Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Luisito]

I know this will be an unpopular thing to say, but something I think would help Quebecois maintain their culture would be to embrace their Catholic roots and revitalize the Catholic church in their province/nation. I know it's probably too late for that, but on a individual level some Quebecois might want to look into it. I know there is some bad history there with the Church. I never thought in a million years I would say this as i had become rather anti church over the years myself, but the Catholic church has more than just religious benefits. There are much larger cultural implications.

Just an idea, don't kill me.

.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Luisito

I know this will be an unpopular thing to say, but something I think would help Quebecois maintain their culture would be to embrace their Catholic roots and revitalize the Catholic church in their province/nation. I know it's probably too late for that, but on a individual level some Quebecois might want to look into it. I know there is some bad history there with the Church. I never thought in a million years I would say this as i had become rather anti church over the years myself, but the Catholic church has more than just religious benefits. There are much larger cultural implications.

Just an idea, don't kill me.

.

It's a good point. Nobody has been better at creating and protecting an insular culture better than the Catholic church.

That said, they are now being taken to task for this very thing, so I'm not sure if you would want Quebecois to take a similar pathway. It doesn't end well.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

To stop paying equalization, Alberta would have to stop paying taxes to Ottawa altogether.

Danielle Smith says “Just watch me!”; she’s heard about the Notwithstanding Clause



… if there are enough JHikkas in Alberta, it might actually work to get elected

[Luisito]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

It's a good point. Nobody has been better at creating and protecting an insular culture better than the Catholic church.

That said, they are now being taken to task for this very thing, so I'm not sure if you would want Quebecois to take a similar pathway. It doesn't end well.

That's the thing though, being Catholic is not being insular. There are about a billion Catholics on this planet and about 250,000,000 French speakers on this planet. Reviatlizing Catholicism would be a good way to to stand up to WASP hegemony and growing influence from other religious groups.

I know many people in Quebec don't like the Church anymore, I understand why. It is a place that takes pride in its secular values, which I also agree with and admire Quebec for standing up for secularism.....but I can't help think it would be wise for Catholics in Quebec and in the country as whole to stick together.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by lio45

… if there are enough JHikkas in Alberta, it might actually work to get elected

Dontchathink that JHikka is a little too far left on the political spectrum for Alberta? He has a pretty jaded view on late stage capitalism (or capitalism in any form).

Plus he likes bikes, busses and dense urbanification and promotes carless streets and walkability. This seems to be the opposite of the pickup truck culture rampant in wild rose country.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Dontchathink that JHikka is a little too far left on the political spectrum for Alberta? He has a pretty jaded view on late stage capitalism (or capitalism in any form).

Plus he likes bikes, busses and dense urbanification and promotes carless streets and walkability. This seems to be the opposite of the pickup truck culture rampant in wild rose country.

I was referring to him as an example of someone who has no clue how the Constitution works; if enough Albertans are like him on that one, Smith's tactics might actually succeed. See quotes below.

O-Tacular would have been a good example as well: if his views on the feasilibility of Smith's plans are shared by a good number of his fellow Albertans, then her ridiculous (and completely DOA/unconstitutional) electoral "promises" could actually seduce them.

Originally Posted by JHikka

Alberta can do the same on basically anything if it so pleases.

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Precisely. In fact UCP and Wexit party politicians are outright pointing to Quebec as the model to copy.

Originally Posted by O-tacular

And Alberta can just make up their own laws and it will be legal too right?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Dontchathink that JHikka is a little too far left on the political spectrum for Alberta? He has a pretty jaded view on late stage capitalism (or capitalism in any form).

Plus he likes bikes, busses and dense urbanification and promotes carless streets and walkability. This seems to be the opposite of the pickup truck culture rampant in wild rose country.

BTW, I am not picking on, or making fun of JHikka:

1) - I am a conservative and a free market capitalist, but I agree that something should be done (simplification of the tax code, a greater number of income triggered tax brackets) to ensure that the uber rich billionaires pay their fair share (or at least more than they do now).
2) - I have nothing against busses and bicycles, although I object to oppressive measures designed to punish or impede the car driving public from accessing the downtown core of cities.
3) - dense urbanification is fine, so long as efforts are made to ensure that space for shops and services are included in the design process. If the goal is a truly walkable downtown, then health clinics and schools should be part of the process too.
4) - carless streets are spiffy too, just make sure that they are not vital roadways. Carless streets should be confined (for the most part) to side streets.

As for pickup trucks, I would never have one, but my eldest son is an electrician, and he can justify one as a requirement of his job. Lots of farmers, fishers and blue collar workers can do so. As for SUVs, I have a small BMW 4x4 X3, which can come in quite handy in a snowbelt city like Moncton, especially when you have been called into the hospital at 3 AM and the roads have not been plowed. Vehicles like this are not a universal evil.

He has his point of view as a dense urbanist living in downtown TO. His feelings are valid. My worldview however is a little different. This is based on where I live and my life circumstances.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by lio45

I was referring to him as an example of someone who has no clue how the Constitution works; if enough Albertans are like him on that one, Smith's tactics might actually succeed. See quotes below.

O-Tacular would have been a good example as well: if his views on the feasilibility of Smith's plans are shared by a good number of his fellow Albertans, then her ridiculous (and completely DOA/unconstitutional) electoral "promises" could actually seduce them.

My views on the feasibility of Smith’s plan have nothing to do with her ability to dupe gullible dipshit anti vaxxers and Wexiteers. I’ve been playing devil’s advocate (your specialty).

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

Alberta doesn't pay equalization, it pays taxes to the federal government and that government has a program called equalization. To stop paying equalization, Alberta would have to stop paying taxes to Ottawa altogether. But even in Alberts just stopped paying its share of equalization, it would not be that bad. The equalization pot is about 20 billion $ and Alberta pays 15 % of it (as Alberta represent about 15 % of GDP) which means more or less 3 billion $. Québec received about 65 % of equalization which means 2 billion from Alberta. A good amount but not irreplaceable. I would gladly let that amount go it that means Albertans can't complain anymore, but I thing they would prefer pay it and keep complaining...

Well, as anti-Francophones measures, Alberta could close all French universities... wait, what French universities? Ok, they could close all French hospitals... oops, same problem... They could stop giving traffic tickets in French... no, they already don't do that. Calgary could stop translating its municipal election guide in French... no, it is translated in 10 languages but not in French. Hmmm! I suppose Alberta could open work camps for Francophones, but I don't see anything like that happening in Alberta (and if it did, maybe we should stop buying Alberta oil and start buying Saudi Arabia oil instead...).

This would make my conservative father’s head explode. It actually made me laugh and takes the piss out of all the breathless claims that the tarsands are the economic engine of all of Canada. That said there’s no way the figure of transfer payments to Quebec attributable to Alberta is that low. This article from 2019 pegs AB’s contribution to Confederation at $420 billion over 11 years with the largest percentage going to Quebec.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada...6ebdd0641/amp/

On a side note it has been very frustrating that since the bust in 2014 AB struggled to receive adequate transfer payments as our economy tanked while Quebec was booming. Visiting Montreal in 2018 was like being in Calgary in the 00’s boom years.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

My views on the feasibility of Smith’s plan have nothing to do with her ability to dupe gullible dipshit anti vaxxers and Wexiteers. I’ve been playing devil’s advocate (your specialty).

You haven't been doing it very well, then. Sorry

What Quebec is doing is fully within the bounds of the federal Constitution; the nonsense that is being discussed about what AB could try to do is absolutely not comparable. "Albertans would simply stop paying their due share of federal taxes, and everyone else would accept it." Lol.

Playing devil's advocate only works when there's an actual argument to be made for the position you're choosing to defend ...

"Smith may be great at duping gullible dipshit Albertan voters", okay, we could agree on that, but "If Quebec can avail itself of Section 33 of the Constitution, then it means Albertans can unilaterally decide to stop paying federal taxes" is not playing devil's advocate

[lio45]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

This article from 2019 pegs AB’s contribution to Confederation at $420 billion over 11 years ...

The tarsands are a resource that used to be owned by the Crown. Only in 1905 was the area organized as a Province. So in a sense, you guys are whining that you have to repay the hand that created you.

It's not like Albertans ever were an independent people, with international recognition of their uncontested tarsands ownership, and THEN made a deal to join Canada, and now are getting screwed and regret not choosing the path of keeping their tarsands (which in this scenario were actually theirs) out of Canadian reach.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by lio45

You haven't been doing it very well, then. Sorry

What Quebec is doing is fully within the bounds of the federal Constitution; the nonsense that is being discussed about what AB could try to do is absolutely not comparable. "Albertans would simply stop paying their due share of federal taxes, and everyone else would accept it." Lol.

Playing devil's advocate only works when there's an actual argument to be made for the position you're choosing to defend ...

"Smith may be great at duping gullible dipshit Albertan voters", okay, we could agree on that, but "If Quebec can avail itself of Section 33 of the Constitution, then it means Albertans can unilaterally decide to stop paying federal taxes" is not playing devil's advocate

First of all I’d like to clarify that it’s not ‘dipshit Albertan voters’ who would elect Smith. It’s dipshit anti vaxxer UCP members as she would be replacing Jason Kenney to become interim Premier until the election in the spring. Just like not all Quebecers are dipshit hijab ban Conservatives, just the CAQ / Legault kool-aid drinkers are. Unfortunately him and his party enjoy much stronger support than Danielle Smith who would certainly lose in the general election, or the UCP which is the least popular party in the province’s history.

Now that we’ve cleared that up, my point in playing Devil’s advocate is that Quebec acts like a rebellious teenager always defying its parents in Ottawa, yet they act surprised when their younger sibling points to them and says “Why not me too?”.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

Alberta doesn't pay equalization, it pays taxes to the federal government and that government has a program called equalization. To stop paying equalization, Alberta would have to stop paying taxes to Ottawa altogether. But even in Alberts just stopped paying its share of equalization, it would not be that bad. .

Better still: Alberta doesn't even pay equalization. Canadian taxpayers who happen to live in the administrative division called Alberta pay into equalization, like all of us.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by lio45

The tarsands are a resource that used to be owned by the Crown. Only in 1905 was the area organized as a Province. So in a sense, you guys are whining that you have to repay the hand that created you.

It's not like Albertans ever were an independent people, with international recognition of their uncontested tarsands ownership, and THEN made a deal to join Canada, and now are getting screwed and regret not choosing the path of keeping their tarsands (which in this scenario were actually theirs) out of Canadian reach.

Not even worth a real response. Your prejudice against Alberta baffles and amuses me.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Canadian taxpayers who happen to live in the administrative division called Alberta pay into equalization, like all of us.

Except me; I intend to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause to pay no taxes at all this year

And the year after that, too, because why not!

[lio45]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Now that we’ve cleared that up, my point in playing Devil’s advocate is that Quebec acts like a rebellious teenager always defying its parents in Ottawa, yet they act surprised when their younger sibling points to them and says “Why not me too?”.

Okay, but in the analogy, the older brother wears jeans with holes in them and listens to music a bit louder than would be polite, and the younger preteen brother sees this and wants to borrow the car or get a handgun.

If you've paid attention to my posts, you know I'm the type of guy who's totally fine with Alberta doing its own thing within this federation. If it wants to "rebel against Ottawa" (within the bounds of what's doable and reasonable, i.e. no to hijacking the Hornets from CFB Cold Lake and using them to bomb Ottawa), then great. I have no problem with that at all. On some things, Quebec and Alberta are even probably natural allies

[lio45]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Not even worth a real response. Your prejudice against Alberta baffles and amuses me.

I have no prejudice against Alberta

I admit I dislike the tarsands, because I like clean air, clean water, and a healthy environment, but I wouldn't consider that "prejudice against Alberta".

[O-tacular]

And I dislike Asbestos. Is that all that Quebec produces?

P.S. how on earth can you care about Climate Change and the environment and have supported Trump and the Republican party? They possibly cooked the planet with the years they cut off our ability to beat the tipping point deadline. Or was that simply supporting democrazy?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

And I dislike Asbestos. Is that all that Quebec produces?

They don't mine asbestos any more in Quebec. The town of Asbestos even changed it's name!

[lio45]

Exactly, MonctonRad.

Quebec closed all its asbestos mines; will Alberta follow suit and shut down the tarsands?