Canada and Sarkozy deserve each other
It’s been a pretty good week for Québec’s independence movement. For real.
Whilst in the middle of very busy week in which he managed to insult the Prime Minister of Britain, the government of the Czech republic and bring almost every single French man and woman to he streets, Nicolas Sarkozy took the time to squeeze in a few nasty thoughts about Québec’s sovereignty movement.
He dismissed us, the sovereigntists, with the same disdain he used to reserve for the racaille of Seine-Saint-Denis. The president called sovereingtists, without naming them, ‘sectarian’ and ‘inwrad-looking’. He said he did not understand the « obligation to define one’s identity by fierce opposition to the other. »
The right of the Québécois democratically decide for themselves who should govern their affairs was not his « thing ». The world did not need another division, he reasoned with the sophisticated and subtle thinking that has become his trademark.
I’m loving it. Nicolas Sarkozy was elected with the support of an important part of the Front National vote. He opposed the accession of Turkey to the European Union because “if it was in Europe, we’d know about it”. He doesn’t think French colonialism had any negative effects of Africa and that the continent’s problem is that “it never entered History”. And now he feels strongly about a united Canada.
Wow. I doubt you could get a stronger confirmation that the sovereigntists are the good guys short of getting George W. Bush and Robert Mugabe to hold a joint press conference titled “The Canadian federation. Our model and inspiration.”.
But even better, Sarko’s little diatribe completely drowned out any news of Jean Charest’s trip to Europe, arguably the most successful trip to the old countries by a federalist Prime Minister. Ever.
Predictably, the Canadian media nearly choked with self-righteousness, praising the French president’s ‘fresh’ and ‘forward-looking’ thoughts. We’ll see how fresh they think he is when he tells them it’s time Canada gets rid of that anachronistic little border on the 49th parallel. He might just get a real taste of a country that defines itself by ‘detestation’ and ‘opposition’ to the other…
But the real story here is not that Nicolas Sarkozy does not know anything or that Canadians are completely blind to their own hypocrisy. Everybody knows that.
No, the real story is that Québec’s sovereigntists need to get new friends. Fast.
Ever since Québec emerged from the Great Darkness, the forces of light and good in the province have put all their eggs in France’s basket. As if the only recognition an independent Québec would ever need would be that of France.
There is a reason why Québec looked to France and it is not only because of a shared language. France has consistently been the West’s left wing. Cooler, smarter and not afraid to break rank on NATO, Irak and the Occident’s apparent determination to abolish food.
But France is not only Renaud and IAM. It is also Brigitte Bardot and Johnny Halliday. France too has it’s Stéphane Gendrons, Josée Verners and Denis Coderres. It is as it never occured to any of the Parti québécois’ numerous regulars of the bistros of Boulevard Austerlitz that one day one of them might actually take power.
Someone like Nicolas Sarkozy.
But it was bound to happen. As night begets day and life begets death, a well read and inspiring American president begets a reductive twit at the Élysée.
The real issue is « why haven’t sovereigntists cultivated more friends in other countries? »
Before the Obama administration actually got the briefing on the aliens of Area 51 and the nuclear missile launch codes, all observers knew exactly how many friends Israel had in the White House and how powerful they were. Canadian Conservatives had mules in Washington before they took power in Ottawa. David Frum, a National Post columnist and the son of Barbara Frum, is the Bush speechwriter who coined the inspiring, in a Battlestar Gallactica kind of way, image of the Axis of Evil.
The last time there was anyone with any pull whatsoever in the White House who had ever heard about Québec was when Pierre Salinger served as press secretary for JFK. Other than that their might be a cab driver in Baltimore who has a cousin in Beloeil. That’s about it.
And while were at it, why don’t we have any of our men and women working the pubs of London? There once was a time when Québec’s representatives regularly looked to London as a fair arbiter in their conflicts with English-speaking neighbours and on more than one occasion the cooler heads in London did not hesitate to put the proto-Rhodesians of Upper Canada and Montreal back in their place.
Sovereigntists could send Pauline Marois to hang out with the Queen. I’m sure they would get along splendidly as they both have a taste for expansive rural estates and an entourage keen on palace intrigue and making inappropriate comments. A few shots of sherry and firm commitment to keep her on as Reine du Québec after independence and there is no doubt Betty would get on board.
First of all, she would have no choice but to publicly support her own subjects’ declaration of independence. Second, no Englishman or woman, no matter how blue the blood, who would ever miss an opportunity to stick it to the French!
Take that Sarko!
AngryFrenchGuy 
“There’s is absolutely no way in hell you can learn English correctly in French schools. And believe me… it wasn’t too long ago that I was in high school (I’m 26), and I’ve seen how it works first hand.”
Don’t tell that to the Anglo-québécois…. They have been telling us for an entire generation that their English schools teach the kids to speak PERFECT French!
Since the Anglo-Québécois and the federalists value billinguism, institutional and personal, above all else, if you are right, that would mean that these people would have to be in favour of sending all English children to French schools, right?
angryfrenchguy
February 11, 2009 at 5:45 pm
The vast majority of people in Quebec, both federalists and sovereignists, think this way, believe me. Which I guess goes a long way in explaining why lots of federalists (including me) frequently air language-related grievances, which unfortunately get dismissed by a lot of people in the ROC as separatist paranoia.
“If there’s one thing that is close to being a consensus in Quebec, it’s that Quebec may share with the ROC a federal political system, Olympic teams, an economic space, etc., it may be represented at the UN and other international bodies by people not from Quebec, its ministers and MPs who work federally may have to switch to English in the corridors of power in Ottawa, but within the confines of Quebec, everything pretty much had *better be* in French.”
Occurs to me that is pretty well the way it is at this time. Obviously, by your own admission english, is gaining ground in Quebec despite loi 101 and all the protection measures enacted by same. Given another one or two generations the anglos will be fully francized ( is that real world) and at that time there will be no cause for concern. I wonder at that time, however, what will be the common language spoken on the street, once the older generation who is consumed by this debate ceases to be a factor. Go to the bar, say hello in french, talk in english part of the time, back to french etc etc. I suppose one could conclude that one common language will prevail.
You know, just like the Ukrainians in SK or AB that can still speak the langue but don’t very often…just like my french speaking inlaws who speak english amongst even themselves, even though their maternal language is french.
Will be interesting, won’t it? given time.
ABP
abp
February 12, 2009 at 12:09 am
No president of France will come out publicly in favor of self-determination, of Quebec or anywhere else, because of the way it could be interpreted internally: Basques, Bretons, Catalans, Corsicans, Occitans… Too many cultures in a very centralist state for its president to support sovereignty movements.
As a related example, the king of Spain once publicly supported the creation of a separate Palestine state and it created such a political storm that the subject’s been taboo for years there.
Marc Ordinas i Llopis
February 12, 2009 at 5:45 am
Some beautiful Louisiana French here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKijkaTXvcs
I don’t know how successful this effort is, although it’s clear that there are people out there who are still trying to keep it up.
littlerob
February 13, 2009 at 8:32 am
Did anyone see this?
http://qc.news.yahoo.com/s/14022009/3/national-france-quebec-sarkozy-adoucit-le-ton.html
Nom
February 14, 2009 at 10:48 am
Softened his remarks a bit, no apologies and it appears he didnt change his opinion on the issue.
abp
February 14, 2009 at 11:33 am
Could it be that the stench of anglophobic racism that is the norm here in Quebec be smelt all the way across the Atlantic?
To answer AGF: Should separatists have been looking outside of France for friends – No, they are too ’sectarian’ and ‘inward-looking’ – duh!
Quote: The president called sovereingtists, without naming them, ’sectarian’ and ‘inwrad-looking’. He said he did not understand the « obligation to define one’s identity by fierce opposition to the other. »
How is it that by talking about an unnamed group as ’sectarian’ and ‘inward-looking’ that separatists knew immediately that he was talking about them?
And it’s not that separatists refute that they are ’sectarian’ and ‘inward-looking’, it’s that Sarkozy had the audacity to say it out loud for the world to know! AGF, it’s no secret. Get over it.
Je me souviens – it’s on every license plates in Quebec. Yet in culturally immature Quebec, we cannot commemorate a battle that took place 250 years ago. Suddenly it’s something not worth remembering.
What is the message we project to the world? A culture that does not care about culture, but that likes to talk about culture and the importance of the culture of my clan. It’s a society that does not know what is culture and sophistication.
Be a redneck! Live in Quebec. One is made for the other.
Toutum
February 19, 2009 at 12:00 am
toutum, tu prends bien plaisir a definir les quebecois comme racistes, xenophobes, immatures, sectaires..Mais quel est le mot qui s’applique justement pour les gens comme toi qui font de l’amalgame:
ex. les italiens sont..
les juifs sont tous…
les quebecois sont ..
les americains sont…
ca s’appelle simplement du racisme mon tit pit..
Anonymous
February 19, 2009 at 9:49 pm