HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pierre@chaos.phys.ualberta.ca (Pierre Rouleau)
Subject: Re: Quebec law : : S.A. law re school access
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 10:54:39 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.184408.28431@meadow.uucp> marc@meadow.uucp
(Marc Riehm) writes:
> I submit that there is _nothing_ in any region of Canada which
> even remotely approaches the conditions of Apartheid or the
> Nazis' excesses.  Law 101 included.
> 
> People should think very carefully before making such
> comparisons, because they serve to trivialize the
> horrors of the concentration camps and the
> killings and institutionalized injustice in South Africa.

AAAhhhhhh! How good it felt to read this. Now I know, after
several months of making a strong appeal in a post entitled
"On exaggeration" which ran along your lines, that I am not
alone...

With much appreciation and friendhip,

Pierre
 
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: CZ94 <CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA>
Subject: Re: History of North America Re: REpublicanisn vs. Monarchists (
Organization: McGill University
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 20:46:56 GMT

In article <12721@grayt> grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray) writes:
>
>Colonial self-government was nothing. You still do not understand
>the concept of responsible government. Canadians had colonial
>self-government since the act of 1791. What Canadian politicians
>wanted and achieved (over British objections) was *responsible
>government*. This was a government responsible to the Canadian'
>electorate and which would act in Canada interest alone.

As I've already said in a previous posting, I think you under-
estimate the importance of internal British politics in the granting
of responsible government.  Some British politicians were opposed to
responsible government in the colonies, but others were in favor.
It was a change of government in Britain in the 1840s which paved the
way for responsible government.  (This is not to deny the important
role played by Canadian reformers such as Lafontaine and Baldwin in
this question).
>
>The enormous economic investment which occurred in the
>Canadian west came from the Canadian economy. The
>building of the Pacific railway almost bankrupted and
>destroyed Canada.   It was a Canadian achievement in
>which the British played NO PART.

I don't have the figures handy, but I believe there was major
British participation in the financing of the CPR, through stock
and bond purchases (by individual investors, not the government).
>
>Canadian soldiers did not fight in any British colonial war.
>This was a major point of contention in Canada. Volunteers
>were allowed to participate but there was no official
>Canadian participation in any British colonial war.

Do you not consider the Boer War to be a British colonial war?
>
>|foreign affairs exclusively until just after the turn of the century.
>
>This is just not so. Canadians won the right to represent themsleves
>internationally at the time of Confederation. There was an
>embassy in Washington and even London. Canadians did not see
>themselves as the arms of any empire.
>
Canada had no embassies in foreign capitals until after World War I.
There was a Canadian High Commission in London in the 19th century.
However, there was no corresponding British High Commission in Ottawa
at that time, because the Governor-General was considered to have the
dual role of representative of the sovereign and representative of the
British government.  Governors-General sent regular reports on their
actions to the Colonial Secretary in London.

Canadians played some part in treaty negtiations with the USA before
WW I, but it was as part of a British diplomatic delegation.

Tom Box
CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA

Xref: sparky can.politics:6374 can.general:4248
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.politics,can.general
Subject: Let's drop S.A. rhetoric!
Date: 2 Sep 92 13:33:43 GMT
Distribution: mtl
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 1837

From article <1992Sep1.105439.22995@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>, by pierre@chaos.phys.ualberta.ca (Pierre Rouleau):
> In article <1992Aug31.184408.28431@meadow.uucp> marc@meadow.uucp
> (Marc Riehm) writes:
>> I submit that there is _nothing_ in any region of Canada which
>> even remotely approaches the conditions of Apartheid or the
>> Nazis' excesses.  Law 101 included.

Agreed! (ch. viii of Law 101 excepted!)

>> 
>> People should think very carefully before making such
>> comparisons, because they serve to trivialize the
>> horrors of the concentration camps and the
>> killings and institutionalized injustice in South Africa.
> 
> AAAhhhhhh! How good it felt to read this. Now I know, after
> several months of making a strong appeal in a post entitled
> "On exaggeration" which ran along your lines, that I am not
> alone...

Agreed!


Can we all drop the S.A. and Nazi references?

I didn't raise either topic in the first place and it does not matter
who did.

I jumped on the S.A. reference as an opportunity to provoke reaction.
It was, as Thomas pointed out, a cheap tactic.

Now it has turned into accusations and insults.

So let's, everybody, drop it: OK?

> 
> With much appreciation and friendhip,
> 

 Ditto.


-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: rwood@lance.carleton.ca (Richard Wood)
Subject: The Accord and the future
Organization: Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
Distribution: can.politics
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 22:51:21 GMT

  Has anyone been following the progress of the 'Accord' in Quebec lately?
It looks dismal.  The PQ is opposed, of course, but so is a significant
part of the Liberal Party, including a majority of the youth wing. These are
the leaders of the future.  About 38 percent of Quebecers polled are dead 
set against the accord as well (according to a recent Angus Reid poll).
  However, about 49 percent of Quebecers polled were prepared to support 
the package at the time of the poll, so it may well pass on October 26.  
  But what is it going to get us?  My guess is at most a few years of 
constitutional peace, and then the bickering will start again over some 
flashpoint or other, say environment. 
  I think this accord is a waste of time because it doesn't solve the basic
problem, that Quebecers think of Canada in terms of Quebec vs the rest, while
everyone else sees Canada in terms of 12 (semi-equal) provinces and territories.
The accord fits CSQ's vision, and puts Quebec in the same boat as the other 
provinces (except for a weak 'distinct society' clause).  
  Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed to me that what Quebec wanted was to 
get out (as much as possible) of that boat.  'Maitre chez nous' is not a 
concept that lends itself much to a triple-E Senate.
  I think we would have been better off making Quebec an 'autonomous' province,
(ie, asymmetry), having the powers described in the Allaire report.  Powers
shared with Ottawa would be managed by some sort of joint government.
  Instead, we're locking ourselves into a structure that Quebecers will soon 
find unacceptable.  Far from solving the problem, the accord strikes me as 
a big step towards the separation of Quebec. 
--
Richard Wood  :  rwood@ccs.carleton.ca 
       Computing and Communications Services
               Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada K1S 5B6

Xref: sparky can.politics:6277 mtl.general:236
From: patrice@cs.concordia.ca (SCATTOLIN patrice)
Newsgroups: can.politics,mtl.general
Subject: Re: Quebec law :: It's racist, Separation is unavoidable
Date: 29 Aug 92 14:11:07 GMT
Followup-To: can.politics
Distribution: can
Organization: Computer Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec


>
>  IMHO, Bill 101 is not only discriminatory - it is indeed racist.
>
>
	Yes it may be indeed racist. However has any good black 
american or any woman will tell you racism need not be institutional to be
effective.  This is, fondamentally the PQ argument, R.O.C is fondamentally
racist against French for which there is need of legal protection, population 
size being insufficient. 


	The greater concern all are forgetting is the unavoidable PQ election
win. Eventually the PQ will win a provincial elections and, now as then,
their main purpose is independence. Their recent statements are to the 
effect that referendum is no longer needed once they win an election since
their central policy is independance no if's or but's

Why is  a PQ win inevitable:

	Bourassa as been in power for 8 years, which is the practical limit
for most political leaders in Can-USA-Europe.

	In power Bourassa keeps loosing support, left and right, because 
basically these days you just can't please everyone.

	Loosing some green support cause Hydro Quebec
	Loosing labor support because of the recession
	Loosing nationalist support for his constitutional agreements
	Loosing low-income support for his welfare reforms
	Loosing some healt-care support for his budget compressions.


The only sizable alternative to Bourassa is the PQ. It's a sizable institution
and firmly grounded with strong support from it's base. There is no alternative
to the Lib's but the PQ


The only conclusion that can be drawn from the above is that if the comming
provincial (Quebec) elections do not make Quebec independent the next one
should. It's the law of political gravity. 

The  consequence of this is simply that get ready for separation. 


>  ///==================================================================\\\
>  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
>  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
>  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||


-- 
Patrice Scattolin
					patrice@cs.concordia.ca
Concordia University			Montreal, Canada
"I am so far north that Santa lives two blocks from me"
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU (Stewart Clamen)
Subject: Re: Double majority
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
Reply-To: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:10:37 GMT
X-Posted-From: byron.sp.cs.cmu.edu
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <Btn8CA.EHE@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:

   According to federal employees (fonctionnaires federaux), Quebec won
   no addition power and just get the right to do a project similar to
   a federal project if she rejects a federal project.

   There is one funny point : each cultural project must receive a double
   majority by the senate and the francophones senators.  The funny point is
   that there is no exam to see if some is francophone.  In other words,
   a unilingual anglophone opposed to a bill in favor of Quebec or French
   speaking (or in favor of an anti-French bill) may declare himself as
   francophone and vote as francophone.  It is the method at this time
   the double majority will be counted.

Je crois qu'un senateur doit choiser "anglophone" ou "francophone"
quand il se jure (?) dans le Senat.

--
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 15213-3891, USA
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: pierre@chaos.phys.ualberta.ca (Pierre Rouleau)
Subject: Re: Indecence [F>E]
Keywords: Vive le jemenfoutisme 
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 01:55:51 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.165217.6355@pandora.matrox.com>
thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood) writes:

> "Hard-line Quebecois nationalism may be annoying,
> but not nearly so annoying as radical Ontario liberalism."
> 
> Glob. Glub.


I like that one :-)

Pierre R.
From: grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Denied access to English schools?
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:32:53 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article <12737@audetf> audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet) writes:
>In article <12733@grayt> grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray) writes:
>>No that is not correct. THere are people in the west who are fighting
>>to maintain their French culture.
>
>Of course, but this is beside the issue: in a few years, there will be
>none left. Give one or two generations.
>

In the long run the sun will expand as a red giant to include the
oribit of Mars. In the long run the Earth will be incinerated.
However until that unhappy day occurs, we should deal with present
problems rather than with hypotheticals.

Or as I say:

Of course, but this is beside the issue: in a few years the French`culture in Manitoba will be the dominant culture in North America just as Califinia
was before it succumbed to ethnic hatred. The French culture in Manitoba
by its uncanny ability to incorporate the best of all cultures into
its artistic output will be the defining culture of North America.

Quebec unfortunately took the path outlined by Denis Beauregard - a
rabid nationalist demogogue of the late 20th century. It now resides
as a suspicious cultural back water which loses its best talent
to the creative ferment of St. Boniface. After the latest financial`crisis
Quebec surrendered control of its monetary and fiscal policies to the IMF
for some badly needed short term credits. The current crisis is one of 
a continuing series of political crises affecting Quebec since independence.
Ardent Beeauregardists in the National Assembly refuse to recognize
the special status of the Cree National Party. As a result, investors have
lost confidence in the Quebec currency which was backed by the now
abandoned James Bay II project. This project was killed by the determined
action of Quebec minorities who organized boycotts of Quebec power until
their rights were recognized.

Beauregardist representaitves say they would rather destroy Quebec than
tp submit to blackmail.

How do you like that hypothetical?


-- 
i.sinature
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Access to English schools
Date: 3 Sep 92 01:41:25 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 2155

From article <plante.715461603@iros1>, by plante@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Frederic Plante):
>
> [discussion between Frederic & Thomas deleted]
>
> N'etes-vous pas d'accord qu'en 1977, quelque chose devait etre fait
> pour changer la situation par rapport a l'affichage et a l'education?
> Qu'aurions-nous du faire, a votre avis?
> 

Jacques Henripin, Professeur de demographie a l'Universite de Montreal,
devant le Comite mixte special du Senat et de la Chambre des communes
sur la Processus de modification de la Constitution du Canada;
26th Avril, 1991:-

  "On s'est beaucoup inquiete d'une possible reduction de la fraction
   des francophones dans cette province [Quebec]. Au debut de ma
   carriere, j'ai moi-meme participe au lancement de cette inquietude,
   pour raisons que je pensais tout a fait valables.

   Or, depuis 1977, nous avons de nouvelles informations qui ont jete
   par terre, ou presque, cette inquietude-la. Des travaux ont ete
   faits qui ont montre que, dans les calculs perspectifs que nous
   faisions avant la connaissance de ces informations nouvelles, nous
   nous trompions. Nous faisions des hypotheses du mieux que nous
   pouvions, mais elles n'etaient pas tres bonnes. Connaissant
   maintenant les information concernant l'immigration inter-
   provinciale par langue, ce que nous ne connaissions pas auparavant,
   il est devenu assez clair que cette fraction des francophones au
   Quebec n'etait pas menacee du tout.

   A l'epoque c'etait un peu heroique de presenter cela, mais
   aujourd'hui, nous avons deux recensements successifs qui
   demontrent que la fraction des francophones au Quebec augmente et
   ne diminue pas, y compris dans la region metropolitaine [Montreal]."

Mais le myth se propagage [propagande?] tout de meme.

I have the official English translation if there is interest I will
post it.
-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Xref: sparky can.politics:6213 soc.culture.canada:6117
From: grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray)
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Has Denis Been Struck Mute?was: Has Your Busy Schedule Kept You From This - Denis? was Re: How about this - Denis!?
Date: 26 Aug 92 11:42:02 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article <BtEs64.DKI@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
>Tom (Gray) : 
>You're annoying me.  I don't see why I shall respond to your texts.
>I already said I found your articles and opinions inspired from some
>kind of racism.  I don't see why I should take time to translate
>what you wrote (yes, I have to make an effort to read your article,
>but you made no effort to write them in French).  The day _you_
>(not another translating for you) will write in French, that day
>I will answer you.
>

That is very good Denis. I intend to keep annoying you. Every time you
post another one of your fantasies about the Anglo Master Race
(remember that one Denis) or the lazy immigrants or Canada being based
upon domination; I will answer you.

You know why I will answer you Denis. It will not be because I have any
respect for your opinion. That I have no respect for. It is because I have
respect for the institutions and people that you are insulting in your
fetid little fantasies.

Remember when you said that there was no vote on Confederation in what
was to become Quebec. Rememeber when you had to admit that there had been a vote
in the legislature and that it passed. Remember how you said that this was
the work of the anglo's who must have imposed this on the helpless French
Canadian. Now that was disgusting even for you Denis.

And now Denis, I criticise your little efforts and what am I. Well I must
be a racist. Well Denis that is the oldest and most pathetic tactic
that you have tried.

-- 
i.sinature
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Wells
Date: 2 Sep 92 13:36:09 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article (Jim Robinson) writes:
>>Why is there hords of red-necked biggots supporting Clyde Wells?
>
>Clyde Wells has a number of supporters because he articulates a particular
>vision that few other mainstream politicians share. A vision whereby the
>provinces are equal and none have any special status.  Only Francois can
>tell us why Wells' supporters, and I would suppose Wells himself, are
>"red-necked bigots".

I don't know if Wells himself is a red-necked bigot, although the
frequent anti-Quebec statements he often makes leave me "perplexe". He
probably just like creating trouble. I don't think he's intelligent
enough to realize that a lot of his supporters (like the employee in a
K-Mart in Ottawa who had "Clyde Wells for Prime Minister" written on
every receipt given to customers) are real "orangistes". I was reading
an article on the mail he receives from his supporters accross Canada,
and a good portion of it was classified by his staff as "fanatics".

-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
        Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754     Facsimile: (613) 592-4784
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: CZ94 <CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA>
Subject: Re: Canada and Boer War (was Re: History of North America)
Organization: McGill University
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 17:17:07 GMT

In article <Bu21Fp.C9L@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
>In article <03SEP92.18541088.0221@VM1.MCGILL.CA> CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CZ94) writes:
>>were Canadians volunteering to serve with the British forces in
>>South Africa, but this was not what British Colonial Secretary
>>Joseph Chamberlain wanted.  On October 6, 1899 he wrote Governor-
>>General Lord Minto: "We do not intend to accept any offer from
>>volunteers.  We do not want the men and the whole point of this offer
>>would be lost unless it were endorsed by the Government of the
>>Colony (sic) and applied to an organized body of the Colonial forces."
>
>I would say the _Colony_ here is South Africa, so (sic) is irrelevant.
>
If you know anything about the imperialist policy of Chamberlain,
it's quite clear that the _Colony_ referred to here is Canada, not
South Africa.  Note that he says "We do not want the men."  There was
no military need for Canadian support of Britain in the Boer War.
Chamberlain's interest in a Canadian contingent was as a symbol of
Canadian support for British imperial policy, and this symbol
would only be effective if the contingent were raised by the
Canadian government, not by private individuals.

Remember also that this letter is going to Lord Minto, the Governor-
General of Canada.  Chamberlain wanted Minto to influence Laurier
to do what Chamberlain wanted.

A piece of genealogical trivia for you, Denis.  Lord Minto's family
name was Elliot, with 2 L's and 1 T.  This is a rather uncommon
spelling -- one also finds Elliott (e.g. P.E. Trudeau), Eliot
(T.S. Eliot), and Eliott.  My great-great-grandmother was named
Elliot, and her family came form the same part of Scotland as Lord
Minto.  So we may be distant relatives.

Lacrosse fans will know Lord Minto as the donor of the Minto Cup.

Tom Box
CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA

Newsgroups: can.politics
From: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU (Stewart Clamen)
Subject: Re: Denied access to English schools?
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<BtLJ61.JAx@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> <Btnv6o.Hw4@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>
Reply-To: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:55:02 GMT
X-Posted-From: byron.sp.cs.cmu.edu
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <Btnv6o.Hw4@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
   In article <BtLJ61.JAx@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> gordon@madmax.uwaterloo.ca (Gordon R. Strachan) writes:

   >don't accept your aguements that somehow all English speaking people are
   >evil oppressors bent on dominating the French people.  It is too simple to
   >say that.  The government and system we live in today, the one you seem to
   >disagree so strongly with, is just as much a result of the French in Quebec
   >as anyone else.  You must remember that Quebec itself is not a monolithic
   >entity and there are French people with different views on how the country
   >should be structured.  And it is those people, more than anyone, who had a

   A wide majority of Francos favor a similar structure.  In national
   days celebration, most Quebecois will celebrate Quebec National Day
   while _anglo-quebecois_ will celebrate Canada days.  I think this
   is meaningful.

Christmas Day is a holiday in Canada (and Quebec).  Most Canadians
(and Quebecers) celebrate Christmas on Christmas Day.  Me and my
family do not celebrate Christmas.  Does this make me any less a
Canadian or a Quebecer?


--
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 15213-3891, USA