Bonne fête, Québec

Hey Québec, je comprends que c’est ta fête aujourd’hui.

Je voulais faire un long billet de tous les choses que j’aime de toi, mais là, c’est tellement beau dehors et le party commence bientôt. Et La Presse et The Gazette ont déjà fait des listes.

Alors, laissez-moi simplement dire que même si nous sommes pas toujours en accord, même avec les trous-de-cul jeunes patriotes qui me disent d’aller à Toronto, même avec la loi 101 et la politique du souveraineté qui termine jamais, le Québec c’est ma province, tout comme Montréal est ma ville et le Canada est mon pays.

En trois mots et demi, je t’aime, Québec.

Et pas juste parce que tes femmes sont ben hot.

Hey, si t’es libre ce soir venez chez moi et on prendra une bière. J’achètera une caisse de Molson Cana… euh, Labatt Bleue.

12 thoughts on “Bonne fête, Québec

  1. Jean Naimard

    et la politique du souveraineté qui termine jamais,

    It will only end when we’ll finally get our sovereignty. Don’t forget that.

    Reply
    1. Fagstein Post author

      No it won’t. Quebec won’t suddenly turn into a utopian paradise where all political issues are solved if somehow it finally votes to separate itself from Canada. Independence will be the beginning of a whole new debate.

      Reply
  2. Jean Naimard

    Independence will be the beginning of a whole new debate.

    Yes, and it’s going to be **OUR** debate, debated amongst **US** without any anglo-saxon imperialist power breathing down our necks and meddling with **OUR** affairs, like they did throughout the world for the last 3-4 centuries.
    Yet another time you brilliantly demonstrate how the english are totally unable to grasp other cultures’ viewpoint. You display yet again the patronizing attitude that the french are good for nothing and cannot be trusted; the same attitude that has been projected at us for the last quarter millenium. You imply that only the english are fit to decide other peoples’ fates.
    And no, the immigrants are not “somehow” to be equated to the english; those who want to join us will be welcomed to do so, while those who don’t want to be joining us will be excluded from the debate, **EXACTLY LIKE IN ANY OTHER NORMAL OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH, INCLUDING CANADA** (remember that south-american Bloc member of paliament who got shit at because he sided with us??? That immigrant is expected to take the side of the english).
    If you like it so much here, you are better prepared to understand the society here, and accept it, just like it is expected from immigrants in all other countries. And don’t complain that you are somehow “excluded” when it becomes plainly clear that you don’t. You are welcome to ask for clues, they are free for the taking, but you have to take them and use it and understand them.
    And yes, if you really are honest and see the things as they are, you can become a “separatist” too, just like many other english people who did. But you have to fist ditch that anglo-saxon attitude of not understanding other cultures.

    Reply
    1. Fagstein Post author

      “those who want to join us will be welcomed to do so, while those who don’t want to be joining us will be excluded from the debate”

      What kind of debate are you going to have when you exclude the other side?

      Reply
  3. Maude Lachaîne

    Votre attitude me désole; vous croyez vraiment que les québécois qui ne partagent pas vos opinions ne comprennent pas notre culture (qui est également la leur). Anglophone ne veut pas nécessairement dire immigrant; ils sont établis ici depuis près de 300 ans! Montréal a des racines anglaises depuis des générations. Si vous croyez que nous les québécois francophones sommes si gentils et compréhensif envers les autres cultures (sauf les méchants anglos!), informez-vous sur les traitements qu’on a infligé aux premières nations du Québec. Ce n’est pas rose-rose. On a été tout aussi odieux que les Anglais.

    I’m ashamed of all the Quebecois “blue necks” who treat Anglos like they are not real 100 % Quebecois. They are denying a big part of our culture… Happy St. Jean anyways!

    Reply
  4. Jean Naimard

     

    What kind of debate are you going to have when you exclude the other side?

    A debate that will move forward instead of backwards. Those immigrants who chose the english side clearly haven’t chosen Québec, so why should they be catered to like those who chose our side??? They have chosen Canada, so why would they remain here once we separate?

    Reply
  5. s&t

    Good post Fagstein. Perhaps this is the way of the future here in Quebec. Harmony between all of us. That would be nice.
    Seems Naimard is at it again…he’s always good for a laugh or two! LMFAO!

    Reply
  6. Maria Gatti

    Oswaldo Nuñez. Know Oswaldo and his wife Zaida well, from the trade-union movement. But there have also been PQ MNAs of anglophone origin, including David Payne who was “Anglo-Saxon”, I believe. Gilles Duceppe also has English ancestors, and don’t forget the part-Celtic Louis O’Neill and Robert Burns. Burns’ father was an anglophone.

    From the wikipedia bio: Duceppe was born in Montreal, Quebec, the son of actor Jean Duceppe and Hélène Rowley. His maternal grandfather was John James Rowley, a Briton by birth. Duceppe’s British roots had him once quip that “I’m a bloke who turned Bloc.”

    Reply
  7. Jean Naimard

     

    Votre attitude me désole; vous croyez vraiment que les québécois qui ne partagent pas vos opinions ne comprennent pas notre culture (qui est également la leur). Anglophone ne veut pas nécessairement dire immigrant; ils sont établis ici depuis près de 300 ans!

    300 ans sans apprendre le moindre mot de français? Ça c’est de l’ouverture!!!

    Montréal a des racines anglaises depuis des générations. Si vous croyez que nous les québécois francophones sommes si gentils et compréhensif envers les autres cultures (sauf les méchants anglos!), informez-vous sur les traitements qu’on a infligé aux premières nations du Québec. Ce n’est pas rose-rose. On a été tout aussi odieux que les Anglais.

    Les premieres nations? Les français sont les seuls qui n’ont pas exterminé les indiens quand il s’est avéré impossible de les réduire en esclavage (on les a évangélisé, ce qui, il y a 400 ans, démontrait que nous les considérions comme des égaux). Ce n’est qu’au Québec que les langues des premières nations sont protégées: 80% d’entre eux les parlent encore, contre 20% dans le reste du Canada. Quand nous négocions avec les premières nations, nous le faison de nation à nation.
    Oui, nous sommes tous aussi odieux que les anglais qui ont tenté de les exterminer puis de les assimiler, oui, très odieux…

    I’m ashamed of all the Quebecois “blue necks” who treat Anglos like they are not real 100 % Quebecois. They are denying a big part of our culture… Happy St. Jean anyways!

    We do not deny the english to be part of our culture, it is them who do it themselves.

    Reply
  8. newbie

    as a new anglophone to quebec I don’t understand the sovereignty issue and perhaps you are the person to clarify all for me… I assume seperatists all ready have a place to make and print their own money, and with this new money be able to buy any equipment they will need to protect their new land as the military and all of its equipment will have to be moved out of the province because it belongs to canada, they will be dealing with a heavily reduced province as the aboriginals own a majority of the province and its resources, don’t forget they were here before the english or the french….oh yes, and passports..those need to be returned because no one here would be allowed to carry one anymore. If this is not what the seperatists want please explain, because splitting from a country involves all of those points. Logistics I know, but also reality. I also don’t understand how there is still a feeling to seperate when elsewhere in the world economies are trying to become stronger by joining together. Like I said, I’m new here and don’t understand, please enlighten.

    Reply
  9. Jean Naimard

     

    I’m new here and don’t understand, please enlighten.

    Okay, let’s turn on the lights. The naiveté of that big compendium of the typical bullshit about the sovereignty of Québec is almost cute, if it’s not a blatant trolling attempt.

    We don’t really need to print our money; we will use the existing canadian dollar, which increasingly looks better than the US dollar or, heck, who knows, the Euro… But if needed, we can always print our very own piastres… :)
    The military matériel and othe federal assets belongs to us; we paid for it with our tax dollars. Oh, if it is moved outside of Québec or otherwise sabotaged, it’s no problem, we’ll just deduct the replacement value from our share of the canadian debt (which we agree to pay — it’s in the P.Q. program; what’s enraging is that if we voted yes in 1980, we would have been spared the Mulroney balloning of the debt).
    The aboriginals do not own the land; the land owns them. That’s why they have been so heavily shafted. They will also notice that they get far more money and respect from the hydroelectric projects (we deal with them nation to nation, instead of tutor to morons when Canada deals with them), so it’s not really an issue; it would be a **HUGE** mistake to assume that the indians would want to stay in Canada. The chiefs who have been put there by Ottawa, maybe, but the rest of the people know very well that Québec respect their traditions, whereas Ottawa cluelessly shoves down it’s procedures down their throats. As an exercise, compare the living conditions in reserves in Canada and in Québec; go to Monsonee and ask the crees there if they would rather be living in Québec…
    As of the passports, well, every canadian citizen is entitled to one. One cannot readily see how Canada would be pulling the passports of Québec citizens who are also canadians.
    Oh, and if Canada were to outlaw dual citizenship, it will find out very soon that it is a very bad move. Many immigrants everywhere would be mightily pissed-off. (And how can you outlaw dual-citizenship? Whether someone has another citizenship is beyond the legal jurisdiction of a country).
    Separating from a country does not involve much points beyond that the old country does not get any jurisdiction over the new country; and for the rest, well, it’s a tit-for-that exercise; if canada can play stupid, we can play stupid too; with our share of the canadian debt in the balance, saner minds will prevail very quickly if some dope would want to play hardball. It’s not that we wish to hold Canada by the by the cojoñes, but all too often, it’s the only thing the english understand and you’ve got to do what you v’e got to do…
    And the main reason to separate is that the english have a very different culture from the french; we don’t give a shit about the magna carta: we don’t think the State is corrupted and rotten and can do nothing good (when a government behaves badly, we have a revolution); we would think nothing of wiping our arses with toilet paper with the queen’s and her degenerate family’s faces printed on it; we are not protestants; we do not worship personal responsibility; we like food that is tasty; we do not trust private companies and entrepreneurs; we see beyond the bottom line and, last and most important, we are not english, but french.
    As of economies coming together, well the economy is just one part of the whole who makes society, and we can do what is needed to make the economies work together, but the other things besides the economy, we want to run them ourselves. And, besides, European Union adhesion is seeked through referendums; confederation was not (it was supposed to, but when McDonald saw that the referendum would bring a resounding *NO* (even though the scatholic church threatened everyone who would vote NO with excomuniation — back then, voting was not secret, and only wealthy landowners could vote), he simply asked the Québec legislature to vote on it, where it passed by a bare one vote of majority.

    If you have any other questions, it will be a pleasure to light your lantern.

    Reply

Leave a Reply