HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: galbrth@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Canada, 2 nations.
Date: 10 Apr 92 23:06:47 GMT
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

rwood@superior.carleton.ca (Richard Wood) writes

schamber@watserv1.waterloo.edu (CHAMBERLAND S - BIOLOGY) writes:
> >   For us, there is no such thing as "the nation of Canada". there is 2
> >   nations, and as long as TROCians won't recognize this, sorry, but
> >   there will be troubles...
> 
>   My opinion exactly.  There are two nations, but TROCers are determined to
> press ahead with the pretence that there is only one Canada, requiring that all
> 10 components must be equal.  The end of this road will probably be something
> like a Commonwealth of Independent Provinces.
>   Quebec is not the same and should, I think, stand apart from the other 9 with
> some form of independence (with a TROC equally independent of Quebec).
>   There will never be a united Canada.  What I want is a united TROC.

Oh pleeeeease.
Guess you've never travelled east of Ontario, have you?
or North of Ottawa?

This idea that TROC is a well defined `english Canada' is utter BS.
It's posts like this that make my stomach turn.
(Ok.  So I'm upset today.  I admit it.)
 _____________________________________________________________________________
 Peter Galbraith       [Phone: (902) 494-7007] |  GALBRTH@AC.DAL.CA (InterNet)
 Dept. of Oceanography,  Dalhousie University  |  GALBRTH@DALAC     (BitNet)
 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, B3H 4J1         |  rhogee@dalcs      (UUCP)
Xref: sparky can.politics:3805 can.francais:169
From: michele@catnix.UUCP (Michele A. Simond)
Newsgroups: can.politics,can.francais
Subject: Incroyable. (Re: Lionel Groulx...)
Date: 15 Apr 92 05:58:47 GMT
	    <3454@disuns2.epfl.ch>
Organization: Rhinoceros, chargez!

riese@litsuns1.epfl.ch (Marc Riese) demande:
>
>Alors le pays voulu par Monsieur Beauregard sera forme' naturellement
>sur la race. Est-ce qu'il y a d'autres sur le reseau qui sont d'accord 
>avec ce genre d'idee? 

Meler race et nation est, a mon avis, faux et extremement dangereux.
L'histoire nous a souvent montre a quels exces la notion de race --
et celle non moins erronee de loi du sang -- pouvait mener. Et il
est inutile de remonter a la derniere grande guerre pour nous en
convaincre.  Ce qui se passe en France, en Yougoslavie et ailleurs
dans le monde devrait nous suffire et devrait, surtout, nous
servir d'exemple a ne pas suivre.

A partir du moment ou l'on parle de "race quebecoise", quand
bien meme on essaierait de la deguiser sous les termes
"appartenance a un meme groupe, une meme famille", on
laisse la porte ouverte a la demagogie, au racisme, a
l'exclusion.  Meme moi, qui vis ici depuis 32 ans, j'en
suis exclue (je suis nee en Suisse, de parents suisses,
nes eux-memes de parents de souches et d'origines diverses).

Il y a dans cette idee de race quebecoise des relents de
bigoterie catholique (qui ne se souvient des discours sur
le bon peuple francais catholique du Quebec?), bigoterie
qui a exclu jusqu'au milieu de la Revolution Tranquille
tout ce qui n'etait pas catholique et qui parlait francais
avec un drole d'accent. Parler de race quebecoise, c'est
se condamner a "ghettoiser" tous ceux dont l'arbre genealogique
ne remonte pas a l'arrivee des premiers colons francais en
terre quebecoise; c'est encore affirmer a ceux qui viennent
ici qu'ils ne seront jamais vraiment quebecois (meme apres
plusieurs generations); c'est se condamner a l'obscurantisme,
continuer de se boucher les yeux et les oreilles.

Un Quebec fonde sur la pretention d'une race, je n'en veux
pas pour tout l'or du monde.  Et meme si je ne suis pas
tres versee en biologie et en genetique, je crois me
souvenir qu'il n'y a que trois grandes races humaines,
determinees par la couleur de la peau, races elles-memes
divisees en plusieurs sous-groupes.  Et meme cette notion-la
est contestee par certains geneticiens (voir a ce sujet un
document publie l'ete dernier dans *L'Evenement du Jeudi*,
un hebdomadaire francais).

Et s'il fallait que cette notion de race quebecoise en vienne
a prendre le pas sur le bon sens, et bien ce serait le signal
du depart pour moi.  C'est deja assez diffile comme ca
d'enseigner a ses enfants que quelle que soit la couleur de
la peau ou la forme des yeux, nous sommes d'abord et avant
tout des humains partageant une parcelle de la planete terre.
S'il faut encore ajouter une autre race qui n'existe pas, n'a
jamais existe et n'existera jamais, alors zut...


--
Michele Simond ...... Traductrice ......  B.P.: michele@catnix.UUCP
(514) 671-8820				   OU :	michele%catnix@cam.org
From: schamber@watserv1.waterloo.edu (CHAMBERLAND S - BIOLOGY)
Subject: Re: Alberta Conservatives & Bilingualism
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 19:38:51 GMT

In article <1992Apr16.190050.2453@watdragon.waterloo.edu> jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll) writes:
>In article <1992Apr16.182025.7598@watserv1.waterloo.edu> schamber@watserv1.waterloo.edu (CHAMBERLAND S - BIOLOGY) writes:
>>>
>
>	Context deleted
>
>>			 (sorry for the native indians, but
>>learning cree won't help anybody to communicate here) 
>
>	Unless, of course, you're trying to talk to Cree...
>
>							James Nicoll
Yes, of course... I meant, communicate with the majority in Quebec or
the one in "TROC"... 

But I would like to see what the Cree language looks like.
I already have a background knowledge of latin languages, saxon
languages and slavic languages. It would be very interesting to
see how their language is contructed.
Any Cree listening??


-- 
Sylvain Chamberland     |   "Trust is earned, not given away!"
University of Waterloo  |          - Worf, Star Trek The Next Generation
Waterloo, Ontario.      |
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: On Exaggeration
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:31:12 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article (Robin Collins) writes:
>Well we all have our flaws. But this is the first time I have
>heard a so-called Quebec nationalist distance himself from
>the legacy of Papineau. Pity.

No, I'm just writting what I read a few days ago about Papineau being
"depasse par les evenements" and not being able to handle la Revolte
des Patriotes. Nobody's perfect.

>No I was pointing out that unlike Groulx, Papineau was very 
>internationalist
>in scope, not narrow, and in fact he took the hand of that anglo,
>Mackenzie in Upper Canada. Something that Groulx would never have done.

I agree 110%. I never said that groulx was comparable to Papineau. In
fact, I never really cared about Groulx since I am not a fan of
Tarte-aux-bleuets nationalism.

-- 
Francois Audet
Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754
Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
From: riese@litsuns1.epfl.ch (Marc Riese)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: On Exaggeration
Date: 31 Mar 92 08:43:34 GMT
            <1992Mar30.202250.4788@bmerh2.bnr.ca>

Collins, Robin
Netto, John
Rouleau, Pierre
and whoever...


Gentlemen,

Will you all kindly attempt to express yourselves in a mature, civilised way,
avoid argumentum ad hominem, and thereby give the group readers a break.

Comments welcome but flames to /dev/null.

Marc Riese
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
Lausanne, Switzerland
From: warkent@ltisun11.epfl.ch (Ken Warkentyne)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: definition wanted: Freedom of Expression
Date: 2 Apr 92 08:53:29 GMT
	<1992Apr01.153317.5570@bmerh2.bnr.ca>
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne---Laboratoire de
	Teleinformatique

Can someone please provide a clear, precise definition of "freedom
of expression"?  In following the discussions in can.politics,
it seems that it has something to do with putting up signs.  But
can someone then explain why we seem to accept the many other limits
to "freedom of expression" that pervade Canadian society?

The banning of certain languages on signs is unjust.  The people who
suffer from such a ban have been injured, and may certainly feel insulted.
However, to go from there and claim that such a restriction contravenes
the fundamental rights of Man is to cross from the uncertain world of
human frailty to the black and white dreamland of the self-righteous and
naive.

We who remain deprived of such assurance struggle to understand why
injustice X is so much more worthy of outrage than injustice Y when
both injustices take place so close to each other.  In the context of
the actual debate, why is the plight of the anglophone community of
Quebec so much more worthy of outrage than the plight of the francophone
communities of Alberta, in particular, and Western Canada in general?

Take a few years and think about it.
--
Ken Warkentyne - warkent@ltisun.epfl.ch
                 Laboratoire de Teleinformatique, EPFL, Suisse.
From: sbo@vlsi.polymtl.ca (Stephane Boucher)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Denis Beauregard's hero?
Date: 9 Apr 92 00:07:50 GMT
	<29E2F748.2775@telly.on.ca>
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal, Canada

In article <29E2F748.2775@telly.on.ca> evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch) writes:

   I can't believe this. By this one yardstick (which is convenient
   considering it requires absolutely no research), you brand the NHL as
   anti-French.

   If you can demonstrate that any of the above, which would be real
   instances of discrimination, still happen, I might believe your point.
   But it amazes me that you are so captive to the symbolic (QC as an
   address, Division names of the NHL) rather than the substantive.

Well, since you seem to be from nearby Toronto, why don't you calculate the
average number of years francophone players stay with the Leafs versus the
average for anglophone players.

I don't have those numbers, although I would be interested in seeing those
numbers. Maybe they will show something, maybe they won't.

--
  ,                          ,                           ,
Stephane Boucher, ing. jr. | Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
sbo@vlsi.polymtl.ca        | 
sbo@info.polymtl.ca        | (514)340-5950
From: schamber@watserv1.waterloo.edu (CHAMBERLAND S - BIOLOGY)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Name-calling again.  What Quebecois want instead.
Date: 15 Apr 92 06:35:58 GMT
Organization: University of Waterloo

In article <1992Apr14.160905.5048@ac.dal.ca> galbrth@ac.dal.ca writes:
>About Stephane's name-calling of Quebecois, stereotyping rednecks we have yet
>to hear from here, Sylvain said:
>
>|Well, they may be a minority, but it's them we hear the most in Quebec.
>|
>|I still remember seeing on TV an old ontarian general who said that
>|TROC should send the army in Quebec...
>|Or APEC dinosaurs...
>|
>|Only YOU know that's a minority. French Quebeckers don't. Media
>|show them the contrary.
>
>No, YOU know it too.  Because you haven't seen it in this net, and if you've
>lived it in Ontario you're keeping quiet about it.  I haven't lived it here
>in 5.5 years.

I've been in Ontario for 3 months now. I spend most of my time in
my lab; I went to see a movie once, I went to MacDo (because did not
have time to make dinner nor to eat :) ) 4 or 5 times.
So I did not see much apart from my lab...

So no, I'm not supposed to know it.  And to what extent can we say that
this net is typical of people's opinions?

But it's part of why I came here: to find out.

>|Maybe "la majorite silencieuse" (silent majority?) should do something
>|before it's too late...
>|
>|(I'm not talking of silly "love letters")
>
>Well, all Denis wants is for Canada to `Qc'.  

Give me a break!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!       :)

> _____________________________________________________________________________
> Peter Galbraith       [Phone: (902) 494-7007] |  GALBRTH@AC.DAL.CA (InterNet)
> Dept. of Oceanography,  Dalhousie University  |  GALBRTH@DALAC     (BitNet)
> Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, B3H 4J1         |  rhogee@dalcs      (UUCP)

Sylvain Chamberland
Dept. of Biology
University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Ontario.
From: robinc@bnr.ca (Robin Collins)
Subject: Re: English: Language of vice ?
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 92 18:17:25 GMT

Gerald, 
on reading the MacPherson piece, it reminded me of one
amusing story in Richler's book. His
buddies gathered around and proposed a new amendment to
Bill 178 to complement the twice-as-big provision for
business signs, where french signs either have to be
twice as big or twice as numerous. 

I was wondering whether the tv show the columnist mentioned
that portrayed the bad guys as anglos would also require
(as Richler suggested) the imposition of the twice as much
rule.

When the francophones spoke, they would be obliged to
speak twice as loudly.
It seems to me that that kind of set-up would help.
Not only would the bad guys be all anglos, but they
would be much quieter too.
So doubly suspicious.

Frank.
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Separation?
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:40:59 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article (Robin Collins) writes:
>In article <1992Apr7.082314.23749@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr6.152103.11849@pandora.matrox.com> thood@pluton.matrox.com (Thomas Hood) writes:
>>>olin@reg.triumf.ca (ART OLIN, TRIUMF INET 128.189.128.2) writes:
>>>
>>>>Now suppose Quebec separated and gave all its residnt Canadians
>>>>Quebec citizenship. On what possible grounds could their Canadian
>>>>citizenship be revoked?
>>>
>>>Disloyalty to the Crown.
>
>Sorry, but loyalty to the crown does not determine MY citizenship.
>I denounce the crown at every opportunity.
>I refuse to stand for the queen's anthem.
>I advocate abolition of the monarchy. 
>
>Does that make me a non-Canadian, even though I was born here,
>and she doesn't even live here?

This is getting better and better!

Do you realise that, in our archaic system, if you decide to join the
army, you'll have to "preter serment a la Reine" (how do you say this,
"swore allegeance to the Queen")? My father (a hard-core federalist
then) had to this, and though it was really insulting.

If you go to court, I'll be "the Queen vs Robin Collins"! Fun, isn't?

You CANADIAN passport makes reference to the Queen. If I remember
correctly, it is given to you by the gvt of Canada on behalf of the Queen.

The Queen of England being the haed of Canada is the most politically
incorrect thing in Canada.  :-)

I suggest we change for the Pope.   3 x :-)

Ciao!
-- 
Francois Audet
Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754
Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
From: robinc@bnr.ca (Robin Collins)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: On Exaggeration
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:50:51 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada

In article <11389@std-2> audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet) writes:
>In article (Evan Leibovitch) writes:
>>I indeed wish Le Devoir would sue Richler for libel (as Bissonette
>>claimed she would do), so that the truth or falsehood of his allegations
>>about the paper, and Groulx, can be made conclusively and very publicly.
>>(Perhaps it is in the best interests of Groulx's fans for this *not* to
>>happen, so an illusion may be kept alive). Those who ridicule the
>>allegations simply because they don't like the tone, are no better than
>>the critiques themselves.
>
>I found an interesting letter in the newspaper on the allege
>antisemitism in Quebec.
>
>It says that in 1832, the jews in Canada were not allowed to have
>cimetaries or synagogues. In 1832, the deputies of the Patriote party
>(under Louis-Joseph Papineau) voted the first Charter of Rights, that
>got these rights (synagogues & cimetaries) for the jews.


Francois, 
NOW you're talking. Papineau is one of my heroes too.
Surely you don't associate the present breed of nationalists 
(so-called) with the calibre of Papineau?!
I don't think you would find him legislating sign laws or
anti-semitic decrees. 
The chauvinists presently who have the microphone are an insult
to legacy of Papineau and Mackenzie et al.


Frank.
From: schamber@watserv1.waterloo.edu (CHAMBERLAND S - BIOLOGY)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Separation?
Date: 10 Apr 92 01:00:38 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: University of Waterloo

>"My Canada includes Quebec."  <-- If you believe it, say it!

About this campaign of the trucker, in French, it says "Mon Canada comprend 
le Que'bec". Direct translation in English: could be "My Canada includes
Quebec"  OR "My Canada understands Quebec".
The true exact translation should be "Mon Canada INCLUT le Que'bec".

Why the words are different in French?
Many people think exactly that Canada DOES NOT understand Quebec.
Coincidence???

Care to comment???

Sylvain Chamberland
Dept. of Biology
University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Ontario
From: robert@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Robert Meunier)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Stephane et les noms...
Date: 8 Apr 92 15:37:23 GMT
Reply-To: robert@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
Distribution: can
Organization: Hydro-Quebec (IREQ)


	Quelqu'un m'a dit dernierement qu'une coutume anglaise
etait d'ajouter la premiere lettre du nom de famille de la
mere au prenom de l'enfant. Donc dans

	Gerald P Heckman

P serait la premiere lettre du nom de famille de la mere.

Est-ce vrai?
From: clamen@CS.CMU.EDU (Stewart Clamen)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Alberta and an EEE Senate (was: Alberta Conservatives & Bilingualism)
Date: 9 Apr 92 00:37:15 GMT
	<1992Apr7.204533.25148@mdivax1.uucp>
	<1992Apr7.233308.18391@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>
Reply-To: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: can
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University

In article <1992Apr7.233308.18391@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:

   One would expect BC, Ontario, and Quebec to be against an equal
   Senate since they would all lose representation...Alberta neither
   gains nor loses in an equal Senate, the small provinces gain.  When
   Alberta is proposing the third E, equal, it is proposing something
   from which it gains nothing for itself...something which goes
   almost totally unrecognized in the constitutional
   debate...something which can hardly be said of Ontario and Quebec.

While Alberta would not gain any direct power compared to the Atlantic
provinces, they would gain considerable power with respect to the
central provinces.  It is silly to claim that an equal and effective
senate does not benefit Alberta.

--
Stewart M. Clamen			Internet:    clamen@cs.cmu.edu
School of Computer Science		UUCP: 	     uunet!"clamen@cs.cmu.edu"
Carnegie Mellon University		Phone: 	     +1 412 268 2145
5000 Forbes Avenue			Fax:	     +1 412 268 5739
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890, USA
From: warkent@ltisun11.epfl.ch (Ken Warkentyne)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Cost of Bilingual Packaging
Date: 10 Apr 92 12:42:08 GMT
	<1992Mar31.145755.27184@bnr.ca> <1992Apr9.162551.16590@bcrka451.bnr.ca>
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne---Laboratoire de
	Teleinformatique
In-reply-to: hemi@bcrkd12.bnr.ca's message of 9 Apr 92 16:25:51 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.162551.16590@bcrka451.bnr.ca> hemi@bcrkd12.bnr.ca (Hemi Thaker) wrote:
> 	Actually, yes, it does cost a fair bit more.  First of, there are
> about 250 Million people in Canada/US.  Packaging for Canada is different
> than packaging for the states, because our packaging is required by law
> to be in both French and English.  Now, if that box was printed only in
> English (which just happens to be what most of the stuff in the states is
> printed in), then we don't need separate, smaller run designs for boxes
> here.

Actually, labels would not only have to be in English but use U.S. measures
and conform to U.S. regulations on content information.  So yes, it
would be much cheaper to let the U.S. decide how we measure things,
what we should know about products, and what claims can be made (juice
vs "fruit drink", light vs. non-light, etc).  Heck, why not go all
the way and do away with all Canadian regulations and government services.
After all, it would be much cheaper just to borrow or rent U.S. ones.
--
Ken Warkentyne - warkent@ltisun.epfl.ch
                 Laboratoire de Teleinformatique, EPFL, Suisse.
From: beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Poids demographique
Date: 10 Apr 92 14:14:16 GMT
Organization: Hydro-Quebec

Une chose dont on n'a pas parle encore : le taux eleve de natalite
des Quebecois jusqu'a il y a une vingtaine d'annees.

Prenez le Quebec de 1763, au moment ou la conquete devient chose
officielle, et supposer un instant que le taux de natalite
devient la moitie de ce qu'il etait reellement.  Les familles de
15 ou 20 etaient nombreuses a l'epoque.

Quelque chose comme 30000 ou 60000 personnes en 1763 ont 16 
millions de descendants en 1980.  Enlevons l'effet des mariages
"mixtes" recents (mixte = avec ceux qui ne s'associent pas avec
ce qu'on appelle traditionnellement les Canadiens-francais) et
disons qu'il y a 10 millions de descendants.  EN toute proportion,
des pays comme la France, l'Allemagne ou le Royaume-Uni, avec
une population d'envirion 50 millions auraient eu 150000 habitants
autour de 1760!  

En ramenant le taux de natalite du Quebec a un taux plus normal
auquel le conquerant de 1759 s'attendait, qu'arriverait-il au
a la population totale?

Supposons des generations de 30 ans.  De 1760 a 1910, cela donne
5 generations.  EN diminuant de moitie le taux de natalite,
nous serions 2^5 = 32 fois moins nombreux.  Ajoutons un facteur
2 pour 1910-1992 (puisque le taux commence a faiblir au debut
du siecle, le facteur s'appliquant sur 82 au lieu de 30 ans).
10 millions divises par 64, cela donne combien?

156250!

Si nous avions eu un taux de natalite normal, l'assimilitation
se serait faite depuis longtemps!

Au moment ou le nombre d'immigrants est de l'ordre de grandeur de
notre population en 1760, n'est-il pas normal de vouloir se proteger
tant soit peu?


-- 
    Denis Beauregard       _ _ _ _  Collecting Beauregard/Jarret/Jarest/Vincent
beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca | * | * | Promoting use of QC as Quebec Postal Code
  Andre Jarret, sieur de  |===|===| Mes opinions?  Oui, oui, les miennes!
   Beauregard 1642-1992   |_*_|_*_| My opinions?  Yes, yes, mine!