outside and tell people that the owners gave him the house.
Exactly, it is harsh, but it's the fact of life. you pick yourself up off the floor, stop feeling self-pity like we all would in that situation and change for the better. Is there any possible way you can get the house back after multiple generations of that mans family living in that house? no? then you have to adapt no matter how much life pushed you down
|
On February 21 2013 09:29 tokicheese wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 09:07 crazyweasel wrote:On February 21 2013 08:59 tokicheese wrote:On February 21 2013 08:39 Kukaracha wrote:
I didn't know they were pushing for free education. I'm quite surprised, as I just came back from a semester in Saguenay (north of Quebec), and while there was a strong movement against the rise of tuition fees, only a few spoke of more drastic measures. It does seem a bit idealistic - but hey, that what the far-right and the far-left do : ask for more, always more.
I do, however, agree with the opposition to the previously planned rise of costs, not in the sense that Quebec should be treated better but in the sense that Canada as a whole should adopt a cost-control policy regarding post-secondary education. It's too late in the US, but I believe that Canada can avoid the storm.
"The storm being student debt, the possible future generator of the next global economical crisis!"
The situation becomes that much more ridiculous when you see that american universities are investing less and less on education, and more and more on comfort and infrastructures. Do you live in Canada or France? Just curious. The PQ is toxic for Quebec and for Canada as a whole imo. If you really need to stoop to legislating what people can put on a menu in their restaurant your culture is already long gone and your just creating animosity with blatantly discriminatory laws. If BC tried to pull that with English forcing Asian's to change their signs/menus people would shit themselves. lol have you ever been to quebec? in our chinatown, menus are bilingual sometime trilinguals. they have their chinese description with french traduction below (aint that normal ? i mean we need to knwo what we buy?) PQ isnt toxic for quebec (debatable but on a left/right thing but not in terms of nationalism or separatism). seems like every canadian has an inherent hate toward the idea that a distinct nation should have their own country, goals, orientations? why do you care so much? Regardless of how many languages are on a menu your still forcing people to put French on there. To me that's a pretty clear sign that a significant part of the population doesn't want French on signs or else it wouldn't need to be legislated. In the "French cultural stronghold" of Canada you need to make it law to have French on signs that's not a healthy sign for a culture. A restaurant got fined $4500 for having pasta on a menu lol. You don't see why that is bad for business? Or why that would piss off English speaking business owners in Quebec? Correct me if I'm wrong but Quebec's economy has gone down since the glory days when it was the Banking/Manufacturing centre of Canada which was owned by Anglophones left. I care because the Natives in Northern Quebec who have stated over and over and over again over the years they want to stay in Canada might get fucked over. Same with the English speaking Canadians who live in Quebec. I personally think that the whole animosity between English speaking Canada and Quebec is retarded. We have been entwined for over a century. I can't see things really being that bad being a part of Canada. It's not like we force children to not speak French or ban French Signs. We still have French on every label across Canada. We still give you $8 Billion a year in Equalization payments even if it is not the highest per capita it is still a shit load of money. Separating won't help keep your language. You still have two massive English speaking countries on both of your borders any ways.
I am metis (white in appearance and i live in montreal), part of my family lives in sept-iles in a Innu "reserve" . there is no relevent element thats shows natives would get fucked neither the english inside quebec. can you tell me why would they get fucked? while alot of communities in canada are left in third world conditions and the only thing federal government can do is put them under "tutelle". while communities in quebec are much more healthier and it is the case with Innus, cris, and inuits even if there are obviously strong problems like i mentioned earlier(and the solution has to come from politization of our ancestral culture to revitalize our way of living as natives).
the point of having a country is autodetermination not oppression on our minorities, with a country there would be no more need of a bill101, tho french would be the sole official language of the country while bilingual in practice (we all speak english and have to speak english in order to get jobs) . actually the english minority in quebec is the luckiest minority in the world. we have 2 great english university that rank among the ebst in the world, 3 english hospital and you can get service anywhere in english (in montreal, but mainly the english live there too). sure Influence will exist from simple proximity with canada or US but we then have political orientation that is proper to our people.
while i agree we receive good perequations, we also pay 50% of taxes and impositions to canada and have to pay again for our own created institutions (that already exist as federal) so it fits our cultural difference. in other words and you'll check up the stats up statscan.ca we receive in perequation 40% of what we actually give to federal governement in taxes and impositions. in other word we give canada more than we actually receive in perequations. while elsewhere in canada you sure need to have french on labels because you also have french minorities outside quebec. you also owe them in a way that they are canadian and that quebec cant always come to the defense of their rights
|
you guy need to understand something first , QUEBEC = french first , that the NATIVE Langage of quebec .
now since many year both english and french are used , but before the 101 law in many place in montreal people were talking ONLY in english , same for restaurant and place , menue only in english , public place who was talking ONLY english and many people who were coming in quebec were not even learning french ( and BIG % still dont )
from someone who talk french that was REALY disgusting and WRONG .
THINK about people coming in usa and talking not in your langage , open place and store where they talk and give service only in french ...
so before the whole quebec turn english only they have passed the law 101 , the law only give some right in quebec
public place need to give service in english AND french , restaurant need to have menue in english and french and so on.
if you want to stay in a country that the less you can do ..... respect the native langage .
|
On February 21 2013 09:57 tokicheese wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 09:52 Dawski wrote:On February 21 2013 09:44 tokicheese wrote:On February 21 2013 09:33 Dawski wrote:On February 21 2013 09:01 crazyweasel wrote:
dear dawski.
the fact that you and me disagree is most likely due to to culture itself. as a matter of fact, there is no social relation that isn't culturally determined (this is proven by science). the main reason you have an opinion is because of your culture. now tell me culture isn't important. culture influences every actions/decision you make. there is a sociolingusitical notion named linguistical market that basically comes down to dominant language vs alternatives ones. the dominant one right now is english (due to european historical emperialism and present status of english as THE market language). knowing this you should then agree that in an mostly english northamerica you guys have alot of DIRECT influence on our french but also on "native" languages. Every existing research on the subject leads to a regression of the alternatives markets such a french or inuktituk for example. meaning these language are more and more english and less and less authentical (we can debate on language revitalisation later). we can argue on the good it makes but if we look at the "indians" life conditions that are directly correlated to acculturation we find -> highest non-employment, suicide, alchoolism, game dependance in the whole canada. now it is a natural process that happens with the constant dominant market vs alternative. as a matter of fact since bill101 passed, regression of french slowly went down to a point where right now it is constant. still regressing but at a slow rate. now, what if YOUR culture was the one slowly getting sucked in the wheel? the thing is not that i am anglophobe not at all i just want to keep my french identity like alot of quebecois. now the best way to do it is to go with legislation that way we ensure the persistance our cultural differences. And you can't deny we have differences of thinking which i consider the first good reason to get the fuck out of that canada we don't fit in (in term of ideology).
PQ's creation was to give quebec its independance, now its purpose is debatable (although independance will ALWAYS have its pertinence) . the feasability of independance is also debatable although it is a complete legitimate choice of ours not yours.
now the reason i want this thread Locked is because not only it is not decently presented (mostly ranting against french canadians) also because alot of people like you who don't have the whole information on the matter are only creating frustration in people like me who are directly conserned. while you can have an opinion, all opinions are not valid. yours is definately not valid. your last post jsut made it clear on how much you do not understand politics in quebec (on the student strike).
free quebec, free scotlant, free catalogne! I've already addressed the points about culture in one of my last posts (the same student strike post). I straight up disagree that the acculturation of the natives are what led to the factors of unemployment, suicide, alcoholism, and game dependence. Native reserves are not forced upon the people. The natives that live that are allowed to leave and join the rest of Canada with all the positives and negativities it has. But there in lies what your problem with the situation is. You feel that the natives shouldn't have to join the rest of canada and should be able to continue in their preserving of their culture even though it is unsustainable. My opinion is the fact that the idea of trying to preserve a cultural identity through legislation has no value in a modern multicultural society. I understand that I may feel a little upset if my culture was the one being taken away. But if it makes sense you do what you have to do. Just like the native band in the Okanagan, BC who have embraced the culture around them and started a private business in the energy sector and arn't dealing with any of those problems you discussed. http://www.straight.com/news/okanagan-nation-alliance-open-letter-stephen-harper-regarding-idle-no-more-movementYou're correct is saying that if you want to separate then when the 51% vote comes in you are allowed to do so and i'm not saying you shouldn't be. I'm actually surprisingly not anti separatist BUT while the separatists are apart of canada they will respect the country they live in and be thankful for all we have given you trying to promote the french language around the whole country. My opinion IS valid and is shared by many people in this country of Canada. Like you have said your worldview is also based on your culture so your opinion is no more valid than mine is. Even hinting at the fact that it is, is what disgusts me yet again. I am directly involved with the politics in Quebec because my tax money goes there, that is the truth. I want you to explain to me right now how my stance on the student strike in Quebec equates to me "not understanding Quebecs problems" Regarding the reserves you really don't understand the problem. + Show Spoiler +There is no parental structure after the Residential schools/borderline genocide before that. People who left the residential schools were often abused sexually and physically and had no real education and were banned from speaking their original language. When people would return home after the residential school they wouldn't be able to speak to their parents because they were forced forget the language. It's understandable when you can't find decent work and can't relate to your family you might turn to alcoholism which was already wide spread since the firewater days. Kids with alcoholic parents who don't know how to be parents causes a lot of kids to not give a fuck at school and drop out. I have a native friend who had an alcoholic uncle living on a reserve who killed himself while his kids were still in elementary school. He called the oldest home to clean up a mess and when the oldest walked in the door he found his dad in the living room with a gun still in his mouth. That guys kids eventually dropped out of high school and now they are all alcoholics. There are some serious problems in Native Society and I personally don't have a clue how to fix it. Sorta off topic but saying they can just leave the reserve isn't true. I don't believe I was saying what the cause of the natives problems are. The self-preserving of their culture is what led them to pass down a language to their children that wasn't used outside of the reserves and further disconnected them from the outside world. If the self-preserving of your culture is what is your downfall, no matter how much it sucks and I do know that it would suck, change it to better your life. When my dutch grandparents were dirt poor in the netherlands they got all the money they could and got on the first boat to canada and assimilated into a new culture because that's what was necessary Most do speak English now because of the Residential schools. The Residential schools should have made them better because they followed your logic. Instead most of the problems that Native's face is from that. They spoke their language because the Natives were isolated in the middle of nowhere in the early 20th century. They forcefully took the kids out of their reserves and then forced them to conform to white society. The stated goal of the residential school was to kill the Indian in the child. The reserves are not about keeping culture now. They are about keeping them in one place so they don't end up in poverty somewhere else.
I suppose this is a good learning period for me because I guess I don't understand it. What would the forcing of people away from their culture have to do with them being forced into poverty? Are you saying the residential schools forced kids to not have a relationship with their parents and in turn caused both to turn to alcoholism?
|
On February 21 2013 10:00 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 09:54 Kukaracha wrote:
This anglo-franco problem is really annoying though, because aside from that Canadian people are pretty much the coolest and kindest people I've met so far.
It's like meeting carebears who play badass sports (hockey is amazing), only to find that they profoundly dislike each other. It's heartbreaking! The thing is I don't dislike the francos...do I dislike an idiology which the majority don't actually share? sure I do but the francos are just as much a respectable people as anyone else. The reason why I'm invested in this is because my fiancee is a french-canadian living in BC. While she likes to hold onto her culture she doesn't support the legislation to do it. I've talked on this subject many times before as you can tell haha. So that's also why i get upset when people accuse someone like me of hating francophone culture and people when it's the furthest from the truth. I'm marrying into one ;P
Granted you might not dislike them, but you have a poor taste in TV news . I looked at the video you posted from the sun news network and I stopped at Canadian Common Sense. There's no such thing as a Canadian Common Sense. Might be why I dislike watching the news on TV and prefer reading from multiple sources.
On February 21 2013 07:24 Dawski wrote:
If you must use legislation to keep your heritage alive, you've already failed. That's my opinion on the subject.
It doesn't matter how much BS the journal is FFS. The point is the OQLF targeted a private business for not being french enough. That is the fact and I think the people in this thread are allowed to have the opinion that it is bullshit in a modern day society
We can agree to disagree. I mean, the word heritage is probably as loaded as the word ethnocide. We could include architectural buildings, language, events, etc. as part of our heritage.
Should we not protect our cultural heritage? I believe we should, yes. Events of our history should be taught in school, language should be protected, historical buildings should be maintained for centuries to come.
Edit: Wrote thought instead of taught, hah.
|
On February 21 2013 10:01 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 09:58 Kukaracha wrote:On February 21 2013 09:52 Dawski wrote:
When my dutch grandparents were dirt poor in the netherlands they got all the money they could and got on the first boat to canada and assimilated into a new culture because that's what was necessary Yeah, but, they weren't invaded... they immigrated! It's a little harsh to blame native americans for not adapting, it's like stealing someone's house, planting them a tent outside, and telling them to deal with it! There's a dude who did that in France though, he murdered a family and basically took their home. He would chill outside and tell people that the owners gave him the house. Exactly, it is harsh, but it's the fact of life. you pick yourself up off the floor, stop feeling self-pity like we all would in that situation and change for the better. Is there any possible way you can get the house back after multiple generations of that mans family living in that house? no? then you have to adapt no matter how much life pushed you down
Well, in that very case the man got arrested obviously, I mean it was a pretty grotesque situation.
It's true that you can always "man up" to situations, but I wouldn't say that to people who suffered tragedies I can't imagine going through myself... I see it as blind anger or depression, it's hard to talk people out of it, not only because the feelings involved are strong but also because the person is so involved while we are so distant from the problem that we don't really have much weight in their decisions.
It's much easier to say "hey man, just GG" when you see someone losing a Starcraft game than saying "hey man, let it go" when you see someone losing their child!
Before I go to bed, I will once again stress how nice canadian people are. Random strangers smiled at me on the street, I got on buses and boats for free, just all these little things that make you think, damn, these people actually care.
|
On February 21 2013 09:01 crazyweasel wrote:
I want you to explain to me right now how my stance on the student strike in Quebec equates to me "not understanding Quebecs problems"
post
well, PQ supported the strike agaisnt an increase of university cost. right now it is offering an indexation which is a progressive increase. PQ is a minority at "assemblée nationale" that said it cannot take extreme mesures and has to respect that 60% didnt vote for them. that said they, for obvious political reasons cannot offer free university like the student leagues are presently wihsing for. politics in quebec are much more complex. we have great divisions between the left wing mostly because of the nationalist question. part of the left thinks its gonna profit the quebecois bourgeois class and not the people. while other leftist think both fit together. we also have rightwing that is separatist too (which is why PQ is so weird as a party - they have both left and right within). and the last part of your political view is liberal (rightwing pro-canada). we're mostly separatist in quebec but can't obtain a majority since of these "chisms" withing the left and separatists. while the strike movement is lefty they dont agree with all of PQ politics
|
On February 21 2013 10:08 quebecman77 wrote:
you guy need to understand something first , QUEBEC = french first , that the NATIVE Langage of quebec .
now since many year both english and french are used , but before the 101 law in many place in montreal people were talking ONLY in english , same for restaurant and place , menue only in english , public place who was talking ONLY english and many people who were coming in quebec were not even learning french ( and BIG % still dont )
from someone who talk french that was REALY disgusting and WRONG .
THINK about people coming in usa and talking not in your langage , open place and store where they talk and give service only in french ...
so before the whole quebec turn english only they have passed the law 101 , the law only give some right in quebec
public place need to give service in english AND french , restaurant need to have menue in english and french and so on.
if you want to stay in a country that the less you can do ..... respect the native langage .
I feel I understand that quite well. I just wish that you would understand the big culture clash here. Where I come from in vancouver, BC we have a large asian community. The richmond area is notorious for having more mandarin speakers than there are english speakers. If this trend continues outward and the english in BC become the minority, I would have to adapt and learn mandarin just for the sake of best interest. A lot of anglophones (and a lot of francophones for that matter) don't feel that situation should be as disgusting and wrong as you think it is (not trying to generalize). If the only reason I have to defend the fact that they should learn english is the fact that it says so on our offical languages section then I feel I am being unreasonable.
|
On February 21 2013 10:11 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 10:01 Dawski wrote:On February 21 2013 09:58 Kukaracha wrote:On February 21 2013 09:52 Dawski wrote:
When my dutch grandparents were dirt poor in the netherlands they got all the money they could and got on the first boat to canada and assimilated into a new culture because that's what was necessary Yeah, but, they weren't invaded... they immigrated! It's a little harsh to blame native americans for not adapting, it's like stealing someone's house, planting them a tent outside, and telling them to deal with it! There's a dude who did that in France though, he murdered a family and basically took their home. He would chill outside and tell people that the owners gave him the house. Exactly, it is harsh, but it's the fact of life. you pick yourself up off the floor, stop feeling self-pity like we all would in that situation and change for the better. Is there any possible way you can get the house back after multiple generations of that mans family living in that house? no? then you have to adapt no matter how much life pushed you down Well, in that very case the man got arrested obviously, I mean it was a pretty grotesque situation. It's true that you can always "man up" to situations, but I wouldn't say that to people who suffered tragedies I can't imagine going through myself... I see it as blind anger or depression, it's hard to talk people out of it, not only because the feelings involved are strong but also because the person is so involved while we are so distant from the problem that we don't really have much weight in their decisions. It's much easier to say "hey man, just GG" when you see someone losing a Starcraft game than saying "hey man, let it go" when you see someone losing their child! Before I go to bed, I will once again stress how nice canadian people are. Random strangers smiled at me on the street, I got on buses and boats for free, just all these little things that make you think, damn, these people actually care.
I have a lot of people to respond to on here it's hard to manage xD.
What you're saying is the point of view that most including myself would like to take. Because we feel sorry for someone for all they've went through we don't want to direct any judgements towards them. The problem is they're already feeling enough self-pity and when someone goes and validates that it can potentially really hurt them in the long run. People start to get obsessed with the fact that they've been hard-done by. Sometimes what it takes is a emotionless machine (not literally) from the outside to tell them how to get out of the situation they are stuck in for the betterment of their lives.
|
[/QUOTE]
I suppose this is a good learning period for me because I guess I don't understand it. What would the forcing of people away from their culture have to do with them being forced into poverty? Are you saying the residential schools forced kids to not have a relationship with their parents and in turn caused both to turn to alcoholism?[/QUOTE]
let me google that for you : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Indian_residential_school_system
this has been terribad for the native people. we ( the federal government ) destroyed their culture, their pride, their families and they also literally got raped in the ass. it is one of the major reasons why nowadays the natives are perceived as a fucked up people who are only good at leeching the government and inhaling fuel fumes.
and you should not go about telling people their culture fails because they made laws that ensure the perennity of their langage in a globalizing/-ed world where anyone coming from a 3rd world shithole can get off the plane and get welfare free healthcare-education and so on...
back in the 1760's the guy who was comissioned by the british crown to find out what was going on with Canadians ( Lord Durham ) said that we would be assimilated in a couple generations cause we had no identity, no culture, no pride, w/e...
so yeah. my culture must be failing bigtime.
|
I feel I understand that quite well. I just wish that you would understand the big culture clash here. Where I come from in vancouver, BC we have a large asian community. The richmond area is notorious for having more mandarin speakers than there are english speakers. If this trend continues outward and the english in BC become the minority, I would have to adapt and learn mandarin just for the sake of best interest. A lot of anglophones (and a lot of francophones for that matter) don't feel that situation should be as disgusting and wrong as you think it is (not trying to generalize). If the only reason I have to defend the fact that they should learn english is the fact that it says so on our offical languages section then I feel I am being unreasonable.
seems like you have a hard time making the difference between immigrants culture and one of the two founding people of this nation.
French and English are the official langages of Canada, Mandarin chinese is not.
|
On February 21 2013 10:19 crazyweasel wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 09:01 crazyweasel wrote:
I want you to explain to me right now how my stance on the student strike in Quebec equates to me "not understanding Quebecs problems"
post well, PQ supported the strike agaisnt an increase of university cost. right now it is offering an indexation which is a progressive increase. PQ is a minority at "assemblée nationale" that said it cannot take extreme mesures and has to respect that 60% didnt vote for them. that said they, for obvious political reasons cannot offer free university like the student leagues are presently wihsing for. politics in quebec are much more complex. we have great divisions between the left wing mostly because of the nationalist question. part of the left thinks its gonna profit the quebecois bourgeois class and not the people. while other leftist think both fit together. we also have rightwing that is separatist too (which is why PQ is so weird as a party - they have both left and right within). and the last part of your political view is liberal (rightwing pro-canada). we're mostly separatist in quebec but can't obtain a majority since of these "chisms" withing the left and separatists. while the strike movement is lefty they dont agree with all of PQ politics
Sure some of that is news to me but I don't see how that goes against the point I was making that, in that situation the students are clearly in the wrong. That's all i was pointing towards in that statement by trying to prove that while biases exist in everyone, there is a time and place when one bias may be more advantageous over another. Just a misunderstanding of the point I was making I guess.
Then again as I look at this can more people from Quebec back up the fact that the majority of Quebec are actually for the separation but just belong to different idealogical parties? I was always told that a small majority (25-30%) of Quebecers were the ones that were for the separation and that they (the other more pro-canada ones) get a bad name because of it
|
On February 21 2013 10:38 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:Show nested quote + I feel I understand that quite well. I just wish that you would understand the big culture clash here. Where I come from in vancouver, BC we have a large asian community. The richmond area is notorious for having more mandarin speakers than there are english speakers. If this trend continues outward and the english in BC become the minority, I would have to adapt and learn mandarin just for the sake of best interest. A lot of anglophones (and a lot of francophones for that matter) don't feel that situation should be as disgusting and wrong as you think it is (not trying to generalize). If the only reason I have to defend the fact that they should learn english is the fact that it says so on our offical languages section then I feel I am being unreasonable. seems like you have a hard time making the difference between immigrants culture and one of the two founding people of this nation. French and English are the official langages of Canada, Mandarin chinese is not.
My point is who the hell cares what your official language is!? you learn the language you have to in order to best serve your interests. I'm trying to come to this discussion with the bias that preserving culture is a useless idea because it grants nothing to your life other than nationalism and pride.
|
so now you say I should not be proud of my culture?? that nationalism is bad??
wtf man
lets agree to disagree
|
Thanks to them all the chances of us ever getting a majority government is flushed down the toilet. Hurray for more elections to waste taxes on! ... Fuck
|
On February 21 2013 10:38 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 10:19 crazyweasel wrote:On February 21 2013 09:01 crazyweasel wrote:
I want you to explain to me right now how my stance on the student strike in Quebec equates to me "not understanding Quebecs problems"
post well, PQ supported the strike agaisnt an increase of university cost. right now it is offering an indexation which is a progressive increase. PQ is a minority at "assemblée nationale" that said it cannot take extreme mesures and has to respect that 60% didnt vote for them. that said they, for obvious political reasons cannot offer free university like the student leagues are presently wihsing for. politics in quebec are much more complex. we have great divisions between the left wing mostly because of the nationalist question. part of the left thinks its gonna profit the quebecois bourgeois class and not the people. while other leftist think both fit together. we also have rightwing that is separatist too (which is why PQ is so weird as a party - they have both left and right within). and the last part of your political view is liberal (rightwing pro-canada). we're mostly separatist in quebec but can't obtain a majority since of these "chisms" withing the left and separatists. while the strike movement is lefty they dont agree with all of PQ politics Sure some of that is news to me but I don't see how that goes against the point I was making that, in that situation the students are clearly in the wrong. That's all i was pointing towards in that statement by trying to prove that while biases exist in everyone, there is a time and place when one bias may be more advantageous over another. Just a misunderstanding of the point I was making I guess. Then again as I look at this can more people from Quebec back up the fact that the majority of Quebec are actually for the separation but just belong to different idealogical parties? I was always told that a small majority (25-30%) of Quebecers were the ones that were for the separation and that they (the other more pro-canada ones) get a bad name because of it
no actually a majority of quebecois wants independance but they want it differently.
and why there is so much hate on pro-canada people is because last referendum (last vote for sovereignty) was stolen. we today coonfirm that the " NO side" used federal public fundings to promote the NO campaign (the "lovin" was part of it). we also know that federal goverment increase immigration during this period knowing a freshly coming immigrant would vote no. also there was irregularities on both side(lets be honest) in terms of counting votes. some poles were "PQ controled" while some canadian got their 2nd property transferd in quebec to vote against (stats compiles around 130k people who voted without appearing on the electoral list). i personnaly dont hate them i just hate when ppl like OP post BS on our nationalism and wish to preserve our culture(United Nation attested that our methdos were totally legitimate according to humans rights and collective rights, when it comes to a dilemma between individual right and colelctive rights, collective rights always prevails according to UN).
as for the student its a left-right debate that i don't want to go into (visibly we dont share same side )
|
On February 21 2013 10:47 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
so now you say I should not be proud of my culture?? that nationalism is bad??
wtf man
lets agree to disagree
agreed to agree to disagree haha. I feel that nationalism is bad because it makes someone prideful in virtues that he did nothing to deserve. You want to show respect to your family line? be the best, nicest, most successful person this world has ever seen. Earn your pride
|
On February 21 2013 10:41 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 10:38 Kevin_Sorbo wrote: I feel I understand that quite well. I just wish that you would understand the big culture clash here. Where I come from in vancouver, BC we have a large asian community. The richmond area is notorious for having more mandarin speakers than there are english speakers. If this trend continues outward and the english in BC become the minority, I would have to adapt and learn mandarin just for the sake of best interest. A lot of anglophones (and a lot of francophones for that matter) don't feel that situation should be as disgusting and wrong as you think it is (not trying to generalize). If the only reason I have to defend the fact that they should learn english is the fact that it says so on our offical languages section then I feel I am being unreasonable. seems like you have a hard time making the difference between immigrants culture and one of the two founding people of this nation. French and English are the official langages of Canada, Mandarin chinese is not. My point is who the hell cares what your official language is!? you learn the language you have to in order to best serve your interests. I'm trying to come to this discussion with the bias that preserving culture is a useless idea because it grants nothing to your life other than nationalism and pride.
Do you believe everyone in the world should speak the same unified language? Hypothetical question, as it won't happen unless there's a higher authority governing it.
Interesting fact: I haven't checked if any conclusive arguments were made recently, but a few years ago, some studies showed that people who knew a lot more languages were prone to live longer. Take it with a grain of salt though, back then the studies weren't conclusive.
|
On February 21 2013 10:59 warshop wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 10:41 Dawski wrote:On February 21 2013 10:38 Kevin_Sorbo wrote: I feel I understand that quite well. I just wish that you would understand the big culture clash here. Where I come from in vancouver, BC we have a large asian community. The richmond area is notorious for having more mandarin speakers than there are english speakers. If this trend continues outward and the english in BC become the minority, I would have to adapt and learn mandarin just for the sake of best interest. A lot of anglophones (and a lot of francophones for that matter) don't feel that situation should be as disgusting and wrong as you think it is (not trying to generalize). If the only reason I have to defend the fact that they should learn english is the fact that it says so on our offical languages section then I feel I am being unreasonable. seems like you have a hard time making the difference between immigrants culture and one of the two founding people of this nation. French and English are the official langages of Canada, Mandarin chinese is not. My point is who the hell cares what your official language is!? you learn the language you have to in order to best serve your interests. I'm trying to come to this discussion with the bias that preserving culture is a useless idea because it grants nothing to your life other than nationalism and pride. Do you believe everyone in the world should speak the same unified language? Hypothetical question, as it won't happen unless there's a higher authority governing it. Interesting fact: I haven't checked if any conclusive arguments were made recently, but a few years ago, some studies showed that people who knew a lot more languages were prone to live longer. Take it with a grain of salt though, back then the studies weren't conclusive.
Yes, I am a right-wing person bringing my arguments to the table. I would totally be for a unified language. I don't see how your second point has any backing whatsoever and I don't see how the two correlate.
|
On February 21 2013 10:08 quebecman77 wrote:
you guy need to understand something first , QUEBEC = french first , that the NATIVE Langage of quebec .
now since many year both english and french are used , but before the 101 law in many place in montreal people were talking ONLY in english , same for restaurant and place , menue only in english , public place who was talking ONLY english and many people who were coming in quebec were not even learning french ( and BIG % still dont )
from someone who talk french that was REALY disgusting and WRONG .
THINK about people coming in usa and talking not in your langage , open place and store where they talk and give service only in french ...
so before the whole quebec turn english only they have passed the law 101 , the law only give some right in quebec
public place need to give service in english AND french , restaurant need to have menue in english and french and so on.
if you want to stay in a country that the less you can do ..... respect the native langage .
Are you serious?
Your aware that Canada has 2 official languages? PEOPLE SPEAKING ENGLISH IN CANADA IS DISGUSTING! Give me a break...
Lots and Lots of Brown/Asian people don't learn english when they come here especially the old ones and we don't make discriminatory laws against them. You would shit your pants if you went to Asian dominated malls in BC...
|
On February 21 2013 14:30 tokicheese wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 10:08 quebecman77 wrote:
you guy need to understand something first , QUEBEC = french first , that the NATIVE Langage of quebec .
now since many year both english and french are used , but before the 101 law in many place in montreal people were talking ONLY in english , same for restaurant and place , menue only in english , public place who was talking ONLY english and many people who were coming in quebec were not even learning french ( and BIG % still dont )
from someone who talk french that was REALY disgusting and WRONG .
THINK about people coming in usa and talking not in your langage , open place and store where they talk and give service only in french ...
so before the whole quebec turn english only they have passed the law 101 , the law only give some right in quebec
public place need to give service in english AND french , restaurant need to have menue in english and french and so on.
if you want to stay in a country that the less you can do ..... respect the native langage .
Are you serious? Your aware that Canada has 2 official languages? PEOPLE SPEAKING ENGLISH IN CANADA IS DISGUSTING! Give me a break... Lots and Lots of Brown/Asian people don't learn english when they come here especially the old ones and we don't make discriminatory laws against them. You would shit your pants if you went to Asian dominated malls in BC...
read better , i agree that canada got 2 official language ( under paper.. ) so you should AGREE that you should get publics service and accomodation in BOTH language , that disgusting that BIG public place was giving service only in english , or you completely miss what i was saying.....
( right now that ONLY true for both english/french in quebec because of law 101 .... ) yes canada got 2 official languages , but let be honest OUTSIDE quebec you will not find many place where they talk french only and french people are not realy welcome in many place... well i will not say not realy welcome but you realy feal like you are NOT in your country where you go outside quebec and that hard find job .
( i have travel to many place outside quebec in canada , and im lucky that my english speaking better that my writing .... )
before the law 101 in quebec the 2 official languages was not respected ( many public place and so on talking only english)
you need to understand that not a discriminatory laws to ask in quebec that service , public place , place for eat , can be for both english and french people . that just some respect for native speaking people who live in quebec canada .
you only need to respect that , not that hard no ? . im pretty sure if you go open for exemple a big phone service in china and give service for help and so on talking only in spanish someone will tell you to change something....
and anyway in reality that not how this work , a big % of people in place like montreal can live their life talking ONLY english just fine , you are not required to learn french in any way.
hope you understand better , and btw im happy to be canadian , but you guy only english speaking need to respect that the only place where you will find french people in your country = quebec , we want to be ok to live your life talking french and be respected too....
|
On February 21 2013 23:23 quebecman77 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 14:30 tokicheese wrote:On February 21 2013 10:08 quebecman77 wrote:
you guy need to understand something first , QUEBEC = french first , that the NATIVE Langage of quebec .
now since many year both english and french are used , but before the 101 law in many place in montreal people were talking ONLY in english , same for restaurant and place , menue only in english , public place who was talking ONLY english and many people who were coming in quebec were not even learning french ( and BIG % still dont )
from someone who talk french that was REALY disgusting and WRONG .
THINK about people coming in usa and talking not in your langage , open place and store where they talk and give service only in french ...
so before the whole quebec turn english only they have passed the law 101 , the law only give some right in quebec
public place need to give service in english AND french , restaurant need to have menue in english and french and so on.
if you want to stay in a country that the less you can do ..... respect the native langage .
Are you serious? Your aware that Canada has 2 official languages? PEOPLE SPEAKING ENGLISH IN CANADA IS DISGUSTING! Give me a break... Lots and Lots of Brown/Asian people don't learn english when they come here especially the old ones and we don't make discriminatory laws against them. You would shit your pants if you went to Asian dominated malls in BC... read better , i agree that canada got 2 official language ( under paper.. ) so you should AGREE that you should get publics service and accomodation in BOTH language , that disgusting that BIG public place was giving service only in english , or you completely miss what i was saying..... ( right now that ONLY true for both english/french in quebec because of law 101 .... ) yes canada got 2 official languages , but let be honest OUTSIDE quebec you will not find many place where they talk french only and french people are not realy welcome in many place... well i will not say not realy welcome but you realy feal like you are NOT in your country where you go outside quebec and that hard find job . ( i have travel to many place outside quebec in canada , and im lucky that my english speaking better that my writing .... ) before the law 101 in quebec the 2 official languages was not respected ( many public place and so on talking only english) you need to understand that not a discriminatory laws to ask in quebec that service , public place , place for eat , can be for both english and french people . that just some respect for native speaking people who live in quebec canada . you only need to respect that , not that hard no ? . im pretty sure if you go open for exemple a big phone service in china and give service for help and so on talking only in spanish someone will tell you to change something.... and anyway in reality that not how this work , a big % of people in place like montreal can live their life talking ONLY english just fine , you are not required to learn french in any way. hope you understand better , and btw im happy to be canadian , but you guy only english speaking need to respect that the only place where you will find french people in your country = quebec , we want to be ok to live your life talking french and be respected too....
http://www.cbc.ca/player/Shows/ID/2337336879/
A OLF agent tells a shop to rename "fish and chips" to "poisson frit et frites" (by the looks of it it's on decarie, an area about 3km from downtown core, very bilingual area). This is what happens: French Canadians disagree. In fact, the OLF disagrees. The office admits there is a provision in bill 101 that allows for the "native expression" of a dish to be used.
I really feel like the examples I've been posting recently, with ben&jerry's, buenanotte and britt&chips, OLF agents interpreted the PQ in power as an excuse to overstep their bounds.
Lets see what JF lisee has to say about that! he's the "anglophone minister" appointed by the french to try to "bridge the gap between cultures". Mostly by making a song, I think. If the PQ wants to bridge gaps, they should hire an actual anglophone as anglophone minister. Just sayan.
Lastly, stop attacking my OP as "lacking quality". I constructed the thread carefully, over three hours of write time and days of research and collecting the good links. Just because it doesn't have funny pictures of koreans doesn't mean it isn't a good thread.
|
On February 21 2013 23:23 quebecman77 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 14:30 tokicheese wrote:On February 21 2013 10:08 quebecman77 wrote:
you guy need to understand something first , QUEBEC = french first , that the NATIVE Langage of quebec .
now since many year both english and french are used , but before the 101 law in many place in montreal people were talking ONLY in english , same for restaurant and place , menue only in english , public place who was talking ONLY english and many people who were coming in quebec were not even learning french ( and BIG % still dont )
from someone who talk french that was REALY disgusting and WRONG .
THINK about people coming in usa and talking not in your langage , open place and store where they talk and give service only in french ...
so before the whole quebec turn english only they have passed the law 101 , the law only give some right in quebec
public place need to give service in english AND french , restaurant need to have menue in english and french and so on.
if you want to stay in a country that the less you can do ..... respect the native langage .
Are you serious? Your aware that Canada has 2 official languages? PEOPLE SPEAKING ENGLISH IN CANADA IS DISGUSTING! Give me a break... Lots and Lots of Brown/Asian people don't learn english when they come here especially the old ones and we don't make discriminatory laws against them. You would shit your pants if you went to Asian dominated malls in BC... read better , i agree that canada got 2 official language ( under paper.. ) so you should AGREE that you should get publics service and accomodation in BOTH language , that disgusting that BIG public place was giving service only in english , or you completely miss what i was saying..... ( right now that ONLY true for both english/french in quebec because of law 101 .... ) yes canada got 2 official languages , but let be honest OUTSIDE quebec you will not find many place where they talk french only and french people are not realy welcome in many place... well i will not say not realy welcome but you realy feal like you are NOT in your country where you go outside quebec and that hard find job . ( i have travel to many place outside quebec in canada , and im lucky that my english speaking better that my writing .... ) before the law 101 in quebec the 2 official languages was not respected ( many public place and so on talking only english) you need to understand that not a discriminatory laws to ask in quebec that service , public place , place for eat , can be for both english and french people . that just some respect for native speaking people who live in quebec canada . you only need to respect that , not that hard no ? . im pretty sure if you go open for exemple a big phone service in china and give service for help and so on talking only in spanish someone will tell you to change something.... and anyway in reality that not how this work , a big % of people in place like montreal can live their life talking ONLY english just fine , you are not required to learn french in any way. hope you understand better , and btw im happy to be canadian , but you guy only english speaking need to respect that the only place where you will find french people in your country = quebec , we want to be ok to live your life talking french and be respected too....
I didn't realize I ceased to exist, being a french canadian from the maritimes. Not like there are tons of french people there...
Quebecers always manage to piss me off one way or another. Always spouting that they are discriminated against being "the only" french people in Canada when there are people fighting a real language battle in New-Brunswick which is legally bilingual (the only province with both languages as their main languages) yet you can often only get served in english.
|
On February 21 2013 01:16 Abraxas514 wrote:So the habs are #1 on the ladder, city hall is shut down while provincial cops raid every single office, but do you know what makes news in montreal? http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2013/02/19/pastas-interdites-dans-un-resto-italienFor those that don't read french: A very popular upscale Italian restaurant/club-lounge is getting harassed by the OLF. Know why? The word "Pasta" on the menu. Show nested quote +Quelle est la prochaine étape pour Massimo Lecas? «C’est entre les mains de mes avocats, m’a-t-il répondu. Jusqu’ici, ça m’a déjà coûté 4500 $ de frais. Le Buona Notte existe depuis 22 ans et c’est la première fois qu’on se fait dire que notre menu est trop «italien». Basic translation: What's the next step for (the owner)? "It's in the hands of my lawyers, but up until now it's costed me 4500$ of lawyer fees. We've existed for 22 years, and this is the first time our menu was deemed too "Italian". ... Gotta applaud the PQ for giving these guys a nice fat budget instead of my engineering school.
Just like any law or rule applied on a big scale, unless it's applied by robots, some people will be overzealous.
It's a shame injustice happens, but the reality is that we can find similar bad decisions from any other gouvernment agency, and fortunately the ''victims'' have ways to appeal those decisions.
Because some people screw up sometimes doesnt mean the problem comes directly from the law itself. People make mistakes.
|
On February 22 2013 02:33 lepape wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 01:16 Abraxas514 wrote:So the habs are #1 on the ladder, city hall is shut down while provincial cops raid every single office, but do you know what makes news in montreal? http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2013/02/19/pastas-interdites-dans-un-resto-italienFor those that don't read french: A very popular upscale Italian restaurant/club-lounge is getting harassed by the OLF. Know why? The word "Pasta" on the menu. Quelle est la prochaine étape pour Massimo Lecas? «C’est entre les mains de mes avocats, m’a-t-il répondu. Jusqu’ici, ça m’a déjà coûté 4500 $ de frais. Le Buona Notte existe depuis 22 ans et c’est la première fois qu’on se fait dire que notre menu est trop «italien». Basic translation: What's the next step for (the owner)? "It's in the hands of my lawyers, but up until now it's costed me 4500$ of lawyer fees. We've existed for 22 years, and this is the first time our menu was deemed too "Italian". ... Gotta applaud the PQ for giving these guys a nice fat budget instead of my engineering school. Just like any law or rule applied on a big scale, unless it's applied by robots, some people will be overzealous. It's a shame injustice happens, but the reality is that we can find similar bad decisions from any other gouvernment agency, and fortunately the ''victims'' have ways to appeal those decisions. Because some people screw up sometimes doesnt mean the problem comes directly from the law itself. People make mistakes.
um except for the fact this type of injustice is actually PROMOTED. They're using the law exactly like they intended to. This isn't the first time this has happened. It's happened many times in the past and there has been opposition but they continue to do so.
|
On February 22 2013 03:02 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2013 02:33 lepape wrote:On February 21 2013 01:16 Abraxas514 wrote:So the habs are #1 on the ladder, city hall is shut down while provincial cops raid every single office, but do you know what makes news in montreal? http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2013/02/19/pastas-interdites-dans-un-resto-italienFor those that don't read french: A very popular upscale Italian restaurant/club-lounge is getting harassed by the OLF. Know why? The word "Pasta" on the menu. Quelle est la prochaine étape pour Massimo Lecas? «C’est entre les mains de mes avocats, m’a-t-il répondu. Jusqu’ici, ça m’a déjà coûté 4500 $ de frais. Le Buona Notte existe depuis 22 ans et c’est la première fois qu’on se fait dire que notre menu est trop «italien». Basic translation: What's the next step for (the owner)? "It's in the hands of my lawyers, but up until now it's costed me 4500$ of lawyer fees. We've existed for 22 years, and this is the first time our menu was deemed too "Italian". ... Gotta applaud the PQ for giving these guys a nice fat budget instead of my engineering school. Just like any law or rule applied on a big scale, unless it's applied by robots, some people will be overzealous. It's a shame injustice happens, but the reality is that we can find similar bad decisions from any other gouvernment agency, and fortunately the ''victims'' have ways to appeal those decisions. Because some people screw up sometimes doesnt mean the problem comes directly from the law itself. People make mistakes. um except for the fact this type of injustice is actually PROMOTED. They're using the law exactly like they intended to. This isn't the first time this has happened. It's happened many times in the past and there has been opposition but they continue to do so.
It is not.
Read or listen to any media since this was reported, the president of the OLF himself apologized and declared this was the act of overzealous workers.
There are terrible decisions every day made by the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Health, or any government branch in fact, that are not mediatised nearly as much because they don't touch such a controversial subject.
|
On February 22 2013 03:05 lepape wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2013 03:02 Dawski wrote:On February 22 2013 02:33 lepape wrote:On February 21 2013 01:16 Abraxas514 wrote:So the habs are #1 on the ladder, city hall is shut down while provincial cops raid every single office, but do you know what makes news in montreal? http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2013/02/19/pastas-interdites-dans-un-resto-italienFor those that don't read french: A very popular upscale Italian restaurant/club-lounge is getting harassed by the OLF. Know why? The word "Pasta" on the menu. Quelle est la prochaine étape pour Massimo Lecas? «C’est entre les mains de mes avocats, m’a-t-il répondu. Jusqu’ici, ça m’a déjà coûté 4500 $ de frais. Le Buona Notte existe depuis 22 ans et c’est la première fois qu’on se fait dire que notre menu est trop «italien». Basic translation: What's the next step for (the owner)? "It's in the hands of my lawyers, but up until now it's costed me 4500$ of lawyer fees. We've existed for 22 years, and this is the first time our menu was deemed too "Italian". ... Gotta applaud the PQ for giving these guys a nice fat budget instead of my engineering school. Just like any law or rule applied on a big scale, unless it's applied by robots, some people will be overzealous. It's a shame injustice happens, but the reality is that we can find similar bad decisions from any other gouvernment agency, and fortunately the ''victims'' have ways to appeal those decisions. Because some people screw up sometimes doesnt mean the problem comes directly from the law itself. People make mistakes. um except for the fact this type of injustice is actually PROMOTED. They're using the law exactly like they intended to. This isn't the first time this has happened. It's happened many times in the past and there has been opposition but they continue to do so. It is not. Read or listen to any media since this was reported, the president of the OLF himself apologized and declared this was the act of overzealous workers. There are terrible decisions every day made by the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Health, or any government branch in fact, that are not mediatised nearly as much because they don't touch such a controversial subject.
I made a post about this about 5 or 6 back. OLF workers who joined because they really believed in taking English down a notch are surpassing their mandate.
I honestly believe that the french canadians in the south think of bilingualism differently than the north. Most of the french I meet around here agree bill 14 is a step in the wrong direction. They are primarily anti-seperatist even if they don't trust our current federal government. I've had no problem speaking english and being responded to in french. I usually speak to my family from france that way unless its just a bonjour comment va tu.
I'm sorry if New Brunswick's bilingualism isn't working out. In places like Brittany the traditional languages are disappearing, almost gone completely, yet the old celtics aren't trying to seperate from the rest of france. It's the responsibility of the population to upkeep their traditions, and it seems ridiculous to legislate one language and 'de-legislate' another. The french people of NB should do their best to open french businesses, write french newspapers and get streets named after famous french people. This is how to preserve a language.
|
The political map of Quebec (and even Montreal) is often seen as seperated on a vertical axis, I'm not sure how you see the north/south demarcation.
|
I'm going to come at this thread from another angle which I've sort-of pointed myself towards in my previous posts. I want you guys to explain to me why Nationalism and pride in your culture instead of your personal merrits is... well.. a good thing to have.
"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind"
-Albert Einstein
I'm a right-wing person who believes individual freedoms come way before collectivist freedoms. Convince me
edit: (man I edit my posts right after I post them way too often lol)
I'm going to try scope in a topic that's relevant to this thread so that I don't go off topic. Why should the individual freedoms of speach in any language they choose to communicate in be tarnished by the collectivist apparent freedom to preserve their culture?
|
On February 22 2013 04:12 lepape wrote:
The political map of Quebec (and even Montreal) is often seen as seperated on a vertical axis, I'm not sure how you see the north/south demarcation.
I would direct you to the link to a picture I merged on page 1:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/107275289/Quebec.jpg
This map should also be overlaid on a population density map though. It points to certain causations (as in, university proximity = liberal support) that may be only correlated.
On February 22 2013 08:35 Dawski wrote:
I'm going to come at this thread from another angle which I've sort-of pointed myself towards in my previous posts. I want you guys to explain to me why Nationalism and pride in your culture instead of your personal merrits is... well.. a good thing to have.
"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind"
-Albert Einstein
I'm a right-wing person who believes individual freedoms come way before collectivist freedoms. Convince me
edit: (man I edit my posts right after I post them way too often lol)
I'm going to try scope in a topic that's relevant to this thread so that I don't go off topic. Why should the individual freedoms of speach in any language they choose to communicate in be tarnished by the collectivist apparent freedom to preserve their culture?
As far as I understand the pequiste argument, if English were to be used without control in quebec, french canadian culture would all but disappear within a century.
|
|
|
On February 22 2013 04:02 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2013 03:05 lepape wrote:On February 22 2013 03:02 Dawski wrote:On February 22 2013 02:33 lepape wrote:On February 21 2013 01:16 Abraxas514 wrote:So the habs are #1 on the ladder, city hall is shut down while provincial cops raid every single office, but do you know what makes news in montreal? http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2013/02/19/pastas-interdites-dans-un-resto-italienFor those that don't read french: A very popular upscale Italian restaurant/club-lounge is getting harassed by the OLF. Know why? The word "Pasta" on the menu. Quelle est la prochaine étape pour Massimo Lecas? «C’est entre les mains de mes avocats, m’a-t-il répondu. Jusqu’ici, ça m’a déjà coûté 4500 $ de frais. Le Buona Notte existe depuis 22 ans et c’est la première fois qu’on se fait dire que notre menu est trop «italien». Basic translation: What's the next step for (the owner)? "It's in the hands of my lawyers, but up until now it's costed me 4500$ of lawyer fees. We've existed for 22 years, and this is the first time our menu was deemed too "Italian". ... Gotta applaud the PQ for giving these guys a nice fat budget instead of my engineering school. Just like any law or rule applied on a big scale, unless it's applied by robots, some people will be overzealous. It's a shame injustice happens, but the reality is that we can find similar bad decisions from any other gouvernment agency, and fortunately the ''victims'' have ways to appeal those decisions. Because some people screw up sometimes doesnt mean the problem comes directly from the law itself. People make mistakes. um except for the fact this type of injustice is actually PROMOTED. They're using the law exactly like they intended to. This isn't the first time this has happened. It's happened many times in the past and there has been opposition but they continue to do so. It is not. Read or listen to any media since this was reported, the president of the OLF himself apologized and declared this was the act of overzealous workers. There are terrible decisions every day made by the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Health, or any government branch in fact, that are not mediatised nearly as much because they don't touch such a controversial subject. I made a post about this about 5 or 6 back. OLF workers who joined because they really believed in taking English down a notch are surpassing their mandate. I honestly believe that the french canadians in the south think of bilingualism differently than the north. Most of the french I meet around here agree bill 14 is a step in the wrong direction. They are primarily anti-seperatist even if they don't trust our current federal government. I've had no problem speaking english and being responded to in french. I usually speak to my family from france that way unless its just a bonjour comment va tu. I'm sorry if New Brunswick's bilingualism isn't working out. In places like Brittany the traditional languages are disappearing, almost gone completely, yet the old celtics aren't trying to seperate from the rest of france. It's the responsibility of the population to upkeep their traditions, and it seems ridiculous to legislate one language and 'de-legislate' another. The french people of NB should do their best to open french businesses, write french newspapers and get streets named after famous french people. This is how to preserve a language.
id agree that its up to the people to upkeep their traditions but in order to do so they need to re-build or revitalize upon their political fight to upkeep them. you can't upkeep a language by simply speaking it..... you have to take political measures/stand. (i explained through many post the effect of hegemony)
|
On February 22 2013 08:35 Dawski wrote:
I'm going to come at this thread from another angle which I've sort-of pointed myself towards in my previous posts. I want you guys to explain to me why Nationalism and pride in your culture instead of your personal merrits is... well.. a good thing to have.
"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind"
-Albert Einstein
I'm a right-wing person who believes individual freedoms come way before collectivist freedoms. Convince me
edit: (man I edit my posts right after I post them way too often lol)
I'm going to try scope in a topic that's relevant to this thread so that I don't go off topic. Why should the individual freedoms of speach in any language they choose to communicate in be tarnished by the collectivist apparent freedom to preserve their culture?
because individual freedoms lead to hierarchy, inequalities, injustice. (if you consider every human should be equal). whereas collective freedom ensures every person is on equal standings. if some people calcualte merits of having "made" it, they often forgot all the people who worked under them. you can't run bizness alone (you need employees/ workers). yet you take all the merit for it. the idea being collectivism is that we can all benefit individually from cooperation while individualism will only favorise some people over others. thats called justice.
|
On February 23 2013 01:28 crazyweasel wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2013 08:35 Dawski wrote:
I'm going to come at this thread from another angle which I've sort-of pointed myself towards in my previous posts. I want you guys to explain to me why Nationalism and pride in your culture instead of your personal merrits is... well.. a good thing to have.
"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind"
-Albert Einstein
I'm a right-wing person who believes individual freedoms come way before collectivist freedoms. Convince me
edit: (man I edit my posts right after I post them way too often lol)
I'm going to try scope in a topic that's relevant to this thread so that I don't go off topic. Why should the individual freedoms of speach in any language they choose to communicate in be tarnished by the collectivist apparent freedom to preserve their culture? because individual freedoms lead to hierarchy, inequalities, injustice. (if you consider every human should be equal). whereas collective freedom ensures every person is on equal standings. if some people calcualte merits of having "made" it, they often forgot all the people who worked under them. you can't run bizness alone (you need employees/ workers). yet you take all the merit for it. the idea being collectivism is that we can all benefit individually from cooperation while individualism will only favorise some people over others. thats called justice.
Right wing folks don't believe in equality. They say they do in their discourse but they know full well that we're not all born with equal opportunities, yet they don't care and don't want to make it right.
I was born in an upper middle class family so my odds of doing well are orders of magnitude higher than that of a majority of the people. And that's what they call success and merit. And they look down on equally intelligent and much smarter people who worked menial jobs because dad couldn't hold a job while I was jerking off in University scoring straight A's because most bachelors and masters degrees are intentionally made easy to get.
|
On February 23 2013 01:28 crazyweasel wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2013 08:35 Dawski wrote:
I'm going to come at this thread from another angle which I've sort-of pointed myself towards in my previous posts. I want you guys to explain to me why Nationalism and pride in your culture instead of your personal merrits is... well.. a good thing to have.
"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind"
-Albert Einstein
I'm a right-wing person who believes individual freedoms come way before collectivist freedoms. Convince me
edit: (man I edit my posts right after I post them way too often lol)
I'm going to try scope in a topic that's relevant to this thread so that I don't go off topic. Why should the individual freedoms of speach in any language they choose to communicate in be tarnished by the collectivist apparent freedom to preserve their culture? because individual freedoms lead to hierarchy, inequalities, injustice. (if you consider every human should be equal). whereas collective freedom ensures every person is on equal standings. if some people calcualte merits of having "made" it, they often forgot all the people who worked under them. you can't run bizness alone (you need employees/ workers). yet you take all the merit for it. the idea being collectivism is that we can all benefit individually from cooperation while individualism will only favorise some people over others. thats called justice.
You seem to have a very skewed view of individualism. The idea of Individualism is that it promotes self-growth and hard work. There seems to be this idea that in an individualistic society, if your neighbour has a a lot then you automatically don't. Your neighbours success doesn't hinder your ability to have success. A boss who forgets about his employees and doesn't thank them via raises/promotions etc. won't be as individualisticly successful as one who does. The system itself uses the human condition of greed/selfishness to create success for everyone (if used by someone with a brain who knows how the angle operates so to speak).
But that doesn't even get to the heart of it. The point of an individualistic society is that everyone does in fact have equal opportunity. You can come over with 10 cents and start up your own business without the need for beaurocratic permits. You can be the sole parent of your kid and send them to a school which teaches them the basics of math/science without the social engineering that goes on in todays Canada like all the sex-ed stuff that doesn't account for the fact that maybe someone wants to teach his kid that himself. You can choose to go to a university that promotes either a right or left wing ideology and not be forced into one which drills into you the fact that a socialist/collectivist nation is "obviously superior". People can send kids to school without having it drilled into him by the age of 10 that abortions are perfectly acceptable when a large group of people still believe they are sick. It's actually hilarious, my fiancee is a journalism major here in BC and I summarized a reading into notes for her because she was so busy. There was a section which actually said that if you don't have a friend of a homosexual tendency then you won't function well in a multicultural environment..wtf?...how does that have any grounding whatsoever.
Unfortunately for a collectivist society, people differ on a lot of very touchy subjects and creating rules for the whole just pushes down the individuals whether you like their opinions or not.
Also you never even answered the second question... so an individual freedom to communicate in whatever language they so desire promotes hierarchy, inequality, and injustice? From my point of view the collectivist right to preserve their culture seems the one that is promoting injustice here sir. Even the french language commitee apologized for promoting injustice
|
On February 23 2013 02:03 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 01:28 crazyweasel wrote:On February 22 2013 08:35 Dawski wrote:
I'm going to come at this thread from another angle which I've sort-of pointed myself towards in my previous posts. I want you guys to explain to me why Nationalism and pride in your culture instead of your personal merrits is... well.. a good thing to have.
"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind"
-Albert Einstein
I'm a right-wing person who believes individual freedoms come way before collectivist freedoms. Convince me
edit: (man I edit my posts right after I post them way too often lol)
I'm going to try scope in a topic that's relevant to this thread so that I don't go off topic. Why should the individual freedoms of speach in any language they choose to communicate in be tarnished by the collectivist apparent freedom to preserve their culture? because individual freedoms lead to hierarchy, inequalities, injustice. (if you consider every human should be equal). whereas collective freedom ensures every person is on equal standings. if some people calcualte merits of having "made" it, they often forgot all the people who worked under them. you can't run bizness alone (you need employees/ workers). yet you take all the merit for it. the idea being collectivism is that we can all benefit individually from cooperation while individualism will only favorise some people over others. thats called justice. Right wing folks don't believe in equality. They say they do in their discourse but they know full well that we're not all born with equal opportunities, yet they don't care and don't want to make it right. I was born in an upper middle class family so my odds of doing well are orders of magnitude higher than that of a majority of the people. And that's what they call success and merit. And they look down on equally intelligent and much smarter people who worked menial jobs because dad couldn't hold a job while I was jerking off in University scoring straight A's because most bachelors and masters degrees are intentionally made easy to get.
That's not true at all. I understand that even people who are in the lowest end of jobs could've easily been equal to some of the most successful of our time. The difference is the reason why they can't. They can't do that anymore because of big government needs of beaurocratic permits for even cutting down a tree or building a house and extreme taxes on anything you own for the "collective". A right-wing society looks down on all that shit. Just listen to stories of your great great grandparents who probably came from poor europe like everyone else did on a wooden boat. They came here with nothing and because of the freedom to build your own house/start up a business for 0 cost other than your own hard work. That's when North America was in the best position
|
From what I've seen in history and around the world today is that collectivist societys promote laziness. Why would anyone work hard to be successful when in some cases you can make more money making $20 an hour than you could $22 just because you moved into the next tax-bracket. The gain to want to work hard just isn't there anymore. The province of Quebec seriously shows this in it's history. When they were the manufacturing post of Canada, they pretty much WERE Canada. They promoted job growth even though your correct the french culture suffered. Once they implemented higher taxes on business/tougher language laws, all big businesses and many anglophones skipped town to Ontario and now Quebec is seen as a "have not" province. If you weren't connected to Canada you wouldn't be able to afford all the social securities you do today, that's objectively true. And if you are able to like some say you are, why the fuck are you collecting $10B in equalization payments towards them?
|
On February 23 2013 02:15 Dawski wrote:
You seem to have a very skewed view of individualism. The idea of Individualism is that it promotes self-growth and hard work. There seems to be this idea that in an individualistic society, if your neighbour has a a lot then you automatically don't. Your neighbours success doesn't hinder your ability to have success. A boss who forgets about his employees and doesn't thank them via raises/promotions etc. won't be as individualisticly successful as one who does. The system itself uses the human condition of greed/selfishness to create success for everyone (if used by someone with a brain who knows how the angle operates so to speak).
That's the idea of classical liberalism which includes free market capitalism which suggests that widespread douchebaggery won't lead to chaos and actually works itself out as a great, well functioning society. Unfortunately what we saw with industrialization is that the small folks were moving into the city to work 80 hours a week with their kids in disgusting conditions in order to barely make a living. The rich were towering above the poor and didn't give a crap about them, as long as they could make them richer. Then the Great Depression happened.
A great success story for classical liberalism and individual freedoms (not really). As it turns out, individual freedoms are only nice on paper because what actually happens when you let people take as much as they want is, they'll always take what they can get away with, unless they're forced to be fair. The thing is, they can only be forced to be fair if the opposition has the capability to force them. And they don't necessarily do have it, even though many people just assume that balance forms itself which is simply not the case.
But that doesn't even get to the heart of it. The point of an individualistic society is that everyone does in fact have equal opportunity. You can come over with 10 cents and start up your own business without the need for beaurocratic permits.
You have to be incredibly gullible to believe that, tbh. Even if you can start your business with 10 cents there's going to be a guy with daddy's $100,000 who'll do it bigger and better across the street and he's almost guaranteed to succeed. And maybe you'll also have 20 competitors who also are trying to do the same thing with their own 10 cents but the rich fellow has a head start no matter what. And odds are, he has more time for his enterprise as he's never had to work to deal with the immediate financial engagements...
Honestly you have to lie to yourself on so many levels to believe in equal opportunity in an individualistic society. It's not even just that it theoretically doesn't make sense, it's that we have clear data of the incredibly individualistic pre-1940's crumbling because of the problems that come from individualism and capitalism taken too far.
On February 23 2013 02:20 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 02:03 Djzapz wrote:On February 23 2013 01:28 crazyweasel wrote:On February 22 2013 08:35 Dawski wrote:
I'm going to come at this thread from another angle which I've sort-of pointed myself towards in my previous posts. I want you guys to explain to me why Nationalism and pride in your culture instead of your personal merrits is... well.. a good thing to have.
"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind"
-Albert Einstein
I'm a right-wing person who believes individual freedoms come way before collectivist freedoms. Convince me
edit: (man I edit my posts right after I post them way too often lol)
I'm going to try scope in a topic that's relevant to this thread so that I don't go off topic. Why should the individual freedoms of speach in any language they choose to communicate in be tarnished by the collectivist apparent freedom to preserve their culture? because individual freedoms lead to hierarchy, inequalities, injustice. (if you consider every human should be equal). whereas collective freedom ensures every person is on equal standings. if some people calcualte merits of having "made" it, they often forgot all the people who worked under them. you can't run bizness alone (you need employees/ workers). yet you take all the merit for it. the idea being collectivism is that we can all benefit individually from cooperation while individualism will only favorise some people over others. thats called justice. Right wing folks don't believe in equality. They say they do in their discourse but they know full well that we're not all born with equal opportunities, yet they don't care and don't want to make it right. I was born in an upper middle class family so my odds of doing well are orders of magnitude higher than that of a majority of the people. And that's what they call success and merit. And they look down on equally intelligent and much smarter people who worked menial jobs because dad couldn't hold a job while I was jerking off in University scoring straight A's because most bachelors and masters degrees are intentionally made easy to get. That's not true at all. I understand that even people who are in the lowest end of jobs could've easily been equal to some of the most successful of our time. The difference is the reason why they can't. They can't do that anymore because of big government needs of beaurocratic permits for even cutting down a tree or building a house and extreme taxes on anything you own for the "collective". A right-wing society looks down on all that shit. Just listen to stories of your great great grandparents who probably came from poor europe like everyone else did on a wooden boat. They came here with nothing and because of the freedom to build your own house/start up a business for 0 cost other than your own hard work. That's when North America was in the best position
You're rewriting history. Big time. Most of our great grandparents and further were proletariat. The middle class is a fairly new thing in North America, and the size of that social class has been increasing.
If you honestly think that the grass used to be greener, you need to actually start reading.
|
On February 23 2013 02:29 Dawski wrote:
And if you are able to like some say you are, why the fuck are you collecting $10B in equalization payments towards them?
A lot of that money is only injected in Quebec's economy because Quebec couldn't keep up with all of its regions solely off of the economy of the few urban centers like Montreal and Quebec City and the few other "poles" of economy which have to redistribute social services out to hundreds of tiny municipalities which can't be reasonably expected to pay for their own amenities like the internet and power, as the costs are massive due to the fact that they live in remote areas.
In per capita, Quebec takes in the second least in equalization payments after Ontario, but I don't see anybody railing on PEI, NB, MB or NS, who take in more per inhabitant for their social services. PEI takes in almost 2.5x more than QC per inhabitant, and that's all due to the fact that it's mostly a rural area. People should understand this.
Saskatchewan and Alberta are also rather rural but they make free money from being on piles of black gold, and BC is just very developed - it helps that they're located right north of California which is great for business.
It's true that QC has made some missteps but you have to understand that it's handling a lot of rural areas which are expensive to sustain if we want those people to lead good lives without necessarily moving to Montreal or the suburbs. The right sometimes expects everyone to live in the cities...
|
On February 23 2013 02:40 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 02:15 Dawski wrote:
You seem to have a very skewed view of individualism. The idea of Individualism is that it promotes self-growth and hard work. There seems to be this idea that in an individualistic society, if your neighbour has a a lot then you automatically don't. Your neighbours success doesn't hinder your ability to have success. A boss who forgets about his employees and doesn't thank them via raises/promotions etc. won't be as individualisticly successful as one who does. The system itself uses the human condition of greed/selfishness to create success for everyone (if used by someone with a brain who knows how the angle operates so to speak). That's the idea of classical liberalism which includes free market capitalism which suggests that widespread douchebaggery won't lead to chaos and actually works itself out as a great, well functioning society. Unfortunately what we saw with industrialization is that the small folks were moving into the city to work 80 hours a week with their kids in disgusting conditions in order to barely make a living. The rich were towering above the poor and didn't give a crap about them, as long as they could make them richer. Then the Great Depression happened. A great success story for classical liberalism and individual freedoms (not really). As it turns out, individual freedoms are only nice on paper because what actually happens when you let people take as much as they want is, they'll always take what they can get away with, unless they're forced to be fair. The thing is, they can only be forced to be fair if the opposition has the capability to force them. And they don't necessarily do have it, even though many people just assume that balance forms itself which is simply not the case. Show nested quote +But that doesn't even get to the heart of it. The point of an individualistic society is that everyone does in fact have equal opportunity. You can come over with 10 cents and start up your own business without the need for beaurocratic permits. You have to be incredibly gullible to believe that, tbh. Even if you can start your business with 10 cents there's going to be a guy with daddy's $100,000 who'll do it bigger and better across the street and he's almost guaranteed to succeed. And maybe you'll also have 20 competitors who also are trying to do the same thing with their own 10 cents but the rich fellow has a head start no matter what. And odds are, he has more time for his enterprise as he's never had to work to deal with the immediate financial engagements... Honestly you have to lie to yourself on so many levels to believe in equal opportunity in an individualistic society. It's not even just that it theoretically doesn't make sense, it's that we have clear data of the incredibly individualistic pre-1940's crumbling because of the problems that come from individualism and capitalism taken too far.
Hm, I suppose you've convinced me that libertarianism is fiscally the wrong path to go. I'm not sure I believe that a collectivistic/socialistic society fixes any problems though. From what I'm seeing in Western Europe the costs of the social securities is almost outgrowing the amount of productivity. Perhaps I'm wrong about a free-enterprise society working the way I thought I still don't agree with the extreme socialism.
I know you haven't made this argument but a lot of people seem to believe that businesses screw over people out of how productive they really are. Let's take for example the idea of a Labour Union, a very collectivistic idea supposed to promote fairness. In reality they seem to be very damaging to the economy and do the opposite of promoting hard work by the employees. I am a steel working whos spent the last 2 years working in one just to get that across. Less and less work is being demanded for more and more money.
All the higher wages of the unions do is raise the price of commodities for all consumers while the company earns even less profit. Because of the higher cost of wages and lower profit for the company they turn away job opportunities because they simply have less money. The only way to tackle these higher costs are less investment and makes the companies less competitive.
Like I see with the shop I worked at, higher costs make them have to reduce labour costs by outsourcing work to other cheaper companies which doesn't profit the union members. In extreme cases like when the NDP won in BC back in the 90s all the companies who unionized realized it was more profitable just to leave even further slowing economic growth.
I guess I agree that wages do need to be kept at sound levels but I feel a collectivist union raises them so unrealistically high.
That's what I feel is happening around the world today. Societies are asking for so much help from the government that it doesn't promote self-growth and in turn economic growth.
I'm still worried about personal freedom of speach violations going on in Quebec at the moment. I still don't see how the collective right to preserve culture and nationalism is greater than the right of free speach which was what I was trying to focus on to prevent derailing the thread. How does that first collective right promote equality and justice?
|
On February 23 2013 02:55 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 02:29 Dawski wrote:
And if you are able to like some say you are, why the fuck are you collecting $10B in equalization payments towards them? A lot of that money is only injected in Quebec's economy because Quebec couldn't keep up with all of its regions solely off of the economy of the few urban centers like Montreal and Quebec City and the few other "poles" of economy which have to redistribute social services out to hundreds of tiny municipalities which can't be reasonably expected to pay for their won amenities like the internet and power on their own as the costs are massive due to the fact that they live in remote areas. In per capita, Quebec takes in the second least in equalization payments after Ontario, but I don't see anybody railing on PEI, NB, MB or NS, who take in more per inhabitant for their social services. PEI takes in almost 2.5x more than QC per inhabitant, and that's all due to the fact that it's mostly a rural area. People should understand this. Saskatchewan and Alberta are also rather rural but they make free money from being on piles of black gold, and BC is just very developed - it helps that they're located right north of California which is great for business. It's true that QC has made some missteps but you have to understand that it's handling a lot of rural areas which are expensive to sustain if we want those people to lead good lives without necessarily moving to Montreal or the suburbs. The right sometimes expects everyone to live in the cities...
You seem to be misunderstanding why people don't harp on the other smaller provinces for equalization payments. Equalization payments are there so that they provinces who obviously couldn't support themselves can give their inhabitants social services that are ON PAR with the rest of Canada. In the Quebec case, the government demands these equalizations for the sole purpose of having a better social security net than the rest of the country based on the fact that that's just your culture.
If your province can't afford the social security net they want for all people including those in the rural areas, you need to cut it back like the the rest of Canada so that you can. I feel that's pretty simple
|
On February 23 2013 03:09 Dawski wrote:
I know you haven't made this argument but a lot of people seem to believe that businesses screw over people out of how productive they really are. Let's take for example the idea of a Labour Union, a very collectivistic idea supposed to promote fairness. In reality they seem to be very damaging to the economy and do the opposite of promoting hard work by the employees. I am a steel working whos spent the last 2 years working in one just to get that across. Less and less work is being demanded for more and more money.
All the higher wages of the unions do is raise the price of commodities for all consumers while the company earns even less profit. Because of the higher cost of wages and lower profit for the company they turn away job opportunities because they simply have less money. The only way to tackle these higher costs are less investment and makes the companies less competitive.
Like I see with the shop I worked at, higher costs make them have to reduce labour costs by outsourcing work to other cheaper companies which doesn't profit the union members. In extreme cases like when the NDP won in BC back in the 90s all the companies who unionized realized it was more profitable just to leave even further slowing economic growth.
I guess I agree that wages do need to be kept at sound levels but I feel a collectivist union raises them so unrealistically high.
Well I don't disagree. Unions used to have their place when workers were clearly being abused, and unions still have their place in that IMO it's outright immoral to strip people from their freedom of association, hence the necessity for the State to keep unions on a short leash in the same way that it keeps businesses from abusing their employees. A balance needs to be hit. Plenty of left-wing folks seem to think that all businesses are "bad" but we're talking about extremists or just uneducated people who have very rainbow-ey views of life. I think that businesses can be unfair though, and so can unions. Both can be damaging in their own ways.
That's what I feel is happening around the world today. Societies are asking for so much help from the government that it doesn't promote self-growth and in turn economic growth.
There are problems with the welfare state and it needs to be adjusted to promote growth, but many people see the failings of social democracy as a call to work out an entirely different paradigm or rush back to the ways of pre-1929 even though that has been proven not to work. I think we have a good thing going on and we should work on the many issues.
I'm still worried about personal freedom of speach violations going on in Quebec at the moment. I still don't see how the collective right to preserve culture and nationalism is greater than the right of free speach which was what I was trying to focus on to prevent derailing the thread. How does that first collective right promote equality and justice?
I'd have to write a book here wouldn't I . I don't know how to respond to this, frankly. The right to preserve culture versus free speech is a moral question. Nationalism is a load of shit. And collective rights specifically aims to promote equality and social justice by making everyone as equal as possible, not only by law but also in practice. Obviously it can be extrapolated to the extreme here, hence the necessity to strike a good balance once again. There are many issues in the way that we do this, which need to be worked on.
You seem to be misunderstanding why people don't harp on the other smaller provinces for equalization payments. Equalization payments are there so that they provinces who obviously couldn't support themselves can give their inhabitants social services that are ON PAR with the rest of Canada. In the Quebec case, the government demands these equalizations for the sole purpose of having a better social security net than the rest of the country based on the fact that that's just your culture.
If your province can't afford the social security net they want for all people including those in the rural areas, you need to cut it back like the the rest of Canada so that you can. I feel that's pretty simple
The equalization payments come with no strings attached, what we do with is only looked down upon by the rest of Canada because it's too "left". But that's a characteristic of QC, we're further on the left than Canada. We're more like Europe and less like the US.
Unless you believe there's something inherently wrong with the left, what we do with the money is not bad. You can criticize it much in the same way that we Quebecers would tend to criticize what other provinces do with their equalization payments because it's less "socialist" than we'd like.
|
dawksi are you implying poor people are just lazy? if you're not succesful its because you havent worked your ass off? People can work in shittiest condition ever 18hrs a day (say chinese industrial workers) and yet get paid 1% of their work's value. how is that promoting hard-work. then you're gonna tell me, well they have the choice of working in that said place. well where is the choice when capitalism instored so high competition that it has become impossible to work for yourself (off subsistance production) if you want to live in decent conditions. your only choice is to join the wheel. that right there is exploitation at its finest. individualism isn't about hard work, its about egoism. (and don,t say we are biologically egoist cause that is not true. i study that field). go read lyotard and foucault on post-modernism, they define individualism perfectly.
as for the language thing. taking mesures for the collectivity by restricting english individuals to a certain amount of things(french basic and secondary school for immigrants, french services). English imposes certain condition to us francophones, we have to learn it, we have to know it to get jobs. to be equal we "force" you to function on the public sphere in french because it is a french province with french in decline. we're maintaining our culture while yours remains fine either way. its the same logic as revenue imposition (which your are propably against), we all give proportionnaly to what we gain in order to fund social programs such as free education(or low cost) free health system, work ensurance etc. accessible to everyone. how is that injustice?
|
Well I don't disagree. Unions used to have their place when workers were clearly being abused, and unions still have their place in that IMO it's outright immoral to strip people from their freedom of association, hence the necessity for the State to keep unions on a short leash in the same way that it keeps businesses from abusing their employees. A balance needs to be hit. Plenty of left-wing folks seem to think that all businesses are "bad" but we're talking about extremists or just uneducated people who have very rainbow-ey views of life. I think that businesses can be unfair though, and so can unions. Both can be damaging in their own ways
I guess all it comes down to is that it's yet to be seen if there can be a system in place that is both sustainable and fair. For now I feel like the centre-right pro-business system is still the best of a bad situation. It promotes hard work and success but it doesn't completely leave out welfare/EI for those who were dealt a bad deal. People like me just get in a huff when we're seen as overly traditional when the system they support isn't sustainable .
There are problems with the welfare state and it needs to be adjusted to promote growth, but many people see the failings of social democracy as a call to work out an entirely different paradigm or rush back to the ways of pre-1929 even though that has been proven not to work. I think we have a good thing going on and we should work on the many issues.
Agreed. While I'd like more emphasis on the private sector I can't disagree with that point.
I'd have to write a book here wouldn't I . I don't know how to respond to this, frankly. The right to preserve culture versus free speech is a moral question. Nationalism is a load of shit. And collective rights specifically aims to promote equality and social justice by making everyone as equal as possible, not only by law but also in practice. Obviously it can be extrapolated to the extreme here, hence the necessity to strike a good balance once again. There are many issues in the way that we do this, which need to be worked on.
There in lies my problem with this whole PQ situation and alot of the arguments in this thread. I won't agree because I don't see culture as important towards self-growth. To me it is purely nationalistic. In my morals I believe individual equality based on who you actually are instead of where you came from to be superior. Someone asked me almost in a derrogatory way if I would be for a unified language. What's wrong with a world unified language/culture? I'd say it even further promotes equality.
The equalization payments come with no strings attached, what we do with is only looked down upon by the rest of Canada because it's too "left". But that's a characteristic of QC, we're further on the left than Canada. We're more like Europe and less like the US.
Unless you believe there's something inherently wrong with the left, what we do with the money is not bad. You can criticize it much in the same way that we Quebecers would tend to criticize what other provinces do with their equalization payments because it's less "socialist" than we'd like.
This is where we differ again. I believe that if you are receiving equalization payments your goal should be to use them to get to a point where you arn't dependant on them anymore. It's like an EI cheque, you use it so that you can stay home and try find another job without having to worry about money. Some provinces will never be able to catch-up like NB/PEI etc. Quebec on the other hand could be focussing that money on economy and help Canada get out of the economic hole that we're in. Instead I feel the Quebec government is perfectly okay collecting these cheques and would continue to do so forever if they could to promote their left-wing ideology.
|
On February 23 2013 03:51 crazyweasel wrote:
dawksi are you implying poor people are just lazy? if you're not succesful its because you havent worked your ass off? People can work in shittiest condition ever 18hrs a day (say chinese industrial workers) and yet get paid 1% of their work's value. how is that promoting hard-work. then you're gonna tell me, well they have the choice of working in that said place. well where is the choice when capitalism instored so high competition that it has become impossible to work for yourself (off subsistance production) if you want to live in decent conditions. your only choice is to join the wheel. that right there is exploitation at its finest. individualism isn't about hard work, its about egoism. (and don,t say we are biologically egoist cause that is not true. i study that field). go read lyotard and foucault on post-modernism, they define individualism perfectly.
as for the language thing. taking mesures for the collectivity by restricting english individuals to a certain amount of things(french basic and secondary school for immigrants, french services). English imposes certain condition to us francophones, we have to learn it, we have to know it to get jobs. to be equal we "force" you to function on the public sphere in french because it is a french province with french in decline. we're maintaining our culture while yours remains fine either way. its the same logic as revenue imposition (which your are propably against), we all give proportionnaly to what we gain in order to fund social programs such as free education(or low cost) free health system, work ensurance etc. accessible to everyone. how is that injustice?
I said no such thing...at all... You have an unfair peg for people like me and you tie me around it whenever I bring up anything in opposition. I said it promotes hard-work in most of the population...surely you can't say that's not true. It obviously promotes growth of the economy when the harder you work and more productivity you produce the more money you will make. I didn't say the system was perfect or couldn't be abused I said it was the best of a worst case scenario. I was foolish in some of my past posts thinking that a complete free-market would work but I've made it clear in this thread that I've been convinced that it's not true.
If it's true that we should not be proud of hard-work or kind acts because that's just egoism what SHOULD we be proud of? Being proud of who you are at work and in the community should come before being proud of what culture you belong to.
What's injustice is the fact that people freedoms of speach in whatever language they desire is being violated because of the idea that upholding culture is important. Like I've said before in this topic, if Vancouver all of a sudden got flooded by Chinese immigrants even more than it is today and it became 70% Chinese and 30% English Canadian (I know there's other ethnicities thats not the point ) it wouldn't make sense to make them all learn english just because it's our official language. It would be up to me to learn a language which best suits my interest to live in this city full of Chinese Canadians without care for "if my english culture is dying".
|
On February 23 2013 04:00 Dawski wrote:
I guess all it comes down to is that it's yet to be seen if there can be a system in place that is both sustainable and fair. For now I feel like the centre-right pro-business system is still the best of a bad situation. It promotes hard work and success but it doesn't completely leave out welfare/EI for those who were dealt a bad deal. People like me just get in a huff when we're seen as overly traditional when the system they support isn't sustainable
We won't "solve" the right vs left debate here in a PQ thread will we =P. But I think that one of the things to take into account is that center-left societies tend to attenuate social inequalities. Even though some people dislike that because it's sort of an artificial adjustment, it has many tangible positive effects. Obviously it works on poverty, but social equality by itself comes with a LOT of negative effects, which range from criminality to infantile mortality and lower life expectancy, etc.
I always suggest that video, it uses data from the OECD which is reliable: http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html
There in lies my problem with this whole PQ situation and alot of the arguments in this thread. I won't agree because I don't see culture as important towards self-growth.
Why does it have to be important toward self-growth in order to be important. It's a very personal thing. Our culture is important to us much in the same way that I love my pet even though she doesn't ever do anything to improve my self-growth. It's an emotional tie. Does it trump free speech though? I don't think so, but it deserves some amount of respect regardless.
I believe that if you are receiving equalization payments your goal should be to use them to get to a point where you arn't dependant on them anymore.
Properly targeted social services can have a positive effect on a province or a country's overall productivity though, through maintaining equality rather than directly stimulating the economy. A good example is Quebec's support to families which attempts to yank them out of poverty, thus giving the kids better odds in life of getting specialized jobs that'll make them competitive in a post-globalization world. It's a big deal because kids who come from poor families don't usually pursue higher education, or their dreams.
Hike up the social standing of all the families, increase the odds that they'll have the tools and the drive to accomplish bigger and better things, all while promoting equality.
|
On February 22 2013 08:35 Dawski wrote:
I'm going to come at this thread from another angle which I've sort-of pointed myself towards in my previous posts. I want you guys to explain to me why Nationalism and pride in your culture instead of your personal merrits is... well.. a good thing to have.
"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind"
-Albert Einstein
I'm a right-wing person who believes individual freedoms come way before collectivist freedoms. Convince me
edit: (man I edit my posts right after I post them way too often lol)
I'm going to try scope in a topic that's relevant to this thread so that I don't go off topic. Why should the individual freedoms of speach in any language they choose to communicate in be tarnished by the collectivist apparent freedom to preserve their culture?
How many people do you know who live in complete isolation? What I'm trying to ask, is how individual merit can be worth anything at all when there is no one else around to recognize it as merit. Humans are social creatures by nature.
I work for French CBC (Radio-Canada) out in Sudbury Ontario (yes, Radio-Canada exists outside of Québec). Let's put all my cards out on the table : I'm a 22 year old male doing a master's thesis on Franco-ontarian identity in Sudbury (arguably a bastion franco-ontarian culture) between 1968 and 1985. I've lived here all my life. French is my first language. I learned to speak English around age 6-7. I'm a French-Canadian, a Franco-ontarian, a student, a musician a blogger and an archivist. Most of my colleagues are from Québec (all over the province). They have varying thoughts about the PQ, Québec, and the Canadian federation.
Is the PQ right for Québec right now? I don't think so. I don't think the Liberals were either though. Do I think bill 101 has its merits? Yes. The point was to get French back into public space. In a place where the majority are francophone, it makes sense. Have they taken things too far? I think so as well. It would be nice for allophones to post signs in the language of their choice, but I think French needs to retain it's public face in Québec, and in the rest of Canada as well. I say let them post their signs, but just put these other languages at the same level as French.
You see, in Sudbury, French-Canadians make up the biggest ethnic group of the entire city. (Scottsmen, Englishmen and Irishmen are not the same thing). Not all of them still speak French. Still, the signage is probably 99% English (I'm pulling that stat out of my perspective, not actual facts). 29% of Sudburians have French as their FIRST language (latest census). That is nearly one third of the city. The city has a bilingual name, and gets most information out in both languages. When I go to the post office, I know most of the time, I'll get a « sorry I don't speak French ». When I order at a restaurant, I'll probably get an often rude « I DON'T SPEAK FRENCH ». Yet, I live in a bilingual country. This place was once called Sainte-Anne-des-Pins (Ste Anne of the pines).
French has to be normal. For it to be normal, it has to have some place in Canadian society as a whole. This is a choice we made collectively some time ago. This is a choice that is entrenched in our Charter.
Somehow, we still have cases of French-bashing (outside of Québec as well) : http://tagueule.ca/2012/03/07/sorry-i-dont-speak-french-anti-bilingualism-protest-in-cornwall-demands-equality-for-all/ (I wrote the article).
Or even this week when Manitoba unveiled optional bilingual (not unilingual French) licence plates. Just read the comments.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2013/02/19/mb-bilingual-plates-manitoba.html
The saddest thing, is that on the French side of CBC, the news item was centered around « people are bitching about the optional bilingual plates in Manitoba! » not « Manitoba will have optional bilingual plates ».
This whole bilingualism thing has to happen in two directions. Otherwise we're just going to keep making it worse.
|
You're right we won't solve a left vs right debate here so i'll try leave it out except for the fact that money spending is a large cause of Canadian tensions. Didn't mean to derail it to that point i'll save my points for a different thread.
Why does it have to be important toward self-growth in order to be important. It's a very personal thing. Our culture is important to us much in the same way that I love my pet even though she doesn't ever do anything to improve my self-growth. It's an emotional tie. Does it trump free speech though? I don't think so, but it deserves some amount of respect regardless.
In my opinion it's only a personal thing because the people of Quebec have had it drilled into them that it's something to be proud of. Legislation shouldn't be based solely on an emotional connection like one you have with your dog. We don't pay towards the legislature to stop peoples feelings from being hurt.
French has to be normal
but I think French needs to retain it's public face in Québec, and in the rest of Canada as well
why does it HAVE to be normal? what is the NEED of any language in a society which has no positive benefits? Like you said the french pretty much must learn english if they want to be recognized by North American businesses. The keeping of the french language and culture is a purely emotional thing based on what, in my opinion, is nationalism. If it's out of respect towards your past ancestors then how about being the most considerate person this world has ever seen? They would be damn proud of that.
My opinion is one that can be portrayed as ignorant and rude. I accept that people will take me that way but that doesn't mean I don't have a point.
|
On February 23 2013 04:59 Dawski wrote:
In my opinion it's only a personal thing because the people of Quebec have had it drilled into them that it's something to be proud of. Legislation shouldn't be based solely on an emotional connection like one you have with your dog. We don't pay towards the legislature to stop peoples feelings from being hurt.
Not much more than any other nation in the world. Most if not all cultures are resistant to change or things that threaten the stability of their way of life. I'm not saying that it's good, but it's understandable at the very least. I'd even go so far as to say that any people put in a similar situation would be resistant to a certain extent.
why does it HAVE to be normal? what is the NEED of any language in a society which has no positive benefits? Like you said the french pretty much must learn english if they want to be recognized by North American businesses.
It sounds cheesy to someone like you who has a very practical view of life but we're humans first, not pieces of a system. It's very reductionist of our nature to portray us as gears in a machine. If you told me that you'd ditch English and your ties with your language if Mandarin became the best way to do business, I'd look down at you as a willful slave of capitalism.
If a society's choices should all be toward productivity and efficiency then we might as well all kill ourselves. Not all wealth can be estimated with dollars.
|
On February 23 2013 04:59 Dawski wrote:
In my opinion it's only a personal thing because the people of Quebec have had it drilled into them that it's something to be proud of. Legislation shouldn't be based solely on an emotional connection like one you have with your dog. We don't pay towards the legislature to stop peoples feelings from being hurt.
If that's the case, why not have Esperanto be the only language on any sign anywhere. Give me a good reason why that wouldn't work and you'll understand how weak your argument really is.
Show nested quote +but I think French needs to retain it's public face in Québec, and in the rest of Canada as well why does it HAVE to be normal? what is the NEED of any language in a society which has no positive benefits? Like you said the french pretty much must learn english if they want to be recognized by North American businesses. The keeping of the french language and culture is a purely emotional thing based on what, in my opinion, is nationalism. If it's out of respect towards your past ancestors then how about being the most considerate person this world has ever seen? They would be damn proud of that. My opinion is one that can be portrayed as ignorant and rude. I accept that people will take me that way but that doesn't mean I don't have a point.
Why? Because I'm living in this country right now. My parents are living in this country right now. My ancestors did as well, but right now, we do. Right now, I feel like an alien in my country. Every fucking day. That's why. Don't I pay taxes just like everybody else?
How does having French in signage hurt anyone?
Who said there were no positive benefits? How about a bilingual population? Two languages are better than one (be it French, Spanish, German, Swahili, Japanese, whatever). There are just additional precedents towards French in this country that could help justify it's presence.
You're talking about me and most of the people I know like if we don't matter and we never will.
|
On February 23 2013 05:04 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 04:59 Dawski wrote:
In my opinion it's only a personal thing because the people of Quebec have had it drilled into them that it's something to be proud of. Legislation shouldn't be based solely on an emotional connection like one you have with your dog. We don't pay towards the legislature to stop peoples feelings from being hurt. Not much more than any other nation in the world. Most if not all cultures are resistant to change or things that threaten the stability of their way of life. I'm not saying that it's good, but it's understandable at the very least. I'd even go so far as to say that any people put in a similar situation would be resistant to a certain extent. Show nested quote +why does it HAVE to be normal? what is the NEED of any language in a society which has no positive benefits? Like you said the french pretty much must learn english if they want to be recognized by North American businesses. It sounds cheesy to someone like you who has a very practical view of life but we're humans first, not pieces of a system. It's very reductionist of our nature to portray us as gears in a machine. If you told me that you'd ditch English and your ties with your language if Mandarin became the best way to do business, I'd look down at you as a willful slave of capitalism. If a society's choices should all be toward productivity and efficiency then we might as well all kill ourselves. Not all wealth can be estimated with dollars.
You sort of seem to make my point. I didn't mean it purely for the business side of life sorry if it sounded like it. I see myself as human first, my beliefs second, and my cultural background doesn't even make the list. I'd learn mandarin in that situation because it would be best way to communicate with my neighbour as well. If my pride and reluctance to change gets in the way of my relationship with my neighbour than it's up to me to deny myself for sake of community.
|
I dont understand how you can dismiss 25%-33% of the countrys population as a cultural failure.
|
On February 23 2013 05:24 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 05:04 Djzapz wrote:On February 23 2013 04:59 Dawski wrote:
In my opinion it's only a personal thing because the people of Quebec have had it drilled into them that it's something to be proud of. Legislation shouldn't be based solely on an emotional connection like one you have with your dog. We don't pay towards the legislature to stop peoples feelings from being hurt. Not much more than any other nation in the world. Most if not all cultures are resistant to change or things that threaten the stability of their way of life. I'm not saying that it's good, but it's understandable at the very least. I'd even go so far as to say that any people put in a similar situation would be resistant to a certain extent. why does it HAVE to be normal? what is the NEED of any language in a society which has no positive benefits? Like you said the french pretty much must learn english if they want to be recognized by North American businesses. It sounds cheesy to someone like you who has a very practical view of life but we're humans first, not pieces of a system. It's very reductionist of our nature to portray us as gears in a machine. If you told me that you'd ditch English and your ties with your language if Mandarin became the best way to do business, I'd look down at you as a willful slave of capitalism. If a society's choices should all be toward productivity and efficiency then we might as well all kill ourselves. Not all wealth can be estimated with dollars. You sort of seem to make my point. I didn't mean it purely for the business side of life sorry if it sounded like it. I see myself as human first, my beliefs second, and my cultural background doesn't even make the list. I'd learn mandarin in that situation because it would be best way to communicate with my neighbour as well. If my pride and reluctance to change gets in the way of my relationship with my neighbour than it's up to me to deny myself for sake of community.
Well that's a particularity of yours. I don't think you can fault people for giving more value to their culture than you do.
Go tell your grandparents that you'd fold to a majority of Chinese people in the sake of productivity and "community" and you'll understand that QC's not particular in its nature. You're special in your willingness to make those sacrifices for the big picture.
|
On February 23 2013 05:19 Dugrok wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 04:59 Dawski wrote:
In my opinion it's only a personal thing because the people of Quebec have had it drilled into them that it's something to be proud of. Legislation shouldn't be based solely on an emotional connection like one you have with your dog. We don't pay towards the legislature to stop peoples feelings from being hurt.
If that's the case, why not have Esperanto be the only language on any sign anywhere. Give me a good reason why that wouldn't work and you'll understand how weak your argument really is. Show nested quote +French has to be normal but I think French needs to retain it's public face in Québec, and in the rest of Canada as well why does it HAVE to be normal? what is the NEED of any language in a society which has no positive benefits? Like you said the french pretty much must learn english if they want to be recognized by North American businesses. The keeping of the french language and culture is a purely emotional thing based on what, in my opinion, is nationalism. If it's out of respect towards your past ancestors then how about being the most considerate person this world has ever seen? They would be damn proud of that. My opinion is one that can be portrayed as ignorant and rude. I accept that people will take me that way but that doesn't mean I don't have a point. Why? Because I'm living in this country right now. My parents are living in this country right now. My ancestors did as well, but right now, we do. Right now, I feel like an alien in my country. Every fucking day. That's why. Don't I pay taxes just like everybody else? How does having French in signage hurt anyone? Who said there were no positive benefits? How about a bilingual population? Two languages are better than one (be it French, Spanish, German, Swahili, Japanese, whatever). There are just additional precedents towards French in this country that could help justify it's presence. You're talking about me and most of the people I know like if we don't matter and we never will.
you. are. not. your. culture
you are a human being just like the rest of us and should be seen as such as simple as that.
You and the people I know matter to me as human beings just like me, not as my french-canadian neighbours. Why are two languages better than one? you say it is but I see no proof towards it. In fact from what I've seen in Canada it creates tension.
If that's the case, why not have Esperanto be the only language on any sign anywhere. Give me a good reason why that wouldn't work and you'll understand how weak your argument really is.
Because I'm not arguing for a language that is forced on everyone. I'm asking for everyone to look past culture and emotional ties that seem to intersect with individual rights like the right to freedom of speech. I think it would be great if everyone just accepted themselves a unified language but I wouldn't legislate it.
|
On February 23 2013 05:24 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 05:04 Djzapz wrote:On February 23 2013 04:59 Dawski wrote:
In my opinion it's only a personal thing because the people of Quebec have had it drilled into them that it's something to be proud of. Legislation shouldn't be based solely on an emotional connection like one you have with your dog. We don't pay towards the legislature to stop peoples feelings from being hurt. Not much more than any other nation in the world. Most if not all cultures are resistant to change or things that threaten the stability of their way of life. I'm not saying that it's good, but it's understandable at the very least. I'd even go so far as to say that any people put in a similar situation would be resistant to a certain extent. why does it HAVE to be normal? what is the NEED of any language in a society which has no positive benefits? Like you said the french pretty much must learn english if they want to be recognized by North American businesses. It sounds cheesy to someone like you who has a very practical view of life but we're humans first, not pieces of a system. It's very reductionist of our nature to portray us as gears in a machine. If you told me that you'd ditch English and your ties with your language if Mandarin became the best way to do business, I'd look down at you as a willful slave of capitalism. If a society's choices should all be toward productivity and efficiency then we might as well all kill ourselves. Not all wealth can be estimated with dollars. You sort of seem to make my point. I didn't mean it purely for the business side of life sorry if it sounded like it. I see myself as human first, my beliefs second, and my cultural background doesn't even make the list. I'd learn mandarin in that situation because it would be best way to communicate with my neighbour as well. If my pride and reluctance to change gets in the way of my relationship with my neighbour than it's up to me to deny myself for sake of community.
And that's probably a good point to bring up. Why AREN'T there more bilingual French/English people in Canada? I would love to share the richness of my culture with more people, but I can't.
|
On February 23 2013 05:28 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
I dont understand how you can dismiss 25%-33% of the countrys population as a cultural failure.
really?... I'm now dismissing the french as a cultural failure?..
Stop taking things so personally! The french culture is dying itself because of outside english influences, you said it yourself. The whole point i've been trying to make for the past couple pages is why is an emotional tie being enforced by legislature
|
On February 23 2013 05:30 Dugrok wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 05:24 Dawski wrote:On February 23 2013 05:04 Djzapz wrote:On February 23 2013 04:59 Dawski wrote:
In my opinion it's only a personal thing because the people of Quebec have had it drilled into them that it's something to be proud of. Legislation shouldn't be based solely on an emotional connection like one you have with your dog. We don't pay towards the legislature to stop peoples feelings from being hurt. Not much more than any other nation in the world. Most if not all cultures are resistant to change or things that threaten the stability of their way of life. I'm not saying that it's good, but it's understandable at the very least. I'd even go so far as to say that any people put in a similar situation would be resistant to a certain extent. why does it HAVE to be normal? what is the NEED of any language in a society which has no positive benefits? Like you said the french pretty much must learn english if they want to be recognized by North American businesses. It sounds cheesy to someone like you who has a very practical view of life but we're humans first, not pieces of a system. It's very reductionist of our nature to portray us as gears in a machine. If you told me that you'd ditch English and your ties with your language if Mandarin became the best way to do business, I'd look down at you as a willful slave of capitalism. If a society's choices should all be toward productivity and efficiency then we might as well all kill ourselves. Not all wealth can be estimated with dollars. You sort of seem to make my point. I didn't mean it purely for the business side of life sorry if it sounded like it. I see myself as human first, my beliefs second, and my cultural background doesn't even make the list. I'd learn mandarin in that situation because it would be best way to communicate with my neighbour as well. If my pride and reluctance to change gets in the way of my relationship with my neighbour than it's up to me to deny myself for sake of community. And that's probably a good point to bring up. Why AREN'T there more bilingual French/English people in Canada? I would love to share the richness of my culture with more people, but I can't.
Because there is no need for someone like me in BC to learn French except to share in the richness of an emotional tie which I feel is pure nationalism
|
|
|
you. are. not. your. culture
you are a human being just like the rest of us and should be seen as such as simple as that.
I never said I was, but I am a part of my culture(s), and more importantly it (they) is (are) a part of me. I grew up playing video games just like you probably did (seeing as we're both on the TL forums). I didn't play Starcraft in French, let me tell you. I found it cool anyway and I never even questioned the fact that it was in English. I just played the game. Culture doesn't limit itself to fine arts. It's not just about musicians and poets. Culture is much broader than that. It's traditions, it's how you treat people. Everything you do is part of YOUR culture. It's not static, it can change.
You and the people I know matter to me as human beings just like me, not as my french-canadian neighbours. Why are two languages better than one? you say it is but I see no proof towards it. In fact from what I've seen in Canada it creates tension.
Here's a good reason why 2 languages are better than one : https://www.google.ca/search?q=learning multiple languages makes you smarter&oq=learning multiple languages makes you smarter&aqs=chrome.0.57.11786&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Hypothetically, not allowing French to be on signage with the same importance as English is forcing a language on everyone as well, isn't it?
|
Because there is no need for someone like me in BC to learn French except to share in the richness of an emotional tie which I feel is pure nationalism
Who's nationalism is it? Canada's a bilingual country, right?
and who is forcing you as an individual to learn French?
|
On February 23 2013 05:33 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 05:28 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
I dont understand how you can dismiss 25%-33% of the countrys population as a cultural failure.
really?... I'm now dismissing the french as a cultural failure?.. Stop taking things so personally! The french culture is dying itself because of outside english influences, you said it yourself. The whole point i've been trying to make for the past couple pages is why is an emotional tie being enforced by legislature
loll never said it was dying. I said some english lord said it would die within 2-4 generations 250 years ago...
my culture is pretty much alive thank you
|
On February 23 2013 05:44 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 05:33 Dawski wrote:On February 23 2013 05:28 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
I dont understand how you can dismiss 25%-33% of the countrys population as a cultural failure.
really?... I'm now dismissing the french as a cultural failure?.. Stop taking things so personally! The french culture is dying itself because of outside english influences, you said it yourself. The whole point i've been trying to make for the past couple pages is why is an emotional tie being enforced by legislature loll never said it was dying. I said some english lord said it would die within 2-4 generations 250 years ago... my culture is pretty much alive thank you
French isn't, and never was dying. English culture was growing much faster, that's all.
|
I just wish people would be more laissez-faire (tee hee!) about the whole thing. Like Dawski, I don't give a shite about English OR French cultural histories or values...
>>Go tell your grandparents that you'd fold to a majority of Chinese people in the sake of productivity and "community" and you'll understand that QC's not particular in its nature. You're special in your willingness to make those sacrifices for the big picture.<<
My grandparents are drunk & inbred. I'm ready for the future, baby.
|
On February 23 2013 05:39 Dugrok wrote:Show nested quote + you. are. not. your. culture
you are a human being just like the rest of us and should be seen as such as simple as that. I never said I was, but I am a part of my culture(s), and more importantly it (they) is (are) a part of me. I grew up playing video games just like you probably did (seeing as we're both on the TL forums). I didn't play Starcraft in French, let me tell you. I found it cool anyway and I never even questioned the fact that it was in English. I just played the game. Culture doesn't limit itself to fine arts. It's not just about musicians and poets. Culture is much broader than that. It's traditions, it's how you treat people. Everything you do is part of YOUR culture. It's not static, it can change. Show nested quote +
You and the people I know matter to me as human beings just like me, not as my french-canadian neighbours. Why are two languages better than one? you say it is but I see no proof towards it. In fact from what I've seen in Canada it creates tension.
Here's a good reason why 2 languages are better than one : https://www.google.ca/search?q=learning multiple languages makes you smarter&oq=learning multiple languages makes you smarter&aqs=chrome.0.57.11786&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8Hypothetically, not allowing French to be on signage with the same importance as English is forcing a language on everyone as well, isn't it?
You again are making my point. Culture isn't static and can change. It has for thousands of years and has anything been lost because of it? if the french culture does in fact assimilate like a lot think it will, then in 500 years people will look in a history book about the cool culture that was. Why should we then create such unconstitutional laws to try hold onto this emotional tie? It is in fact unconstitutional, when faced with this I've heard a lot of PQ supporters say that Quebec never actually signed the original constitution as if that was something to be proud of.
The factor that learning a second language may make you smarter is probably the only positive side I'd accept. It's healthy for your brain to switch focus and operations like switching from one language to another. But I don't think that the benefit is so extreme to be worth legislating to keep a dying culture. I'm not bilingual but I believe I have sufficient brain power to make it in my life.
|
People in Quebec feel like they share a unique culture. Like any human being, they feel like it is worth preserving. People saying that they don't feel any attachment to their country and culture and don't feel like it should be preserved, even in the face of potential extinction, maybe you should do some introspection to understand the feeling.
Now, is that good or bad? In the grand scheme of things, is cultural diversity a good thing, or a bad thing? Yes, maybe we would be better off with a monoculture, a single language, because there would be more understanding, less wars, etc. Differences can create incomprehension and hate and all that stuff. But the things is, differences are going to appear anyway, regardless of culture, between individuals. So the answer is not to try and diminish the importance of other languages and cultures in our life for the sake of communication, but rather we should celebrate them, because by learning to open ourselves to other cultures and languages, we learn to open ourselves to outcasts in our own culture, our own family, and within us.
Quebec is a good thing for Canada, because it forces english and french Canadians to think about this difficult issue (and thus learning something), and even if most of them are unfortunately kind of stupid in their response. See this thread for examples... If you live in an environment where you only ever read one language, and always see the same artists, I can guarantee you are going to grow on average more stupid than otherwise.
So why protect french, protect the natives, protect small cultures that would die without help of the government or other external means? Because we get more intelligent and mature as a whole by being in contact with them, and a country made of more tolerant, mature and intelligent people will have a brighter future.
|
On February 23 2013 06:16 Xain wrote:
People in Quebec feel like they share a unique culture. Like any human being, they feel like it is worth preserving. People saying that they don't feel any attachment to their country and culture and don't feel like it should be preserved, even in the face of potential extinction, maybe you should do some introspection to understand the feeling.
Now, is that good or bad? In the grand scheme of things, is cultural diversity a good thing, or a bad thing? Yes, maybe we would be better off with a monoculture, a single language, because there would be more understanding, less wars, etc. Differences can create incomprehension and hate and all that stuff. But the things is, differences are going to appear anyway, regardless of culture, between individuals. So the answer is not to try and diminish the importance of other languages and cultures in our life for the sake of communication, but rather we should celebrate them, because by learning to open ourselves to other cultures and languages, we learn to open ourselves to outcasts in our own culture, our own family, and within us.
Quebec is a good thing for Canada, because it forces english and french Canadians to think about this difficult issue (and thus learning something), and even if most of them are unfortunately kind of stupid in their response. See this thread for examples... If you live in an environment where you only ever read one language, and always see the same artists, I can guarantee you are going to grow on average more stupid than otherwise.
So why protect french, protect the natives, protect small cultures that would die without help of the government or other external means? Because we get more intelligent and mature as a whole by being in contact with them, and a country made of more tolerant, mature and intelligent people will have a brighter future.
This implies that I am actively seeking to diminish other cultures. The issue at hand it quite the opposite. The culture which is supposedly being naturally diminished through outside influences is preserving itself through unconstitutional means. There is no one in this argument that is xenophobic towards Quebec.
We are teaching future generations that they should be prideful of something that they had no merrit of accomplishing themselves. Contrary to popular belief pride isn't a beneficial trait and never has been. Even less so when they had no participation in what they are prideful about.
Like I said before stressing certain parts of your brain may make those parts more intelligent but not doing so or doing so of other means in no way makes anyone "stupid".
In this case it is up to the people to stop being so emotionally tied to something which the world has naturally gone through hundreds of times before and has not made the human race inferior because of it. It's up to them to lose their pride and adapt to new times, not us to support (with our tax dollars) an idiology which puts an emotional tie before constitutional rights
|
Dawski, we need to have a beer together man. You're missing my point.
1) I'm not a Québécois.
2) I don't support loi 101 the way it stands (nor does it really apply because I live in Ontario)
3) Seriously man, we should make it a thing to go have a beer.
I never said you were dumb. All having another language can do is open you up to the world. I'm happy I can speak English. Just like I'm happy I can speak a bit of Spanish.
This is bigger than Canada man.
Think of this like exploring a secret cave. With another language, you can explore the cave, and bring back some of the treasure to your friends. You might even meet some new friends in the cave and have a better understanding of how the world works.
If that's not worth a few signs here and there, I don't know what is.
|
On February 22 2013 08:35 Dawski wrote:
I'm going to come at this thread from another angle which I've sort-of pointed myself towards in my previous posts. I want you guys to explain to me why Nationalism and pride in your culture instead of your personal merrits is... well.. a good thing to have.
"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind"
-Albert Einstein
"Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first."
- Charles de Gaulle
:p
I don't think nationalism is a rational behaviour. It is "love" for an idea, after all (in the best case), and love works in mysterious ways. In any case, you either love your culture or you don't, or you love it a little more or a little less. I'd be very careful with the "shoulds" here!
Human sciences have also attacked the idea of personal merit - not saying that there is none, but it has outlined the vast number of factors which come into play but are out of our reach with theories like Bourdieu's habitus,
I, for example, am fluent in three languages, almost in four. I have no merit in that, and yet it has been very beneficial my whole life! My first job at 18 was paid quite a little more than minimum wage, for example, because I could do simple things that went beyond stacking crates. And the reason I'm learning german, and am open to other countries, is because I grew up with that interest to begin with. So, how is being proud of what my education made me any different than being proud of my country?
I'd also point out, to those that wish for a minimal state, that the Middle-Ages were in fact a time of weak administrative power. Actually, even large well-built empires like the Romans had little administrative control over the different dukes (ducis) that ruled the provinces. Were those times of personal freedom? Nay! Power was simply passed to local lords.
|
On February 23 2013 06:28 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 06:16 Xain wrote:
People in Quebec feel like they share a unique culture. Like any human being, they feel like it is worth preserving. People saying that they don't feel any attachment to their country and culture and don't feel like it should be preserved, even in the face of potential extinction, maybe you should do some introspection to understand the feeling.
Now, is that good or bad? In the grand scheme of things, is cultural diversity a good thing, or a bad thing? Yes, maybe we would be better off with a monoculture, a single language, because there would be more understanding, less wars, etc. Differences can create incomprehension and hate and all that stuff. But the things is, differences are going to appear anyway, regardless of culture, between individuals. So the answer is not to try and diminish the importance of other languages and cultures in our life for the sake of communication, but rather we should celebrate them, because by learning to open ourselves to other cultures and languages, we learn to open ourselves to outcasts in our own culture, our own family, and within us.
Quebec is a good thing for Canada, because it forces english and french Canadians to think about this difficult issue (and thus learning something), and even if most of them are unfortunately kind of stupid in their response. See this thread for examples... If you live in an environment where you only ever read one language, and always see the same artists, I can guarantee you are going to grow on average more stupid than otherwise.
So why protect french, protect the natives, protect small cultures that would die without help of the government or other external means? Because we get more intelligent and mature as a whole by being in contact with them, and a country made of more tolerant, mature and intelligent people will have a brighter future. This implies that I am actively seeking to diminish other cultures. The issue at hand it quite the opposite. The culture which is supposedly being naturally diminished through outside influences is preserving itself through unconstitutional means. There is no one in this argument that is xenophobic towards Quebec. We are teaching future generations that they should be prideful of something that they had no merrit of accomplishing themselves. Contrary to popular belief pride isn't a beneficial trait and never has been. Even less so when they had no participation in what they are prideful about. Like I said before stressing certain parts of your brain may make those parts more intelligent but not doing so or doing so of other means in no way makes anyone "stupid". In this case it is up to the people to stop being so emotionally tied to something which the world has naturally gone through hundreds of times before and has not made the human race inferior because of it. It's up to them to lose their pride and adapt to new times, not us to support (with our tax dollars) an idiology which puts an emotional tie before constitutional rights
Loi 101 is FAR from responsible for the amount of cultural products that come out of Québec. It's one brick in the wall. Seriously.
|
good post xain , but im guessing dawski will understand nothing
honestly you should respect other culture , and who are you dawski for say such rude thing about quebec and the culture ??
for exemple you say
why does it HAVE to be normal? what is the NEED of any language in a society which has no positive benefits?
when you say that no one will take you seriously , that like asking in china and france
( ho damn they talk french too here , guess they bring no positive benefits too ) or any other country in the world where they dont talk your amazing language , they bring no positive benefits ??!!!
and who are you for force a language ON PEOPLE ?? you are the same guy who not happy because you need to respect some rules in quebec but you want everyone to talk your language ?? and be forced to do so ?? sorry to burst you buble but not everyone in quebec talk and know english .why they should learn your language ?? you will force them ??
then you say
Stop taking things so personally! The french culture is dying itself because of outside english influences, you said it yourself. The whole point i've been trying to make for the past couple pages is why is an emotional tie being enforced by legislature
hope you are kidding here , the french culture and the culture quebec bring to the canada realy high in fact that probably your heart , just like ontario and so on are the one for food and stuft like that , how many actress, singer ?? madona ?? sound , music , movie , book autor you think are from quebec , just art ?? the quebec realy rich in culture and you look like a fool for say something like that . honestly if you remove quebec from canada you probably loss 50 % of all this culture i have say and diversity . you will look grey and boring . people visit canada mostly for quebec ..... that what they want to see usualy .
you can google some stuft , you will learn about the rich culture , feal free to come visit one day , dont worry you will do fine if you talk only english , since we respect the billingal culture .
|
"Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first."
- Charles de Gaulle
I don't think nationalism is a rational behaviour. It is "love" for an idea, after all (in the best case), and love works in mysterious ways. In any case, you either love your culture or you don't, or you love it a little more or a little less. I'd be very careful with the "shoulds" here!
Human sciences have also attacked the idea of personal merit - not saying that there is none, but it has outlined the vast number of factors which come into play but are out of our reach with theories like Bourdieu's habitus,
I, for example, am fluent in three languages, almost in four. I have no merit in that, and yet it has been very beneficial my whole life! My first job at 18 was paid quite a little more than minimum wage, for example, because I could do simple things that went beyond stacking crates. And the reason I'm learning german, and am open to other countries, is because I grew up with that interest to begin with. So, how is being proud of what my education made me any different than being proud of my country?
I'd also point out, to those that wish for a minimal state, that the Middle-Ages were in fact a time of weak administrative power. Actually, even large well-built empires like the Romans had little administrative control over the different dukes (ducis) that ruled the provinces. Were those times of personal freedom? Nay! Power was simply passed to local lords.
Yeah apart from what I sound like at some points in this thread I do completely agree with the idea that only reason we make decisions to do things in this life is based on our upbringing and life experiences. All I meant was that if you WERE going to be proud of something, even though pride isn't a good trait to begin with, then something you have absolutely no control over and doesn't change the fact that you're human like the rest of us is even further degradation of society. What I should've instead focused on was pride in general.
3) Seriously man, we should make it a thing to go have a beer.
Haha deal if you're ever in the greater vancouver area just send me a pm.
|
On February 23 2013 06:49 quebecman77 wrote:
good post xain , but im guessing dawski will understand nothing
honestly you should respect other culture , and who are you dawski for say such rude thing about quebec and the culture ??
for exemple you say
why does it HAVE to be normal? what is the NEED of any language in a society which has no positive benefits?
when you say that no one will take you seriously , that like asking in china and france
( ho damn they talk french too here , guess they bring no positive benefits too ) or any other country in the world where they dont talk your amazing language , they bring no positive benefits ??!!!
and who are you for force a language ON PEOPLE ?? you are the same guy who not happy because you need to respect some rules in quebec but you want everyone to talk your language ?? and be forced to do so ?? sorry to burst you buble but not everyone in quebec talk and know english .why they should learn your language ?? you will force them ??
then you say
Stop taking things so personally! The french culture is dying itself because of outside english influences, you said it yourself. The whole point i've been trying to make for the past couple pages is why is an emotional tie being enforced by legislature
hope you are kidding here , the french culture and the culture quebec bring to the canada realy high in fact that probably your heart , just like ontario and so on are the one for food and stuft like that , how many actress, singer ?? madona ?? sound , music , movie , book autor you think are from quebec , just art ?? the quebec realy rich in culture and you look like a fool for say something like that . honestly if you remove quebec from canada you probably loss 50 % of all this culture i have say and diversity . you will look grey and boring . people visit canada mostly for quebec ..... that what they want to see usualy .
you can google some stuft , you will learn about the rich culture , feal free to come visit one day , dont worry you will do fine if you talk only english , since we respect the billingal culture .
If this is your opinion of me then you are lost in your pride of culture. The points I made were valid and your absolute nationalism towards your culture is proved when you say things like "people visit canada mostly for quebec.... that what they want to see usually"
I've made my points and you may take them as rude if you wish but the deeper question behind them was not ignorant or mean in the slightest. I never once said you were forced to... I said that your culture was naturally being influenced by the english people around you and unconstitutional legislation is not the answer.
|
On February 23 2013 06:36 Dugrok wrote:
Dawski, we need to have a beer together man. You're missing my point.
1) I'm not a Québécois.
2) I don't support loi 101 the way it stands (nor does it really apply because I live in Ontario)
3) Seriously man, we should make it a thing to go have a beer.
I never said you were dumb. All having another language can do is open you up to the world. I'm happy I can speak English. Just like I'm happy I can speak a bit of Spanish.
This is bigger than Canada man.
Think of this like exploring a secret cave. With another language, you can explore the cave, and bring back some of the treasure to your friends. You might even meet some new friends in the cave and have a better understanding of how the world works.
If that's not worth a few signs here and there, I don't know what is.
I guess I just don't feel that emotional connection to learning a new language. You learn a language to communicate with human beings. The way the language sounds doesn't really matter, how it influenced a lot of art doesn't really matter. I just don't see how learning a new language is delving deep into how the world works.
It's about a few signs not allowed to be here or there. The stepping over of individual rights to protect an emotional tie to culture which me and many others do not feel. I will continue to look at anyone in any culture as another awesome human being (not saying you don't lol had to quick edit that in)
I gotta go but I'll be back tonight, been a fun little discussion so far
|
+ Show Spoiler +On February 23 2013 06:28 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 06:16 Xain wrote:
People in Quebec feel like they share a unique culture. Like any human being, they feel like it is worth preserving. People saying that they don't feel any attachment to their country and culture and don't feel like it should be preserved, even in the face of potential extinction, maybe you should do some introspection to understand the feeling.
Now, is that good or bad? In the grand scheme of things, is cultural diversity a good thing, or a bad thing? Yes, maybe we would be better off with a monoculture, a single language, because there would be more understanding, less wars, etc. Differences can create incomprehension and hate and all that stuff. But the things is, differences are going to appear anyway, regardless of culture, between individuals. So the answer is not to try and diminish the importance of other languages and cultures in our life for the sake of communication, but rather we should celebrate them, because by learning to open ourselves to other cultures and languages, we learn to open ourselves to outcasts in our own culture, our own family, and within us.
Quebec is a good thing for Canada, because it forces english and french Canadians to think about this difficult issue (and thus learning something), and even if most of them are unfortunately kind of stupid in their response. See this thread for examples... If you live in an environment where you only ever read one language, and always see the same artists, I can guarantee you are going to grow on average more stupid than otherwise.
So why protect french, protect the natives, protect small cultures that would die without help of the government or other external means? Because we get more intelligent and mature as a whole by being in contact with them, and a country made of more tolerant, mature and intelligent people will have a brighter future. This implies that I am actively seeking to diminish other cultures. The issue at hand it quite the opposite. The culture which is supposedly being naturally diminished through outside influences is preserving itself through unconstitutional means. There is no one in this argument that is xenophobic towards Quebec. We are teaching future generations that they should be prideful of something that they had no merrit of accomplishing themselves. Contrary to popular belief pride isn't a beneficial trait and never has been. Even less so when they had no participation in what they are prideful about. Like I said before stressing certain parts of your brain may make those parts more intelligent but not doing so or doing so of other means in no way makes anyone "stupid". In this case it is up to the people to stop being so emotionally tied to something which the world has naturally gone through hundreds of times before and has not made the human race inferior because of it. It's up to them to lose their pride and adapt to new times, not us to support (with our tax dollars) an idiology which puts an emotional tie before constitutional rights
I did not say you were seeking to diminish our culture. However, you seem to be saying we should not help a culture survive "artificially" either. I put artificially in quotations because it is kind of a bizarre idea, because when you think about it this way of doing things through the government is part of the culture too, but anyway I won't get into that.
The constitutional argument is also kind of a bizarre argument, because you're implying that the constitution is some kind of moral absolute, which it isn't.
I didn't say it makes you stupid, I said it makes you more stupid, or rather, what I mean is that a person born in an culturally diverse environment should be more intelligent on average, at least emotionally (I don't mean intelligent in the academic sense).
Also, on the pride issue: you say it is not a beneficial trait. Yes the human mind works in sometimes (actually, very often) counter-productive ways. But there is a reason why we evolved that way: emotional attachment to your community means that you will work to the betterment of it. We judge people (for better and for worse) according to the various values they represent; if one of those values is, for example, your country, your social value get tied in a certain way to that country and its actions. We do that for all kinds of stuff: if you value esport, and esport is doing better, you feel better. Why? One of the reasons is that your values represent you in society, and your societal value is pretty fucking important in your brain, in a very deep way. Maybe you, personally, dont feel that way with your country but I'm pretty sure it is there for other things.
So, saying that we should put our national pride aside because you didn't influence it is ignoring how the brain works and values stuff. Sorry I have trouble properly expressing this idea but I hope you understand. Yes, it sometimes is stupid, but it has ramifications so large that humans wouldn't be humans without it.
So actually it is counter-productive to go and tell people: "stop feeling that way". That won't help in any way. Like you would say to a gay person: "Just change, your way of life is not productive to society because you're not producing children". (I'm stretching the argument a bit I know)
*Edited for some clarifications and spelling mistakes.
|
Your freedom to preserve your culture artificially is in itself a right, but only to a certain degree. Once that freedom crosses over someone elses freedoms towards your own benefit (think a smokers right to smoke wherever he wants vs a non-smokers right to clean air) it immediately becomes a moral issue of which one is more important towards society as a whole.
The constitution may not be a moral absolute but if you don't agree with it then instead of saying it like that, I want you to specifically say the problems you have with the freedom of free speech. I find it's very easy for someone to bash the constitution as a whole to disregard specifics but as soon as you tell them to focus on a certain proposed freedom they have more of a problem.
Another problem I have is with your intelligence argument. Intelligence that is not academic intelligence is purely subjective and once again based on your own world-view.
Before I go onto my next point I feel I have to talk a little bit more about individualism and self-growth. Like I said in my last posts I agree with the idea that everything we do and all the "merritable" decisions we make arn't ours to make because they come from our upbringing and life experiences. But after a little bit of hard thinking while I was out (I'm one of those people where once im engaged in a deep conversation I can't stop thinking about it even when I'm out with other people lol) I thought it must go deeper than that. Once you have the intellect of knowing that your decisions are almost predetermined by your upbringing and experiences then don't you have more of a moral responsibility to go against the grain and try to better determine right from wrong and start to do acts that are likely to be more "merritable"?
aaaanyways that's just my ramblings lol.
I understand that it is completely human to become attached to an idea and feel good when that idea succeeds. And while pride in and of itself may not seem like a terrible trait to have, it has the capabilities of being extremely dangerous. Is the value of having pride of an idea that you believe in worth preserving to the point that you'd cross over a persons freedom of speech. The question isn't "if we can" get people away from nationalistic tendencies it's "should we try". While it's purely human to feel pride when something you believe in does well, why should you? It's easy to say we evolved this way and thus it has it's purpose but like you said there's many evolutionary cases in the human body which are counter-productive.
If I could I would like to say that all pride should be done away with like I said in my last paragraph but you're right to say that it's not humanly possible because we all feel it one way or another. Then it comes down to which way is safer and provides a more healthy society. While being pride of your own acts and self-growth may be wrong because we don't have complete control over it. I feel that it's alot safer than pride in a nationalistic idea.
|
And one more thing (I always do this lol) that is more getting back on the idea of the PQ and Quebec sovreignty. If people are so for bilingualism for intellectual purposes then why is the separatist movement even a thing? Wouldn't the goal be to keep Quebec in Canada and instead promote bilingualism is provinces that arn't only Quebec?
Also, both sides have already agreed that cultures change constantly, humanity has not been at more of a loss because of it. If we accept that all language is, is a tool of communication then what would be the problem of being proud of a culture that spoke english but still had your old customs? Why do people feel their culture would be changed so drastically all because of language? If you are going feel nationalistic towards your culture, why would someone feel more proud of a culture of french speaking people who eat tourtierre on their european style christmas-eve than a english speaking one that does the same?
edit: as I finished typing the second paragraph I sorta realized it was unnecessary because it's already been answered in this thread over a dozen times. The people feel a strong emotional connection to it and they don't feel their language is a mere tool of communication but instead a symbol for their way of life.
I just keep coming back to the same thing and I feel like I'm just running my mouth for the sake of talking but: I feel like holding onto your past emotional connection so tight that change can't get to it even in face of natural adversity is almost in a way...immature. Change and how we deal with it is in a way a part of life that people must go through.
one final disclaimer: I hate making statements like I made in this post because so many people take it offensively. I'm not xenophobic i'm merely looking at a situation where if the only possible way to save a culture is to create radical language laws which cross over individual freedoms then is it worth it or should we accept the natural change? Man I'm always trying to say sorry even before people get offended...lol
|
I don't think what you're saying is offensive, I just think you don't have any understanding of the importance of cultural identity in a society and what it means to people, and the last few pages have been about debating this basic concept. I don't blame you, I don't think I would have that kind of consideration either if my national identity was pretty much a copy of the American culture.
I'm not sure how nationalism came on the subject but this isn't even what it's about. I'm not proud to be Québécois. It's just a huge part of who I am and I want this heritage to stay intact for our next generations. It's not about the past, it's about the future. I truly believe that every culture that disappears or degenerates into some kind of folkloric melting pot is a loss for humanity as a whole. Some changes are bad and they're worth fighting against.
To some extend, you could draw a comparison with animal protection. Your position would be like saying ''well, many tiger species can't survive in nature without reinforcing some laws and removing some rights from humans, so let them die. Why fight against change?''
If you think this is about eating tourtière, you just don't get it, sorry.
On February 22 2013 14:08 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2013 04:12 lepape wrote:
The political map of Quebec (and even Montreal) is often seen as seperated on a vertical axis, I'm not sure how you see the north/south demarcation. I would direct you to the link to a picture I merged on page 1: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/107275289/Quebec.jpgThis map should also be overlaid on a population density map though. It points to certain causations (as in, university proximity = liberal support) that may be only correlated.
To make sure I understand, to you, if the North of Quebec (with about 1% of the total population) is blue, and there's a bunch of red spots under it, that means the map is separated north/south?
|
On February 23 2013 14:10 lepape wrote:
I don't think what you're saying is offensive, I just think you don't have any understanding of the importance of cultural identity in a society and what it means to people, and the last few pages have been about debating this basic concept. I don't blame you, I don't think I would have that consideration either if my national identity was pretty much a copy of the American culture.
I'm not sure how nationalism came on the subject but this isn't even what it's about. I'm not proud to be Québécois. It's just a huge part of who I am and I want this heritage to stay intact for our next generations. It's not about the past, it's about the future. I truly believe every culture that disappears or degenerates into some kind of folkloric melting pot is a loss for humanity as a whole. Some changes are bad and they're worth fighting against.
If you think this is about eating tourtière, you just don't get it, sorry.
You're right, I don't see how cultural identity is as important as you make it out to be. What people don't understand is that any modern culture of today is just as much a melting pot as the American one. Only it happened a little while longer ago. Yours isn't any more legitimate a culture than the American.
"I'm not proud to be Quebecois. It's just a huge part of who I am and I want this heritage to stay intact" ??? this is completely contradictory. If you truly weren't proud of your heritage then you would be completely okay with change for your children. Not saying that you'd promote change, but you certainly wouldn't say you arn't for it.
I didn't say it was "about eating tourtiere"... I used that as an example as french cultural things which the people keep to hold true to their cultural background.
To some extend, you could draw a comparison with animal protection. Your position would be like saying ''well, many tiger species can't survive in nature without reinforcing some laws and removing some rights from humans, so let them die. Why fight against change?''
You take the two rights and you pit them against eachother to see which is better for society as a whole. It wouldn't harm people one bit if you said they were unable to hunt tigers while a freedom of speech violation is much more serious.
|
You can feel affection for something without feeling proud about it.
|
On February 23 2013 14:33 lepape wrote:
You feel affection for something without feeling proud about it.
Yes you can, but when your scared of a change to what you feel affection towards that is pride. edit: sry I didn't mean exactly what I said here, what i more meant was when you would rather cross over someones freedom of speech instead of submit to a natural change than that is pride
proud
[proud] Show IPA adjective, proud·er, proud·est, adverb
adjective
1.
feeling pleasure or satisfaction over something regarded as highly honorable or creditable to oneself (often followed by of, an infinitive, or a clause).
2.
having, proceeding from, or showing a high opinion of one's own dignity, importance, or superiority.
3.
having or showing self-respect or self-esteem.
4.
highly gratifying to the feelings or self-esteem: It was a proud day for him when his son entered college.
5.
highly honorable or creditable: a proud achievement.
|
No, heritage is not about pride, sorry.
It's about keeping what you cherish alive after you're gone. It's nothing more than passing a torch and trying to keep it burning.
|
On February 23 2013 14:40 lepape wrote:
No, it is not.
Heritage is not about pride, sorry. It's about keeping what you cherish alive after you're gone, it's nothing more than just passing a torch.
And why do you cherish it? because it is an achievment worth keeping alive?
|
Because it's a part of who you are. Not because it's better.
We have kids for the same very basic human need, it's called posterity.
(By the way, could you please explain how the bill 101 dampens the freedom of speech in any way?)
|
I don't blame you, I don't think I would have that kind of consideration either if my national identity was pretty much a copy of the American culture.
especially this quote right here. Obviously you feel some sense of cultural superiority that you would think that your culture is more worth having consideration for than an american one
|
Not at all, I can understand your own lack of understanding.
That didn't imply it's a bad or worse culture, because there is no such thing.
|
On February 23 2013 14:45 lepape wrote:
Because it's a part of who you are. Not because it's better.
(By the way, could you please explain how the bill 101 dampens the freedom of speech in any way?)
It's not apart of who you are, it's how you got here. There's a big difference. Everything you do is about how you were raised as an individual because of how your parents were raised as individuals. While this may correlate with culture it is not the cause of culture. Your fathers individual choice to follow cultural traditions is what impacted his raising of you.
I think it's pretty self-explanatory in the name. It's the right to communicate in whichever way you so desire..whether that's orally, on signage, or fricken hand signals lol. If society has no use for it, he will lose business, if it gains from it then it should be accepted
|
On February 23 2013 14:51 Dawski wrote:
I think it's pretty self-explanatory in the name. It's the right to communicate in whichever way you so desire..whether that's orally, on signage, or fricken hand signals lol. If society has no use for it, he will lose business, if it gains from it then it should be accepted
And how exactly does the bill 101 refrains anyone from communicating any message he desires, in any language?
By the way, there is no such thing as total freedom of speech in any country I know of. Try opening a shop on any main street, putting a sign with offensive words and wait for how long it takes for the sign to be put away. Laws are about where you draw the line.
Saying a law is bad solely because it affects freedom of speech, that's a pretty shallow argument right there. There's already plenty of laws and regulations affecting freedom of speech everywhere.
|
On February 23 2013 15:00 lepape wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 14:51 Dawski wrote:
I think it's pretty self-explanatory in the name. It's the right to communicate in whichever way you so desire..whether that's orally, on signage, or fricken hand signals lol. If society has no use for it, he will lose business, if it gains from it then it should be accepted And how exactly does the bill 101 refrains anyone from communicating any message he desires, in any language? By the way, there is no such thing as total freedom of speech in any country I know of. Try opening a shop on any main street, putting a sign with offensive words and wait for how long it takes for the sign to be put away. Laws are about where you draw the line.
The bill forces people to put both french and english on any piece of signage, and even make french the same size or larger... unfortunately for the PQ that also means that if someone doesn't want to support french culture for whatever reason and he doesn't want to put french on his sign he's allowed to because of basic freedom of speech. You could argue that it's not good for society and thus isn't a true freedom, but I don't think french culture/language is automatically seen as better for society like someones right to clean air would be (sry wrote this after 2nd paragraph lol) and the topic really is debatable
You're right because the freedom of someone walking down the street to not see offensive language outweighs the freedom for posting it because it would be more harmful for society. (again think the right for smokers to smoke anywhere they want vs non-smokers right to clean air in certain places).
|
I agree, that's part of the real debate concerning bill 101. Laws are about reinforcing positive actions and discouraging negative/harmful actions, after all.
So the real question that's been debated for decades : is a sign written solely in english really harmful to the french canadian culture?
Asked this way, I admit it sounds silly and this is why it's also hard to convince the answer could be yes. And then again, this issue has always been about the bigger portrait in the medium-long term, which is always hard to explain.
In the very long term, it probably doesnt even matter. But then again, nothing that we do today matters in the very long term, I guess.
|
On February 23 2013 15:27 lepape wrote:
I agree, that's part of the real debate concerning bill 101. Laws are about reinforcing positive actions and discouraging negative/harmful actions, after all.
So the real question that's been debated for decades : is a sign written solely in english really harmful to the french canadian culture?
Asked this way, I admit it sounds silly and this is why it's also hard to convince the answer could be yes. And then again, this issue has always been about the bigger portrait in the medium-long term, which is always hard to explain.
In the very long term, it probably doesnt even matter. But then again, nothing that we do today matters in the very long term, I guess.
Yeah totally which is where we started to branch off in the debate that - is preserving of the french culture through laws which overrides the freedom of speech reinforcing positive action.
And that's a big point which I've brought up multiple times in this thread as well. If in the long term it is ruled that it isnt worth it and the culture does in fact become more a mix of anglophone culture (I don't think the heart and motivation of the people from that culture would ever die) In the very long term it really isn't the biggest of deals and humanity will carry on and there will always still be something to be affectionate about.
|
Don't forget that you can put a sign in any language you want, as long as there is a french one. It's really not that big of a deal. Just put a "café" beside "coffee". There. Done. I don't understand what the fuss is about. If you're an immigrant coming here opening a shop, I think it's the least you can do to try and integrate our society.
Also I just want to bring up a point about the different types of culture. I had an argument once with someone from Louisiana talking about the Cajun culture, and how it still existed even though they were surrounded by Americans. But when I ask if he still spoke french, he said no, and basically what was left was a bit of music and food from the past. So my point here is the difference between a living culture and a "museum" culture. Unfortunately, many cultures in north america (particulary the native's, which is very sad) have become museum cultures. When you only have memories from the past but you cease to create cultural products, even more, when your language stops evolving or is forgotten, your culture is not living anymore. When a culture dies like this, the world as a whole becomes poorer. You might not notice it, but a culture is also a different viewpoint (in part because the language and the way it is spoken create a different viewpoint). Anyway it already made this argument before, kinda.
Now about sovereignty, I am a bit on the fence about it. Emotionally I would like Quebec to be independant. But at the same time, like I said, perhaps being forced to cooperate with the rest of Canada, even when it seems pointless, maybe makes us stronger in the end and the constant argument makes us think more and we are wiser from it. So I don't know...
Yes some freedoms are limited through this law, and sometimes I also wonder myself if it's all worth it. But this law forces you to do, is it really that bad? Stop looking at it in a Kantian way.
Plus the problem with capitalism is that many useful things for humanity don't have a price tag on it.
|
On February 24 2013 03:06 Xain wrote:
Don't forget that you can put a sign in any language you want, as long as there is a french one. It's really not that big of a deal. Just put a "café" beside "coffee". There. Done. I don't understand what the fuss is about. If you're an immigrant coming here opening a shop, I think it's the least you can do to try and integrate our society.
Also I just want to bring up a point about the different types of culture. I had an argument once with someone from Louisiana talking about the Cajun culture, and how it still existed even though they were surrounded by Americans. But when I ask if he still spoke french, he said no, and basically what was left was a bit of music and food from the past. So my point here is the difference between a living culture and a "museum" culture. Unfortunately, many cultures in north america (particulary the native's, which is very sad) have become museum cultures. When you only have memories from the past but you cease to create cultural products, even more, when your language stops evolving or is forgotten, your culture is not living anymore. When a culture dies like this, the world as a whole becomes poorer. You might not notice it, but a culture is also a different viewpoint (in part because the language and the way it is spoken create a different viewpoint). Anyway it already made this argument before, kinda.
Now about sovereignty, I am a bit on the fence about it. Emotionally I would like Quebec to be independant. But at the same time, like I said, perhaps being forced to cooperate with the rest of Canada, even when it seems pointless, maybe makes us stronger in the end and the constant argument makes us think more and we are wiser from it. So I don't know...
Yes some freedoms are limited through this law, and sometimes I also wonder myself if it's all worth it. But this law forces you to do, is it really that bad? Stop looking at it in a Kantian way.
Plus the problem with capitalism is that many useful things for humanity don't have a price tag on it.
I guess the problem occurs when you have something that can't be translated. Like a joke in english.
|
On February 24 2013 03:06 Xain wrote:
Don't forget that you can put a sign in any language you want, as long as there is a french one. It's really not that big of a deal. Just put a "café" beside "coffee". There. Done. I don't understand what the fuss is about. If you're an immigrant coming here opening a shop, I think it's the least you can do to try and integrate our society.
Also I just want to bring up a point about the different types of culture. I had an argument once with someone from Louisiana talking about the Cajun culture, and how it still existed even though they were surrounded by Americans. But when I ask if he still spoke french, he said no, and basically what was left was a bit of music and food from the past. So my point here is the difference between a living culture and a "museum" culture. Unfortunately, many cultures in north america (particulary the native's, which is very sad) have become museum cultures. When you only have memories from the past but you cease to create cultural products, even more, when your language stops evolving or is forgotten, your culture is not living anymore. When a culture dies like this, the world as a whole becomes poorer. You might not notice it, but a culture is also a different viewpoint (in part because the language and the way it is spoken create a different viewpoint). Anyway it already made this argument before, kinda.
Now about sovereignty, I am a bit on the fence about it. Emotionally I would like Quebec to be independant. But at the same time, like I said, perhaps being forced to cooperate with the rest of Canada, even when it seems pointless, maybe makes us stronger in the end and the constant argument makes us think more and we are wiser from it. So I don't know...
Yes some freedoms are limited through this law, and sometimes I also wonder myself if it's all worth it. But this law forces you to do, is it really that bad? Stop looking at it in a Kantian way.
Plus the problem with capitalism is that many useful things for humanity don't have a price tag on it.
I just don't understand how the world became poorer when the Cajun culture was lost... If the viewpoint in todays world has merrit then it will be felt by a people. It's as simple as that. We're at an age now where cultures arn't the ones bringing new ideas into the world. We have the internet and funded studies to specifically examine different topics on all viewpoints and angles. edit: think of all the cultures that made up the french culture in Europe. You'd be silly to think that the french culture is completely genuine from the time it began. All those subcultures that were assimilated together to create the cultures we see today haven't been a loss for the world, instead it helped contribute to a bigger culture.
Language in and of itself is nothing more than a tool of communication. The language itself doesn't make your view of a subject any more or less credible. The emotional tie to the language isn't a result of the language, it's a result of a heavy desire from the people to be affectionate (I'll try say affectionate instead of pride as pointed out in past posts) about something.
You can't be surprised that a lot of people have a problem with a fascistic way of policing a tool of communication. The emotional tie that the people have grown towards their tool of communication in no way makes it any less or more than what it is.
|
On February 24 2013 04:05 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 03:06 Xain wrote:
Don't forget that you can put a sign in any language you want, as long as there is a french one. It's really not that big of a deal. Just put a "café" beside "coffee". There. Done. I don't understand what the fuss is about. If you're an immigrant coming here opening a shop, I think it's the least you can do to try and integrate our society.
Also I just want to bring up a point about the different types of culture. I had an argument once with someone from Louisiana talking about the Cajun culture, and how it still existed even though they were surrounded by Americans. But when I ask if he still spoke french, he said no, and basically what was left was a bit of music and food from the past. So my point here is the difference between a living culture and a "museum" culture. Unfortunately, many cultures in north america (particulary the native's, which is very sad) have become museum cultures. When you only have memories from the past but you cease to create cultural products, even more, when your language stops evolving or is forgotten, your culture is not living anymore. When a culture dies like this, the world as a whole becomes poorer. You might not notice it, but a culture is also a different viewpoint (in part because the language and the way it is spoken create a different viewpoint). Anyway it already made this argument before, kinda.
Now about sovereignty, I am a bit on the fence about it. Emotionally I would like Quebec to be independant. But at the same time, like I said, perhaps being forced to cooperate with the rest of Canada, even when it seems pointless, maybe makes us stronger in the end and the constant argument makes us think more and we are wiser from it. So I don't know...
Yes some freedoms are limited through this law, and sometimes I also wonder myself if it's all worth it. But this law forces you to do, is it really that bad? Stop looking at it in a Kantian way.
Plus the problem with capitalism is that many useful things for humanity don't have a price tag on it. I just don't understand how the world became poorer when the Cajun culture was lost... If the viewpoint in todays world has merrit then it will be felt by a people. It's as simple as that. We're at an age now where cultures arn't the ones bringing new ideas into the world. We have the internet and funded studies to specifically examine different topics on all viewpoints and angles. edit: think of all the cultures that made up the french culture in Europe. You'd be silly to think that the french culture is completely genuine from the time it began. All those subcultures that were assimilated together to create the cultures we see today haven't been a loss for the world, instead it helped contribute to a bigger culture. Language in and of itself is nothing more than a tool of communication. The language itself doesn't make your view of a subject any more or less credible. The emotional tie to the language isn't a result of the language, it's a result of a heavy desire from the people to be affectionate (I'll try say affectionate instead of pride as pointed out in past posts) about something. You can't be surprised that a lot of people have a problem with a fascistic way of policing a tool of communication. The emotional tie that the people have grown towards their tool of communication in no way makes it any less or more than what it is.
I do agree that the french culture (or any surviving culture today) is a mix of different ones. However, if we bring up the exemple of France, they actually willingly destroyed many subcultures that existed through legislation, wars, etc. I think they would be better off today without having done that, but anyway this example is a bit different from the Quebec one so it's not relevant that I delve too much into it.
Language is more than a tool of communication. That's where you're wrong. Language is a way to think, to organize thoughts. It's more deep than just communication of ideas.
Edit: quick example: just the fact that you modify nouns by adding a letter for the feminine form (and that standard form is masculine) shapes your thoughts in a subtle but real way.
Yes I would agree with your last point if the law 101 was fascistic, but it's not.
|
On February 24 2013 04:15 Xain wrote:
I do agree that the french culture (or any surviving culture today) is a mix of different ones. However, if we bring up the exemple of France, they actually willingly destroyed many subcultures that existed through legislation, wars, etc. I think they would be better off today without having done that, but anyway this example is a bit different from the Quebec one so it's not relevant that I delve too much into it.
I wouldn't quite say that. In fact, the power of Germany, France, the UK, Spain and Italy comes from the unification and normalization of these territories.
It's not the most humanist approach, but the most efficient in the long run. Though life isn't about efficiency...
|
Language is more than a tool of communication. That's where you're wrong. Language is a way to think, to organize thoughts. It's more deep than just communication of ideas.
Edit: quick example: just the fact that you modify nouns by adding a letter for the feminine form (and that standard form is masculine) shapes your thoughts in a subtle but real way.
Yes I would agree with your last point if the law 101 was fascistic, but it's not.
But why don't we see this in actual application in real life? All the french canadians I know who learned english as a second language all think the exact same way anyone else does. The human mind is a constant design. People think differently based on chemical balances/all that other sciency stuff that i'm not going to list. These factors towards the way people think vary from people in the culture not from one culture to another.
Someone should be allowed to not support french culture by not including french on their signs. The idea of supporting french culture is an opinion. When you have a task force devoted entirely to enforcing an opinion that is in my opinion a facsistic way of policing.
I should flesh this post out a bit more. You can change the way a mind thinks but that's through constant repitition of an idea. If someone hears the same thing their whole life they will inevitably start to believe it. I don't want to look this negatively at the Quebec media but when they react to Manitoba going more bilingual by looking at the negative side and using it to show how "the people there don't want it! they hate us!" you can't help but feel that's more the effect
|
+ Show Spoiler +On February 24 2013 04:33 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +
Language is more than a tool of communication. That's where you're wrong. Language is a way to think, to organize thoughts. It's more deep than just communication of ideas.
Edit: quick example: just the fact that you modify nouns by adding a letter for the feminine form (and that standard form is masculine) shapes your thoughts in a subtle but real way.
Yes I would agree with your last point if the law 101 was fascistic, but it's not.
But why don't we see this in actual application in real life? All the french canadians I know who learned english as a second language all think the exact same way anyone else does. The human mind is a constant design. People think differently based on chemical balances/all that other sciency stuff that i'm not going to list. These factors towards the way people think vary from people in the culture not from one culture to another. Someone should be allowed to not support french culture by not including french on their signs. The idea of supporting french culture is an opinion. When you have a task force devoted entirely to enforcing an opinion that is in my opinion a facsistic way of policing. I should flesh this post out a bit more. You can change the way a mind thinks but that's through constant repitition of an idea. If someone hears the same thing their whole life they will inevitably start to believe it. I don't want to look this negatively at the Quebec media but when they react to Manitoba going more bilingual by looking at the negative side and using it to show how "the people there don't want it! they hate us!" you can't help but feel that's more the effect
Never heard of this Manitoba thingy, but I don't watch tv so maybe I just missed it.
So having to pay taxes is fascistic? Having to wait for the green light to cross the street is fascistic?
And because you don't notice the difference doesn't mean it's not there. I notice it personally.
|
On February 24 2013 04:47 Xain wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 24 2013 04:33 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +
Language is more than a tool of communication. That's where you're wrong. Language is a way to think, to organize thoughts. It's more deep than just communication of ideas.
Edit: quick example: just the fact that you modify nouns by adding a letter for the feminine form (and that standard form is masculine) shapes your thoughts in a subtle but real way.
Yes I would agree with your last point if the law 101 was fascistic, but it's not.
But why don't we see this in actual application in real life? All the french canadians I know who learned english as a second language all think the exact same way anyone else does. The human mind is a constant design. People think differently based on chemical balances/all that other sciency stuff that i'm not going to list. These factors towards the way people think vary from people in the culture not from one culture to another. Someone should be allowed to not support french culture by not including french on their signs. The idea of supporting french culture is an opinion. When you have a task force devoted entirely to enforcing an opinion that is in my opinion a facsistic way of policing. I should flesh this post out a bit more. You can change the way a mind thinks but that's through constant repitition of an idea. If someone hears the same thing their whole life they will inevitably start to believe it. I don't want to look this negatively at the Quebec media but when they react to Manitoba going more bilingual by looking at the negative side and using it to show how "the people there don't want it! they hate us!" you can't help but feel that's more the effect Never heard of this Manitoba thingy, but I don't watch tv so maybe I just missed it. So having to pay taxes is fascistic? Having to wait for the green light to cross the street is fascistic? And because you don't notice the difference doesn't mean it's not there. I notice it personally.
we've been over this already many times... even at the top of last page...
the idea of preserving the french culture is plainly NOT as objectively superior to society than not getting hit by a car or contributing to your government which represents you....
There was never enough evidence to promote the fact that preserving the french culture via this law would reinforce positive behaviour by the people
You can say you notice the difference but neurobiology disagrees
|
On February 24 2013 04:50 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 04:47 Xain wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 24 2013 04:33 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +
Language is more than a tool of communication. That's where you're wrong. Language is a way to think, to organize thoughts. It's more deep than just communication of ideas.
Edit: quick example: just the fact that you modify nouns by adding a letter for the feminine form (and that standard form is masculine) shapes your thoughts in a subtle but real way.
Yes I would agree with your last point if the law 101 was fascistic, but it's not.
But why don't we see this in actual application in real life? All the french canadians I know who learned english as a second language all think the exact same way anyone else does. The human mind is a constant design. People think differently based on chemical balances/all that other sciency stuff that i'm not going to list. These factors towards the way people think vary from people in the culture not from one culture to another. Someone should be allowed to not support french culture by not including french on their signs. The idea of supporting french culture is an opinion. When you have a task force devoted entirely to enforcing an opinion that is in my opinion a facsistic way of policing. I should flesh this post out a bit more. You can change the way a mind thinks but that's through constant repitition of an idea. If someone hears the same thing their whole life they will inevitably start to believe it. I don't want to look this negatively at the Quebec media but when they react to Manitoba going more bilingual by looking at the negative side and using it to show how "the people there don't want it! they hate us!" you can't help but feel that's more the effect Never heard of this Manitoba thingy, but I don't watch tv so maybe I just missed it. So having to pay taxes is fascistic? Having to wait for the green light to cross the street is fascistic? And because you don't notice the difference doesn't mean it's not there. I notice it personally. we've been over this already many times... even at the top of last page... the idea of preserving the french culture is plainly NOT as objectively superior to society than not getting hit by a car or contributing to your government which represents you.... There was never enough evidence to promote the fact that preserving the french culture via this law would reinforce positive behaviour by the people You can say you notice the difference but neurobiology disagrees
*Sigh* And you are a neurobiologist?
Not it's not superior than not getting hit by a car, but respect and acknowledgement of french culture in Quebec is superior to you not wanting to put a goddamn sign in french beside your store's name for god's sake it's not a big thing.
|
On February 24 2013 05:04 Xain wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 04:50 Dawski wrote:On February 24 2013 04:47 Xain wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 24 2013 04:33 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +
Language is more than a tool of communication. That's where you're wrong. Language is a way to think, to organize thoughts. It's more deep than just communication of ideas.
Edit: quick example: just the fact that you modify nouns by adding a letter for the feminine form (and that standard form is masculine) shapes your thoughts in a subtle but real way.
Yes I would agree with your last point if the law 101 was fascistic, but it's not.
But why don't we see this in actual application in real life? All the french canadians I know who learned english as a second language all think the exact same way anyone else does. The human mind is a constant design. People think differently based on chemical balances/all that other sciency stuff that i'm not going to list. These factors towards the way people think vary from people in the culture not from one culture to another. Someone should be allowed to not support french culture by not including french on their signs. The idea of supporting french culture is an opinion. When you have a task force devoted entirely to enforcing an opinion that is in my opinion a facsistic way of policing. I should flesh this post out a bit more. You can change the way a mind thinks but that's through constant repitition of an idea. If someone hears the same thing their whole life they will inevitably start to believe it. I don't want to look this negatively at the Quebec media but when they react to Manitoba going more bilingual by looking at the negative side and using it to show how "the people there don't want it! they hate us!" you can't help but feel that's more the effect Never heard of this Manitoba thingy, but I don't watch tv so maybe I just missed it. So having to pay taxes is fascistic? Having to wait for the green light to cross the street is fascistic? And because you don't notice the difference doesn't mean it's not there. I notice it personally. we've been over this already many times... even at the top of last page... the idea of preserving the french culture is plainly NOT as objectively superior to society than not getting hit by a car or contributing to your government which represents you.... There was never enough evidence to promote the fact that preserving the french culture via this law would reinforce positive behaviour by the people You can say you notice the difference but neurobiology disagrees *Sigh* And you are a neurobiologist? Not it's not superior than not getting hit by a car, but respect and acknowledgement of french culture in Quebec is superior to you not wanting to put a goddamn sign in french beside your store's name for god's sake it's not a big thing.
I don't have to be a neurobiologist to read that it's our life experiences that shape us. It's what were told growing up that shapes us. For example, you won't think differently about women because of the words your language describes as feminine unless your own life experiences and what people tell you paint the picture.
respect and acknowledgment of the french culture is not worth having a task force legally able to come into my private business go into my office and tear down a quote from benjamin franklin because it's a threat to the integrity of the french language
Big government powers like this may not always be used wrongly, but they have the ability to. Think of the recent pasta story as well. When the OQLF apologized for the overzealousness of the employee who filed the complaint they phrased it what could be translated as "his heart was in the right place". This has a huge effect on the people! they believe this stuff! His heart was most definitely not in the right place! That's how peoples minds begin to work differently in cultures
|
|
|
I think what caught my eye the most about that article wasn't just the power abuse of the OQLF but instead the response from the restaurant..
"Joe Beef is a French restaurant that serves French market cuisine and sells uniquely French wine; the name Joe Beef stems from the namesake tavern of 1820. Our menu is only in French (there is no English menu on premises), all the staff is fully bilingual, we spend all of our money in province using local suppliers and analyze all our systems to make sure that the money we spend stays in province, we have endured the insult of the Mev box, the retroactive alcohol tax, and several incidents with the OQLF. Look at our website; we have brought and participated in several foreign magazine editorials all promoting various aspects of tourism and eating traveling in Quebec. Our book was a success in French, 20K copies, and internationally it sold 40K, and is essentially a book about our love affair with this province. JOE BEEF is the true son of the people, JOE BEEF is a true patriot . The inspectors that we met were not able or intelligent and obviously not understanding of their task, one actually mistook the hatch print as a menu and asked what the price was on the sausages it promotes, we were stunned, a child can obviously see that it's art, not a menu. We sent them a long letter on advice of a lawyer explaining all of the said items in question and how they were all antiques and artifacts and we have not really heard anything intelligent back."
It's no wonder the PQ and the OQLF can be at least semi-supported in Quebec. They are actually trying to reason with the OQLF that "don't do it! we're totally for Quebec! you got the wrong guys!" instead of actually fighting against the unjust law. We would just hate to invest some of our money into a next door neighbour of the same nation who spends billions of dollars on bilingualism and french immersion programs... For Mother Russi-... Quebec! Pure nationalism.
That article got it spot on in a couple places
"Brit & Chips, very clearly a British-themed restaurant, was cited for daring to use the term "fish and chips" on their menu, and for having a sign on the bathroom door that read "gents." The OQLF isn't as quick to back down from this case, perhaps because it's easier to pick on symbols of our colonial oppressors."
"The Parti Québécois can blame lone, "over-zealous" language inspectors all they want, but the law is the problem. When you give law enforcement enough rope, they're bound to hang someone with it. And in this case, they're targeting another jewel in Montreal's food scene; a restaurant frequented by international celebrities and a place that's become a source of pride for all Montrealers. Dave, Fred Morin and the gang at Joe Beef are some of Quebec's best ambassadors abroad, and we're giving them and restaurateurs like them every reason in the world to take their money and passion and head down the 401."
Sorry if i'm a little more emotionally invested in this post than the last ones. Just bothers me in ways not many things do.
|
On February 24 2013 06:29 Dawski wrote:
They are actually trying to reason with the OQLF that "don't do it! we're totally for Quebec! you got the wrong guys!" instead of actually fighting against the unjust law.
The problem is, you can't fight bill 101 without being anti-french. 101 gave control of the province back to the french, and they never found a way to retain control without it.
|
Not only related to the PQ, but montreal and quebec politics in general:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/quebec-to-raise-university-tuition-fees-despite-strong-opposition/article9018652/
Our higher education summit ends exactly the way it began: Tuition price + 3%. This is exactly what Marois was saying she would do for the past couple weeks, and absolutely nothing changed during the summit.
I'm afraid (in the polite sense) that she just shafted the last group that would've supported her. It must be tough being in power in a time of recession, but Obama did just fine. It's sad that the entire 'maple spring' ends on a draconian note: "Let the adults take care of business, students, we actually really don't care what you've got to say."
Not that I ever supported the red square, but to see leaders shove away young adults like this is disgusting.
|
On February 26 2013 13:34 Abraxas514 wrote:Not only related to the PQ, but montreal and quebec politics in general: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/quebec-to-raise-university-tuition-fees-despite-strong-opposition/article9018652/Our higher education summit ends exactly the way it began: Tuition price + 3%. This is exactly what Marois was saying she would do for the past couple weeks, and absolutely nothing changed during the summit. I'm afraid (in the polite sense) that she just shafted the last group that would've supported her. It must be tough being in power in a time of recession, but Obama did just fine. It's sad that the entire 'maple spring' ends on a draconian note: "Let the adults take care of business, students, we actually really don't care what you've got to say." Not that I ever supported the red square, but to see leaders shove away young adults like this is disgusting.
I've usually agreed with you in this thread but seriously? People are complaining about a 3% increase of tuition? What is that like $40-$80 a year? I'm quite sure that might even be less than the inflation rate of education nowadays which would make it a rollback lol.
It's not shocking that people will actually have to make a business strategy and ignore the entitled students who think that money comes from trees in order to get the education system back on the road to sustainable.
|
On February 26 2013 14:00 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2013 13:34 Abraxas514 wrote:Not only related to the PQ, but montreal and quebec politics in general: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/quebec-to-raise-university-tuition-fees-despite-strong-opposition/article9018652/Our higher education summit ends exactly the way it began: Tuition price + 3%. This is exactly what Marois was saying she would do for the past couple weeks, and absolutely nothing changed during the summit. I'm afraid (in the polite sense) that she just shafted the last group that would've supported her. It must be tough being in power in a time of recession, but Obama did just fine. It's sad that the entire 'maple spring' ends on a draconian note: "Let the adults take care of business, students, we actually really don't care what you've got to say." Not that I ever supported the red square, but to see leaders shove away young adults like this is disgusting. I've usually agreed with you in this thread but seriously? People are complaining about a 3% increase of tuition? What is that like $40-$80 a year? I'm quite sure that might even be less than the inflation rate of education nowadays which would make it a rollback lol. It's not shocking that people will actually have to make a business strategy and ignore the entitled students who think that money comes from trees in order to get the education system back on the road to sustainable.
Personally I totally agree with the hike. I thought the hike the liberals proposed would help universities deliver better education.
What bothers me is how nonchalantly our prime minister sweeps the students that voted her into office under the rug (although, I was not one of them. Just commenting on her personal values.)
|
On February 26 2013 14:11 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2013 14:00 Dawski wrote:On February 26 2013 13:34 Abraxas514 wrote:Not only related to the PQ, but montreal and quebec politics in general: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/quebec-to-raise-university-tuition-fees-despite-strong-opposition/article9018652/Our higher education summit ends exactly the way it began: Tuition price + 3%. This is exactly what Marois was saying she would do for the past couple weeks, and absolutely nothing changed during the summit. I'm afraid (in the polite sense) that she just shafted the last group that would've supported her. It must be tough being in power in a time of recession, but Obama did just fine. It's sad that the entire 'maple spring' ends on a draconian note: "Let the adults take care of business, students, we actually really don't care what you've got to say." Not that I ever supported the red square, but to see leaders shove away young adults like this is disgusting. I've usually agreed with you in this thread but seriously? People are complaining about a 3% increase of tuition? What is that like $40-$80 a year? I'm quite sure that might even be less than the inflation rate of education nowadays which would make it a rollback lol. It's not shocking that people will actually have to make a business strategy and ignore the entitled students who think that money comes from trees in order to get the education system back on the road to sustainable. Personally I totally agree with the hike. I thought the hike the liberals proposed would help universities deliver better education. What bothers me is how nonchalantly our prime minister sweeps the students that voted her into office under the rug (although, I was not one of them. Just commenting on her personal values.)
ahh sorry, I guess I read that wrong.
Yeah your governor pretty much pissed off everyone that actually voted for her for her own merrit lol. Oh well looks like all the students are back voting for Quebec Solidaire
|
On February 26 2013 14:22 Dawski wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2013 14:11 Abraxas514 wrote:On February 26 2013 14:00 Dawski wrote:On February 26 2013 13:34 Abraxas514 wrote:Not only related to the PQ, but montreal and quebec politics in general: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/quebec-to-raise-university-tuition-fees-despite-strong-opposition/article9018652/Our higher education summit ends exactly the way it began: Tuition price + 3%. This is exactly what Marois was saying she would do for the past couple weeks, and absolutely nothing changed during the summit. I'm afraid (in the polite sense) that she just shafted the last group that would've supported her. It must be tough being in power in a time of recession, but Obama did just fine. It's sad that the entire 'maple spring' ends on a draconian note: "Let the adults take care of business, students, we actually really don't care what you've got to say." Not that I ever supported the red square, but to see leaders shove away young adults like this is disgusting. I've usually agreed with you in this thread but seriously? People are complaining about a 3% increase of tuition? What is that like $40-$80 a year? I'm quite sure that might even be less than the inflation rate of education nowadays which would make it a rollback lol. It's not shocking that people will actually have to make a business strategy and ignore the entitled students who think that money comes from trees in order to get the education system back on the road to sustainable. Personally I totally agree with the hike. I thought the hike the liberals proposed would help universities deliver better education. What bothers me is how nonchalantly our prime minister sweeps the students that voted her into office under the rug (although, I was not one of them. Just commenting on her personal values.) ahh sorry, I guess I read that wrong. Yeah your governor pretty much pissed off everyone that actually voted for her for her own merrit lol. Oh well looks like all the students are back voting for Quebec Solidaire
Essentially, it's dirty politics taken too far. She rode the students wave to get elected, and now she's moving back to the center to get ready for the next elections since her minority government most likely won't hold. My take is that it's an insult to the PQ and an insult to their principles, and my bet is that their campaign strategist had no damn clue what he's doing, and doesn't realize that the PQ's platform is the left now. If they lose their left-leaning politics, their platform will be the independence stuff that's not enough to get elected, at least not anymore
In other words, their strategical centrism will get them to lose the next elections IMO.
|
There's many nasty words I could say about the PQ, even the students. I can say in truth, I'm not surprised in the least.
|
|
|
This makes me sad:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/03/01/montreal-french-italian-english-caffe-gamba.html
The story here is a French Canadian took a trip to Italy once, and got the Idea to open an Italian-style coffee shop and call it "Caffè in Gamba", which can be translated literally to "espresso on the ball." (Note: It isn't english)
The reason why this is so disappointing is because of it's style. In Italian, you say "Caffè" to mean "Italian-style espresso" specifically. It's the same as "fish and chips" which refers to a specific way of preparing food.
The fact that the OQLF has a problem with this is really really sad. This isn't a matter of french anymore, it's a matter of culture. Montreal is a place where you can find any culture in the world, and have it's food/art/music celebrated. This screams xenophobia and intolerance.
Here is another anecdote where the interesting parts are highlighted:
Instead of pursuing its original goal of making sure every Quebecer can get services in French, they have taken to bullying businesses for the most insignificant uses of languages other than 'the chosen language.' On/off labels on switches are no longer acceptable, even handwritten lists used only by chefs in a kitchen – away from the public’s eyes – can only be in French as well. These cases themselves are violations of French Charter, which assures a “spirit of fairness and open-mindedness, respectful of the institutions of the English-speaking community of Québec, and respectful of the ethnic minorities, whose valuable contribution to the development of Québec it readily acknowledges.” This government agency has no room for open-mindedness. Why else would they seek to find an alternative name for Quebec City’s vélo boulevard only because it’s a literal translation of the English term ‘bicycle boulevard’?
And Old Montreal restaurateur Maurice Holder said he had been ordered by the OQLF to cover up “on” and “off” buttons on the microwave and “hold” and “redial” buttons on the phone.
Make up your own mind...
|
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/03/06/montreal-student-protest-tuition-hike-parti-quebecois.html
The related piece is this:
"We are angry," the organizers declared in a Facebook page urging people to fill the street.
"The Pequiste increase is almost the same as the Liberals, except over a longer period."
So thousands of students in the streets again. Mostly French Canadian, as they seen to be the most passionate about micro-tuition. The sad part is it took them an average of what, 21 years?, to realize that governments lie and trick their way into getting elected.
|
It's mostly French Canadians because that's the majority of the people in this province, ye know .
Also, they know that governments lie and trick their way into getting elected, but governments are also typically smart enough not to piss off their electors, ESPECIALLY when it's in a minority government that WILL fall.
The PQ is playing their cards all wrong.
|
On March 07 2013 00:52 Djzapz wrote:It's mostly French Canadians because that's the majority of the people in this province, ye know . Also, they know that governments lie and trick their way into getting elected, but governments are also typically smart enough not to piss off their electors, ESPECIALLY when it's in a minority government that WILL fall. The PQ is playing their cards all wrong.
What I meant to say by the demographic is that the English universities are under-represented. This (AFAIK) is because of the following: Large international student base, generally wealthier families, higher percentage of in-city families (living with parents) and finally, anglophones are simply less likely to riot in the streets.
The interesting part there is that "The Pequiste increase is almost the same as the Liberals". I think 3% per year and 15% per year are worlds apart. The former isn't actually an increase. I think student leaders just don't understand the time value of money, and the PQ seems to forget the students were the swing that allowed it to nail that tiny minority government (31.6%).
|
Got this from facebook, pretty eye opening.
"It dawned on me as I went through the interviews I gave following last week's anti-Bill 14 demonstration, that people - including commentators - did not know what this Bill is about. It is only tangentially about language. Language is the excuse for some of the most retrograde initiatives a western liberal jurisdiction can enact. Following is a list of just five of the most shameful elements of the Bill.
1. The Bill eliminates the term of law "ethnic minorities" which is a human rights designation in the UN Covenant on Human Rights (1948), The UN Covenant on Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (1992), The Inter-Parliamentary Alliance Quebec City Declaration (Oct.2012, accepted by this very government, the Canadian Charter and the Quebec Charter, with the designation of "cultural communities" which has no legal standing. Quebec thus becomes the first western democratic jurisdiction to opt out of an international human rights convention regime.
2. The Bill gives inspectors for the OQLF the power to seize anything in a place of business that they find objectionable; go to the director of criminal and penal prosecutions; swear out an affidavit; and get a court judgment for $2500 without any notice to the citizen. Quebec thus becomes the first western democratic jurisdiction to allow prosecutions without notice, a basic tenat of western law for a thousand years and considered by Montesquieu in "Les ésprits des lois" to be the basis of civilized legal regimes. Actually, Revenue Quebec officers had that power for a year and a half until I got that changed working with Jean St-Gelais, then DG of RevQue, now head of the fonction publique.
3. The Parti Québecois has since its founding in 1970 made respect for ``démocratie locale`` a foundational organizing principle. Bill 14 will do away with bilingual status for the 89 municipalities - 70 of them more than 90% francophone - who have passed resolutions stating that they wish to retain their bilingual status. So much for local democracy.
4. Sec. 33 of this Bill directs anglophone Cegeps not to consider any applications from francophone students until all anglophone applications have been accepted. That`s called segregation. Would we ever accept this if instead of anglophone we used the word "men" and instead of francophone we used the word "women." Standards based on language are as discriminatory as those based on color, gender, or religion.
5.Soldiers who risk their lives for our safety will be forced to send their children to French schools even if they have been transferred here from other parts of the country and are themselves anglophones. Eliminating the Bill 101 exemption for soldiers is simply odieux.
People should read the Bill. And understand that evil is possible here. The bill is not about language. It is a venal attempt by a government that has had to back away from almost all its promises to keep its `"pur et dur" in line through the politics of demonization, nullification and interposition"
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=488228667906760&set=a.126361207426843.19917.100001588920435&type=1&theater
|
On March 07 2013 06:09 iAmWaKai wrote:Got this from facebook, pretty eye opening. "It dawned on me as I went through the interviews I gave following last week's anti-Bill 14 demonstration, that people - including commentators - did not know what this Bill is about. It is only tangentially about language. Language is the excuse for some of the most retrograde initiatives a western liberal jurisdiction can enact. Following is a list of just five of the most shameful elements of the Bill. 1. The Bill eliminates the term of law "ethnic minorities" which is a human rights designation in the UN Covenant on Human Rights (1948), The UN Covenant on Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (1992), The Inter-Parliamentary Alliance Quebec City Declaration (Oct.2012, accepted by this very government, the Canadian Charter and the Quebec Charter, with the designation of "cultural communities" which has no legal standing. Quebec thus becomes the first western democratic jurisdiction to opt out of an international human rights convention regime. 2. The Bill gives inspectors for the OQLF the power to seize anything in a place of business that they find objectionable; go to the director of criminal and penal prosecutions; swear out an affidavit; and get a court judgment for $2500 without any notice to the citizen. Quebec thus becomes the first western democratic jurisdiction to allow prosecutions without notice, a basic tenat of western law for a thousand years and considered by Montesquieu in "Les ésprits des lois" to be the basis of civilized legal regimes. Actually, Revenue Quebec officers had that power for a year and a half until I got that changed working with Jean St-Gelais, then DG of RevQue, now head of the fonction publique. 3. The Parti Québecois has since its founding in 1970 made respect for ``démocratie locale`` a foundational organizing principle. Bill 14 will do away with bilingual status for the 89 municipalities - 70 of them more than 90% francophone - who have passed resolutions stating that they wish to retain their bilingual status. So much for local democracy. 4. Sec. 33 of this Bill directs anglophone Cegeps not to consider any applications from francophone students until all anglophone applications have been accepted. That`s called segregation. Would we ever accept this if instead of anglophone we used the word "men" and instead of francophone we used the word "women." Standards based on language are as discriminatory as those based on color, gender, or religion. 5.Soldiers who risk their lives for our safety will be forced to send their children to French schools even if they have been transferred here from other parts of the country and are themselves anglophones. Eliminating the Bill 101 exemption for soldiers is simply odieux. People should read the Bill. And understand that evil is possible here. The bill is not about language. It is a venal attempt by a government that has had to back away from almost all its promises to keep its `"pur et dur" in line through the politics of demonization, nullification and interposition" https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=488228667906760&set=a.126361207426843.19917.100001588920435&type=1&theater
I chose not to delve into Bill 14 in this thread because it's such a can of worms. Perhaps, all of the proponents of separatism should be aware that it comes with a price. If Quebec becomes it's own country, I can guarantee you it will not be a left of center, progressive change. And think, the PQ is the "less extreme" of the separatist parties.
But, to be absolutely fair, here is the reddit counterargument:
http://www.reddit.com/r/politicalfactchecking/comments/19a9fg/rmontreal_redditor_claims_bill_14_will_radically/c8mbtmp
But to be honest, everybody knows laws can be used in many ways. I mean, how the hell can a 'corporation' be considered a 'legal person' without some legal manipulation? How did Jews go from writing a J on their passport to not being able to own businesses? Fucking magnets?
Anyhow, here is montreal's response to Bill 14:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/03/06/quebec-parents-petition-language-bill-national-assembly.html
(Interestingly enough, in that video Marois admits the "pastagate" story is rediculous.)
|
Quebec has a premier not a Prime Minister.
I've only read about 6 pages of this thread and skimmed most of the rest so I might be missing something in my observations, forgive me if that is the case.
Bill 101 fascism or not; restricts freedom of speech in a very similar way as labeling on food or safety instructions on products. That restriction is put there for the consumer, there can be no argument about that, restrictions are not for the regulators, of course they benefit from it but the reason they exist is for "end user". So I think the question that has to be answered is what is the reason for bill 101.
Is the objective of bill 101 to retard the appearance of the english dominance? OR to provide service to a significant people group that is legally and politically supported?
The evidence provided in this thread seems to me to indicate that the scope of this law is too great, and I think that many of you can agree with that. Having regulators fine businesses for using "fish and chips" is exceeding what I believe the people would mandate.
That is the only question that I think is important in this debate everything else is just personal spin and emotion getting in the way. I think this question can be answered by the application of said law. Now I am unaware of the actually written part of the law in question and probably even if I did read it laws are notorious for using facetious language to describe a simple topic as to create wiggle room at a later date.
|
On March 07 2013 11:54 Gofarman wrote:
Quebec has a premier not a Prime Minister.
This is somewhat of a "Frenchisism".
In French it's "Premier Ministre"
Which in English is literally "First Minister" so we say "Prime Minister".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier
In many nations, "premier" is used interchangeably with "prime minister".
"Premier" is also the title of the heads of government in sub-national entities, such as the provinces and territories of Canada, states of the Commonwealth of Australia, provinces of South Africa, the island of Nevis within the Federation of Saint Kitts and Nevis, and the nation of Niue. In some of these cases, the formal title remains "Prime Minister" but "Premier" is used to avoid confusion with the national leader. In these cases, care should be taken not to confuse the title of "premier" with "prime minister". In these countries, terms such as "Federal Premier", "National Premier", or "Premier of the Dominion" were sometimes used to refer to prime ministers, although these are now obsolete. In Canadian French, the equivalent of the English word "premier" is "premier ministre", which is also the word used for "prime minister".
Cheers
|
On March 07 2013 05:11 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2013 00:52 Djzapz wrote:On March 07 2013 00:45 Abraxas514 wrote:http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/03/06/montreal-student-protest-tuition-hike-parti-quebecois.htmlThe related piece is this: "We are angry," the organizers declared in a Facebook page urging people to fill the street.
"The Pequiste increase is almost the same as the Liberals, except over a longer period." So thousands of students in the streets again. Mostly French Canadian, as they seen to be the most passionate about micro-tuition. The sad part is it took them an average of what, 21 years?, to realize that governments lie and trick their way into getting elected. It's mostly French Canadians because that's the majority of the people in this province, ye know . Also, they know that governments lie and trick their way into getting elected, but governments are also typically smart enough not to piss off their electors, ESPECIALLY when it's in a minority government that WILL fall. The PQ is playing their cards all wrong. What I meant to say by the demographic is that the English universities are under-represented. This (AFAIK) is because of the following: Large international student base, generally wealthier families, higher percentage of in-city families (living with parents) and finally, anglophones are simply less likely to riot in the streets. The interesting part there is that "The Pequiste increase is almost the same as the Liberals". I think 3% per year and 15% per year are worlds apart. The former isn't actually an increase. I think student leaders just don't understand the time value of money, and the PQ seems to forget the students were the swing that allowed it to nail that tiny minority government (31.6%).
Well I'll give my position about that. I'm sitting this one out because it's somewhat reasonable from the PQ, but I was rather active during the last student "strikes" despite the fact that I'm toward the end of my studies and I wouldn't benefit from lower tuition fees. Plus unlike others, I've been lucky enough to never have any financial issues as far as this goes. Yet fighting against higher tuition fees makes sense to me because it's the kind of shit I stand for.
The reason why protests are going on is that they've typically been successful, which is the reason why education in Quebec is so heavily subsidized. Students and their supporters will rush to the street the second they feel threatened. Some idiots participate, some bastards who just want to save money participate, but some of them just have a social conscience, and lean to the left politically.
The problem though is that even tho 3% is reasonable, it could easily lead to a slippery slope. And so people are defensive.
Edit: And yeah premier ministre in French, prime minister in English. I rarely hear the PM being referred to as "premier" although it's correct too.
|
On March 07 2013 12:16 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2013 11:54 Gofarman wrote:
Quebec has a premier not a Prime Minister.
This is somewhat of a "Frenchisism". In French it's "Premier Ministre" Which in English is literally "First Minister" so we say "Prime Minister". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PremierShow nested quote +"Premier" is also the title of the heads of government in sub-national entities, such as the provinces and territories of Canada, states of the Commonwealth of Australia, provinces of South Africa, the island of Nevis within the Federation of Saint Kitts and Nevis, and the nation of Niue. In some of these cases, the formal title remains "Prime Minister" but "Premier" is used to avoid confusion with the national leader. In these cases, care should be taken not to confuse the title of "premier" with "prime minister". In these countries, terms such as "Federal Premier", "National Premier", or "Premier of the Dominion" were sometimes used to refer to prime ministers, although these are now obsolete. In Canadian French, the equivalent of the English word "premier" is "premier ministre", which is also the word used for "prime minister". Cheers
GJ ignoring the important part of my post. Language is only effective if you use the best form, this is an english language forum and you are predominantly arguing with english language speakers, use the best form. Arguing semantics only contributes to my bias against french people.
EDIT- I didn't actually want to say this in the main body of my reply so here is it as an edit; I have great respect for federalism in Canada and strongly believe that Canada is more than just a sum of the parts. Using the term Prime Minister to describe your Premier creates the impression (whether intended or not) of Quebec as a separate nation and is very abhorrent to my sensibilities.
All that is a greater issue though, and not directly applicable to this conversation, hopefully you understand my intent is not to degrade the office of the Premier in Quebec but to esteem the office of Prime Minister of Canada
|
On March 07 2013 12:29 Gofarman wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2013 12:16 Abraxas514 wrote:On March 07 2013 11:54 Gofarman wrote:
Quebec has a premier not a Prime Minister.
This is somewhat of a "Frenchisism". In French it's "Premier Ministre" Which in English is literally "First Minister" so we say "Prime Minister". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PremierIn many nations, "premier" is used interchangeably with "prime minister". "Premier" is also the title of the heads of government in sub-national entities, such as the provinces and territories of Canada, states of the Commonwealth of Australia, provinces of South Africa, the island of Nevis within the Federation of Saint Kitts and Nevis, and the nation of Niue. In some of these cases, the formal title remains "Prime Minister" but "Premier" is used to avoid confusion with the national leader. In these cases, care should be taken not to confuse the title of "premier" with "prime minister". In these countries, terms such as "Federal Premier", "National Premier", or "Premier of the Dominion" were sometimes used to refer to prime ministers, although these are now obsolete. In Canadian French, the equivalent of the English word "premier" is "premier ministre", which is also the word used for "prime minister". Cheers GJ ignoring the important part of my post. Language is only effective if you use the best form, this is an english language forum and you are predominantly arguing with english language speakers, use the best form. Arguing semantics only contributes to my bias against french people. EDIT- I didn't actually want to say this in the main body of my reply so here is it as an edit; I have great respect for federalism in Canada and strongly believe that Canada is more than just a sum of the parts. Using the term Prime Minister to describe your Premier creates the impression (whether intended or not) of Quebec as a separate nation and is very abhorrent to my sensibilities. All that is a greater issue though, and not directly applicable to this conversation, hopefully you understand my intent is not to degrade the office of the Premier in Quebec but to esteem the office of Prime Minister of Canada
Pointless argument. PM is the official title. We call PMs 'premiers' purely to distinguish them from the federal PM. But just like the "crown" discussion earlier, its completely irrelevant.
Also, I don't want this to be a thread about Bill 101, unless it is as it pertains to the PQ.
|
|
|
sup folks, the actual thing with the "pasta" thing was a fake
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=484978848218272&set=a.324109114305247.73488.156743514375142&type=1&theater
actually the whole menu is in english.... "never underestimate the dishonest people who are too racist to acknowledge that Quebec is french".
and yet again
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/03/07/quebec-intensive-english-program-parti-quebecois.html
So now it is quite obvious the PQ doesn't really want francophones to learn english in school. This is the first step in a slippery slope. Way to go PQ, there's no one way you can alienate your own people more than by removing their second language education. . I think you do not understand our language priority... french, then english. it's not alienating at all, our gouvernment pays for intensive english school at 5th and 6th grade of elementary, we have english throuhout secondary and cegep, PLUS we're surrounded by an english world. we finance equally english universities like concordia and mcgill (semester cost are about the same, the difference is mostly due to "coûts afférents")WTF are you talking about. i just don,t get it. WE ALIENATE OUR SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING WTf how much money R.O.C puts in BILINGUISM AND second language learning. French communities even require that WE as a province help them to have their linguistical rights respected oustide quebec WTF. and now we're the bad guys.
|
On March 09 2013 03:09 crazyweasel wrote:sup folks, the actual thing with the "pasta" thing was a fake http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=484978848218272&set=a.324109114305247.73488.156743514375142&type=1&theateractually the whole menu is in english.... "never underestimate the dishonest people who are too racist to acknowledge that Quebec is french". and yet again Show nested quote +http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/03/07/quebec-intensive-english-program-parti-quebecois.html
So now it is quite obvious the PQ doesn't really want francophones to learn english in school. This is the first step in a slippery slope. Way to go PQ, there's no one way you can alienate your own people more than by removing their second language education. . I think you do not understand our language priority... french, then english. it's not alienating at all, our gouvernment pays for intensive english school at 5th and 6th grade of elementary, we have english throuhout secondary and cegep, PLUS we're surrounded by an english world. we finance equally english universities like concordia and mcgill (semester cost are about the same, the difference is mostly due to "coûts afférents")WTF are you talking about. i just don,t get it. WE ALIENATE OUR SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING WTf how much money R.O.C puts in BILINGUISM AND second language learning. French communities even require that WE as a province help them to have their linguistical rights respected oustide quebec WTF. and now we're the bad guys.
So a facebook group called "Quebec Francais" puts up a picture of their English menu? What does that prove? Restaurants are allowed to have entirely English menus as long as they have entirely French ones. The group that you're quoting is precisely the kind of people who alienate Anglophones in this province.
|
Also, about that group you're quoting, it equates McGill University with cancer...
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=485291544853669&set=a.324109114305247.73488.156743514375142&type=1&theater
Just to give you an idea of the xenophobic nature of the people who believe this crap.
EDIT: another nice example from their facebook page:
Comme le dit un commentateur sur la page : « Où sont nos chers défenseurs du bilinguisme ? » La vérité, vous la connaissez si vous suivez notre page : le bilinguisme est l'outil dont se sert la majorité anglaise pour assimiler la minorité française. Quand tous les citoyens francophones parlent anglais, l'anglais devient de facto la langue commune. C'est le destin qui nous attend si nous ne mettons pas fin au bilinguisme qu'on nous impose de plus en plus au Québec.
My translation:
Like the commentator said on the page: "where are our dear defenders of biligualism?". The truth, you'll know if you follow our page: Bilingualism is a tool that the Anglophone majority use to assimilate the french minority. When all francophone citizens speak anglish, it will become the de facto language. Thats the detiny that awaits us if we don't put an end to bilingualism that's imposed on us more and more in quebec.
This is SO DISGUSTING. It's a hate group. The only point you're proving is that people like this exist. On the first few pages of this thread people were accusing me of intolerance toward french... but the page you just posted, that everyone who understands french should take a look at, highlights french canadian xenophobia all by itself.
|
|
|
|
|
Some updates:
http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/postscript-pq-covers-ears-to-widespread-opposition-to-bill-14-1.1245142
Here is what's happening in Quebec. The provincial government is trying to pass a bill that would guarantee the marginalization of anglophones for good. The bill allows language inspectors (OQLF) to seize property, it forces military families temporarily stationed in Quebec to transfer their kids to french-only schools (a language which their kids don't speak) and it attempts to circumvent international human rights by replacing terms like "ethnic minority" with "cultural community".
The interesting part of that not-so-biased editorial is that it's the French Canadians who are themselves opposed to this bill. The Quebec bar association itself finds the bill is contrary to democratic values, and the majority of protesters on the street are French.
This is no different from the widespread denunciation of SOPA. This is a bill designed to make Quebec a place for "Quebecois" and nobody else.
|
On April 20 2013 23:35 Abraxas514 wrote:Some updates: http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/postscript-pq-covers-ears-to-widespread-opposition-to-bill-14-1.1245142Here is what's happening in Quebec. The provincial government is trying to pass a bill that would guarantee the marginalization of anglophones for good. The bill allows language inspectors (OQLF) to seize property, it forces military families temporarily stationed in Quebec to transfer their kids to french-only schools (a language which their kids don't speak) and it attempts to circumvent international human rights by replacing terms like "ethnic minority" with "cultural community". The interesting part of that not-so-biased editorial is that it's the French Canadians who are themselves opposed to this bill. The Quebec bar association itself finds the bill is contrary to democratic values, and the majority of protesters on the street are French. This is no different from the widespread denunciation of SOPA. This is a bill designed to make Quebec a place for "Quebecois" and nobody else.
Assuming it's true, I'm glad the Bill won't pass. That said, I think it's possible that the following probably are extrapolations and probably weren't intended by the people who wrote the bill.
1- language inspectors with power of search and seizure
-What the hell is this madness...
2- armed forces families losing language of education rights
-I don't understand how they could possibly word that for it to sound justified. Probably not the intended function of the bill.
3- historic bilingual towns and cities losing the ability to serve their citizens in English
-That's not constitutional and will be destroyed the second it touches a court floor.
But like I said, I'd have to go read Bill 14 and that's tedious... so I'll just wait for this whole mess to blow over because it inevitably will. But I think the crazy stuff with the bill probably comes from loopholes or whatever. Anyway cheers.
|
I'll do some searching for you:
Bill 14: https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CEIQFjAD&url=http://www.assnat.qc.ca/Media/Process.aspx?MediaId=ANQ.Vigie.Bll.DocumentGenerique_68169en&process=Default&token=ZyMoxNwUn8ikQ+TRKYwPCjWrKwg+vIv9rjij7p3xLGTZDmLVSmJLoqe/vG7/YWzz&ei=cuRyUZ3_OKe42gX5rIGACA&usg=AFQjCNFmKIUQCzOcs77ORkooEay5Kzgwow&bvm=bv.45512109,d.b2I
To anyone reading this: Keep in mind how twisty lawers and policymakers can be with laws. If something says "any reasonable doubt" or anything of the like, it WILL be translated to mean whatever the lawyer wants. I'm sure you all know how the law works.
Amendments are introduced to promote the rights recognized
under the Charter relating to language of work and of the service
sector.
Other amendments seek to reinforce the learning of French
among the various educational clienteles and to discourage the
circumvention of the measures provided for in the Charter regarding
the language of instruction.
In addition, the Charter of human rights and freedoms is amended
to enshrine new language rights.
1.(2): by replacing “the ethnic minorities” in the third paragraph by “cultural
communities”.
The following legal bullshit english states a bilingual municipality will be "judged" every 10 years. "recognition" implies anything the province wants it to. I'm sure you know how legal loopholes work.:
12. The Charter is amended by inserting the following sections after
section 29.1:
“29.2. Every 10 years following the recognition of a municipal body
under subparagraph 1 or 2 of the second paragraph of section 29.1, the Office
shall evaluate whether the conditions justifying the recognition have been
maintained, and shall send a written status report to the Minister and the body
concerned.
The evaluation must be based on the information relating to language in the
most recent census taken in accordance with Canadian statistics legislation. If,
at the time of the first evaluation, the publication of that data was more than
two years old, the evaluation is postponed until the year that follows the
publication of the subsequent census. Subsequent evaluations are postponed
accordingly.
Unless otherwise provided by law, the Office may also be required to perform
such an evaluation, at the Minister’s request, in anticipation of or following a
major restructuring of the body, such as a merger or an integration involving
the recognized body and another body that does not have such recognition.
And here 2 points later they admit the truth:
29.4. The Government may also, upon the filing of a status report by
the Office under section 29.2, on the Minister’s recommendation and when the
body concerned no longer satisfies the conditions that justified its recognition,
withdraw such recognition if it considers it appropriate in light of all the
circumstances.
Elements that may be considered for that purpose include the historical
presence of an English-speaking community receiving services from the
recognized body or the significant involvement of members of such a community
within that body.
10
No decision to withdraw the recognition of a body may be made without the
Office and the body having been invited by the Minister to submit their
observations. They must be allowed at least 45 days to do so.”
Going on...
This part is very suspicious:
17. Section 40 of the Charter is amended
(1) by replacing “of the Office québécois de la langue française” in the first
paragraph by “of the Minister”;
(2) by adding the following sentence at the end of the first paragraph: “The
permit is subject to the duration and other conditions fixed by the Minister
upon authorizing its issue.”;
Permit? for what may I ask??
19. Sections 41 to 50 of the Charter are replaced by the following sections:
“41. In order to ensure that workers’ rights under section 4 are respected,
an employer shall
(1) use French in written communications to staff;
But we already know if you and your boss are anglophone, or from china, you gotta write them internal memos in french!
Did you know our bus drivers don't speak english? In downtown Montreal? Here is the paragraph:
“46. Before requiring knowledge, or a specific level of knowledge, of a
language other than French for a position, an employer must thoroughly evaluate
the actual linguistic needs relating to that position; the employer must
subsequently review such needs periodically.
The evaluation must consider, among other factors, the linguistic skills
already required of other personnel members to satisfy the needs of the
enterprise.
47. An employer is prohibited from requiring that a person have
knowledge of or a specific level of knowledge of a language other than French
unless the nature of the person’s duties with the employer requires such
knowledge.
....aaaaaaaand what this actually means is they can remove the need for bilingual enployees if the employer "evaluates it so".
Here is another interesting one:
48. Every person has a right to work in an environment that is free from
vexatious behaviour, discrimination or harassment based on the person’s not
having a sufficient command of a language other than French, demanding the
right to work in French or having asserted a right arising from the provisions
of this chapter.
The employer must take reasonable steps to prevent this type of behaviour
and, on learning of such behaviour, to put a stop to it.
So if you only speak french, and get hired into a strongly anglophone office, they can't make fun of you for.... not being able to speak another language than french. I'm glad they specified that, because it's totally legal for them to discriminate my average french!!
49. An employer is prohibited from dismissing, laying off, demoting or
transferring a person, or taking reprisals or imposing any other sanctions on a
person because the person does not have a sufficient command of a language
other than French, or because the person has asserted a right arising from the
provisions of this chapter.
So if I'm working in tourism, or at a restaurant in a non-french neighbourhood, I can't be fired for only knowing french and not a word of the local spoken language. Nice!!
The following ensures that under ANY reason, any family temporarily spending a year in quebec can't send their kid to an english-only high school:
30. The Charter is amended by inserting the following after section 88:
88.0.2. No secondary school diploma may be issued to a student who
does not have the knowledge of spoken and written French required by the
programs of the Minister of Education, Recreation and Sports.
Force small businesses to speak french internally at all times, regardless of the employees:
“151. An enterprise that employs between 26 and 49 persons and that
maintains that number for more than six months during two consecutive years
is governed by this division.
21
“151.1. An enterprise must verify its mode of operation and, taking into
account its specific circumstances, must pursue the following objectives:
(1) making French the normal and everyday language of work
Force small English towns to have ANY event (Like Canada Day, for example) to do everything in french:
156.1. The Minister may, by a regulation, require any specific category
of municipal body to adopt a language policy in order to encourage the
implementation of measures to give the French language a predominant place
in their activities.
156.4. In addition to determining measures to generalize the use of
French and give it a predominant place in the activities of the municipal body,
the language policy of a municipal body must underline that French is the
official language of Québec, the normal and everyday language used in the
public sphere, and an essential instrument of social cohesion.
Where does it underline that English is the official language of Canada? Just curious..
And here we get to the OQLF:
160. The Office shall monitor the linguistic situation in Québec,
especially as regards the use and status of the French language and the behaviour
and attitudes of the various linguistic groups. It shall render an account of its
observations, at least every five years, in a report to the Minister. The report
may include recommendations.
50. Section 166 of the Charter is replaced by the following section:
“166. The Office may designate any person, generally or specially, to
make an inquiry or an inspection.”
51. Sections 174 and 175 of the Charter are replaced by the following
sections:
“174. A person authorized to act under section 166 may, at any reasonable
time, for the purpose of ascertaining compliance with this Act and the
regulations, visit any place where an activity governed by this Act is carried
on.
175.2. The operator of a place undergoing an inspection is required to
give the person authorized to act under section 166 reasonable assistance in
carrying out the inspection.
That last one sounds like a special right a cop gets, not some government worker..
Here is the big one:
175.3. During the course of an inspection, the person authorized to act
as an inspector may seize any thing which he or she believes on reasonable
grounds may prove the commission of an offence under this Act or the
regulations.
Another special right only cops should have.
177. If the Office is of the opinion that this Act or a regulation under
this Act has been contravened, it shall refer the matter to the Director of Criminal
and Penal Prosecutions so that appropriate penal proceedings may be instituted
where required.”
IF YOU DONT LET THE OQLF TAKE YOUR MENU YOU GO TO STRAIGHT TO JAIL! DO NOT PASS GO!
CHARTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
56. The preamble to the Charter of human rights and freedoms (chapter C‑12)
is amended:
57. The Charter is amended by inserting the following section after section 3:
“3.1. Every person has a right to live and work in French in Québec to
the extent provided for in the Charter of the French language (chapter C‑11).
Every person who settles in Québec has a right to learn French and to benefit
from reasonable measures to welcome him and to facilitate his integration into
life in Québec.”
What, may I ask, is a "reasonable measure" to "facilitate my integration"?
77. The Act is amended by inserting the following section after section 5:
30
“5.1. To better reconcile the objectives of the educational program with
the realities of Aboriginal life, the Minister may determine special conditions
for the implementation of the educational program.”
Aboriginals? Quebec should stay the fuck away from those people.
REGULATION RESPECTING THE EXEMPTION FROM THE
APPLICATION OF THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF SECTION 72 OF
THE CHARTER OF THE FRENCH LANGUAGE THAT MAY BE
GRANTED TO CHILDREN STAYING IN QUÉBEC TEMPORARILY
79. Section 1 of the Regulation respecting the exemption from the application
of the first paragraph of section 72 of the Charter of the French language that
may be granted to children staying in Québec temporarily (chapter C-11, r. 7)
is amended by striking out “, the child of a member of the Canadian Armed
Forces or his spouse’s child” in the last paragraph.
89. Any authorization to receive instruction in English obtained under
section 3 of the Regulation respecting the exemption from the application of
the first paragraph of section 72 of the Charter of the French language that may
be granted to children staying in Québec temporarily and that is in force on
(insert the date of coming into force of this section) continues to apply until it
expires but may not be renewed.
-------------------------------------------
I hope this helps. This bill is a serious blow to the rights of minorities in Quebec, and even though will never pass, should be treated as a serious ethical violation of political mandate.
|
A nice one for the books:
The Charbonneau commision is a government-independent group that is working on uncovering as much corruption in Quebec as possible. They have been working for years.
Now, as soon as a PQ member becomes the target of investigation, Marois 'advises caution' to the commission. Sounds to me like she forgot to keep her opinions in check because the commission is set up to be free of ANY pressure from the government (they have the mandate to arrest any government official, capture any and all documents.)
http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/charbonneau-commission/parti-quebecois-suddenly-expresses-concerns-about-corruption-inquiry-1.1263616
|
The liberals took years to even start the commission dude. You don't need to bump this thread every time you find something to be angry about.
|
I started this thread precisely to track any news concerning the Parti Quebecois. The previous post is offers significant insight to how the Premier conducts her politics.
|
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/05/15/quebec--pq-drainville-citizenship-shavuot-parking-ndg-montreal.html
The question here is, is it ok for a borough to relax it's parking rules at certain times of the year to accommodate a specific (and numerous) religious group? I see no issue in relaxing parking laws, as long as it affects everyone. If a sub-municipality decides not to give tickets on a certain day, like Canada Day or New Years day, there's no problem, but when they won't give tickets during a holiday that prohibits performing actions like moving a car for a certain group, what's the issue?
This video highlights the specific Xenophobic nature of the members of the Parti Quebecois. The secularism charter they are proposing isn't means to guarantee individuality such that the Canada Charter guarantees, it's meant to turn this province into a melting pot.
|
you should start a thread on CPC instead of PQ.... THEY are a threat to "canadian" values. PQ is somewhat rightwing-ish in these times and is no longer different than the PLQ aside from the Question Nationale. And it still amazes me that you dare categorize PQ as Xenophobic... in your eyes every nationalist party is xenophobic? what about QS and ON? all they want is to acheive auto-determination which by the way is an inherent RIGHT of every people of this planet.
as for the news report you just posted, its just comes down to some practical mesures. If jews can't move cars on fridays cause of shabbat, gosh they can simply move it thursday in prevision. how is that fair for the people to which the holiday don't apply (which most of the population). If we had to plan every public services according to their 300 holidays per year.... it just never ends. they have bar mitzva, shabbat, and so on every day of the week (i'm exagerating) but that just how orthodox jews live in mtl. and this question is even more sensible because its a sectarist community whose members are prohibited to have too much contact with our society, they practice endogamy, etc. to keep their community hermetic. HOW IS THAT PLURALISM.
You're vision oppose everything that is rationally reasonnable. Canada's chart is a pluralist vision which was condamned throughtout the intellectual world (intellectuals, scholars) because feeding the interest of the cultural hegemony. While quebec's chart isn't perfect, it still uses more inter-subjectivity (which is much needed for such a complicated topic) to discuss the cultural matter of quebec, because it considers collective rights before individuality.
Your treating this whole matter with dogma and blind ideology instead of trying to understand the other's point of view.
IF anything you should be worried about PQ is their recent tendency towards right-wing, which is what most quebecois are denouncing right now.
The only way to solve quebec's situation is soverignty or socialist revolution, only that way will there be recognition and acknowledgement of the other as equal that can put them both or all on the same level.
It's the whole problem of post-modernity : how to reach political unity when there are no apparent frontiers between individuals towards the collectivity? We all blend into consumerism, work, capitalism and have no attachment to construct our identity upon. There's always this need of individuality, of differentiation, affirmation towards others or the collectivity in order to maintain unity, the thing is to find a middle or an equilibrium of both you can't just mystify collectivity(capitalism) nor can you simply mistify individuality(we've seen it failed communism, like Stalin's).
shit im going off topic PPP
|
On May 17 2013 03:36 crazyweasel wrote:
how is that fair for the people to which the holiday don't apply (which most of the population).
Well, there is a very large Jewish population in that area of Montreal, perhaps 5%-10% of the total population.
It's fair because it offers no sanctions, only freedoms. You can park for free on *these* days on top of *these* days, the former being Jewish holidays the latter being civil holidays.
I mean, why should I be forced to take Christmas day off? I'm not Christian, I've never celebrated the holiday, yet I don't complain about the free parking.
The thing I find offensive is the elementary school level of thought: "hey that's not fair, we have the same thing but it benefits him more than me!"
If you were told you could park for free one week of the year because of some obscure tradition, would you complain?
|
On May 17 2013 04:12 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2013 03:36 crazyweasel wrote:
how is that fair for the people to which the holiday don't apply (which most of the population). Well, there is a very large Jewish population in that area of Montreal, perhaps 5%-10% of the total population. It's fair because it offers no sanctions, only freedoms. You can park for free on *these* days on top of *these* days, the former being Jewish holidays the latter being civil holidays. I mean, why should I be forced to take Christmas day off? I'm not Christian, I've never celebrated the holiday, yet I don't complain about the free parking. The thing I find offensive is the elementary school level of thought: "hey that's not fair, we have the same thing but it benefits him more than me!" If you were told you could park for free one week of the year because of some obscure tradition, would you complain?
Out of everything he said, it's free parking for jewish people that stuck out. Really?
|
On May 17 2013 04:17 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2013 04:12 Abraxas514 wrote:On May 17 2013 03:36 crazyweasel wrote:
how is that fair for the people to which the holiday don't apply (which most of the population). Well, there is a very large Jewish population in that area of Montreal, perhaps 5%-10% of the total population. It's fair because it offers no sanctions, only freedoms. You can park for free on *these* days on top of *these* days, the former being Jewish holidays the latter being civil holidays. I mean, why should I be forced to take Christmas day off? I'm not Christian, I've never celebrated the holiday, yet I don't complain about the free parking. The thing I find offensive is the elementary school level of thought: "hey that's not fair, we have the same thing but it benefits him more than me!" If you were told you could park for free one week of the year because of some obscure tradition, would you complain? Out of everything he said, it's free parking for jewish people that stuck out. Really?
What? Did you misread or is this actually the way you understand it?
It's free parking for everyone.
And the rest of his post looked like a sophomore political science student's essay. I can't say I understood all the jargon or what was implied with the questions.
|
On May 17 2013 04:12 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2013 03:36 crazyweasel wrote:
how is that fair for the people to which the holiday don't apply (which most of the population). Well, there is a very large Jewish population in that area of Montreal, perhaps 5%-10% of the total population. It's fair because it offers no sanctions, only freedoms. You can park for free on *these* days on top of *these* days, the former being Jewish holidays the latter being civil holidays. I mean, why should I be forced to take Christmas day off? I'm not Christian, I've never celebrated the holiday, yet I don't complain about the free parking. The thing I find offensive is the elementary school level of thought: "hey that's not fair, we have the same thing but it benefits him more than me!" If you were told you could park for free one week of the year because of some obscure tradition, would you complain?
the very large jewish (im guessing you include the non-assydims) don't do such thing like not using car on shabbat im sorry mister, they don't even to this in israel
|
On May 17 2013 04:26 Abraxas514 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2013 04:17 Djzapz wrote:On May 17 2013 04:12 Abraxas514 wrote:On May 17 2013 03:36 crazyweasel wrote:
how is that fair for the people to which the holiday don't apply (which most of the population). Well, there is a very large Jewish population in that area of Montreal, perhaps 5%-10% of the total population. It's fair because it offers no sanctions, only freedoms. You can park for free on *these* days on top of *these* days, the former being Jewish holidays the latter being civil holidays. I mean, why should I be forced to take Christmas day off? I'm not Christian, I've never celebrated the holiday, yet I don't complain about the free parking. The thing I find offensive is the elementary school level of thought: "hey that's not fair, we have the same thing but it benefits him more than me!" If you were told you could park for free one week of the year because of some obscure tradition, would you complain? Out of everything he said, it's free parking for jewish people that stuck out. Really? What? Did you misread or is this actually the way you understand it? It's free parking for everyone. And the rest of his post looked like a sophomore political science student's essay. I can't say I understood all the jargon or what was implied with the questions.
So what does that make you? A freshman political science student?
|
"I mean, why should I be forced to take Christmas day off? I'm not Christian, I've never celebrated the holiday, yet I don't complain about the free parking.
The thing I find offensive is the elementary school level of thought: "hey that's not fair, we have the same thing but it benefits him more than me!"
the thing here is that we live in a juedo-christian society therefore our seculiar or civil holidays are drawn from that tradition, everybody celebrates christmas even jew and muslim who go and party with their friends. very few people still celebrate this as a religious holiday. while a minority of jews only do the shabbat every friday etc.... its not about not being fair, its just too complicated for the garbages, parking, recycling, you can't just adapt for so few people who are mostly sectarist as i explained and makes it a 1 way commitment from a group to the other, which is unfair.
|
On May 17 2013 04:38 crazyweasel wrote:
"I mean, why should I be forced to take Christmas day off? I'm not Christian, I've never celebrated the holiday, yet I don't complain about the free parking.
The thing I find offensive is the elementary school level of thought: "hey that's not fair, we have the same thing but it benefits him more than me!"
the thing here is that we live in a juedo-christian society therefore our seculiar or civil holidays are drawn from that tradition, everybody celebrates christmas even jew and muslim who go and party with their friends. very few people still celebrate this as a religious holiday. while a minority of jews only do the shabbat every friday etc.... its not about not being fair, its just too complicated for the garbages, parking, recycling, you can't just adapt for so few people who are mostly sectarist as i explained and makes it a 1 way commitment from a group to the other, which is unfair.
Ok, so you find it unfair. But nobody in CDN-NDG finds it unfair. So why does a PQ minister decide it's unfair, yet the residents here have no issue?
On May 17 2013 04:29 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2013 04:26 Abraxas514 wrote:On May 17 2013 04:17 Djzapz wrote:On May 17 2013 04:12 Abraxas514 wrote:On May 17 2013 03:36 crazyweasel wrote:
how is that fair for the people to which the holiday don't apply (which most of the population). Well, there is a very large Jewish population in that area of Montreal, perhaps 5%-10% of the total population. It's fair because it offers no sanctions, only freedoms. You can park for free on *these* days on top of *these* days, the former being Jewish holidays the latter being civil holidays. I mean, why should I be forced to take Christmas day off? I'm not Christian, I've never celebrated the holiday, yet I don't complain about the free parking. The thing I find offensive is the elementary school level of thought: "hey that's not fair, we have the same thing but it benefits him more than me!" If you were told you could park for free one week of the year because of some obscure tradition, would you complain? Out of everything he said, it's free parking for jewish people that stuck out. Really? What? Did you misread or is this actually the way you understand it? It's free parking for everyone. And the rest of his post looked like a sophomore political science student's essay. I can't say I understood all the jargon or what was implied with the questions. So what does that make you? A freshman political science student?
what? I don't pretend to have a few years of university PS education, so I can't really reply or retort.
|
[/QUOTE]
Ok, so you find it unfair. But nobody in CDN-NDG finds it unfair. So why does a PQ minister decide it's unfair, yet the residents here have no issue?
[/QUOTE]
why mr minister decides its unfair? its a good question. to me the reasonnable answer is that there needs to be a line. that will apply everytime. just like the law. if your'e line is : do w/e you want, then from there how do we judge of the situation. at some point we'll have to accomodate everyone's demands. if no body in NDG cares, its not the case in outremont, not the case else where and so on, we can't just make rules based on case to case. His approach is simple, you have a holiday, plan it, park your car on thrusday its not hard. just like muslims plan with their jobs for friday's prayer at the mosque and things like that, theres no rule in an office where everybody gets afternoon off on friday because there's muslims in the office.
there needs to be a line, then we can make individual exceptions to the rules if its reasonnable.
|
On May 17 2013 05:24 crazyweasel wrote:Show nested quote +
Ok, so you find it unfair. But nobody in CDN-NDG finds it unfair. So why does a PQ minister decide it's unfair, yet the residents here have no issue?
why mr minister decides its unfair? its a good question. to me the reasonnable answer is that there needs to be a line. that will apply everytime. just like the law. if your'e line is : do w/e you want, then from there how do we judge of the situation. at some point we'll have to accomodate everyone's demands. if no body in NDG cares, its not the case in outremont, not the case else where and so on, we can't just make rules based on case to case. His approach is simple, you have a holiday, plan it, park your car on thrusday its not hard. just like muslims plan with their jobs for friday's prayer at the mosque and things like that, theres no rule in an office where everybody gets afternoon off on friday because there's muslims in the office. there needs to be a line, then we can make individual exceptions to the rules if its reasonnable.
Actually many offices end early on Friday, but that's besides the point.
Religious Jews are forbidden to enter their cars for a period of 48 hours beginning at sundown and ending an hour after sundown two days later. The city chooses not to punish an individual for choosing to follow this tradition so they don't give tickets.
The best comparison I can make is like this: There is one diabetic in a class of 20 grade 6 students. He needs to be given a piece of chocolate at 3PM. In order to make things fair, every kid in the class gets a bite. Then, a parent says "It's unacceptable that every student gets a piece just because one student is diabetic. He should plan ahead and leave class early to get his sugar".
|
This should be a blog.
If it shouldn't, then it means anyone can make a post about anything and rant about it. Then I believe I'll make a post about my mayor, I don't like him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/Universities_in_Qu%C3%A9bec.svg)
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/Montr%C3%A9al_-_Secteurs_Statitiques_2006_-_Langue_Maternelle.svg/640px-Montr%C3%A9al_-_Secteurs_Statitiques_2006_-_Langue_Maternelle.svg.png)
