AngryFrenchGuy

Quebec On a Mission to Save English in the World

with 1,297 comments

It’s going to be a scorching hot summer in Québec City. In about a week the Philadelphia Flyers will put an end to the providential media blackout provided by the Habs’ unexpected early playoffs successes and Jean Charest’s Liberals, already busy with Mulroney-scale allegations of corruption, will also have to deal with their very first full-scale language crisis.

And if the word on the WiFi is true, Charest might just be about to take Québec’s already schizophrenic linguistic situation straight through the looking-glass.

Y’all of course remember that last year the Supreme Court of Canada invalidated Bill 104, a law that closed a loophole used by wealthy families to purchase the right to send their kids to English-language public schools, a privilege that in the spirit and letter of Québec’s laws, is supposed to be reserved for Québec’s historic English-speaking minority.

The Supremes essentially agreed that closing that loophole was a legitimate objective, but decided that the technicalities of Bill 104, the idea that all the time a student spent in a unsubsidized private school didn’t count as education in Canada, was too much. It gave the Québec bureaucrats one year to find a better way to close the loophole.

Evidently this is harder than it sounds and Charest government already missed its deadline.

In the Red corner, tenors of the English-speaking community have taken the debate way beyond the loophole and are arguing that short of a new source of students, Québec’s English-language public school system, and, by extension, all of Québec’s English-speaking community, is on the verge of demographic collapse. (The inconvenient fact that the size of the English system relative to the French system is stable, that interprovincial migration from English-speaking provinces to Québec is on the rise and that English as a home, work and higher education language in Québec is in the midst of a historic boom is conveniently ignored.)

Emboldened by a recent poll that suggests that for the first time in decades Québec Francos would support giving themsleves the right to send their kids to English schools, some are asking the Liberals to take this opportunity to give… everyone except Québec’s Franco’s access to English schools.

One of the solutions to the English schools demographic « decline » peddled by School Board—and appalingly getting support in some sovereigntist circles—is the right to public education should be extended not only to families who have received an English education somewhere in Canada, but also to those who have received this education in « English-speaking countries » such as the US or the United Kingdom.

Notice the two countries that inevitably come up when that solution is proposed: the US and the UK. What about Jamaica, South Africa, Belize, Nigeria and Cameroun?

An arbitrary choice of countries could never be justified on any objective moral grounds and would inevitably be struck down in courts as discriminatory. Eventually, the right to a subsidised English education would have to be extended to the children of parents who have been educated in English not only in Canada, but « to any children with at least one parent educated in English anywhere on Earth », as the Montreal Gazette suggested.

In other words, instead of closing a loophole that enabled wealthy Québec Francos and immigrants to purchase the privilege of a subsidized English education in Québec, these people are suggesting that we take the racket global!

Because make no mistake about it, « elsewhere on Earth » an English education is a privilege of the wealthy. In places like Pakistan, India, much of Africa and Asia, sending their children to exclusive private English-language schools is the local elites way of making sure they have first dibs on all the good government, justice and army brass jobs.

Ain’t globalization grand?

It is possible to argue that Québec’s English-speaking community has historical rights to its own institutions. But we would now be extending these rights to ALL English-speaking people, anywhere on Earth. Québec, of all places, would be the first Nation in the world to treat ALL THE WORLD’S ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLES as a minority in need of special protection!

And all the Francos in the English language school board’s poll that want greater access to English schools?   Too bad.  They’d still be locked out.

Add to FaceBookAdd to Google BookmarkAdd to RedditAdd to Twitter SAVE THE ENGLISH

Written by angryfrenchguy

May 19, 2010 at 6:49 pm

Posted in AngryFrenchGuy Speaks!

Tagged with , ,

1,297 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. @midnightjack

    “All the provinces are unilingual, except New Brunswick.”

    Err, no midnightjack. NB is the only officially bilingual province in Canada. The other provinces have never designated themselves as either bilingual or unilingual. They can’t declare themselves unilingual, otherwise they would be in breach of the Canadian Constitution. Except for one province, which starts with Q…

    “And you didn’t know that Quebec never signed the canadian constitution: it has been imposed in a very anti-democratic way….”

    Sure. Then please stop taking the transfer payments from us as well. Quid pro quo, mate.

    ottawamigrant

    August 3, 2010 at 4:45 pm

  2. http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/rss/article/1143338
    Look what happens in Bathurst: discrimination against francophones is not over at all..

    midnightjack

    August 3, 2010 at 4:52 pm

  3. @midnightjack

    Time for you to learn to read as well mate:

    http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/rss/article/1143338

    “Anglo Society says it will continue to fight for rights”

    This is not a story about discrimination against francophones. Sounds more like an Anglophone who is pissed off with bilingualism in NB.

    “Glenn, a 78-year-old former lumberman and pulp mill worker, said he isn’t against French people or bilingualism.

    But he is concerned about the “forced bilingualism” taking root in places such as Moncton, where a bilingual sign bylaw is being considered, and Dieppe, where one has already passed.

    “There is nothing wrong with bilingualism, but when they force it on people … you have to be bilingual now to get a job. It’s not right,” he said.

    “This is what’s happening more and more and more. A lot of the anglophones don’t seem to know what’s going on right in front of them.”

    OK, Glenn sounds like someone from the Tea Party in the US. Doesn’t Glenn realise we live in a bilingual country. What a tool!

    ottawamigrant

    August 3, 2010 at 5:01 pm

  4. Coming back to the story at hand, I actually agree with AngryFrenchGuy: Let people decide what language they want their children educated in, regardless of whether they are Anglo, Franco, Allo or Alieno.

    If they want English, they can choose English.

    If they want French, they can choose French.

    Vive la “freedom of choice”

    ottawamigrant

    August 3, 2010 at 5:13 pm

  5. @JN

    “Throughout their empire, the english have always used the natives to do their dirty work.”

    Substitute “the english” for “the french” and the statement is equally true.

    ottawamigrant

    August 3, 2010 at 5:18 pm

  6. Thanks for the link AngryFrenchGuy

    @Marc, @ragazzino. Do us a favour and please read:

    http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/Poll+shows+Quebecers+support+right+choose+language+education/3010906/story.html

    “The current law, upheld by all Quebec governments for three decades as essential to the survival of French in Quebec —_but struck down last October by the Supreme Court — limits English-language public schooling to students whose parents were educated in English somewhere in Canada.”

    So why can’t anyone decide to send their kids to an English-language public school? Isn’t this a curtailment of rights by Quebec?

    “But Beaulieu wants the new bill, which is expected to be presented in the provincial legislature this week, to include the notwithstanding clause, to extend application of Bill 101, Quebec’s Charter of the French Language, to private unsubsidized English schools as well.”

    And they want to extend the curtailment of rights to private schools in Quebec as well.

    Can someone explain to me why the government of Quebec is sooooo hell-bent on this?

    Thanks. Much appreciated.

    ottawamigrant

    August 3, 2010 at 5:31 pm

  7. J EA NN A I M A RD here.

    So why can’t anyone decide to send their kids to an English-language public school? Isn’t this a curtailment of rights by Quebec?

    Why would anyone want to send it’s offspring to an english school in Québec?

    Anonymous

    August 3, 2010 at 6:11 pm

  8. la plupart ne vivent même pas au Québec; ils ne font que le critiquer du fond de leur ignorance.

    Kriss

    August 3, 2010 at 7:49 pm

  9. Thanks for the link AngryFrenchGuy

    @Marc, @ragazzino. Do us a favour and please read:

    http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/Poll+shows+Quebecers+support+right+choose+language+education/3010906/story.html

    Your putting faith in a poll conducted by and as per the wishes of the rag known as the Montreal Gazette says a lot more about you than it does about me.

    So why can’t anyone decide to send their kids to an English-language public school? Isn’t this a curtailment of rights by Quebec?

    Absolutely not. An english education is not a fundamental right. But one in the territory’s official language (in this case french) certainly is. This is how every other country operates. Official languages and by extention, language of education are defined by territory. And on the territory of Québec, it is French.

    And they want to extend the curtailment of rights to private schools in Quebec as well.

    As I explained to you before, there is no curtailing of anyone’s rights in Québec. You’d be very hard pressed to find an example of such a thing.

    marc

    August 3, 2010 at 9:28 pm

  10. marc writes:

    Your putting faith in a poll conducted by and as per the wishes of the rag known as the Montreal Gazette says a lot more about you than it does about me.

    I am not at my home computer so I don’t have access to my files but I know of two other polls done through the years that somewhat confirm the Gazette poll. I say “somewhat” because the questions weren’t exactly the same and, like I say, I’m not home and don’t have access to them.

    But forget polls and whether or not they are accurate. Think about it for a second: francophones aren’t stupid. They know that the way for their kids to get ahead is by learning English. And they know that as fully functioning human beings that they should have all the rights and freedoms that their anglophone neighbours have. So why shouldn’t they, too, have freedom of choice in language of education? That is precisely what a majority of Quebec francophones think and believe.

    It is only elitists and those who seek to control the thoughts and minds of francophones — like the church elite of pre-Quiet Revolution Quebec — that want to deny francophones full rights. They want to control them and decide for them how to think, act and vote.

    In other words, the hate mongers and racists who support in and believe in Bill 101.

    anonymous

    August 3, 2010 at 9:39 pm

  11. @ ottawaimmigrant:

    Actually, you don’t read and seem to learn much. But you still have a lot to learn about your new country…surely a good crash course on Canadian history would help.

    If you really want to discuss word usage…Virtually and barely are actually not the same. Virtually bilingual means it is *almost* bilingual, which means it is not bilingual but could be…*barely* bilingual means it has achieved bilingualism but just enough to be considered bilingual, it’s precariously bilingual, in other words…

    1) that is government-related.
    2) still government-related.
    3) again, government-related.
    4) I know, I’ve worked at one and 60% of my calls were done in English. 50% of my Montreal calls were dealt with in English.
    5) Does that make your average Canadian viewer bilingual? No. The vast majority of English Canadians will watch TV exclusively in English, won’t know of any French-speaking TV show or series whatsoever, will have never heard of any Quebec hosts, stand-up comedians or actors, etc.

    Most MPs in the House of Commons will debate in English. The Prime Minister and other bilingual ministers or MPs might go for a sentence in French once in a while or read something off their sheet just to look good but that’s it. That is not bilingualism. Only MPs from the Bloc will debate exclusively in French.

    Again, perhaps because you haven’t lived long enough or haven’t travelled in Canada much, you seem not to know the difference between what’s offered on paper and what’s actually happening in reality.

    And what Acajack recounted wasn’t a conspiracy theory. It is the reality of things.

    ragazzino

    August 3, 2010 at 10:51 pm

  12. @ ottawaimmigrant:

    Any polls from The Gazette regarding Bill 101 is dubious. Who was surveyed? age range? when? how was the question asked?

    It isn’t a curtailment of rights because Quebec’s official language is French, therefore basic education (primary and secondary) should be carried out in French to Francophones. Just like primary education in Japan is taught in Japanese, in Swedish in Sweden or in Catalan in Catalunia. Anglo Quebecers have the most legitimate right to receive their education in English and that’s what exactly what’s offered to them.

    Sending little Francos to English schools as early as primary school would be a social and linguistic disaster.

    ragazzino

    August 3, 2010 at 10:58 pm

  13. Na im ar d again:

    But forget polls and whether or not they are accurate. Think about it for a second: francophones aren’t stupid. They know that the way for their kids to get ahead is by learning English.

    You can’t allow the french and immigrants to send their kids to english schools, because that will turn them into englishes.
    If it’s that important for them, they are welcome to move to Ontario. Québec is a free country, people who don’t like it can leave.

    And they know that as fully functioning human beings that they should have all the rights and freedoms that their anglophone neighbours have. So why shouldn’t they, too, have freedom of choice in language of education?

    Because if you allow the french to go to english schools, you have to allow the immigrants. Now how will immigrants will learn french? Certainly not in english schools.

    That is precisely what a majority of Quebec francophones think and believe.

    No. It’s only those who are colonized enough to think that the english are better than the french.

    It is only elitists and those who seek to control the thoughts and minds of francophones — like the church elite of pre-Quiet Revolution Quebec — that want to deny francophones full rights. They want to control them and decide for them how to think, act and vote.

    Oh, and because english canada doesn’t want to control Québec?

    In other words, the hate mongers and racists who support in and believe in Bill 101.

    The racists are those who swamp Québec under an onslaught of immigration that is expected to become english. And those hate-mongers always depict quebecers as bad.
    * * *
     

    Sending little Francos to English schools as early as primary school would be a social and linguistic disaster.

    It worked very well elsewhere where french schools were outlawed: there aren’t much french left there…

    Anonymous

    August 3, 2010 at 11:36 pm

  14. @ottawamigrant:
    “OK, so in other words, I lose my Charter Rights and Freedoms when I cross the provincial border? Thanks for reminding me.”
    Hum, no you don’t. The Charter was imposed on us (apparently, it’s not too difficult to have a democratic process for a constitution when you are in a war – Irak, Afganhistan – but it was too complicated in Canada in a time of peace – not only once but twice (1867, 1982)). It apparently lacks legitimity, but is still applied. If you’re nevertheless worried, the Charte des Droits et Libertés du Québec still protects every formal rights worth having.

    @AngryFrenchGirl, @Geck:
    So, Geck told us: we are renegades. Kinda cool actually (when you think of it, and since we’re already past the Godwin Point anyway, Oscar Schindler was a renegade).

    Although I used to think of myself as a loyalist of sorts, loyal to the people who welcomed my immigrant ancestors as neighbours and friends and even family, and shared their conditions as working poors in the English-ruled Montreal of the time.

    Tancrède

    August 4, 2010 at 4:55 am

  15. Ok, here’s part of the list of the zombies that will keep coming until AFG appears from wherever he is and give us a little food for thought:

    We will have:
    1. Someone who will complain about bill 101 being a hate law;
    2. Someone who will complain about Quebec taking transfer paiement;
    3. Someone who will quote Parizeau about the “money and ethnic vote” as another evidence for the former idea, nothwithstanding statistical evidence that he simply stated sad facts of life in a misleading way (i.e., identifying “ethic votes” with “non-francophone vote”);
    4. Someone who will say that Quebec nationalism is only supported by “pure laine” quebeckers and so is an ethnic form of nationalism (and then call living proofs that he is wrong ‘renegades’);
    5. Someone who will challenge the legitimity of the BQ and call for the financial ruin of every federal party except the CPC;
    6. Someone who, when challenged with stats, will asks us not to believe data;
    7. Someone who will say that we can’t keep the Canadian dollars, even if prohibiting it from use in a independant Quebec would lead to monetary collapse for Canada;
    8. Someone who will say we cannot keep the Canadian passport in an independant Quebec, as if it was a big deal for separatists and (as someone point out recently) this would also be difficult to prohibit;
    9. Someone who will drop some trash talk about Quebecker, signing as anonymous.

    It seems to me that when AFG’s posts are published, there is a certain time when the posts are commented, and then it reverts to the above lists of zombie arguments coming back in circle, until the next post.

    Now, if I can ask – I remember AFG saying that there were good reasons against independence and that he was not too big on bill 101 – but these questions weren’t discussed enough. If I may, I would like a little bit to hear his thought about it when and if he comes back. Because there are good reasons against Quebec independence of course – it’s all about weighting the pros and cons when it comes to any independence cause – but they certainly have nothing to do with this silly canadian passport thing; and there may be reasons that counts against bill 101, but certainly not that it is a “hate/race law” (the post above wasn’t totally clear either on where he stands on if and how to close the loophole).

    Tancrède

    August 4, 2010 at 5:38 am

  16. Le nouveau filtre anti-Kondaks semble tenir bon (merci WordPress)…vous devriez avoir un nouveau post ce week-end.

    Sa blonde

    August 4, 2010 at 7:09 am

  17. Le nouveau filtre anti-Kondaks semble tenir bon (merci WordPress)…vous devriez avoir un nouveau post ce week-end.

    The posting by “anonymous” on Aug. 3 at 9:39 pm was written by Tony Kondaks. It’s in his style.

    marc

    August 4, 2010 at 8:08 am

  18. C’est pourquoi le filtre? Les arguments de l’autre cote sont plus forte?

    anonym

    August 4, 2010 at 8:14 am

  19. Ragazinno: “Quebec is officially unilingual by law (and that on a provincial level) but is more than generous in accomodating its Anglophone minority and *is* the second most bilingual province in practice.“

    Generous?

    You’re right as to the actual state of affairs (bilingualism in Montreal), but you’re wrong as to the motives. You’re saying that Quebec (be it the government or the people) are “accommodating” the Anglophone minority and the English language, while in fact they are trying hard not to. The (only) reason why there is still so much English in Quebec is because Quebec governments and its militant splinter groups CAN’T do anything about it. They are powerless to curb the trend which they would love to curb. English is here despite Bill 101, NOT with its blessing. It’s here despite laws passed by successive Quebec governments, despite the PQ, despite the BQ, despite the MMF, despite the SSJB, despite the IF, despite the RRQ. English is something that won’t go away, despite many people/organizations in Quebec wanting it to go away completely or at least fade into the background and become a distant second language, not a vaible alternative in communication.

    Another thing is the “minority” status given to the Anglophone community. It must be the most powerful 10% minority in the world. Is it because they speak a language that you’re drowning in on all sides, thus making the Anglos a de facto majority, and a “dangerous” one too? After all, Quebec’s administrative border is no Hadrian’s Wall, so the influence from the outside is very potent. And drawing a circle on the map and stating that “it is French” is a futile exercise of self-deception.

    anonym

    August 4, 2010 at 8:17 am

  20. @ ottawaimmigrant

    Your posts about the French colonial past are excellent. This is the hypocrisy I often bring up – complaining about other people being “les colonialistes meprisants” while all that is needed is a good look in the mirror.

    However, don’t expect any acknowledgement of this point. It will either fall on deaf ears, or be dismissed with a ridiculous and historically inaccurate claim that the French were “good colonialists”. To those who claim it, I suggested the excellent film The Battle of Algiers. I received no feedback on that either.

    The French of Quebec have NOT been colonized by the English, they simply lost the war that they waged with the British across the world. You can call the English “meprisant” for having the gull to win the war, but which side in any war wants to lose? Blaming the king of France, not the British, would make more sense.

    They are essentially trying to sell a “colonization of the colonialist” story, which is something truly unique in world history. As is the “allogene” business, a sociological invention cooked up by the new breed of Quebec “social scientists” bent on proving that the “ethnics” do what they clearly aren’t doing.

    anonym

    August 4, 2010 at 8:24 am

  21. Na IM aR d here, popping-in to rebuke the usual bullshit:

    Your posts about the French colonial past are excellent. This is the hypocrisy I often bring up – complaining about other people being “les colonialistes meprisants” while all that is needed is a good look in the mirror.
    However, don’t expect any acknowledgement of this point. It will either fall on deaf ears, or be dismissed with a ridiculous and historically inaccurate claim that the French were “good colonialists”. To those who claim it, I suggested the excellent film The Battle of Algiers. I received no feedback on that either.

    It doesn’t fall on deaf ears, not at all.
    The french colonialism you decry is the one that happened post-french (and industrial) revolution, after France was totally subverted by the bourgeois. The New France colonization had nothing to do with it. All the bourgeois are interested in is plundering and raping, just like the british, who are the bourgeois par excellence.
    The king of France did not give a shit about the natural ressources in New-France, otherwise, he would not have refused to take it back then the brits offered it at the end of the war. Had France been ruled by the bourgeois at the time, they would have jumped back to get it and they would have fortified it like hell just to make sure the battle of the plains of Abraham would not happen again.
    And boy would the thirteen colonies be nervous!!! So nervous that they would have clung to the britshit crown like shit on a blanket!!!
    There would have been NO United States of America! Just a bunch of limeys clinging to the Appalachians.
    The first words spoken on the Moon would have been in french.

    The French of Quebec have NOT been colonized by the English, they simply lost the war that they waged with the British across the world.

    We, the french of New-France/Canada/Québec have not lost the war, we have been abandonned by “our” king. (That’s SOP for the french monarchy, who would eventually be killed by his revoting subject some 25 years later).

    You can call the English “meprisant” for having the gull to win the war, but which side in any war wants to lose? Blaming the king of France, not the British, would make more sense.

    That’s what I’ve been doing all allong, dope. And yes, the english were “méprisant” indeed, and still are; the posts here are a testament to that fact.

    They are essentially trying to sell a “colonization of the colonialist” story, which is something truly unique in world history.

    Indeed it is unique. It is also interesting to note that the people colonized are those from the colonizer’s international rival. An european people colonized by another european people!

    As is the “allogene” business, a sociological invention cooked up by the new breed of Quebec “social scientists” bent on proving that the “ethnics” do what they clearly aren’t doing.

    The “ethnics” are nothing but a tool used by the english to minorize the french. And you cannot disprove that fact.

    Anonymous

    August 4, 2010 at 8:45 am

  22. @marc

    “Absolutely not. An english education is not a fundamental right. But one in the territory’s official language (in this case french) certainly is. This is how every other country operates. Official languages and by extention, language of education are defined by territory. And on the territory of Québec, it is French.”

    And the territory of Quebec is in Canada. Canada is bilingual – French and English, last time I checked.

    There were 2 referendums to change this situation, and they were both defeated. The second time by “money and the ethnic vote”.

    So yes, Quebec IS curtailing rights, as Angry French Guy points out very well. Quebec is curtailing the fundamental rights of Canadian citizens be they Anglo, Franco, Allo or Alieno to decide which of the official languages their children should be educated in.

    ottawamigrant

    August 4, 2010 at 9:04 am

  23. @ragazzino

    OK, here’s something for you to think about. You seem like a smart guy, so I know this will get through to you.

    Roughly 75% of Canada is English-speaking, and 25% of Canada is French-speaking. So the market for English-speaking Canada is ~ 3 times that of French-speaking Canada.

    Naturally, there will be more DEMAND and ECONOMIC INCENTIVES to cater to the English-speaking market than to the French-speaking market.

    But that doesn’t mean that companies are going to “drop” the French-speaking market. 25% is still significant. There is still an ECONOMIC INCENTIVE to cater to this market.

    “4) I know, I’ve worked at one and 60% of my calls were done in English. 50% of my Montreal calls were dealt with in English.”

    So at the first call centre 40% were in French, and at the second call centre 50% were in French? Wow, sounds pretty significant to me. And when you look at the stats I presented above, pretty good.

    “5) Does that make your average Canadian viewer bilingual? No. The vast majority of English Canadians will watch TV exclusively in English, won’t know of any French-speaking TV show or series whatsoever, will have never heard of any Quebec hosts, stand-up comedians or actors, etc.”

    But they have the opportunity to watch French TV if they want to. They exercise the CHOICE not to. it’s a free country ragazzino. It’s not “suppressed” or “denied” to them.

    Francophones make it sound like the French language channels are underground broadcasts, which are not true. THey’re there and in the open, and people can watch if they want to.

    I know some Anglos who are bilingual and do watch French TV and French movies. In fact, some of my favourite movies are French. It’s far more interesting when you can pick up some of the language, instead of relying on the at times crappy subtitles.

    “Most MPs in the House of Commons will debate in English. The Prime Minister and other bilingual ministers or MPs might go for a sentence in French once in a while or read something off their sheet just to look good but that’s it. That is not bilingualism. Only MPs from the Bloc will debate exclusively in French.”

    Again, remember the 75%/25% statistic I pointed out. Guess what? It’s likely that around 75% of the MPs in Parliament are English-speaking and 25% are French-speaking. So, they will debate in the language that they are most comfortable in. But both languages are allowed.

    ottawamigrant

    August 4, 2010 at 9:20 am

  24. @ragazzino

    “And what Acajack recounted wasn’t a conspiracy theory. It is the reality of things.”

    No, it’s not. Let me tell you why.

    OK, let’s take my example of MB. Let’s say 2 million Francophones turned up in MB overnight, in a province with 1.3 million people. Suddenly MB is French-dominant.

    2 million Francophones = 2 million new voters. Do you think politicians will be stupid enough not to try to capture these votes? Of course! So there will be all kinds of political pressure to ensure services in French. It will become an election issue even.

    Do you think that businesses are not going to try and capture this huge French-speaking market somehow? Of course they will!

    And if you think this is far-fetched, guess what? It’s happening in the US, in the SOuthwest states where there are significant Spanish-speaking minorities.

    It’s happening in Vancouver – more and more businesses are catering to the growing Mandarin and Cantonese-speaking population by offering services in Mandarin and Cantonese.

    So no. The reality of things is that ECONOMIC INCENTIVES drive a lot of what happens in the world today. The era of “suppression” is almost over.

    ottawamigrant

    August 4, 2010 at 9:27 am

  25. @ragazzino

    “Sending little Francos to English schools as early as primary school would be a social and linguistic disaster.”

    I have many friends from India, ragazzino. They all went to English-language schools in India. Yet they speak their languages (Tamil, Hindi, Telugu) fluently at home, and their culture is doing well. In fact, they are doing very well.

    I’m taking a wild guess that judging by your username, either you’re Italian, or your ancestors are Italians in some way.

    I used to live in the US and Australia, 2 countries with big Italian migrant populations. I noticed that the Italian migrants in both countries did an excellent job of keeping Italian language and culture alive and strong. Remember, I’m talking about the US and Australia here. 2 countries which are as Anglo as you can get. But the Italian migrants kept their language and culture strong.

    Same goes for Chinese people in Canada – they do a great job of keeping their language(s) and culture(s) alive and strong. This is in spite of the fact that they are surrounded by Anglo culture on all sides.

    In fact when you look at many migrant groups e.g.:

    Lebanese
    Greek
    Portuguese
    Tamil
    Vietnamese

    All of these migrant groups are smaller in size than the Francophones in Canada. Yet they do a good job of keeping their language and culture alive and strong.

    Most importantly, they don’t whine and cry a river. They get down to building structures and communities that ensure the survival of their language and culture.

    Francophones are 25% of Canada’s population. Yet they are always whining about the decline of French language and culture.

    Take a lesson from some of these groups – they don’t WHINE and ask for the WAMBULANCE. They roll up their sleeves and get down to business.

    ottawamigrant

    August 4, 2010 at 9:38 am

  26. @JN

    “Québec is a free country, people who don’t like it can leave.”

    Canada is a free country. You want to secede, have a referendum and secede.

    The last referendum got defeated by “money and the ethnic vote”. Maybe you should talk to the people who control the money and the ethnics sometime and figure out why they didn’t want to secede.

    Learn to listen sometimes JN, it helps.

    ottawamigrant

    August 4, 2010 at 9:41 am

  27. ottwamigrant:

    “My objection is – how can one province which is part of a bilingual country declare itself officially unilingual? Sounds like that province doesn’t want to play along with the rules of the country, so maybe it’s time for that province to leave.”

    Ummm… reality check?

    Maybe start getting to know that beautiful country you are so proud of soon becoming a citizen of. You would then learn that there is only one province/territory in Canada that has two official languages. BC? One official language. Guess which one. Manitoba? Guess again. Ontario? You would be surprised. The bottom line is, all provinces/territories have one official oanguage except for one, which is bilingual. All unilingual provinces have English for their official language, save Quebec.

    So, if we follow your reasoning, then all these provinces are not worthy of that beautiful Canada of yours and they should leave. Then, you could finally move to New Brunswick, which would be renamed Canada, and live at peace with your truly bilingual, worthy friends.

    You’ve got it all mixed up. I hope you fail your citizenship exam.

    AngryFrenchGirl

    August 4, 2010 at 9:45 am

  28. […] AngryFrenchGuy.com […]

  29. You write:

    “One of the solutions to the English schools demographic « decline » peddled by School Board—and appalingly getting support in some sovereigntist circles—is the right to public education should be extended not only to families who have received an English education somewhere in Canada, but also to those who have received this education in « English-speaking countries » such as the US or the United Kingdom.

    Notice the two countries that inevitably come up when that solution is proposed: the US and the UK. What about Jamaica, South Africa, Belize, Nigeria and Cameroun?

    An arbitrary choice of countries could never be justified on any objective moral grounds and would inevitably be struck down in courts as discriminatory. Eventually, the right to a subsidised English education would have to be extended to the children of parents who have been educated in English not only in Canada, but « to any children with at least one parent educated in English anywhere on Earth », as the Montreal Gazette suggested.”

    This argument is a total red herring. Quebec can simply choose to opt in to section 23(1)(a) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees an English-language education to the children of Canadian citizens (including those born abroad) in Quebec whose mother tongue is English. Quebec is presently exempted from that section by section 59 of the Constitution, but other provinces are subject to this requirement for French.

    Dave

    May 11, 2011 at 6:20 am

  30. While you bring out interesting points about Bill 104, I must clarify 1 thing in your article. In India and in lot of other south east Asian countries, the English education isn’t only given to elites who target top brass jobs. The English schools are very prevalent to locals and very much available to anyone.

    Since I am from India, I must say that, the greatest thing I appreciate in India is that federal or provincial government gives it’s citizens freedom to educate their kid in any language of choice (English, Hindi or any other vernacular medium).

    Quebec’s insistence to French language education is really irrational.

    Raj

    July 7, 2011 at 11:25 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: