50

The PQ, identity and the Front National

The Parti Québécois garners praise from France’s notorious anti-immigration party


 

The recent piece I wrote about the Parti Québécois and identity quotes columnist Jérôme Lussier, who makes a (conditional) comparison between the current incarnation of the PQ and other nationalist parties including Le Front National, the English Defense League and the Sweden Democrats and the Tea Party. It is not a comparison to be made lightly, and in many ways it doesn’t fit. Friend and columnist Patrick Lagacé takes issue, noting (correctly) how the FN would never dream of funding, say, historically Jewish hospitals, or Muslim schools.

Yet as far as the politics of identity are concerned, today’s PQ is certainly more forthright in equating the demise of French language and culture with the influx of immigrants who may not have French as their first language. The argument, put forth by PQ candidate Jean-François Lisée, flies in the face of reality: according to l’Office québécois de la langue française, the number of immigrants learning and living in French has actually increased by over 20 percentage points since 1989; as well, the number of immigrants who speak French upon arrival in Quebec has gone up by nearly 20 percentage points since 2001. You read that correctly: under Jean Charest, the Liberal government has arguably been more effective in recruiting French-speaking immigrants than Bernard Landry. (Sources for these stats are in my piece here.)

Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, the Parti Québécois continues to trade in the canard that French is regressing on the island of Montreal, and its plan to fix this ‘regression’ has the support of France’s Front National. For the record, Lisée best summarized his belief that  immigrants who speak French as a first language are better for Quebec than, say, those who have Mandarin as a mother tongue in the following quote from this interview: “From the moment where there isn’t a majority of people whose first language isn’t French, it means there is no majority to defend it. We can be very attached to our second languages, but I won’t go protest to defend English or Spanish.”

What follows is a brief exchange with Front National Secretary General Steeve Briois. Pay attention to the last line. Note: Briois answered these questions before Lisée’s sortie. As well, the Coalition Avenir Québec says it favours a ‘temporary decrease’ in the number of immigrants for economic, not identity, reasons.

If it forms the next government, the Parti Québécois intends to adopt a charter that establishes “the fundamental values of the Quebec nation regarding its historical patrimony, the predominance of the French language, the equality between men and women and the secularism of public institutions.” Do you think this kind of charter would be useful in France?

I don’t think it would be useful, as it would be announcing principles that are obvious and should be applied naturally. We aren’t counting on the socialists to have these principles respected, and such a charter would only have a moral not a legal value. The only thing that can guarantee these values is having Marine Le Pen and members of the Front National elected.

The Parti Québécois and the Coalition Avenir Québec intend to reduce the number of immigrants. This is in part because new arrivals are hurting the French fact and Quebec values. Do you think this type of measure would help the cause of Quebec’s language and identity?

Immigration is disastrous for the identity and the culture of a region when it is large-scale and doesn’t include a policy of assimilation. It’s why each country that worries about having its traditions, its spirit, its culture and its values must imperatively regulate the number of immigrants arriving on its territory, and when it accepts a certain number of immigrants, the total assimilation and conversion to the welcoming country must be ensured. Quebec is starting to know similar problems that we are seeing in France, and notably the suburbs of Montreal have nothing to envy to those of Paris. The PQ is therefore in taking a healthy step for the future of Quebec and its identity.


 
Filed under:

The PQ, identity and the Front National

  1. There are currently millions of refugees and migrants on the move worldwide, not to mention all the others who wish to move for economic and safety and educational reasons…..and there are also lots of politicians worldwide who see an easy way to get elected….appeal to the dark side of human nature…xenophobia.

    THEY’RE A COMIN’ FOR YOUR WIMMENFOLK……!

    Step on vermin racists….now.

    • Are you willing to hold the same speech to the Japanese who have problems with migrant workers coming from China and Korea and to the native Blacks from South Africa who performed a series of violent riots in 2008 against Black refugees coming from neighbouring countries?

      • Yup….same speech to the whole world. The nation-state is a recent invention in history, and totally artificial. Borders are just lines drawn on a map.

        Humans are moving everywhere around the world….it’s all part of globalization.

        • Actually, there has NEVER been a functional multicultural DEMOCRACY, in all of history. The Roman Empire, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Former Yugoslavia, Singapore, and even India have all relied on state coercion to keep from blowing apart. The nation state exists because different cultures simply have too many non-negotiable conflicts, over everything from gender relations to the role of religion in society, to not suffer severe conflicts. Even the old Holy Roman Empire was united by a common (Christian) culture and lingua franca (Latin). The ‘borders don’t matter’ line is nothing but a fantasy of Golden Archers and multicultist progressives.

          • “Actually, there has NEVER been a functional multicultural DEMOCRACY, in all of history”

            Does that mean there never can be? Pretty well all these examples you cite were the result of empire building and predate the development of modern day democratic institutions; not remotely comparable to[ or examplars of ultimate human failure] to a modern, democratic, ongoing experiment in multiculturalism such as Canada.

          • Yes, it does. A civil society requires its citizens to be ‘on the same page,’ over issues like gender relations. And multiethnic societies ALWAYS fracture violently, in the absence of state coercion, Just ask white and Asian South African citizens, who are fleeing post-Apartheid SA in droves, if they think ‘diversity is strength.’ And the Czechs and Slovaks decided, peacefully, to pull the plug on their multiculti experiment, once democracy came to the country.

          • No comparison at all. The only group that might have a genuine case for claiming ownership of the country are FNs. Luckily despite a troubled history with European newcomers they have always been more interested in sharing the country and its resources than can be said for many of the Europeans – be they French or Anglo. Bottom line no one has an exclusive claim on the country. Things certainly havn’t been as simple elsewhere.
            Remember the old aphorism: Canada’s problem isn’t too much history, its too much geography.

          • ‘Bottom line no one has an exclusive claim on the country.’ ← Go tell that to Caucasians, to Israelis, to Japaneses, to Koreans, to Russians, to Rwandans, to South Africans, to Ugandans, etc.

          • Please follow the thread…i’m talking about “this” country – Canada.

          • Yeah well, Quebec nationalists (the subject of this article) don’t claim exclusivity on Canada. They want to have their own territory where their ‘tribe’ can survive and thrive the same way Amerindian tribes have territories of their own. If a given people needs its own territory free from unrestricted immigration to protect its identity, so be it.

            Plenty of peoples across the world have their own territory where immigration is restricted and where they decide what is the spoken language. Quebec nationalists are working to achieve this goal. If Canadians want to do the same, where’s the problem?

          • Really? You know very little history then.

            Race, and ‘culture clashes’ are fairly recent in history….every great civilization has been a crossroads for everyone. Multiple colors, languages, cultures….and they did well.

            The Roman Empire was around long before christianity….in fact christianity eventually took it down……

            All human beings are the same race you know….no one is an alien here

          • ‘@Ira Zinman: Really? You know very little history then. Race, and ‘culture clashes’ are fairly recent in history….every great civilization has been a crossroads for everyone. Multiple colors, languages, cultures….and they did well.’ ← No, you are the one who knows NOTHING about history. Are you able to list one example to counter all the examples Ira Zinman has listed? Obviously not…

            ‘The Roman Empire was around long before christianity….in fact christianity eventually took it down……’ ← Arnold Joseph Toynbee, a British historian, once wrote ‘Civilizations die by suicide, not by murder’… Go meditate on that thought…

            ‘All human beings are the same race you know….no one is an alien here’ ← No, human beings belong to the same species, not to the same race. Race is a subdivision of a species and it goes way beyond skin color. That is why Black Africans and Australian Aborigenes belong to two different races despite the fact that they both have black skin and curly hair. In fact, there is a greater ‘genetic distance’ between Black Africans and Australian Aborigenes than between Black Africans and White Europeans.

          • Yup…we’re all the same species….same DNA….there is no such thing as race, that’s a social construct……skin color makes no more difference than hair color.

            Black Africans and Australian Aborigenes….are the same as you and me. Sorry

            Why should I do Ira’s homework for him?…he can look up ‘civilization’ all by himself. We’ve had thousands of years of them

            Toynbee died long before genome work, so a passing remark of his has no point whatever…..and he was obviously unaware of many of the worlds civilizations.
            .

          • Yes, all humans belong to the same species and no, race is a biological reality not a social construct.

            I highly doubt Black Africans and Australian Aborigenes will accept you as one of them…

            You needed to provide me ONE example of a successful civilization where populations of all cultures, of all races, of all religions, etc. can coexist peacefully and mingle into a single ‘tribe’; one example to counter all the examples Ira gave… You didn’t. You failed. I can now conclude that unrestrained immigration, multiculturalism and open borders don’t work in real life.

            Toynbee was a British historian who studied the civilizations of the world and wrote many books about the subject. And BTW, he will probably agree with you when you wrote that race is irrelevant… The fact that you wrote all that bullshit about him proves my point: you are the one who knows nothing about history, not Ira.

          • Nobody needs to provide you with anything….I”m sure your Google works just fine. It will also prove you a racist.

            Now stop playing silly buggers and find something else to do.

          • You can’t even provide me of an objective definition of the word ‘racist’.

            I don’t play silly buggers. I present my humble opinion, something you don’t have the mental capacity of doing. You’re just capable of parroting the propaganda the Left used to brainwash you. Now quit this website and go suck on a pacifier! =P

          • The dry cleaners called…..your hood is ready.

          • HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! Another ad hominem attack coming from an idiot short on arguments! What makes you think I’m a White Klansman? Who knows? Maybe I’m a Black guy who’s not duped by leftist propaganda…

          • You think you could actually get on topic?

            Or do I have to tell everyone about the shitstains on the robe?

          • You are a leftist idiot. You know NOTHING about world history or about human nature. You have a choice: go educate yourself or go kill yourself.

          • Go sleep it off, and don’t bother me again.

          • No, leave this website to grownups and do not come back.

          • Off you go….ta ta

          • You can’t even provide me of an objective definition of the word ‘racist’.

            I don’t play silly buggers. I present my humble opinion, something you don’t have the mental capacity of doing. You’re just capable of parroting the propaganda the Left used to brainwash you. Now quit this website and go suck on a pacifier! =P

          • You can’t even provide me of an objective definition of the word
            ‘racist’.

            I don’t play silly buggers. I present my humble opinion, something you
            don’t have the mental capacity of doing. You’re just capable of
            parroting the propaganda the Left used to brainwash you. Now quit this
            website and go suck on a pacifier! =P

          • I don’t care about Google.

            You can’t even provide me of an objective definition of the word ‘racist’.

            I don’t play silly buggers. I present my humble opinion, something you don’t have the mental capacity of doing… You seem to be only capable of parroting the propaganda leftists used to brainwash you. Now quit this website and go suck on a pacifier! =P

          • ‘Race’ isn’t the issue–culture is. The politically incorrect reality is that religious and cultural systems inform a host of norms and customs, and different cultures have too many gross differences (gender relations, etc,) to cohabit within the same civil society. Multiculturalism was a failed social experiment from the Trudeau era, and nothing intrinsically ‘Canadian.’

          • I mentioned race because it is a biological reality, not a social construct, despite what that idiot EmilyOne wrote. And it is an issue, otherwise lobby groups such as the NAACP and La Raza wouldn’t exist.

            A Polish historian nobody knows who went by the name of Feliks Koneczny used the term ‘civilization’ to define the ways a given people functions as a group and how they deal with social issues, such as gender relations.

            And ‘civilization’ as he defined it has nothing to do with race. That is why, according to him, Poles and Russians fought bloody wars against each other: they belong to the same race, yet not to the same ‘civilization’. And again according to him, ‘civilizations’ cannot coexist in the same geographical area or ‘mix’ into a coherent whole.

          • Some failure Canada. Personally i’ll take that sort of failure any day of the week.

    • ‘Catface’ has a point. Canada somehow ended up taking in over a quarter million Sri Lankan Tamils. This is despite the fact that they should have gone directly to Tamil Nadu, rather than crossing an ocean to avail themselves of Canada’s post-Singh Decision generosity. India has the third largest air force in the world, is the world’s largest arms importer, recently spent untold billions upgrading its nuclear arsenal, and developed an ICBM–they can afford to deal with a refugee problem in their own backyard. And other non-Western, wealthy countries (Japan, South Korea, China) utterly refuse to accept refugees. Canada needs to stop being the third world’s hostel and drop-in clinic.

      • Are you seriously suggesting Canada can continue on at the present level of economic well being without immigrants?

        • The only sector that NEEDS mass immigration is the real estate-financial lobby. But, in terms of problems like urban sprawl and escalating local water consumption, Canada can’t afford to keep the real estate bubble inflated.

        • Apparently, between the mid-1980s and 2005, California’s population grew by 10 million (mainly due to Mexican immigration) while tax filers paying income taxes rose by just 150,000… So yeah, Canadian economy can do much better without immigration!

          • There isn’t a demographer in the country would support that opinion, at least none I’m aware of. How do you grow an economy at a time when the net domestic birthdate is below even break even rates ? Honestly I don’t see any comparisan to California; the vast majority of our immigrants wind up being a net gain for the country.

          • I see, I see… You want to welcome immigrants, not because you see them as equals or because you want to help them have a better life in Canada… You want them as taxpayers and as workers… You want them to pay for all your expenses and to take care of you when you get old enough to be put in a retirement community… ;)

            The Californians thought exactly like you did: Let’s welcome millions of Mexican immigrants! They will enjoy doing all the jobs no one wants to do! They will enjoy toiling in our factories, in our farms, in our gardens, etc.! They will enjoy wiping my ass and cooking my food when I’m an old fart living comfortably in a retirement community! They will make babies (who will, of course, become the next generation of docile taxpayers and obedient workers) and raise families while we have sex only for pleasure and enjoy a decadent, freewheeling, materialist lifestyle free from children and all the troubles they cause!

            In real life, did their thoughts turn out the way they dreamed it? Not really…

            ‘Civilizations die by suicide, not by murder’ – Arnold Joseph Toynbee.

          • Okaaaay…slowly backing away from this conversation.

          • Unable to reply, isn’t it? Be honest: do you really care about immigrants? Or do you see them only as taxpayers and workers?

          • This conversation is over. Once someone starts to inject bizarre assumptions about the others motives or beliefs there’s no point in continuing. It seems you already know what i think so why bother?

          • You use the usual economic arguments to justify immigration: immigrants are needed for the economy, immigration is needed because Canadians are not making enough babies to produce the next generation of taxpayers and workers, etc. You seem to be only interested in them for their (supposed) economic value while I see them for what they are: human beings who won’t give up their own cultural/ethnic/religious/wtv identity to adopt another. Mexican immigrants living in California consider themselves Mexican, not American. They will celebrate Cinco de Mayo, not the Fourth of July.

            I don’t know what you think. I gave you a chance to write me what you really think. You didn’t. I can now rightfully conclude you’re an hypocrite who don’t give a shit about immigrants. You only want them as slaves. Since this conversation is over, I won’t bother you anymore. I’d prefer to let you wallow in your own hypocrisy.

          • Look I’m an immigrant myself, although it was more than 30 years ago now. Most immigrants come here for exactly the same reason my family did – a better life, particularly for their children. See what I mean about making unwarranted assumptions.
            I really hav’nt the faintest idea where you’re going with this. It’s the 21 century. We aren’t an empire looking to exploit immigrants. I don’t expect them to come here to clean my toilets. All over the world people are clambering to get in here- no one is forcing them to. Most of them come for a better life, same as me.

          • What would you say to Canadians who fear they will disappear and be replaced by newcomers the same way the Amerindians disappeared and were replaced by European settlers?

          • I would say you need to stop peddling obnoxious, odious ethnocentric tripe.

          • Why is ethnocentrism obnoxious and odious? Japanese people are very ethnocentric and they seem to do fine, economically speaking… Is ethnocentrism good for them and bad for Canadians?

          • Odd you should pick one of the worst examples of cultural insularity. Just what has it bought them, economically or otherwise? They openly discriminate against non Japanese cultures[particularly Korean or other asians]have a birthrate in free fall and their economy has been skating on a knife edge for a couple of decades now[ that is of course not necessarily linked to racist policies]. In the name of preserving their culture in amber they appear content to see it shrivel into senility and ultimate decay.

          • And immigration is the answer to all these problems? I’d advise them to start breeding again rather than relying on non-Japanese immigration…

      • Perhaps you should check all the treaties we, and other countries have signed agreeing to take in refugees. There are lots of us doing so…..thank goodness

  2. http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/15/so-now-it%E2%80%99s-no-business-of-the-state/2/

    “Lucien Bouchard cautions the Parti Québécois not to get mixed up with
    “identity politics.” What a card! Identity politics is, of course, the
    PQ’s raison d’être. Quebec nationalism came into being to protect
    Quebec’s “cultural identity.” Once upon a time, that didn’t need
    explaining: “La langue est gardienne de la foi,” Henri Bourassa
    said a century ago. The French language protects the Catholic faith.
    But the faith is long gone, and the churches are empty, and Quebec’s
    shrivelled, post-Catholic fertility rate combined with a
    constitutionally dubious, provincially controlled immigration policy has
    resulted in a recently arrived and ever swelling population from
    “French” (please, no tittering) North Africa and the Middle East.

    |Is that all that’s left of Quebec’s “cultural identity”? The lingo?
    Or to put it another way: suppose, in a few years’ time, the last
    elderly Anglos who still refer to Trois-Rivières as “Three Rivers” have
    died off and instead the streets of the province’s cities are clogged
    with niqab-clad francophones. Would Quebec feel it had won its battle to
    preserve its “cultural identity”?

    |Obviously not. Which is why 95 per cent of Quebecers favour the
    government’s niqab ban. Even in the ROC, support is running at about 80
    per cent.”

  3. “Immigration is disastrous for the identity and the culture of a region
    when it is large-scale and doesn’t include a policy of assimilation”

    Perhaps this citizen of the old world would like to travel up to explain that statement to the Cree of James Bay? This is the new world bud. No 1000 years of pre established European civilization here.

  4. I must be the only one in Quebec… at least one of the very few. But hey, I like Sweden Democrats, I like the EDL (I’d like if we could create one such group, we already have sites for it, Point De Bascule and Poste de Veille) and I think the Tea Party is just dandy (and there we had an equivalent, with the Col Rouge who are extremely anti-PQ and similar to WildRose). I dislike the Front National because they are a very left-wing party, way to the left of the socialists. So they are only right-wing on issues of immigration. But I also like Progress Party in Norway. You guys are just so desperate with your finger pointing nonsense.

    Meanwhile, the PLQ have become the exclusive territory of minority voters. May work in France, where 95% of Muslims who vote for the Left and Far-Left are just sufficient enough to get the socialists in office. But it isn’t quite yet in Quebec.

    The medias embrace of multiculturalism when it fit the narrative of dismentling a people is hilarious. So yes, the majority of the population will be against mass-immigration from the third-world while you quacks still promote this as some sort of “economic sinecure”. What a freakin’ joke… it isn’t and never was. Tell me how well have that worked out for England and France again?

    The only hope that may remain is for France to collapse… so we can get mass-immigration of French natives (we already get 3-4000 a year, but it could spike up as people in Marseille figure there is no future for them in that city… third largest French city, 30-40% Muslim). Just in time to say, hey, maybe we should stop here as well, so we don’t end up having a civil war like they’re having in France already.

  5. Well, Mr Patriquin, you’ve finally done it. You have provided undeniable proof that the FN is in fact a crypto-offshoot of the PQ. Indeed, before having taken the levers of power in ’76, René Levesque dispatched a crack team of french nationalists to France, in order to prepare a retreat in the event of a crackdown at home. Upon being elected, however, dissent arose in the French wing, which broke free to work the FN in 1972. All that is ill in the Francophonie can therefore be attributed to the French Canadian.

Sign in to comment.