Rick Perry Thinks Canada Is Not A Foreign Country

[bikerdruid]

IIRC she is also the largest landowner in the world with close to 2.5 trillion acres in Canada.[/QUOTE

although public land in canada is called 'crown land', it is not owned by the queen, anymore than england is owned by her.

 

[TSR]

although public land in canada is called 'crown land', it is not owned by the queen, anymore than england is owned by her.

.
In Soviet England, land owns you.
.

 

[Morrigan]

Disclaimer: I am a Québécoise, but I am not a separatist, nor do I have any attachment to Québec culture or language. In fact, I find our culture (pop or otherwise) to be 99% garbage.

All that said... the comparison to Mexico is just not valid. Mexico is technically in North America, but it's also part of "Latin America" and is very much Hispanic. Their language or culture is not remotely under threat of assimilation from their English neighbours. On the other hand, in Montréal, it's common place to find restaurants or shops where you can't even get service in French. Before Bill 101 it was a lot worse.

You could make the argument that a strong culture doesn't need laws to protect it, if you want. I don't really care about that, it could be true or not (seeing as the English issue is only really present in Montréal as far as I know), but the situation is not remotely analogous to Mexico.

 

[lomiller]

So is Mexico. Does that country have language laws similar to those found in Quebec?

Also, again, if the culture is as strong and vibrant as you say then it ought not need any protection. It's strength and vibrancy should serve as all the protection needed. What differences does it make what language is spoken elsewhere? The fact that the language laws exists strikes me as a de facto statement that Francophones in Quebec are not as secure and confident in their culture as you contend.

Yup

 

[lomiller]

To what extend does the Queen of England have power over Canada?

None

To what extent does the Queen of England, by comparison, have power over the USA?

About the same as she has over Canada

 

[Pardalis]

Yup

Nope.

Too easy.

 

[Corsair 115]

Nope.

Too easy.

Perhaps you'll actually justify your dissent with more substantive explanation (and maybe even with a little actual evidence).

 

[Corsair 115]

All that said... the comparison to Mexico is just not valid. Mexico is technically in North America, but it's also part of "Latin America" and is very much Hispanic. Their language or culture is not remotely under threat of assimilation from their English neighbours.

What was being compared was the argument that being bordered by English-speaking nations in and of itself qualifies as justification. And that justification fails in that Mexico has an enormous mostly English-speaking nation right next to it.

Also, to follow up on your more interesting point, what is the actual threat of "assimilation" in Quebec proper anyway? Can this supposed danger even be quantified in any meaningful way? Is there any sort of empirical evidence that can be pointed to which demonstrates this seemingly perpetual fear of "assimilation" has a firm basis in reality? Or is it really more of a long-standing paranoia of the English bogeyman? Might there be something else at play?

On the other hand, in Montréal, it's common place to find restaurants or shops where you can't even get service in French. Before Bill 101 it was a lot worse.

Montreal is not the entirety of the province of Quebec. Has the city not always had a sizable Anglophone population? Shouldn't that simple fact weigh in the analysis? When you can cite restaurants in Quebec City where you can't get service in French then I'll certainly agree there is a problem. But to basically say, "As goes Montreal, so goes all of Quebec" strikes me as an exaggeration.

 

[Pardalis]

Perhaps you'll actually justify your dissent with more substantive explanation (and maybe even with a little actual evidence).

I did. Your comparison is ludicrous.

Anyway, we don't have to hang portraits of the Queen to remind ourselves we are different was my point. But I actually like the fact that Harper is desperately trying to generate a national identity by forcing monarchy back where it had disappeared (like renaming the Armed Forces), the more he'll do it the more he's going to wake up our nationalism, and the more likely a new referendum is going to happen, and be successful. I myself was beginning to be more moderate on the issue, but in the last year Harper rekindled my old flame.

This year he's going to make a diplomatic faux-pas by bombastically commemorating the 1812 war. I can't wait to see the US' reaction.

 

[Spindrift]

1. And most of your imported oil;
2. The us comsumes lots of pork rinds, you have nothing to look down your nose at here lad/lass/whatever;
3. You say that like it's a bad thing..
4. Not that I admire Riel for the 1885 business, but he wasn't drunk. That was our Sir John A. the PM; and
5. I think you'll find that the OEM disagrees with you.

You can keep Mr. Perry, we've enough loons here.

The OEM? You even abbreviate things differently.

 

[sarge]

I did. Your comparison is ludicrous.

Anyway, we don't have to hang portraits of the Queen to remind ourselves we are different. But I actually like the fact that Harper is desperately trying to generate a national identity by forcing monarchy back where it had disappeared (like renaming the armed forces), the more he'll do it the more he's going to wake up our nationalism, and the more likely a new referendum is going to happen. I myself was beginning to be more moderate on the issue, but the last year he triggered the old flame.

This year he's going to make a diplomatic faux-pas by bombastically commemorating the 1812 war. I can't wait to see the US' reaction.

Does a portion of Canada have laws pro/prescribing the use of a language other than English?

 

[Pardalis]

Does a portion of Canada have laws pro/prescribing the use of a language other than English?

Canada is supposed to be bilingual, but in reality bilingualism is only truly enforced in Québec, New Brunswick and Ottawa.

 

[lomiller]

Does a portion of Canada have laws pro/prescribing the use of a language other than English?

Several provinces require that all laws be written in both English and French and that all services be available in both English and French. Only Quebec prohibits the use of any language. In some cases companies can’t even put their company name on a sign in front of their building because it’s deemed to be an English name and therefore cannot legally be displayed unless it’s in a small script beside a larger “translated” version of the company name.


All Canadian provinces and territories except Quebec make provide schools/education in both English and French. (IE anywhere expect Quebec you can freely send your children to a School where classes are in English or one where classes are in French.) In Quebec you must send your children to a French school, though exceptions exist for children who started off in English Schools elsewhere in Canada.

 

[sarge]

Several provinces require that all laws be written in both English and French and that all services be available in both English and French. Only Quebec prohibits the use of any language. In some cases companies can’t even put their company name on a sign in front of their building because it’s deemed to be an English name and therefore cannot legally be displayed unless it’s in a small script beside a larger “translated” version of the company name.


All Canadian provinces and territories except Quebec make provide schools/education in both English and French. (IE anywhere expect Quebec you can freely send your children to a School where classes are in English or one where classes are in French.) In Quebec you must send your children to a French school, though exceptions exist for children who started off in English Schools elsewhere in Canada.

Huh. If I understand the situation properly, a French speaking minority are able to demand that only French be used for some interactions. I can see no rational justification for such a thing. Seems to be a bit of pandering to a vocal minority to me - but then, I'm not from there (and assume we have some of the same in one form or another).

What percentage of the population speaks French as their first language?

 

[bikerdruid]

Huh. If I understand the situation properly, a French speaking minority are able to demand that only French be used for some interactions. I can see no rational justification for such a thing. Seems to be a bit of pandering to a vocal minority to me - but then, I'm not from there (and assume we have some of the same in one form or another).

What percentage of the population speaks French as their first language?

i'm going to take a quess that 25% of canadians are francophones.
but, they are not only in quebec.
i live in northern alberta. there are severalfrancophone communities here, where french is the first language.
in fact, there are francophone communities in most provinces in canada.

 

[lomiller]

Huh. If I understand the situation properly, a French speaking minority are able to demand that only French be used for some interactions. I can see no rational justification for such a thing. Seems to be a bit of pandering to a vocal minority to me - but then, I'm not from there (and assume we have some of the same in one form or another).

What percentage of the population speaks French as their first language?

If you were to compare it to the US it’s more of a “States Rights” type issue where the Province of Quebec wants to restrict the use of any language other than French, while the other provinces and Federal Government encourage both languages to be used.
The breakdown is ~25% speak French as a first language, mostly in Quebec, 75% speak English as a first language, mostly outside Quebec. The % of people who speak French as a first language has declined over the last 3-4 decades, but not quite for the reasons Pardalis would have you believe.

If French is in decline in Canada, the largest reason is that Quebec itself has been seriously lagging most of the country since it passed it’s language laws in the 1970’s. Since then business and corporate headquarters have consistent moved or for start-ups choose to set up elsewhere to the point where Montreal, which used to be Canada’s largest city and most important economic center is almost irrelevant outside Quebec.

 

[sarge]

i'm going to take a quess that 25% of canadians are francophones.
but, they are not only in quebec.
i live in northern alberta. there are severalfrancophone communities here, where french is the first language.
in fact, there are francophone communities in most provinces in canada.

Is there something inherently beneficial to Canadian society about having a francophone minority, or are the rights (as defined by whatever Canada's equivalent of a Constitution is) of the Francophones violated if languages in addition to French are allowed?

It does not seem strange that French would be allowed in public business, especially with 25% of the population speaking French primarily. It does seem strange that French would be required in a nation where only 25% of the population speaks French.

 

[lomiller]

Is there something inherently beneficial to Canadian society about having a francophone minority,.

I think there is inherent value in giving people the freedom speak whatever language they want. In areas where there is demand, services should be available in that language, whether it be English, French or Cree.

It does not seem strange that French would be allowed in public business, especially with 25% of the population speaking French primarily. It does seem strange that French would be required in a nation where only 25% of the population speaks French.

In Quebec the percentage of people who speak primarily, or only, French is high and government has no business forcing or even asking them to change. That would be an unnecessary and unreasonable intervention in people’s day to day lives. Naturally the same logic would hold for the Provincial government trying to force people to stop using English.

 

[sarge]

I think there is inherent value in giving people the freedom speak whatever language they want. In areas where there is demand, services should be available in that language, whether it be English, French or Cree.



In Quebec the percentage of people who speak primarily, or only, French is high and government has no business forcing or even asking them to change. That would be an unnecessary and unreasonable intervention in people’s day to day lives. Naturally the same logic would hold for the Provincial government trying to force people to stop using English.

I can't tell if your are argueing pro or con allowing Quebec to prohibit the use of English.

I can see no logic for such a prohibition in a country that is primarily English speaking. To be clear, I see no issue with:

1. Allowing both French and english to used for all public and private interactions.

2. Requiring goverment agencies to provide both French and English language services.

3. Requiring private enterprise to accomodate both French and English speaking customers.

The part I find unreasonable is prohibiting English.

 

[Pardalis]

The part I find unreasonable is prohibiting English.

English is not prohibited in Qc, but French has to have predominance. That's all.

It does seem strange that French would be required in a nation where only 25% of the population speaks French.

That's because we are a founding nation.