Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Talk about de Gaulle's 1967 speech shows maturity, Charest says

RHÉAL SÉGUIN

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 6:03 AM EST 08/07/08

French president's contribution to Quebec-France relationships needs to be emphasized more strongly, Premier suggests ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Bert Russell Paradox, BC from Canada writes:
    Strange how these types come out of the woods to pat themselves on the back, when Canada has supported Quebec since the "Plains" .... France was nowhere to be seen back then .... and now France wants to thank and congratulate Quebec for surviving?
  2. pierre lefebvre from Brossard, Canada writes: Here we go again. This blog will be a collection of Quebec and France bashing stupidities. And Rheal Seguin at G&M goes on. Enjoy the litany of negative comments against diversity.
  3. A Better Canada from no-quebec, Canada writes: How naive French Canadians can be, and will remain. France got rid of their jails and sent prisoners with prostitutes in Canada, and then, abandonned them. Only " quelques arpents de neige" Napoleon traded 25% of United States for a few islands in the Caribbeans. France made a fiasco in Algeria and so many other places. Now, Americans are not better, but, only the fascist group of Quebec still believe in having a sense of superiority by keeping contacts and visits to Paris. Meanwhile, the economy is collapsing, head offices and Expos are gone, and the rule of law does exist only for a special class.
  4. Jean-Guy Tremblay from Chicoutimi, Canada writes:

    A Better Canada from no-quebec, Canada writes: France got rid of their jails and sent prisoners with prostitutes in Canada.

    Shows how long a way we've gone. Pretty amazing when you think of it... and of course... all of it is Canada's doing exclusively.

    A Better Canada from no-quebec, Canada writes: only the fascist group of Quebec still believe in having a sense of superiority...

    Fascists?... who?

    A Better Canada from no-quebec, Canada writes: the economy is collapsing, head offices and Expos are gone, and the rule of law does exist only for a special class.

    Quebecers are generating revenues of 70 G$ a year is all kinds of taxes. 40 G$ of it goes to Ottawa. The Expos are gone?... oh my god!... this province must really be going down the drain. Special class?... which?
  5. A Better Canada from no-quebec, Canada writes: Forgot to ignore head-offices, Jean-Guy....do you understand the economic importance in having head-offices, including Expos? it seems not, because they are just laughing.....For your 40G$ going to Ottawa, did you forget to mention the XXX G$ coming from Ottawa? To Lefbvre, what is negative, is to ignore the facts and find excuses to justify a collapsing economy, and a declining standard of living. By the way, the fascist group includes attorneys with a license to steal, wicked judges, the directors of a so-called financial institution, and certain executives who do not apply the good corporate ethics.
  6. Jean-Guy Tremblay from Chicoutimi, Canada writes:

    A Better Canada from no-quebec, Canada writes: Forgot to ignore head-offices, Jean-Guy... do you understand the economic importance in having head-offices, including Expos?

    Head-offices are important, but many provinces in this country have fewer of them and are doing pretty well. A professional sports team is more a matter of local pride than economy. I think their departure is more symptomatic of Quebec's American penchant.

    This year, Ottawa sent 19 G$ to Quebec in transfer payments. 12 G$ of it is part of federal programs that all provinces receive. Which leaves 7 G$ for equalization; the famous "have not" part. Sure, Quebec does not have the booming economy Alberta has (which contributes to the global environmental mess), but, when compared to the 40 G$ it sends to Ottawa, it certainly is not the burden that so many like to portray.

    http://www.fin.gc.ca/access/fedprove.html

    A Better Canada from no-quebec, Canada writes: the fascist group includes attorneys with a license to steal, wicked judges, the directors of a so-called financial institution, and certain executives who do not apply the good corporate ethics.

    That's the sentence you keep copying and pasting in most of your post. Although we are drastically moving off topic, I wish you could enlightened me a bit.
  7. Leon Russell from Gatineau, Qc, Canada writes: Jean-Guy Tremblay from Chicoutimi, Canada writes: "
    A Better Canada from no-quebec, Canada writes: France got rid of their jails and sent prisoners with prostitutes in Canada."

    " Shows how long a way we've gone. Pretty amazing when you think of it... "

    Great answer, Jean-Guy. I didn't think it was true, but if it is, Australia was populated the same way. Can't wait for him to post as "A Better Commonwealth Without Australia".
  8. King's Knight from Canada writes: These celebrations marked the 400th anniversary of Quebec City and a French PRESENCE in North America that strongly influenced the shaping of a country AND a continent. This individual from France had no cause to even venture down the De Gaulle highway. He's either as inexperienced as Maxieme Bernier or as stupid as a fox. If the later, he should have been quietly taken to task. It's highly doubtful that a Canadian representative on hand for activities in France would even mention the issues surrounding the Vichy regime.
  9. Not The Real Jacques Parizeau from Montreal, Canada writes: When will Canada finally understand that we want a country and we shall have it. We won't be satisfy with a motion recognizing us as a nation no matter how nice the gesture is. We want a country, a country that belong to us and a country that truly represents what we really are. Quebecers are the least Canadians of all Canadians and yet because of Ontario's obcession with us, our presence in Canada undermine this country as a whole. Separation is a win-win solution. We can be good friend, but we will never be good bedfellows.
  10. Chode Mcblob from Canada writes: De Gaulle was a supreme hypocrite. The same separatistes who cheered him in 1967, danced in the streets when France fell in 1940.
  11. pierre lefebvre from Brossard, Canada writes: To Chode Mcblod: Judging de Gaulle as an hypocrite, how do you perceive Pierre Elliot Trudeau a fascist, Nazi and Petain sympathiser in 40`s, while Canada was at war with these same evil forces?
  12. Bruno D from Montreal, Canada writes: yes De Gaulle was a hypocrite for putting gas in the fire back in the 60's while at Expo 67.

    Lets not forget that in the 40's when France was attacked by the NAzis, De Gaulle fled to London and France was saved by the Alies USA, Britain and Canada.

    To Pierre Levbreve: Is Trudeau a hypocrite too, yes!

    For supporting communists and by implementing anti-democratic laws most notably the official languages act i.e Canadian Bilingualism.

    BY the way, is the bashing on Cyberpresse any different then here? NO! So if you dont like to be bashed stop bashing others on your french web sites.

    Mr. Fillion states in the 6th paragraph "...France has not abandoned Quebec."

    oh boy... can someone please tell him to read up on Canadian history! The treaty of Paris of 1763, France cedes Quebec to Britain for a couple of islands.

    If France wants quebec back, no problem, but give us back those islands as they can be more useful to Canada then Quebec.

    Feel free to bash me but i wont be on the computer as its too nice outside & remember, Free speech!
  13. Fake Name from Canada writes: " pierre lefebvre from Brossard, Canada writes: Here we go again. This blog will be a collection of Quebec and France bashing stupidities. And Rheal Seguin at G&M goes on."

    Nope, just separatist-bashing.

    As for "not the real Jaques Parizeau: We can be good friend, but we will never be good bedfellows." - what makes you think that the ROC would want Quebec for a good friend after a slap in the face like a separation vote? If at some point the majority of Quebecois decide they're too good for Canadian citizenship, I think you'll find the majority sentiment in the ROC is going to be more along the lines of 'if that's your attitude, we don't want anything to do with you'. Expect widespread support for heavy tariffs on any trade with a separate Quebec, to recoup the years of subsidization payments.
  14. Not The Real Jacques Parizeau from Montreal, Canada writes: Fake Name from Canada writes: "As for "not the real Jaques Parizeau: We can be good friend, but we will never be good bedfellows." - what makes you think that the ROC would want Quebec for a good friend after a slap in the face like a separation vote?"

    That's very simple. Ontario enjoys a 6 million trade surplus with Quebec. I don't think the government of Ontario will jeopardize the jobs of tens of thousands of Ontarians that depend on trade with Quebec. In those kind of situations money talk and cooler heads prevail. When there's so much at stakes, the dust tends to settle rather quickly. And for your information, separation will get a warm reception from Wrstern Canada if they don't separate before us.
  15. Not The Real Jacques Parizeau from Montreal, Canada writes: I'm disappointed. Only about fifteen posts for a thread about Quebec. That has never been seen before!!! Maybe people are growing tired of talking about Quebec. Their attention has shifted to Western Canada as Dion's Liberals are trying to sell Western Canadians their NEP II.
  16. Rob Swanson from Edmonton, Canada writes: NOT J.P.

    Nope. We are just more aware than you that separatism is a dead issue.

    We burned a pretty good rare leader who had a chance to go national to shut the separatists up, and are getting full value for that trade.

    You knew that right?
  17. k p from Montreal, Canada writes: "I didn't think it was true, but if it is, Australia was populated the same way. Can't wait for him to post as "A Better Commonwealth Without Australia". " technically it applies more closely to Australia than Quebec. You could be deported to Australia for the equivalent of a parking ticket, with the death penalty applied if you ever returned. The vast majority of the French who came here volunteered
  18. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    I'm interested in this worker exchange thing.

    As a member of the EU, 'French" workers can from anywhere in Europe.

    Does this mean that a Polish plumber who is working is Normandy will be able to work in PQ?

    Or is it limited to French Nationals only? Will all French citizens be welcome as workers, or only those who have that 'pur laine' thingy working for them?

    What kind of work do French Nationals excel at, and why would they want to work in Quebec?

    Will Montreal be flooded with Albanain-born French national workers??
  19. Fake Name from Canada writes: " spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:
    What kind of work do French Nationals excel at"

    The same kind as TTC union members?
  20. Fake Name from Canada writes: " Not The Real Jacques Parizeau from Montreal, Canada writes:
    That's very simple. Ontario enjoys a 6 million trade surplus with Quebec. I don't think the government of Ontario will jeopardize the jobs of tens of thousands of Ontarians that depend on trade with Quebec."

    Tariffs, not blockades.
  21. Rick C from Canada writes: Jean-Guy Tremblay from Chicoutimi, Canada writes:

    "This year, Ottawa sent 19 G$ to Quebec in transfer payments. 12 G$ of it is part of federal programs that all provinces receive. Which leaves 7 G$ for equalization; the famous "have not" part. Sure, Quebec does not have the booming economy Alberta has (which contributes to the global environmental mess), but, when compared to the 40 G$ it sends to Ottawa, it certainly is not the burden that so many like to portray."

    Sweet! We'll take our $7 billion back and your taxes can be adjusted to where they should be in order to have the services you receive.

    I have no problem with Quebec choosing $7/day daycare and subsidized electricity rates. However it's not up to the rest of Canada to pay for it.
  22. Nassar Ben Houdja from Canada writes: If France is so fond of Quebec, then it can pick up part of the equalization payments.
  23. A Better Canada from no-quebec, Canada writes: To Tremblay and Lefebvre and Russell, twice I have tried to reply, but I have been censored by Seguin, who seems to protect his friends in Quebec, at the expense of real journalism for real Canadians having the real story. Surprising that Globe keeps a Horse Trojan in his staff, but, if Ottawa still hires bureaucrats in the Revenue Dept. for giving special tax favours to their contacts in Quebec, nothing is surprising in this Canada.
  24. Jean-Guy Tremblay from Chicoutimi, Canada writes: Rick C from Canada writes: Sweet! We'll take our $7 billion back and your taxes can be adjusted to where they should be in order to have the services you receive.

    I don't follow your logic, but that wouldn't be the first time.

    A Better Canada from no-quebec, Canada writes: To Tremblay and Lefebvre and Russell, twice I have tried to reply, but I have been censored.

    Try to be level-headed and using articulate vocabulary, your reply should get posted.
  25. Compos Mentis from in the Darwinian Wild, Wild West..., Canada writes: Not The Real Jacques Parizeau from Montreal, Canada writes: "When will Canada finally understand that we want a country and we shall have it. We won't be satisfy with a motion recognizing us as a nation no matter how nice the gesture is. We want a country, a country that belong to us and a country that truly represents what we really are..." Nothing is stopping you from finding your own country - go for it! Just leave Canada out of it. "... Quebecers are the least Canadians of all Canadians and yet because of Ontario's obcession with us, our presence in Canada undermine this country as a whole..." With that attitude, nothing anyone says make you believe in Canada. My Canada includes Quebec (where all my relatives on my mom's side were born). "... Separation is a win-win solution. We can be good friend, but we will never be good bedfellows. " Your attitude is a perfect example of the mentality surrounding the "...we can be only ever be good friends but we'll never feel like we belong...". Canada has bent over backwards to accommodate Quebec and all we get in return is a slap in the face! Time to grow up and realize that Quebec is stronger now *because* of Canada, not in spite of it! Try travelling around the country a little more (and I don't mean going only to Ontario). You'll be suprised by how much french there actually is out here in Canada. Sorry to burst your bubble, but Quebec does not hold exclusive rights to everything French Canadian.
  26. Michael Sharp from Victoria, Canada writes:

    Maturity, shmaturity.

    BC is 150 years old.
    Vancouver Island, 170 years old.

    Nu chal' nuth?
    10,000 years old.

    Stop playing us for fools.
  27. Troubled Youth from Everywhere, Canada writes: France has no business or ties with Quebec and should respect that once you make a trade and the people offered the opportunity to return to their national homeland any and all nationalistic/political relationships end. Any continued nationalistic/political interference is a slap in the face of the new government of the land. de Gaulle was wrong then and any reference by France to day is equally wrong. Unless France is willing to allow the nations of WW2 Allied Army to interject nationalistic/political statements into todays France under the guise of securing Frances freedom from Nazi fascism. After all didn't some of the soldiers marry some of France's women. Blood tie right? Vive le Africain nord libre.
  28. James McDowell from Kitchener, Canada writes: "Pays" is a loose word in French, apparently, while "nation" is a loose word in English, as most of us realize now. Glad to see the user of "pays" say, "pardon my French," before another Canada-France tempest rocked our tea leaves!

    But anyone who thinks De Gaulle's comment of 1967 is worthy of some kind of praise needs his head read. What IS indicative of any maturity we now have in Canada and the Quebec nation is the ability to discuss De Gaulle's statement and inappropriateness. A lot of water has flowed down the Ottawa and St. Lawrence Rivers since 1967, and many more Canadians, Québecois and non-Québecois, have a better understanding of the unique history of Québec as France's virtually-abandoned child in the New World, and are able to see a Québec that is now capable of relating to France without being either patronized or misled by De Gaulle.

    Anyway, the 400th Anniversary, like Expo '67, was generally impressive. I for one resist any suggestion that De Gaulle's 1967 remark had any positive value. Everything else the public personae had to say this week was fine enough. Vive le Québec, belle pays du Nouveau Monde, et ses gens!
  29. Not The Real Jacques Parizeau from Montreal, Canada writes: I wasn't born when De Gaulle made his famous " Vive le Quebec Libre " statement. But anytime I see it on TV, it gives me goosebumps and I'm always very moved by it. That has exactly the same effect on me as when I see on TV Rene Levesque saying " Maybe we are something like a great people " or " If I understand you well, what you've told me is a la prochaine ". I was only a child when that happened and I have absolutely no memories of the first referendum but I'm always extremely moved when I hear Levesque pronouncing these famous words. Levesque, without a doubt is in the same class as Mandela, Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Levesque like these three characters is the one who made sure we will only choose pacific means to acheive emancipation and free ourselves from the colonialists invaders. De Gaulle with his statement is the one who provided the necessary spark that helped Quebecers to awake and fully realized that they were second class citizens on their land. For that, I'll be eternally grateful to De Gaulle. Paradoxically, it's worth nothing that Levesque himself was not comfortable with De Gaulle's statement. But as we know, Levesque was a pragmatic, he was not really a sovereigntist but more of a autonomist. Thank you General De Gaulle, thank you Mr. Levesque and thank you to France. Long live the french language Long live France Long live Quebec!!!
  30. James McDowell from Kitchener, Canada writes: Thanks, not the real Jacques (Montreal) for your thoughts. They are well received, and if De Gaulle's "Quebec libre" was for you inspiring, I can accept that, and even be glad for what it did for you. We live on different sides of the Ottawa River, and there is such a thing as perspective. I think there might have been different things De Gaulle could have said that might have inspired the people of Quebec, starting with an apology for France's colonial policy up until 1759. In 1967, he could have praised the people of Quebec for not only surviving, but for building a great society in her St. Lawrence homeland, with so much history and culture to enrich la francophonie mondiale. He could have highlighted Quebec's key position in that commonwealth. The Rest of Canada could have applauded all that, and many more things. But no, De Gaulle chose a divisive comment, and no-one could convince me it was not deliberate. Given the 30 years prior to 1967, it seems supremely ungracious of the man. Nevertheless, I am glad for all the consciousness among Quebecois and Quebecoises that they are a great society and a nation with both a language and homeland. This 400th anniversary is one more great event in Quebec. Congratulations, and best wishes for the future, whether as our good friends or bedfellows (I hope). Well said concerning Rene Levesque. He was an amazing leader, a man of honour and principle.
  31. Not The Real Jacques Parizeau from Montreal, Canada writes: @ James McDowell, Thank you very much for your kind remarks. I've always known that there exist in English Canada many great Canadians with whom we can have a constructive dialogue and you are one of them. Actually, it's true that France has abandonned us in some way. I believe De Gaulle has always though that France had a moral debt toward Quebec. That's why he made his famous statement. But I may be wrong, we'll never know fo sure. He did praise Quebecers too because at that time the quiet revolution was well underway. But his vive le Quebec Libre statement has obviously shadowed everything else he said. That's all people remember. That statement could be interpreted in many ways. Obviously, if you were nationalist, you interpreted as an endosement for sovereignty. But Quebec can obviously also be free within Canada depending on how we share the powers between the federal and provincial government. So it's a matter of perspective. You've got to remember, that there was a huge gathering of Rassemblement pour l'independance Nationale (RIN) sympatizers shout Quebec libre in front of Montreal City Hall balcony where De Gaulle was speaking. That probably influenced De Gaulle too. But once again, we'll never know for sure. By the way, De Gaulle also said vive le Canada Francais but people tend to forget it. Clearly De Gaulle went a bit too far during his visit. He even compared the atmosphere in Quebec to that of France following the liberation after WW II. That was over the top but I guess that was a fascinating period in Quebec. I remember during the 1995 referendum, there was no passion. Basically it was akin to a normal election. Of course Bouchard was electrifying but something was missing. That's strange when you think about it. It's probably because we had already moved from a society that had collective dreams to a society dominated by individualism.
  32. Not The Real Jacques Parizeau from Montreal, Canada writes: @ James McDowell, Thank you very much for your kind remarks. I've always known that there exist in English Canada many great Canadians with whom we can have a constructive dialogue and you are one of them. Actually, it's true that France has abandonned us in some way. I believe De Gaulle has always though that France had a moral debt toward Quebec. That's why he made his famous statement. But I may be wrong, we'll never know fo sure. He did praise Quebecers too because at that time the quiet revolution was well underway. But his vive le Quebec Libre statement has obviously shadowed everything else he said. That's all people remember. That statement could be interpreted in many ways. Obviously, if you were nationalist, you interpreted as an endosement for sovereignty. But Quebec can obviously also be free within Canada depending on how we share the powers between the federal and provincial government. So it's a matter of perspective. You've got to remember, that there was a huge gathering of Rassemblement pour l'independance Nationale (RIN) sympatizers shout Quebec libre in front of Montreal City Hall balcony where De Gaulle was speaking. That probably influenced De Gaulle too. But once again, we'll never know for sure. By the way, De Gaulle also said vive le Canada Francais but people tend to forget it. Clearly De Gaulle went a bit too far during his visit. He even compared the atmosphere in Quebec to that of France following the liberation after WW II. That was over the top but I guess that was a fascinating period in Quebec. I remember during the 1995 referendum, there was no passion. Basically it was akin to a normal election. Of course Bouchard was electrifying but something was missing. That's strange when you think about it. It's probably because we had already moved from a society that had collective dreams to a society dominated by individualism.
  33. Michael Sharp from Victoria, Canada writes:

    To celebrate Quebec's 400th, I had poutine last night.
    First time ever.

    The diarrhea stops soon, I hope.
    I don't have any more to give.
  34. Jean-Guy Tremblay from Chicoutimi, Canada writes: Yeah Michael, it does that sometimes. Glad you tried it and shared your experience with us.
  35. James McDowell from Kitchener, Canada writes: Interesting, not the real Jacques (Montreal) to know that De Gaulle was feeding off the RIN part of the crowd--I hadn't known that--and perhaps he did seize the moment, albeit without a proper risk assessment.

    I've been happy to see France's involvement this year, of course, and the more focused care being taken on what's being discussed. A good relationship among France, Canada and Quebec seems to be the joint goal this time.

    Appreciated your point about the individualism taking precedence over the collective dream. Western cultures are certainly moving in this direction--and as you imply, to too great an extent.

    The 50 years of la revolution tranquille have been an interesting ride. Much has been accomplished, and no doubt a few things lost. I hope for a bright future, though.
  36. Mark Thomas from Toronto, Canada writes: Make no mistake about the French Prime Minister's comments. They were well orchestrated by French CBC Radio and Quebec intellectuals living in France e.g. Louise Beaudoin. His comments were a direct result of the panic amongst Quebec nationalists after the GG caused a sensation in France during her visit to launch 400 yr celebrations.

    C. Charette's CBC morning radio show hooked up politicians from France and Louise Beaudoin to beg them to ignore the GG and to ensure the old special relationship between Qebec and France remained in tact.
  37. Regina Phallange from Does it matter?, Canada writes: What concerns me is the labour mobility agreement. How can there be such an agreement between one province and a different country? What is the federal role in this?
    And how is it possible that a foreigner can come to work in Canada when there are provincial barriers all over the country to many out-of province professionals, be it in the medical field, construction or trades?
    Canada is a great country with some major problems, with regions and provinces wanting to create their own little kingdoms, which is why we are not and never will be, a nation.
    Quebec on the other hand, although it makes me uncomfortable in some ways to admit it, for reaons of national unity, is indeed a nation, and bravo for them, for they have what Canada as a whole will almost certainly never attain.
  38. Nassar Ben Houdja from Canada writes: Having that zombie rummaging the streets of Quebec looking for brains is as useless now as it was then.
  39. James McDowell from Kitchener, Canada writes: Regina Phallange, I agree that the French people of Quebec have a national identity. It's based on so many aspects of their history, such as a common language they love, a European homeland, a long history replete with pain and deprivation, an unusual attachment to the land, and a long history of common faith. These are the elements of community, and the Rest of Canada hasn't shared such a journey. The R of C has other features which have been socially engineered in recent decades to the multicultural vision. It creates an open, inventive society in which individualism and innovation will flourish. The shared values are of necessity focused on human rights and environmental concerns, which are fairly universal. In that sense, the culture of the R of C is in some sense that of the emerging global village. It is such a different and vast community. Quebeckers are beckoned to this global community as well. Many of them are members of it, as well as of the Quebec nation. As for the other provinces and regions with their provincial kingdoms, I'd say don't resist the best aspects of the regionalism too much. There are some less desirable aspects, such as local regulation that impedes broad trade. This should give way to country-wide standards, of course, so as to maximize productivity, one of the high values of the global village. But the regional flavours are charming, and perhaps can be seen as mild expressions of the kind of "nationality" that we can celebrate among the Quebecois and Quebecoises. What do you think?
  40. Not The Real Jacques Parizeau from Montreal, Canada writes: To all and James Mcdowell in particular: James, your remarks are extremely relevant and interesting. Very respectfully, I think the reason why English Canada doesn't have a strong national identity is because of the policy of multiculturalism. At least that's a major reason. Please do not confuse multiculturalism and immigration. I'm strongly in favor of immigration but I'm ferociously opposed to multiculturalism. You can't have a strong national identity when a significant portion of the population is comprised of hyphenated-Canadians or worse Canadians of convenience. It's either you're Canadian or you're not. In Toronto people usually don't refer to themselves as Canadian but as Chinese, Indian, Arab, Jamaican etc. That's what multiculturalism does. On the other hand in the USA, everybody is American. Remember during the aftermath of 9/11 , you've never heard New York mayor Rudy Guiliani referring to himself as a Italian-American, only as a American. That's the difference between integration and multiculturalism. There's no way multiculturalism can encourage people to share common values, to share a common identity and to create a strong bond between everybody. Joe Clark had it right when he talked about a community of communities. There is still national cohesion in Western Canada and the Maritimes but Ontario's social experiment has gone way too far. I'm sorry to say that but I will not be surprised to see riots and even possibly civil war in Toronto someday because of multiculturalism. Multiculturalism = balkanisation. I hope I'm wrong but one can't rule out the possibility. It happened (riots) in France and England.
  41. Bruno D from Montreal, Canada writes: I agree with Jacques Parizeau,

    however you cant compare Canada to the USA. It would be like comparing Quebec to France, no contest.

    You cant make everyone happy either, although the Americans have a good internal system, you seem to forget that there are groups of people in the USA who do NOT identify themselves with the majority for example the Hawaiiens.

    We should look for alternative routes for strentghning National Unity in Canada. For example, years of appeasing Quebec has not giving the Federal govt the expected results. In fact appeasing quebec has only done worse for national unity, the referendum results of 40% in 1980 and 50% in 1995 are pretty good indicators.

    The Federal govt should actually have a more hands-off approach and decentralize the entire system. The decentralization of powers is going to enforce national unity by allowing each province to manage & epress itself.
  42. Fake Name from Canada writes: " Not The Real Jacques Parizeau from Montreal, Canada writes:
    I'm sorry to say that but I will not be surprised to see riots and even possibly civil war in Toronto someday because of multiculturalism. Multiculturalism = balkanisation. I hope I'm wrong but one can't rule out the possibility. It happened (riots) in France and England."

    I hope you're wrong too, but more than that, if we ever see such things in toronto I hope we handle them with proper force applied to maintain law and order, instead of treating rioters with kid gloves like the french did. Martial law (shoot looters and arsonists on sight) is entirely rational in such a situation.
  43. Fake Name from Canada writes: " James McDowell from Kitchener, Canada writes: There are some less desirable aspects, such as local regulation that impedes broad trade. This should give way to country-wide standards, of course,"

    Does that mean we get to see federal authorities stomp hard on arrogant little upstarts like toronto mayor david miller, who thinks his views on which chemicals are safe to be marketed should trump the national regulatory board that has legal jurisdiction? If so, sign me up.
  44. James McDowell from Kitchener, Canada writes: Not the real Jacques (Montreal), wrote "There's no way multiculturalism can encourage people to share common values, to share a common identity and to create a strong bond between everybody." While I see most of your observations about the Rest of Canada being accurate, and do agree that multiculturalism is problematic in the ways you indicate, I do see, with reference to your statement above, some common values that multiculturalism can espouse. As I mentioned in an earlier post, they focus on human rights and care for the environment, and I should have indicated at that time, on economic wellbeing. These are not insignificant values. They are part of the Quebec vision by the way. Are they enough to create a common identity and a strong bond uniting everyone? I'm not sure. We haven't been on this road for 400 years! You make a good point about Ontario. This province has changed so much, and I wish we had something as strong, beautiful and lasting as Quebec has. But I feel that 0on every level--federal, provincial and local, social engineering and the influx of American and global culture have re-contoured our cultural landscape. I lament and I adapt. You might be right, not the real Jacques (Montreal)--what we have become here in Ontario may be inadequate in terms of values we enthusiastically share, an identity we rejoice in, and universal community bonding. We must try, though. As I write this, I realize Kitchener-Waterloo is not Toronto, where I once worked, commuting from Markham. The values, identity and bonding issue looms larger in Toronto, I think, than in Kitchener-Waterloo. I appreciate the perspectives that have been expressed from Montreal.
  45. loraine lamontagne from Canada writes: Why would the Globe and Mail choose not to translate the word 'paysans' in the last paragraph quoting Fillon?
    The word 'peasants' is not only a totally accurate translation but it precisely conveys the tone of Fillon's speech and clarification.
  46. Jean-Guy Tremblay from Chicoutimi, Canada writes: To James and Jacques, this is a very interesting conversation and you are setting the tone, an example to follow in these Globe and Mail forums.

    P.S.: James is English for Jacques and vice versa... amusing.
  47. Summer of Discontent from Ottawa, Canada writes: Let Quebec separate. Let them fully assume the GDP debt they owe of Canada. Let them fully become French only. Let them demand passports to enter their country.

    Then let the RoC do what should have been done by those idiots long ago: Invade Quebec, force the entire population to be English only with the same laws as the RoC and shoot down all the separatists.

    My what a headline that would be and debate that would provoke!

    Not to mention that all Quebecois politicians be extradited to their home country (Dion can go first to either St Pierre & Michequelon or proper France itself).
  48. Jean-Guy Tremblay from Chicoutimi, Canada writes: Summer of Discontent from Ottawa, Canada writes: My what a headline that would be and debate that would provoke!

    Yeah, fascism always stirs up a lot of passion.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top