I agree with you. While I support the law in principle, I certainly don't think it should apply to First Nations.
Quebec Language Police Are Mysteriously Drawn to Italian Establishments
- Thread starter no color
- Start date
I agree with you. While I support the law in principle, I certainly don't think it should apply to First Nations.
Why. Why is it more insulting than when it is applied to english, or in this case, Italian?
Because of the fact that First Nations suffered permanent damage due to the arrival of Europeans. It seems to me that if francophone Quebecers are gonna defend their language (and culture) through laws than it only makes sense to help and support First Nations wanting to defend theirs, considering what they've lost through the centuries.
I'm quite comfortable with this double standard because of the obvious difference between English and Native languages. English is in a very strong position both locally and internationally while native languages are in a fragile position. English has always been associated with strength and big business for historical reasons. So it's rather clear why french Quebecers wouldn't have much remorse in giving French the sole official status. It is seen as some form of balance of power. It's obvious to me that if Canada had never accepted language laws in Quebec, it would have succeeded in separating for better or for worse. The fact that we can have our language laws is in a sense one of the best federalist arguments.
As for Italian, the recent cases are examples of ridiculous overzealousness. I'm glad these stories came out and hopefully the debates they are causing in Quebec will lead to more common sense when it comes to language laws.
Actually the French who created New France were quite friendly with the Natives of North America....
You're right in a way. The Great Peace of Montreal of 1701 is a good example of this. But there was some fighting between Natives and French. My point is that too many French Quebecers seem to forget or ignore the fact that we took this land from others.
It does though. So would you support revising that part of Bill 101? It certainly would put Quebec in a good light in the news, making for good PR.
They(The French) fought against the Iroqious who expelled the Huronians(French ally) from their land (Georgian Bay)... Then the French(Huronian allies) gave the survivors(Huronians) shelter in New France....
The people Jacque Cartier first met when he landed along the St Lawarence werent killed by the French wholesale....
no ****, your whole province is a double standard... Your like the little rich kid who was never exposed to common sense...
What do you actually know anyways?
The people Jacque Cartier first met when he landed along the St Lawarence werent killed by the French wholesale....
no ****, your whole province is a double standard... Your like the little rich kid who was never exposed to common sense...
What do you actually know anyways?
I would wholeheartedly support it. And while I'm not involved in politics, this discussion is certainly inspiring me to spread the idea and confront those around me who are passionate about protecting French.
Double standards aren't necessarily a bad thing. If let's say you had 2 daughters of 18 and 12 years old, I'm sure you'd have many double standards when it came to rules.
Not that much, considering all there is to learn in this world.
So is Quebec the 12 yr old and the rest of Canada is the 18 yr old and the government is the parent?
So how long are we going to wait until Quebec hits puberty????
Sooner or later that 12 yr old needs to grow the **** up and become a real women or man...
My interpretation of your example
I agree in principle that Bill 101 ought to apply to internal government administration only. However, in terms of degree, at least in principle an English-speaker can always go back to England or an Italian to Italy to live in his language. The local indigenous language cannot be lived in anywhere else. So while you are right, in relative terms it's even worse for the local indigenous language because of that.
In northern saskatchewan the Cree and Dene speak their languages freely and openly, and in front of the white man.... Ask some people and its probally the most spoken langauges north of prince albert :lol:... They dont need laws
I think a complicated marital relationship would be more apt to describe the dynamics between Quebec and Canada but whatever...
My example was simply to demonstrate how double standards are not always a bad thing. You're just twisting it into a rant against Quebec.
In Quebec, Bill 101 is kind enough to allow its reserves to be exempted from Bill 101. How generous eh.
That is generous.... Or mabye they didnt want to look like colonialists, inforcing the white mans language on the reserves like the residential schools did.... Mabye Quebec didnt want another OKA crisis....
I think Quebec did itself a favour by exempting 101 from its reserves, not the natives....
You think im a pain in the **** (making you all leave the forum with your tail between your legs), im nothing compared to what other people are capable of..
The Quebec government of today is not the same as the New France Government.... If the natives were more passive they'd be forced to abid by bill 101...
And the anti-english language stance is more easily defended....
Fearing the Boogyman
I think Quebec did itself a favour by exempting 101 from its reserves, not the natives....
You think im a pain in the **** (making you all leave the forum with your tail between your legs), im nothing compared to what other people are capable of..
The Quebec government of today is not the same as the New France Government.... If the natives were more passive they'd be forced to abid by bill 101...
And the anti-english language stance is more easily defended....
Fearing the Boogyman
Last edited:
The way I see it you're Johnnny on Canadian Content expressing his opinions. Life is already complicated enough to be annoyed by people on the internet. I cherish the opportunity to discuss issues I care about with people who have a totally different view. I've learnt to deepen my reflection on Quebec and Canadian politics since I started exchanging with folks here. This place would be pretty boring if we all agreed on everything.
Bill 101 already exempts reserves. The problem though is that exemption the moment they leave the reserve.
My personal vision for the world in the long term would be to gradually replace the UN's current official languages with an international auxiliary language. I'd even be prepared to have the UN gradually replace English and French by Esperanto or some other such language as an initial good will gesture!
I'd even be prepared to support something similar for Canada, essentially functionaing like the Indonesian model, whereby the official language of the country would be a common easy-to-learn language everyone would agree to learn. To me, that would just be common courtesy. If you have to learn a second language, it's only fair that I ought to have to learn one too. No?
I'm beginning to wonder if the language police that are hired to enforce bill 101, are really familiar with the law? It's bad enough that the law is based on linguistic discrimination, but when you have individuals not familiar with the law trying to enforce it, that's when all hell breaks loose, as we've seen recently with Pastagate.
The reason I'm questioning the competancy level (or I.Q. level) of the language cops has to do with two words: PASTA and FESTIVINO. These are two words that are used by the SAQ, the government run Quebec Liquor Board in it's advertising. They are obviously legal, otherwise there ain't no way a separatist government would approve their use.
Read it on Global News: Global Montreal | Trouble brewing with Quebec language police for a Montreal 'caffe'
The reason I'm questioning the competancy level (or I.Q. level) of the language cops has to do with two words: PASTA and FESTIVINO. These are two words that are used by the SAQ, the government run Quebec Liquor Board in it's advertising. They are obviously legal, otherwise there ain't no way a separatist government would approve their use.
Read it on Global News: Global Montreal | Trouble brewing with Quebec language police for a Montreal 'caffe'
The OQLF has all the intelligence of a wet noodle? (hehe sorry, it just seemed punny enough to post).
Only to First Nations? Let us suppose that I, a French Canadian with no indigenous blood that I know of, should choose to open a shop and, out of resept for the local indigenous language, decided to put up the sign first in the local indigenous language, followed by another language of my choise, followed by an international auxiliary language (let's say Esperanto) so as to promote more equity between our groups. And let's say that I present them all in the same size?
Are you suggesting that because I'm not Algonquin that I should not be allowed to put up an Algonquin sign? Yet you don't have to be French to put up a French-language sign, and in fact you must put one up even if you're not francophone! Why the doubpe standard?
I don't blame the OQLF one bit. For all we know maybe some of their staff themselves think the law is ridiculous. I've never been a civil servant in my life, but I still know that a responsible civil servant fulfils the legal mandate of his office whether he agreees to it or not. End of story.
Also, Bill 101 would not allow me to send my child to an Algonquin-medium school even if I wanted to. Certainly I should be allowed to ask for a voucher to send my child to such a school at least. Sure it might not be possible owing to not enough children to make the school viable, but at least then the government could more legitimately say that it did not place any direct legislative obstacle in my way and then just blame the market. But if it cannot even grant me a school voucher then it's prohibiting me as per Bill 101 to do that. That is offensive. We're not Europe here, but North America.
Because the linguistic majority of Quebec (francophones) which are a linguistic minority in Canada have chosen to use their democracy to give themselves laws that promote and impose the use of French (our official language) on Quebec's population as a whole. Because of the fact that English is such a strong influence and that the absence of laws would clearly play out in the disfavour of French in the long term, these laws are needed to reestablish some form of balance.
The way I understand it is that the majority in Quebec don't accept the idea of unrestrained multiculturalism. We need some form of cultural standards that structure the many freedoms and responsibilities we have as citizens.
Here's an example that doesn't have to do with language. All children must follow the course ''Éthique et culture religieuse'' in classes from primary to secondary school. The idea is that whatever background you are from, you are expected to have a basic understanding of the diversity of religious and cultural trends that inhabit our history and society. Whether you're a Hassidic Jew or an atheist francophone, your child must follow this course and cannot be exempted (at least as far as I know). Are you against this idea? Do you think this is an attack on individual freedom? Perhaps it is. But I don't personally care because I don't view individual freedom as an ideal that should prevail over democratic choices of a collectivity. And I think it's very good idea that all children be exposed to this information. Of course, this raises the question of when majority rule becomes mob rule and it's a very complex issue. But it's clear to me that the idea of individual freedom ought to be balanced out by the idea of collective choices. My individual freedom may be hindered by the law that says I can't go through a red light as I drive on the road. But most of us accept as a collectivity that in many occasions, individual freedom does need to be hindered for the benefit of the collectivity. The devil is in the details of course!
So coming back to language laws, I can't deny that the majority in Quebec is imposing French on many citizens who would probably not bother about it in the first place. But we also impose many other laws that don't have to do with language. All countries have different laws and have a different balance between the legal do's and don'ts and that's what democracy is at the end of the day... majority rule. If you have a better system I'd like to hear about it.