From: 4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (John LaRocque)
Newsgroups: can.politics,can.general,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Legalized Discrimination in Quebec
Date: 16 Dec 92 01:18:30 GMT
Organization: University of Western Ont, London

In article <BzBnDI.3qw@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>, beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
> 
> The right way of writting Lynne is Line or Lyne.  A taste of englicization?
> 

Go for the French expression for this one - Anglicization

>>>>(ii) the UN has declared the Quebec legislation unfair and oppressive
>>>>    to minorities in Quebec.
>>>
>>>What did they say when the majority was oppressed?
>>>
>>So you want an 'eye for an eye'. The English oppressed the French. The
>>English realize their mistake and try to make up for the past. The
>>French then decide, now is their chance to make up for it, and oppress
>>the English. Good plan, Denis. Very mature!

I don't think that Quebecers could ever get eye for an eye. Just what
do you think would happen today if they passed a Quebec version of the
Manitoba School act - with NO guarantee of English education. That's
right - and the issue was never about getting revenge anyways. As
for English "making up for the past", I don't think ANY amount of
bilingualism will bring back the French communitees which once sprawled
all over the West, but continue to dissappear as their kids join
the "majority" and lose their culture. 
                
   As for multiculturalism that is an even biggert fraud... English
Canada has always wanted to be a melting pot, but couldn't because of
Quebec. So they invented bilingualism and multiculturalism so that
French minorities could get token services and the English could continue
to find ways to condemn EVERYTHING the Quebec government did to raise the
status of the majority of the population. Praised be Jean Lesage for 
inventing his own pension scheme instead of caving in to Pearson. 
It is better than the federal one anyways, and they know it. If it 
weren't for him, today the federal government would have carte blanche
on any and all NEW national "social programs" that would have overided
section 92 in the name of "the people".  I am GLAD that we don't have
universal day care anyways.....

Denis also responds:
> Before going an eye for an eye, wait the situation was normalized alone,
> without needing a law.  Just wait that instead of using words like
> "oppressive", they use words more accurate to depict the situation.
> Then, it will be time to slow down the law.  Before 1976, a bilingual
> francophone was earning less than a unilingual anglophone.

Even now unilingual anglophones still earn more than unilingual 
francophones (from that Toronto Star piece I posted a month ago)

>  We needed
> a law to get that.  Before depicting the state as oppressive, just check
> what it was before.  And not a damn anglo protested before the law, not
> a damn one.  Now, they pretend to be more civilized.  Oh, what a big step
> they made in civilization in just one split second.  The day Quebecois
> decided to change the direction of who take the decisions, who is
> privileged, then, they begin to talk about the tyranny of majority.
> But, before that, not a word about racism that was common.

I hope one day Quebec won't need any of those laws. They wouln't have
been needed anyways but for the fact that the English and the Americans
ran the economy and the Church made sure that the people were quiet
and discouraged from entering evil "Protestant" industries. Better to 
stay on the farm than go to hell. Is it any wonder that Anglos had complete
and utter control of Quebec? And now people complain because someone had
the BALLS to say "Nous sont Quebecois" and "Maitres chez nous".

Quebec's
francisation laws for the workplace were the BEST means of getting 
Quebec's industries to work in the French language, instead of exclusively
in English, and to start hiring qualified French speaking Quebecers to
fill top spots in firms. Even today, with the "new" franco-business,
a good part of the Quebec economic engine is in the hands of English
Quebecers. This is not alarmism, just the facts. 30 years of reform 
have not solved all the anomalies in Quebec. And the goal of true
Maitre chez nous is not complete.

> Eye for eye?  My ass.  

oiiiiiiiy , mon oiel!

>>>Since the majority of anglophones and allophones are in Montreal,
>>>this was leading to the main town being in one language and all the
>>>other parts of country in another.
>>                ^^^^^^^
> 
> So, you don't like that meaning of country?  Maybe a gallicism from me.
> Pays is either a region or an independent state.  I apologize if you
> can't accept other than limited meaning for words.  A province is
> a colony of a central foreign state.  So, Quebec is a province?  OK,
> but in this case, like the first thing a prisoner has to do is to get free,
> then the first thing a province has to do is to liberate from the foreigners.
> Or to change the term to something more accurate.

Don't be sheepish about it. In every way Quebec is a NATION. It is not
sovereign (not yet!) but Quebec's nationhood should never be in doubt.
A nation with historical roots deeper than many other North American
communites. A nation with a common culture, a common language and a
common history. A nation where the attitudes towards life and living
are not as oppressive and closed minded as other Canadian provinces.
(check out last years Actualite (jan 1992). In that survey, ENGLISH
quebecers also tended to have more liberal attitudes as their cousins
in, for example, Ontario).

Quebec is not a country, not yet. That is why they say "on veut un
pays". Until the Quebec nation is sovereign, it will never be a country.
And that is a fact.

> What about this one?  In a report about NB, a few years ago, they shown
> a panel in English only for a store in a francophone communauty.
> The head office of the company has decided not to advertise in French,
> even in a store was deserving a 100% French-speaking town.  How would
> you deal with this one?  Boycotting the store?  Boycott is a sign of
> fight and war.  Writting letters?  Having a law?  What would YOU do????

Complacency is the death of all communities. A good way to protest is to
ask for everything in FRENCH ONLY. That should confuse the businessman. If
he wants business, he will have to cater to his customers. And that means
accomodating the French. Even in Montreal, they have shopkeepers who are
completely fluent in French and ready to serve you. Is that too much
to ask.

> -- 
>   \_\    Denis Beauregard  *  internet:beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
>  /   \   Ge'ne'alogiste des familles : Beauregard/Jarret/Jarest/Vincent
> J   __>  Un Que'bec renouvele' dans une Ame'rique renove'e
> \_.-===  Ope'rateur de "Racines du Que'bec" (514) 922-9636 BBS/Genealogie
-- 

John P. LaRocque
vader@uwo.ca
University of Western Ontario
London, Ontario


"Urk..urk..."
"Apology accepted, Captain Needa", Darth Vader
Newsgroups: can.politics