Canada caters to France and their cultural ideologies

[Leafless]

Back to the original topic.

I am still waiting for anyone to demonstrate that membership in the Commonwealth precludes membership in other multinational organizations.

The topic revolves around Canada/Quebec and La Francophonie and not what you posted.

But I will give you a very good reason relating to Canada and La Francophonie, as to why, would not be in the political interest for Canada as a whole.

As you know, in the past and even somewhat to-day, Quebec's political interest was associated with separation from Canada.

Even if Quebec had separated from Canada, the strongest support recognizing Quebec internationally, would more than likely be from the countries associated with La Francophonie including France.

And this is where the political danger lies. The majority of the countries within the La Francophonie organization, have themselves gone through the process of obtaining independence.

In essence Canada is accommodating Quebec's political dream as becoming it's own sovereign nation, by not recognizing, that there are two opposing polical ideologies at play. One being Canada as a whole and the second one, Quebec as a separate country.

Also with Canada/Quebec being part of La Francophonie, serves as a retail outlet for Quebec's cultural products such as books, films, manufactured articles etc. all at the expense of Canadian tax payer.

[Machjo]

The topic revolves around Canada/Quebec and La Francophonie and not what you posted.

But I will give you a very good reason relating to Canada and La Francophonie, as to why, would not be in the political interest for Canada as a whole.

As you know, in the past and even somewhat to-day, Quebec's political interest was associated with separation from Canada.

Even if Quebec had separated from Canada, the strongest support recognizing Quebec internationally, would more than likely be from the countries associated with La Francophonie including France.

And this is where the political danger lies. The majority of the countries within the La Francophonie organization, have themselves gone through the process of obtaining independence.

In essence Canada is accommodating Quebec's political dream as becoming it's own sovereign nation, by not recognizing, that there are two opposing polical ideologies at play. One being Canada as a whole and the second one, Quebec as a separate country.

Also with Canada/Quebec being part of La Francophonie, serves as a retail outlet for Quebec's cultural products such as books, films, manufactured articles etc. all at the expense of Canadian tax payer.

Canada, not Quebec, is a direct member of the Francophonie. Quebec is merely a member by association. Also, your suggestion that we need to leave the Francophonie owing to the cultural ties involving book exports just shows your contempt. Clearly your goal is to silence French Canadian culture on the international stage as much as is feasible.

[Machjo]

I for one support both the Commonwealth and the Francophonie. Now I would like to see both organizations to be more grassroots and Canadian membership at the government level to be more limited. But membership in both organizations is a good means by which to build cultural ties.

[CANADIEN]

The topic revolves around Canada/Quebec and La Francophonie and not what you posted.

So says the clueless one who was the first to claim that being part of the Commonwealth was sufficient for Canada.

But I will give you a very good reason relating to Canada and La Francophonie, as to why, would not be in the political interest for Canada as a whole.

As you know, in the past and even somewhat to-day, Quebec's political interest was associated with separation from Canada.

Even if Quebec had separated from Canada, the strongest support recognizing Quebec internationally, would more than likely be from the countries associated with La Francophonie including France.

And this is where the political danger lies. The majority of the countries within the La Francophonie organization, have themselves gone through the process of obtaining independence.

In essence Canada is accommodating Quebec's political dream as becoming it's own sovereign nation, by not recognizing, that there are two opposing polical ideologies at play. One being Canada as a whole and the second one, Quebec as a separate country.

You almost make sense... almost. A strong Canadian presence in La Francophonie means less appeal for your pipe dream... Quebec getting out of Canada. Besides, as others have pointed out, Canada is a full member, not Quebec.

Also with Canada/Quebec being part of La Francophonie, serves as a retail outlet for Quebec's cultural products such as books, films, manufactured articles etc. all at the expense of Canadian tax payer.

Imagine that... more markets for CANADIAN products. Including products from New Brunswick, Ontario. Manitoba, etc. And of course, you hate that... But then, you can hardly wait for bad things to happen...

Edited February 28, 2010 by CANADIEN

[Leafless]

Canada, not Quebec, is a direct member of the Francophonie. Quebec is merely a member by association.

It is more than an association.

1971

The Governments of Canada and Quebec agree on the terms and conditions for Quebec's participation in the institutions, programs and activities of the ACCT. An identical agreement is concluded with New Brunswick in 1977. Their status as participating governments enables both governments to be recognized as such within the Organisation internationale de La Francophonie.

http://www.international.gc.ca/franco/evolution.aspx

[bloodyminded]

English speaking Ontarians are affected by a form of apartheid. You know political, economic and legal discrimination.

Sure, "apartheid." Yeah, that's not a promiscuous bit of rhetorical insanity at all.

[CANADIEN]

Sure, "apartheid." Yeah, that's not a promiscuous bit of rhetorical insanity at all.

Not one bit. Remember, in Ontario English-speakers cannot get government services in their language, and now on top of that they can't vote and they're barred from living in certain areas. After all, that's what apartheid was. So there must be an Ontario in an alternate reality/oarralel universe where this happens, because it's not happening in this universe yet if Leafless says it it must happen somewhere.

[bloodyminded]

Not one bit. Remember, in Ontario English-speakers cannot get government services in their language, and now on top of that they can't vote and they're barred from living in certain areas. After all, that's what apartheid was. So there must be an Ontario in an alternate reality/oarralel universe where this happens, because it's not happening in this universe yet if Leafless says it it must happen somewhere.

Well of course. It's not as if Leafless is exaggerating.

(Well, actually, he's not exaggerating; he's inventing out of whole cloth. There's a difference.)

Hell, if anyone can make the claim he is making, it would be the French in New Brunswick, until a generation ago. They really were somewhat repressed, at least in the English regions.

But they wouldn't make the claim of actual "apartheid" either, because it's far too inflammatory to describe the realities.

[Leafless]

Well of course. It's not as if Leafless is exaggerating.

(Well, actually, he's not exaggerating; he's inventing out of whole cloth. There's a difference.)

Please provide proof to back up your asinine statement.

Hell, if anyone can make the claim he is making, it would be the French in New Brunswick, until a generation ago. They really were somewhat repressed, at least in the English regions.

And exactly who do these poor residents of New Brunswick complain to, relating to linguistic oppression or for that matter any English speaking Canadian?

But they wouldn't make the claim of actual "apartheid" either, because it's far too inflammatory to describe the realities.

Trudeau never found his linguistic policies inflammatory.

What he did was practice the age old liberal formula of normalizing and making legal, Nazi or commie type ideologies to indoctrinate Canadians, thus resulting in a culturally segregated, fractionated society.

[bloodyminded]

Please provide proof to back up your asinine statement.

You want me to "prove" that your "apartheid" remark is wrong?

I don't think it works that way, Leafless.

And exactly who do these poor residents of New Brunswick complain to, relating to linguistic oppression or for that matter any English speaking Canadian?

They have less reason to compalin than they used to, now that we are an officially bilingual province.

And in the old days...well, they DIDN'T complain very much. You could take a lesson from them.

[CANADIEN]

Please provide proof to back up your asinine statement.

The assisine statements have been yours, and all yours, from the first you exposed this site to your cluelessness. And we are all still waiting for proof.

Trudeau never found his linguistic policies inflammatory.

Because they were not.

What he did was practice the age old liberal formula of normalizing and making legal, Nazi or commie type ideologies to indoctrinate Canadians, thus resulting in a culturally segregated, fractionated society.

Where is my leaflish-English dictionary again?

[Leafless]

You want me to "prove" that your "apartheid" remark is wrong?

I don't think it works that way, Leafless.

I did say it is a FORM of apartheid.

The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity "committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime."

Oppression is the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner.[1] It can also be defined as an act or instance of oppressing, the state of being oppressed, and the feeling of being heavily burdened, mentally or physically, by troubles, adverse conditions, and anxiety.

A dominance hierarchy (in humans: social hierarchy) is the organization of individuals in a group that occurs when competition for resources leads to aggression.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_apartheid

They have less reason to compalin than they used to, now that we are an officially bilingual province.

And in the old days...well, they DIDN'T complain very much. You could take a lesson from them.

I can understand why New Brunswick is the only province in Canada to be 'officially bilingual', especially if they all think like you.

[CANADIEN]

I did say it is a FORM of apartheid.

Nice play on words. Doesn't change the fact that once again you do not know what you are talking about. That's very clear from the definition of apartheid YOU posted.

[CANADIEN]

And in the old days...well, they DIDN'T complain very much. You could take a lesson from them.

I would argue that the Acadians did not take it in silence. But then, unlike Leafless, they had a point.

[Leafless]

Nice play on words. Doesn't change the fact that once again you do not know what you are talking about. That's very clear from the definition of apartheid YOU posted.

And English speaking Canadians have been through it all and continue to be discriminated upon by the very same governments they pay their taxes to.

The only thing I can think of to rectify the situation is a revolution, something I do not advocate.

[CANADIEN]

And English speaking Canadians have been through it all and continue to be discriminated upon by the very same governments they pay their taxes to.

You must be paying taxes to the government of a foreign country... or another. Because the discrimination you claim does not exist.

[Leafless]

You must be paying taxes to the government of a foreign country.

It certainly appears that way, including being treated as someone without a culture and their linguistic place in Canadian society legally dictated by government. Heil Hitler!

Because the discrimination you claim does not exist.

Brain wash English speaking Canadians some more...."does not exist"...sure.

Trudeau started the linguistic trend using the old I.I.DI.N. I read about somewhere, Infiltrate, Indoctrinate, Demoralize, Intimidate then follows NORMALIZATION, relating to discriminatory language policies.

[CANADIEN]

being treated as someone without a culture and their linguistic place in Canadian society legally dictated by government.

You mean the way you would like the Government to treat French, a Canadian language, and canadians who speak it.

Trudeau started the linguistic trend using the old I.I.DI.N. I read about somewhere, Infiltrate, Indoctrinate, Demoralize, Intimidate then follows NORMALIZATION, relating to discriminatory language policies.

Tell me.. in that parralel universe of yours, do the Leafs win the Stanley Cup every year?

Edited March 6, 2010 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

The only thing I can think of to rectify the situation is a revolution, something I do not advocate.

Nope, you barely advocate discrimination, intolerance, hatred and nonsense.

[bloodyminded]

I can understand why New Brunswick is the only province in Canada to be 'officially bilingual', especially if they all think like you.

So...you have a problem with NB's officially-bilingual status. I mean, to you, this is self-evidently a bad thing.

I mean, English NB-ers have suffered terribly under this bilingual status. Because....wait a sec....I'm trying to think how it has oppressed us English...there must be something.....

Wait, I got it! Our road signs have French as well as English on them! I have to look at those nefarious French words when I drive!

This apartheid is killing me.....

[whowhere]

It certainly appears that way, including being treated as someone without a culture and their linguistic place in Canadian society legally dictated by government. Heil Hitler!

Brain wash English speaking Canadians some more...."does not exist"...sure.

Trudeau started the linguistic trend using the old I.I.DI.N. I read about somewhere, Infiltrate, Indoctrinate, Demoralize, Intimidate then follows NORMALIZATION, relating to discriminatory language policies.

Hitler would be proud of your posts and you are good disciple of his doctrine.

[Leafless]

So...you have a problem with NB's officially-bilingual status. I mean, to you, this is self-evidently a bad thing.

Absolutely!

Being forced to share a culture discriminates, creates animosity and opens new doors to favouritism and destroys personal initiative.

[bloodyminded]

Absolutely!

Being forced to share a culture discriminates, creates animosity and opens new doors to favouritism and destroys personal initiative.

1. No, it used to discriminate. Against the French. Now it doesn't--to the English or to the French.

2. The animosity between the French and English in NB has diminished notably--very notably--just in my lifetime, and I'm 43.

3. How does it open new doors to favouritism?

4. How does it destroy "personal initiative"?

[Leafless]

1. No, it used to discriminate. Against the French. Now it doesn't--to the English or to the French.

And how can you possibly know this for fact?

2. The animosity between the French and English in NB has diminished notably--very notably--just in my lifetime, and I'm 43.

And again you have provided no proof that this is indeed the case.

It took me about 10 seconds to dig up this one little gem which shows that animosity does exist in New Brunswick.

Sounds very similar to what Russell Ontario residents are experiencing. Russell is a small town just east of Ottawa Ontario.

Dieppe is proposing a bylaw that will require all future commercial signs on the exterior of buildings in the southeastern New Brunswick city to be either in French or bilingual.

Dieppe city councillors brought forward the sign bylaw on Monday night in an attempt to quell a long-simmering debate in the francophone city over the number of English-only signs.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2009/11/10/nb-dieppe-sign-bylaw-527.html

3. How does it open new doors to favouritism?

You mean you have never heard of someone gaining employment or obtaining some sort of favours,political or otherwise by the corrupt actions of someone loyal to that individuals culture/language.

4. How does it destroy "personal initiative"?

Example:

Personal initiative is destroyed when one cannot cope with the corrupt linguistic legislation or actions that undermine that persons ability to succeed in their jobs.

Personal initiative can also be destroyed knowing that even if your language is the majority you will have a hard time finding employment because government propagated bilingualism has spread to private sector employers.

Ottawa's main newspaper, every 8 months or so publish articles relating to the low moral in the federal public service. As a matter of fact there are three articles this weekend relating to bilingualism.

[CANADIEN]

Absolutely!

Being forced to share a culture discriminates, creates animosity and opens new doors to favouritism and destroys personal initiative.

Jacques Parizeau would be jealous of you.

But at least, i must thank you for (not on purpose I am sure) revelead what you are truely aiming at - having no non-English speaking culture around.