From: evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch)
Subject: Re: French/English status after independence
Organization: Somewhere just far enough out of Toronto
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 03:58:19 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.220957.24209@pandora.matrox.com>
	thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood) writes:

>steven@spxtech.ca (Steven C. Potter) writes:

>>  One doesn't protect a language and culture by suppressing another!

>You will not help your case by denying the obvious.  Suppression CAN
>be very effective, as the English have shown all over the world.

Well, you could argue that Quebec has proven Steven's point. One doesn't
protect a language and culture (English in Quebec) by suppressing another
(Quebec francophones). I believe one could interpret Steven's argument
to say that one may *try* to suppress a language in order to protect
another, but that it doesn't work in the long term.

>The point is: Quebec is suppressing English arbitrarily.  According
>to Denis Beauregard, the Quebecois do not like the English, and
>want them to leave.  They have found a pretext for getting rid of them
>(that the English threaten the survival of the French Fact) and are
>acting on this pretext. [...]

A very well-put capsule.

>Note that Jacques Parizeau told the Americans
>that Quebecers, being a small people, will have to speak English,
>or he'll kick their butts!

Well, this may not count for much. Parizeau, when he goes abroad
(especially to the US), is doing nothing but damage control. He's trying
to allay fears that Quebec will be a closed, inhospitable place in which
to do business. So far his success has been underwhelming.

>This has already begun: government
>officials refuse to speak English to you until they find out that
>you are a non-Quebecer.  Have you not noticed that every Quebecois
>you meet asks you where you were born within five minutes?

I appear to have been fortunate. Most of the francophones I deal with
don't seem to care.

>They want
>to know whether you are a true foreigner, deserving of respect, or a
>colonialist, to be shunned.

I see. And the Americans, who turned a thriving French culture into a
Mardi Gras festival and fleurs-de-lys on football helmets, are to be
respected, instead.

>If a person insists that the English community "must" be suppressed
>for the sake of the "survival" of French Quebec, there is not much one
>can say in reply, except "bullshit" or a polite equivalent.

Well, one can also criticize its lack of morality, the tactic's failures
through history, and its basic lack of respect for those who don't fit.

>So let us turn to politics.  Given that the Government of Quebec aims
>to eliminate the English minority (for a good cause, of course), how
>shall the English minority respond?

>) Plead            Doesn't work: they don't care.

Agreed.

>) Protest          Doesn't work: and who needs the hassle?

Well, it's a mild form of "Fight Back", which I'd argue is worth the effort.
See below.

>) Disobey          "You can't fight City Hall"

Agreed.

>) Fight back       Oppose Meech Lake like Donald Johnston?
>                     Sabotage Quebec's reputation like Mordecai Richler?
>                     Doesn't work: it just makes them mad.

Sure it works. Just ask Hydro-Quebec how effective were the efforts of
Richler and the Native bands, in  making Quebec's tolerance a major
factor in the cancelling of New York's electricity contract.

The "E/F", "Bienvenue/Welcome" and "INTERDIT!" signs being used in
protest all serve to ridicule the policies. They are not ignored by
tourists and potential investors.

Even passive fighting back, like the exodus of the English with their 
skills and businesses and capital, has its effect. Look at the war zone
on Rue Ste.  Catharine and the unemployment levels in east-end Montreal,
and get a taste of things to come. It's going to get worse.

The native Quebecois population is dropping and immigrants are leaving
faster than they come (for elsewhere in Canada). One can demand that
Quebec gets 50% of Canada's immigrants, but under present laws you can't
force them to stick around. And these days they aren't.

One of the important weapons against Quebec's ethnic purity policies
is a demonstration of their cost -- not just in money, but in jobs, world
reputation, tourism, and skill levels. Some of that can be argued, some
is already happening.

One can also make the point that these policies are simply unethical, that
they contravene basic Judeo-Christian morals. Francophones are definitely
not doing unto others as they would have others do unto them. But I guess
that may not matter not that the Church's influence is dead.

Of course fighting back meant opposing Meech. I have little say over
what will happen within Quebec; that's up to the Quebecois. But I will
certainly fight any attempt by the rest of Canada to condone its actions.

As for making them mad; doesn't bother me at all, when I see the
callousness of the reactions to Mr. Potter's complaints.

>) Terrorize        Immoral.

The line between "terrorist" and "freedom fighter" is fine indeed; look
at how the Laporte murderers are being excused, even now.

It's the last refuge of the desparate. Don't count it out...

>) Sabotage things  Hmm.  Unfortunately, all those fatcat colonialist
>                     capitalists aren't very good with their hands.
>                     Not like a good Quebecois who can bring down
>                     a hydro pylon in seconds flat!  Bummer.

Consider that all the fatcats are gone, leaving the diehard English.
Anyone in Quebec who is still uniligual English has got to have some
chutzpah in them anyway. And there are plenty of government institutions
and icons that can be securely identified with the Francophone opressors.

>) Sing             Aaaalriiiight!

:-)

-- 
 Evan Leibovitch, Sound Software Ltd., located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario
         evan@telly.on.ca / uunet!utzoo!telly!evan / (416) 452-0504
   Said Captain Jean-Luc Picard to the tailor at his machine: "Make it sew!"
Xref: sparky can.general:3353 can.politics:5278