AngryFrenchGuy

The FLQ Manifesto, Whiggers and English Canada’s Jungle Fever

with 192 comments

22n.riot1

On the 29th of January 1969, 10 months 22 months before the kidnapping of James Cross and Pierre Laporte by the Front de Libération du Québec and the beginning of the October crisis, about 200 black and white students of Sir George William university—now Concordia University—occupied the computer room to protest racism and discrimination. Things got ugly, fire broke out and the university called in the riot squad to arrest the students while a crowd of white students stood by, chanting « Burn, Nigger, Burn ».

Canada briefly became the symbol of racism and imperialism across the black world, writes Sean William Mills of Queen’s University in The Empire Within, as « protests against symbols of Canadian power erupted throughout the Caribbean. In the aftermath of the event, students at the Cave Hill campus of the University of the West Indies in Barbados mounted a “symbolic burial of (…) the racist institution of Sir George Williams University,” and the visit of Canadian Governor General Daniel Roland Michener to the West Indies on a ‘good-will’ tour set off a series of mass protests, contributing to a revolutionary moment that nearly toppled the government of Trinidad. »

That was Montreal in it’s “glory days”, you know, before the separatists showed up…

Earlier this week newspapers across Canada offered unsolicited advice of the controversy surrounding the proposed reading of the Front de Libération du Québec’s manifesto on the Plains of Abraham as part of a commemoration of the 1759 battle that, according to a Globe and Mail writer “marks the birth of the great Canadian spirit of cultural accommodation.”

Some, like the Calgary Herald, argued against “celebrating and glorifying the racist text.”  Most, however, thought the manifesto should be read in the name of memory and History.  It is a reminder of the dark side of Québec nationalism, editorialized the Edmonton Journal: « The document is as ancient, paranoid and creepy as a lunatic pamphlet promoting sterilization or racial cleansing ».   The National Post also agreed the Manifesto should be read, as long as it was « delivered with all the savage, sneering, race-supremacist spirit in which it was written. »

The National Post editorial board saw a black québécois, Luck Mervil, who announced he was going to read the manifesto of a 1970’s radical gang that trained in Jordan with the PLO, idealized Algerian revolutionaries, worshiped the Black Panthers, kidnapped a couple of white guys–a Brit and a French-Canadian–before fleeing to exile in Cuba, and with their deep and subtle understanding of History discerned a “race-supremacist spirit »?!?

People sometime do that. When they don’t like an event or memory in their personal past they ctrl-x it out and ctrl-v another story in its place.

The way in which English-Canada has been mapping the events of the Civil Rights movement and the violence that shook the deep american south onto the October Crisis is transparent. English Canadians are cast as the good guys, progressive and modern JFK-type northerners. French Canadians play the role of the fundamentally good yet slightly retarded southern whites in need of stern moral guidance.  English Montrealers become the powerless black folk and the FLQ is completely reinvented as a hate-filled rear-guard militia of inbred bigots known in other parts as the KKK. In that story the Canadian army was sent into the streets of Montreal to prevent a race war and restore harmonious multicultural peace.

Hey, Canadians aren’t the only ones who are trying to live out someone else’s history. The white private school guerrilleros of the FLQ had deeply immersed themselves in the writings of Malcom X, Aimé Césaire and Black Liberation. They had come to see and describe themselves as the « Blacks of Canada » and the « White Niggers of America ». Whiggers with dynamite.

Québec and Black Nationalists actually did bang together on some occasions, like that time in 1962, reported in Time magazine, when a “frowsy, 6-ft. blonde named Michelle Duclos, 26, (…) a frequent visitor to New York for dates with African representatives to the U.N.” was arrested for transporting dynamite over the border for “the Black Liberation Front, a hot-eyed batch of pro-Castro New York Negroes.”  Randy negros and promiscuous French girls:  Protestant America’s nightmare.

But at the end of the day the fact is there were black people in Montreal in 1970 and they weren’t down with the FLQ any more than they were the FLQ’s target. They had their own struggle.

Remembering History is great. Remembering what really happened is even better.

And what actually happened is that when the anti-racism Sir George William University demonstrators were tried for civil disobedience and destroying 2 million dollars worth of computers, their attorney was Robert Lemieux

…the FLQ’s lawyer.

Written by angryfrenchguy

September 13, 2009 at 1:36 pm

192 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. He called Tremblay an ex-sovereignist, which he isn’t and Tremblay didn’t question the “desirability” of Québec sovereignty nor “renounce” it. The entry is old, the title is a blatant falsehood, no original quotes from Tremblay are used and mongolophone had no idea what he was talking about, as usual. Hence your defence of him.

    James

    September 18, 2009 at 1:50 pm

  2. “Don’t kid yourself about blogs being representative of any kind of important opinion currents.”

    It’s true of the mainstream media as well.

    “And please lose the anglo-hegemonic schtick, it lessens your otherwise intelligent observations.”

    Thanks for the advice, but even if it risks making me appear less intellectual, I do believe there is an anglo-hegemonist streak in quite a few of the people I share my country with. Just as there is a franco-hegemonist streak that is present in Quebec.

    “So people from outside Quebec comment on Quebec blogs, can’t you just accept it for what it is and not see some foreboding presence ? Lots of Quebecers comment on blogs outside Quebec, its not a sin .”

    Of course, but that doesn’t change the fact that the amount of keen interest in Quebec affairs seems way out of proportion to me.

    It’s not normal that most people in English-speaking Canada can go on and on about how Quebec mistreats its anglo minority, but that most have never heard of the fact that some officers of city police forces on the Prairies not that long ago would take homeless aboriginals off downtown streets and dump them in the middle of wheatfields 50 miles outside of town in the middle of the night when it’s -40.

    Acajack

    September 18, 2009 at 1:57 pm

  3. How amusing that someone who puts in question the scholarly validity of a U. of Ottawa prof while pointing to no scholarly work of his own which challenges it, and providing a “link” to support his argument which doesn’t even work, would come to the defence of wikipedia. From the horse’s mouth, as it were, a wikipedia article on.. wikipedia’s accuracy:

    Wikipedia acknowledges that it should not be used as a primary source for serious research.[13] Librarian Philip Bradley stated in an October 2004 interview with The Guardian that the concept behind the site was a “lovely idea,” but, “practically, I wouldn’t use it; and I’m not aware of a single librarian who would. The main problem is the lack of authority. With printed publications, the publishers have to ensure that their data is reliable, as their livelihood depends on it. But with something like this, all that goes out the window.”[14] Robert McHenry and Paul Vallely similarly noted that readers of Wikipedia can not know who has written the article they are reading – it may or may not have been written by an expert.

    Gee, imagine a non-peer reviewed “encyclopedia” in which any anomymous hack with any or no credentials can write anything about anything being…unreliable.

    Actually it was Antonio who furnished us with an example of the imbecilities Wikipedia can lead to, not long ago either. So I guess with your other deficient faculties Vinster we can add that of your memory:

    https://angryfrenchguy.com/2009/06/17/quebec-separatist-save-st-jean-baptist-show-from-ultra-nationalists/#comment-8558

    James

    September 18, 2009 at 2:08 pm

  4. Gees, doesn’t take much to get you excited.

    “How amusing that someone who puts in question the scholarly validity of a U. of Ottawa prof while pointing to no scholarly work of his own which challenges it”

    Well, you can take my analysis, at the time, for what it’s worth. If I my memory does not fail me, I seem to remember that AFG found the exercice interesting, and I don’t recall anyone questioning my objectivity. If you care to give a reply of your own on this topic, you are free to dig deeply in the AFG archives and retrieve it.

    As for the rest of your diatribe… well, I’d have to ask politely what your point is, and what it is exactly that you are trying to debate. If your point is that Wikipedia is not the most reliable source, I agree with you. If your point is that, however unreliable it might be, it is still a decent and interesting “encyclopedia”, then I agree again. So, where’s the problem this timme?

    Vinster171

    September 18, 2009 at 2:17 pm

  5. @ James :

    Thank you for proving the following statement :

    “While I do not think that this “reaction” is representative of how most Quebeckers would react, it still shows that this subject of often far too emotional for some to be discussed rationally.”

    Vinster171

    September 18, 2009 at 2:22 pm

  6. “It’s not normal that most people in English-speaking Canada can go on and on about how Quebec mistreats its anglo minority, but that most have never heard of the fact that some officers of city police forces on the Prairies not that long ago would take homeless aboriginals off downtown streets and dump them in the middle of wheatfields 50 miles outside of town in the middle of the night when it’s -40.”

    Well, it sort of reminds me of how easy it is for bloggers like AFG or even some mainstream medias in Quebec to go on and on about how French Canadians are being treated in the ROC. People don’t like to focus on their own shortcomings. It’s much easier to look at what the neighbor’s doing wrong and criticize.

    Vinster171

    September 18, 2009 at 2:27 pm

  7. Well, you can take my analysis, at the time, for what it’s worth.

    I did. Promise.

    If I my memory does not fail me, I seem to remember that AFG found the exercice interesting, and I don’t recall anyone questioning my objectivity.

    Well I guess that takes care of peer review, then.

    If your point is that Wikipedia is not the most reliable source, I agree with you. If your point is that, however unreliable it might be, it is still a decent and interesting “encyclopedia”, then I agree again.

    My point is that it’s not a reliable source. My point was never that is was a “decent and interesting” encyclopedia. Why would an unreliable encyclopedia be “decent”? Forget putting words in my mouth, it’s a tall enough order for you to produce them for yourself.

    Since Wikipedia is a complete “hit and miss” operation, things will be entered there which are accurate along with things that aren’t. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

    As it happens, all the affirmations made in the passages Antonio quotes can be found documented elsewhere, by authors with names to defend and sources to cite. E.g. Philpot’s « Le référendum volé », and his and Lester’s « Les secrets d’Option Canada. »

    Aide-mémoire:

    https://angryfrenchguy.com/2009/08/18/quebecs-bizarre-segregated-school-system/#comment-9972

    James

    September 18, 2009 at 2:45 pm

  8. “My point is that it’s not a reliable source. My point was never that is was a “decent and interesting” encyclopedia. Why would an unreliable encyclopedia be “decent”? Forget putting words in my mouth, it’s a tall enough order for you to produce them for yourself.”

    So, if I am getting this straight, this means that the discussion we are having at the moment started when you threw a hissy fit at me for quoting you correctly… Well, I guess that makes sense!

    Vinster171

    September 18, 2009 at 2:57 pm

  9. before you conclude that “facts aren’t welcome here” Vinster, you might want to consider presenting some first. You know, run them up the flagpole and see who salutes them.

    Like your idea that sovereignists have the monopoly on being thin-skinned when someone changes camps. For starters, that wasn’t the case with Tremblay, but no-one can correct one of your idiot allies here without being a candidate for a straitjacket apparently. As I recall Lesage and Kierans weren’t exactly zenned out and stoic when Lévesque came over to sovereignty. Nor did a lot of anglos greet with equanimity Richard Holden’s crossing over to the PQ. As I recall the Gazette had hissy fits over one of the B-T commissioners being a sovereignist. The fact that the other commissioner was an anglo federalist was fair game though.

    But I love getting lessons on “maturity” and history from someone who’s interest in history doesn’t extend past the last time the Islanders won the Stanley Cup. History lessons from you are fun. Maybe not as fun as decorum lessons from Rory, but fun all the same.

    James

    September 18, 2009 at 3:10 pm

  10. Well, if you consider the most francophones in Quebec aren’t even aware of the presence of francophones outside the province, “propagandists” like AFG and others must be doing a pretty poor job. I find it hard to believe that most Quebecers are aware that their francophone brothers and sisters in the ROC are mistreated when most have no clue that they exist.

    Hey, I moved to Gatineau from Ottawa, which is just across the river. When I tell (some) Gatineau-born people that I am from Ottawa, that I went to high school there, their reaction is: “Huh? There are francophones in Ottawa?!? You went to school in French in Ontario?!?!”

    I travelled throughout Quebec many times (and many of my friends and relatives still do) with Ontario licence plates and at least a couple of times during any given trip people will almost literally fall off their chairs when an Ontario-plated car pulls up to a gas station or a restaurant and people pop out of it speaking French.

    So I highly doubt that the average person in Trois-Rivières or Victoriaville can get all riled up over the situation of Franco-Ontarians or Franco-Manitobans.

    This ignorance of ROC francophones is actually a major problem, but that’s a whole other matter.

    The fact remains is that there is hardly a Quebec smear campaign against the ROC where the intent is to expose the ROC’s dirty laundry to all who are willing to listen.

    Acajack

    September 18, 2009 at 3:40 pm

  11. “And please lose the anglo-hegemonic schtick, it lessens your otherwise intelligent observations.”

    [Sarcasm on – thanks to Vinster for inpiring this subtle yet effective comprehension-aiding technique]

    Yes, really AJ, you might want to drop such offensive references. Bear in mind that a number of the people you’re addressing here have the historical and political awareness of your average Loft Story participant. So lose the boilerplate persecutophone jargon, willya?

    here are some *acceptable themes* for use in our circle of discussion:

    All anglophones in QC consider themselves Québécois, even though the English college dictionaries don’t actually define them as such, and neither does Prime Minister Harper. And when anglophone journals pontificate about the « Québécois’ » endless shortcomings, they don’t seem to be including anglophones either. But play along please.

    The treatment of francophones outside Québec = the treatment of anglophones in Québec. Surely there’s no disagreement on that point. Why I’ve lost count of all the times I’ve seen an entire workgroup or board of directors in Windsor or Welland all switch over to French just because there’s *one* francophone among them. Not to mention how impossible it is to get served in English in Saint-Boniface or Sturgeon Falls or Hawkesbury. Or the ridiculous decision to accord the francophone CHU in Toronto the same funding as the anglophone CHU. Franchement… Or the 0% rate of assimilation of Québec anglos and the 35+% rate of assimilation of ROC francophones. That works out about the same when you round it off.

    The Flq is making an imminent revival. Worse, its worst perps aren’t still incarcerated naked in cells with no natural light and instead are leading productive lives and paying taxes. Scandale! At least, however, the people who stripped and mocked innocent women in their homes and feigned executions of innocent detainees to scare the bejeezus out of them are collecting their fat pensions.

    Work with these themes instead please and stop being so sectarian.

    [sarcasm off – mise en relief technique intellectual property of Vinster; all rights reserved]

    James

    September 18, 2009 at 4:09 pm

  12. James, you are STILL missing the point! Where did I ever stated the following :

    “Like your idea that sovereignists have the monopoly on being thin-skinned when someone changes camps.”

    I can certainly understand why you would assume that, but it is not the case. I was simply pointing out that you were missing allophone’s argument.

    Vinster171

    September 18, 2009 at 4:49 pm

  13. “[Sarcasm on – thanks to Vinster for inpiring this subtle yet effective comprehension-aiding technique]”

    I have to start charging for that…

    Vinster171

    September 18, 2009 at 5:00 pm

  14. Acajack,
    I disagree that anyone is annoyed by the fact that a corner of NA is Francophone. In fact I suspect most find it quite quaint. Most in the US don’t give one iota. Canadians who make such a fuss are probably doing it because they feel that a group of people living hundreds or thousands of kilometers away from them somehow get to dictate the cultural and linguistic identity of their country. It’s pretty much exactly the same thing that annoys Quebecois about English Canada.

    The ironic thing is that in Quebec it is tinged with angst over the fact that English cultural domination threatens their “national” culture, whereas in the rest of Canada it actually helps identify their national culture.

    In the end Canada is not so very different from the U.S., except for the French.

    Edward

    September 18, 2009 at 9:24 pm

  15. ”I disagree that anyone is annoyed by the fact that a corner of NA is Francophone. In fact I suspect most find it quite quaint. Most in the US don’t give one iota.”

    I was referring mostly to Canadians. One cannot be very familiar with English-speaking Canada to say that there isn`t a good-sized proportion of the population that is annoyed by the fact that there is a chunk of their country where they feel out of place because it is French-speaking. As for the Americans, you are right that most don`t care but once again there is also a non-negligeble anglo-hegemonist streak in the U.S. as everyone knows. Once again, to suggest otherwise is to have never travelled abroad and seen these people in action. For some people, the fact that Quebec is right next door to the States and part of a larger mainly anglo country is even more confounding.

    ”Canadians who make such a fuss are probably doing it because they feel that a group of people living hundreds or thousands of kilometers away from them somehow get to dictate the cultural and linguistic identity of their country. It’s pretty much exactly the same thing that annoys Quebecois about English Canada.
    The ironic thing is that in Quebec it is tinged with angst over the fact that English cultural domination threatens their “national” culture, whereas in the rest of Canada it actually helps identify their national culture.

    In the end Canada is not so very different from the U.S., except for the French.”

    In spite of the fact that I truly believe many English-speaking Canadians know and feel this deep down inside, very few of them can actually bring themselves to truly embrace the francophone character that is huge part of what makes their country unique. At best, they pay lip service to it when it`s convenient, in the same way that aboriginal cultures are trotted out in many countries of the world in order to impress foreign VIPs.

    Acajack

    September 18, 2009 at 10:42 pm

  16. Acajack: Why am I here still? It’s a fair question.

    Because I find Quebec odd in its regional context—especially because, as someone here said, it’s not often Anglophones find themselves in a minority. (And my acquaintances I was burbling about Quebec to found it even more odd: they kept asking “so… why are there French in Quebec again?”)

    And because the identity struggles are played out gros-plan, in boldface, and in a language I knew well and a language I kinda know. Because there are some consonances with other identity struggles I’m more familiar with, and plenty more dissonances.

    Actually, the French department at my university had a Quebec specialist (Jane Warren), and in the mid 2000s she got healthy enrolments in her course on Quebec language politics: we find that kind of thing interesting in Australia. Well, some of us do.

    This does not make me as an outside observer benevolent, sympathetic, or clueful. But if you set yourselves an interesting dynamic, you will get people gawking at the glass house… *shrug*.

    I completely don’t get the amnesty of Rose & Co, btw; but I wasn’t there in either 1970, nor 1965.

    Anonymous

    September 19, 2009 at 8:34 am

  17. Sacré. That was me, just then.

    Nick Nicholas

    September 19, 2009 at 8:35 am

  18. @ James :

    “In a similar spirit, the PQ blackballed Patrick Bourgeois, a non-terrorist as well who’s never hurt a flea, for something they should have been *congratulating* him for, namely his and Falardeau’s successful campaign to stop the battle which marked the beginning of centuries of subjugation of Québécois to the British Empire from being turned into a Disneyfied tourist fête.”

    vs

    “Remembering History is great. Remembering what really happened is even better.”

    So it’s okay to hold an event that is mostly financed by separatists organizations and where the FLQ manifesto is read, because it is a part of our history… but God forbids we have a re-enactment of the Bataille des Plaines d’Abraham, which is also a part of our history! Gotta love double standards!

    Vinster171

    September 19, 2009 at 4:34 pm

  19. Marc here; I’ve noticed that another poster on this blog is using the name Marc so I’ll switch to something more unique.

    > I was referring mostly to Canadians. One cannot be very familiar with
    > English-speaking Canada to say that there isn`t a good-sized proportion
    > of the population that is annoyed by the fact that there is a chunk
    > of their country where they feel out of place because it is French-speaking.

    In other words, it’s not so much the fact that French is a majority in Quebec that bothers Canadians, but rather the fact that English is a minority in Quebec. Since Quebec is part of Canada, anglophone Canadians expect that they should feel at home there, just like they do from St. John’s to Vancouver. (I don’t believe the regional cultural differences in Canada outside Quebec are so great as to make Canadians feel foreign.) But they don’t, or at least not as much as they’d want. This is what leads them to make pronouncements about Quebec being “closed to the world”, etc.

    Francophone Quebecers don’t expect to feel at home in the rest of Canada, so they don’t have this problem.

    > In spite of the fact that I truly believe many English-speaking Canadians
    > know and feel this deep down inside, very few of them can actually bring
    > themselves to truly embrace the francophone character that is huge part of
    > what makes their country unique. At best, they pay lip service to it when
    > it`s convenient, in the same way that aboriginal cultures are trotted
    > out in many countries of the world in order to impress foreign VIPs.

    This is true. While I’m sure anglophone Canadians would mention the fact that the country is “part French” when asked for defining characteristics of Canada, it really doesn’t do anything for them. They have their own culture independent of Quebec’s. In fact, I’d say that the statement that “Canada is not so very different from the U.S., except for the French”, depending on the tone, can be close to an insult towards Canada.

    Obelix

    September 19, 2009 at 4:48 pm

  20. Anglo Canadians listen to pretty much the same music, read pretty much the same books, and go to pretty much the same movies as we do down here. Their historical traditions and myths are a good bit different from ours, however. Indeed, anglo Canada and the US even fought a war (1812-14) against each other, one which the Canadian side believes it won. (This view of “Mr. Madison’s War” is not shared in this country, however; see, e.g. the song “The Battle of New Orleans,” popularized by Johnny Horton.)

    I mentioned here before that one of my college history professors was fond of pointing out that “Canada is British because it’s French.” I think he meant that more as a statement of historical and cultural fact rather than as an insult, although I don’t know how my old roommate Garth from Alberta would have reacted to what he said.

    littlerob

    September 19, 2009 at 8:09 pm

  21. Anglo Canadians listen to pretty much the same music, read pretty much the same books, and go to pretty much the same movies as we do down here.

    You can whistle that again, mon littlerob:

    Il est sans doute très rassurant pour les Québécois de savoir que 47 de leurs 50 émissions françaises de télévision les plus populaires sont produi-tes au Québec, et très bouleversant pour les Canadiens anglais de sa-voir que 47 de leurs 50 émissions les plus populaires sont produites aux États-Unis.

    Click to access pour_un_quebec_souverain.pdf

    although I don’t know how my old roommate Garth from Alberta would have reacted to what he said.

    puts me in mind of one of my favourite tv sketches. In no way intended as a comment on your ex-roommate, bien entendu:

    James

    September 19, 2009 at 8:30 pm

  22. > Indeed, anglo Canada and the US even fought a war (1812-14) against
    > each other, one which the Canadian side believes it won.

    Yes, the War of 1812 appears to be popular among anglophone Canadians for some reason. It’s almost totally unknown in Quebec; the Rebellions of 1837 are much more well-known here. The British appear to have prevailed militarily but the treaty negotiations ended with the status quo. Now, whether we can say that “Canada” won the war is a question of debate. The Canadian militia appears to have participated to some of the battles, but as far as I know the British army was the major player on the British side.

    Obelix

    September 20, 2009 at 12:21 am

  23. James: I’m still laughing at the bit about the election for mayor as I write this.

    Garth did report that there were franco families in his town, not omitting to complain that they had the bad habit of speaking French among themselves.

    Obelix: My sense is that anglo Canadians claim that “we” burned the White House (this was in fact done by British regulars), while “they” lost the Battle of New Orleans (also British regulars). Have your cake and eat it too. AFAIK the local (anglo) militia did not participate in any battles outside Upper Canada and the adjoining American states/territories, although it held its own, to be sure, in those areas.

    1812 and 1837 have a bit of a connection in that Louis-Joseph Papineau, during his exile in the United States, tried to get the Van Buren administration to act on behalf of the Patriotes. Van Buren was a protegé of his predecessor, Andrew Jackson, who made his political reputation as the victor of the Battle of New Orleans; Jackson was throughout his life a violent Anglophobe. Van Buren ultimately decided to declare the United States neutral in the conflict, however, much to Papineau’s disappointment and disgust.

    littlerob

    September 20, 2009 at 7:05 am

  24. @James,

    On another forum, I was told this:

    “Notre but est de rendre la situation inconfortable pour l’occupant et aussi pour les collabos. Nous allons donc rendre la sitation très inconfortable pour les gens comme toi. Les immigrants qui respectent notre peuple et qui considèrent le Québec comme leur pays sont mes frères. Toi tu es un ennemi du Québec Libre… “

    My question to you: when dealing with people who think that they are part of some imaginary resistance movement, fighting an imaginary war against an imaginary occupant, isn’t the use of the word “paranoid” justified?

    allophone

    September 20, 2009 at 11:00 am

  25. @allophone,

    And this missive came from whom? A nobody with an internet account like you?

    The reason I don’t generalize about sovereignists on the basis of something like that is the same reason I don’t generalize about federalists on the basis of someone like you – not all of them are as racist or stupid as you, in fact most of them aren’t.

    Not every federalist would make the racist insinuation for example that a business with Oriental-sounding names in its title will deliver superior services to one with French-Canadian-sounding names, trading in the English Canadian stereotype of French Canadians as beer-swilling BS-collecting gigueurs. Or would suggest the hegemony of English globally is because it’s a “simpler” language which is more functional. Or make fun of the name of an immigrant who disagrees with his Elvis Gratton politics while claiming to be the voice of mistreated immigrants.

    Most federalists aren’t that stupid. But examples of paranoia and hysteria abound: Ottawa’s leading newspaper conducting a hate campaign against a hospital president because he was once a PQ candidate, encouraging people to denounce him as a “traitor.” A Mohawk leader wondering aloud whether the “Québécois”, by which he didn’t include himself or Stephen Gordon or Don MacPherson, were “ready” for the violence which would ensue if they chose to “separate.” A Liberal minister claiming sovereignty would cost a million jobs. Harper’s ministers thundering in the parliament Goebbels-style about a “separatist-socialist” coalition which was neither, and the 100’s of people who took the cue to demonstrate against the “traitors.” That’s not to speak of all the nobodies in internet fora who talk about how to deal with the “Québécois” “separatist” traitors too. You could trawl the ‘net and find them as well. Funny how your diagnostic skills never turn to them. Their loss.

    James

    September 20, 2009 at 12:16 pm

  26. Vinster,

    “So it’s okay to hold an event that is mostly financed by separatists organizations and where the FLQ manifesto is read, because it is a part of our history… but God forbids we have a re-enactment of the Bataille des Plaines d’Abraham, which is also a part of our history! Gotta love double standards!”

    The difference is a matter of taste. The reconsitution of the Battle of the Plains of Abraham was going to be done in a festive manner which lends to bad taste. For starters, they were going to have people dress up in period costumes, mock shoot at each other and play dead. This is a trivialization of the battle where people really died. Worse, after the battle, the actors for the generals Wolfe and Montcalm were going to shake hands, as a poster advertising the reconsitution showed, which is a trivialization too. Wolfe and Montacalm were enemies in real life, they did not like each other. Worse, the shaking of hands seemed to serve Canadian propaganda insisting that we have moved on and that the battle is of no consequence. This is offensive to those who believe, like I do, that the battle led to the Conquest which led to the the struggle and survival of the French fact in North America.

    The manifesto of the FLQ was not done in a festive manner like the reconstitution would have been. For starters, it is one of many historical documents of different viewpoints being read at the event.

    That is the difference. I see no double standards.

    Antonio

    September 20, 2009 at 12:21 pm

  27. Vinster,

    “So, if I am getting this straight, this means that the discussion we are having at the moment started when you threw a hissy fit at me for quoting you correctly… Well, I guess that makes sense!”

    You miss James point. He was saying that, contrary to what you were claiming, he has no problem with the quotes that I used in my earlier post because, although they were from Wikipedia, these quotes can be found in more scolarly sources also, meaning that they were acceptable in James’s eyes. Therefore, unlike what you said, James loved my post and my sources all the same.

    For the record, I like using Wikipedia since it is the easiest source of information to find online as long as we take care that the information taken from there is valid by cross-checking them with other sources. Wikipedia is not all bad nor is it completely reliable.

    Antonio

    September 20, 2009 at 12:33 pm

  28. Thanks for this exaustive answer, James. But a yes or no would have sufficed.

    allophone

    September 20, 2009 at 2:38 pm

  29. what, you didn’t like that tour through some of your most memorable bloopers? Well I certainly did. Keep up the good work.

    James

    September 20, 2009 at 2:54 pm

  30. That was a tour through my bloopers? I didn’t even realize. Maybe because I fell asleep half way through the first paragraph. Next time I’ll try a stronger moka latte to help me read through your posts.

    But I’m flattered that I have such an avid fan that keeps track of these things. Thanks James.

    allophone

    September 20, 2009 at 4:23 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: