It’s Not Francophobia, It’s Canadian Anger

The flavor of the week for the separatists establishment has become ‘francophobia’. In other words, the systematic hatred towards Francophones in the English and to a certain extent the French media in Canada and in Quebec. A coalition has been formed called ‘Unie contre la francophobie’, of which a number of well known Quebecers have signed.T

There is a document on their site that covers, rather extensively, cases of what appear to be ‘francophobia’. In fact, very little of it is directed at francophones specifically, but, granted it can be construed that way by some. The document is viewable here:

http://issuu.com/ssjb/docs/francophobie_?http://issuu.com/ssjb/docs/recension_12.12.2013?e=8966061/5985221

I think it is fair to say that the types of statements made that are supposedly ‘against’ francophones can be divided into two categories:

1. Well known news outlets, making sarcastic and somewhat defamatory statements about the Quebec political establishment and Quebec politicians themselves.

2. Remarks, images and content of a more odious nature by grass-roots dissenters to the Parti Quebecois, sovereignty politicians, separatists and the sovereignty movement in general. Most of the remarks and comments cited in the document fall into this category.

A look at the definition of ‘francophobia’ is as follows from Dictionary.com:

a person who fears or hates France, the French people, French culture, products, etc

I would consider statements such as ‘Frogs’, ‘Pepsi’, ‘Pepper’ to be francophobic statements because they clearly, without a doubt, express hatred towards francophones. I think we can all agree on this, and anyone who uses statements like this should be ashamed of themselves. On the inside of the first page of the document the statement ‘Fuck Frogs’ is displayed in a stylized manner, but no information is given to its context. I have seen statements like this in graffiti in and around Montreal, but not for many years. What is even less common is hearing these kinds of words and statements uttered in public.

What becomes immediately obvious as one reads through the document is that there is actually very scant evidence of francophobia presented. Instead, it contains a loose collection of excerpts from National Post, Gazette, Globe And Mail articles as well as comments in blogs, social media, bathroom walls, vandalism and the like. The vast majority of the arguments made target the Quebec separatists political establishment. This has nothing, I repeat nothing to do with the aforementioned definition of francophobia. Thus, the whole exercise is designed to prove that Francophones are somehow treated like the blacks were in the southern United States in the early 20th century and doesn’t amount to much more than a witch hunt against anyone who opposes the sovereignty movement inside or outside of Quebec, even naming the guilty in the English media.

Instead of trying to point out how untrue the claim of francophobia made by this document is, or rather, why this exercise is just a great way to excuse and reinforce separatist dogmatism, I will turn my attention instead to federalist and Canadian anger directed towards the sovereignty movement, of which pretty much all of the material in the document is a product of. Furthermore, notice that the accusations made in the document are entirely political. The anger is based fundamentally in the stress and strain that the separatist movement causes to Canada and federalist Quebec, and how it detracts from more important issues and consumes energy that could be used for much more important and pressing matters. Specifically, we are faced with, on a daily basis the ‘sword of Damocles’, which the Parti Quebecois dangles over our heads and the arrogance of separatists who believe that they can strip us federalists in Quebec of our country and identity. As Canadians, our sense of unity is held hostage, and as federalist Quebecers, our sense of economic, social and cultural security is held hostage. This is plenty enough to make people angry.

I agree that some examples of anger provided in the document are extreme, but people are looking for ways to vent their frustration and at times an effigy of a political figure, a slanderous statement or a comparison to a dictator helps one vent their frustration, captures the essence of ones’ feelings, and resonates with others that feel the same way, providing a desired sense of solidarity among other dissenters of the same stripe. I am sure that there is not a political entity or group in the history of man that has experienced at least some of the aforementioned in varied degree. But it appears, you cannot win against a separatist – if you agree with them and give them everything the want, they will still want more. If you disagree with them, they will call you a francophobe.

Besides the reasons for being angry mentioned above, here is a list of my top reasons for being angry – what are yours? Does this resonate with you?

Violating the rights of minorities

There is a very interesting statement on the first page of the website of  ‘Unie Contre La Francophobie’ (http://francophobie.org):

Au Québec, la misogynie, l’homophobie, l’intimidation,l’islamophobie et les préjugés contre les autochtones sont condamnés de plus en plus haut et fort dans tous les milieux. La francophobie, une autre forme de discrimination commence à réapparaître. Aujourd’hui, nous unissons nos voix pour la dénoncer! …

Notice how they slip “L’Islamaphobie” in there. Really ? Quebec condemns Islamaphobia ?

CTV did a report recently about the rising incidence of hatred towards Muslims in Quebec. This is what a spokesperson for the Muslim Council Of Montreal had to say about pre- and post announcement of the Quebec Charter Of Values :

“during the last 7 months, there have only been 25 complaints, but from Septemeber 15th to October 15th, there have been 115 complaints”

Note that means that there are 32 times the number of complaints per month than before the charter announcement. This makes the statement by francophobie.org that Quebec condemns Islamaphobia rather shocking – a shocking lie.

Let’s take a look at 2 highlights with respect to bill 14, another odious piece of legislation tabled by the Parti Quebecois;

1. Businesses that employ 26 to 49 regular employees must make French the everyday language of the workplace.

2. Government would have the power to revoke a municipality’s bilingual status if the anglophone population drops below 50 per cent.

There are a few other sinister points in the bill, but let’s keep it simple and treat these two points.

As for 1., I will give you a little background on myself – I work as a software developer. I have worked for a number of companies in Montreal. Of the 8 different (approximately) companies that I have worked for, French was the common language in 1 of them – furthermore, I had to look hard for that particular job because I wanted to work in a French environment. The reason ? French is not the language that is used in software firms globally. Furthermore, all of these companies had more than 26 employees. Imagine if they enacted a ridiculous law like this – it would devastate the IT sector in Quebec – there is no way they could comply with this law, they’d all leave.

As for 2. Anglophones have been an integral part of the city of Montreal and the province of Quebec for over 300 years. They are entitled to speak and do business in English. Let me repeat that as an Anglophone and Canadian, YOU ARE ENTITLED TO SPEAK AND DO BUSINESS IN ENGLISH IN MONTREAL. I don’t care what the law says.

I cannot think of a single thing that bill 14 is good for other than to spite Anglophones – can you ? It’s like saying ‘let’s encourage municipalities to discriminate against Anglophones, by stripping them of access to services in their own language’.

Lies about the economy and ‘economic benefits’ after a referendum win

Jean Marc Aussant has been probably the most visible go-to guy for the economic realities of sovereignty. His gig involves dispelling and demystifying federalists scare tactics, a noble cause indeed.

For all of his lofty credentials, what he is saying in the above video (a speech that contains a decent summary of his main ideas) amounts to nothing more than esoteric anti-federalist diatribe. There is nothing of substance in what he says with respect to the random and wide ranging possible outcomes at a social level following a referendum win. Notice how he refers to the Quebec of today – ‘today Quebec is in great shape economically’. But why doesn’t he talk about the Quebec of a post referendum win ? Isn’t that the whole point of being a ‘sovereignist economist’ and the elephant in the room ? Strange.

If you don’t think that a man with such credentials can be wrong (masters degree in economic analysis from the Université de Montreal), take a look at how wrong World Bank economists can be that have higher degrees from far more prestigious schools (phd’s from Harvard and The London School of Economics). An example of this on a large scale is the World Bank involvement in the Suharto regime in Indonesia – the economists at the World Bank were commissioned to provide aid for the country so that it could develop infrastructure and services – essentially a nation building effort. Suharto ended up stealing a large portion of the World Bank money allocated to Indonesia with the people of Indonesia picking up the tab, owing to date billions of dollars to the World Bank and impoverishing millions of people. Essentially, economic theory fails consistently to take into account human behavior. The case of Indonesia and Quebec are very similar, because they involve economists attempting to build an entirely new economic system by using trivial models that are incapable of taking into account the most basic assumptions of human nature and the socioeconomic contexts in which they are to be applied.

I am mentioning this because, if it is impossible for the best economists to predict the random variable of human nature when developing an economic model, how are we supposed to believe that Aussant’s model is even remotely credible, with the completely unpredictable events that would occur after a referendum win ?

In his speech in the video, Aussant talks about how Quebec is very fortunate compared to other countries in the world, that federalists will scare separatists by talking about debt which according to him is no big deal, how Canada will allow Quebec to maintain the Canadian dollar, equalization payments per capita, blah blah blah. These are actually never issues I personally considered a big deal when considering the economic repercussions of sovereignty. It becomes apparent that what he isn’t talking about means everything and what he is talking about means nothing. For example: how about businesses and 100’s of thousands of people leaving the province, massive government revenue losses, collapsing housing market, economic sectors affected by lower consumer spending, costs related to the establishing government services, etc. Since he doesn’t discuss any of these obvious issues, his entire speech equates to one thing: hogwash. He should go work for the World Bank.

Separatist francophobia

There is clearly a culture of francophobia among separatists themselves. Pierre Falardeau was great at degrading federalist francophones. He created a character by the name of ‘Elvis Gratton’ to portray a sort of ‘Uncle Tom’ francophone. Uncle Tom was originally a character from the book by Harriet Beecher Stowe’s ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin’. The book was a novel that sought to reveal the ills of slavery, and the ideas of the book were ironically considered to be a contributing factor to the American civil war. The term is used now to portray a sort of subservient individual who perceives themselves as inferior due to their race. This was exemplified also by Pierre Valliéres book ‘White Niggers of America’.

elvis_gratton

                      Elvis Gratton

Falardeau constantly referred to francophones as being ‘colonized’, even though the history of Quebec shows no evidence of what happened to New France falling neatly into the category of  ‘colonized’. Rather, the term is used as a sales pitch: to lower ones self opinion so that sovereignty is necessarily the only way to elevate it. In other words ‘you are a colonized, oppressed people and sovereignty is equivalent to the emancipation from your oppressor’.

Another example of separatist francophobia is Louise Beaudoin’s statement in a interview with Maclean’s magazine, when she essentially says that Francophones need to have more self confidence, implying that they don’t have any to start off with, she also admits that Quebec is not really open to others, and only will be when it is sovereign:

Q (Macleans):You need sovereignty to be open to others ?

A (Beaudoin): Yes. To be open to others you need to be sure of oneself, and the only way to be totally sure of ourselves is to be sovereign. If you and I talk in 10 years after sovereignty, I’m convinced that Quebecers will have even more self-confidence, they’ll be far more advanced individually and collectively, and everyone will be more happy. There you go.

Clearly, separatist thinkers are trying to instill in francophones a sense of self-hatred and low self-esteem and to get them to blame this feeling on the colonial oppression that Canada has inflicted on them. The amazing thing to realize here, is that the separatists themselves are quite covertly francophobic themselves.

Anglophobia

Let’s look at Anglophobia in Quebec, of which there is a myriad of examples. Here are some tidbits:

Pierre Curzi, with respect to Anglophones in an interview with Gilles Proulx (Pierre Curzi is on the francophobe.org panel), suggesting that a sovereign Quebec could strip Anglophones of their rights:

“We can’t take away their right to vote because that is a right we cannot control because we are still a province within the federation. Obviously, the day when the country is there, we will control citizenship, which will have more teeth, if I can dare to say so.”

In October, a 77 year old veteran and cancer patient in a Gatineau hospital is told by an orderly:

‘This isn’t a hotel. I don’t speak English; this is Quebec,”

“Speak to me in French! This is Quebec!”

In December, an article in LaMetropole targeting activist Murray Levine for simply wanting more English signs in Fairview shopping center on the West Island  – a completely reasonable request since the West Island is over 70% English (and perfectly within the law):

“Pourquoi nous, les francophones, devrions-nous mettre un genou en terre pour ne pas irriter ces anglos si susceptibles? Je vous le dis, il faudra que Pointe-Claire se mette au français et vite, ou qu’ils plient bagages en Ontario.”

In other words, speak French or get out.

Grafitti – hatred towards Anglophones (see http://www.wiccab101.org/tedwrightswallsofshame.html for more examples)

hangman englishit englishdead 101

10 thoughts on “It’s Not Francophobia, It’s Canadian Anger

  1. Yes and a “Canadian anger” that expresses strong hatred towards anything Quebec. Sadly, it doesn’t seem to be understood that this only fuels a very vicious circle.

    May not be right to call it ‘francophobia’ but I believe ‘Quebec hatred’ fits. I’m not sure how that makes it any better.

    • Hi Jenny,

      I think the difference has to do with hatred of the people vs the politics. I am not arguing that Quebec bashing doesn’t exist – it clearly does, but I don’t trust the context in which this document was put out. I agree that Quebec hatred may fit better, but I think that if Quebec truly wanted to work with Canada, in this day and age, there would be very few issues. The separatist movement is a real burden for Canada, and unfortunately, it fuels hatred. I think it is normal in way. Canadians identify with their country, and the sovereignty movement threatens that identity.

    • Jenny,
      Appeasement clearly didn’t work. The Quebec separatists are like being in an abusive relationship. They abuse anglos and Canada…..anglos and Canada trie to placate them, they abuse more. When anglos and Canadia finally fight back with a vengeance, the abuser says, “how dare you, who do you think you are picking on poor us”. No matter what anglos and the rest of Canada say or don’t say, the separatists will always find fault and cry foul.

  2. I wish to remind the Quebecois that they are a DEFEATED PEOPLE who are NOT the owners of the Canadian Province of Quebec but are in fact GUESTS who can have their Canadian Citizenship revoked and then they can be deported back to France where they belong. The fact remains is that Great Britain WON and France LOST thhe French and Indian War (1754-1763) and at the Treaty of Paris (1763), it was France who ceaded New France to Great Britain in exchange for the French West Indies, this means that all of the territory of New France located in the borders of the Dominion of Canada and that includes the Province of Quebec belongs to Anglo Canadians as the descendents of the victorious British and to the Quebecois as the descendents of the defeated French. After the Conquest of New France in 1763, the Kingdom of Great Britain gave the Quebecois (French Canadians) a choice they can submit to British colonial rule and swear loyalty to the British crown and be allowed to stay in Canada or if they refused to do so they can be returned back to the Kingdom of France at British taxpayer expence, they chose the former and were allowed to stay in Canada. I believe that since most Quebecois are nothing but anti-English bigots and who have proven themselves disloyalt to the Dominion of Canada should now be forced to do the latter and that means they should return back to France just like their ancestors should have done after the conquest. The Quebecois have proven themselves unworthy of the rights and freedoms granted to them by Great Britain in the form of the Quebec Act (1774) which granted them rights to speak the French Language, obey French Civil Law and attend the Roman Catholic Church and in the Constitution Act (1867) which under Sectionb 133 Use of English and French languages, established both English and French as the official languages of not only of the Dominion of Canada but also it’s Proivnce of Quebec, because they like the ungratefull spoilt children have shown their insolence and arrogance by creating anti-English language laws like Bill 22 (Official Language Act) of 1974 and Bill 101 (Charter of the French Language) illegally and unconstitionaly removed English as an official language and made French the sole official language of the Province of Quebec and transformed Anglo Quebecers into 2nd class citizens in their own province. The time has long since past to put an end to the divisioin and tension in both the Dominion of Canada and it’s Province of Quebec and the reason for all this tension and dvision is the French Language itselt with has province itselt to be a thorn in both Canada and Quebec since the Conquest of New France in 1763. Time and time again the Quiebecois have shown themselves to be petty people who have never appreaciated the rights and freedoms that were given to them by using and abusing these rights and freedoms to persecute Anglo Quebecers. What is needed is for the Province of Quebec to be ANGLICIZED and transformed from a French province to an English province by flooding it with English speakerers to make the Province of Quebec no differant from other English provinces like the Province of Ontario and the Province of Alberta and for either the Quebecois to be ASSIMILIATED into Anglo Canadians or DEPORTED back to France. Lord Durham was was 100% right when he warned that if French Canadians were not asssimiliated into Anglo Canadians and that if the Province of Quebec was not ANGLICIZED into an English province that it would cause tension and division in both the Dominion of Canada and it’s Province of Quebec and would cause problems and troubles in the future. I have advice for the anti-English Quebecois bigots and that is SPEAK ENGLISH or get out of the Dominion of Canada and the includes the Province of Quebec. I say that we must set up a petion to the Canadian government to revoke the Canadian Citizenship of all anti-English and anti-Canada Quebecois separatist traitors and declare them persona non grata and then send in the Royal Canadian Armed Forces and Royal Canadian Mounted Police to arrest and round them up and then put them on planes and ships bound for France and then bar them and their descendents from ever coming back to the Dominion of Canada FOREVER. This is the only way to bring peace and harmony to both the Dominion of Canada and especially it’s Province of Quebec. The province of Quebec belongs to Anglo Canadians and to the Dominion of Canada because of the blood, sweat and tears of Royal Amry of Great Britain under the Command of Brigadier General James Wolfe who captured Quebec City in the Battle of the Plains of Abraham (1759) and Major General Jeffrey Amherst who captured Montreal in the Battle of The Thousand Islands (1760), if the Quebecois separatist traitors want a WAR then I say lets give to them and show them who is boss and who are the real owners of the Province of Quebec, it will be the Battle of the Plains of Abraham and the Battle of The Thousand Islands all over again and when we win, there will be no Quebec Act (1774) and Constitution Act (1867) to be granted to the defeated French Quebecois separatist traitors. Pauline Marois is the modern day Jefferson Davis, sadly I dont see a modern day Abraham Lincoln. What the Dominion iof Canada needs is an Abraham Lincoln who would be brave enough to declare Martial Law in the province of Quebec becaus eit is a renagade province for it’s anti-English language laws and anti-Canada sedition and then would then an issue a DECLARATION OF WAR on the likes of the Parti Quebecois and company and then send in the Royal Canadian Armed Forces under modern day Generals Uslysse Grant and William Sherman to crush and destroy Quebecois separatism once and for all. The United States went through its own bloody and violent civil war to keep the union together which was being threatend by the Confederate separatist traitors in the southern states and emerged much more united and stronger, a similiar conflict may be required to do the same in the Dominion of Canada whose unity is being threatend by Quebecois separatist traitors in the Province of Quebec. According to Albert Einstein the defination of insantity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a differant result, well Canada’s policy of appeasement for the past 44 years has nothing to show as posisitive results and have resulted in nothing but 2 independence referendums and harsher anti-English language laws and the persecutiong of Anglo Quebecers, what is now needed is not appeasment but MILITARY ACTION. There is a time for peace and there is a time for war and lets be honest the policy of epace for 44 years has proven to be a misserable failure and now its time for a policy of war. Quebecois have shown themselves nothing but anti-English bigots who have voted in the most reactionary fascist leaders like Pauline Marois and company anjd thefore has proven themselves the enemies of the Anglo Canadian people and traitors to the Dominion of Canada and the only way to avoid conflict in the future is for the Canadian Citizenship of these Quebecois to be revoked and then they should be mass deported back to France where they belong because they dont belong in the Dominion of Canada and it’s Province of Quebec. The British were smart to deport the Acadians from New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island but not to deport the Quebecois from Quebec. Had the British deported The Quebecois along with the Acadians from Canada the situtation today would be alot better and more peacefull with out the constant bs that you see in the Province of Quebec today. QUEBECOIS GO BACK TO FRANCE WHERE YOU BELONG, QUEBEC DOES NOT BELONG TO YOU BUT TO CANADIANS.

  3. The Republic of France has the right idea on how to deal with minority languiages in it’s territory and that is to BAN THEM and to establish a policy of Francization and the assimiliation of minority people likie the Bretons of Brittany and Germans of Alsace-Lorraine into Frenchmen in order to stop division and tension between the majority French and the minority Bretons and Germans and to stop separatism problems in Normandy and Alsace-Lorraine.

    Language Policy in France

    Third Republic

    The only languager allowed in primary school was French. All other languages were forbidden, even in the schoolyard, and transgressions were severly punnished. After 1918, the use of German in Alsace-Lorraine was outlawed. In 1925, Anatole de Monzie , Minister of Public Education, stared that “For the linguistic unity of France, the Breton Language must disapear”. As a result speakers of minority languages began to be shamed when using their own language-especially in the educational system-and over time, many families stoped teaching their own language to their children and tried to speak only French to them.

    Fifth Republic

    The French government allowed in 1964 for the first time one and half minutes of Breton on regional television. But even in 1972, French President Georges Pompidou said “Thre is no room for regional languages in a France that is destined to mark Europe deeply”.

    I say that the Dominion of Canada should look to the Republic of France on how to deal with the French language which is a source of tension and divsion ever since the Conquest of New France in 1763. The Canadian Government should ban and outlaw the French language in the Province of Quebec along with the Rest of Canada and that should state a policy of shaming French speakers into not speaking their own language and force them to speak English. If the Republic of France can succede in a campagn of Francization of Alsace-Lorraine and the assimiliation of it’s German people and of Brittany and the assimiliation of it’s Breton people into French people, then the Dominion of Canada can to do the same with a policy of Anglicization of Quebec and the assimiliation of it’s Quebecois people into Anglo Canadians. I quote Anatole de Monzie from an Anglo perspective “For the linguistic unity of Canada, the French language must disapear” and I also quote Georges Pompidou from an Anglo perspective too “There is no room for the regional languages in a Canada that is destined to mark North America deeply”. The result of forced assimiliation and Francizaiton in France has proven very successfull in preventing the scourge of separatism in both Alsace-Lorraine and Brittany and now both regions are very French in language and culture and the Republic is at peace and harmony. The result of no forced assimiliation and Anglicization in Canada has proven very uncessfull in preventing the scourge of separatism in Quebec and now Quebecois are still French in language and culture and not English in language and culture and the Dominion is suffering from tension and divison. The Quebecois should be given a choice and that choice is assimiliation into Anglo Canadians and the Anglicization of Quebec or be mass deported back to France where their ancestors should have been shipped as soon as the Treaty of Paris (1763) by France and Great Britain ending the French and Indian War (1754-1763). The progressive tollerance by Great Britain and Canada to the Quebecois in both the Quebec Act (1774) and the Constitution Act (1867) has resulted in ungratefullness and insolence on the part of the defeated Quebecois and because of this the Quebecois ingrates have succedded in the establishment of many fascist anti-English Language Laws like Bill 101 (Charter of the French Language) of 1977 and Bill 22 (Official Language Act (1974) which illegally and unconstitionally removed English as a co-official language and made French the sole official language of the province of Quebec and transformed Anglo Quebecers into 2nd class citizens in their own province which is theres and not the Quebecois, also it has led to 2 independence referendums in 1980 and 1995 which almost broke apart the Dominion of Canada by the Quebecois who are the descendents of the defeated French to steal the territory of the province of Quebec which is not theres but belongs to Anglo Canadians as the descendents of the victorious British and spit on the memories of the British soldiers and marines who died in the French and Indian War (1754-1763) under the command of Major General Jeffrey Amherst and Brigadier General James Wolfe to drive the French out of North America, the sacrifices of these heroic men with their blood, sweat and tears would have been futile and in vain. THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC BELONGS TO THE DOMINION OF CANADA AND NOT TO SEPARATIST TRAITORS. Every Quebecois who supports the separatist PQ and the separatist lite Liberal Party is an ENEMEY OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA and to the Canadian people who should have their Canadian Citizenship revoked and then mass deported back to France where they belong ASAP.

    • More than 95% of Quebec Anglos vote for “the separatist lite Liberal Party”. France would not want them.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s