[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Sheilbh]

So, secularity = bigotry.  Interesting to note.  Does this apply only to Quebec? 

Also to France and Turkey.

There's a huge gulf between Anglo-American secularism and French secularism.

Ask your average English Canadian about Lord Durham and he'd likely say to you: "who was that?" 

Well, yeah. Most English people don't remember imperial governors in Ireland or India - but they're remembered there.

[Jacob]

Also to France and Turkey.

While in Denmark the equivalent bigotry is not covered up in secularism clothing, it's just straight up bigotry... which makes it easier to identify the bigotry components when people try to disguise it with arguments about secularism.

[Sheilbh]

Also to France and Turkey.

While in Denmark the equivalent bigotry is not covered up in secularism clothing, it's just straight up bigotry... which makes it easier to identify the bigotry components when people try to disguise it with arguments about secularism.

I think so in the UK too. But in a French context there is genuine, deep-felt secularism - especially on the left. When someone like Le Pen talks about secularism it's normally an appropriately veiled attack on Muslims. But Mitterrand, for example, tried to intervene in private Catholic schools to make them 'universal and secular' which led to huge opposition and he had to back down.

So the French left do have a serious secularist streak especially in the context of education that targets everyone.

[Malthus]

Also to France and Turkey.

While in Denmark the equivalent bigotry is not covered up in secularism clothing, it's just straight up bigotry... which makes it easier to identify the bigotry components when people try to disguise it with arguments about secularism.

I think so in the UK too. But in a French context there is genuine, deep-felt secularism - especially on the left. When someone like Le Pen talks about secularism it's normally an appropriately veiled attack on Muslims. But Mitterrand, for example, tried to intervene in private Catholic schools to make them 'universal and secular' which led to huge opposition and he had to back down.

So the French left do have a serious secularist streak especially in the context of education that targets everyone.

The Quebec version of "deep felt secularism" requires those working for the government to remove "highly visible" religious symbols, knowing full well this 100% affects minorities ... but the government itself need not remove visible Christian symbols, like a Cross hanging in the legislature, because those are "cultural".

The disguise is pretty thin. It's a straight-up anti-immigrant thing.

[Malthus]

Well, yeah. Most English people don't remember imperial governors in Ireland or India - but they're remembered there.

So? No-one is disputing that people in Quebec remember this stuff - often, as Viper demonstrates, to an irrational degree. Hell, the motto of Quebec, on every license plate, is "Je me souviens"!

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

The issue is that there is no similar notion that a unanimous English Canada is "remembering" that it is superior to Quebec in culture, or treating early English colonial officials as popular heroes - that is flat-out wrong.

[garbon]

Well, yeah. Most English people don't remember imperial governors in Ireland or India - but they're remembered there.

So? No-one is disputing that people in Quebec remember this stuff - often, as Viper demonstrates, to an irrational degree. Hell, the motto of Quebec, on every license plate, is "Je me souviens"!

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

The issue is that there is no similar notion that a unanimous English Canada is "remembering" that it is superior to Quebec in culture, or treating early English colonial officials as popular heroes - that is flat-out wrong.

When I was in Montreal this weekend, my traveling companion and I asked our friend what that meant. She told us it meant "I remember" but then said that she didn't know what it was she was remembering.

[viper37]

The disguise is pretty thin. It's a straight-up anti-immigrant thing.

The cross is ok, it's the crucifix that is bothering.  But so many things are wrong with this... you could have a veiled Minister, but not a veiled prosecutor.

It's more an electoralist ploy than anything anti-immigrant, hence the right .  But even if the Muslim Brotherhood affiliates would find it so distateful that they left for Ontario, I wouldn't cry.

That being said, we'll likely be settled soon.  The government just spent 700M$ to promote his "new" (as in, 1970 new) economic plan.  There's going to be a mini-budget soon.  The charter is around the corner.  Polls aren't that good, but they have an unscheduled meeting for October 25th.  By then, their internal polls will tell them the truth of the matter.

[viper37]

These guys seem to me to be making a "slippery slope" argument - that is, allowing this type of intolerance is bad, because in the past it led to the horrors of Nazi Germany.

It's a bad argument, as 'slippery slope' arguments often are, because not all acts of intolerance lead to a race to the bottom ending in genocide. The Charter of Values sucks because, while the intolerance displayed is pretty minor, it is still a bad thing unto itself. It would suck even if, as is obviously vastly more likely, Quebec never becomes like unto a Nazi state. 

However, making the argument isn't the same thing as claiming Quebec = Nazis, which you appear to believe.

Edit: examples of the "slippery slope" as an informal fallacy:

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html

Well, we're 1932 Nazis instead of 1943 Nazis.  I suppose that's better...

[Barrister]

It's more an electoralist ploy than anything anti-immigrant, hence the right .  But even if the Muslim Brotherhood affiliates would find it so distateful that they left for Ontario, I wouldn't cry.

Umm, it's an electoralist ploy because it's anti-immigrant (or at least anti-muslim)...

[viper37]

So? No-one is disputing that people in Quebec remember this stuff - often, as Viper demonstrates, to an irrational degree.

I like history and I usually remember what I read without having to re-read it 30 times.  So that makes me a special case.  Most people in Quebec probably don't know what is the Seven Years War either.  I knew all the major Romand&Greek gods before I had my first history class and I knew my Quebec history of both regime before I had my first class.  Heck, at some point, I could even list all the French forts along the Frontier in the Ohio valley, that was mandatory learning in our elementary class.  I am a special nutcase, after all

Imho, it's no more irrational to remember your past than insisisting on displaying your Faith 24/24 no matter where you are and what you do.  And I think on the list of annoyance, depriving a people of education in their language lists higher than hiding your religious symbols for 37.5hrs a week.  To each his own, I suppose.

[Neil]

Is viper seriously trying to advance Campeau as some sort of example of Quebec being wronged?

[Grallon]

... I knew all the major Romand&Greek gods before I had my first history class and I knew my Quebec history of both regime before I had my first class.  Heck, at some point, I could even list all the French forts along the Frontier in the Ohio valley, that was mandatory learning in our elementary class.  I am a special nutcase, after all

-----


And I couldn't agree more - if they can't put aside their rags at work they should be fired.  Similarly with prayers and all this godsdam superstitious mummery.

Apparently the govt is thinking of removing the crucifix after all.  I wish Marois would just order it removed already - and put everyone before a 'fait accompli'.  It would deprive  the opponents of that ammunition.




G.

[crazy canuck]

I am a special nutcase, after all

Agreed.  Not because you like history.  We all do.  You are a special nutcase because of the way you interpret the our posting through a particular historical lens that translates our words in your brain as something we did not say.

[viper37]

Umm, it's an electoralist ploy because it's anti-immigrant (or at least anti-muslim)...

But they don't need 30% more votes, and they ain't getting it either.

2012 election results were 31.95% for the PQ, 31.2% for the Liberal party, 1.89% for Option National (concentrated in a few key ridings outside of Montreal).
That mean, at 30% you get to be in the government, albeit a minority one.
At 33% and above you start having a shot at majority government.  35% and you're sure of being a majority government.

The PQ needs 3% more votes than it had at the last election.  The Liberals have a new leader (since this Spring) and are badly... let's say damaged by financing scandals uncovered, where as the PQ can simply claim "they were all victims".

This 3% means nothing in Saguenay or Lower St-Lawrence valley.  The ridings they have, they will most likely keep, there isn't a strong Liberal presence there.
Quebec city is gone for the PQ.  They hold the center and the outside of the city, the rest is a battle between CAQ and PLQ.
Montreal island is divided in three: Center with two possible ridings for the commies.  East for the PQ, West for the PLQ.
Montreal suburbs outside the island is where the battle will be played, and this is where the Charter is popular, because of the religious based accomodations wich people don't like.

Now, you look at the charter itself, the funny thing is, most of Quebec is divided 50-50 on it.  Remove the religous symbol thing from the charter, and supports comes at nearly 80%, even the anglos of the West island come more in favour of the charter.

5% more votes in the 450 area (Montreal's suburbs) means a majority for the PQ.  After that, the priority will shift to a referendum, the Charter will be on "standby".  PQ will taut it as something Canada does not want, but essential to protect Quebec's identity.  They'll also bring back their silly new French language charter that opposition parties refused to endorse as it was.  Both these proposals, they hope, will make for a strong basis of Quebec vs Canada necessary to hold a referendum. 

In 1995, we had the failure of Lake Meech Accord, the horrible Charlottetown accord and a majority Liberal Party of Canada in power insistant on placing Quebec as one province among 10.  What do we have today?  A proposal for centralization of financial power in Toronto?  Most poeple already hate finance, not enough.  A government more closely aligned to Albertan and Western values than Quebec values?  We have the choice between a government aligned to Ontario's values or Western values, Quebec is too weak to be taken seriously.  Not enough.  The PQ has tried to create a crisis over the Champlain bridge reconstruction, but despite earlier missteps (like not inviting the Quebec Minister of Transportation for the announce), the Feds have been pretty reasonable and haven't rejected anything out of hand.  Again, not enough.

However, if you create an identity crisis, denounce multicularilism (wich is a failure, here and in Europe, given all we know), you get a chance at gaining votes.

So, I repeat step 1:
- Gather all sovereignists under one banner.  Done.  Aussant is back in London making millions of $ a year, is party is in shamble, thanks to the PQ manoeuvers of last fall.
- Create conflict with Canada.  They tried hard, but they finally found something that made Canadians bite.  Before we had done or published anything.  It's a winner.

As it is, the Charter most likely violates our own laws, those voted by René Lévesque.  Even the PQ lawyers have refused to comment on the legality of the proposed 2013 Charter of Values.  Doubtful it will past.

There is xenophobia in Quebec, just as much as anywhere else.  What we don't have is racist extreme-right wing groups with the level of popularity they enjoy in western Canada, America or Europe.  When we discuss immigration, it's about how to better integrate them and allocate proper resources or reduce immigration level if we don't have those resources to help them integrate (language classes, evaluation of their academic background, helping them find a job, etc).

Comparing that to the likes of Lepen of British National Party is completely silly and demonstrate that English Canada will never understand what is going on with the other founding nation of the country. 

But there is a genuine concern that immigration has been a tool of Canada to drown Quebec's (and French Canadian) identity in the country (as in Lord Durham's policies and negation of french rights outside of Quebec due to "low numbers" and hostility to bilinguism coming from the Reform and Alliance Party).  That does not make the people of Quebec more racist, bigoted or xenophobic than the rest of the western world.

But there are xenophobic and outright racist elements in this province, and yes, Pauline Marois is hoping they will come out in sufficient force to get her the majority she needs. And as I said, they don't need to be 30%.  3-5% in Montreal's suburbs, she's got a shot at majority government.

I've played with this site: http://www.tooclosetocall.ca/p/simulateur-pour-le-quebec.html
In the absence of reliable post-charter polls, I've entered the numbers for the last elections, than changed them a little.
So I got:
PLQ 32% (+1%)
PQ 35% (+3%)
CAQ 26% (-1%)
QS 6% (0%)
ON 0% (-2%)
Green 1% (0%)
That gives me 63 MPs for the PQ, wich is the majority (125 ridings).

Of course, the site isn't 100% accurate, but it gives you a good idea of how close things are.
As you well know, in the British parliamentary system, a majority, even by one, gives you total control over nearly everything for 5 years.  The only thing you can't do is change the Canadian Constitution.

Imho you guys worry too much at the supposed anti-immigrant bias (as evidenced by Malthus misunderstanding of Parizeau's 1995 rant).  You shouldn't worry either at a 3rd referendum, because the impact on Canada will be negligeable.  It will be disastrous for my province though and will make an already difficult economic situation hell.  Heck, I'm not even sure my company will stay afloat if the PQ is re-elected with a majority.

[crazy canuck]

What we don't have is racist extreme-right wing groups

Its funny that you make this observation while defending racist government policy.