Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well for that you'd really need Quebec to become an independent country and a mightily authoritarian or fascist one at that. You'd have to set up checkpoints and questioners to thoroughly question all immigrants to make sure they can speak conversational French, you'd have to hire a special governmental bureau to routinely inspect all schools to make sure students are taught proper French and that teachers are indeed speaking French, and you'd have to limit or even prohibit certain American goods that promote English speaking culture such as CDs into Quebec. You say the English language to Quebec and especially Montreal is like a narcotic, too addictive and corrupting to the Allophones and youth of Montreal and yet causes harm to society, well so be it. Fascism does not come for free though. Everyone would have to routinely work hard to preserve the system over their own individual rights and the country would have to be entirely self-sufficient. You said Quebecois don't like to work longer hours because they believe in the right for everyone to enjoy life. Well don't be surprised if that can no longer work and everyone has to work two shifts just to make ends meet. How would the fun loving Montrealers feel about that? Not to mention I'm sure many of your fellow Quebecois would not appreciate losing the privilege of driving over to Ontario or New Brunswick without a passport so you will have inconvenienced them too.
Requiring immigrants to know French before coming to Quebec is authoritarian and fascist?
Requiring immigrants to know French before coming to Quebec is authoritarian and fascist?
You misunderstood me. I said that in order to ensure that all immigrants know the national language, you'd have to have some sort of system that does not allow them a choice of primary language and that means you need a fascist state where everyone holds the same belief and customs. One of the first ingredients for a wholly unified state is that everyone including newcomers is fluent in the national language. Beyond that, it is likely expected that everyone knows the national song, is well versed in national history, and pretty much has to agree with almost everything the nation has to say. I know, both the U.S. and the rest of Canada are very bad examples of such strong unity because both never were such and I sincerely hope not to be.
I studied comparative governments in college. I read all about the respective governments of France, Germany, Italy, etc. National identity means very much to those countries and is much stronger than anything here in North America. The president of France for instance has much more power than the president of the U.S. or the Canadian prime minister, in fact I remember my instructor likening the French president to being an elected dictator. You can see the influence in everyday life. In countries like France, the government can enact laws prohibiting certain dress in public for the purpose of national cultural unity and the whole of the public must obey. In order to live in France and be appreciated in society you must act like a Frenchman, speak like a Frenchman, dress like a Frenchman, and think like a Frenchman or else be ostracized. The same goes for many European and Asian countries, not just France. Russia and the Ukraine are doing the same thing. I needn't tell you about China because China goes even further than any country in Europe in achieving national cultural unity. In many parts of the U.S. and Canada, even in Greater Montreal, you'd be labeled an intolerant bigot, a hater of cultural diversity, and a nationalistic chauvinist. I'm not saying that it's bad to live in those countries, I mean a great many of them have great standards of living, but it's a different way of thinking altogether in the Old World. The U.S. and Canada are worlds apart from Europe, Asia and Africa. One of the major reasons people left the Old World and emigrated to the New World is to escape from that intolerance. Why recreate an Old World society in North America? Is it worth it?
I don't entirely disagree with QuebecOpec's stance on French language and culture in Greater Montreal. I just think there are more democratic ways to preserve it and within the realm of Canada. He himself said that the British in Canada once tried to apply the same tactics in eradicating French culture so that everyone spoke like the British, acted like the British, thought like the British, and considered themselves loyal British subjects regardless of whether they were a White, Smith, Maguire, or Provencher. In belief, the next step probably would have been to require knowing English before arriving in Canada. And yet he wants to take those same repressive tactics but this time apply it to non-French speakers? Canada is independent now and is much freer now than it has been in the past. You can proudly claim you are an English Canadian, an Irish Canadian, a French Canadian, an Indian Canadian, or a Chinese Canadian, live freely in your culture, and speak the language you wish to speak. Seeking revenge for past wrongs is not the right way of going about it.
As long as Quebec remains a province of Canada it has to abide by certain rules and regulations of the mother country or there will be no more transfer payments for you, so if Montreal is Anglicizing more than you would like theres not much you can do about it other than play stupid linguistic games with the language police and bill101. Separation is the key,why is it most francophones arent in favor of this course of action?
I just think there are more democratic ways to preserve it and within the realm of Canada. He himself said that the British in Canada once tried to apply the same tactics in eradicating French culture so that everyone spoke like the British, acted like the British, thought like the British, and considered themselves loyal British subjects regardless of whether they were a White, Smith, Maguire, or Provencher. In belief, the next step probably would have been to require knowing English before arriving in Canada. And yet he wants to take those same repressive tactics but this time apply it to non-French speakers? Canada is independent now and is much freer now than it has been in the past. You can proudly claim you are an English Canadian, an Irish Canadian, a French Canadian, an Indian Canadian, or a Chinese Canadian, live freely in your culture, and speak the language you wish to speak. Seeking revenge for past wrongs is not the right way of going about it.
Look, if you're immigrating to a country, you should have to adapt yourself to that country. If you left a certain country, you can't expect that Canada will now change itself because it is comfortable for you. Sorry. It's like having your cake and eating it too. After all, the immigrant is the newcomer. Why should the country adapt to her? Immigrants should be respected and treated equally, but they can't ask for special treatment. Immigrants left their country, they are not in a position to make be making unreasonable demands. Like this court case filed on behalf of foreigners says the BC real estate tax is "discriminatory to foreigners":
This would be laughed out of court in most countries.
In German, Japan, Sweden, or Argentina, do you think they are going to pay public money so the immigrants can learn English to the detriment of the national language? The priority is the national language as it should be. Quebec "should be" like that, as it really is an separate nation, just one currently trapped in a confederation.
Sounds pretty much like language crisis (if you're interesting in things like preserving languages)
From the article:
“Essentially, we are told two things,” Vaillancourt says in an interview. “There are fewer Quebecers with French as a mother tongue, and at the same time Montreal is becoming more English. That is true, but it is not the whole story. There are other things going on.”
Look, if you're immigrating to a country, you should have to adapt yourself to that country. If you left a certain country, you can't expect that Canada will now change itself because it is comfortable for you. Sorry. It's like having your cake and eating it too. After all, the immigrant is the newcomer. Why should the country adapt to her? Immigrants should be respected and treated equally, but they can't ask for special treatment. Immigrants left their country, they are not in a position to make be making unreasonable demands. Like this court case filed on behalf of foreigners says the BC real estate tax is "discriminatory to foreigners":
This would be laughed out of court in most countries.
In German, Japan, Sweden, or Argentina, do you think they are going to pay public money so the immigrants can learn English to the detriment of the national language? The priority is the national language as it should be. Quebec "should be" like that, as it really is an separate nation, just one currently trapped in a confederation.
As I said in my previous post, you cannot apply the same formula used in other countries to the U.S. and Canada because those countries do not thrive off of immigration the same way the U.S. and Canada do. You can read up on statistics that show most immigrants to these two countries actually contribute a lot of positive things to their respective economies or put it another way, the U.S. and Canada have traditionally been sponges for absorbing immigrants. No doubt a lot of people in the U.S. and Canada right now do not want to continue this paradigm. Such people claim that foreign language speaking immigrants are a drain on social services, that they contribute little to society, and worse are a threat to mainstream American and Canadian culture (if there ever was such a thing).
I on the other hand cannot criticize Canada for its tolerance of immigrants and foreign cultures. Sometimes I think that Canada is even more tolerant of foreign cultures than the U.S. which really tries hard to integrate and assimilate foreigners (I'm not saying Canads isn't trying hard either but it still seems more tolerant). Still, I remember only 16 years ago, I was on a flight back into the U.S. and there were two other individuals holding American passports sitting next to me, a husband and wife. Neither could speak English well. When the flight attendant asked what kind of juice they wanted, they just replied "juice". When we had to fill out our port of entry documents which were only in English (might have had Spanish too - I don't quite remember), I had to help them out extensively because they couldn't read and understand it well enough. Does Canada have the same situation? If so, then such is the beauty of being in North America.
As I said in my previous post, you cannot apply the same formula used in other countries to the U.S. and Canada because those countries do not thrive off of immigration the same way the U.S. and Canada do. You can read up on statistics that show most immigrants to these two countries actually contribute a lot of positive things to their respective economies or put it another way, the U.S. and Canada have traditionally been sponges for absorbing immigrants.
Agreed, immigrants have made large contributions to the U.S. and Canada. But I disagree with your larger point. Each nation is different, but at the base, the structure of a nation works no matter the specific history. People's psychology is the same, and so the basic social and psychological principles apply wherever they are. A healthy nation needs trust and shared customs, language and history. It takes time to build.
You can't just airdrop millions of people into a country, not integrate them, and then expect no consequences on the society. That is what has happened in the US and parts of Europe for decades. It doesn't justify xenophobia, but the underlying frustrations shouldn't be dismissed with the wave of a hand. The result? Brexit, Trump, Austria, Italy, Poland, Hungary, almost France, etc.
Also, it's a bit myopic to think U.S. and Canada are special exceptions. All of South America and Australia were settled exactly like North America. And even "Old World" countries were at one time colonies. Much of Western Europe was colonized by the Romans. The whole of North Africa was colonized by Arabs. Large parts of Russia were settled as recently as the 19th century. China is currently colonizing Tibet and other regions. It's an ongoing process.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Peasant
No doubt a lot of people in the U.S. and Canada right now do not want to continue this paradigm. Such people claim that foreign language speaking immigrants are a drain on social services, that they contribute little to society, and worse are a threat to mainstream American and Canadian culture (if there ever was such a thing).
Yes, there is such a thing as US and Canadian culture. I know its fashionable in certain circles to denigrate the European roots of US/Canada, but Northern/Western Europe is the foundation of the entire society and government of those countries. It happens to be an extremely successful model and has attracted people from all over the world. But it's deceptive to try to erase those roots for political purposes (i.e. promoting further large-scale immigration). Why do so many people want to come to the West in the first place? Doesn't seem like a lot of people want to immigrate to China, Saudia Arabia or Russia. What is the source of that attractiveness of North America, if there is no American/Canadian culture?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Peasant
Still, I remember only 16 years ago, I was on a flight back into the U.S. and there were two other individuals holding American passports sitting next to me, a husband and wife. Neither could speak English well...
That is the result of a failed immigration policy. Making demands of immigrants is good for them and for the society they are coming into. The U.S. government failed to properly integrate those people into American society. Of course they should have been forced to learn English before becoming citizens, for exactly the situation you describe. Its crazy they weren't able to.
Sounds pretty much like language crisis (if you're interesting in things like preserving languages)
From the article:
“Essentially, we are told two things,” Vaillancourt says in an interview. “There are fewer Quebecers with French as a mother tongue, and at the same time Montreal is becoming more English. That is true, but it is not the whole story. There are other things going on.”
I actually thought that was a bit of an odd statement when I read the article... in light of everything else Prof. Vaillancourt said. It stuck out to me as well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
