[La_Belle_Province]

Tman1 Tman1:

Err maybe because Lower Canada was managed mainly by English entrepreneurs, I could be wrong. In addition, Upper Canada was still growing and extensivly newer in growth potential, at least until after the war of 1812 where massive immigration progressed compared to Lower Canada.

I wasn't talking about the reasons lower canada was more financially viable, I was just stating in the end, Lower Canada had to pay half of Upper Canada infrastructure while we didn't had any.

[DerbyX]

LBP;

Do me a favour and actually respond to points I have made instead of ignoring them. See my previous posts.

$1:

ou made my day Rolling Eyes.

Of course, it's not like British have had this habit for centuries. It's not like Durham proposed it, and Acte d'union was made. There's some reasons for the fact our culture is still alive and well, but it's certainely not because of past English benevolence.

Btw, upper Canada had a large debt because of infrastructure, while Lower Canada was financially in good health, without deb. Guess what, when it was the 2 were merged, the debt was evenly spread between the 2 Shocked.

And like I said previously, we were already merged to Upper Canada(Ontario) at that point, so we were already in this. So of course, when offered to create the BNA we accepted, to get back some independance we lost.

Your anti-english stance and attempts to show how "upper canada" was superior to "lower canada" show nothing other then your own inferiority complex and racism. France lost to England (yet again) not Quebec lost to Ontario. Get Over it!

See Mustang1's post about confederation. French-Canadian culture exists b/c our people have tried to perserve it. You tell me where in our history has there been a DELIBERATE attempt to assimilate the french-culture. All cultural problems today lie with the problems associated with a US dominated western world which a seperate Quebec WILL SOLVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in that regard. You seperatists love to paint yourselves as an "oppressed people" valiantly struggling to achieve freedom from its "occupiers". Our country was founded equally by french & english settlers and just b/c you want to seperate you LIE about history and say your people were "forced" to join Canada.

[Tman1]

$1:

You tell me where in our history has there been a DELIBERATE attempt to assimilate the french-culture.

In Lower Canada, this set off a skirmish between the Canadien Party – which became known as the Patriote Party in 1832 - and the Tory Party. The former, led by Louis-Joseph Papineau beginning in 1830, represented the French-speaking majority and fought to protect the interests of the Canadien nation. The latter, whose members were primarily British settlers, wanted to assimilate the French Canadians by means of massive British immigration and an English school system. To achieve this, they advocated the union of Upper and Lower Canada.

In Upper Canada, a segment of the population was also growing increasingly dissatisfied with the way the political elite was running the colony. The "Family Compact", a small, powerful group of wealthy aristocrats with strong ties to the British Crown, had dominated the decision-making bodies of Upper Canada since the early 19th Century. By the 1830s, their opponents had begun to gain support for political reform in Upper Canada. This movement prompted the birth of the Reform Party led by William Lyon Mackenzie, a Scottish-born journalist who was elected Toronto's first mayor in 1834.

http://www.opinion-canada.ca/en/article ... le_84.html

For nearly a half century, Canada has been living under the threat of Quebec separation. During this long period of tension between English - about 34.5 per cent - and French Canadians - about 28 per cent of the population - the immigrant minorities have been in a dilemma. Traditionally the overwhelming majority, even in Quebec, became integrated into 'Anglo' society. (In Canada the 'English' include a large number of Scots who have played a crucial role in the country's history.) However, in that province during the last few decades, this tendency to assimilate into dominant English culture has caused much friction, has raised concerns among French Canadians and has given rise to debates throughout Canada.
Continue article
Advertisement

Amid these pressures, how do the Canadian minorities whose origins can be traced to countries from the four corners of the world, see the Canada of the future? For an answer, one must travel back in history to the beginning of this century, when non-French and non-British Europeans in large numbers along with a few Asiatics began to immigrate to Canada. In that period, assimilation of the minority ethnic groups, without regard to their desires was the order of the day. In one or, at the most, two generations, the dominant Anglo-Saxon culture and language melted into its folds - not always happily - the vast majority of the sons and daughters of these immigrants.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/ ... i_19420276

http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWSPoliticsColumn ... eroux.html


Quebec entered Confederation out of choice and because it was mutually beneficial. The theat of invasion from the U.S during their Civil War made all the more tempting. That doesnt mean that during the history before Confederation that Quebec wasnt being assimilated or the possiblity to.

[Mustang1]

Tman1 Tman1:

$1:

You tell me where in our history has there been a DELIBERATE attempt to assimilate the french-culture.

In Lower Canada, this set off a skirmish between the Canadien Party – which became known as the Patriote Party in 1832 - and the Tory Party. The former, led by Louis-Joseph Papineau beginning in 1830, represented the French-speaking majority and fought to protect the interests of the Canadien nation. The latter, whose members were primarily British settlers, wanted to assimilate the French Canadians by means of massive British immigration and an English school system. To achieve this, they advocated the union of Upper and Lower Canada.

In Upper Canada, a segment of the population was also growing increasingly dissatisfied with the way the political elite was running the colony. The "Family Compact", a small, powerful group of wealthy aristocrats with strong ties to the British Crown, had dominated the decision-making bodies of Upper Canada since the early 19th Century. By the 1830s, their opponents had begun to gain support for political reform in Upper Canada. This movement prompted the birth of the Reform Party led by William Lyon Mackenzie, a Scottish-born journalist who was elected Toronto's first mayor in 1834.

http://www.opinion-canada.ca/en/article ... le_84.html

For nearly a half century, Canada has been living under the threat of Quebec separation. During this long period of tension between English - about 34.5 per cent - and French Canadians - about 28 per cent of the population - the immigrant minorities have been in a dilemma. Traditionally the overwhelming majority, even in Quebec, became integrated into 'Anglo' society. (In Canada the 'English' include a large number of Scots who have played a crucial role in the country's history.) However, in that province during the last few decades, this tendency to assimilate into dominant English culture has caused much friction, has raised concerns among French Canadians and has given rise to debates throughout Canada.
Continue article
Advertisement

Amid these pressures, how do the Canadian minorities whose origins can be traced to countries from the four corners of the world, see the Canada of the future? For an answer, one must travel back in history to the beginning of this century, when non-French and non-British Europeans in large numbers along with a few Asiatics began to immigrate to Canada. In that period, assimilation of the minority ethnic groups, without regard to their desires was the order of the day. In one or, at the most, two generations, the dominant Anglo-Saxon culture and language melted into its folds - not always happily - the vast majority of the sons and daughters of these immigrants.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/ ... i_19420276

http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWSPoliticsColumn ... eroux.html


Quebec entered Confederation out of choice and because it was mutually beneficial. The theat of invasion from the U.S during their Civil War made all the more tempting. That doesnt mean that during the history before Confederation that Quebec wasnt being assimilated or the possiblity to.

Tman1 and DerbyX,


And you’ll notice that the dissenting voices have yet to counter history with any semblance of scholarly work. I’ll post some seminal works on 1837 in a pre-emptive move to rebut their predicted aped “separatist” website link or a source less opinion of history that will likely emerge.

1. Ouellet, F. “1837/8 Rebellion in Lower Canada as Social Phenome”
2. Greer, A. “The Question of Property” in Patriots and the People: The Rebellion of 1837
3. Perin, R. “Nationalism and the Church in French Canada 1840-80”

[Tman1]

Yah, those are good sources. My University has them, thanks Mustang1

[DerbyX]

$1:

The latter, whose members were primarily British settlers, wanted to assimilate the French Canadians by means of massive British immigration and an English school system.

The British who didn't grow up here perhaps but I think that on a whole both side have strived to preserve and develop our own national identity. I certainly don't think that in the last 100 years Canada has attempted to assimilate french-canadian culture. There is certainly outside influence (ie american) but that is not only a nationally Canadian problem but one that exists globally as well. A seperate Quebec will not change this fact unless it seeks to bar any outside influences.

$1:

Traditionally the overwhelming majority, even in Quebec, became integrated into 'Anglo' society

I agree. They learn english preferentially because of its prevalence in the world. I'd support Quebec requireing immigrants who want to live in Quebec having to learn french.

[DerbyX]

Mustang1;

I humbly bow to your superior knowlege of historical facts.

I'm not worthy!!

[Tman1]

DerbyX DerbyX:

$1:

The latter, whose members were primarily British settlers, wanted to assimilate the French Canadians by means of massive British immigration and an English school system.

The British who didn't grow up here perhaps but I think that on a whole both side have strived to preserve and develop our own national identity. I certainly don't think that in the last 100 years Canada has attempted to assimilate french-canadian culture. There is certainly outside influence (ie american) but that is not only a nationally Canadian problem but one that exists globally as well. A seperate Quebec will not change this fact unless it seeks to bar any outside influences.

$1:

Traditionally the overwhelming majority, even in Quebec, became integrated into 'Anglo' society

I agree. They learn english preferentially because of its prevalence in the world. I'd support Quebec requireing immigrants who want to live in Quebec having to learn french.

$1:

I certainly don't think that in the last 100 years Canada has attempted to assimilate french-canadian culture.

I dont mean to question you DerbyX but did you miss the entire point of these articles? It proves that Canadians did or attempted to assimilate French-Canadian culture into British culture in the last 100 years. The last article, although I dont know how credible it is, shows in the 1940s, some conflicting views demonstrated the fact that Canada wanted to assimilate or get rid of French culture in Canada.

[DerbyX]

Tman1, just read the articles now.

I guess its food for thought. I'll point out that the immigration assimilation is something desired by virtually all countries. Both english & french canadians (as your articles pointed our) worked together when threats of assimilation surfaced. Our descendents worked together to preserve this culture don't you agree. LBP would have us believe that it was french inhabitants alone fighting against the english that perserved their culture. The article about trudeau working to establish Canada as a "multicultural nation in a bilingual framework" is certainly good evidence to my earlier posts about Quebec having a very large voice within Canada. I don't know why he is so reviled by the seperatists?

[Tman1]

Yes, I agree that Quebec had a large extended voice and still does in Canada. Perhaps Trudeau is reviled simply because the separatists view HIM as a traitor working to preserve Canadian culture and refuse to believe that a Quebecer can work together with the ROC.

[La_Belle_Province]

Tman1 Tman1:

http://www.opinion-canada.ca/en/articles/article_84.html

Direct result of the rebellions of 1837 etc. So dont dismiss it as "garbage"

Finished reading the article. Very interesting. Thanks Tman1. Makes me believe both our nation can be excellent neighboor.

DerbyX DerbyX:

I'll point out that the immigration assimilation is something desired by virtually all countries. Both english & french canadians (as your articles pointed our) worked together when threats of assimilation surfaced. Our descendents worked together to preserve this culture don't you agree. LBP would have us believe that it was french inhabitants alone fighting against the english that perserved their culture.

Thing is , it's only natural (as in this is what happen, not how it should ideally be) that any nations co-existing, one will seek pre-dominance. For example, english communites made sure to have more power in lower Canada by having a non-representative governement, meaning that the number of deputies wasn't in relation to the number of inhabitants. Once they had more population through immigrants influx, this system was changed to again favor the english community.

Canada has a majority of english speaker, and the majority belongs to the anglo-saxon culture. Quebec has a majority of people belonging to the french culture (for both, this includes all races that have been integrated within each communities). Now, we seek to preserve this culture, and we can't expect another culture, to be the safekeeper of our. This is why our 2 nations should be on equal grounds and be excellent partners. What we want, is a new nation open to the world and with a safe footing.

DerbyX DerbyX:

The article about trudeau working to establish Canada as a "multicultural nation in a bilingual framework" is certainly good evidence to my earlier posts about Quebec having a very large voice within Canada. I don't know why he is so reviled by the seperatists?

That 'Multicultural nation' and 'Bilingual' is a joke, a lure to lull our sens.
-Multicultural: Primirly designed in order to make our revendications seems irrelevent because 'why the hell should we get special treatement while we're just one minority amongs many others'. In this 'multicultural' nation, the anglo-saxon is the biggest one, and get to distribute the cards.

-Bilingual : This is is the funniest one. How many canadian outside of Quebec are bilingual?
....Canada : 2.3millions, or 10.5%
....Quebec : 2.9millions, or 41.1%.
Pretty one sided isn't it?

Now, I'm not saying that ROC should all be bilingual, or that Quebec should stop learning english. I can understand people from Alberta not giving a damn about learning french, and in this north american reality, english is a usefull thing to know. But don't bother trying to make us believe in a bilingual Canada, this is a ruse to make people from Quebec feel like there's strong french communities througout Canada, while in reality, it's being systematicly assimilated.

As for why Trudeau is not liked, well he changed the constitution without our accord, changing the rules to the benefit of Canada (which was detrimental to the Quebec nation). He had little respect for Quebecois (calling our liberal prime minister of the time a 'mangeux de hotdogs'). And while declaring martial law, used this opportunity to arrest anyone linked to Partie Quebecois, or having ideas of independance. Were we back in those days, I could very well be arrested for having written this text. He who once was so vehement about civil liberties, writing how it is easy to take control of a population that is in fear. I could also turn the question around, why is it that you do not like people like Duceppe, Bernard Landry, etc... Not that I expect an anwser.

[Tman1]

La_Belle_Province La_Belle_Province:

Tman1 Tman1:

http://www.opinion-canada.ca/en/articles/article_84.html

Direct result of the rebellions of 1837 etc. So dont dismiss it as "garbage"

Finished reading the article. Very interesting. Thanks Tman1. Makes me believe both our nation can be excellent neighboor.

DerbyX DerbyX:

I'll point out that the immigration assimilation is something desired by virtually all countries. Both english & french canadians (as your articles pointed our) worked together when threats of assimilation surfaced. Our descendents worked together to preserve this culture don't you agree. LBP would have us believe that it was french inhabitants alone fighting against the english that perserved their culture.

Thing is , it's only natural (as in this is what happen, not how it should ideally be) that any nations co-existing, one will seek pre-dominance. For example, english communites made sure to have more power in lower Canada by having a non-representative governement, meaning that the number of deputies wasn't in relation to the number of inhabitants. Once they had more population through immigrants influx, this system was changed to again favor the english community.

Canada has a majority of english speaker, and the majority belongs to the anglo-saxon culture. Quebec has a majority of people belonging to the french culture (for both, this includes all races that have been integrated within each communities). Now, we seek to preserve this culture, and we can't expect another culture, to be the safekeeper of our. This is why our 2 nations should be on equal grounds and be excellent partners. What we want, is a new nation open to the world and with a safe footing.

DerbyX DerbyX:

The article about trudeau working to establish Canada as a "multicultural nation in a bilingual framework" is certainly good evidence to my earlier posts about Quebec having a very large voice within Canada. I don't know why he is so reviled by the seperatists?

That 'Multicultural nation' and 'Bilingual' is a joke, a lure to lull our sens.
-Multicultural: Primirly designed in order to make our revendications seems irrelevent because 'why the hell should we get special treatement while we're just one minority amongs many others'. In this 'multicultural' nation, the anglo-saxon is the biggest one, and get to distribute the cards.

-Bilingual : This is is the funniest one. How many canadian outside of Quebec are bilingual?
....Canada : 2.3millions, or 10.5%
....Quebec : 2.9millions, or 41.1%.
Pretty one sided isn't it?

Now, I'm not saying that ROC should all be bilingual, or that Quebec should stop learning english. I can understand people from Alberta not giving a damn about learning french, and in this north american reality, english is a usefull thing to know. But don't bother trying to make us believe in a bilingual Canada, this is a ruse to make people from Quebec feel like there's strong french communities througout Canada, while in reality, it's being systematicly assimilated.

As for why Trudeau is not liked, well he changed the constitution without our accord, changing the rules to the benefit of Canada (which was detrimental to the Quebec nation). He had little respect for Quebecois (calling our liberal prime minister of the time a 'mangeux de hotdogs'). And while declaring martial law, used this opportunity to arrest anyone linked to Partie Quebecois, or having ideas of independance. Were we back in those days, I could very well be arrested for having written this text. He who once was so vehement about civil liberties, writing how it is easy to take control of a population that is in fear. I could also turn the question around, why is it that you do not like people like Duceppe, Bernard Landry, etc... Not that I expect an anwser.

$1:

Finished reading the article. Very interesting. Thanks Tman1. Makes me believe both our nation can be excellent neighboor.

Whoa ol boy, Im not supporting your concept of nationhood but only to provide evidence of attempted assimilation of French-Canadians. Thats it. It proves that Quebec can co-exist in Canada as a part of it, not a nation. Sorry, im in this for historical purposes but not supporting separation.

[Tman1]

$1:

I could also turn the question around, why is it that you do not like people like Duceppe, Bernard Landry, etc... Not that I expect an anwser.

What do I not like about Bernard Landry? The little f*cker called Canadas flag a RED RAG!!"hows that for starters? And separatists want respect? Mr. Deception is nothing but a little weasel who provides nothing at all to Quebec.

[DerbyX]

LBP;

I'm not going to bother quoting you. Once again you have not answered my points. You call trudeau a traitor and blame him for calling out the army during the OCT-crisis when it was at the request of the premier of Quebec. You don't bother to point out that it was seperatist that were bombing buildings and who murdered Pierre Laporte. ADDRESS my point that Quebec has a voice in Canada will you? Quebec continually influences the direction of Canada and still you bitch. The diminishing of french-candian culture is due to the global shift towards a US centered culture. A SEPERATE QUEBEC will not change this.

You are correct that most many more Quebeckers are bilingual than the rest of Canada but that is the result of english being the current dominat language. A seperate Quebec will not change this. Every politician in Canada must learn french right. Take that out of Canada and you will actually diminish french teaching in Canada.

Bernard Landry & Giles Duceppe are fucks who cares nothing for the well being of Canada. We see the glee on their face whenever the feds are in trouble and hear continual comments from them that Canada is not a actual country but Quebec is. They want Canada to break up so they can achieve their goals.

$1:

This is why our 2 nations should be on equal grounds and be excellent partners. What we want, is a new nation open to the world and with a safe footing

You aren't a nation. Do you know why? You are part of Canada. My family from Quebec are Canadians. You seperatists blame Canada for all your problems as if "Canada" is deliberately targetting Quebec. Since you are an avowed seperatist I CHALLEGE YOU to answer my previous questions.

WILL a seperate soverign Quebec:

1) Allow the natives who do not wish to join remain in CANADA or form their own nation.

2) Will you allow those areas of Quebec who do not wish to leave Canada to remain.

Feel free to ignore everything else but please answer those questions!!

[QuebecSpock]

DerbyX DerbyX:

You aren't a nation. Do you know why? You are part of Canada.

Read at this previous post from this thread:

Proculation Proculation:

na·tion (nā'shən) pronunciation
n.

1.
1. A relatively large group of people organized under a single, usually independent government; a country.
2. The territory occupied by such a group of people: All across the nation, people are voting their representatives out.
2. The government of a sovereign state.
3. A people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language; a nationality: “Historically the Ukrainians are an ancient nation which has persisted and survived through terrible calamity” (Robert Conquest).

Quebec doesn't fit 1 and 2.
But it fits 3.

So it depends of your interpretation of a nation.

La_Belle_Province La_Belle_Province:

Now, I'm not saying that ROC should all be bilingual, or that Quebec should stop learning english. I can understand people from Alberta not giving a damn about learning french, and in this north american reality, english is a usefull thing to know. But don't bother trying to make us believe in a bilingual Canada, this is a ruse to make people from Quebec feel like there's strong french communities througout Canada, while in reality, it's being systematicly assimilated.