Now you are being dishonest, for years now you have advocated for the various governments to pony up and supply free education in what ever language is wanted.
English signs must be taken down in Gaspé hospitals, language watchdog rules
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
Now you are being dishonest, for years now you have advocated for the various governments to pony up and supply free education in what ever language is wanted.
As per market demand, no more. A voucher programme allowing schools to teach in the language of their choice as long as learners can pass the tests in the official language would expand linguistic equality at no extra cost to the taxpayer because it would be up to the school to make due with a voucher of the same value as those that English schools get.
If it would cost the taxpayer more money, you'd have a point. But since my proposal wouldn't cost the taxpayer one cent more than bow. I don't see your point.
Unless you're saying that only the English should have a monopoly on the language of education, free market be damned?
And when there are less than a full classroom of students wanting to be taught in their special language, what then? Hire a teacher specifically for them any ways? Multiple teachers?
If the school can afford it, yes.
But remember, because the value of the voucher is fixed, if demand is too low, then the school might have no choice but to switch to a more dominant language to respond to market demand.
Unlike the present situation that guarantees a right to French-medium education at all cost, my proposal would not guarantee it as a right, but merely allow it as a freedom. Big difference. Because it would be only a freedom and not a right, it merely means the government would allow it and not prohibit it, would not stand in the way of it hapoening, but in the end the responsibility would still be in the hands of the French-speaking community to make it happen according to what the market will allow within the restraints of the value of their voucher.
Really? The French culture would have died right there on the Plains of Abraham? There was no actual French-Canadian culture at that time, it was still just French.
so, again, we are back to tearing up agreements made during confederation. You really don't seem to be a very trustworthy person.
You call it an agreement, I call it collusion.
The only two parties to your 'agreement' were 5 he British and the French.
Yeah but the British and the French colluded, made a deal, a pact with one another, didn't they?
Well if we take official bilingualism as an example, was there a single indigenous Canadian or Chinese Canadian on the Commission?
There was no agreement, the facts point to an Anglo-French collusion.
I don't know. Was there? When was this "bilingualism" decided? When was this "multiculturalism" decided?
The English and French linguistic provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms trace their roots directly to the Official Languages Act, which in its turn traces its roots directly to the recommendations of Book I of the Report of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, which in its turn was written by a Commission that was precisely equally represented by English and French Canadians to make recommendations to promote an equal partnership between 'the two founding races.'
and what was the reason for that? I am thinking you don't know the whole story behind the B&B commission, either that, or you really don't give a rats a$$ because you are a bigot.
I've read the whole five volumes of that report. The first volume is explicitly ethnicist. Freely available for download in PDF format.
You'll notice that I often use the terms 'two founding races,' 'other ethnic groups,' 'the Indians and the Eskimos, ' etc. Those are direct quotes from the report.
Wonderful. You still haven't answered my questions, which can only lead me to believe you really didn't read the reports or you didn't understand. I think it's a combination of both. That, along with your obvious lack of knowledge and understanding concerning the founding of this country explains a lot about why you are so bigoted.
Just to give you an idea of its ethnic prejudices, just read Book I, General Introduction, Paragraph 21 and Book I, Chapter I, Paragraph 19. Those Are Just Among its More Explicitly Ethnic I St paragraph, But it's implied throughout the book.
Book I even explicitly takes inspiration from the linguistic policies of Apartheid-era South Africa in its Book I, Chapter I.
I bet you did not know that, did you.
Book I even explicitly takes inspiration from the linguistic policies of Apartheid-era South Africa in its Book I, Chapter I.
I bet you did not know that, did you.