A year earlier, Quebec premier Daniel Johnson had famously called for equality or independence. Trudeau replied that he too spoke for Quebec, and the federal parliament would protect the rights of French speakers across Canada. Quebecers did not wish to live in a ?wigwam,? they wanted to be at home everywhere in Canada, said the then Justice Minister, and member of parliament for Mount Royal.
Judging how well minority rights are protected is one way to assess how democratic a society is in practice. It is as if those who decided not to give Harper's Conservatives their vote understood their role. They were political scientists; the Conservatives failed the democracy test.
In the early 1990s, at the time of the Charlottetown constitutional accord, the Reform Party was vocal in its opposition to bilingualism. Philosopher Charles Taylor talked about Canada, where an outsider would arrive, and could be welcomed into two linguistic societies. Call it what you wish, he said to parliamentarians, that is the reality of our country.
Trudeau himself once mused that his policy should have been called language equality. Bilingualism implied that everyone had to speak two languages. That frightened people, and it was not what the policy was about.
While people associate Trudeau with bilingualism, it was his predecessor, Lester Pearson, who in the summer of 1966 brought forward a white paper outlining plans for a public service able to serve the population in both languages.
The Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, headed by André Laurendeau and Davidson Dunton had been established by Pearson as well. The official languages act was its result, though let it be said, the rise of Quebec nationalism was the real instigator. What was at issue in the act was this: citizens had a right to be served in their language. This meant bilingual public services where numbers warranted it. If people were going to be served in their own language, the public servants had to know both. In order for the population to remain unilingual, the public servants would be paid to learn a second language. This was the meaning of bilingualism, or language equality, in practice.
But, many Canadians embraced more than this. They wanted to speak two languages, or have their children learn the other official language ? thus Canadian Parents for French, and immersion classes across the country. Canada was a country of great spaces, but also of two of the world's great languages. Why not make this an integral part of our life?
You have to believe that the personal example of Trudeau speaking both languages was important in all this. And why stop at two? Trudeau spoke Spanish as well. And many Canadians were encouraged to preserve or to learn their ancestral languages.
Canada's identity has become tied up in the values represented by language policy. This has been reflected in the world of thought. Charles Taylor, who ran for the NDP against Trudeau in Mont Royal, became world-renowned for his writings on identity rights, the self and tolerance. Will Kymlicka of Queen's University is widely translated, and studied in multi-linguistic societies in Europe.
Recently, in Vancouver, salesperson Glen Chow was giving my companion and me the lowdown on digital cameras. She and I converse in French, normally. Noting this, Chow mentioned that his daughter was in French immersion in Langley (a suburban area, south of Vancouver).
This is not evidence in support of the failed ideal argument of the Conservative party leader. Nor for that matter is Harper himself. His French is better than serviceable; only John Turner and Audrey McLaughlin have done better among Anglophone party leaders from outside Quebec.
Bilingualism, or language equality, does not mean everybody can, or should, speak French. But it is interesting that French language rights have come to be understood, in Canada, to be like other rights. Voters see that if you take one right away, other rights are endangered as well.
The just society still has its enemies though ? those who want to treat homosexuality as a medical condition, or criminalize abortion, or stop the Supreme Court from interpreting the Charter of Rights, or limit access to services in French.
Duncan Cameron ? duncanc@rabble.ca ? writes from Chelsea, Quebec. His column appears weekle on rabble.ca. It is reprinted here with permission.
Note: The Just Society and it...
duncanc@rabble.ca
Stumble It!
I certainly have major issues with Harper's view of Bilingualism (among many others!) but I also have major issues with the current status quo. I will however give Harper credit for trying to reassess this Sacred Cow and make our out of control bureaucracies accountable to the People most affected by these well wishing policies. And this credit comes in spite of being a huge political burden on the Quebec vote.
Monsieur Cameron should note that the majority of Francophones Hors-Québec (FHQ) can no longer write in French and are barely reading anything anymore in French. I challenge him to find substantial signs of life on the Internet, for instance or any improvement in the inter-generational assimilation rates. Our infrastructures have gone stale quite some times ago now and have caused many to simply drop out to the anglophone side where the service monopoly gets challenged. I myself cannot even communicate with my fellow FHQs in French anymore as they either cannot write back in proper French or are subject to retribution if they happen to be subsidized by the current system. Is this not a wonderful illusion of a Just Society?
I would suggest that Mr. Cameron meets some Francophones Hors-Québec far away from Ottawa and Quebec politics pressure for his next review so that he can provide us with a more balanced view of how Bilingualism is actually working out on the ground. In addition, Mr. Cameron should note that Maillarville and the "native" reserves are a dismal failure. Accessing federal services from a francophone -vs- anglophone speaking bureaucrat was not something we never really ask for either and we may have much more pressing language survival needs on our hands as a result. Does that make me an enemy of the Just Society? Trudeau (and Lévesque) were both fine for their times but time to move on is now overdue.
Canadians and immigrants to this country have benefitted from centuries of law and custom that have led to freedoms unimaginable to the average person in the past - Trudeau's policies and legacies of multiculturalism throw all that away and lead us right back to tribalism.
And frankly, with our globalising world, I can't believe anyone is still debating the merits of actually having a bilingual country. We're extraordinarily lucky to live in a country where two world languages are spoken. By a 'historical accident,' as Trudeau would say, Canada was given a distinct advantage over other states. We should be doing everything in our power to preserve equality of English and French and ensure every citizen can learn the other language. That includes learning English.
“Until white anglo males stop trying imposing their will on everybody else, they will find adversaries to fight them.”
For someone so worldly, these comments are quite ignorant. I am a white Anglo male. Born in England and raised in Canada. I do not push my views onto anyone. It is also ignorant to say that only English speaking people see other languages as ethnocentric crap! Remnants of the colonial days? This is rich considering the countries involved in the colonialism of the world were speaking English, French, and Spanish.
The major problem is this: People want to force their culture and their viewpoints onto others and this spawns the resistance. If speaking the French language is important to you then preserve your culture within your community and family. Let people decide what is important to them. I think that the last thing we need to worry about in Canada is the Conservatives views on bilingualism. While some of their other stances put our nation in much greater danger, such as the arming of space, and the privatization of health care.
Let’s not fool ourselves. The French language is not endangered. If it is the only ones to blame are the ones who make the CHOICE to abandon their OWN culture. I would assume that your comments were written in haste, as this would also explain the spelling errors. (Sorry for the cheap shot!)
It is also a cheap shot to suggest coming from the anglophone "pure-laine" majority who are the only ones to blame. The demography of francophone minority hors-Quebec is such that there will be no more francophone hors-Québec in a near future. The original francophones that were born hors-Québec have already switched over; the ones born in Québec that have gone ROC are doing just the same unless they are "de passage" or the lucky few well subsidized by the existing francophone bureaucracies. Who is to blame here?
Chretien's assessment at the end of his term was that assimilation was simply a "fact of life", long after Lévesque's assessment of Francophones Hors-Québec as "dead ducks". Providing federal services in French Hors-Québec is not going to change this problem ***one bit*** although may give the illusion that it makes a difference.
Perhaps you can explain why would you provide federal services in French hors-Québec if there is no more people that will access these services in that language unless they are unilingual Québécois "de passage"??? It is already very difficult to get services in any language from a government in the first place. Let's get real please.
Finally according to your "who is to blame" logic, there was simply no need for bill-101. I can pretty well ensure you that there would be no more french problem in Canada if Quebec had not passed bill-101. I hope that this shed new lights on the Just Society utopia. It is most unfortunate that Trudeau never had a real job in his entire life and could not relate to how the real world actually operates. I think he has been a much greater evil to Canada than Lévesque ever was. Call me a Western Canadian on this.
On a positive note, I will suggest that there are certain things that could be done to make francophone communities hors-Québec more dynamic and attractive to the next generation. And please do not tell me that we can do this on our own (or Québec will help us) given our current "dead ducks" state. You hopefully agree that cultural and language bureaucracies unacccountable to the People are not the way to solve problems, unless it was the objective in the first place! Bureaucracies are a sure way to burry the dead ducks (or ensure that they either assimilate or go back to Quebec).
The Just Society was just a textbook utopia.
BTW, I live in rural Manitoba, and I am (half I guess you could say) francophone.
Back to Trudeau, he didn't head off the separatists, because the hard-liners control Quebec's curriculum, government, and media elite.
As for why English has its status, you're all missing something quite obvious--it's the language of the west right now, and the language of world commerce. The people of Quebec would have to learn to speak English if they left Canada, to do business with the world, selling them bottled water I guess. Right now, Quebeckers can speak French and do business in Canada--outside of Canada they couldn't do that.
If Quebec separated, this would turn Quebec into Louisiana in a few short years, guaranteed, yet people still cry about how awful it is in Canada. Hilarious, sad, and pathetic.
Can't the separatist fools see that life is getting worse for everyone around the world, and that Quebec has been artificially insulated from this by the government of CANADA? Most Canadians are unemployed or underemployed, yet Quebec still gets manufacturing jobs, of all things, manufacturing jobs! But Canada is a prison, apparently. A prison for the insane perhaps.
In closing, the hard-liners will never accept the views of those such as Trudeau. They want to be treated better than anglophones in Quebec, and equally in the rest of Canada. The French were just as arrogant and imperial as the British, and the fact is that in the fight for control of our great country, the French lost the control they once had. That is historical fact, and happened long before we were born. The reason English is so common is the former British Empire. That's HISTORY, accept it. Perhaps one day, we'll all be suffereing through Mandarin or Cantonese lessons, but God I hope not.
Although the French lost their control, they (despite what some say) actually did retain their dignity, and now thrive in Canada. They are not disappearing in Canada, they are thriving in Quebec, and more than holding their own in areas all across Canada, especially areas like Nova Scotia and Sudbury, Ontario. These people are not disappearing--they speak two languages, as do most people in Europe. What people like michou really want is the ability to live their lives with no English-language presence whatsoever, bilingualism isn't enough.
The French outside of Quebec have tonnes of dignity. Although the French lost control of Canada, they did become, as they called themselves: "Canadians." This while rejecting the country of France, the failed empire that abandoned them. The French-Canadians have language rigths despite losing control--unimaginable to those who speak any aboriginal language or any other European language--but who cares I guess.
And as for culture, one of the unfortunate consequences of modern statism is the notion that culture isn't a natural product of human interaction and creativity with a society, but rather something created (or at least, "nurtured") by the state.
In fact, pointing to the genius and achievements of one's own "culture" is merely trying to take credit for the achievements of other, more talented individuals who would have made significant creative contributions to whatever ethnic group the universe's lottery dropped them into.
If a language or culture cannot survive on its own, why must it be propped up with money that could be put to better use providing basic services for citizens. Why should we spend significant amounts of money trying to perserve French in Western Canadian provinces while ethnic nationalists in Quebec spend money trying to eradicate English?
And "cultural diversity" being like bio-diversity? Give me a break! The world won't die out if there's only one human culture. In fact, we all might just get along better.